BRIAN ROSS REPORTS
ALERT: A New Message From Osama Bin Laden Is on the Way
Legal Powerhouse Olson Will Take W.Va. Court Case to SCOTUS
Panel OKs "Boot Camp" Bill
Oil Giants to Appear Before Congress
Bush Signs CNMI Immigration Bill into Law
Embattled Official Defends Pricey Hand Towels
Shock and Awe on M Street
WEWS Cleveland: Natural Gas Boom Has Hidden Danger
Lobbyists Making Even More Money Than Ever
Thanks to You, the Blotter Marks Second Year With More Success
White House Ousts Top Official Accused of Political Favoritism
Second Trial for Boeing Whistleblower
Undercover Investigation: One-Stop Shopping for Steroids
Report: U.S. Anti-Corruption Efforts Looking Good (in Iraq)
CIA Tape Probes, Still Chugging Along
Ex-KBR Workers to Testify on Contract Fraud
McCain Aided Arizona Businessman
Duke Briber Hasn't Made Bail, Judge Says
Rezko out on Bail
TOP BLOTTER CATEGORIES
- Abramoff Lobbying Scandal
- American Al Qaeda
- Avian Flu
- Beirut Hospital Out of Gas
- CIA
- CIA Secret Prisons
- D.C. Madam Affair
- FBI
- Federal Air Marshal Service
- Homeland Security
- Hurricane Katrina
- Mark Foley Internet Scandal
- Millionaire Sex Scandal
- Nigerian E-mail Scams
- Norman Hsu, Clinton Fundraiser
- NSA: Wiretapping
- Osama bin Laden
- Payola
- Pharmacy Investigation
- Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert
- Terror
- U.K. Airline Terror Plot
- U.K. Bombing Attempts
- Wen Ho Lee
- William Jefferson
- Zarqawi
'08 Candidates' Disclosures Make Bush/Cheney Look Good
July 26, 2007 2:15 PM
The major 2008 presidential campaigns have recruited more than 1,800 individuals -- known as "bundlers" -- to bring in tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars to their campaign coffers, according to whitehouseforsale.org, a new Web site launched today by the campaign finance watchdog group Public Citizen.
But they're falling short on telling the public who those people are and how much they are raising, the group says. Even the Bush/Cheney campaigns -- whose administration has become notorious for its secrecy -- did a better job of disclosing where their money came from.
"The campaigns are being far less transparent about bundling than the 2004 field of candidates," says Laura MacCleery, director of Public Citizen's CongressWatch, which developed the site. "Anyone willing to be less transparent than, for example, George Bush, should realize we have a problem."
Bundlers are well-connected individuals who solicit contributions from friends and associates on behalf of a candidate after donating the maximum $2,300 individual donation.
While the major 2008 candidates have publicly released the names of their top fundraisers, only two, Democratic hopefuls Barack Obama, Ill., and Hillary Clinton, N.Y., have disclosed how much the bundlers have raised and published the lists on their campaign Web sites, according to Public Citizen.
Bundling has been a common campaign fundraising tool since the 1970s when post-Watergate reforms limited the amount individuals could directly contribute to federal candidates.
Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.
The practice was taken to new levels when the 2004 Bush/Cheney campaign designated their top fundraisers as Bush "Pioneers" and "Rangers." The Bush campaign regularly updated the list of bundlers who raised $100,000 and $200,000 on their Web site with their state of residence.
While the major 2008 candidates have not publicly disclosed how much their top fundraisers have brought in, it's clear that they are keeping track of how much they are raising.
For example, Republican hopeful former Mayor Rudy Giuliani has taken a page from the Bush fundraising model, using baseball terminology to designate his top fundraisers as "Sluggers," "All Stars," "MVPs" and "Team Captains" for bundling $50,000 to $1 million, according to the New York Daily News. Giuliani thanked some of those top earners with a retreat in New York last weekend, where events included golf and a dinner yacht cruise (pictured above).
Democratic Sen. Clinton has also set targets for her top fundraisers, known as Hillraisers, to funnel $25,000 to $1 million in donations to her presidential campaign.
Campaign finance reform advocates, like Public Citizen, say that the practice of bundling, while legal, goes against the spirit of campaign finance laws that seek to limit the influence of campaign donors.
"There is a reason for individual campaign contribution limits, it's supposed to create a more even playing field between someone who has a vote to give and someone who can max out donations," says MacCleery. "If you have bundlers who were influence peddlers who lobby on policy issues, like Ken Lay or Jack Abramoff, those individuals have a disproportionate influence over policy."
Calls to the Giuliani, Edwards, Romney and McCain campaigns were not returned.
This post has been updated.
Do you have a tip for Brian Ross and the Investigative Team?
July 26, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (14)
Obama is willing to disclose, yet his picture is splashed on the story with those who don't?
Why does this headline look exactly like something the National Enquirer would play up?
Posted by: ErniePF | Jul 26, 2007 4:46:57 PM
What the hell?? I choked when I saw this headline at abcnews.com with the pictures of McCain, Obama, and Giuliani. I was certain that Obama was being transparent; that is one of the many reasons I support him, and have even donated to his campaign. Well, well. He IS being transparent, according to Brian Ross's blog. So why the heck is ABC putting Obama's picture alongside two who are NOT being transparent. Yet again, we bust the bubble that is the myth that the media is liberal-biased! Shame on you ABC!
