Tag Archives: Political Contribution

News

How Barack Obama gave top campaign donors government jobs

Leave a comment

Left-leaning Politico reports on corruption, cronyism, nepotism and patronage appointments in the Obama administration.

Excerpt:

Telecom executive Donald H. Gips raised a big bundle of cash to help finance his friend Barack Obama’s run for the presidency.

Gips, a vice president of Colorado-based Level 3 Communications, delivered more than $500,000 in contributions for the Obama war chest, while two other company executives collected at least $150,000 more.

After the election, Gips was put in charge of hiring in the Obama White House, helping to place loyalists and fundraisers in many key positions. Then, in mid-2009, Obama named him ambassador to South Africa. Meanwhile, Level 3 Communications, in which Gips retained stock, received millions of dollars of government stimulus contracts for broadband projects in six states — though Gips said he had been “completely unaware” that the company had received the contracts.

More than two years after Obama took office vowing to banish “special interests” from his administration, nearly 200 of his biggest donors have landed plum government jobs and advisory posts, won federal contracts worth millions of dollars for their business interests or attended numerous elite White House meetings and social events, an investigation by iWatch News has found.

These “bundlers” raised at least $50,000 — and sometimes more than $500,000 — in campaign donations for Obama’s campaign. Many of those in the “Class of 2008” are now being asked to bundle contributions for Obama’s reelection, an effort that could cost $1 billion.

As a candidate, Obama spoke passionately about diminishing the clout of moneyed interests. Kicking off his presidential run on Feb. 10, 2007, he blasted “the cynics, the lobbyists, the special interests,” who had “turned our government into a game only they can afford to play.”

“We’re here today to take it back,” he said.

Say one thing in public, and do the opposite in private. Don’t believe the words of a candidate in their stump speeches. Look at their voting record, and their legislative initiatives, and their ratings from non-partisan organizations, such as the Club For Growth, Citizens Against Government Waste, and the National Taxpayer’s Union. Don’t vote based on pleasant sounding words and pleasant appearances, do the research.

News

Gay donors fuel Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign

3 Comments

From the left-wing Politico.

Excerpt:

President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign is banking on gay donors to make up the cash it’s losing from other groups of wealthy supporters who have been alienated and disappointed by elements of Obama’s first term.

Pleased by an all-out White House push to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” gay donors have surprised campaign officials with the extent of their support. And the campaign’s new fundraising apparatus appears designed to capitalize on their enthusiasm: Obama’s finance committee included one gay man in 2008; there are 15 this year, a source said.

The Obama campaign finance director, Rufus Gifford, was a top California gay fundraiser; the DNC treasurer, Andrew Tobias, is gay; and the White House social secretary — traditionally a key, if unofficial, fundraising job — is also a gay man, Gifford’s former partner Jeremy Bernard.

The spur for the gay community becoming an anchor for Obama’s reelection fundraising is a series of policy shifts in 2010. After a year of rocky relations and suspicion from Obama’s gay supporters that he wasn’t really committed to their issues, the last year saw a surge in activity. Along with the high-profile repeal of the military ban, Obama’s Justice Department recently refused to defend the Defense of Marriage Act. And the administration has taken smaller steps, like gay partner hospital visits and hate crimes legislation, concrete and important gestures that simply weren’t made during the Bush administration.

[…]Professional gay men, with a personal stake in politics and less likely to have children or college funds that would consume their disposable income, have long been key to Democratic fundraising. A rarely told story of Howard Dean’s 2004 rise, for instance, was his early, blockbuster fundraising from gay donors who appreciated his support for civil unions, then a cutting-edge policy.

This is what he gets for refusing to defend the Defense of Marriage Act in court. Democrats don’t believe in marriage. They don’t believe that children should be raised by their mothers AND fathers.

News

Harper would ban political contributions from unions and corporations

Leave a comment
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper

From PostMedia News.

Excerpt:

Stephen Harper says scrapping taxpayer subsidies for political parties could help break Canada’s cycle of holding federal elections every few years, but his political foes say it’s another attempt to financially cripple the other parties.

On Friday, Day 7 of the campaign, Harper said he will ban the subsidies if the Conservatives win a majority government on May 2. Any party that receives more than two per cent of the vote in a general election receives a subsidy of roughly $2 per year for each vote the party received.

Harper said the system funnels taxpayers’ money to political parties they don’t necessarily support, and allows parties to operate in perpetual campaign mode.

“We think money should come from voters. Not from corporations, not from unions and not from government. (It) should come from the voters,” he told reporters.

[…]In January, Harper revealed for the first time, in an interview with Postmedia News, that a ban on the subsidies would be a “clear plank” in his party’s platform for an election.

Shortly after winning the 2008 election, the Tories proposed to end the subsidies, but that sparked anger from the opposition parties and they rallied to form a coalition that nearly defeated Harper’s government. On Friday, Harper made it clear he hasn’t changed his mind. However, in an apparent bid to take some of the sting out of the move and to reduce criticism, he revealed there would be a three-year transition.

“I’ve wanted to change this, but we’re very clear: Unless we have a majority government, we’ll never attempt to change it, because we know that in a minority government you could never move this forward. So if we get a chance to change it, we will,” Harper told reporters.

Basically, there should only be ONE WAY for parties to get money in my view. Individual contributions from workers and small businesses. Anyone who can use government to grant it a monopoly (unions, big corporations) should NOT be allowed to contribute money to politicians. Get the big money from left-wing unions and left-wing big corporations out of politics.

Here’s the latest poll, showing the Conservatives steady at 41.3% support. (H/T Jeanie)