Saving Democracy, Documented

NEW MAYDAY.US POLL:  Voters of Every Political Stripe Agree on the Need for Fundamental Reform to the Campaign Finance System

September 25, 2015

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the political reform Super PAC MAYDAY.US released a new presidential poll showing that Americans strongly agree – regardless of which political party or presidential candidate they support – on the need to fundamentally reform the way we fund campaigns. The survey is available now online, broken into a Republican sample and a Democratic sample.

Survey respondents indicated not only that they strongly believe there is a problem, but also that they believe – overwhelmingly – that Washington should takes concrete steps to resolve the problem. This support extended to: Congress, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and President Obama taking steps to increase political disclosure; Congress establishing citizen-funded elections that match small donations using public funds; and Congress reforming the Federal Election Committee (FEC) so that it holds lawbreakers accountable.

“A lot divides us as a country, but the results are clear: Supporters of every candidate for President – all the way from Ted Cruz and Ben Carson to Hillary Clinton and Lawrence Lessig – believe that our system is broken and needs fundamental reform,” MAYDAY.US CEO and Board Chair Zephyr Teachout said. “Americans are looking to Washington to break the cycle of corruption, and they’ve had it with a handful of corporations and well-connected individuals exploiting the weakness in our democratic design to corrupt our country from the inside.”

Key takeaways from the poll include:

Corruption

• 85% of Democrats and 81% of Republicans agree that the system needs fundamental reform. This includes: 88% of Paul supporters, 87% of Christie supporters, and 88% of Clinton supporters.

• 86% of Democrats and 85% of Republicans agree that corruption would decrease if politicians focused more on small dollar donations than big donations from special interests. This includes: 91% of Huckabee supporters, 86% of Fiorina supporters, and 92% of Sanders supporters.

• 92% of Democrats and 94% of Republicans agree that special interest money has too much influence in American political campaigns. This includes: 93% of Rubio supporters, 95% of Bush supporters, and 100% of Lessig supporters.

Citizen-funded elections

• 72% of Democrats and 62% of Republicans respondents expressed support of citizen-funded elections matching small donations using public funds. This includes: 79% of Christie supporters, 78% of Huckabee supporters, and 71% of Biden supporters.

Disclosure

• 91% of Democrats and 91% of Republicans – the exact same level – believe that Super PACs and special interest groups should have to disclose the source of their funding. This includes: 96% of Carson supporters, 92% of Bush supporters, and 93% of Clinton supporters.

• 88% of Democrats and 88% of Republicans – the exact same level – believe the SEC should force corporations to disclose their political spending. This includes: 94% of Cruz supporters, 93% of Kasich supporters, and 92% of Sanders supporters.

• 78% of Democrats and 66% of Republicans believe President Obama should issue an executive order requiring government contractors to disclose their political spending. This includes: 77% of Trump supporters, 72% of Paul supporters, and 82% of Clinton supporters.

FEC Reform

• 93% of Democrats and 92% of Republicans think the FEC should be reformed so that it holds accountable those who break election law. This includes: 97% of Huckabee supporters, 96% of Kasich supporters, and 98% of Sanders supporters.

The survey – conducted by Public Policy Polling – was conducted September 22-23, 2015 and includes 2,780 primary voters in the sample.

PRESS RELEASE - Lawrence Lessig To Turn Over CEO and Board Chair Position to Zephyr Teachout

In new role, Teachout will oversee 2016 independent expenditure effort to support candidates who favor changing the way campaigns are funded.

On Monday, July 27, Mayday PAC (MAYDAY.US) announced that its CEO and Board Chair - Lawrence Lessig - will transfer control of the organization to Zephyr Teachout for the 2016 election cycle. While Lessig will remain on the MAYDAY board, Teachout will be the new CEO and Board Chair of MAYDAY.

Teachout - who has served as a board member of MAYDAY since last year - is a former anti-corruption candidate for New York Governor and an Associate Professor of Law at Fordham University. She is a constitutional and property law expert and author of “Corruption in American: From Benjamin Franklin’s Snuff Box to Citizens United.” Previously, Teachout served as the first national director of the Sunlight Foundation, a non-resident fellow at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School and the Direct of Internet Organizing for Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential campaign.

