Democrats nominated a millionaire for president in 2016, but she lost to a billionaire. If the party now wants to trade up to a billionaire, Michael Bloomberg might be its guy. He’ll start with a big — let’s not call it healthy — war chest, for he is promising to spend $100 million of his own money on the way to the White House.
But anyone who fears that the party of the Left might be sullied by dependence on, or dominance by, such a mega-rich candidate should reconsider their support for campaign finance regulations.
While Bloomberg can put $100 million in his campaign coffers on his campaign’s first day with a single check, his Democratic opponents — Bloomberg is currently a Democrat, in case you lost track — will have a much harder time hitting such a high total. The maximum contribution an individual can make to a presidential campaign in the primaries is $2,700. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., would need to find 37,000 donors just to catch up to Bloomberg’s sum. Political Action Committees can give $5,000 in a primary, so Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., would need 20,000 PAC checks to match the Bloomberg wad.
Because Harris or former Vice President Joe Biden can’t get a million, much less a hundred million, in a single check, they come up with clever ways to get a million in one night. They rely on volunteer fundraisers called “bundlers” to throw a cocktail party, the price of attendance being a $2,700 or $5,000 campaign contribution.
Who are these bundlers?
What sort of persons (a) want to do favors for politicians and (b) have connections to many rich individuals or corporate PACs? The answer is, lobbyists. So the effect of the low cap on individual donations pushes politicians into the arms of lobbyists and their clients. Does anyone seriously think this is less corrupt than allowing unlimited donations by rich individuals?
Rep. Beto O’Rourke, D-Texas, Harris, Biden, and Sanders can get millions of dollars from backers such as George Soros or Tom Steyer, but that money would have to go through super PACs or other outside groups, some of which do not have to disclose their donors. But again, this isn’t the recipe for openness and transparency.
Perhaps Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., would propose curbing Bloomberg’s ability to spend on his own campaign, but the Supreme Court wouldn’t and shouldn’t tolerate a law restricting how much of your own money you may spend to ask people to vote for you.
Here’s a better proposal for any progressive out there who doesn’t want billionaire candidates to start with a huge advantage. Our idea could instantly abolish the position of lobbyist bundler, and it might make dark money and super PACs a thing of the past.
Here it is: Abolish the limit on individual contributions. If Bloomberg can get a million-dollar check from himself, Harris should be able to get a million-dollar check from Steyer, and Biden should be able to call up his former boss, former President Barack Obama, for a million.
This would be cleaner and simpler than the system we have, and that’s what the progressive Left says it wants. Or Democrats could leave the regulations as they are — if they like Mike.
