Once Again, DNC Panel Blocks Vote on Dark Money Ban in Democratic Primaries - CommonDreams

[GGoss]

Once Again, DNC Panel Blocks Vote on Dark Money Ban in Democratic Primaries - CommonDreams

For the second time in less than five months, the Democratic National Committee's resolutions panel refused Thursday to allow a vote on a proposed ban on dark money in the party's primaries, despite substantial support for the change among DNC members and prominent progressive lawmakers.

Judith Whitmer, the chair of the Nevada Democratic Party and lead sponsor of the dark money resolution, wrote on Twitter that "these funds are being used to exclude, not empower. They're being used to silence the voices our party most needs to hear," Whitmer added. "The DNC did not pass my dark money resolution, but my voice was heard. Our elections are not for sale."

According to DNC member R.L. Miller, the founder of Climate Hawks Vote, "not a single person" on the Resolutions Committee "dares move to even put it for a vote, just like summer 2022." During that meeting, which took place in September, the panel also declined to let the proposed dark money ban advance to a vote, as Common Dreams reported at the time.

Recounting the September meeting in an op-ed for The Nation, longtime DNC member James Zogby—who helped craft the dark money proposal—wrote that after Whitmer delivered a "powerful" statement to the resolutions panel in support of the ban, the panel's chair "asked if any member of the committee wanted to put our resolution up for a vote."

"There was dead silence in the room," Zogby wrote, suggesting that members were likely pressured by DNC leadership to stonewall the dark money proposal. "With not one of the two dozen committee members in attendance willing to call for a vote, the resolution died."

The DNC's proceedings are notoriously anti-democratic and untransparent—and they are likely to become even more so under bylaw changes that the body quietly enacted during its September gathering.

Link: https://www.commondreams.org/news/dnc-blocks-dark-money-ban

[RandySF]

1. There's nothing the DNC can do about it anyway.

[lindysalsagal]

2. Very disappointing.

[W_HAMILTON]

3. Uhh, how they hell are they suppose to ban Super PACs?

Super PACs can't contribute to a candidate or directly coordinate with a political party or candidate, so, how the hell is the Democratic Party supposed to """ban""" them from participating in primaries (it should be noted that "participating in primaries" in this case just means running ads and the like). How do you ban something that, by law, political candidates and political parties have no control over? Do these so-called progressives ever explain that?

[Still Sensible]

4. Exactly n/t

[betsuni]

14. Thank you. Super PACs can't contribute directly to candidates or coordinate with them.

Want to scream every time I see the constant attacks of corruption, that money goes right into Democratic candidates' pockets and they're bought off, corporate, Wall Street, oligarchs, etc. Really stupid. Sick of it. But of course this will instantly be used to fundraise with misinformation about the diabolical DNC and Establishment stopping at nothing to prevent progress. Shameful.

[Itchinjim]

5. "Common Dreams"

Pffft.

[brooklynite]

6. Once again, the DNC has no ability to block independent expenditures.

[uponit7771]

7. +1

[GGoss]

11. OK... So Color Me Confused. Why Didn't They Allow A Vote?

As a lifelong Democrat, I've always thought the "Democrat" moniker had something to do with Democracy.

What am I missing here?

[RandySF]

12. It implies coordination with independent PACs, which is illegal.

[GGoss]

15. RandySF... Help Me Out Here

Allowing that vote implies coordination with independent PACs ?

James Zogby—who helped craft the dark money proposal, suggested doing something illegal ?

Can't the DNC decide which money they will, or will not, accept ?

[Phoenix61]

18. The money isn't being given to the DNC. It's being given

to PACs that operate, by law, independent of any party or candidate. Any vote implying past, current, or future co-ordination between the DNC and a PAC is acknowledging illegal activity.

[GGoss]

19. Ok... Maybe I'm Gettin It Now...

So if money comes in to a candidate's coffers...

There's no way of distinguishing where it came from without running afoul of the law.

That can't be right, can it?

[Phoenix61]

21. Candidates have to report all donations and expenses, as Santos is currently finding out.

The resolution or what ever it was has nothing to do with that. It’s specific to PACs which are private, separate entities who support whichever candidates they want to support. They DO NOT have to report where their money comes from, hence Dark Money. Ex. You’re a tech company and want to squash any possibility of restrictive legislation. Candidate A has stated he is against restrictive tech legislation.
We Love Tech PAC wants to promote tech freedom so your company writes them a check for a cool million and they start running adds for Candidate A and against his opponent. The PAC doesn’t have to report your donation.

[GGoss]

22. Ok... So What Was The Problem With The Resolution They Froze Out ???

Was it just that it was meaningless ?

Because apparently it had some meaning to somebody.

Was it just "symbolic" ?

[Phoenix61]

23. Symbolic and stupid at the same time.

It’s incredibly easy to turn it into an admission of previous illegal behavior. Like those, “We’re not saying we did it but we promise to never do it in the future.” releases that businesses make when they get caught doing something wrong.

