But ActBlue lists any Democratic candidate running for state or local office, without picking or choosing, or endorsing. As such, they really are not acting like a PAC. In fact, ActBlue has been instrumental in jumpstarting more individual contributions, hence more widespread participation in the ever-present and very corrupt money game. This is only a good thing for democracy.
Kos has more, and also advises that the FEC is taking comments in regards to this ruling. They are often swayed by public comment when an argument can be made, but the more emails sent, the better. You can send public comment to Mary Dove at mdove@fec.gov.
I myself sent the following email:
Hi,
I am registering my opposition to considering ActBlue a PAC for purposes of public matching funds.
ActBlue literally is just a mechanism for any Dem candidate to set up online fundraising. The rules governing public matching funds are intended to keep “big money” out of politics and keep “small donors” important. I agree with that completely. However, ActBlue has the effect in campaigns of encouraging small donors, by allowing individuals, be they bloggers, or just Joe down the street, to set up a place for people to send the same sort of individual donation that you might do directly through a candidate’s website or by sending them a check.
By ruling them ineligible for matching funds, you would be stifling small donor participation in the process of donations. In regards to the fact that ActBlue only allows one political party to participate, there is nothing stopping any other party from setting up the same mechanism online, and I believe they should be accorded the same ruling.
Please allow ActBlue donations to count towards public matching funds. I say this as a voter who has not even made up my mind about which Democrat to support in the primary, so I have no reason to want Senator Edwards (who is as I understand the impetus for clarifying this rule) to gain a serious advantage by getting this money. I just believe in fairness and want to ensure that the rules governing our elections encourage instead of discourage public participation…as the rules were intended to do. ActBlue is a poster child for the spirit of democratic participation. Please do not let your ruling stifle that.
Thank you,
Lynne
And you said why in your own post:
<
p>
<
p>They are “picking and choosing” only the Dem, therefore they are endorsing the Dem over any independent, Repub, Rainbow-Green, etc.
<
p>I think the notion of trying to remove the “big money” from the election (ohh, and from after the election, since Deval has been sucking up big money since being elected) is a great goal. But unless they do the same for all candidates they are endorsing one over another simply based on party affiliation.
The DNC isn’t a PAC, is it? But it’s a Democratic institution. There is nothing stopping any other party from having the same mechanism, is there? In fact there is a Republican site out there doing the same thing (forget what it’s called, and its record is pretty pathetic on funds raised, but that’s mostly because of the political climate out there, as well as Republican tendency to rely on Big Money).
<
p>Just because it’s partisan, doesn’t make it automatically a PAC. BUT if they endorsed and pushed certain candidates, yes, I would agree. They do not. They merely are a vehicle for people to set up their own mini fundraising sites.
Together we can! When will people stop believing this bullshit. Now Edwards and Obama are using this jingoistic crap.
How about making a relevant comment? You know, on-topic?
<
p>~rolls eyes~
<
p>You really are very lame.
<
p>…it strikes me that what ActBlue is doing would hardly be considered a PAC. If ActBlue was aggregating monies and doling it out to whom they wanted to dole it, that would be a PAC. But a central operation that candidates themselves can use to raise funds, in my book is not a PAC.
You got it in one. They are literally a passthrough just to make it easier to donate, especially useful for smaller races, where some candidates use that mechanism instead of (expensively) setting up their own merchant account and secure site.