“It has been an honor to serve as CEO and Board Chair of Mayday PAC over the past year, and I can think of no stronger leader to take on the cause of advancing fundamental reform over the next election cycle than Zephyr Teachout,” Lessig said. “Zephyr is a rising star in our movement who spearheaded a bold campaign against the Democratic establishment in her big for Governor of New York last year. I first met her when she first entered politics as the director of online organizing for Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential campaign. That campaign showed the world the potential for online organizing. A proven fighter with a spirit that is not afraid, Zephyr will be an extraordinary leader for MAYDAY.”

“Private financing of elections is the enemy of democracy. Americans know it but politicians are far too silent and like to deflect the conversation elsewhere. Only two presidential candidates have even spoken out in favor of publicly-financed elections. At MAYDAY, we directly confront power and corruption and refuse to allow the plague of silence and lip-treatment to propagate fundamental corruption,” Teachout said. “Lessig’s extraordinary legacy includes his lack of fear. MAYDAY, at its heart, is a fight for democracy against fear and silence. We will speak out against silence and corruption in the 2016 election starting today.”

As the new CEO and Board Chair, Teachout will lead MAYDAY’s strategic planning for the 2016 election cycle. This will include selecting the next round of electoral targets and managing independent expenditure campaigns as part of the organization’s ongoing effort to advance fundamental reform. In addition, as part of her efforts, Teachout plans to put additional emphasis on the inter-connections between race, power, and privately financed campaigns.

PRESS RELEASE - MAYDAY Thanks Rep. Pete Aguilar for Supporting Fundamental Reform

Today, Mayday PAC (MAYDAY.US) thanked Rep. Pete Aguilar for signing onto H.R. 20, Rep. John Sarbanes’ Government By The People Act.

“We have identified five proposals that would fundamentally change how campaigns are funded,” MAYDAY co-founder Lawrence Lessig said. “These include two Republican proposals, two Democratic proposals, and one that was crafted with advice from both sides. We are grateful that Rep. Aguilar has answered the call for leadership from his constituents by signing onto the Government By The People Act.”

H.R. 20 would create a system in which public matching of small-dollar donations can offset the negative influence of corporate money in our elections. The bill fits squarely within the Supreme Court’s recent rulings and would allow congressional candidates to voluntarily power their campaigns on small-dollar donations of $150 or less – and have those donations matched 6 to 1 and even as much as 9 to 1. With this plan, a high school teacher who donates $150 would have more voice than a lobbyist who contributes $1,000.

As part of its 2015 campaign to advance fundamental reform, MAYDAY has been organizing citizens to persuade members of Congress to commit to fundamental reform and has launched an online platform to support that citizen engagement. The ultimate goal of these activities is to elect and re-elect Members of Congress who take leadership in advancing campaign finance reform.

In March, MAYDAY launched a crowd-sourced project to identify potential leaders in Congress to join the fight for fundamental reform. MAYDAY solicited input from its army of supporters to help identify Members who are most likely to support reform and offer explanations for why. In May, MAYDAY announced a list of 47 Members who it believes could be the key to unlocking a majority. Rep. Aguilar was on this list.

All five reform proposals are described at repswith.us. In addition, a list of the 47 Members of Congress MAYDAY identified as the key to unlocking a majority is available here.

PRESS RELEASE - In 2014, MAYDAY.US Moved Voters and Sent a Signal to Politicians - But More Remains to Be Done.

MAYDAY.US’s goal is to elect a Congress committed to fundamental reform in how campaigns are funded.

Our aims in this election cycle were A) To send a signal to members of Congress that opposing reform could have real electoral consequences and supporting reform could have electoral benefits, B) To demonstrate that the issue of money in politics moves voters, and C) To learn lessons about campaigning on our issue this cycle to set ourselves up for 2016.

Unlike the DSCC or NRSC, MAYDAY.US’s goal was never about picking up a few seats around the edges in a short-term game. For us, winning elections is the simplest proof of viability for a longer-term strategy for fundamental reform. But it is not the only route. And our core goals saw significant advancement this cycle – setting us up for success in 2016.

A) Did we show politicians electoral consequences for opposing or supporting reform? Absolutely.

MAYDAY.US helped elect two reform champions: Rep-elect Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) and Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) – showing that we will support politicians from both parties who do the right thing.

