Dean Declares Independence From Special Interests

[sfecap]

Dean Declares Independence From Special Interests

Supporters vote overwhelmingly to forego federal matching funds

BURLINGTON-In a ceremony here today, Democratic presidential candidate Governor Howard Dean, M.D., announced that, following an overwhelming vote by supporters over the last two days, Dean for America would not accept public matching funds.

"Today by a 85 percent-15 percent margin the people who made this campaign have voted to decline public financing. We support public financing, but the unabashed actions of this president to thwart our democratic processes with a flood of special interests money have us forced to abandon a broken system," Governor Dean said.

"Our campaign has not been talk of campaign finance reform, it has been actual reform. Over 200,000 people have given an average of $77 to bring us here and they have now overwhelmingly refused to be intimidated by George Bush and his cronies," Dean added.

In 2000, then-Governor Bush opted out of the public financing system, raising and spending more than $100 million in the primaries. This election, he has decided to opt out of the system again and is widely expected to raise $200 million for a primary where he has no opponent.

Today, Dean-joined onstage at the University of Vermont by seven grassroots leaders from across the country-announced the decision and then proceeded to sign a declaration of independence announcing that the campaign would be "free and independent of special interests."

During the two-day vote, supporters of the campaign pledged or contributed over $5.3 million with an average contribution or pledge of $116.89. Of the 104,746 supporters who voted, 85 percent, or 89,533 Americans, voted to forego federal matching funds-meaning a turnout of over 20 percent. In the only other large-scale Internet vote, the two-day Moveon.org primary over the summer, 22 percent of the 1.4 million eligible members participated. In contrast to the campaign's vote, which was only announced Wednesday morning-less than 72 hours before polls closed-Moveon.org and the campaigns involved had more than two weeks of intense get-out-the vote efforts leading up to its primary.

" has begun to reconnect the bonds between citizens, establish a new communication between citizens and their elected officials, and taken a large step in winning back our government so that it works not for the profit of the few but the benefit of the many. Thomas Jefferson wrote two centuries ago that, 'Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government. Whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights,'" Governor Dean said.

"So with this campaign, we hope to attract the notice of the people of the United States and we trust that, just as they always have done in the past, they will set things right. We have just begun. This decision means that we have many challenges ahead of us. We must expand this campaign from hundreds of thousand to tens of million," Dean concluded.

Earlier this week, the campaign sent over 600,000 ballots to supporters, and asked them to decide whether the campaign should decline public financing or accept federal matching funds. The ballots, which went out to supporters by email, first class mail, and telephone, allowed them to vote once using a unique code. Voting ended last night at midnight.

During the course of the two-day vote, over 70,000 people commented on their ballots about the decision. While many wrote comments as simple, "Give 'em Hell, Howard!" others provided insight into how they made the difficult decision:

* "As much as I believe in and support public funding of political campaigns, accepting federal matching funds would provide an unfair advantage to the Bush campaign. Once Governor Dean is elected President, I would encourage him to pursue a policy of support and even increase public funding of political campaigns while placing limits on total amounts that can be raised."

* "This is a vote for freedom. We in this country have fought and died for freedom. Just because this is a gentle revolution makes it no less important to our future. Every American has a stake in this vote. Without it, America as we know it, will not survive."

* "The system is broken; Congress should fix it, but the Republicans who control won't fix it when it works to their advantage. No meaningful campaign finance reform can occur unless we first defeat George W. Bush."

* "Let's prove that we have the power to take this country back through the engagement of the people who want to re-establish America's founding ideals, an America that guides, not steers or bullies, an America that has a moral compass, an America that will be admired and looked up to."

* "Although I may not agree with this on a philosophical level, we cannot allow Bush and Cheney another 4 years, and therefore I support an effort to decline the federal matching funds. You can fix the system AFTER you win."

* "I understand the need for Campaign Reform however we need to be playing on a level field in this election. There is so very much at stake."

* "Although I favor campaign-funding reform, this isn't a vote on that issue. Rather it's a vote for all the issues that Howard Dean supports and for the candidate himself, for by declining matching funds, Gov. Dean will have the best chance of reaching the White House and thereby executing his vision."

