The Bernie effect: Gillibrand and Booker pledge no corporate PAC money

[VivaRevolution]

Two more senators ditch corporate PACs

by Megan Janetsky and Josh Finkelstein on February 15, 2018

• 
  
  (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
  
  Two Senate Democrats joined a group of congressional incumbents running for reelection who have sworn off contributions from corporate political action committees (PACs).
  
  Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) on Tuesday announced on Twitter that they would join at least 10 other members of Congress in rejecting donations from corporate PACs in their upcoming reelection campaigns.
  
  “Because of the corrosive effects of corporate money I have decided from this point on I will not be accepting corporate PAC checks into my campaign,” Gillibrand said in a Tuesday video.
  
  Booker announced a similar pledge in a Tuesday night tweet, saying “our campaign finance system is broken.”
  
  A corporate PAC is a committee funded primarily by employee and individual contributions — not from corporate treasuries — and have a $5,000 per-candidate, per-cycle donation limit. Neither candidate has said they plan to reject individual donations from employees of corporations.
  
  End Citizens United, a nonprofit that opposes corporate money in politics, hailed the move as a victory.
  
  “Right now, we’re seeing a wave of candidates rejecting corporate PAC money and taking a stand against the rigged system,” Anne Feldman, a spokeswoman for ECU, said in an email. “By making this commitment, Senator Gillibrand, Booker and others are showing they will fight for people and not corporate interests.”
  
  Corporate PAC donations make up just a small percentage of campaign funding for incumbents, such as Gillibrand and Booker, who have accepted millions in PAC donations from banks, pharmaceutical companies, and international and corporate interests, FEC data shows.
  
  Since running for Congress, Gillibrand has accepted $4.9 million from business PACs — 9.7 percent of her total fundraising. Her top PAC donors include Goldman Sachs, UBS AG and Morgan Stanley.
  
  Booker, with one run for Senate under his belt, has accepted $1.8 million from business PACs — 8 percent of his total fundraising. His top PAC donors include JP Morgan Chase, Verizon, and law firms Connell Foley and DLA Piper.
  
  Gillibrand’s highest PAC contributor and Booker’s second highest was the pharmaceutical company Pfizer.
  

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2018/02/two-more-senators-ditch-corporate-pacs/

______________________________________________________

Not sure how much this means if they are still taking direct contributions from corporations, but then again, if a pro-labor Democrat takes a donation from Costco, saying they have common goals for the treatment of labor, that isn't exactly selling out either.

Kind of seems like prep for presidential bids as well, knowing Bernie is going to eat there lunch on this issue.

 

[bobgeese]

Gillibrand went from hometown girl, to political whore.




She can take her fat ass to the back of the line...

 

[VivaRevolution]

Btw can anyone tell me why I see DLA Piper law firm on so many donation lists for dems?

How deep can a law firms pockets go?

 

[VivaRevolution]

Bump

 

[godking]

Two more senators ditch corporate PACs

by Megan Janetsky and Josh Finkelstein on February 15, 2018

• 
  
  (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
  
  Two Senate Democrats joined a group of congressional incumbents running for reelection who have sworn off contributions from corporate political action committees (PACs).
  
  Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) on Tuesday announced on Twitter that they would join at least 10 other members of Congress in rejecting donations from corporate PACs in their upcoming reelection campaigns.
  
  “Because of the corrosive effects of corporate money I have decided from this point on I will not be accepting corporate PAC checks into my campaign,” Gillibrand said in a Tuesday video.
  
  Booker announced a similar pledge in a Tuesday night tweet, saying “our campaign finance system is broken.”
  
  A corporate PAC is a committee funded primarily by employee and individual contributions — not from corporate treasuries — and have a $5,000 per-candidate, per-cycle donation limit. Neither candidate has said they plan to reject individual donations from employees of corporations.
  
  End Citizens United, a nonprofit that opposes corporate money in politics, hailed the move as a victory.
  
  “Right now, we’re seeing a wave of candidates rejecting corporate PAC money and taking a stand against the rigged system,” Anne Feldman, a spokeswoman for ECU, said in an email. “By making this commitment, Senator Gillibrand, Booker and others are showing they will fight for people and not corporate interests.”
  
  Corporate PAC donations make up just a small percentage of campaign funding for incumbents, such as Gillibrand and Booker, who have accepted millions in PAC donations from banks, pharmaceutical companies, and international and corporate interests, FEC data shows.
  
  Since running for Congress, Gillibrand has accepted $4.9 million from business PACs — 9.7 percent of her total fundraising. Her top PAC donors include Goldman Sachs, UBS AG and Morgan Stanley.
  
  Booker, with one run for Senate under his belt, has accepted $1.8 million from business PACs — 8 percent of his total fundraising. His top PAC donors include JP Morgan Chase, Verizon, and law firms Connell Foley and DLA Piper.
  