In Michigan’s 6th Congressional District, powerful House Energy & Commerce Chair Fred Upton was sitting on a multi-million dollar war chest of special interest money, not expecting to spend it. The New York Times reported, “In a race that was on no one’s radar a month ago, Mayday is now the biggest outside spender” and the KZOO Gazette reported, “U.S. Rep. Fred Upton has cruised to easy victories for 28 years, but this time a national super PAC is spending $2.15 million against Upton.”

Upton’s reaction is well documented: Intimidating Mayday donors, airing ads attacking Mayday, and proclaiming himself a supporter of reform (clinging to a 2002 vote). But of most interest to Upton’s colleagues, he was forced to deplete his war chest and had to be helped by a Koch Brothers aligned group to defend himself.

The Hill reported, “Supporters and opponents of House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) are spending big in the final days before his election, turning a once-ignored race into a possible upset… MayDay PAC, aimed at ending ‘money’s corrupting influence in politics,’ released its latest ad slamming Upton on Wednesday.”

Word has spread and will continue spreading in the halls of Congress that Mayday can create real pain for those who oppose reform. And that can change the calculus for politicians considering whether to support reform.

B) Did we show that the issue of money in politics can move voters? Yes.

Throughout our work this cycle, we built into our campaigns data-driven experiments – testing the impact of our TV ads, mail, and phone program. The results of these experiments are still be compiled and will empower us to run even more impactful campaigns in 2016.

But data that we already have back is below.

Results in Michigan’s 6th District

• Our campaign significantly increased Paul Clements’ visibility and favorability and made MI-06 a ‘last minute battleground race.’ In late August, Clements was unknown – only 22% of voters could identify him.

• Early on, Clements was also totally undefined, with nearly equivalent 6% favorability and 7% unfavorability. Two months later in October, twice as many (43%) voters were familiar with Clements and his favorability jumped to 40% and a net positive approval rating.

• Clements has a significant lead on our issue – among the 25% of voters who do not favor Citizens United, he leads by 61 points over Upton.

• By the end of the campaign, 51% of polled likely voters agreed “sides with corporate special interests” describes Upton well.

• Our ad buys reduced Upton’s net approval by over 10 points – forcing him to double his ad buy the last week in a bid to recover.

• Overall, post-election polling shows that politicians putting their own interests ahead of the people they represent is an important voting issue for 78% of voters.

• Likewise, politicians putting the interests of big-money campaign donors ahead of the people they represent is also an important voting issue for the vote of 71% of voters.

Results in South Dakota Senate Race

• MAYDAY.US’s message fared well against Mike Rounds – of the 81% of voters who recalled seeing ads about Rounds, three times as many said the ad made them less favorable to him as reported feeling more favorable.

• Our investment helped give Weiland a boost in the most critical advertising window of any campaign – the weeks right before the election.

• Our campaign also corresponded with a tripling of the number of voters who felt that Rounds, more than Weiland, would put campaign contributors ahead of his constituents.

• The week before the election, nearly 49% of voters said Mike Rounds was too close to corporate special interests – compared to just 13% for Weiland.

• Post-election polling shows that politicians putting their own interests ahead of the people they represent is an important voting issue for 77% of voters.

• Likewise, politicians putting the interests of big-money campaign donors ahead of the people they represent is also an important voting issue for the vote of 68% of voters.

Results in New Hampshire Senate Republican Primary

• During NH-SEN primary, MAYDAY.US ran TV and mail advertisements that called attention to Scott Brown’s history of working at a lobbying firm and being ‘Wall Street’s favorite Congressman’. Nearly six weeks after these ads, 60% of voters still remember the attacks and, of those who remember, 70% view Brown unfavorably.

• MAYDAY.US’s campaign had reach – in an exit poll, 68% of voters saw or heard advertising supporting Rubens and 84% remembered advertising opposing Brown.

• Our campaign significantly increased Rubens’ visibility and favorability. In July, Rubens was familiar with only 36% of voters and polled at 9%. The race ended with Rubens at 23.5% of the vote and 58% familiarity among Republican primary voters.

• Campaign finance reform was a key issue in the race - 37% of voters said that reducing the corrupting influence of money in politics was a major factor in their vote. Of these voters, 29% said Rubens would do a better job addressing this issue.

• Rubens performed best among reform voters with 36% of the vote, just shy of Scott Brown at 37%.

