Top Leaderboard, Site wide
July 22, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed





War of the Whales
S Street Rising


Truthdig Bazaar
Bob Dylan in America

Bob Dylan in America

By Sean Wilentz
$16.92

more items

 
Report

Democrats’ Faustian Bargain

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on May 19, 2007
billhill
AP Photo / Seth Wenig

Familial faces:  Bill Clinton (he’s the one with the pink tie) sets his charm beam on “high” as Chelsea (right) smiles in support of mom Hillary at a New York campaign fund-raiser on April 23, 2007.

By Bill Boyarsky

In their mad race for money, the front-running Democratic presidential candidates might be selling themselves to the devil.  That is, in words more familiar to political debate, they might be delivering themselves into the hands of rich and powerful opponents of progressive policies.

That’s the natural consequence of soliciting the huge sums required by the campaign.  We’ll see what happens if a Democratic president takes office and tries to make progress on universal health insurance, child care, greedy loan practices and all the other parts of a domestic agenda shelved during the Bush presidency and compromised in the Clinton years.

I thought of this after reading a story in The New York Times on Bill Clinton’s efforts on behalf of Hillary.  It was an admiring account of Clinton’s role as “master strategist ... consigliore and ... a fund-raising machine who is steadily pulling in $100,000 or more at receptions.”

You don’t raise $100,000 at an event on charm alone, even with someone as charming as Bill Clinton making the pitch.  More important than charm are the bundlers, the heart of a presidential campaign.  As described in a Hoover Institution study of campaign finance, bundling is “the practice of pooling individual contributions from various people—often those employed by the same business or in the same profession—in order to maximize the political influence of the bundler. Typically, all of the checks collected in this way are sent or delivered to candidates on the same day.”

With federal law limiting individual contributions to $2,300, or $4,600 for a couple, the bundler has become perhaps the most valuable player in presidential politics. Sometimes, a bundler is just a well-connected, rich, star-struck fan.  Other bundlers are friends.  In politics friendship isn’t the same as in normal life.  A friend is a political ally who can help you out.  Life is too busy for other kinds of friendships.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
The most common bundler: a power lawyer, lobbyist, Wall Street executive, real estate mogul or Hollywood boss.  This individual will host a dinner or reception at his or her luxurious home or in a prime room in the most expensive and exclusive club or hotel in town.  The candidate mingles, feigning great interest in the donors’ idiotic ideas.  The candidate then gives a speech sucking up to the guests.  Reporters, barred from the event, wait in a crowded pressroom or stand behind ropes, illustrating that the candidate and the campaign managers hold them in contempt.

A report of the Center For Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan organization that tracks campaign contributions, gives an indication of which Democratic candidates have the best bundlers.  The report does this by breaking down the percentage of donations of $2,300 or more to each candidate.  Such contributions are the usual ingredients of a donation bundle.

  Not surprisingly, the findings correspond to the candidates’ current standing in the presidential nomination handicapping.

First is Sen. Clinton.  A total of 74 percent of the $36 million she has collected came from those giving $2,300 or more.  For Sen. Barack Obama, it was 49 percent of his $25.7 million.  Forty-seven percent of John Edwards’  $14 million came from such big contributors.

That’s a lot of bundling.  With it goes an unspoken agreement that candidate and staff will listen to the bundler’s business and professional problems when the time comes.  When Republicans do this, nobody blinks twice; the Republican Party is in bed with corporate America.  But the Democrats, as heirs to progressive politics, have an obligation to tackle the country’s social and economic problems.

Obviously, the biggest blight on our country today is the war, and the Democrats’ greatest challenge is to find a way to force President Bush to end it. 

After that, though, is the domestic crisis of a poor and middle class deprived of affordable healthcare, good public education and reasonably priced housing.  And that’s just a start.

The biggest of these is health insurance.  All Americans need access to something like Medicare, which provides fairly good insurance for those over 65.  Our present system of employer-based insurance no longer works.  Even big business admits the high cost makes it difficult for American companies to compete with foreign firms.  Companies are shedding workers, often partially replacing them with contract employees who receive no benefits.  The ranks of the middle-class uninsured are growing, joining the large army of uninsured poor.

To fix this, a Democratic president and Congress will have to find their way through a tangle of special interests—drug and insurance companies, big and small employers, doctors and others opposed to universal medical insurance.

Unlike the war debate, these domestic battles will not be fought on a public stage.  They’ll be done in the backrooms, deal by deal, one sneaky clause after another, far from the public view, too arcane for the mainstream media, too dull for most of the blogosphere. 

In this atmosphere, the bundlers are transformed into policy-makers.  Hopefully, a new Democratic president and a Democratic Congress will not sell out to them.

 


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

RAE's avatar

By RAE, May 19, 2007 at 7:47 pm Link to this comment

I disagree with Butterfied - there are far too many people who couldn’t analyse the policies and platforms of the various candidates to save their souls. These folk can only follow what they’re told by their religious leaders or peer group. How do you think Bush ever got elected in the first place?

Those folk haven’t gotten any “smarter” in the last 7 years. They’re still out there by the millions waiting to be told how to vote. All we can hope for is that all their “leaders” will follow Falwell into the hereafter, leaving the sheep without a shepherd on election day.

Report this

By republicanSScareme, May 19, 2007 at 7:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“The candidate then gives a speech sucking up to the guests.”

I can’t believe anyone would think that shit happens.

Report this

By Margaret Currey, May 19, 2007 at 7:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The money will be well spent, people say that both sides are corrupt, that may be but these Republicians have taken our government and sold it to the highest bidder, not only do they give jobs to their cronies, their cronies cannot handle the jobs given to them, even Clinton gave out jobs, but I do believe that the people could do their jobs.  The “good job brownie” was a misnomer, they could no do their jobs because they did not know how.

The Democarats have never had this many people quit in mass like the Republicians, even those running for congresss know that their chances are less and less the longer Bush stays in office and the longer he supports this Gonzales who makes this country look like a pack of fools, The Emperor with clothes has a lot of his administration looking like people without clothes.

Report this

By louis stroud, May 19, 2007 at 5:49 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

well, this is all well and good, collect lots of money, and get in the same position as the r’s, all this debt to repay, and meanwhile our soldiers are getting slaughtered in iraq and afghanistan, do you need to play politics with the bushies? just stop the damned war!!, pull the money, don’t worry what the r’s will say about not supposrting the troops, they would not be getting killed anymore, so gorget the politics, pull the funding and let them howl, the r’s that is, and then our troops can come home, don’t become part of their plan, just stop the war!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS!!!!!!

Report this

By B Webster, May 19, 2007 at 5:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

The assumption of the article is misplaced.  The Dems are not been on the side of the middle-class/poor people in America. Their only goal is to replace the Republican has heads of the Empire. When has an election changed the lives of ordinary people?

Report this

By Peter RV, May 19, 2007 at 5:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Touching tender scene. Is that Monica behind?

Report this

By John F. Butterfield, May 19, 2007 at 3:48 pm Link to this comment

I think Democrats can win the next election without spending much money.

Report this

Page 2 of 2 pages  <  1 2

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook