Tag Archives: money in politics

Bill Gates Spent More Than $200 Million to Promote Common Core. Here’s Where it Went.

Mother Jones

Source: Gates Foundation Photograph: Win McNamee

When it comes to putting your money where your mouth is, few organizations can match the sheer weight of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Longtime education benefactors, the couple has poured more than $200 million into the Common Core cause over the last several years. Below is the last few years’ worth of individual grants.

This article: 

Bill Gates Spent More Than $200 Million to Promote Common Core. Here’s Where it Went.

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Bill Gates Spent More Than $200 Million to Promote Common Core. Here’s Where it Went.

How the Defense Industry Convinced Congress to Militarize Local Cops

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Ferguson, Missouri, police department’s display of armored cars, officers in riot gear, and assault rifles over the past week shocked Americans who didn’t realize how much military equipment is now available to local police departments. But since the 1990’s, more than 8,000 federal, state, tribal, and local police agencies across the country have armed themselves with the military’s excess gear, free of charge. The inventory includes everything from office furniture and first aid kits to aircraft, armored cars, rifles and bayonets, according to the Defense Logistics Agency, the Department of Defense office that manages the transactions under an initiative called Program 1033.

In June, Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) introduced an amendment to de-fund aspects of the program. Grayson’s bill would have exempted certain military equipment, including planes and armored cars, from Program 1033. That effort failed; just 62 members of the House of Representatives voted for the measure, with 355 voting no. Maybe the outcome shouldn’t have been a surprise: According to a new analysis of campaign finance data, the politicians who voted against Grayson’s bill received, on average, 73 percent more campaign donations from defense industry sources from 2011 through 2013 than their peers who voted for it.

The analysis—conducted by the Berkeley-based research group MapLight using data provided by the Center for Responsive Politics—also found that of 59 representatives who received more than $100,000 from the defense industry from 2011 through 2013, all but three voted against the amendment.

Link to original: 

How the Defense Industry Convinced Congress to Militarize Local Cops

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How the Defense Industry Convinced Congress to Militarize Local Cops

How "Citizen Koch" Saw the Light of Day After Public TV Snubbed It

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Oscar-nominated filmmakers Carl Deal and Tia Lessin were steeped in the production of a documentary on the influence of money in politics, but it wasn’t until funding for their project was unceremoniously yanked last year that the power of big donors truly hit home.

The pair had received a $150,000 commitment from the Independent Television Service (ITVS), a Corporation for Public Broadcasting-funded organization that bankrolls projects aired on PBS. They would later learn that their film, Citizen Koch, which explores the post-Citizen United political landscape and the rise of the tea party, had touched a nerve among public television officials worried about angering a generous benefactor, David Koch, who served on the boards of Boston’s WGBH and New York City’s WNET. In the fall of 2012, PBS had aired Alex Gibney’s Park Avenue: Money, Power and the American Dream, which featured a highly unflattering portrait of the billionaire, including an interview with a former doorman at Koch’s elite Manhattan apartment building who singled him out as its most miserly resident. Public television officials were sensitive about offending Koch again.

Continue Reading »

More here:

How "Citizen Koch" Saw the Light of Day After Public TV Snubbed It

Posted in Abrams, Anchor, Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How "Citizen Koch" Saw the Light of Day After Public TV Snubbed It

4 Key Takeaways About Scott Walker’s Alleged "Criminal Scheme"

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Thursday, a federal judge unsealed a batch of documents shedding light on a secret investigation that has dogged Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and some of his conservative allies since the summer of 2012.

Prosecutors are probing whether Walker and two of his aides illegally coordinated with outside groups—including the Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity—to fend off a wave of recall elections in 2011 and 2012. This kind of probe, conducted in secret, is known in Wisconsin as a “John Doe.” It is spearheaded by Francis Schmitz, a former federal prosecutor who was on George W. Bush’s shortlist to be US attorney in Wisconsin’s Eastern District. The investigation was initiated by the Milwaukee County district attorney’s office, which is led by Democrats.

