With a crowded herd of Democratic party candidates already and likely to grow further (has DeBlasio declared yet, or will he be the new Green Party candidate?) it is increasingly tough for those in the field to get noticed. Many of those needing to gain attention are striving to be more extreme in their proposals, hoping to earn some traction in the press. Kirsten Gillibrand is showing signs of flailing in just the past couple of days.
First was this desperate AOC-style attempt at relevancy — showing the New York candidate playing beer pong.
— Philip Wegmann (@PhilipWegmann) April 30, 2019
Not only is this as painful to watch as your parents playing, but that is not even beer. Unless those glasses are filled with Ketel One, her playing with water is even more pathetic!
The Senator has since followed up that attempt with a brand new campaign proposal. She is unveiling what she describes as “Democracy Dollars” — a plan to allocate $600 to eligible voters. Now, before you get caught up in an Anthony Yang-like fervor, understand that YOU do not get this cash infusion. She does.
Gillibrand’s proposal is to set up accounts for voters to give them up to $600 in funds to then distribute to candidates running for federal offices. This is such a blatant pandering move as to become laughable, but in such a crowded field her idea is unlikely to look outlandish compared to everything proposed so far, like free college tuition or the elimination of private health insurance.
The attempt by Gillibrand to line her own pockets, and those of her own party, is clearly designed to blunt the big campaign donors and place federal tax dollars under the control of the demographic groups her party already panders to on the regular. Her plan would restrict candidates to a lower ceiling of maximum donation amounts, but supposedly they would benefit by collecting more funds from a wider swath of voters.
It does not take much to see they want to hand over federal money to “their” groups for distribution — ensuring that Democrats would become enriched with our tax dollars.
Currently, only about 0.5 percent of Americans contribute more than $200 to campaigns each cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Research by the progressive think tank Demos in 2016 found donors tend to be disproportionately whiter, wealthier and more male than the overall population. “It will change who has a seat at the table and who gets elected in this country within one election cycle,” Gillibrand said.
And there it is. Take the donor power away from those wealthy white men, and “empower” those who cannot afford to donate to campaigns by giving them other people’s money — to then give to the candidates themselves.
Interesting to see this attempt to rig the system from the party that is forever groaning loudly about supposed fixes like gerrymandering. It is only wrong when the other side does this.