Unity08 All Over Again: Americans Elect Leader Steps Down to Start Draft David Walker Campaign

April 17th, 2012 | Posted by Jim Cook in Alternative Parties | Americans Elect | Election 2012 | Politics | unity08 - (10 Comments)

When it became clear that despite its money and inside connections Unity08 was not attracting popular support, its two chief leaders abandoned their pretense to not having a preferred presidential candidate and stepped down from Unity08 to start the Draft Bloomberg Committee. It turned out that the connections between Unity08 and the Draft Bloomberg Committee were extensive: Unity08 gave money to the Draft Bloomberg Committee. Multiple Unity08 staffers also went to work on the Draft Bloomberg Committee along with the Unity08 chiefs. Unity08 shared office space with the Draft Bloomberg Committee too. Finally, it turned out that Unity08 had reserved the domain name draftmichaelbloomberg.com a year before.

Americans Elect is Unity08 continued; the two groups even lived in the same office space. In 2012, Americans Elect has apparently inherited the Unity08 spin-off strategy as well.

As in recent weeks it has become clear that despite its money and inside connections Americans Elect is not attracting popular support, a group within Americans Elect has begun efforts to kick start a presidential campaign, this time for someone named David Walker. Ned Martel of the Washington Post breaks the news behind the mysterious change, starting with the leaders and advisers who form the core of Americans Elect:

…from those advisers may come Americans Elect’s face-saving option. In the past month, a small group of activists has emerged to recruit Dave Walker, an independent who once ran the Government Accountability Office, to run for president. Walker, who is on the Americans Elect board of advisers, said that he knew about the effort and that an Americans Elect employee had stepped down to lead the draft movement. Also in recent weeks, Americans Elect changed the requirements Walker needs to meet to win the nomination, revising the number of online supporters to 1,000 in 10 states instead of 5,000 in 10 states.

“This is an issue-oriented movement, and they’re trying to put a face to the movement,” Walker said in a phone interview. He said his mission has long been deficit reduction and the reorganization of the national debt. “For whatever reason, they believe I’m a person who symbolizes that. I guess they kind of view me as a means to an end.”

Americans Elect leaders have promoted and done favors for a Draft Walker committee, and one of them (unnamed) has even moved over into overt leadership of this Draft Walker committee. And just as in 2008 Draft Bloomberg Committee leaders swore that it was “unrelated” to Unity08 (when it turned out it was in many ways), in 2012 David Walker is taking to the news media to insist that the Draft Walker committee is “unrelated” to Americans Elect:

“Reports in the media have mentioned an effort to draft me as a candidate for President through the Americans Elect (AE) process, and I want to clarify my position. I am aware of this recent independent movement to draft me, which is an initiative by people who evidently share my views regarding the need for fiscal, political and other major reforms to keep America great. Importantly, their effort is unrelated to the Comeback America Initiative (CAI), No Labels, and AE organizations.

“While I appreciate and am humbled by their efforts, I am not a candidate and don’t expect to become one. Rather, I am focused on my many responsibilities, including serving as CEO of the non-partisan CAI, as a national co-founder of No Labels, and as a member of AE’s Board of Advisors.”

The second paragraph is a typical non-Shermanesque statement by a person who hopes to become a candidate in the future; notice the careful choice of words.

And who was talking about the Comeback America Initiative and No Labels? How very odd of David Walker to be specifically denying involvement by the Comeback America Initiative and No Labels when nobody in the media has been mentioning these groups as behind the Draft Walker committee along with Americans Elect. A curious choice, don’t you think?

And now that David Walker mentions it…

What group spent last fall organizing a “Draft Dave Walker” online campaign? Why, it was No Labels.

What group was asking people this February to spread around Thomas Friedman’s column calling on David Walker to run for president? Why, it was No Labels.

What group has extensive documented connections with Americans Elect? Why, No Labels.

What group was founded the very same month as No Labels? Why, the Comeback America Initiative.

Whose policy ideas has No Labels been fawning over since its creation? Why, Peter G. Peterson’s.

Who provides funding for “most of the operations” of the Comeback America Initiative? Why, Peter G. Peterson.

Who was President and Chief Executive Officer of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation immediately before taking on his position as head of the new Comeback America Initiative, funded by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation? Why, David Walker.

Is No Labels funded by Peter G. Peterson? No Labels refuses to answer that question.

Is Americans Elect funded by Peter G. Peterson? Americans Elect refuses to answer that question.

Was Unity08, Americans Elect’s direct predecessor, funded by Peter G. Peterson? Why, yes. Oh, yes indeed. Pete Peterson gave the maximum-allowable contribution at the time.

But David Walker says these groups are entirely unrelated to the Draft David Walker movement that otherwise has essentially no popular support. And since David Walker says so, without prompting by anyone in the media, why, it must be so. Just one of those curious thingamabobs that happens now and then, surely.

Forward, democracy!

