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.

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

Business meeting, blurred background and people in office for teamwork, collaboration and planning

Another recruitment drive won’t fix a nonprofit board. A practical guide to sharing real decision-making power with diverse members: acknowledge, affirm, act.

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

Before Recruiting Diverse Board Members, Examine Who Holds Power

Nonprofit leaders keep asking me where they will find the next generation of diverse board talent. My question is what those leaders will be allowed to change once they arrive. In this piece, I outline concrete steps boards can take to ensure diverse members have real opportunities to shape organizational decision-making and to translate good intentions into meaningful progress.

In my board service and consulting work, I hear the concern from executives and grassroots activists alike. They worry about recruiting successors, sustaining funding, and governing organizations whose work increasingly depends on partnerships beyond their own walls. I share those concerns. I also wonder whether another recruitment initiative will solve what troubles them.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

The Pennsylvania state capitol building.

jimfeng/Getty Images

Pennsylvania’s Bipartisan Exchange Is Rebuilding Trust in Governance

The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics has nearly 40 years of experience working with legislators from different political parties, and it is building on this history by drawing on lessons from the successful American Congressional Exchange model, begun in 2018 at the Bipartisan Policy Center, and from state exchanges now underway in Minnesota and Michigan. The University of Pittsburgh Institute of Politics, in collaboration with the Bridge Alliance, has launched the Pennsylvania Legislative Exchange.

This state-based, systematic approach is designed to foster better relationships and build trust across the political aisle with the following guiding principles:

Keep ReadingShow less
Shadow on a wall of Judge hitting gavel in court, concept of justice, law, and legal protection

DOJ lawsuits in Alaska and California preview post-Election Day fights over certification and seating winners. Here’s how officials and voters can prepare.

Aitor Diago / Getty Images

The Lawsuits Will Lose. The Delays Will Still Win.

Less than two weeks before Election Day, President Trump’s Justice Department asked a federal court to stop Alaska from certifying its U.S. Senate race if Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan loses to Democrat Mary Peltola. The lawsuit claims that a second candidate on the ballot, Daniel J. Sullivan, will confuse voters. That argument went nowhere in June, when the Alaska Supreme Court ruled that the state had no legal way to remove him from the ballot. Asked about the suit, the president took credit. “I’m the one that said do it,” he told reporters.

Alongside the Alaska suit, the Trump administration sued California to keep the state from counting mail ballots from 20,000 people it calls “likely” noncitizens. Over the summer, the Department of Homeland Security put that number at 190,000. Legal experts expect both suits to fail, as so many suits like them have. Still, Alaska and California give us an early look at what the weeks after November 3rd could bring: recount demands, calls to review or throw out ballots, and pressure to delay seating winners.

Keep ReadingShow less