Here are four key takeaways from the newly released documents:

1) Walker and two aides allegedly ran a “criminal scheme”

Prosecutors allege in the documents that Walker, his campaign committee, and two close aides, RJ Johnson and Deborah Jordahl, ran a “criminal scheme” using dark-money nonprofit groups to evade state election laws. Their goal: Defend Walker and a group of state lawmakers facing recall elections in 2011 and ’12.

The documents describe a web of 12 nonprofit groups that closely coordinated their fundraising and spending. Prosecutors say Walker, Johnson, and Jordahl presided over this web of groups. The documents quote a May 2011 email sent by Walker to GOP operative Karl Rove about the coordination plans: “Bottom-line: RJ Johnson helps keep in place a team that is wildly successful in Wisconsin. We are running 9 recall elections and it will be like 9 congressional markets in every market in the state (and Twin Cities).”

In a statement, Walker said: “The accusation of any wrongdoing written in the complaint by the office of a partisan Democrat district attorney by me or by my campaign is categorically false. This is nothing more than a partisan investigation with no basis in state law.”

2) A conservative leader voiced concerns about coordination between outside groups and Walker

The documents show that the Wisconsin Club for Growth acted as a conduit for funneling dark money to pro-Walker and pro-GOP groups. It also ran its own ads defending Walker and his policy agenda, which included a controversial budget-repair bill that limited bargaining rights for public-sector workers.

Wisconsin Club for Growth’s activities had at least one conservative leader worried. “Notably, prior to the 2011 Wisconsin Senate recall elections, the national Club for Growth organization raised concerns about coordination or interaction with Wisconsin Club for Growth and Friends of Scott Walker as early as 2009.”

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1201720-john-doe-ii-docs/annotations/163747.js’);

The documents cite a comment by the national Club for Growth’s then-director, David Keating, who said he had “legal concerns” about Wisconsin Club for Growth ads that featured Walker.

3) Walker’s alleged coordination scheme was an expansive, all-hands-on-deck effort

A quick bit of history: In early 2011, Walker introduced Act 10, the anti-union bill that curbed workers’ rights. Democrats and labor unions reacted by organizing massive protests, then sought retribution by recalling state lawmakers who’d voted for the bill.

The documents reveal, in the clearest detail yet, the extent to which Walker, Wisconsin Republicans, and a slew of dark-money nonprofit groups rallied to fend off those recall efforts. RJ Johnson, a Walker confidant and a central player in the coordination probe, used the Wisconsin Club for Growth to coordinate with the Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity, the national Club for Growth, the Republican Party of Wisconsin, the Republican State Leadership Committee, and the Republican Governors Association. It was a murder’s row of conservative players who all pitched in to help preserve the GOP majorities in the Wisconsin legislature and to keep Walker, a rising GOP star, in office.

dc.embed.loadNote(‘//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1201720-john-doe-ii-docs/annotations/163833.js’);

4) All of this information may be for naught

Something to remember amidst the frenzy surrounding the release of the new documents: The John Doe probe into Walker and his allies is almost dead.

The pushback has been led by Eric O’Keefe, a director with Wisconsin Club for Growth who has fought the probe every step of the way, selectively leaking documents to the Wall Street Journal editorial board and suing in court to halt the investigation. And he’s having success: The probe is temporarily on hold while a federal judge studies his lawsuit. O’Keefe say their activities zeroed in on by prosecutors weren’t illegal because the groups in question coordinated on issue-based activities, not expressly political work. He also argues that the John Doe probe violates his First Amendment rights to free speech.

So far, a state judge and a federal judge have sympathized with O’Keefe’s argument, saying that prosecutors have failed to make the case for illegal coordination. The investigation of Walker and his allies is still alive, but its prospects don’t look good.

Read the documents:

DV.load(“//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1201720-john-doe-ii-docs.js”,
width: 630,
height: 700,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
pdf: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-1201720-john-doe-ii-docs”
);

Visit site: 

4 Key Takeaways About Scott Walker’s Alleged "Criminal Scheme"

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Oster, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 4 Key Takeaways About Scott Walker’s Alleged "Criminal Scheme"

WATCH: MoJo’s Dan Schulman Talking Koch Brothers, ‘Sons of Wichita’ on The Daily Show

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Mother Jones’ own Daniel Schulman appeared on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart on Tuesday to talk about Sons of Wichita, his new book on the Koch brothers. If you’d like to buy the book, click here.