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Violating Charter and Bylaws, No Labels and Americans Elect Promote Presidential Bid of Pete Peterson-Funded David Walker

February 21st, 2012 | Posted by Jim Cook in Alternative Parties | Americans Elect | Election 2012 | Politics | unity08 - (19 Comments)

Update, 2:22 pm 2/21/2012: Until this afternoon, this article had featured the word “apparent” regarding the Americans Elect press release promoting Draft Presidential Candidate David Walker. I had suspicions that the press release might be fake, considering how brazenly it violates Americans Elect’s own policy against speaking or acting to promote a presidential candidacy. But the subsequent publication of the press release on Americans Elect’s website shows that it’s real.

What Americans Elect and No Labels Say: No, We’re Not Promoting Any Presidential Candidate…
The organizing documents published by the 501c4 corporation No Labels declare prominently that No Labels is not in the business of supporting a third-party or independent candidate for president in 2012.

Is No Labels trying to start a third party or support an independent for president? No. That's what No Labels says. What No Labels does is rather different.

The organizing documents published by the 501c4 corporation Americans Elect declare prominently that while Americans Elect is setting up a structure for a third-party presidential candidate, it is not in the business of promoting or opposing any particular presidential candidate:

Pursuant to the unanimous March 2010 opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in Unity08 v. FEC, the organization, its directors, officers, and its paid staff do not and will not support, or oppose, any particular candidate or particular draft effort for a candidate for the presidential or vice presidential nominations of Americans Elect. That impartiality will continue until the Delegates have made their choice in June 2012.

See also Americans Elect bylaws 4.1.2 and 6.1.

What No Labels and Americans Elect say and what they do seem to be at variance.

What No Labels has been doing: Promoting Presidential Candidate David Walker
Friday February 17 2012, one Dave Walker gives his Twitter followers a news tip:

On Feb. 17 2012, Dave Walker lets people know about the upcoming Thomas Friedman article promoting his presidential candidacy

Saturday February 18 2012, No Labels promotes the policy writings of one David Walker by e-mail:

Saturday, 2/18/2011: No Labels asks people to read what David Walker has written

Sunday February 19 2012, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman (who has published inside-access promotions of Americans Elect before) promotes the idea of a presidential run by one David Walker:

I know what I’d pay good money to see: an intelligent independent candidate just taking part in the presidential debates, because it would make both Obama and his Republican opponent better. One independent I’d like to see play that role is David Walker.

Walker was the country’s chief auditor, serving from 1998 to 2008 as the U.S. comptroller general. He is currently the chief executive of the Comeback America Initiative (www.tcaii.org), a nonpartisan group dedicated to getting America’s fiscal house in order. Walker — who came in second to Hillary Clinton in a reader poll that Politico conducted last October for favorite Third Party candidate…

… reader poll? Reader poll? Where have I heard about that Politico reader poll before?

October 6 2011:

No Labels freeps a Draft Dave Walker for President poll on October 6 2011

October 8 2011:

No Labels runs a Draft Dave Walker for President campaign to stuff a Politico presidential preference online poll on October 8 2011

October 10 2011:

Dave Walker, promoting a Draft Walker vote in conjunction with the No Labels freeping effort, October 10 2011

October 11 2011:

Draft Dave Walker Presidential Campaign, started by No Labels in October 2011. This promotions piece dates to October 11 2011.

Dave Walker self-promotes his No Labels presidential campaign in October 2011, to be used as a selling point by Thomas Friedman for Americans Elect February 2012

October 14 2011:

David Walker is Honored and Humbled by the No Labels American People October 14 2011

Enough flashback. Spring back to Sunday February 19 2012, the same day Thomas Friedman published his New York Times trial balloon promoting David Walker for president, when No Labels sends out this similarly gushing e-mail endorsement of Dave Walker for president:

No Labels e-mail of February 19, endorsing the same-day Dave Walker campaign for President

Monday February 20 2012, the same Dave Walker who shared an advance tip of Friedman’s article announces his humbled reaction:

Dave Walker is Honored and Humbled by the Article promoting him he Knew About in Advance

Americans Elect, Promoting David Walker’s Presidential Candidacy
Rick Hasen of the Election Law Blog has this scoop on the promotion of David Walker by Americans Elect, February 20 2011:

Americans Elect has an official policy of neutrality (rule 6.1) when it comes to which candidate should get the Americans Elect nomination. Yet one day after Tom Friedman wrote a fawning New York Times column promoting David Walker as a potential presidential candidate (without mentioning Walker’s membership on the AE board), I received this press release:

===

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
BOARD MEMBER DAVID WALKER EMBOLDENS VOTERS TO FACE THE CRITICAL CHALLENGES OF OUR NATION
WASHINGTON, D.C., FEBRUARY 20, 2012 – Dave Walker knows the facts, the truth and the tough choice we face in connection with our nation’s poor finances and other key challenges. As the nation’s former chief auditor and head of the U.S. Government Accountability Office for almost 10 years, Walker has front-line experience in connection with the many challenges and partisan gridlock in Washington that literally threaten our nation’s and our families’ futures. Walker’s three presidential appointments from Reagan, Bush and Clinton, combined with his many years of private and non-profit leadership experience, and his engagement with Americans in all 50 states, led him to Americans Elect, where he now serves as a member of the Advisory Board.

