Clinton fundraising leaves little for state parties

[pdsimdars]

The Democratic front-runner says she's raising big checks to help state committees, but they've gotten to keep only 1 percent of the $60 million raised.

In the days before Hillary Clinton launched an unprecedented big-money fundraising vehicle with state parties last summer, she vowed “to rebuild our party from the ground up,” proclaiming “when our state parties are strong, we win. That’s what will happen."

But less than 1 percent of the $61 million raised by that effort has stayed in the state parties’ coffers, according to a POLITICO analysis of the latest Federal Election Commission filings.

<snip>

The arrangement has sparked concerns among campaign finance watchdogs and allies of Clinton’s Democratic rival Bernie Sanders. They see it as a circumvention of campaign contribution limits by a national party apparatus intent on doing whatever it takes to help Clinton defeat Sanders during the party’s primary, and then win the White House.

But it is perhaps more notable that the arrangement has prompted concerns among some participating state party officials and their allies. They grumble privately that Clinton is merely using them to subsidize her own operation, while her allies overstate her support for their parties and knock Sanders for not doing enough to help the party.

“It’s a one-sided benefit,” said an official with one participating state party. The official, like those with several other state parties, declined to talk about the arrangement on the record for fear of drawing the ire of the DNC and the Clinton campaign.

cont . . . .

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/clinton-fundraising-leaves-little-for-state-parties-222670#ixzz47V8vORKW

[yourpaljoey]

1. Hmmm... sounds like criminal activity

[FreakinDJ]

18. Dishonest Yes - Criminal no

But Hillary is no stranger to dishonesty

[flor-de-jasmim]

2. I'd like to know whether the C campaign has now paid its bills:

In this election, as in 2008, small communities and small businessmen have provided services for the Clinton campaign (and others), only to see their bills go unpaid. With all the millions and all the rhetoric, these people and institutions should be paid before the campaign leaves the state moving on to greener pastures. Food services, fire, police, etc. have been shafted.

A couple of weeks ago there was an article stating that only Bernie´s campaign had paid its bill in full and at the time of service.

[leftofcool]

5. Bernie needs to worry about the FEC. Hillary's bills are paid.

[sixersixersixer]

11. Are you sure?

http://www.aol.com/article/2016/03/14/police-frustrated-with-clinton-campaign-over-unpaid-bills/21327449/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3493601/Hillary-Clinton-owes-Iowa-police-THOUSANDS-dollars-unpaid-bills-providing-security-Katy-Perry-concert-six-months-ago.html

Just the two I found off Google.

[pdsimdars]

12. No. That's what you'd like to think but no, that's not reality

Many small towns in Iowa at least have BIG bills for extra police, etc. when Hillary went through. . but Bernie was the only candidate from ANY party that actually paid these people for their service. Hillary didn't. That's just how she rolls. Let the common people cover it. Just like her taking all the money from her "party" fundraising for herself.

[Duckhunter935]

21. Site a source for that bullshit please

It stinks in here from it

[dchill]

27. You KNOW that's not gonna happen.

[NWCorona]

34. Bernie + FEC = not much. Hillary + FBI = something to worry about nt

[KittyWampus]

47. LOL! Sanders is the one who has broken FEC regulations 4 months in a row.

[FarPoint]

3. So, Bernie gives ZERO to anyone, including state Democratic Party funding support.

Double Standard system?

[1939]

6. Uhhhhh

Bernie wasn't raising money under the guise of "helping local parties".

[FarPoint]

9. He's just keeping all the money for himself.

He never had any interest in working with the Democratic Party, ever..just being a Hitchhiker for self serving gains. I do not support greed.

[1939]

10. He has run his campaign

with zero party support and in fact has had to overcome active opposition from the party and DWS. He has solicited from his believers and has not sold out to the banksters to get campaign money. If (and it is a big IF) he can secure the nomination, then there is time for him to do active fund raising for the local parties (which DWS should be doing now instead of spending her time shilling for Hillary). A Hillary win and a down ticket defeat will leave us just where we are now.

