Stephen Breyer: Money Calls the Tune

Stephen Breyer Money Quote saying in his desent to McCutcheon v. Fed. Election Commission that nothing can be heard from voters if corporations and the wealthy speak louder with their political music of money. Stephen Breyer said:
 

 

“Where enough money calls the tune, the general public will not be heard. Insofar as corruption cuts the link between political thought and political action, a free marketplace of political ideas loses its point” — Stephen Breyer

In this quote, Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is expressing concern about how large sums of money in politics can drown out the voices of ordinary citizens. By stating that “where enough money calls the tune, the general public will not be heard”, Breyer suggests financial influence allows well-funded special interests to override public opinion.

He implies that when corruption “cuts the link between political thought and political action”, it undermines democratic representation by allowing monetary priorities rather than voters’ preferences to dictate policy outcomes.

The overall interpretation is that Breyer views disproportionate financial clout in the political process as weakening people power and the ability of elected leaders to be responsive to constituents over wealthy donors. His perspective conveys that an excess of money in elections and lawmaking threatens the integrity of the democratic system by replacing public will with the agendas of those able to spend the most to promote their views.

Steve Israel: Shark Tank Democracy

Steve Israel Money Quotation saying as New York Congessman finishing final term that money from the wealthy fueling campaign finance has destroyed politics. Steve Israel said:
 

 

“This isn’t ‘Shark Tank’ This is your democracy. But as the bidding grows higher, your voice gets lower. You’re simply priced out of the marketplace of ideas. That is, unless you are one of the ultra wealthy” — Steve Israel

In this quote, Steve Israel is criticizing the influence of money in politics and how it drowns out the voices of ordinary citizens. He draws a comparison to the TV show “Shark Tank”, where entrepreneurs pitch their business ideas to wealthy investors.

Israel argues that politics has similarly become a “bidding” process where the “ultra wealthy” can essentially “buy” more influence over policymaking. By referring to the “marketplace of ideas”, he suggests democratic debate and civic participation are being undermined as the “bidding grows higher” through more political spending, effectively “pricing out” the voice of the public.

Overall, Israel is decrying the role of big money in politics from wealthy special interests, which he says marginalizes average citizens who cannot financially “outbid” them for access and impact on government decisions.

Jack Weatherford: Cash in Relationships

Jack Weatherford Money Quotation saying there is no denying that money strongly affects all interpersonal interaction and human social connections. Jack Weatherford said:
 

 

“Money defines relationships among people, not just between customer and merchant in the marketplace or employer and laborer in the workplace” — Jack Weatherford

In this quote, Jack Weatherford is expanding on his view that money plays a defining role in relationships. The best interpretation is:

• Weatherford believes money not only shapes relationships between economic actors like customers/merchants and employers/employees, as one might expect.
• He argues that money also influences relationships among people in general, whether they are interacting in an explicitly economic context or not.
• Weatherford sees the power of money to define dynamics and introduce complications extending beyond just marketplace and workplace transactions, but also coloring personal interactions and social bonds between individuals wherever they occur.

The overall message is that according to Weatherford, money is deeply ingrained in society and a pervasive factor that can affect the character of relationships between all people on multiple levels, not just in overtly commercial settings. He views monetary influences as woven into the fabric of social interactions in a broad sense.