* "Campaign finance reform is *the* most important issue we face ... Democracy is being undermined by a corporate oligarchy, and no progress of any sort can begin until we get their money out of our electoral system. HOWEVER, until that happens, we can't let the Republicans run roughshod over us."

* "It is the greatest irony that the campaign finance laws have become an obstacle to free participation and an aid to the wealthy. Thank God that Gov. Dean can compete, thanks to the Internet. Let's reform these reform laws after he gets elected."

* "I'm still a strong supporter of campaign finance reform, but I don't think it makes any sense to agree to be bound by spending limits when Bush won't be. Nothing is more important than defeating him in November. Nothing."

* "I would like to see the campaign not have to opt out of federal matching funds. However I think with the monies that Bush is raising leaves no other alternative, but to continue to raise funds without the constraints required for matching funds."

* "Nothing...NOTHING...is more important for the future of this country than defeating George Bush in 2004. If it means admitting that the matching fund system no longer is viable in the current climate...then so be it."* "I believe in common sense campaign finance regulation, but I don't believe in being naive. When faced with the overwhelming money that the Bush campaign has, we can't take the high road to defeat. On the other hand, we can't take the special-interest-money, low-road, either. This is a great experiment in people's democracy. Let's make it work!"

* "I think we need to change the campaign finance system, but in order to make change, Bush must be ousted. Then let's change the system. For now, we need all the money we can raise."

* "Although necessary, this strategy is very undesirable. President Dean should commit to revisiting this issue and working toward an improved, fair public financing system."

* "We have been forced into rejecting federal matching funds by an administration that has sold our democracy to the highest bidder. We the People will not rest until we take our country back."

www.deanforamerica.com

[Cha]

1. I love the sense of

History being made! Future campaigns will learn from the success of The Dean Campaign! Here's to our "Independence"! :toast:

[genius]

2. While taking donations from Halliburton

Dean's very good at misleading the public.

I guess we will never see public financing of elections under Dean.

[LuminousX]

4. Halliburton Employee... big difference

[no name no slogan]

7. What if this employee is an EXECUTIVE?

Like those at AOL/TimeWarner?

"Common man" my arse.

[Egnever]

11. His 2k means more than mine how again exactly?

it doesnt. When you start seing an avalanche of pacs then maybe you will have a legitimate point as it stands right now your making mountains out of molehills

[no name no slogan]

20. But he's not limited to $2k if he foregoes matching funds, is he?

[Egnever]

21. yes he is

why do you think bush is having 2k a plate dinners?

[sfecap]

26. 2K is the limit for the Primaries, 2K for the General.

Matching funds or no matching funds.

The limit does not change.

Educate yourself at www.fec.gov

[Mairead]

46. His ability to coerce *additional* 2Ks is the issue

A 'casual' mention to one's direct reports that you wish you could have given more than 2K to Dean is a sufficient hint to any careerist, since names and contributions are in the public record. It's the brave careerist indeed who wouldn't be sure to contribute 2K of his own.

I've seen some real woppers from the Dean camp, but the title of this thread takes the bikkie. Public money is special-interest money. Right. And down is up, rich is poor, and the world is more safe and free with Cokespoon in charge.

Have people no shame?!?

[sfecap]

16. What if he is?

It is a free country. (Sort of...)

Any citizen can contribute up to $2000.00 to any candidate.

[LuminousX]

18. No! Halliburton isn't allowed to hire people

who might support someone who isn't GOP.

[no name no slogan]

19. So if K. Rove gave $2k to Dean, he'd take it?

Is that what you're saying?

[Egnever]

27. with a huge grin on his face I would imagine

are you suggesting that if carl rove was stupid enough to give 2k to any dem they should turn it down?

[LuminousX]

28. Yeah, how much 'influence' would that buy?

[DuctapeFatwa]

3. Limitless campaign spending is a great way to get rid of special interests

The chocolate ration has been doubled!