Walker currently serves as Founder and CEO of the Comeback America Initiative, which engages the public and policymakers on fiscal issues and nonpartisan solutions that can achieve bipartisan support. Walker understands that Americans Elect’s online nominating process for president combined with its independence from the two major political parties has the ability to shock the current political system in a positive manner.

Walker is an author of three books, a national co-founder of No Labels, a member the Accounting Profession’s Hall of Fame, the Sons of the American Revolution, and the Trilateral Commission. His experience in these areas make him an important resource for Americans Elect moving forward.

“This nation has faced great challenges in the past, and it’s always risen to successfully address those challenges. It’s time to do so again.” said Walker. “Americans Elect is providing the American people with more choice and competition in connection with the nation’s two highest offices. It offers an opportunity to break the partisan gridlock and to bring to life the first three words of the U.S. Constitution – ‘We the people.’”

“Now more than ever, this country needs truth, leadership and sensible, nonpartisan solutions to the key challenges that we face. The Americans Elect process will give every registered voter – no matter their party or point on the political spectrum – a say in how best to change course and right our ship of state so that our future will be better than our past.”

###
Let’s Make History!

Americans Elect

This press release, available now on the Americans Elect website in confirmation, stands in contradiction of Americans Elect’s declaration that it would remain neutral in the nomination process. It demonstrates a direct violation of Americans Elect’s own presidential nomination rules.

It would be hard to overstate the importance of this act by Americans Elect. It’s just demonstrated that its promises and pledges are not worthy of trust.

Dave Walker, Pete Peterson, Americans Elect and No Labels
As for that “Comeback America Initiative” Thomas Friedman mentions, come back with me to its founding in December of 2010, coincidentally right when No Labels was founded. It turns out that through the end of 2013, “The Comeback Initiative” is funded by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation and run by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation’s President and Chief Executive Officer. That’s David Walker:

New York, N.Y. — The Peter G. Peterson Foundation (PGPF) announced today that President and Chief Executive Officer, David M. Walker, will be leaving the Foundation to launch a new initiative focused on promoting and achieving specific fiscal solutions. The new organization will be entitled the Comeback America Initiative (CAI). Walker will serve as the Founder and Chief Executive Officer of CAI, which has received a three-year grant from PGPF and will engage the public and promote fiscal solutions, including those outlined in Walker’s book, Comeback America: Turning the Country Around and Restoring Fiscal Responsibility.

“Dave Walker has been a Paul Revere on the unsustainable fiscal outlook for our country. He has done a first rate job of getting our Foundation off to a fast start and raising awareness of the critical need for fiscal responsibility. We look forward to continuing to partner with Dave as he begins this important new initiative,” said Peter G. Peterson, Chairman of the Foundation.

Peter G. Peterson is known better as Pete Peterson. Who’s Pete Peterson? A billionaire who has been pushing for years for social security cuts and privatization. Also, a funder of Unity08, which underwent a name change to Americans Elect (Americans Elect won’t tell anyone who’s funding it now).

As for the connection between No Labels and David Walker, search for “David Walker” at No Labels and you’ll find a dozen articles singing his praises. Search for “Dave Walker” there and you’ll find 18 more. David Walker is listed as a “Founding Leader” of No Labels.

Is Pete Peterson a funder of No Labels? No Labels won’t tell anyone — it has refused to disclose the names of its funders. But notably, No Labels has been noting the priorities of Pete Peterson with gushing admiration since its inception last year at the same time as the inception of “The Comeback Initiative.”

Click here to review a list of known connections between No Labels and Americans Elect. They stretch back in time to at least the Fall of 2010.

David Walker and the actual American People
Inside the Americans Elect – No Labels – Pete Peterson nexus, David Walker is very popular. But is he popular with the actual American people living outside that nexus?

In order gain access to the Americans Elect ballot, Walker will have to gain somewhere between 10,000 and 50,000 votes of support by May. For about three weeks now, David Walker has been a draft candidate for the Americans Elect presidential nomination. With the actual American people, prior to the launch of a funded draft Walker effort, he’s not on pace to make the ballot. His current number of supporters after three weeks: 88.

Waiting for grassroots support for a Draft David Walker movement won’t get David Walker on the ballot. What would work? A well-funded effort by paid gatherers sent to stand outside supermarkets has worked for Americans Elect before. It could work again.

Given This, Questions Americans Elect Really Ought to Answer
1. Did Americans Elect issue a press release promoting the candidacy of David Walker?

