No To Out-Of-State Political Donations

This week, I got an email from David Zuckerman complaining that an out-of-state organization is supporting his opponent in the Lt. Governor’s race here in Vermont.  The organization is the National Association of Realtors and they are supporting his opponent because he is in favor of Act 250 which regulates development.  Now, I don’t blame Zuckerman for being annoyed by out-of-state people trying to influence our elections.  It never seems fair when people with no direct interest in our politics try to use their money to affect the people we elect and the issues we support.  But it’s also disappointing to see people on the left doing exactly the same thing.

Lest I leave the wrong impression, Zuckerman hasn’t done fund-raising for anyone but himself as far as I know.  But others on the left have.

Case in point: I get many emails from Bernie Sanders’ organization soliciting funds to support out-of-state candidates.   As much as I like Bernie, this has always rubbed me the wrong way, especially with his long-standing views on excessive money in elections.  That aside, I need to have a really compelling reason to send cash out of my own community, and some guy running for State Rep in Arkansas (or wherever) isn’t enough.

It’s tempting to think that throwing money around the country will be worth it if it gets people who are not of the same party as Donald Trump elected.  Nevertheless, it’s a risky tactic to embrace.  Unless we want people doing it to us here in Vermont (and we don’t) we should mind our own business when it comes to other states’ elections and let locals decide for themselves.

Comments | 6

  • Just wondering

    I am for getting big money out of politics and challenging decisions that say in effect that corporations are people in their rights. But I have seen in the sixties, the positive effect of people working outside their own states in canvassing, doing voter registration, and giving financially. We are one nation responsible for each other as well as individual states. Once again we are experiencing Voter Suppression in our country, so that I wonder if this letter has validity when considering why it could sometimes be a positive to work for and contribute financially to out-of-state candidates, especially when those who cannot vote as readily, ask us to help them do so.

    Here is a sample letter that might contribute to the discussion:
    Let America Vote Logo

    My calendar says it’s 2018, . If you look at the racially motivated voter suppression happening in Georgia, you’d think we were back in the 1950s with Jim Crow laws in full effect.

    A majority of the 53,000 voter registrations placed on hold by Brian Kemp’s office are from African American applicants. Brian Kemp is running against Stacey Abrams, an African American woman. This is not a coincidence.

    Now Kemp’s office is saying “outside agitators” are responsible for pushing back against his voter-suppression scheme. “Outside agitators” was used during the Civil Rights era by southern politicians who claimed calls for rights and equality were being pushed by white northerners.

    Racist Jim Crow-era voter suppression is happening as we speak — right down to the 1950s-era segregationist lingo. Americans across the country should be outraged, and we should be mobilizing to put an end to this despicable erosion of voting rights in Georgia.

    Our team has knocked nearly 45,000 doors in Georgia to stop Brian Kemp from becoming governor. In a close race, the one-on-one conversations we have will make a difference and could be the deciding factor in whether Kemp becomes governor.

    I hope you’ll stand with our team and for democracy and help us defeat Brian Kemp. The voter suppression he’s deploying should be read about in history books about our country’s regretful past, not on full display in 2018.

    Thank you,
    Jason Noble
    Communications Director

  • Regarding "No to out-of-state political donations

    Lise, I have continued to think about your post, and will do so further.

    Short video concerning another out-of- state request for donations of time, information spreading, and financial support.
    Just check out last Monday’s Rachel Maddow show with O.J. Semans, Executive Director of Four Directions — and you’ll understand what is going on North Dakota right now, 23 days out from the most important election in our life time — and then come back and finish reading this email:
    https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/native-americans-rallying-to-overcome-gop-obstacles-to-voting-1345088067862?v=railb&&link_id=0&can_id=ef87becc27efc749f3c20877f854965c&source=email-navajo-nation-could-turn-arizona-blue-in-november&email_referrer=email_438888&email_subject=navajo-nation-could-turn-arizona-blue-in-november

    For me, this is a situation where the right and responsibility to help with donations of time and money is palpable. We can help in the immediate concerns for the welfare of people being hurt by targeted voter suppression. This out of state work is compatible for me, with working to end the Citizens United sponsored flow of money from corporate and huge lobbying donors. One activity rather than negating the other, may be taking steps toward helping individual to vote for their candidates who are being punished for good decisions through huge donors and voter suppression tactics.

  • Out of state money cuts both ways

    In past elections, out of state money and organizational strength have been used to defeat local ballot initiatives on a variety of issues. Some if not most of these initiatives were on the progressive side. My thinking when this happens is that it shouldn’t be allowed.

    This feels like one of those things that is good when our side does it but not so good when the other side does. And in that case, I wonder if anyone should be doing it.

    With voter suppression, I would expect a national outcry because it’s a crime and should be called out and stopped. But I’m not sure more money is always the answer. Maybe in these times, money is just the most expedient way to express oneself.

    Obvious civil rights violations aside, I still get an uneasy feeling about getting too involved in the politics in other jurisdictions. I wonder what local politics would have done before the internet. 😉

  • Obvious civil rights violations

    Lise,

    Like you, I would like to see Big money out of politics. There needs to be reform and the situation of Citizens United to be overturned. I like the mentioning that it is ok to get involved in the obvious civil rights violations in the politics in other jurisdictions, while still getting an uneasy feeling about getting too involved in the politics in other jurisdictions when civil rights violations are not happening.