[FarPoint]

15. He has USED the Democratic Party from day one...

Sanders made false claims just so he could campaign under the umbrella of the Democratic Party... Including getting in State Ballots, actively being able to participate in Debate Forums..that is just for starters....He had been nothing less than an insult to the Democratic Party Host. He would still be in Vermont planting his raised garden bed and tapping maple trees without the support of the Democratic Party.

[dchill]

28. We know who has USED the Democratic Party...

And it's NOT Sanders.

[CanadaexPat]

26. Hilary's TAKING from the state parties

by depleting the pool of funds available to them. So, yes, giving nothing is much better.

[virtualobserver]

31. Wrong...I have given to four different candidates based on direct fundraising emails from Bernie.

Then I get emails from the individual candidates who are thrilled to get hundreds of thousands of dollars for their house race.

Hillary just pretends to help down ticket candidates....She is all hat and no cattle.

[NWCorona]

36. Ever? You are misinformed. nt

[JSup]

67. I dunno...

...if he's keeping it all for himself; I suspect a sudden rise in secret Green Party donations since speculating out loud is how things are done here now.

[KittyWampus]

48. the agreement is he would help fund raise. He hasn't.

[Duckhunter935]

49. Lets see this agreement

He has fundraised for the dems for years

[hellofromreddit]

16. Hey, you guys keep telling us Hillary's a beast at funding the party.

I's not Bernie's fault that it's bullshit.

And, FWIW, http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511721681

[JudyM]

39. Clinton has been *running on* the super delegate lead she got in the 33 state deal ---

huge, highly relevant difference.

[tonyt53]

51. Exactly.

This is the very reason that Bernie will never get any supers to switch. He has helped nobody downticket.

[leftofcool]

4. And Bernie gives 0, nada, nothing.

[pdsimdars]

7. Not true and you should know that. He is giving to individual candidates.

[IamMab]

14. No, he "splits" donations with a few specific candidates (and only because they endorsed him).

And the Sanders campaign still keeps the lion's share, so this criticism against Clinton lacks fangs, because Sanders is essentially doing the same thing with his fundraising arrangement.

[jeff47]

19. And Clinton takes 99% of what she raises, per the OP.

Is that not "the lion's share"?

[IamMab]

20. Bernie and Clinton are doing the same thing, but it's only bad if Clinton does it?

You're not even going to try to hide the bias, not even a little? Typical.

[jeff47]

25. No, Sanders is not keeping 99% of what he raises for other candidates.

IIRC, the split is 60-40. That's significantly better than 99-1.

[DebDoo]

33. Wait - they're both doing it? So the claims that Bernie isn't raising $ for down ticket are lies?

[-none]

54. They can't keep their lies straight.

Someone over there should have waited for the latest talking points before posting.

[riderinthestorm]

32. Nope, we have a list of @ 200 candidates we're supporting directly as ID'd by Bernie

Cutting out the DNC middleman

http://jackpineradicals.org/showthread.php?4694-Bernie-s-Coat-Tails-Important-List-of-Bernie-Democrats-Running-for-Office

[leftofcool]

29. No he is not period!

[pdsimdars]

37. Go do a little research before making such a misinformed statement.

Do you think if you put an exclamation point at the end it makes it any more factual? Well, that would be no. Bernie has been giving to individual campaigns there have been many article on it. Go look it up.

[Duckhunter935]

50. Another outright lie

Why are you not ashamed?

[djean111]

8. Who, really, expected anything less - especially with the inane and incessant Rovian

yapping that Bernie does nothing for down-ticket dems? Remember - the motto is "always accuse the other guy of what you are doing". Deflection.

And, there is this -

Democrats have lost 900+ state legislature seats, 12 governors, 69 House seats, 13 Senate seats.

All under the loving ministrations Of Debbie Wassermann-Schultz. This, IMO, is deliberate. A Third Way rebuilding.

