SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Wall Street donations to the two Democratic congressional campaign committees
are down 65 percent from two years ago, The Post reports. Party
insiders say "the overwhelming factor is the rising anger among
financial executives who think they have not been treated well based on
their support of Democrats over the past four years."
The National Journal writes that Wall Streeters are "sick of being used as political punching bags."
Wall Street donations to the two Democratic congressional campaign committees are down 65 percent from two years ago, The Post reports. Party insiders say "the overwhelming factor is the rising anger among financial executives who think they have not been treated well based on their support of Democrats over the past four years."
The National Journal writes that Wall Streeters are "sick of being used as political punching bags."
And Post columnist Steven Pearlstein suggests that "bad blood" between big business and the Obama administration is "not a good thing."
Given the reckless corporate behavior that led to the collapse of the economy and the consequent need for a new financial regulatory regime, I hardly think soothing the hurt feelings of bankers, hedge funders and corporate CEOs should be a priority.
JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon doled out $65,000 in contributions to the Dems in 2006 and 2008 and nothing this cycle. Good riddance. The same goes for Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein, who's given zilch to Dems after showering candidates with $50,000 in the previous two election cycles.
Rather than greasing the skids so Blankfein et al. resume their big-buck donations, isn't it time legislators focus on diminishing the strings-attached purchasing power of corporate campaign contributions?
That's exactly what the Fair Elections Now Act would do by severing the ties between big-money contributors and members of Congress. The bill has 22 cosponsors in the Senate (not a single Republican), and 157 bipartisan cosponsors in the House. It would bar participating congressional candidates from accepting contributions larger than $100 and allow them to run honest campaigns with a blend of small donations and public matching funds. Only candidates demonstrating their viability through meeting a minimum threshold of signatures and small donations would be eligible.
A coalition is now pressing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to keep her pledge to vote on Fair Elections this year. She should.
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Wall Street donations to the two Democratic congressional campaign committees are down 65 percent from two years ago, The Post reports. Party insiders say "the overwhelming factor is the rising anger among financial executives who think they have not been treated well based on their support of Democrats over the past four years."
The National Journal writes that Wall Streeters are "sick of being used as political punching bags."
And Post columnist Steven Pearlstein suggests that "bad blood" between big business and the Obama administration is "not a good thing."
Given the reckless corporate behavior that led to the collapse of the economy and the consequent need for a new financial regulatory regime, I hardly think soothing the hurt feelings of bankers, hedge funders and corporate CEOs should be a priority.
JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon doled out $65,000 in contributions to the Dems in 2006 and 2008 and nothing this cycle. Good riddance. The same goes for Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein, who's given zilch to Dems after showering candidates with $50,000 in the previous two election cycles.
Rather than greasing the skids so Blankfein et al. resume their big-buck donations, isn't it time legislators focus on diminishing the strings-attached purchasing power of corporate campaign contributions?
That's exactly what the Fair Elections Now Act would do by severing the ties between big-money contributors and members of Congress. The bill has 22 cosponsors in the Senate (not a single Republican), and 157 bipartisan cosponsors in the House. It would bar participating congressional candidates from accepting contributions larger than $100 and allow them to run honest campaigns with a blend of small donations and public matching funds. Only candidates demonstrating their viability through meeting a minimum threshold of signatures and small donations would be eligible.
A coalition is now pressing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to keep her pledge to vote on Fair Elections this year. She should.
Wall Street donations to the two Democratic congressional campaign committees are down 65 percent from two years ago, The Post reports. Party insiders say "the overwhelming factor is the rising anger among financial executives who think they have not been treated well based on their support of Democrats over the past four years."
The National Journal writes that Wall Streeters are "sick of being used as political punching bags."
And Post columnist Steven Pearlstein suggests that "bad blood" between big business and the Obama administration is "not a good thing."
Given the reckless corporate behavior that led to the collapse of the economy and the consequent need for a new financial regulatory regime, I hardly think soothing the hurt feelings of bankers, hedge funders and corporate CEOs should be a priority.
JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon doled out $65,000 in contributions to the Dems in 2006 and 2008 and nothing this cycle. Good riddance. The same goes for Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein, who's given zilch to Dems after showering candidates with $50,000 in the previous two election cycles.
Rather than greasing the skids so Blankfein et al. resume their big-buck donations, isn't it time legislators focus on diminishing the strings-attached purchasing power of corporate campaign contributions?
That's exactly what the Fair Elections Now Act would do by severing the ties between big-money contributors and members of Congress. The bill has 22 cosponsors in the Senate (not a single Republican), and 157 bipartisan cosponsors in the House. It would bar participating congressional candidates from accepting contributions larger than $100 and allow them to run honest campaigns with a blend of small donations and public matching funds. Only candidates demonstrating their viability through meeting a minimum threshold of signatures and small donations would be eligible.
A coalition is now pressing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to keep her pledge to vote on Fair Elections this year. She should.