Answer: Yes. The press release is available at Americans Elect’s website. This promotion of David Walker, issued after the press introduction of his presidential draft candidacy, is a violation of Americans Elect bylaws and pledges.

2. Has Americans Elect received funding from Pete Peterson or any person or entity associated with Pete Peterson?

3. Have Americans Elect and No Labels or their leaders or staffers been in communication with one another regarding David Walker?

I’ve directly asked Americans Elect these questions. See if Americans Elect’s leaders provide answers. They haven’t been forthcoming before. I hope they change course now.

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Like Unity08, Americans Elect Dishes out Iowa/New Hampshire Rhetoric that Doesn’t Wash.

January 22nd, 2012 | Posted by Jim Cook in Alternative Parties | Americans Elect | Election 2008 | Election 2012 | Politics | unity08 - (6 Comments)

Past as Prelude: Unity08 and the Story of Big Bad Iowa & New Hampshire
In the 2008 election cycle, the presidential bid called Unity08 started off its appeal for an online presidential nomination election in which it would run an election, count votes, and announce a winner all by itself. People were skeptical, so Unity08 tried to argue that it would be fairer than the current voting system, rolling out this claim:

“Did you know that 99% of American voters have NO say in who is picked to run for president on the party tickets? Unless you live in Iowa or New Hampshire, you’re left out in the cold. And everyone knows, these two races (and how filled the campaign coffers are) dictates what happens in the rest of the country.”

and this one:

In the past, by the time Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina voted, it was over — and 99% of the country has been shut out.

This was supposed to stand in contrast this to the Unity08 would-be “convention,” at which 10 million people were supposed to gather online and vote for a nominee.

Problem was:

1) Unity08 turned out to be a stalking horse for a Draft Michael Bloomberg campaign, not a neutral entity. Unity08 registered the web domain draftmichaelbloomberg.com back in July 2007. The Draft Michael Bloomberg Committee had the same mailing address as Unity08, the leaders of the two efforts were the same, and on top of that Unity08 gave the Draft Bloomberg Committee a contribution.

2) The trend that Unity08 referred to in its promotional materials doesn’t exist. Rather, presidential nominations are littered with Iowa and New Hampshire victors who didn’t get their party’s nomination. In 2000, John McCain won New Hampshire. He didn’t win the nomination, and the nomination battle between Bush and McCain lasted past Iowa and New Hampshire. In 2008, Hillary Clinton won New Hampshire. She didn’t win the nomination, and the nomination battle between Clinton and Obama lasted so darned long that by the end people were complaining about the number of contests they had to pay attention to. Only 4 out of the 7 New Hampshire Democratic victors in the past thirty years became the eventual nominee. Only 3 out of the 5 New Hampshire Republican victors in the past twenty years became the eventual nominee. These early contests are not a guarantee of sealing the deal.

When Republican and Democratic parties changed the primary schedule around to create a number of early contests, negating Unity08′s stated reasons for attempting its own presidential bid, what did Unity08 do? Change its reason, of course. Unity08 Chief Douglas Bailey explained the new reason for Unity08 to run its own candidate: too many early contests:

“I think, frankly, that the American public is just fed up with the game-playing of both political parties, and this is just another example of it. How stupid can you get? You don’t even have a very good sense of what the issues will be in the (general) election when you pick the nominee this early. This just feeds the public frustration.”

Push to the Present: As Americans Elect, Unity08 Brings Up Big Bad Iowa & New Hampshire All Over Again
Unity08 failed to attract enough supporters to do much of anything in 2008. But it morphed itself into a new entity named Americans Elect, sharing the old posh offices and many of the old posh leaders of Unity08 and pushing forward its goal of running a privatized online-only presidential nomination into the new 2012 election season. This time, Unity08 Americans Elect doesn’t need big numbers of supporters — it has a small number of very big donors to fund its operations, the names of which it keeps a tight secret. But oddly enough, Americans Elect is issuing communications as if it has the advantage of a large number of supporters, even as evidence of broad support fails to materialize.

Just like its direct predecessor, Americans Elect says in a January 16 2012 press release that we should participate in its privatized presidential nomination because it’s not right that nearly four hundred thousand Iowa and New Hampshire voters bully their way into picking the president for the rest of us:

After Only 369,448 Votes, Half of the Presidential Field is Gone

Jon Huntsman is leaving the GOP primary race, after fewer than 400,000 Americans have had a chance to cast a vote. And Huntsman isn’t the first:

Abandoned bids for GOP nomination before a single vote was cast: CEO Herman Cain, Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, Gov. Gary Johnson, Gov. Tim Pawlenty

After 122,225 voted in the Iowa caucus: Rep. Michelle Bachmann

After 247,223 voted in the New Hampshire primary: Gov. Jon Huntsman

Still standing: Speaker Newt Gingrich, President Barack Obama, Rep. Ron Paul, Gov. Rick Perry, Gov. Mitt Romney, Sen. Rick Santorum

Is this really the best way to pick a president? Are you ready to settle?