This is not Bernie's fault, and this is not Bernie's job to fix. Oh, and he does fund-raise for Democrats. I have sent money to him, and he splits it with other candidates. That way I know my money goes to a candidate, and not into Hillary's pockets.

[pdsimdars]

13. ^^^^^^^^^^^ Amen! ^^^^^^^^^^^

And a VERY important distinction. Stop throwing money down a sh*t hole and give it to someone who knows how to use it.

[yourpaljoey]

23. Agreed

[KittyWampus]

46. Sanders hasn't done anything for down ticket Democrats which HE AGREED TO DO

when he joined the contest for the Democratic nomination.

It takes a Rovian mindset to ignore that FACT.

[Buns_of_Fire]

17. Well, it IS called the "HILLARY Victory Fund"

Not the "DEMOCRATIC Victory Fund".

From the article:

Some fundraisers who work for state parties predict that the arrangement could actually hurt participating state parties. They worry that participating states that aren’t presidential battlegrounds and lack competitive Senate races could see very little return investment from the DNC or Clinton’s campaign, and are essentially acting as money laundering conduits for them. And for party committees in contested states, there’s another risk: they might find themselves unable to accept cash from rich donors whose checks to the victory fund counted towards their $10,000 donation limit to the state party in question — even if that party never got to spend the cash because it was transferred to the DNC.

(snip)

Sanders' campaign late last year signed a joint fundraising agreement with the DNC, but the committee has been largely inactive. Instead, after Sanders was chided by Clinton allies for not helping down-ballot Democrats, he sent out appeals to his vaunted email list that helped raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for a trio of progressive House candidates, who got to keep all the cash.

The Hillary Victory Fund, by contrast, allows the Clinton campaign to maintain tight control over the cash it raises and spends. The fund represents by far the most ambitious use to date of a joint fundraising committee — and arguably one the most ambitious hard-dollar fundraising efforts in modern presidential politics. Until 2014, the most an individual could have given to such a committee was $123,200. But in April of that year, the Supreme Court, in a case called McCutcheon vs. FEC, struck down aggregate limits on total giving to federal campaigns, allowing maximum donations to as many different committees as a donor wanted.

So much for the Hillary Gravy Train, I guess. Shoulda read the fine print.

[pdsimdars]

38. Thank you. And good call, "Hillary" Victory fund. . . what else? Me, me, me.

[Demsrule86]

45. This guy has an agenda

A little hard to read but if you make it bigger...this refutes this guy who is a Bernie supporter and biased in my opinion.
https://www.opensecrets.org/jfc/summary.php?id=C00586537

[CharlotteVale]

22. I'm so shocked.

[Demsrule86]

24. The reporter is a Bernie supporter

I would have to see an article by someone else...just don't trust such sources these days...too much rightie stuff.

[dchill]

30. K&R.

[CrispyQ]

35. I read the article linked below & frankly,

I don't believe HRC will fight against Citizen's United.

APRIL 1, 2016
How Hillary Clinton Bought the Loyalty of 33 State Democratic Parties
by MARGOT KIDDER

Collusion between the Clinton campaign and the DNC allowed Hillary Clinton to buy the loyalty of 33 state Democratic parties last summer. Montana was one of those states. It sold itself for $64,100.

The Super Delegates now defying democracy with their insistent refusal to change their votes to Sanders in spite of a handful of overwhelming Clinton primary losses in their own states, were arguably part of that deal.

In August 2015, at the Democratic Party convention in Minneapolis, 33 democratic state parties made deals with the Hillary Clinton campaign and a joint fundraising entity called The Hillary Victory Fund. The deal allowed many of her core billionaire and inner circle individual donors to run the maximum amounts of money allowed through those state parties to the Hillary Victory Fund in New York and the DNC in Washington.