[GGoss]

24. OK, But Did You See Post #17 ?

One would think Bernie Sanders, James Zogby, and Judith Whitmer, the chair of the Nevada Democratic Party and lead sponsor of the dark money resolution (among MANY others) would know that.

What type of point do you suppose they were trying to make taking such a risk ?

[Phoenix61]

25. Purity test. "We're not owned by corporate America."

Also, counting on people not knowing it is meaningless. If people on DU don’t understand how PACs work what do you think the average voter knows?

[GGoss]

26. LOL, I'm Really OK With That...

Better than: "We're most definitely owned by corporate America."



Thanks for your help in understanding this.

[betsuni]

27. Anti-establishment purity test.

I recently saw an email from a senator warning that Democrats are joining forces with Republicans through a PAC "to try to stop progressives who launch primary challenges against establishment Democrats." Establishment Democrats: "candidates who protect the wealthy and powerful, and against candidates who will fight for the working class of this country."

Message: Democrats are the same as Republicans, controlled by oligarchs and billionaires, corrupt, corporatists, ignore the working class, rig primaries. Us vs Them and Democrats are in cahoots with Them, the enemy, while we are pure and uncorrupted and moral, on the side of "The People."

"Members of the establishment are worried." The Oligarchs have "shock and concern." They must stop the "movement."

"Here is the simple truth. If the Democratic Party stands for anything, it must not allow Oligarchs and their PACS ... to buy Democratic primaries. ... Unfortunately, during the last DNC meeting the establishment wouldn't even allow the resolution to come to a vote."

Imaginary conspiracy theory nonsense to attack Democrats for a fantasy populist revolution.

[GGoss]

34. And That's What It Sounded Like To Me

Thank you.

I thought I was goin nuts.

[betsuni]

35. Yes, conspiracy theory purity test nonsense to attack Democrats for a fantasy revolution.

Really shameful. Not even very good for fundraising anymore so I don't know why they do it.

[W_HAMILTON]

28. I wouldn't, because it's clear they do not.

[RandySF]

31. You have to ask them (btw, Bernie is not a Democrat)

[uponit7771]

8. Shit kicking article, Dems have no power to stop outside groups

[Just A Box Of Rain]

9. What about a certain 501(c)(4) organization that is supposed to be a "social welfare organization"

that instead actually operates like dark-money Super Pac?

Will "Common Dreams" go after them too???

Asking for a friend.

[tritsofme]

10. Sounds like performative nonsense to me. How could the DNC enforce such a ban?

Spoiler alert: They can’t.

[RandySF]

13. Wouldn't a vote imply coordination with independent PACs?

Isn't that illegal?

[Elessar Zappa]

16. More anti-Dem bullshit from common dreams.

[GGoss]

17. And... More Anti-Dem Bullshit From Some In The Democratic Party

"It was absolutely stunning," Zogby said in an interview after the meeting. "The resolution was never even considered. I know how that works. I was chair of the resolutions committee for 10 years. I was a member of the resolutions committee for 20 years. It means that staff whipped the members and said, 'Don't you dare.'"

"I went up to folks afterwards who I've known," Zogby added. "I mean, you know, they've served on the committee with me. And I said, 'Why? Why did this happen?' They wouldn't look me in the eye."

In a column for In These Times on Thursday, Our Revolution board chair and DNC member Larry Cohen wrote that "while Citizens United may allow for unlimited corporate money in general elections, that Supreme Court ruling does not govern Democratic Party rules."

However, Cohen added, "it is likely that in February, for the second time, the resolutions committee (which determines which proposals move forward) will refuse to report out the dark money ban—despite the significant support it has received from DNC members in about 20 states."

Link: https://www.commondreams.org/news/sanders-dark-money-primaries

[KY_EnviroGuy]

20. Maybe they should have forwarded it to the Firm Condemnations Panel.

If the Condemnations Panel fails to vote, promptly hand-deliver it to the infamous Meaningless Sanctions Panel.

If all these democratic efforts fail, just discuss it at the next Pearl-Clutchers Anonymous meeting. After adjournment, everybody meet for drinks at Stonewallers Bar and Grill where all good intentions go to die.

After all, that's what governments around the world do when there's an issue of evil for which they can do nothing to stop.


KY..........

[LiberalFighter]

29. I don't consider commondreams worth the time.

[RandySF]

30. Let me clarify a few things.

The DNC cannot, by law, coordinate with PACs or tell them what to do. The DNC and candidates cannot tell a group or individual where to direct a donation unless it’s a donation to the DNC. PACs exist and operate outside of the hard money system. A resolution is useless and everybody knows this, including Bernie.

[betsuni]

32. I'm afraid no matter how much it's repeated it won't make much of a dent.

The fundamental populist belief is that everyone else is corrupt. Reality has nothing to do with it.

[RandySF]

33. It's a DSA-driven resolution, to boot.

[betsuni]

36. That makes sense.

Our Revolution/Brand New Congress/Justice Democrats/DSA etc.