[genius]

6. Dean's set the goal. Buy the Presidency.

Guess what Dean. Bush can outspend you. Perhaps Dean should try a different approach - like getting some integrity.

[Egnever]

9. or maybe you shoud chip in

unless of course your goal is a Bush win

[LuminousX]

10. It is

[genius]

12. My goal is for a real Democrat with real Democratric values to win

If Dean gets the nomination, he will guarantee Bush the Presidency. If it's a matter of money that determines the outcome, Dean doesn't have a chance against Bush. If it's a matter of integrity, Dean won't get the nomination.

[Egnever]

25. its niether

The debate about whether any one candidate can beat George Bush is not worth having -- the only person who can beat George Bush, not to mention global warming, is not a person at all, but a mood, a spirit, a swell. We need an eruption of hope, of determination, of participation, something hot enough to melt our frozen politics. Fate -- in the curious and counterintuitive fashion that fate often operates -- just might have chosen the unlikely Howard Dean as the volcano through which that passion could pour. At the very least, everyone can root for the people power that has broken the surface of our politics, root for it to go on gathering steam and savvy, and, a year from now or a decade from now, to transform our political landscape.

[DuctapeFatwa]

13. Yes let's keep focused on putting a Dem face on the PNAC strategies!

That's a lot more important than any old country!

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cha]

24. And maybe Not!

[dpbrown]

29. Candidate X has better ideas, "my way of the highway" isn't too convincing

And I think that pummelling someone over the head for sticking to their principles is counterproductive.

Dean said early on he was going to go with public financing, and he said he'd make a big deal about it if other Democratic candidates didn't.

Now he's changed his mind.

Russ Feingold won in Wisconsin using public financing.

Kucinich is still committed to using public financing, and he's still got a better platform than Dean.

So clubbing someone over the head and telling them that their only choices are "Dean" or "Bush" is a little premature.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Egnever]

30. Who is saying that?

Ill turn it arround on you and say that stivking to your principles in the face of a changed circumtances simply as a matter of principles is foolish

What you seem to be saying if somehow denis got a whirlwind of incoming dollars and suddenly had 200 million to use dirsectly against bush he should stick to his guns and only spend 45 million because it is somehow the honerable thing to do.

Thats called cutting off your nose to spite your face where I come from.

[LuminousX]

31. Don't be irrational

Kucinich is still committed to using public financing, and he's still got a better platform than Dean.


Kucinich isn't raising the same sums of money, for him to effectively campaign, he would NEED matching funds.

[dpbrown]

32. Feingold won using public financing

The honorable thing is to make Bush's waste and greed the issue.

Rejecting public financing is accepting the rules as the Republicans play them.

Dean thinks he can beat the Republicans at their own game.

But the Republicans never play fair. If Dean thinks he'll be better at being a "privately financed" candidate than Bush will - well, he's got a lot to learn.

And with the "campaign finance" issue off the table, it just plays into the hands of the cynics who will say "there they go again - Democrats and Republicans, both with their hands in the private interest cookie jar." And whether it's true or not, people will say, "There's no difference."

Kucinich has an effective, grassroots campaign. He will need to continue getting his message in front of potential voters, but he'll always be in a better position because he fought for what was right - campaign finance and public funding is the right thing to do.

Dean has just created a subset of people who will vote for Kucinich for the public financing reason alone.

The thing is - Dean thinks he doesn't need them.

Dean and his followers think Dean will win with the "angry well-off white" demographic. They're so confident they say things like "if you don't support Dean you must be supporting Bush" and other unconvincing, rather snide comments meant more to belittle potential supporters than win them over.

Maybe Dean will win with his demographic alone. Bush is pretty vulnerable.

But it seems a shame to have Bush in a position to vanquish the Republicans once and for all from the White House, and then settle on the "good enough" candidate instead of one we can really be proud of.

Kucinich: Better Ideas, Better Candidate - it's just that simple

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Sean Reynolds]

33. Why do you gripe?

Coming from a Kucinich supporter I'd of thought you would have LOVED Dr. Dean's grassroots campaign, I mean your candidate too is building one. So Dean opted out of public financing, how is that evil? If 99.9% of the money coming in is from the grassroots campaign, that only goes to show he's not a whore to corporate money and special interests.