Watch:

Read article here: 

WATCH: MoJo’s Dan Schulman Talking Koch Brothers, ‘Sons of Wichita’ on The Daily Show

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Oster, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on WATCH: MoJo’s Dan Schulman Talking Koch Brothers, ‘Sons of Wichita’ on The Daily Show

Quote of the Day: Billionaires Insist that Billionaire-Friendly Policies Don’t Actually Benefit Billionaires

Mother Jones

Americans for Prosperity, the Koch-fueled super-PAC, is doubling down this year after its failure to move the needle much in 2012. Politico’s Kenneth Vogel got hold of an internal strategy memo that outlines what they think went wrong in the last election:

To remedy the messaging disadvantage, AFP developed “a sophisticated new media message-testing strategy to target specific demographics in specific locations we need to move on our issues,” according to the memo….“If the presidential election told us anything, it’s that Americans place a great importance on taking care of those in need and avoiding harm to the weak,” reads the AFP memo….“We consistently see that Americans in general are concerned that free-market policy — and its advocates — benefit the rich and powerful more than the most vulnerable of society….We must correct this misconception.”

And what better way to correct this misconception than to collect hundreds of millions of dollars from America’s crankiest right-wing billionaires in order to fund the election of people dedicated to slashing every possible program that protects the weak and takes care of those in need? It’s hard to understand why America’s poor and working class are so obstinately misguided about what America’s moneyed class really wants.

See original:  

Quote of the Day: Billionaires Insist that Billionaire-Friendly Policies Don’t Actually Benefit Billionaires

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Quote of the Day: Billionaires Insist that Billionaire-Friendly Policies Don’t Actually Benefit Billionaires

The Lawyer Behind the Supreme Court’s Latest Campaign Finance Decision Has a New Cause: Sarah Palin for Senate

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

When the Supreme Court recently demolished yet another chunk of the nation’s campaign finance laws, Dan Backer arguably cheered louder than anyone. It was Backer, a Washington, DC-area attorney active in conservative politics, who had convinced an Alabama businessman named Shaun McCutcheon to challenge the government’s limit on the number of candidates, party committees, and political action committees an individual can contribute to in a single election cycle. (The basic limits on how much money that donor can give to each candidate, party, or PAC remain intact.) Backer, who represented McCutcheon, responded to the news of the Supreme Court’s decision by tweeting (in apparent reference to William Wallace in Braveheart): “FREEEEDOMMMMM!!!!”

Backer’s victory is shining some light on another high-profile cause of his: Convincing Sarah Palin to run for US Senate.

In an email headlined “Palin for Senate” recently blasted out by a PAC called the Tea Party Leadership Fund, Backer writes, “Sarah’s the proven leader we need.” He goes on, “She has a better grasp on world politics, and she knows what it means to cherish and protect our American freedoms far better than THE MAN WHO IS SUPPOSED TO BE LEADING THE FREE WORLD.” Backer slams incumbent Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) for spending “too much time in Washington, DC, begging the Obama administration for favors rather than representing the good people of Alaska.” Palin supporters need to act quick, Backer warns: The window for her to get into the race “has almost closed.” And so Backer asks recipients to sign a petition and gather enough signatures to “to push Sarah Palin over the top in a critical run for Alaska’s Senate seat in 2014.”

In an interview, Backer said almost 100,000 people had signed the Palin for Senate petition. If Palin did enter the race,he said the Tea Party Leadership PAC would bolster her candidacy with direct mail and radio ads. “Nobody’s going to be a greater agent for change than Sarah Palin from Alaska,” Backer told me. “She will bring something to the race and she will disrupt the Senate. And disruption is good.”

