This is a pretty genius move by Zephyr Teachout.
First, some background, via the Huffington Post:
In May, billionaire Paul Singer fundamentally changed one of the most interesting political contests of 2016. The vulture fund manager wrote a $500,000 check to a super PAC supporting John Faso, a Republican trying to fill an open congressional seat in New York’s Hudson Valley. Overnight, Faso became a serious contender in a race that had been dominated by progressive Democrat Zephyr Teachout.
Faso had been relying on super PAC funding from another hedge fund billionaire, Robert Mercer, to get through a much tighter primary contest on the Republican side. When Singer signed on in May, Faso had the firepower to challenge Teachout in the general election.
On Monday, Teachout decided to bypass Faso himself and go after his donor. In a video posted to her Facebook account, she criticized Singer and challenged him to a debate.
Teachout is an academic corruption expert who is building her campaign message around curbing the influence of large corporations and money in politics. So highlighting Singer isn’t just an attempt to dismiss Faso as a tool of big money interests ― it also draws attention to Teachout’s strongest issue.
Now watch the video.
This takes politics to another, much needed level. It’s similar in nature to a strategy I outlined in last year’s post, Charting the American Oligarchy – How 0.01% of the Population Contributes 42% of All Campaign Cash, in which I wrote:
There are roughly 250 million adults in America, so 0.01% of that is about 25,000 people. I would argue even this number is too high. In fact, I want to find out information about what percentage of political contributions come from the 0.001%. That number will probably get us much closer to the root of the problem. It is far more possible and efficient to closely monitor 2,500 people as opposed to 25,000. After all, 25,000 people don’t regularly call Congress and get the specific legislation they want passed. 25,000 people don’t have a direct line to the Federal Reserve, but people like Jamie Dimon do, and it is these people we must watch like hawks. If we can zero in on the 2,500 wealthiest people, we can also efficiently pick out the worst offenders, as opposed to just demonizing people based on wealth, even within the 0.001%. You can’t easily separate the good from the bad with a sample of 25,000 people, but you can with 2,500 (and that smaller group has much more pull anyway).
We need to shine a very bright light on the tiny minority of busybody Americans with both the resources and the will to buy our politicians. The nation’s future depends on it.
For more articles on the topic, see:
Bought & Paid For – 1/3 of All SuperPAC Donations Have Come from Wall Street
Hillary Consolidates Wall Street Support as Republican Financiers Shift to Clinton
In Liberty,
Michael Krieger
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G
Follow me on Twitter.
