Questionable contributions to Dennis Kucinich's various house campaigns...

[originalpckelly]

within the last ten years:

ALTRIA GROUP INC.
BP AMERICA (and at other times BP CORPORATION NORTH AMERICA INC.)
BOEING
BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES
CLOROX COMPANY
EDS (Electronic Data Systems)
GEICO
KEYCORP
LOCKHEED MARTIN

http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/can_give/H6OH23033

*This candidate became the subject of discussion in another thread in this series, hence his thread.

[MonkeyFunk]

1. You have to explain what's questionable

is it from corporate PACs, or individuals who work for those companies? How much money?

Has Kucinich ever acted in a way that would indicate he was bought by these contributions (which are 5k, max, for corporate PACs)?

[glowing]

2. Are these the only you can find? Let's list all the candidates...

I'm quite sure the questionable is a lot longer.

[originalpckelly]

3. I've been doing that.

It all started with an article about Ben Nelson of Nebraska (DINO) and some type of corruption with a donor to his campaign.

Then someone suggested I should look into Hillary, so I did, but I didn't think that was fair, so then I did the #2 spot Obama. Edwards I'm not able to do with confidence because the Senate campaign was a while ago, and it doesn't look like the FEC has good record in their database about it. I may have to resort to second hand information from other donation monitoring websites.

[charlie]

4. Clorox and Lockheed seem to be employee union PACs

I wouldn't call those questionable.

FWIW, most of the rest paid once a decade ago and didn't do it again.

[originalpckelly]

5. Actually, if you look...

it's got vague donation descriptions and the ones with accurate descriptions contain management.

However, if you look at the actual donation forms you'll find it's almost all executive management types and the FEC didn't include these more apt job descriptions in their database.

[originalpckelly]

6. If you really think about it, it's pretty damn dishonest to say it's an "employee" pac...

because most people who work at Clorox (if they're union) will donate to a union and the union will donate in its name or the name of a group of unions.

[charlie]

8. Is that what those are?

Ringers? I wouldn't know. Are there no union-created PACs?

[originalpckelly]

10. Sometimes, but only if the union has the company name in it...

I don't think many companies do that.

Now, if you look through Kucinich's other donations, he has a boatload of unions and progressive causes, but alas this thread is about questionable donations not the good ones by union/etc.

[charlie]

15. I understand the thread topic

I'm just looking to see if those two are questionable.

[charlie]

7. I'm not sure I understand

I looked at the donation forms. Is there elsewhere where you've found more comprehensive forms? How do you tell an executive management type from what's listed?

[originalpckelly]

9. You click on the long numbers to the right of the donations.

You'll get pictures of the actual donation forms, there you will find more information than "Clorox Employee". In fact, I think that was an entirely deceptive thing to label themselves that way. The forms all give a clear picture that those people are not mere employees, they're the management types.

[charlie]

11. I'd already done that

It just reiterates the name on the index page, not Clorox Employee, but Clorox Employee's Political Action Committee.

[originalpckelly]

16. You have to go to the PAC's donation page by clicking the PAC's name...

in Kucinich's donation list. Then go to "Individuals Who Gave To This Committee"

And then look through the list of donors to the PAC. The list contains few people who are really generic employees, most of them are the management/executive types.

This is the list of individual contributors I'm talking about:
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/com_ind/C00062224/

[charlie]

18. Oh, I see

I didn't click thru to the Individuals Who Gave Listing.

[originalpckelly]

19. Sorry, I should be more precise...

this was mainly my doing by not being more precise. Eeek! I hope you can forgive me? :-)

[charlie]

23. If I don't see

3 fat links while looking for "executive types", it's hardly your fault :)

[originalpckelly]

12. There are the following columns:

Contributor Address Date Amount Employer/Occupation Image Number

Click the numbers under the "image number" link and you'll find what I'm talking about.

[MonkeyFunk]

13. Umm...

I've been a manager, and I was always an employee, too. I didn't run the company, but I ran a group.

[originalpckelly]

14. Were you a Senior VP, or a Director?

[MonkeyFunk]

17. I've been a director

it meant I ran a department, not that I was on the Board of Directors.

[originalpckelly]

20. Did you feel the people you managed were "under you"?

[MonkeyFunk]

21. Under me, yes.

Beneath me? No.

[originalpckelly]

22. You had power over them, right?

Have you ever considered that particular model of capitalism is more similar to a dictatorship than a democracy? (I'm not implying capitalism is bad, I'm implying our structure of capitalism is bad.)

[MonkeyFunk]

24. This has nothing to do with the topic of discussion

I'm simply saying that people who are listed as managers or directors aren't necessarily hotshots that rule the world. They're employees, and they can certainly give money to candidates if they want.

You haven't yet shown anything questionable about these donations.

[originalpckelly]

25. Not all of them are the apex of power, but they're a part of the controlling group.

They're a part of the smaller group of people trying to control the larger group of people, a rather undemocratic force.

[MonkeyFunk]

27. in your opinion

You still haven't shown anything questionable about these donations.

Going off on some rant about the undemocratic nature of capitalism, while entertaining to watch, doesn't address the issue.

[originalpckelly]

39. I don't think you get it, and if you have to ask it's too hard to explain.

Democrats don't believe in protecting the big people in a company, I'm terribly sorry if that displeases you, but most of us understand it.

[charlie]

26. Yeesh

I really didn't know this was going on. I keep running into "employee" PACs larded with senior management contributions, it seems they're common as dirt. Look at Best Buy, they don't even have a single floorshop grunt for appearance's sake:

http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/com_ind/C00405076

[MonkeyFunk]

28. maybe the floorshop grunts

have better things to do with their money than give it to politicians.

[charlie]

29. Probably so

Or maybe the employees PAC's aims aren't allied with the bulk of the employees' interests.

[MonkeyFunk]

31. yeah

which is why they give to Kucinich :eyes:

[charlie]

32. They didn't

Tuck that eye-rolly thing into cold storage so it'll stay fresh when you really need it.

[MonkeyFunk]

33. this is a thread

about donations to Kucinich. The companies and pacs listed in the OP donated to Kucinich.

[charlie]

34. Oh geez

It's germane to the post I replied to. Your getting caught tossing out unwarranted scorn ain't my fault. Let it go.

[MonkeyFunk]

35. what scorn?

I'm utterly confused.

the OP claimed listed donations to Kucinich from corporations or corporate PACs.

What donations are YOU talking about? I was referring to the ones in the OP, which were donations to Kucinich.

I honestly don't know what you're talking about.

[Katherine Brengle]

30. While I wish he wouldn't accept such contributions, it certainly isn't

unusual.

No one is immune I guess.

[Subdivisions]

36. I am a Kucinich supporter and though I hope desperately

that he is honorable, seeing the names of donors on these politico's rolls is just laying out in black and white why this country needs public campaign financing.

[LWolf]

38. I believe he is the only candidate in this crop

to support public campaign financing. :shrug:

[originalpckelly]

40. Nope, unfortunately. We have to work to form even better progressive...

funding sources, but we should make the receipt of funds from those sources dependent upon whether or not a candidate takes corporate contributions.

[regnaD kciN]

37. As I recall, BP America is or was based in Cleveland...

...so it's not surprising they'd contribute to the local candidate.

[originalpckelly]

41. Yes, but on the other hand they are a company with a dangerous safety record...

their shoddy maintenance cost people their lives at a refinery down in Texas.