CBC -- or the unofficial reparations committee

Somebody, anyone, needs to explain how and why we have allowed this Congressional Black Caucus committee to come into existence in the first place and why we allow it to continue polluting the political discourse in this country.  Finally. in a real bit of investigative reporting by the NYT  this article brings the CBC into the light of day.  It would have been nice had the Times challenged the very existence of this corruption rather than simply point out how it raises and spends monies, however with the NYT one takes what one can get.  It is outrageous that a caucus within the legitimate Democrat Party caucus operates in our system, although, to be fair,  the article points out there are multiple caucuses formed within congress representing all manner of causes or interests some as small as just a few members with an interest in Scotland, for example.  However the CBC is in a league of its own (BTW it owns its own  Georgetown mansion, worth at leas 4 million) taking fund raising for their allegedly charitable causes to new heights:  54 million dollars contributed to CBC over a four year period, largely by major US corporations.  No one presumes these successful multinational corporations contribute shareholders money without a quid pro quo in mind, and indeed the article provides several examples of these.  Where does all the money go?  Does anyone really know?  Is this just one huge black incumbency fund designed to elect and keep black members of the Democrat Party elected?  Not only that but the whole idea of a specifically black caucus strikes many as inherently racist in that it segregates membership by race.  Whites, Hispanics, Asians, need not apply, and what's more Republicans need not apply as maybe the one black Republican found out.  Based on the success of the CBC, when do we see the extension of identity politics with the formation of the Asian-American caucus, the whites-of-european decent caucus, the whites of latin decent caucus, and so forth and so on.

Further, of the 55 million in contributions to the CBC over the past 4 years, according to the article only 1 million went to the CBC's PAC for distribution to candidates for public office.  The rest of the 54 million went to parties and scholarships, intern programs, etc, designed to help young black people get involved in politics.  On other words the funds raised under the guise of a "political" association for the permitted activities of a PAC, such as funding campaigns, were largely spent on whatever the caucus deemed appropriate, like parties and scholarships and whatever.  Wasn't the idea of McCain Feingold to reduce the amount of money in politics?  Instead we have the 527s of George Soros, and the CBC raising money and doing what they want with it, political or otherwise.

The only way to eliminate this foolishness is to shrink the size and influence of the federal government.  Can we make this happen?