An article issued by the Information Office of China's State Council said that American democracy, labeled by the U.S. Government as a "model of democracy," is but a myth and "a rich man's game."

This is the second time that the Information Office of the State Council, in response to the yearly Country Reports on Human Rights Practices issued by the U.S. State Department, has released an article on the U. S. human rights record.

The article said that the United States continuously hawks " American-style democracy" to other countries in the world. Under the pretext of safeguarding this type of democracy, the United

States makes rash criticisms of other countries and interferes in their internal affairs. "Nevertheless, well-informed people know that the so-called democracy has been nothing more than a fairy tale since the United States was founded more than 200 years ago," the article said.

The article pointed out that the 2000 presidential election debacle further exposed the inherent flaws in the American electoral system, citing that less than 50 million voters -- about one-fourth of the 205 million eligible voters -- cast ballots, representing a record low in U.S. voter turnout.

Since the right to vote is evidently meaningless to the majority of Americans, the notion of democracy in the United States has been further exposed, the article pointed out. The article said that U.S. democracy amounts to a game for rich people: Money in the bank often translates into victory at the polls.

In a country like the United States where politics is highly commercialized, any bidder for an official post needs to spend a staggering amount of money to win. Presidential and congressional candidates won't get far without significant financial backing, the article said.

The general election of 2000 cost about three billion U.S. Dollars, 50 percent more than in 1996, and reaching a record high. The congressional races in various states cost another one billion dollars in total.

The article said that U.S. law prohibits donations from individuals to candidates, political commissions and parties, but allows any amount of soft money to be contributed from companies or trade unions to political parties.

Statistics show that the soft money collected by various parties and candidates in 2000 reached 648 million U.S. dollars, five times that of four years ago.

During the election campaign, at least 20 contributors gave more than one million U.S. dollars each.

The National Rifle Association, together with firearms manufacturers, funneled several billion U.S. dollars into Capitol Hill, lobbying congressional members to oppose to limits on gun sales and possession. As a result, gun control legislation did not pass, the article said.

The article quoted a report by the British newspaper Financial Times on October 25, 2000, saying that the political system in the United States is decaying to a point where even American voters can smell the stink of money. It can be said that the U.S. general election of 2000 was sold to the highest bidders.

The top spender in the 2000 congressional campaign, Jon Corzine of New Jersey, spent more than 60 million U.S. dollars to win his Senate seat. He set a new record for congressional election campaign spending.

The article cited an Associated Press analysis published on November 9, 2000, saying that 81 percent of the Senate winners and 96 percent of House winners outspent their opponents; 26 out of 32 Senate races and 417 out of 433 House races were won by the candidate with the most money to spend as of October 18, the last date for which figures were available.

Larry Makinson, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that studies money and campaigns, was quoted by the AP as saying, "The depressing thing about American democracy is I can check the fund-raising balances at the Federal Election Commission and tell you what the election results will be before the election."

(Xinua 02/27/2001)