Would you rather have a candidate running that didn't opt out of public financing and GOT all his money from big corporations and special interests? OR would you rather have a candidate running that did opt out of public financing and got most of his money from average American citizens in the sum of $70?

To me that shows Dean is willing enough to place his campaign into the hands of the people. He's void of special interests and it's up to his supporters how much money he makes. IF Dean makes over 40 million this quarter, you do know that MOST of that money will probably come in donations of $70-80, right? What is so wrong with that?

[dpbrown]

34. "Most" is only one dollar more than half - Dean gets plenty of corp. cash

Former Governor Dean gets a lot of credit for setting up an effective grassroots fundraising plan. He's tapped deeply into the vein of "angry, average-to-well-off white foks" and he thinks he can ride that wave better than Bush can.

But he's traded at least a part of his integrity to make this leap.

It's a big "if" to claim that Dean is getting 99.9% of his money from the "grassroots" when in fact, he isn't.

According to a Feb. 25, 2002, Associated Press article by David Gram, titled "Dean Turns to Utility Executives to Finance New Campaign": "When Gov. Howard Dean wanted to raise money for a possible presidential bid, he followed the example of a former governor of Texas and called on his friends in the energy industry. Nearly a fifth of the roughly $111,000 collected in its first months by Dean's presidential political action committee, the Fund for a Healthy America, came from people with ties to Vermont's electric utilities, according to a recent Federal Elections Commission filing. It should be no surprise. Dean and utility executives have had a long and friendly relationship…"

One-fifth is a whole lot different than 99.9%

And according to Center for Responsive Politcs, the second biggest donor to Dean presidential campaign is AOL/Time Warner executives and employees.

So, while ex-Governor Dean has done a good job raising money, trading in the principle he spoke so strongly about in March of 2003 for a chance to try and beat the Republicans at their own game seems a little foolish.

On March 7, 2003, the Associated Press wrote: "Howard Dean committed Friday to taking taxpayer dollars to finance his presidential campaign.... He promised to make it an issue in the Democratic primaries if any of his rivals decide to skip public financing, as President Bush did en route to winning the Republican nomination in 2000. 'It will be a huge issue,' Dean said. 'I think most Democrats believe in campaign finance reform.'"

Well, most Americans do believe in campaign finance reform, and I think ex-Governor Dean and his cabal of angry, mostly white, pretty well-off supporters are about to find out how many.

Kucinich: Better Ideas, Better Candidate - it's just that simple

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[Sean Reynolds]

35. Doesn't matter.

Today his campaign is built BY his supporters. THEY'RE the people that will feed his campaign. NOT the corporations or special interests. HELL, if Dean recants and starts accepting special interest money in droves, I will second look his campaign. BUT as of today the Dean campaign is built on the grassroots, not corporations.

[dpbrown]

36. One-fifth funding by Vermont power executives is not "grassroots"

And having as the second-largest contributor AOL executives is not "not corporations."

You expressed your sentiment precisely in your header - "Doesn't matter."

For the Dean faithful, it doesn't matter if he changes his mind ("changed circumstances" they say). It doesn't matter if he positions are not "people-powered" ("those are the positions that'll pass" they say).

You keep repeating to yourself the mantra that the Dean campaign is "built on the grassroots, not corporations" despite evidence to the contrary.

Two things remain to be seen - 1) how many Democrats will begin holding former Governor Dean to his word on some of the things he formerly took a firmly populist stance on, and 2) how would a President Dean go about repaying his favors to the power industry lobby and the telecommunications/Internet lobby?

Luckily, if enough people answer the first question in the positive, we won't have to answer the second question.

Dan Brown
Saint Paul, Minnesota

[genius]

49. Good point Dan

Thank you for posting this.