The stats are a bit fudgy here: lots of presidential contenders always drop by the wayside before the first caucus or primary because they can’t attract supporters, just like the five contenders listed here. Heck, Thaddeus McCotter never really ever started his presidential campaign, at least not seriously. If you count just the presidential contenders who were still competing when the Iowa and New Hampshire contests started in 2012, a majority were still in the race after voting was done in Iowa and New Hampshire and South Carolina.

On the 17th of January 2012, Americans Elect sent a similar message by e-mail:

Wait, is that it?

Only two states have cast their primary votes and already the parties and the media are sending us a message: like ‘em or not, these are your choices.

But actual events have intervened to once again trample on Americans Elect’s narrative. It turns out that in the first three contests for the Republican nomination, a different politician has won each contest. Iowa went to Rick Santorum, New Hampshire went to Mitt Romney, and South Carolina went for Newt Gingrich. The race is actually wide open, a message that party voters and the media are actually communicating pretty clearly.

Participation is Americans Elect’s very own problem.
As for the numbers, the 369,448 votes in Republican elections have gone up to 970,401 with the addition of 600,953 voters in South Carolina. That’s for the less than ten candidates in contention for the Republican nomination. Meanwhile, the number of people tracking the 10 most popular politicians in the Americans Elect system…

1st place: Ron Paul
2nd place: Barack Obama
3rd place: Jon Huntsman
4th place: Bernie Sanders
5th place: Buddy Roemer
6th place: Gary Johnson
7th place: Dennis Kucinich
8th place: Al Franken
9th place: Mitt Romney
10th place: Newt Gingrich

… adds up to just 31,218. That’s just 3.2% of the number of people who’ve participated in the Republican process so far. Over the last five days, Americans Elect has been adding 235 new tracks a day. That’s nice, but at that rate it will take eleven years for Americans Elect tracking numbers to make it up to the level of participation reached in the Republican nomination race so far. If you want to identify a process that’s generating low numbers in participation, Americans Elect would be the process to pick on.

As the number of people participating in the presidential nominating process continues to grow, don’t be surprised to see Americans Elect follow the path that it did as Unity08, ignoring the fact that its old reason for being turned out to be false, then plowing right on, fashioning some new reason that fits the moment.

I’m becoming less convinced as the days roll on that the American people will actually swallow whatever that new message might be. After all, to sell a presidential nomination process you have to actually have a presidential nomination process to sell. Americans Elect has blown 2 months and 16 days past the original date when Americans would be able to start drafting candidates to appear on the ballot for Americans Elect. The first ballot in the nominating process is just 2 months and 26 days from now, and still, as it has for 3 months now, Americans Elect reports that its system will be up and running “very soon.” How can a real, viable grassroots movement to draft a presidential candidate start up, organize itself and succeed on the ballot in just 2 months and 26 days — or in 2 months and 25 days come tomorrow? A real, viable grassroots movement can’t. With Americans Elect’s delays, only big money will be able to pull off such an effort now. Whatever legitimacy Americans Elect might have earned with a significant campaign period and openness about its funding seems impossible now. I expect what we’ll see now is a long, variably messy implosion.

The lesson that I don’t expect Americans Elect leaders to absorb: you can have gobs and gobs of secret dollars from hedge fund pals, and you get your public relations people to book you on all the right talk shows, but if you don’t actually engage with and really empower the American people, you’ll be only a paper moon flying over a cardboard sea.

, , , , , , , , ,

Does Americans Elect owe its $20 Million Benefactors if it pays them Back?

July 27th, 2011 | Posted by Jim Cook in Alternative Parties | Americans Elect | Election 2012 | Politics | Questions | unity08 - (3 Comments)

If someone loaned you $20 million to start an enterprise, would you feel indebted to that person after you paid him or her back? What if the loan were interest-free?

If someone loaned you $20 million interest-free to start an enterprise, would you feel indebted to that person after you paid him or her back?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

I’m asking this question because Americans Elect, the 501c4 corporation trying to arrange the election of its own presidential candidate in 2012, has been “financed with some serious hedge-fund money,” according to Thomas Friedman in a column that Americans Elect has embraced. According to John Avlon, a spokesman for the closely allied organization No Labels, Americans Elect has received $20 million from members of this wealthy investor class in average increments of $400,000. Despite Americans Elect’s insistence that “none of our funding comes from special interests,” it appears to be awash in special-interest hedge fund money.

But according to Americans Elect, that’s all OK, because it says it will pay the money back, or at least “the bulk of” it:

We intend to pay back the bulk of our initial financing as we recruit delegates, so that no single individual will have contributed more than $10K. And so that our candidates will answer only to the American people.

