Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Good-government groups ask Trump and Biden to unmask campaign bundlers

campaign cash
erhui1979/Getty Images

Good-government groups are launching a new push for campaign finance transparency during the presidential campaign.

A coalition of 20 organizations, from across the ideological spectrum, sent letters to both the Trump and Biden campaigns on Tuesday requesting they disclose their most prolific "bundlers" — the rich and well-connected people whom politicians rely on to collect donations from their friends and business associates.

While federal law does not require presidential candidates to name their bundlers, unless they are registered lobbyists, it has long been a bipartisan practice.


George W. Bush, John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama all did so. Former Vice President Joe Biden released a list of 230 bundlers in December, months before he secured the Democratic nomination, but he has yet to update it. President Trump has never publicly disclosed any information about his bundlers.

The letters urge the two candidates to implement a system to regularly and meaningfully disclose their bundlers during the final 16 weeks of the campaign, ideally releasing the information in tandem with their monthly campaign finance reports to the Federal Election Commission.

The groups want the candidates to name anyone who raises more than $50,000 for their campaigns, along with home address and occupation — information candidates are already supposed to report about donors to the Federal Election Commission.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Bundlers raise millions for presidential campaigns every four years and are often rewarded for that work with special campaign access and influential jobs if their candidate wins — including ambassadorships, senior Cabinet department posts and memberships to presidential boards and commissions. Bundler disclosure now will help explain who gets these perks and promotions in the next four years.

"More and more money is flowing into presidential elections, yet, disturbingly, there is less and less transparency about the people helping both candidates raise mountains of campaign cash," said Meredith McGehee of Issue One, the bipartisan democracy reform group that organized the letters. (It operates but is journalistically independent of The Fulcrum.)

The other signatories include Common Cause and Public Citizen on the left, the Campaign Legal Center and the League of Women Voters from the center, and Take Back Our Republic and the National Legal and Policy Center on the right.

Read More

The Fragile Ceasefire in Gaza

A view of destruction as Palestinians, who returned to the city following the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, struggle to survive among ruins of destroyed buildings during cold weather in Jabalia, Gaza on January 23, 2025.

Getty Images / Anadolu

The Fragile Ceasefire in Gaza

Ceasefire agreements are like modern constitutions. They are fragile, loaded with idealistic promises, and too easily ignored. Both are also crucial to the realization of long-term regional peace. Indeed, ceasefires prevent the violence that is frequently the fuel for instability, while constitutions provide the structure and the guardrails that are equally vital to regional harmony.

More than ever, we need both right now in the Middle East.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money Makes the World Go Round Roundtable

The Committee on House Administration meets on the 15th anniversary of the SCOTUS decision on Citizens United v. FEC.

Medill News Service / Samanta Habashy

Money Makes the World Go Round Roundtable

WASHINGTON – On the 15th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s ruling on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, and one day after President Trump’s inauguration, House Democrats made one thing certain: money determines politics, not the other way around.

“One of the terrible things about Citizens United is people feel that they're powerless, that they have no hope,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Ma.).

Keep ReadingShow less
Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

The United States Supreme Court.

Getty Images / Rudy Sulgan

Top-Two Primaries Under the Microscope

Fourteen years ago, after the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional the popular blanket primary system, Californians voted to replace the deeply unpopular closed primary that replaced it with a top-two system. Since then, Democratic Party insiders, Republican Party insiders, minor political parties, and many national reform and good government groups, have tried (and failed) to deep-six the system because the public overwhelmingly supports it (over 60% every year it’s polled).

Now, three minor political parties, who opposed the reform from the start and have unsuccessfully sued previously, are once again trying to overturn it. The Peace and Freedom Party, the Green Party, and the Libertarian Party have teamed up to file a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Their brief repeats the same argument that the courts have previously rejected—that the top-two system discriminates against parties and deprives voters of choice by not guaranteeing every party a place on the November ballot.

Keep ReadingShow less
Independents as peacemakers

Group of people waving small American flags at sunset.

Getty Images//Simpleimages

Independents as peacemakers

In the years ahead, independents, as candidates and as citizens, should emerge as peacemakers. Even with a new administration in Washington, independents must work on a long-term strategy for themselves and for the country.

The peacemaker model stands in stark contrast to what might be called the marriage counselor model. Independent voters, on the marriage counselor model, could elect independent candidates for office or convince elected politicians to become independents in order to secure the leverage needed to force the parties to compromise with each other. On this model, independents, say six in the Senate, would be like marriage counselors because their chief function would be to put pressure on both parties to make deals, especially when it comes to major policy bills that require 60 votes in the Senate.

Keep ReadingShow less