[SonofRage]

41. Dean never said 99.9%

Dean has been very open on this issue. He has always said that half his donations are from small donations on the net. Plus, Dean put it up to a vote, he didn't just come out and say he was going to do it and his supporters overwhelmingly voted for him to opt out.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Egnever]

8. please point to the special interest contributing to deans campaign

If 90% or better of his cash is coming from individual donars I would say hes doing a great job of fighting special interests.

When we have true campaign finance reform that actually limits the spending of all the candidates then maybe we can ytalk again. For now there is no real campaign finance reform if anyone who wishes to can disregard it.

[killbotfactory]

38. Dean's secret special interest

THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

[genius]

14. That was a great book.

Both Bush and Dean have been using double-speak for so long that neither one of them knows how to tell the truth anymore.

[no name no slogan]

5. Huzzah!

Because I truly believe there will be media reform if we elect a candidate who's taken big-buck contributions from the executives at AOHell/TimeWarner.

Play the Repug's game, get severe case of redass from K. Rove & Co.

[sfecap]

15. Kucincich / Kerry /Dean - Sector totals:

Kucinich

Agribusiness $20,090
Communic/Electronics $107,107
Construction $19,869
Defense $1,450
Energy/Nat Resource $5,957
Finance/Insur/RealEst $56,780
Health $67,478
Lawyers & Lobbyists $31,523
Transportation $9,950
Misc Business $113,087
Labor $24,050
Ideology/Single-Issue $13,075
Other $312,219

Kerry

Agribusiness $53,675
Communic/Electronics $865,150
Construction $301,730
Defense $27,990
Energy/Nat Resource $73,325
Finance/Insur/RealEst $2,549,875
Health $532,339
Lawyers & Lobbyists $3,309,740
Transportation $87,675
Misc Business $1,251,174
Labor $7,250
Ideology/Single-Issue $79,335
Other $1,442,639

Dean

Agribusiness $95,094
Communic/Electronics $1,217,200
Construction $182,431
Defense $28,777
Energy/Nat Resource $40,322
Finance/Insur/RealEst $968,822
Health $755,391
Lawyers & Lobbyists $1,009,757
Transportation $63,174
Misc Business $983,918
Labor $10,045
Ideology/Single-Issue $95,913
Other $3,207,870

http://www.opensecrets.org/

Note:

These totals reflect donaions from employees of companies in the sectors listed. They do NOT represent donations from companies within the sector.

[sventvkg]

17. Ya know what, keep bickering amongst yourselves..And lose 04!!

[no name no slogan]

37. If we nominate a principle-less D, we've already lost (n/t)

[LuminousX]

52. I don't see any of our candidates as lacking principles

We only lose if Bush wins.

[FluxRostrum]

39. Dean Declares Independence From Special Interests ?????

Is this title not completely .... misleading.

[LWolf]

43. Yes.

I was really confused. I read the post title, then went back to find the article I just read in this morning's paper, and was wondering,

"What...did he decide to stick to funding limits, and then change his mind the next day, or what?" Then I read the post and realized it was the same article!

I would prefer public funding of campaigns. I think it's the private money involved that constitutes "special interest." I wish Dr. Dean had stuck with the limits; he hasn't exactly been strapped for cash so far. But that is his, and his supporters', choice.

He declared freedom from public funding, leaving himself wide-open to special interest money.

[Mairead]

47. "Is this title not completely .... misleading."

Yes. This might be the single most egregiously misleading title this year. I was sure when I opened it that I was going to read that Dean had decided to keep his original commitment to public financing. Silly me.

[sandnsea]

40. Unions are Special Interests

Interesting the campaign financing comes up right before these two big union endorsements. Coincidence? Maybe yes, maybe no.

[Mairead]

48. I don't think unions are in the same category as special interests

Because unions (ideally) serve the interests of their many ordinary-citizen members, while corporations and industry groups serve the interests only of their few owners (more than 40% of ALL corporate ownership is vested in the wealthiest 1% of all people, and 85% in the wealthiest 10%).

[9119495]

51. Not all special interests are bad!

I wish all candidates (including Dean) would stop blanketing all special interests with negatvie words. Teachers, the elderly, college students, kids, unions, environmentalists are by definition special interests if they in any way fund a group that advocates changes in policy. What is wrong with that? No I don't want RJ Reynolds to take over my government, but I think we'd be much better off if unions had more say.