Megafinancing from a small number of very wealthy people is a crucial part of Americans Elect’s plan to elect its own President of the United States. I can declare this with confidence because the previous incarnation of Americans Elect, Unity08, sued in federal court for the right to pursue campaign megafinancing outside the limits of campaign finance laws. Ditching its earlier commitment to a campaign based on small-dollar donations, Unity08 declared to the court that it was essential for its presidential aspirations that it obtain very large loans from a small number of benefactors.

“A number of individuals otherwise prepared to make loans in these larger amounts have been unwilling to do so because of the Commission’s ruling… A favorable ruling in the near term may make it possible to revive Unity08 through substantial loans from those individuals who have expressed a willingness to make such loans but not in the face of legal uncertainty about their exposure to possible liability for doing so.”

“Unity08 is currently soliciting funds primarily through the Internet and personal contacts…. It concluded, however, that, in order to have the best possible chance of raising monies to defray the cost of obtaining ballot access as an organization in thirty-seven (37) states prior to the 2008 election, it should accept donations from individuals, which may be in the form of loans, without limitation as to the amount.”

In case you’re not clear on the matter, here’s proof that Americans Elect is Unity08 resurrected.

And so I’ll restate the original question of this post: If a small set of wealthy people loaned Americans Elect $20 million interest free to start a presidential campaign — a loan without which Americans Elect says it could not operate — is Americans Elect indebted to those people?

, , , , , , , , , ,

No Special Interest Funding for Americans Elect? New York Times reports “Serious Hedge-Fund Money”

July 24th, 2011 | Posted by Jim Cook in Alternative Parties | Americans Elect | Economy | Election 2012 | Ethics | Media | Politics | Questions | unity08 - (25 Comments)

Americans Elect, a 501c4 corporation working to arrange the election of its own presidential ticket in 2012, has rolled out its publicity campaign today with a piece written by New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. Friedman wrote his column after being invited by Americans Elect to tour “its swank offices, financed with some serious hedge-fund money, a stone’s throw from the White House.”

That’s a curious turn of phrase, considering the point-blank declaration this month by Americans Elect that “None of our funding comes from special interests or lobbyists.”

'None of our funding comes from special interests or lobbyists.' — Americans Elect declaration of, July 2011

The definition of a special interest, according to Merriam-Webster, is a person or organization seeking gain through specific economic activity and standing to gain or lose depending on the shape of action taken by the government. Hedge fund investors and managers are market insiders who make money off of aggressive, high-risk investments. Government regulation of hedge funds has been a significant point of contention in recent years, making hedge fund managers and investors part of a special interest group.

Indeed, concerns regarding the regulation of hedge funds almost perfectly bookend the creation and roll-out of Americans Elect. In July of 2010, as the old Unity08 finished its corporate reorganization through the Unity12 Task Force into the new Americans Elect corporation, the Dodd-Frank Act was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama, introducing a new array of regulations of hedge fund activities. In July of 2011, as Americans Elect begins its public roll-out, government agencies, hedge fund managers, banks and investor groups are clashing over the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act, especially rules that allow banks to get into the hedge fund business.

When it comes to Thomas Friedman’s report that Americans Elect is “financed with some serious hedge-fund money,” there are two possibilities:

Possibility 1: Despite having a gig with the New York Times and going to interview Americans Elect in “its swank offices,” Thomas Friedman doesn’t know what he’s talking about here. This isn’t inconceivable: Friedman refers to Kahlil Byrd as “the C.E.O. of Americans Elect,” but current corporate documents show Byrd is actually the Vice Chairman and Treasurer while billionaire Peter Ackerman is Chairman. Americans Elect corporate bylaws specify that “The Chairman shall serve as the chief executive officer of Americans Elect.”

Possibility 2: Americans Elect really is awash with special-interest hedge fund money. Some other evidence pointing in this direction has already emerged. In a fawning promotional piece this weekend for the Daily Beast, No Labels co-founder John Avlon drops a useful statistic: that Americans Elect has raised $20 million from just 50 people, a whopping average contribution of $400,000 per person. Not just anybody can write a check for 400 grand; these are 50 mostly anonymous people to whom Americans Elect owes a big debt of gratitude. We know from other documents that two private investment executives have made donations to Americans Elect: Rockport Capital chief Peter Ackerman to the tune of $1.55 million and hedge fund operator Kirk Rostron in an undisclosed amount. Incomplete documentation of a “giving stream” to Americans Elect also names Melvin Andrews of Los Angeles as a contributor. Melvin Andrews of Los Angeles is the President of Lakeside Capital Partners. Outside of the capital investment business, but definitely in the realm of a “special interest,” is the donation to Americans Elect by Jim Holbrook, Chairman of the Promotion Marketing Association.