Posted by: Jill K. | Jul 26, 2007 5:13:50 PM
Obama is playing the money game along with everyone else, but if that's the only way to win under the current system, at least he is being more transparent about it than the other candidates:
Posted by: Akhilleus13 | Jul 26, 2007 5:35:37 PM
Sorry, ABC. Slapping up a different picture that merely adds Edwards and Romney doesn't fix the fact the you ARE showing the faces of the only two candidates, Clinton and Obama, who ARE being transparent about "bundling" fundraisers. I can't believe that someone at ABCnews.com actually felt this was a remedy to what is at best a misleading photo. Did you really think that by including two more people we wouldn't notice??
Posted by: Jill K | Jul 26, 2007 10:38:41 PM
As the former FBI chief Robert S. Mueller challenges and contradicts Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales’ sworn testimony over the Bush administration’s secret eavesdropping program, and the lying by Scooter Libby’s about national security issues, the unjust war in Irag, the raising of the minimum wage, the rape of our country’s resources, the lying about weapons of mass destruction, and all the other things to numerous to list herein, the U.S. Congress seems to be bringing up the temperture a notch or two on these corrupt Republicans and the Bush administration
Then there is the slippery slope on growth and lending worries sending the Dow industrials down some 300 points in the worst one-day decline since last February bringing home to roost the sad state of affairs these corrupt Republicans have brought this country into. Then, there is today a Federal Judge who blocked a local law designed to deter illegal immigration, a decision most likely will affect many communities around the country because local government no longer has any rights to apprehend or arrest lawbreakers in their communities. This federal district Judge James Munley in my opinion erred when he said the town of Hazleton in northeastern Pennsylvania acted unconstitutionally when it passed it’s Illegal Immigration Relief Act Ordinance under which businesses would be penalized for hiring illegal aliens and landlords would be fined for renting rooms to them. I wonder, what part of illegal does this federal judge not understand? If there is a violation of law does not the perpetrator face judgment at the bar of justice? In my opinion, if the local government cannot arrest a criminal for committing a criminal act this country is in wrost shape than I thought, and I mean serious shape.
Posted by: William in Alabama | Jul 26, 2007 11:32:58 PM
There are no upstanding politicians.
Anyone who would actually be good at the job, wouldn't want it!
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | Jul 27, 2007 9:36:03 AM
The only thing Obama can disclose is his complete incompetence and how chronically naive he his. This man could not run a lemonade stand.
Posted by: Sam | Jul 27, 2007 10:20:49 AM
Politicians will be politicians! Nothing about this is new. I do disagree with the title of this article. Excuse me, sure the candidates look bad, but nothing and I do mean NOTHING could make Bush and Cheney "look good" at this point.
Posted by: LetsKeepItReal | Jul 27, 2007 12:53:07 PM
$,$,$,$ is not politics should be about. It should be, in it's purest form a calling to serve our fellow human beings in a governmental role. We all know and are bombarded by e-mails begging us for donations for this candidate or that one and only they can solve our problems with our $. Wrong! We don't count, just our $ does and how much we can send or collect to these black holes of contributions. That to me is the epitome of political corruption.
I propose that we pool all the $ collected(time frame or amount as a limit) for various candidates and hand it out equally to each of them. Our system has degenerated into one of who has the most money will probably win and obviously that is not what this is supposed to be about. We must control the $ and then we will control the politicaian. If we don't then we are nothing more than money breeding machines for these smiling buffoons. Is the politican owned by the person who votes for him/her or owned by the coporations that buy that person with finances the tiv ads,newspapers ads,etc..?
Posted by: michael hall | Jul 29, 2007 8:56:12 AM
There is no honor among politicians.
Posted by: Rick McDaniel | Jul 30, 2007 10:56:00 AM
Are you kidding? Politicians will be politicians. I know those in the running may look pretty bad but there is absolutely NO WAY they or anyone else could make Bush and Chaney look "good" at this point.
Posted by: LetsKeepItReal | Jul 30, 2007 4:33:10 PM
Apperantly the American people are too ignorant, or too busy to find out that there are honest, responsible choices for 08. Kusinich and Paul are both men of integrity who are being systematically marginalized by commercial news organizations. It is a sad day in this countries history that this congress and the last have handed over the keys to the hen house to the wolves, while the watch dog press sleeps
Posted by: Pete | Aug 1, 2007 11:16:01 AM
Only ABC would find a way for bush & cheney to look good. Even if it was ONLY THEIR OPINION, I think it explains why most anti bush/cheney posts keep getting deleted from these pages, but that's ONLY MY OPINION.
Posted by: newzjunky | Aug 1, 2007 8:22:17 PM
Probably the majority of Americans that cheer for these "buffoons" and vote for them do so because in their eyes it is the candidate's ability to raise money that is a good indicator of their leadership, organizational, decision-making and management skills. I think a society only gets the leaders it deserves. The consistent lack of quality of America's leaders and its political process is only a reflection of the state of America's collective consciousness. Where are all the "intellectuals", "pundits" and "saints" who judge the politicians' non-performance and/or lack of morals? I do not see them act to create any alternative to this corrupt and decadent setup. Are they content sitting by the sidelines judging? Get over your silent apathy and act. Show America a better way! Darkness exists only when there is no light. Bad takes over when the good is silent. Personally, I am too confused to come up with a solution to this country's problems. Else I would not be sitting at my desk typing these words.
Posted by: VenuP | Aug 3, 2007 11:41:22 AM
Post a comment