[helleborient]

42. More evidence to me Dean is looking for a mandate with which...

To truly govern.

For me, the big risk in talking about the Confederate flag, "God, guns, gays..." was an example Dean is still willing to take big risks to ultimately win big. Other candidates aren't reaching so far out of the traditional Democratic base. If you pull people from that far outside of your base and combine them with your base, you win big. The campaign financing is in the same category.

In my gut, I feel Dean will either win big or lose in a spectacular fashion. If he is successful, it will be extremely difficult for members of Congress, Republican or Democrat, to deny that he has fought for and received a massive mandate of the people. This is the kind of target Reagan and Clinton both reached for. I'm so excited about the potential revolution to come.

[George_Bonanza]

44. What revolution? Campaign revolution?

I think candidates in 2008 will be very smart to build on Howard Dean's success. They should. It's a great campaigning method, although the credit should go to Trippi and co., not Dean.

However, don't flatter your candidate so much that a DLC-type centrist Democrat would bring about some kind of political and integrity revolution to American politics. If history is any indicator, Dean will govern in the middle, like he did in Vermont.

[cryofan]

45. dean just another blueblood with no perspective on reality of ...

.....the common working person. Of course, coming from money, he will be against the european-style taxes that are needed to get the european-style lifestyle that would be an improvement for 2/3 of Americans.

[burr]

50. my....what a lengthy excuse!

* "Although I may not agree with this on a philosophical level, we cannot allow Bush and Cheney another 4 years, and therefore I support an effort to decline the federal matching funds. You can fix the system AFTER you win."

If you don't agree with it philosophically, then don't defend it! If you do agree with it philosophically, then state your case.


"Nothing...NOTHING...is more important for the future of this country than defeating George Bush in 2004. If it means admitting that the matching fund system no longer is viable in the current climate...then so be it."* "I believe in common sense campaign finance regulation, but I don't believe in being naive. When faced with the overwhelming money that the Bush campaign has, we can't take the high road to defeat. On the other hand, we can't take the special-interest-money, low-road, either. This is a great experiment in people's democracy. Let's make it work!"

I can think of something more important than defeating Bush in 2004, and this is enabling the American people either elect him or someone else as their President in 2004. As you well know, this power is reserved exclusively to the Selectoral College.


* "I'm still a strong supporter of campaign finance reform, but I don't think it makes any sense to agree to be bound by spending limits when Bush won't be. Nothing is more important than defeating him in November. Nothing."

Glad to know you haven't abandoned the concept of democracy completely! However, no matter how much you repeat your claim of nothing being more important than defeating a single politician..this does not make that statement a truism.


* "This is a vote for freedom. We in this country have fought and died for freedom. Just because this is a gentle revolution makes it no less important to our future. Every American has a stake in this vote. Without it, America as we know it, will not survive."

A vote for freedom? Was this also the case when shrub opted out of the campaign financing limits in 2000 and again this year? I suppose this makes only Shrub and Dean the "pro-freedom" candidates!


* "I think we need to change the campaign finance system, but in order to make change, Bush must be ousted. Then let's change the system. For now, we need all the money we can raise."

Amen, two wrongs do make a right! Four wrongs make 2 rights, 100 wrongs make 50 rights! And now...we need to prove it. Make sense to you?


* "Although necessary, this strategy is very undesirable. President Dean should commit to revisiting this issue and working toward an improved, fair public financing system."

Althought necessary, staying alive can often be very undesirable. Either the strategy is necessary and desirable for some moral reason, or it is undesirable and therefore unnecessary for some moral reason. It is all a matter of perspective, whose side are you on...and why even vote? What do these politicians owe us, or do we owe them? :shrug:

[tobys]

53. Does this make sense?

Dean Declares Independance from Special Interests, by opting out of public financing, by rejecting spending caps that the rest of the Democratic candidates are committed to, and by opening himself to the possibility of seeking more corporate money? :thumbsdown: :eyes: