Post from MB Blog:
Power Shifting
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.
The next two weeks mark the American quadrennial event of party conventions for both Democrats and Republicans.

Of course, this week the Democrats meet in Denver, while the Republicans gather next week in my town(s) of origin, the Twin Cities of St. Paul and Minneapolis.

For a time, the seat of American political power will shift away from Washington, D.C. The figurative shift is noteworthy because it marks a time-honored tradition for our political system.

The unfortunate reality about this presidential election year is that another, much more disturbing shift is taking place.

I'm talking about the eyebrow-raising shift in PAC donations from Republicans to Democrats. Seems money finds its way to the party most favored to have power after the upcoming election.

Now, I'm not naïve. The money always follows the power. But, given all of the public corruptions scandals, haven't Americans had enough of money and powerful lobbyists ruling the roost?

I sure hope they have.

Take some time to peruse the list. I strongly suspect the interests represented by the various PAC's do not make investments without expecting some kind of return on their investments.

Now that the PAC donation shift is in full swing, you can bet the various PAC representatives will be working overtime in Denver this week.

This kind of brazen influence peddling has to stop.

Reader Comments
  
Agreed
By Mark Aug 27th 2008 at 5:53 pm MDT (Updated Aug 27th 2008 at 5:53 pm MDT)
So, after all of the D's bashing the R's for using this means of funding, now its the D's that are using it?
I'm definitely with you in hoping that Americans have finally had enough of it. Third parties (Green, Constitution, etc.) have been growing - maybe this will provide them with the growth spurt that they need to become an effective voice!
  
You missed a few PACs
By Jim Aug 27th 2008 at 10:33 pm MDT (Updated Aug 27th 2008 at 10:33 pm MDT)
You failed to mention the union PACs that contribute members' dues to the Democratic party. Big Labor outspends most of the corporate PACs, and much of this Congress' legislation bears a union label: such as eliminating union certification elections and blocking trade agreements that would increase American exports. Talk about influence peddling!

Another big Dem contributor is the trial lawyers association: the fat cats who make millions from class-action lawsuits. The Democrats held up a national security bill because the lawyers wanted to sue the telecom companies that cooperated with the government after 9/11.

If you really are opposed to brazen influence peddling, let's include ALL the special interests.
Re: You missed a few PACs
By Matt Brix Aug 28th 2008 at 1:44 pm MDT (Updated Aug 28th 2008 at 1:44 pm MDT)
No question, Jim. The sum total of influence peddling is disturbing. That's why public financing of campaigns is something we should strive for at all levels of government.

But, let me say again, the point of the post was to highlight the worst of the "chameleon donors" - or those that switch from party to party, depending on which way the wind blows. If you look at the list again, you'll see how these particular PAC's pump money into the political party that is most likely to have power after a given election. Pretty bad stuff.