Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Carrie Johnson have a profile up at the Washington Post on Senator Dodd. The headline is The Banker’s Candidate; Dodd Amasses Huge War Chest. Before I discuss this profile I want everyone that participated in Senator Dodd’s Q & A to know that his office contacted me to let me know that it’s been a circus down there and that their responses have been delayed. They’ll get to it.
It’s a sad fact that you can’t win the nomination of one of the two major parties without raising obscene quantities of cash. The problem is so great that the media is not wholly unjustified in looking at campaign coffers to decide who is viable or electable. Nothing about George W. Bush made him more qualified to be President than Orrin Hatch or John McCain. He was barely qualified to stand on the same stage with Gary Bauer and Alan Keyes. But he had gadzillions of dollar bills. And that meant he was viable. We can talk about what to do about this situation in another thread, but it is a reality that we cannot deny.
So far the media has annointed Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama as the front-runners, and they can’t deny polling that shows John Edwards is a serious contender. Beyond that, they are doing their best to ignore that there are other candidates. Part of that is based on early meaningless polling and part of that is based on campaign coffers. As Birnbaum and Johnson note, Senator Dodd is polling very low at the moment. But, as they also note:
Among Democrats, Dodd’s $5 million campaign nest egg is surpassed only by that of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), who has one of the most elaborate fundraising machines ever assembled…
Dodd collected $3 million in the last three months of 2006, outraising even Clinton. Employees of American International Group and Morgan Stanley were among the largest givers.
There is a very simple reason that Sen. Dodd has been able to raise so much cash. He is the Chairman of the Senate Banking committee.
Financial services companies “will be making contributions to Dodd’s presidential run because they can’t afford to annoy him,” said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. “Whether or not his presidential ambitions go anywhere, he’ll still be the chairman of Senate Banking Committee, and they will still need his goodwill.”
Senator Dodd wants to be President of the United States. He’s running against a very formidable candidate in Hillary Clinton. He has to contend with the personal magnetism and compelling life-story of Barack Obama. Senator Biden has a high profile perch as Chairman of Foreign Relations. He’s using it to try to repeal the Iraq War resolution. John Edwards is well known from his Vice-Presidential run and he has an army of trial lawyers supporting him. Bill Richardson has the best resume in politics. Wesley Clark has a large loyal following. Dodd has the financial services industry.
This is the state of American politics. It’s distasteful. You’d like to think that anyone could become president and that they wouldn’t need to take donations from big business to get elected. Someone might figure out a way to do that someday…I hope they do…but the important things are still a candidate’s actual policy positions and leadership skills.
I come at financial services from the bottom as a small investor and an activist that used to work with ACORN. From that side of things, Dodd has a decent record.
He has also taken positions on a few narrow issues that anger financial firms but are popular with the populists who usually vote Democratic.
For instance, Dodd said he intends to campaign against predatory-lending practices by banks, which entail charging excessive interest rates on mortgage loans, often to low-income people. He also said he wants to crack down on excessive fees charged by credit card companies.
Dodd has leveraged his committee’s jurisdiction to press for Wall Street jobs for low-income workers. In recent weeks, he has reached out to minority voters with a speech at the Rainbow/Push Coalition’s Wall Street Economic Summit in New York. At the summit, convened by the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson, Dodd decried economic inequality and pledged to establish a “working group” to expand opportunities for minorities in the financial services industry.
Since assuming the Banking Committee chairmanship last month, Dodd has held hearings on predatory mortgage loans and high-interest-rate credit cards that burden consumers with unwieldy debt.
Predatory loans, check cashing joints, and income tax preparers are the banes of the ghetto. They’re actually worse than crack dealers because they have managed to make what they do legal. And they did it by making large cash contributions to politicians (mostly Republicans). I’m glad to see that Senator Dodd is no ally of these people. Dodd also worked on the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which was Congress’s answer to the Enron/MCI scandals.
On the down side:
He has opposed vigorous federal regulation of hedge funds, many of which are based in Connecticut. He also was the Senate’s leading champion of a 1995 law that limited shareholders’ right to bring class-action lawsuits against companies for alleged securities misdeeds.
I’m not very impressed with either one of those positions. There is some element of representing a home state business interest (somewhat like Joe Biden’s loathesome vote on the Bankruptcy Bill). I’d like to see a liberal Democrat put the people of East Hartford over the Hedge Fund operators. Here’s what Dodd has to say about his cozy relationship with the financial services industry:
He said he will not hesitate to shake Wall Street’s money tree, even though he is chairman of the committee that watches over its companies. But accepting millions of dollars from industries that his committee oversees will not affect his policy decisions, Dodd said.
“My record speaks for itself,” the senator said. “I haven’t changed my tune. I’ve been, I think, fairly consistent in my views on these issues.”
Again, I don’t see how Dodd could run for President without shaking the Wall Street money tree. He’s just in a better position to do it than some of the other candidates. The question is whether he would be a fair president that would remember to protect all those little people getting squashed by predatory loans, defrauded out of their modest investments, and denied bankruptcy protection.
One thing is clear though. He has enough money in the bank to pass half the viability test. Now he just needs to see a bump in the polls.
Orange.
This is reason #1 why we need publicly funded elections.
Candidates have to prostitute themselves to corporate interests and wealthy donors to get the money to make their campaign viable. No wonder any millionaire who enters a race for Federal office gets immediate respectability.
That’s one of the few things John McCain has been honest about. People don’t donate money to causes unless they they expect something from it. I’m not saying that there aren’t altruistic motives for giving money, but I don’t think that is what drives people from the financial services sector to give money to the chairman of the Banking committee.
Charlie Rangel over at Ways and Means has been chortling about all the new friends he has. They aren’t friends.
So Dodd voted against the abominable bankruptcy “reform”, unlike Biden? I’ll vote for the Libertarian or the Vegetarian candidate before I vote for anyone who backed that.
Really Boo. There’s no shortage of good ways to change the current system of government by bribery that we now enjoy. There’s nothing to figure out — but corruption has a life of its own and our Constitution makes it nearly impossible to dump the entrenched usurpers. I hope history will record Bush as the catalyst for a backlash that brought genuine revolutionary change to our system.
I think we’ve some inroads in house elections and locally, but state-wide and presidential just cost so much money.
Why exactly is it so expensive to run for President? Is it paying all the employees of the campaign staff? Is it upkeeping the blog? Is it paying for polls?
Or is it largely expensive due to the sheer amount of advertising that needs to be purchased? Advertising that often comes in the form of television ads. Ads that run on channels that broadcast over the air, which are owned by the people of the United States, who license private companies to use them?
Every democracy I know limits campaigning to six weeks and severely restricts television ads. Heck even in Romania every presidential candidate has to be given equal airtime by law – and the last campaign had 12 contenders!
Pax
Even if we took all that out, this is a big country and travelling it is enormously expensive.
In 04 Bush and Kerry spent over $650 million dollars. Chuck Schumer spent over $17 million for his Senate race.
Travel ain’t anywhere near that expensive. Advertising is.
And those numbers don’t count the millions spent by private outfits ranging from MoveOn to the swiftboat liars. You can’t have democracy in a propaganda-driven climate like this. The US has the worst electoral system among the developed democracies. It has to change radically. All that’s stopping change is the entrenched PTB that make nice profits from the bribocracy system.
alot like the pharma industry constantly harping on about why they need to charge Americans 10-15 times more for medications than they charge our Canadian and European counterparts for the very same medications– i.e. “it costs Soooooo much to do research”.
what a Load. notice how in the last five years you see wayyyy more television ads for two consumer items: cars and drugs?. TV advertising ain’t cheap.
the same applies to the “political consulting” industry– obviously a small, very specialized group of PR, polling firms and advertising types make up this select and very expensive industry.
how does one “break into” this gravy train?
you don’t. either you’re an established firm that has been doing this work for decades, or you’re not in the business to any large, profitable degree.
in the last cycle it was totally exciting to see Howard Dean and Joe Trippi finally bust through this monopoly– in more ways than one– and BTW, this took a lot of people by surprise and scared the major players who have been getting rich over the years.
one of these major players being MSM TV corporations who were not at all pleased with Dean’s talk about doing something about the bandwidth ripoff issue, for starters.
so it was no surprise when Diane Sawyer cornered Mr. Dean and his wife in the one interview with her, “oooooooooooh, Howard, why did you do the scream? aren’t you concerned about..blah, blah, blah bullcrap…
yeah, God forbid any of our POTUS candidates show one ounce of emotion or enthusiasm for the whole process– that is just TOO scary! esp. for the dinosaur voters in Iowa who apparently bought into this nonsense and b backed John “Herman Munster” Kerry.. a horrible candidate by any definition you choose to pick.
the rest is history.
