Lessig's Anti-SuperPAC SuperPAC Raises First $1 Million In Just 12 Days
from the off-to-a-great-start dept
We're a little late on this (past few days have been quite busy...) but Larry Lessig's SuperPAC to end all SuperPACs has hit its first target way early. As you hopefully remember, the goal was to reach $1 million in 30 days, which would then be matched by an (as yet) unknown donor, followed by a second campaign to raise $5 million in June -- again matched by a donor. The plan then would be to use the $12 million to work on a few specific Congressional races to prove that it can have an impact, and then kick off in 2015 with a much bigger campaign to have an even larger impact. There's still a long way to go, but this seems like a great start:
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: larry lessig, mayday citizens superpac, mayone, superpacs
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Maybe it's not a moonshot after all. Maybe people just needed someone to start the engines.
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I donated
I have the utmost respect and much admiration for Mr. Lessing and he certainly has my trust.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Money...Politics...Oil...Water
Determining failure is about whether the next congress actually gets something done for the people and not their contributors.
It fails on a misdirected objective. That misdirected objective is 'competing with 'Citizens United' style money' vs. removing money from the campaign trail. The former is nice, the later is necessary.
There are numerous ways to take the money out of politics. Just like a fire, you remove the fuel to put it out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Money...Politics...Oil...Water
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Money...Politics...Oil...Water
Don't mistake my pessimism with dislike. I like the idea. I just don't think it will go, where Mr. Lessig, and I, would like it to go.
Money fighting money. What are the Vegas odds on that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Money...Politics...Oil...Water
If they could get to Wheeler and pay him off by putting this money in an offshore account, or even if they agreed to pay all politicians to support real title 11 internet neutrality by paying them in offshore accounts that would show everyone that the laws are up for sale and the people just need to start buying them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Money...Politics...Oil...Water
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let me get that right:
A bidding war against those running the money presses?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Are we..
Cant we just FIRE THEM??(this isnt easy)
How about SCARE them? (they doubled and tripled ammo and gun prices)
COULD we post all the bills they have voted on and SHOW who paid for the VOTE??(kinda easy)
HOW about Black mail??
Its funny that long in the past, someone went to the Banker at the Congress, where these people pull money out to PAY for stuff, and Got the listing of how much they had been GIVIN, over their PAY.
Is it that HARd to TRACK how much money they get paid, and compare it to how much they have SPENT? and how much is is ALL their accounts?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.wolf-pac.com/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Damn Lessing could let the politicians know that if they do not change the laws regarding bribery in politics they would use their base to create a convention.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And there you have people talk about how left wingers are naive
5% of the population hold over half of the US wealth and since they only need to keep a smaller proportion of it on hand to maintain financial security they can also deploy more of their 61.9% of the nations wealth (looking at 2007 numbers) than someone who has their wealth tied up in illiquid assets like a house or in essential savings like a college fund for their kids. Given how much access and influence that money gives and how quickly lobbying gets mobilized once a threat to moneyed interests emerges I am certain that they'll get outspent if they ever manage to raise a significant amount of money or simply ingnored if they don't scale up to something significant.
This is not even going into the fact that after the McComish, Citizen's United and McCutcheon rulings you'd need to get a constitutional amendment passed to do anything about campaign finance. The Supreme court has gutted any restriction on campaign financing as unconstitutional on 1st amendment grounds and any matching fund systems also as unconstitutional. Getting any constitutional amendment passed, let alone one which would be opposed by every lobbyist out there, is nigh on impossible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And there you have people talk about how left wingers are naive
I question whether you've followed what Lessig has been up to the past few years, or the details of this plan. Because it appears you are unaware.
5% of the population hold over half of the US wealth and since they only need to keep a smaller proportion of it on hand to maintain financial security they can also deploy more of their 61.9% of the nations wealth (looking at 2007 numbers) than someone who has their wealth tied up in illiquid assets like a house or in essential savings like a college fund for their kids. Given how much access and influence that money gives and how quickly lobbying gets mobilized once a threat to moneyed interests emerges I am certain that they'll get outspent if they ever manage to raise a significant amount of money or simply ingnored if they don't scale up to something significant.
Are you aware that it's Lessig who has been the one spreading news about those very stats? He knows what he's up against.