  Gillibrand’s highest PAC contributor and Booker’s second highest was the pharmaceutical company Pfizer.

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2018/02/two-more-senators-ditch-corporate-pacs/

______________________________________________________

Not sure how much this means if they are still taking direct contributions from corporations, but then again, if a pro-labor Democrat takes a donation from Costco, saying they have common goals for the treatment of labor, that isn't exactly selling out either.

Kind of seems like prep for presidential bids as well, knowing Bernie is going to eat there lunch on this issue.

I smell bullshit.

The money that they won't take from Business PACS directly they will either take indirectly or supplement in another way.

 

[ultramanhyata]

@Jack V Savage needs to get in here and tell everybody how corporate campaign contributions have no effect on the behavior of candidates. And how this is just meaningless grandstanding from a couple democrats who are drifting too far to the left.

 

[Mondo Freaks]

Hopefully Booker stays with the Suns.

 

[Quipling]

Btw can anyone tell me why I see DLA Piper law firm on so many donation lists for dems?

How deep can a law firms pockets go?

Donation lists include money contributed by individual employees/members of their families, if they mention that affiliation while giving. Per Opensecrets, 3/4 of the DLA Piper contributions are by individual employees, not the firm.

DLA is a huge firm (3500 attorneys-third biggest in the world, billions in revenue). Lots of them give as affiliates of the firm (unlike, say, Skadden), and there are about 25 dla offices in the country. If five partners (average salary of 400k) in an office each give the max amount to a state governor, congressman, senator, presidential candidate, etc, that adds up quick.

Latham (an even bigger firm) produces similar numbers, and all of their donations are individual.

 

[IGIT]

Gillibrand went from hometown girl, to political whore.

She can take her fat ass to the back of the line...

hi bobgeese,

i bet she gets a cool reception from my friends @VivaRevolution and @Anung Un Rama.

in some ways, she's more Hillary than Hillary is. Gillibrand seems like a cool customer, calculating, a bit of an opportunist and....i don't know. sort of a phony.

- IGIT

 

[Jack V Savage]

@Jack V Savage needs to get in here and tell everybody how corporate campaign contributions have no effect on the behavior of candidates. And how this is just meaningless grandstanding from a couple democrats who are drifting too far to the left.

I didn't (and wouldn't, as you well know) say they were drifting too far to the left, but, yeah, this is obvious grandstanding. They think rubes will eat it up. Seems harmless enough.

 

[Ophydian]

I smell bullshit.

The money that they won't take from Business PACS directly they will either take indirectly or supplement in another way.

I agree 100% with this. I am sure they will not mind when a PAC runs negative adds on their competition. I mean it isn't a campaign donation.

 

[Jack V Savage]

hi bobgeese,

i bet she gets a cool reception from my friends @VivaRevolution and @Anung Un Rama.

in some ways, she's more Hillary than Hillary is. Gillibrand seems like a cool customer, calculating, a bit of an opportunist and....i don't know. sort of a phony.

- IGIT

Yep. It's utterly pointless for Democrats to try to get Intercept-type nutters. Those guys are just part of the right's propaganda arm.

 

[IGIT]

Yep. It's utterly pointless for Democrats to try to get Intercept-type nutters. Those guys are just part of the right's propaganda arm.

hi JVS,

i like Anung and Viva, they are good peoples, Jack!

Glenn has been a disappointment to me, i don't know what to say. do you remember when he wrote for Salon?

*sigh*

first Hitchens on Iraq, and now this. its a bummer.

- IGIT

 

[ultramanhyata]

I didn't (and wouldn't, as you well know) say they were drifting too far to the left, but, yeah, this is obvious grandstanding. They think rubes will eat it up. Seems harmless enough.

You do not disappoint!

 

[Jack V Savage]

You do not disappoint!

So let me ask you something (that I think will demonstrate that you actually agree with me): Does this move make you at all more likely to vote for either of them?

 

[ultramanhyata]

So let me ask you something (that I think will demonstrate that you actually agree with me): Does this move make you at all more likely to vote for either of them?

I have already ordered my Cory 2020 bumper sticker.

 

[ultramanhyata]

The money that they won't take from Business PACS directly they will either take indirectly or supplement in another way.

This is the problem with personal promises absent actual campaign finance laws.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I have already ordered my Cory 2020 bumper sticker.

You're joking, but I'm serious. Does this move make you any more likely to vote for Booker?

 

[Trotsky]

In principle I support this, but the "corporate" element of campaign finance issues is kind of overblown. It's the lack of expenditure limits for private citizens to PACs that is a bigger issue.

Also, the idea that campaign finance doesn't distort political reality just because contributions cannot be temporally linked to reversals on positions is just stupid.

 

[Bamboozled]

Good luck winning