Read the email:

DV.load(“//www.documentcloud.org/documents/1112091-backer-palin-senate-email.js”,
width: 630,
height: 500,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
pdf: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-1112091-backer-palin-senate-email”
);

Backer’s plea isn’t entirely out of left field. Palin has made noises about running for Senate in Alaska. Last summer, she said on Sean Hannity’s radio show that she was considering a run. “I’ve considered it because people have requested me considering it,” she said. “But I’m still waiting to see what the lineup will be and hoping that…there will be some new blood, new energy, not just kind of picking from the same old politicians in the state.” But this email comes when it’s getting late for a possible Palin campaign. (The filing deadline is six weeks away.) Right now, the much-watched Alaska Senate race pits Begich against Republican Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell. Most polling shows Begich in the lead, but the seat is considered a toss-up Senate race that could determine which party ends up controlling the upper chamber.

Backer’s email asks for more than just a signature; it includes a plea to donate $5 or more to the Tea Party Leadership Fund PAC. (Backer is the PAC’s treasurer.) A cynical political observer might wonder if this “Palin for Senate” effort could be more of a fundraising ploy than a realistic attempt to get Palin into the race. Campaign records show that the Tea Party Leadership Fund has so far raked in $3.8 million in the 2013-14 election cycle, and most of that money—almost $9 of every $10—has gone to fundraising, legal fees (to Backer’s own firm), consulting, and other related expenses.

But Backer says the Tea Party Leadership PAC has spent so much non-electoral money because it was building its donor lists during 2013, an off year. This year, he says, the PAC plans to be a counterweight to the outside money from corporations and trade associations backing establishment Republican candidates. “We knew this was going to be a tough cycle and a tough year,” he said. “You need resources you can put on the ground when you need them.”

Source: 

The Lawyer Behind the Supreme Court’s Latest Campaign Finance Decision Has a New Cause: Sarah Palin for Senate

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, oven, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Lawyer Behind the Supreme Court’s Latest Campaign Finance Decision Has a New Cause: Sarah Palin for Senate

The Supreme Court’s McCutcheon Decision Nuked Campaign Laws In These 11 States (Plus DC)

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court’s five conservative justices struck down the so-called aggregate limit on campaign contributions—that is, the total number of donations within federal limits an individual can make to candidates, parties, and committees during a two-year election cycle. Before the court’s decision in McCutcheon v. FEC, there was a $123,200 ceiling on those legal donations; now, a donor can cut as many $2,600 checks to candidates and $5,000 checks to parties as he or she wants. (The $2,600 and $5,000 figures are the maximum direct contributions a donor can give.)

The court’s decision specifically dealt with the federal aggregate limit, but legal experts say McCutcheon will also void similar campaign finance laws in 11 states and the District of Columbia. “The McCutcheon opinion is right from the Supreme Court and what the Supreme Court said is state aggregate limits on top of the federal limit are unconstitutional today, unconstitutional yesterday, unconstitutional 20 years ago,” says David Mitrani, an election lawyer who specializes in state campaign finance law.

Mitrani says the impact of McCutcheon on state-level laws will vary depending on how low a state’s aggregate limit was. Rhode Island and Wisconsin, for instance, limited donors from giving more than $10,000 per calendar year to state political committees. “There are going to be pretty big changes in how money flows into those states,” Mitrani says. In New York State, however, Mitrani says he doesn’t expect as big of an impact when the existing aggregate limit was set at $150,000 a year.

Here are the 11 states (plus DC) where aggregate limits are now likely gutted thanks to the Supreme Court’s McCutcheon decision:

var listItemTemplate = ‘

state
limit

‘;
var thing = PrettyList(
‘0As5NjsZ93CjDdDdlb21KMktsMFAzbjFJU3ZnSDdXSlE’,
‘#prettylist’,
listItemTemplate,
‘https://s3.amazonaws.com/mj-tabletop-proxy’
);

Continue reading here: 

The Supreme Court’s McCutcheon Decision Nuked Campaign Laws In These 11 States (Plus DC)

Posted in alo, Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court’s McCutcheon Decision Nuked Campaign Laws In These 11 States (Plus DC)

“This Is The Era of The Empowered ‘One Percenter'”

Mother Jones

The Koch brothers. Citizens United. “Dark money.” Billionaire sugardaddies. A Republican takeover of Congress.