So let’s ask Americans Elect about this. Admittedly, Americans Elect’s track record in answering questions isn’t that hot: I’ve been reaching out to the group, asking various questions and trying to make contact with it for nearly a year now and have never gotten any communication in reply. But by gum, I’ll keep trying. I’ve posed the following question to Americans Elect today through its online contact form, through the e-mail address info@americanselect.org, and by a phone call to the newly disclosed media contact number of Americans Elect at 541-WE-ELECT/541-933-5328 (no live person answered the call, but I did leave a message after a recording promised that “we will get back to you as soon as possible”). If I receive an answer to my question, I’ll post it in the comments section for you to read. If you don’t see an answer from Americans Elect in the comments section, it’s because Americans Elect hasn’t given me an answer.

Question: Americans Elect declares that "none of our funding comes from special interests or lobbyists." But in his Sunday New York Times profile of Americans Elect, columnist Thomas Friedman describes "swank offices, financed with some serious hedge-fund money, a stone’s throw from the White House." Given recent special interest advocacy of hedge fund operators regarding the Dodd-Frank Act, these two statements appear to be inconsistent. Is Thomas Friedman's statement regarding hedge fund contributions to Americans Elect inaccurate? Or has Americans Elect been accepting money from the operators of hedge funds?

I’ll share any answer I get in the comments section below. If you don’t see any answer from Americans Elect in the comments section for this article, you’ll know that Americans Elect never got back in touch.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Americans Elect Funder and Chair Peter Ackerman Hires Son to run Rules Committee

June 23rd, 2011 | Posted by Jim Cook in Alternative Parties | Americans Elect | Election 2012 | Ethics | Politics | unity08 - (6 Comments)

For a connected chain of private political corporations, arranging presidential elections is a family affair.

In the 2008 election season, when Unity08 organized to run its own ticket for President of the United States, co-founder Hamilton Jordan had his daughter placed in the leadership of its youth effort, UnityPetition. Jordan also placed his daughter’s schoolteacher and his daughter’s camp counselor on the Unity08 Founders’ Council.

Americans Elect is the continuation of Unity08. In the runup to the 2012 election season, the headquarters of Unity08 was moved into the top floor of 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC, a space owned by the billionaire leveraged buyout artist Peter Ackerman. There Unity08 shared office space for a brief time with an entity called the Unity12 Task Force before Unity12 was renamed Americans Elect, the entity we see today at the same address of 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue.

The sole disclosed funder of Americans Elect (to the tune of $1.55 million) is Peter Ackerman, who is also placed as Americans Elect President, Chairman and Director. This month brings brings news that 30-year-old Elliot Ackerman has won appointment as Americans Elect’s Policy Director. Elliot Ackerman is Peter Ackerman’s son.

I can see three reasons a child of a powerful leader in an American corporation might be appointed to a position in that organization. The first reason is that, among 300 million other possibilities in the country, the leader’s child is the best qualified to do the job. The second reason is that a plum job that generates useful contacts and a good-looking line on a resume, positioning a child advantageously for a future career. The third reason is that children tend to be loyal to parents; stocking a corporation with one’s children and other relatives prevents challenges to the leader’s authority and dictates. There may be other reasons, but these three are worth thinking about in the context of Americans Elect.

, , , , , , , , ,

The 3 Ways Americans Elect Could Improve Politics (and the 3 Ways it Could Go Wrong)

June 2nd, 2011 | Posted by Jim Cook in Alternative Parties | Americans Elect | Election 2012 | Politics | Tech - (0 Comments)

The summer is an empty stage. With Congress and the President going on extended vacations, with students away from campus and student activism on hold, there is a vacuum of traditional political news during the summer months, a vacuum that begs to be filled by some other story: the murder of an intern, shark attacks, insinuations of a terrorist attack and kerfuffles about mosques have been latched onto in recent summers. This summer, I expect the big political drama to be the emergence of Americans Elect.

What is Americans Elect?

Americans Elect is a 501c4 corporation with origins as Unity08, a group that in the 2008 election cycle publicly promoted itself as a vehicle for Americans to choose a presidential ticket in an online election while it privately positioned itself to run a Michael Bloomberg for President campaign. Unity08 failed because it did not attract popular support through the large number of the small-dollar campaign contributions that traditionally powered political campaigns in America.

Since Unity08′s failure, however, the Supreme Court has ruled that corporations can make unlimited expenditures to promote candidates. Subsequently, Unity08 reformed itself as Americans Elect, began taking large-dollar contributions from undisclosed sources, and with little fanfare began hiring paid petition gatherers to collect signatures to put it on the presidential ballot as its own political party. Americans Elect has already gained ballot access in a number of states.

The plan, as Americans Elect has begun to describe it:

  • Obtain ballot access in 50 states
  • Convince Americans to register at its website as “delegates”
  • Invite politicians to compete to run on the Americans Elect ticket for President and Vice President of the United States
  • Ask delegates to “help identify crucial issues” that will form the basis for campaigns
  • Ask delegates to “guide the formulation of a ‘Platform of Questions’ that candidates will be required to completely answer”
  • Set up an online voting system for the final Americans Elect presidential ticket to be selected
  • Include unspecified “checks and balances to make sure that vehicle stays on the road”

How could Americans Elect change American politics for the better? Where could Americans Elect go wrong? How can those pitfalls be avoided?