• Money in politics is an important issue to voters’ feelings toward candidates in Republican primary races. With a targeted campaign, Mayday.US was able to mobilize people passionate about this issue to turn out to vote – even for a relatively unknown candidate.

Results in Arizona’s 7th District

• MAYDAY.US transformed campaign finance reform from an issue that would make 41% of people more likely to support a candidate to an important issue for over 60% of voters and “the most important issue to their vote” for 27% of voters in Arizona’s 7th Congressional District.

• In this district, 42% of these issue voters went on to vote for Gallego, contributing to his almost 13-point win in the primary election.

• On average, 45% of people who saw our mailers and videos said they made them “much more likely to vote for Gallego” – and a majority went on to do so.

Results in Kansas Senate Race

• Money in politics was a key issue that Orman won – 70% of voters who find Citizens United unfavorable. Among these voters, Orman leads Roberts by 37 percentage points.

• Voters concerned about campaign finance reform were a key part of Orman’s base – among those who said they would vote for Orman, 80% do not support rules allowing corporations and billionaires to spend unlimited money.

• Post-election polling shows that politicians putting their own interests ahead of the people they represent is an important voting issue for 78% of voters.

• Likewise, politicians putting the interests of big-money campaign donors ahead of the people they represent is also an important voting issue for the vote of 73% of voters.

Results in Iowa 3rd District

• The majority of likely voters (62%) were concerned about the impact of big money donors. Among these voters, Staci Appel enjoyed a 28 point lead.

• Appel had the most significant lead with the campaign finance reform audience. Among the 27% of voters who do not favor Citizens United, 74% supported Appel – for a 55 point lead.

• Again – post-election polling shows that politicians putting their own interests ahead of the people they represent is an important voting issue for 64% of voters.

• Likewise, politicians putting the interests of big-money campaign donors ahead of the people they represent is also an important voting issue for the vote of 68% of voters.

Results in New Hampshire 1st District

• We mobilized 70% of New Hampshire voters concerned about the influence of big money campaign donors on our democracy – 10% of whom were undecided in this close race.

• Mayday’s investment helped give Carol Shea-Porter a boost in the most critical advertising window of any campaign – right before the election.

• Overall, post-election polling shows that politicians putting their own interests ahead of the people they represent is an important voting issue for 76% of voters.

• Likewise, politicians putting the interests of big-money campaign donors ahead of the people they represent is also an important voting issue for the vote of 68% of voters.

Results in North Carolina 3rd District

• MAYDAY.US supported incumbent Walter Jones in this race – the only Republican Member of Congress to publicly support changing the way campaigns are funded.

• Although Jones did not have a competitive race – MAYDAY.US engaged with voters in this district via mail and radio advertising.

• 82% of voters in this district said it was important to their vote whether politicians put their own interests ahead of the people they represent, according to a post-election survey.

• In addition, 74% of voters in this district also felt that putting the interests of big money campaign donors ahead of the people they represent is important to their vote.

C) Did we learn lessons that will prepare us for 2016? Yes.

This election taught us some important lessons, and highlighted one important constraint.

First, reform is important, but partisan loyalty is more important when voters see control of a legislative chamber at stake. The data demonstrate that we could make the issue of corruption salient to voters, and thereby move the approval ratings and positive and negatives of candidates on the basis of reform. But especially in the current partisan environment, that movement was not enough to resist strong partisan voting.

Second, it is easier to win voters in safe seats than in partisan battle ground seats. Following from the first lesson, we saw a significant difference in the willingness of both Republicans and Democrats to support the issue of reform in safe, rather than divided, seats. Though we didn’t have enough opportunities in primaries to prove this point, the data suggest that it is much easier to rally both Democratic and Republican voters to reform, when the voters don’t perceive their decision as affecting the ultimate likelihood of their party’s candidates to prevail in the general election. Put differently, if partisanship doesn’t matter — because the seat is a safe seat anyway — voters are more willing to be moved on the basis of reform.

Third, transparency has its costs. MAYDAY.US committed to full transparency about its donors (over $200). That commitment was costly. Because our large contributors were known, it was easier for at least one powerful incumbent to leverage his power against our contributors.