These are a few of the 2014-themed issues that Mother Jones senior reporter Andy Kroll and ProPublica’s Kim Barker discuss on the latest episode of Moyers and Company, the popular weekly show hosted by the acclaimed journalist Bill Moyers. They talk about the 2014 midterms, which could be the most expensive off-year election cycle in history; the influence of big-money politics on Congress and the White House; and the upcoming Supreme Court decision that could obliterate yet another campaign law and send even more money rushing into our elections.

As Kroll says in the interview, this is a great time to be a fired-up millionaire or billionaire. Today, these individuals have the ability to pump unlimited sums of cash into our elections through super-PACs and anonymously funded nonprofit groups. As they do, the center of gravity in our political system shifts from the political parties to these mega-donors spending big on the Democratic and Republican side. “This is the era of the empowered ‘one percenter,'” Kroll notes. “They’re taking action and they’re becoming the new, headline players in this political system.”

What’s the effect of all that money on our democracy? Watch the entire episode above or over at BillMoyers.com to find out. Throughout the weekend, you can catch the interview on your local PBS affiliate.

Visit source: 

“This Is The Era of The Empowered ‘One Percenter'”

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, ProPublica, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on “This Is The Era of The Empowered ‘One Percenter'”

Potential 2016 Contender Martin O’Malley Supports New Bill to Wean Politicians Off Big Money

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

While Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic nominee in the 2016 presidential contest, has made headlines lately for the big-money-fueled super-PACs lining up in her corner, another potential Democratic contender, Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, is embracing the other end of the political money spectrum.

O’Malley, who would likely run to the left of Clinton in 2016, says he supports the Government By The People Act, a new bill recently introduced by Maryland Congressman John Sarbanes intended to increase the number of small-dollar donors in congressional elections and nudge federal candidates to court those $50 and $100 givers instead of wealthier people who can easily cut $2,500 checks. The nuts and bolts of the Government By The People Act are nothing new: To encourage political giving, Americans get a $25 tax credit for the primary season and another $25 credit for the general election. And on the candidate side, every dollar of donations up to $150 will be matched with six dollars of public money, in effect “supersizing” small donations. (Participating candidates must agree to a $1,000 cap on all contributions to get that 6-to-1 match.) In other words, the Sarbanes bill wants federal campaigns funded by more people giving smaller amounts instead of fewer people maxing out.

What makes the Sarbanes bill stand out is breadth of support it enjoys. The bill has 130 cosponsors—all Democrats with the exception of Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.)—including Sarbanes and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) And practically every progressive group under the sun has stumped for the Government By The People Act, including the Communication Workers of America, the Teamsters, Sierra Club, NAACP, Working Families, Friends of Democracy super-PAC, and more. Through efforts like the Democracy Initiative and the Fund for the Republic, progressives are mobilizing around the issue of money in politics, and their championing of Sarbanes’ bill is a case in point.

But O’Malley is the first 2016 hopeful to stump for the reforms outlined in the Government By The People Act. “We need more action and smarter solutions to improve our nation’s campaign finance system, and I commend Congressmen John Sarbanes and Chris Van Hollen for their leadership on this important issue,” O’Malley said in a statement. “Elections are the foundation of a successful democracy and these ideas will put us one step closer toward a better, more representative system that reflects the American values we share.”

No other Democratic headliners, including Clinton, have taken a position on the Sarbanes bill. (New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo did include a statewide public financing program in his latest budget proposal. And Clinton, as a senator, cosponsored the Kerry-Wellstone Clean Elections Act.) Yet with nearly every major liberal group rallying around the money-in-politics issue, any Democrat angling for the White House in 2016 will need to speak up on how he or she will reform today’s big-money political system.

See original article: 

Potential 2016 Contender Martin O’Malley Supports New Bill to Wean Politicians Off Big Money

Posted in Anchor, Citizen, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Potential 2016 Contender Martin O’Malley Supports New Bill to Wean Politicians Off Big Money