    I agree. The difficulty for me is how many civil rights violations are happening. I am grateful for union members who came to support the political campaigns which were not advocating for big business union busting . Grateful for folks who assisted with the campaign of politicians who were working for reforms in housing, policing and facing the inequities of race . Supporting someone who was opposed to the likes of Ray Moore seemed like a civil rights action. Working against voter suppression is good Working for those candidates who have proven that they are against Detention for women and children in Immigration Reform is another reason. Helping those who believe in Climate Change seems another reason to get involved in other juridstictions where a Senator from another area makes a decision that effects all of us. People unjustly not having health care is another issue that is a justice issue that crosses juridstictions and is a national concern.

    Donations of time, energy and sometimes money is helpful. In New Hampshire when Death Penalty Abolitionists were working hard to stop the death penalty through legislation by supporting legislatures, it seemed right to cross over the river to help them. In local elections that effect the justice concerns of all of us, it seems right to help each other out .

    The problem is the big money and corporations being considered people which is wrong and unfair disadvantage. Neighbor helping neighbor across state lines in justice work effecting all, does seem right to me, even if that help is in food or sending money for food and supplies, or testing, canvassing or financially supporting canvassers, writing letters encouraging voting, making phone calls, or some other creative donation of time and the little bit of money some of us can contribute..

    While thinking about this in theory, I am practically so grateful for those who come into the states where basic human rights are being violated: Grateful to those who sent money and gave time to the folks in Flint to have support candidates who are trying to break into the Michigan legislature to assure clean water and to get help for those children who suffer from the effects of their just rights for clean water.

  • Tough one

    It’s a tough one. If the other team has a nuke, do you go into battle with sticks and stones?

    I definitely dislike out of state money coming into Vermont to support politicians. Any of them.

    If I was in another state and considering sending money to Vermont to help sway things toward my, say, Texas point of view, I’d be doing it because I thought the nice people up in Vermont needed some swaying. They just don’t do things right, you see, and I’d want to send my billions to help. I might even notice that the opposition has no out of state money, so my help would be influential.

    Now, if I just called people, or wrote to them, or donated my time, that’s me as an American reaching out to another individual. I think. If I send money, I’m not longer “talking” to any specific people. I’m swaying groups.

    As a Vermonter, I’m mostly concerned with things here, but I do have opinions about elsewhere. Should I get involved in local politics in southwest Florida? What would the people there think of me helping?

    I think the problem is the money. If everyone was limited to what they could do personally, in their free time, it would place a more natural limit on campaigns. As it stands now, a large amount of money can outweigh those personal efforts in some cases.

  • A tough one

    “It’s a tough one. If the other team has a nuke, do you go into battle with sticks and stones?”

    Thanks Chris, this is how I feel it is like.. The David and Goliath story reworded.
    For some folks the answer is “Yes”. There is a role for some people of resisting against all odds.

    “I definitely dislike out of state money coming into Vermont to support politicians. Any of them.”

    Generally me too, but I would appreciate the contribution of an out-of-state friend toward helping to get people to a Guns Sense rally in Montpelier, (especially the teens) and supporting the politician voting for gun regulations.

    “If I was in another state and considering sending money to Vermont to help sway things toward my, say, Texas point of view, I’d be doing it because I thought the nice people up in Vermont needed some swaying. They just don’t do things right, you see, and I’d want to send my billions to help. I might even notice that the opposition has no out of state money, so my help would be influential.”

    Absolutely big money needs to be out. Makes sense to me. Citizens United has to go. Controls on contribution amounts must be made to equalize the field.
    While working for the regulations to come, , we do what we can in the here and now. Personal donation from other people in other states who were also working on Gun Sense, would be welcome by me for a candidate I knew was a person of integrity working on this issue.
    However, I doubt if big donors would be interested in the issues and politicians I support. Nor do I think that large donors think about “the nice people in Vermont needed some swaying” because Vermonters do not see things right. I might just be interested in sending big bucks to protect and increase my profit in gun sales, no matter the guise I worked under.

    “Now, if I just called people, or wrote to them, or donated my time, that’s me as an American reaching out to another individual. I think. If I send money, I’m not longer “talking” to any specific people. I’m swaying groups.”

    I like that distinction. Thank You. I do not have much money, but if someone I trust asked for help on a campaign/issue they were working on, then I would help. New Hampshire folks ask us Vermonters all the time to help out with their campaigns. I get phone calls to come over and canvas, bring cookies and such all the time. Good friends just over the border in MA need help with Elizabeth Warren. I am a Vermonter, but it is good to help a neighbor. My neighbor is not bound by State boundaries. If asked by a Missouri friend or someone in Florida, I would help as I can.

    “As a Vermonter, I’m mostly concerned with things here, but I do have opinions about elsewhere. Should I get involved in local politics in southwest Florida? What would the people there think of me helping?”

    As a Vermonter, I’m focused first on Vermont too. A good rule of thumb for me (not everyone) is to go where I am asked to go and needed. Give when I am asked by those I trust. When a particular state has a referendum that is voter repression, or any of the denial of human rights issues, then it is right for me to go where I am not only not asked, but where I am not wanted. It is a right to contribute . Perhaps even a responsibility.

    “I think the problem is the money. If everyone was limited to what they could do personally, in their free time, it would place a more natural limit on campaigns. As it stands now, a large amount of money can outweigh those personal efforts in some cases.”

    Absolutely. Helpful summary. Continuing to try against such odds as we have now, is hard. The money not only can but does outweigh personal efforts and general people’s donations. And still we carry our slingshots sometimes only loaded with love .. and foolishly go against the windmills. Our sticks and stones of marching, rallies, canvassing , texting, and phone calling are slight against the Nukes of corporate conniving and greed. Some of us work together across state lines on the concerns we so deeply share in common..
    If one does not want to work on issues across state lines, one can work on encouraging voter turnout throughout the country.. That is a non-party issue that looks for volunteers. Of course that is still just a stick and stones endeavor,,,,

Leave a Reply