The idea was to increase how much one could personally donate to Hillary by taking advantage of the Supreme Court ruling 2014, McCutcheon v FEC, that knocked down a cap on aggregate limits as to how much a donor could give to a federal campaign in a year. It thus eliminated the ceiling on amounts spent by a single donor to a presidential candidate.

In other words, a single donor, by giving $10,000 a year to each signatory state could legally give an extra $330,000 a year for two years to the Hillary Victory Fund. For each donor, this raised their individual legal cap on the Presidential campaign to $660,000 if given in both 2015 and 2016. And to one million, three hundred and 20 thousand dollars if an equal amount were also donated in their spouse’s name.

~more at link

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/04/01/how-hillary-clinton-bought-the-loyalty-of-33-state-democratic-parties/

Scroll to the bottom of the article to see which states are in on this deal. Colorado is on the list. We have 12 Super Delegates & Sanders won the vote by 60%, yet to date, 9 of 12 of our SDs are for Clinton. I realize the rules are already in place & HRC is using them to her advantage, but it reeks. HRC is part of the problem, not the solution.

[pdsimdars]

40. Was there ever a doubt? For people who can't motivate voters, all they have left

are smears and money.

[Autumn]

41. Hillary Victory Fund. That tells you all you need to know about that smelly little arangment.

[JudyM]

42. The poetic justice if they turn on her at the convention would be great to see.

I hope she doesn't pay them, especially in locales where there's a Bernie dem running.

[Autumn]

43. They won't turn on her, they are members of that club.

[JudyM]

44. Probably, though if they don't owe her, the chances are better, at least.

If Bernie draws close after CA and he continues to lead in the head-to-heads.... and especially if FBI finally gets that referral to DOJ out...

[pdsimdars]

66. Really, are we the only grown ups in the room who aren't afraid to look at the facts

on the ground? They refuse to even acknowledge the facts.

[MisterP]

55. they do have self-preservation: if she wins there's going to be hell to pay for the delegates

for the party letting it get this close

[Lans]

52. Not Suprised

Clintons entire campaign has always been about a single thing - making Hillary Clinton president and she has been working towards this goal before Bill and her exited the White House.

[vintx]

53. Hands up, who's surprised?

Anyone?

[pdsimdars]

56. Beuler, Beuler . . . . anyone . . . .?

[pdsimdars]

57. My, my, this truth must have stung. . . .

although I can't see them, most of the replies seem to be Hillary supporters.

It points to a character flaw.

[vintx]

58. It's all finger-pointing at Bernie. The fact that they've been echoing her lies

diesn't seem to be too much of an issue for them.

[Hydra]

68. Zero calorie posts, you aren't missing anything n/t

[bettyellen]

59. The DNC gets it and redistributes to state parties as needed. 4.5 million has gone to states, and

double that is coming. The headline is dishonest, and no one read the article. Shocked.

[pdsimdars]

60. Gotta look beyond the headline. . . . 1% has gone back to the states. . Shocked? I am.

But then again . . nothing Hillary does shocks me any more.

[bettyellen]

61. The headline is based on outdated filings- and admits as much in the article... The money is just

begining to be redisributed by the DNC- and the 1% is no longer true. That they ran the headline knowing this, and people here repeat the lie, is quite telling.

[pdsimdars]

62. The article is dated 05/02/16 05:21 AM EDT. if you have a reputable link to more current data

post it

[bettyellen]

63. It is in the article itself, about how this data is OLD and money is beginning to be redistributed

Which says a lot about the source- pushing a phony headline like that.

[Cheese Sandwich]

64. LOL nt

[pnwmom]

65. He sent the same story out one day before NY. Yet he still hasn't reported her to the FEC.

Even with that "money laundering" and all. Probably because he knows this:

But even if state parties aren’t getting to keep the victory fund cash, they benefit from money spent to enhance the DNC’s data, research and design services, said Jeremy Kennedy, the executive director of the Maine Democratic State Committee, which is a victory fund participant.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/clinton-fundraising-leaves-little-for-state-parties-222670#ixzz47WMVVM5F
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook