What an incredibly sensible and ambitious legislative agenda. I firmly hope that Democrats take over both Houses of Congress in November and begin to move this legislation and stick to it in the face of Trump's almost certain vetoes.
As a political scientist, these are many of the same things I have advocated in my books and talks. Brave, Ms. Newman.
Thank you. Very useful information. It’s so easy to succumb to despair, but this is a great reminder that Congress could do much more to combat authoritarianism and the oligarchy.
All that requires Congress to act, and we know how that is going. Yer gonna need a substantial House Majority, a filibuster proof Senate and enough votes to override Trump's veto. Good luck.
You'd probably have better luck with (some of) the states.
We agree big money distorts things, but none of these bills would stop Soros grants to groups like Indivisible or Singham funding radical networks that organize protests and push messaging. Those are 501(c)(4) nonprofits getting general support money, not formal PACs. How do your ideas actually close that loophole for both sides?
One last time, yes, Soros gives to indivisible. It is transparent and available to everyone and he gives a lot. It is not a grant, it is a donation. Indivisible is a national nonprofit, just like Easter Seals, American Cancer society. They have staff and expenses like all nonprofits. The bills I listed today would stop the PAC side. So Soros would not be able to give money to a PAC that supports candidates. He would be able to give to the nonprofit side. I hope that helps.
Thanks for your reply. I get that your bills would limit direct PAC money to candidates. That is one part of it.
But the bigger issue is the 501c4 nonprofits like Indivisible Project. They are not like Easter Seals. They organize big national protests, coordinate messaging, do voter mobilization, and push advocacy that affects elections every cycle. Soros foundations have given them millions in grants for "social welfare activities" — over 7 million total, including a 3 million dollar grant in 2023. Those grants pay for staff, operations, and the infrastructure that helped run No Kings events. Indivisible was the lead on the main permit.
Same thing with Singham funding groups like the Peoples Forum and Code Pink — tens of millions in general support that keeps the protest and organizing machine running.
Your bills add some disclosure or PAC limits, but they do not stop these big general donations to the nonprofit side that still influences politics and elections. That loophole stays open for billionaires on both sides.
How do we actually close the full loophole so regular working people have more say than the big funders, no matter which team they back?
Got news for you: all those groups do the same thing for their constituencies. I guess I do not see the point, other than you do not like protests. That is completely fair. Protests are free speech and yes, organizing too. It is all our right. The issue here is you do not like protests and organizing and I do. Let’s agree to disagree. Have a good day.
I have no problem with protests. That is protected speech for everyone.
My point was about big money and consistency. When we talk about billionaire influence in politics, it should include Soros grants to groups like Indivisible and Singham funding the networks that helped organize No Kings. Those are 501c4 nonprofits getting general support money that pays for staff, coordination, and big actions. It shapes elections and the political climate even if it is not direct PAC checks to candidates.
We see this differently and that is okay. Like you said thought; agree to disagree. Have a good day as well.
What an incredibly sensible and ambitious legislative agenda. I firmly hope that Democrats take over both Houses of Congress in November and begin to move this legislation and stick to it in the face of Trump's almost certain vetoes.
As a political scientist, these are many of the same things I have advocated in my books and talks. Brave, Ms. Newman.
I shared it in my Facebook page. Well done, Ms. Newman.
Thank you. Very useful information. It’s so easy to succumb to despair, but this is a great reminder that Congress could do much more to combat authoritarianism and the oligarchy.
All that requires Congress to act, and we know how that is going. Yer gonna need a substantial House Majority, a filibuster proof Senate and enough votes to override Trump's veto. Good luck.
You'd probably have better luck with (some of) the states.
yup!
We agree big money distorts things, but none of these bills would stop Soros grants to groups like Indivisible or Singham funding radical networks that organize protests and push messaging. Those are 501(c)(4) nonprofits getting general support money, not formal PACs. How do your ideas actually close that loophole for both sides?
One last time, yes, Soros gives to indivisible. It is transparent and available to everyone and he gives a lot. It is not a grant, it is a donation. Indivisible is a national nonprofit, just like Easter Seals, American Cancer society. They have staff and expenses like all nonprofits. The bills I listed today would stop the PAC side. So Soros would not be able to give money to a PAC that supports candidates. He would be able to give to the nonprofit side. I hope that helps.
Thanks for your reply. I get that your bills would limit direct PAC money to candidates. That is one part of it.
But the bigger issue is the 501c4 nonprofits like Indivisible Project. They are not like Easter Seals. They organize big national protests, coordinate messaging, do voter mobilization, and push advocacy that affects elections every cycle. Soros foundations have given them millions in grants for "social welfare activities" — over 7 million total, including a 3 million dollar grant in 2023. Those grants pay for staff, operations, and the infrastructure that helped run No Kings events. Indivisible was the lead on the main permit.
Same thing with Singham funding groups like the Peoples Forum and Code Pink — tens of millions in general support that keeps the protest and organizing machine running.
Your bills add some disclosure or PAC limits, but they do not stop these big general donations to the nonprofit side that still influences politics and elections. That loophole stays open for billionaires on both sides.
How do we actually close the full loophole so regular working people have more say than the big funders, no matter which team they back?
Got news for you: all those groups do the same thing for their constituencies. I guess I do not see the point, other than you do not like protests. That is completely fair. Protests are free speech and yes, organizing too. It is all our right. The issue here is you do not like protests and organizing and I do. Let’s agree to disagree. Have a good day.
I have no problem with protests. That is protected speech for everyone.
My point was about big money and consistency. When we talk about billionaire influence in politics, it should include Soros grants to groups like Indivisible and Singham funding the networks that helped organize No Kings. Those are 501c4 nonprofits getting general support money that pays for staff, coordination, and big actions. It shapes elections and the political climate even if it is not direct PAC checks to candidates.
We see this differently and that is okay. Like you said thought; agree to disagree. Have a good day as well.
Again they are not grants
I'm in. Let's do it all!