Perhaps the most disturbing line in Alan Greenspan's new book, "The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World," was about Republican Party political intentions, not American or international finance.

For context, although Mr. Greenspan has worked for Democratic as well as Republican presidents, he is a life-long convinced Republican. With that, and the fact that he has had perhaps unparalleled access to administration after administration of top Republican leaders as background, he then says, "For many party leaders, altering the electoral process to create a permanent Republican-led government became a major goal."

The next question then has to be, "How did they imagine that they could ever get rid of competitive two-party government in this country?" Short of some sort of improbable coup d'etat, it would have had to be through jimmying, doctoring or buying the electoral process.

A visit to California just gave me a good look at one attempted Republican fast move. With the exception of two states, Maine and Nebraska, the current system of allocation of states' votes in the Electoral College provides that the party's presidential and vice presidential candidates who achieve the majority of popular votes in a state receive all of that state's votes in the Electoral College. One could argue that the system is unjust, that a state's electoral votes should be divided proportionately, reflecting the divisions among the state's voters, instead of winner-take-all. But that isn't the way it is now, and California, with 55 electoral votes, based on its size, is the 100-pound pumpkin in the field. (Votes in the college total 538.) Even though California's population includes some of the most fervent Republicans in the country, its electoral votes in recent years have usually gone to the Democratic candidates.

So the Republicans are -- or perhaps, were -- having a run at changing the California system so that its electoral votes would be divided proportionately. It is worth noting that California is the only state the Republicans are targeting for this change. Texas, with 34 electoral votes, which usually goes Republican, is not being pushed to change its winner-take-all system.

In any event, the Republican effort in California may be running out of gas, short of support and money. Among others, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican himself, has criticized the effort as an unsporting attempt to change the rules in the middle of the game. Two members of the committee promoting the so-called Presidential Election Reform Act reportedly have resigned from it.

A second conservative Republican initiative to gain political power was launched by a group called Freedom's Watch, which is led by former White House officials, including ex-press secretary Ari Fleischer. According to The New York Times, Freedom's Watch was launched this year at a meeting of the Republican Jewish Coalition in Manalaplan, Fla. Funded by wealthy conservatives, the organization has already put into motion a $15 million advertising campaign to maintain support for funding of the Iraq war and will now mount a new effort to encourage Americans to support a military attack on Iran.

Another place to look for the funding of a Republican attempt to assume long-term control of the White House and Congress is the stack of fat contracts that have been handed out to GOP supporters as part of the Iraq war effort. One of the major contracts for security in Iraq went to Blackwater USA of Moyock, N.C. Its CEO, Erik D. Prince, is a major financial donor to the campaigns of President Bush and other Republicans. Blackwater's activities have received media attention in recent days following its employees' killing of some 11 Iraqi civilians in a shoot-out near Baghdad. It's estimated that Blackwater's largely no-bid Iraq contracts have amounted to nearly $1 billion so far.

Another, more recent beneficiary of the Iraq war is Hunt Oil Co. of Dallas, Texas. Its CEO, Ray Hunt, is also a big donor to Republican campaigns. In spite of the administration's continued protestations that it wants the Iraqi parliament to pass a law governing investments in Iraqi oil, Mr. Hunt's company has just signed a contract with the regional government of Kurdistan, apart from the Iraqi national government. No one seems to know how much the deal is worth, but the Hunt contract is ground-breaking and Mr. Bush's friend's company is first through the door in dividing up the Iraqi oil patch.

In spite of Mr. Greenspan's observation, it probably goes too far to say that the various contracts that corporate supporters of the Republican Party have carried away through the Iraq war were designed to channel U.S. government money into their pockets and back into the Republican Party to help it gain or retain political power in perpetuity. At the same time, money is the instrument for achieving and keeping political power in the United States and these companies and organizations, whether it be the California committee for the Presidential Election Reform Act, Freedom's Watch, Blackwater or Hunt Oil, are not short of money and clearly have collected a certain amount of it from taxpayers, by way of the U.S. government.