This is not even going into the fact that after the McComish, Citizen's United and McCutcheon rulings you'd need to get a constitutional amendment passed to do anything about campaign finance.
Lessig knows that too. It's why he started the ConCon -- Constitutional Convention -- a few years back to kick off some thinking in that direction.
Either way, he admits this is a moonshot, but I'm sick of cynical people insisting nothing will work when someone is making a real go of it. You're just guaranteeing that nothing changes. Sad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: And there you have people talk about how left wingers are naive
Ask him Mike... http://lessig.tumblr.com/ask
Also... agree btw. Lessig is trying and it needs more than an initial Constitutional Convention to "get the money out". Lobbying, revolving door is also part of the problem. The issue needs a multi-pronged approach and your own politicians. It's good to see you all finally do something and can't understand some cynicism for effort.
I am not even American but I care because this issue clearly affects the rest of the world too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: And there you have people talk about how left wingers are naive
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: And there you have people talk about how left wingers are naive
Would be interesting to see. $85 average seems a little high as a median. I reckon the median is about $10 or $20 with quite a few "big donors" considering who Lessig is and the influence he has. Wouldn't be surprised to see a few $10,000 donations in there somewhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Beyond naive
This is a terrible idea, and in complete opposition to everything TechDirt claims to favor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: And there you have people talk about how left wingers are naive
It is like a bunch of rag-tag rebels forming a proper of battle to face a professional army instead of engaging in asymmetric warfare.
Now as a campaigning and awareness raising measure I have some respect for it. I also appreciate the attempt, even if I do think it is tilting at windmills, since it will give us a data point and case study to guide actions in the future. I am very interested to see exactly how this will play out. I also do think it will work out better overall than Americans Elect for example, which was a previous attempt at trying to induce a paradigm shift in the current US political system.
The way to challenge the status quo though is not by mobilizing money (where the field is very strongly tilted against the general population of this great democracy) to mobilizing people where you might say we have a 19 to 1 advantage...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: And there you have people talk about how left wingers are naive
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: And there you have people talk about how left wingers are naive
I do not think that means what you think it means. In the original story, Don Quixote charged a windmill thinking it was a giant that was a threat to the people, when in fact it was simply a harmless (and even beneficial) piece of machinery.
What Lessig is attacking is a very real, very threatening giant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: And there you have people talk about how left wingers are naive
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
$12 million isn't that much money
Plus, as a lot of rich candidates show up, people who pour tons more of their own money into campaigns then their opponents lose far more often than they win.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: $12 million isn't that much money
I can't believe people keep bringing this up after we've explained over and over again.
The $12 million is not the goal. It's the test. They're using $12 million in a few races where it *will* make a difference to prove the point, and then will seek to raise MUCH more for the big campaign.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: $12 million isn't that much money
I can. Unfortunately, that's the way it is. Not everyone knows or has researched the issue properly and the same questions will always be asked. You need to keep saying the same thing over and over and over and over again.
Same thing exploited: (with repetitive "soundbites", "slogans" and "talking points")
They are so affective that they are used to imply the opposite of the actual facts. Like Orwell's Ministry of truth.
Just the way it is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: $12 million isn't that much money
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: $12 million isn't that much money
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: $12 million isn't that much money
Which is a HUGE part of what's wrong with our political system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe it's not a moonshot after all. Maybe people just needed someone to start the engines.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ok, that's what I was waiting for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What is meant by removing money from politics?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What is meant by removing money from politics?
Not really -- they have that power either way. Right now, they can decide for themselves which ads will or won't run, and choose the coverage given to the various candidates.
Removing money from politics (which I don't actually advocate -- I take a slightly more nuanced approach) isn't about correcting the coverage. It's about removing the need for such extreme amounts of money in order to run for and remain in office. Most legislators spend more of their time doing fundraising every single day than they spend actually doing their jobs. It also makes it much easier to corrupt and bribe them. That's the problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Capitalist Democracy is Oxymoron
It tends to point out that beyond the lip-service about one-person one-vote, democracy American Style is nothing more than who "they who have the gold get to decide everything".
Regardless though, I'm very interested to see where this will lead. I sincerely hope it is not simply the beginning of the Politician's Best Gravy Train Ever.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]