Opportunity #1. Americans Elect could kill political parties and gain a new third choice for president on Election Day.

Political parties, not American citizens, nominate presidential candidates in today’s system. Although some American citizens are permitted to participate in the selection of nominees, they usually can do so only as members of political parties, and only to a certain extent. In the 2008 presidential primary season, it looked for a time as if unelected “superdelegates” in the Democratic Party would have the ability to choose the Democratic presidential nominee independent of citizen input.

While Americans Elect is registering itself as a political party, it is promising an election system in which all citizens across the nation can participate by directly nominating a presidential candidate through an online election. If everyone can get together and cast a vote online to select a presidential candidate, who needs the old Democratic and Republican parties anymore?

Even if the Democratic and Republican parties survive the onslaught of Americans Elect, the new organization’s candidates will stand as an third alternative in the presidential elections. With more choices, American citizens may be able to support candidates that don’t fit in the two-party dichotomy.

Pitfall #1. Americans Elect could replace political parties with a new version of insiderism.

Americans Elect is only an improvement upon traditional political parties if it actually ends insider influence over candidate choice and allows all American citizens equal say in the selection process. When Americans Elect says that all Americans will be able to “help identify crucial issues” and “guide the formulation of a ‘Platform of Questions’,” what do the words “help” and “guide” mean? Will “delegates” have limited but non-determinative input in these matters? Will “delegates” be given the ability to choose from a limited set of alternatives? What sorts of choices will “delegates” not be permitted to make?

If Americans Elect arranges the choice of its presidential ticket to meet some standard predetermined by its corporate leadership, then the additional choice of an Americans Elect in the presidential elections wouldn’t be the people’s choice. It would be the addition of another corporate insider’s choice.

How to avoid pitfall #1. Make all substantive and procedural decisions by Americans Elect subject to delegate vote, with the field of alternatives generated by delegates. Allow delegates to overrule decisions made by Americans Elect corporate leadership.

Opportunity #2. Americans Elect could end the undemocratic dominance of small states holding early primaries.

Voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada winnow the field of candidates down before voters in Florida, Utah, Alaska and Illinois have a chance to weigh in. Every American could be able to vote at once in a single primary election, giving every American an equal say in picking a presidential nominee.

Pitfall #2. Not every American can or does use the internet, the means by which this online election is to be held.

How to avoid pitfall #2. Make the Americans Elect voting process accessible to Americans with disabilities or who do not have computers. For those without access to the Internet, make an alternative means by which votes can be cast.

Opportunity #3. Americans Elect could put citizens in control of political discourse.

As the years pass, public access to presidential campaigns has become more limited. Questions at whistle-stop rallies are strictly regulated and pre-screened if they are allowed at all. Debates are staged and scripted. Citizens have even been ejected from events for wearing the wrong t-shirt or sporting the wrong bumper sticker on their car.

Americans Elect could reverse this trend by allowing everyday American citizens the ability to ask questions of and set standards for contenders for the presidential nomination in an environment controlled by those citizens, not by campaigns.

Pitfall #3. The Americans Elect corporation could restrict political discourse on its website.

Americans Elect’s direct predecessor, Unity08, regularly deleted posts on its website when they asked difficult questions, and even deleted Unity08′s own past statements when they proved embarrassing.

Americans Elect could use its administration of an online political community to ensure compliance with a party line.

How to avoid pitfall #3. Make it a policy not only to tolerate dissent on the Americans Elect website, but to encourage dissent and incorporate that dissent as an essential aspect of the Americans Elect process.

There is a significant opportunity for Americans Elect to use its mysteriously-obtained resources to open up the American political process. There is also the unfortunate potential for Americans Elect to squander that opportunity by driving the process from the top-down and manipulating rather than empowering the citizens who are looking for a good alternative to the same old two-party system. As Americans Elect rolls itself out this summer, pay close attention to see which path the corporation follows.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Americans Elect files as political party in Florida

April 24th, 2011 | Posted by Jim Cook in Alternative Parties | Americans Elect | Election 2012 | Politics | State and Local | unity08 - (0 Comments)

I am indebted to Richard Winger of Ballot Access News for his discovery that Americans Elect has filed papers to gain recognition in the state of Florida as a political party. As of today, the 2012 presidential contending group does not yet appear on the official list of approved political parties in Florida; barring any petition irregularities we should expect Americans Elect to appear there soon. From that point forward the page should serve as a gateway to regularly-required reports on Americans Elect’s activity. Those reports can be telling — check out these reports for Americans Elect’s predecessor, Unity08, show that it fell out of legal compliance in the last election cycle.

, , , ,