The D.C. donor class doesn’t represent the diversity of Washington D.C.’s population, a new Demos report finds. In Washington D.C.’s 2014 mayoral election, large donors (those who gave more than $1,000) accounted for 67 percent of all money raised by the three candidates in 2014.
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision vacating the federal bribery conviction of former Virginia Governor Robert McDonnell. The Court’s ruling narrowed the scope of federal bribery laws and required clearer jury instructions on the kinds of “official acts” that can be prosecuted when officeholders accept personal gifts from private individuals. In response, Brenda Wright, Vice President of Policy and Legal Strategies at Demos, issued the following statement:
New York, New York — Today, Demos, Every Voice, People for the American Way, and 21 other organizations sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee opposing Judge Amul Thapar’s confirmation to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The organizations called into question Judge Thapar’s troubling record on money in politics, noting that they are deeply concerned with the growing role of big money in American politics.
Washington, DC – Today, Demos, Every Voice, People for the American Way, and 23 other organizations sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee opposing John Bush’s confirmation to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth District and Damien Schiff’s confirmation to the Court of Federal Claims. The organizations opposed Bush and Schiff due to their troubling views on the issue of money in politics.
Washington, D.C.-- Today’s 5-0 vote by the Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety to advance the Fair Elections Act of 2017 (B22-0192) to the full Council for consideration is a major step forward for the campaign, supporters said today. They called on the Council to immediately schedule a vote to pass the legislation.
Councilmembers Charles Allen, David Grosso, Anita Bonds, Mary M. Cheh, and Vincent C. Gray voted unanimously in favor of the legislation, which passed without amendment.
David Callahan, a senior fellow at the think tank Demos, contends the tax code should differentiate between charities and overtly partisan advocacy organizations. Now neither type of group must reveal the names of its supporters.
The Montana Supreme Court in Helena stands just off the main drag, dramatically called Last Chance Gulch Street. The picturesque setting is fitting for an institution that has just challenged the U.S. Supreme Court to a legal showdown on the enormously important question of whether corporations should have an unfettered right to dominate elections or whether citizens have the right to adopt commonsense protections to defend democratic government from corruption. Get the kids off the streets, because this could be an epic confrontation.
The difference is obvious, Potter replied. Because 527 groups were legally shady, they attracted far less money from fewer donors. True, the FEC didn’t enforce the law, but donors couldn’t be sure that would be the case, and some were unwilling to take the risk.
The U.S. Supreme Court's Citizens United decision unleashed the specter of unlimited corporate political donations in U.S. elections. So far, however, it's mostly rich individuals doing the donating.
One of the effects of the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision is that it allowed corporations to give unlimited amounts to independent expenditure political action committees capable of supporting or opposing political candidates.
But a new report from the non-profit group Demos shows that the majority, 55.6 percent, of donations to super PACs in 2010 and 2011 still came from individuals rather than for-profit entities.
A joint analysis by Demos and US PIRG released today takes a detailed look at the increasing (and deleterious) impact that so-called Super PACs are having on elections in the United States. Super PACs are independent political action committees that can accept unlimited and often undisclosed financial contributions from donors to campaign for or against candidates or issues during an election.
A new report from two public-interest groups confirms fears "that the cash for big-ticket campaign spending like TV advertising is increasingly controlled by an elite class of super-rich patrons not afraid to plunk down a million bucks or more for favored candidates and causes."
Six out of the top 10 fundraising super PACs have received untraceable donations. In total, 20 percent of super PACs received untraceable donations in 2011.
A study entitled "Auctioning Democracy" also found that the super rich give a large amount of the funding received by super PACs. This skews American politics, it concluded, because wealthy donors have different life experiences and political preferences than other citizens.