Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

AOC, a dark money critic, linked to questionable campaign finance tactic

Politicians who challenge the status quo must remember they live in a very large glass house, their critics always poised to throw the first stone. It's one reason why so few members openly challenge the ethical or ideological baselines in Congress, lest they become vulnerable to being pilloried as hypocrites.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is an exception that proves the rule on this front, her eagerness to passionately challenge convention topping the reasons why she stands apart as the most prominent and polarizing first-term House member in decades. The self-described democratic socialist has already parried charges of duplicity on several symbolically resonant fronts — making tabloid headlines in recent days, for example, by choosing a car over the subway back home in New York while championing a Green New Deal as her signature issue.

Now comes a charge of hypocrisy that's maybe more serious.


Saikat Chakrabarti, who's now chief of staff after running the Ocasio-Cortez campaign last year, helped create a pair of political action committees that paid his political consultancy, Brand New Congress, more than $1 million in 2016 and 2017, federal campaign finance records show. Chakrabarti's firm also got $18,880 from the campaign in its early stages, after which he worked as a volunteer.

But that arrangement, "first reported by conservative outlets, left hidden who ultimately profited from the payments — a sharp juxtaposition with Ocasio-Cortez's calls for transparency in politics," The Washington Post noted.

A conservative group filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission on Monday alleging the PACs wrongly shielded the spending from disclosure.

An attorney for the PACs, the consulting firm and the congresswoman's campaign, David Mitrani, said in a statement Tuesday that none of his clients did anything illegal. But watchdog groups suggested the arrangement was unduly evasive, especially for someone aligned with a politician who has labeled dark money "the enemy to democracy."

"In a normal situation, if all you saw was a PAC that disbursed hundreds of thousands of dollars to an affiliated entity to pay the salaries of people who were really working for the PAC, that looks like ... a PAC that takes in money to engage in political activity but is actually enriching its owners," Adav Noti, a former Federal Election Commission lawyer who is now a transparency advocate at the Campaign Legal Center, told The Post.


Read More

U.S. Capitol.

A rundown of the House bills most likely to become law this week — from seafood fraud enforcement to a sanctions bill critics call a tariff bill.

Photo by Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash

Both Chambers in Session this Week

Last Minute Rush

We’re not going to describe every bill the House aims to take action on this week because there’s lots. Instead, we’re going to focus on the ones that will become law if passed by the House and pull a few notable bills at the beginning of the legislative process. We’ll use the same level of discretion at the end of this week when we review what actually happened between today, Monday Sept. 14 and Friday, Sept. 18.

Probable New Laws

In addition to the bills listed below are also a couple of park renamings. All of these will, if passed, then go to the President for signing and once that’s done, become law.

Keep ReadingShow less

Alaska Is Voting on More Than Ranked Choice Voting. It’s Voting on Who Gets to Vote

Alaska voters will once again vote on a measure to repeal its nonpartisan election system. Those fighting to preserve the system have gone to the courts to make a simple case: It’s only fair that voters know exactly what is on their ballot.

Specifically the consequences of Ballot Measure 2, which would give parties the ability to shut out 60% of Alaska voters registered as independents. This is what attorney Scott Kendall argued before the Alaska Supreme Court last week.

Keep ReadingShow less
Group of young adult students sit at desks in classroom listening to teacher

Why do Americans respond so differently to hard history lessons? A look at the three psychological mindsets driving the patriotism debate — and a path past it.

Lighthouse Films/Getty Images

“They Hate America”: Patriotism in the Face of Historical Updates

I happened upon a civil discussion blog and read a post by a man who said he was happy to report that when he attended a panel discussion about teaching patriotism in the schools, all went well. He said that’s because most of the people in the bridging organization that hosted the event are “pretty patriotic.” He clarified that by writing, “None of the type of bad actors (and there are many) who want to teach kids to hate America and Western Civilization were represented.”

Someone made a comment about why we can’t incorporate historical change into curriculum and objected to the notion that a segment of the population wants to teach kids to hate America. The man who posted cited what he believes is proof. A last commenter simply input the emoji for a sleeping person, as though the argument was boring or unimportant.

Keep ReadingShow less