It’s fair to ask– where does this end? will “serious” POTUS candidates soon have to raise $1 Billion apiece for their campaign?
and I think we can now dispense with the myth: “In America, anyone can grow up to be POTUS”.
it’s not a surprise the financial sector wants their hand in this election cycle. this is a huge, growing industry. in the Chicago area, one used to be able to say, “there’s a bar or a church on every major corner”.
now it’s a bank branch on every corner, kiosks in the grocery store, and now they open seven days per week.
Kevin Phillips in his most recent book goes into great length as to how big increases in the size of the financial sector in empires of the past (Dutch, Spanish, British) was more often than not a harbinger of the end of that respective empire’s real power.
why does this matter? because for at least the last ten years now I’ve been hearing about how the service sector is going to be the successful replacement of the industrial sector– we don’t have ANYTHING to worry about!
as draftdodger cbeney said a few years ago: “it doesn’t matter if you’re making potato chips or computer chips”.
wrong.
http://www.amazon.com/American-Theocracy-Politics-Religion-21stCentury/dp/0143038281/sr=1-1/qid=1171
652421/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-0693940-6808929?ie=UTF8&s=books
I respectfully disagree with you about Senator Dodd’s position against class actions. As someone who worked in the legal department of a Fortune 500 firm, and was required to support the corporate side of those class filings (before I left that lucrative career and walked away from the bullshit with my integrity and soul still intact) I personally support Senator Dodd’s position against class actions.
Why? The litigation attorneys who file the claims are in cahoots with the financial industry, and it’s all a big game to them (and quite the profit maker for contractors who work on class action discovery and consulting). There’s all sorts of behind the scenes shenanigans taking place in partnership between attorneys on both sides – ultimately for the purpose of financially raping investors. I walked out of quite a few of those meetings in total disgust. The corporate big wigs and opposing counsel conducted behind the scenes maneuvers throughout the entire process – in mutual consort to take advantage of the vulnerable investors who had unwittingly signed their names to the actions.
When an investor enters a class action, they might get pennies on their dollars, if the litigation attorneys “win” the action. Typically, rather than money, the investor will receive some worthless piece of shit addendum to their investments, annuity contract or variable insurance policy – an add on “bonus” that will never benefit the investor in any regard. (Unless, of course, they accidentally die, and their beneficiaries receive something like a whopping extra $1,000 in that 1 in a million chance of accidental death.) In contrast, if an investor files an individual dispute, outside the scope of a class action, they are the ones who receive the financial rewards if their dispute filing is with merit and is successful.
Bottom line – that’s what prompted my furor in writing a diary on the subject. The proposed SEC bill is aimed against the small investor who has been wronged by fraud – outside the scope of class actions. Financial institutions are already protected by volumes upon volumes of legislation and arbitration clauses hidden within the small print of every effing piece of paper a client signs when they purchase an investment or variable insurance product. This new SEC filing is utterly appalling in its blatant support of financial institutions and total disregard of individual investors.
Just my opinion. From decades of experience.
good info. As I hope is obvious, I am neither a lawyer or a savvy investor, so I try not to make pretensions that I know what I am talking about in those fields.
As you’ve likely noticed, same holds true for me when it comes to politics.
Just wanted you to know that you can cross off one of those “downsides” when it comes to Dodd – at least from my personal perspective.
Just wanted to add…even if you were an attorney, who also happened to work in the financial industry, you wouldn’t be aware of that crap unless you worked in that very specific field of litigation.
Once those investors sign the dotted line and participate in a class action, more often than not they’ve sold their souls to the devil. In most instances they unwittingly lose their ability to ever again file another dispute against that financial institution – no matter what type of fraud has been committed against them.
Hey Boo,
Just sorta breezing through – Will read tomorrow.
What I do want to comment on is that your setup with Sen Dodd, provided the best run, most qualitative on line blogging interview that I have seen of ANY of the Pols.
Frankly Sen Dodd was not on my list, but his willingness not to duck any questions, and Tim Stilles efforts to communicate really did impress me.
I am checking to see what his schedule is for NH – I like my answers up close and personal, so I am looking for a small venue. I’ll read this regarding financing and check Open Secrets before I go meet him in person.
Again, Thanks for the most stellar and informative on line session of ANY blog! VERY WELL DONE and you deserve tremendous credit for doing it so professionally. Everyone who asked questions really stayed focused and there was none of the “Whine” that you usually see.
If this will be of any help to you (or anyone else) following is a link to a comprehensive NPR interview with Senator Dodd, in which he discusses his consumer-driven positions concerning the financial services industry.
I found it to be an interesting read/resource.
http://tinyurl.com/2h3zlb