Fourth, reform requires a candidate. We were proud of the candidates we supported, but the strongest races were with candidates willing to openly and vigorously champion the issue we pressed. This is a difficult challenge, given the unwillingness of most media to even raise the issue. In the New Hampshire Senate Primary, for example, even though our candidate was the only Republican running for Senate in the nation who had made campaign funding an issue, not a single question in the one debate asked candidates about this issue. Victory will require Zephyr-Teachout-like candidates passionate on the issue, and a willingness among candidates to force the issue into the campaign.

Fifth, victory is not the only motivator. We entered the races we did to win, but we obviously recognized with at least some of the races we entered that victory wasn’t likely. But our objective is to create an incentive sufficient to motivate a majority in Congress to get on the right side of reform. In the four biggest races we entered, our intervention was a significant tax on our opponent, forcing him to spend significantly to neutralize the effect of our campaign. The threat of that tax will motivate other candidates to avoid the risk of a similar fight.

Sixth, and finally, bandwidth is limited. However difficult it was to persuade voters, it was just as difficult to get the media to understand the strategy of our campaign. The simple binary framing of electoral politics makes is hard to demonstrate the effect of interventions within the margin. In 2012, for example, Karl Rove had a powerful impact on American politics, even if he won no elections, because his interventions restricted the options of candidates on the other side. Yet this truth is hard to convey in a framework were the only measure of success is whether a candidate has won or lost.

The 2014 cycle was our opening move in the fight. In 2016, armed with the progress and lessons from this cycle, our reform movement will be even stronger.

PRESS RELEASE - MI-06: MAYDAY.US Calls On Dark-Money Group to Disclose Who Is Funding Pro-Upton Ads

As a new poll shows Upton leading by just 4 points, dark-money group with ties to Big Oil billionaires pours money into Southwest Michigan

On the heels of a new poll showing Fred Upton with just a 4-point lead over challenger Paul Clements, a dark money group with ties to the Koch brothers has announced it will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to back the embattled incumbent. Now, MAYDAY.US, a people-powered Super PAC funded by over 60,000 contributions, is calling on the American Future Fund to disclose who is funding the conservative group’s pro-Upton ads.

MAYDAY goes above and beyond legal disclosure requirements and does not accept “dark money,” or funds transferred to Super PACs from certain kinds of non-profits. When a Super PAC takes dark money, it is only required to disclose the name of the non-profit that transfers the money, not the individual donors who contributed it. Dark money appears to be the sole source of AFF’s funding.

“Fred Upton has already taken $2.1 million from Big Oil and energy interests and voted to give away billions in tax breaks for oil and gas companies. Now, a shadowy group that has been largely bankrolled by two billionaire oil barons is pouring money in Southwest Michigan to support him,” said MAYDAY co-founder and Harvard Professor Lawrence Lessig. “Voters have a right to know if the hundreds of thousands of dollars AFF is spending to send Fred Upton back to Washington comes with strings attached.”

While AFF operates in the shadows, what we know about the organization is troubling:

• An investigation by the Center for Responsive Politics found it raised nearly all of its revenue from the Koch brothers.

• The L.A. Times reported the AFF was part of a “secretive network of conservative nonprofits” that poured money into an anti-union ballot measure campaign in California that same year. California’s campaign finance regulatory agency later fined an AFF affiliate more than $4 million for the illegal money laundering scheme.

• The independent Factcheck.org has identified several false, misleading, and exaggerated claims in AFF ads about the federal health care legislation. government spending and the Obama administration.

“The Koch brothers have billions of dollars invested in the very industries that Fred Upton oversees as Chairman of the powerful House Energy and Commerce Committee,” Lessig said. “If they are funding a last ditch effort to save Fred Upton, voters deserve to know about it.”

On October 9th, MAYDAY.US, a Super PAC fighting to fundamentally reform the way campaigns are funded, announced it would spend $1.5 million to defeat Upton and elect reformer Paul Clements. MAYDAY has since announced its commitment to spend $2.15 million in this race.

Upton has taken $10 million in special-interest PAC money over his career, much of that from industries and corporations that benefit the Koch brothers. Upton took $2.1 million from Big Oil and energy interests, and he voted to give away billions in subsidies for oil and gas companies. He took $1.4 million from drug and insurance companies, and voted to make seniors pay more for the prescriptions they need.

In contrast, Clements has pledged to reduce the influence of big-money donors and increase the voices of regular people.

President Obama won Michigan’s 6th District 53% to 45% in 2008 and narrowly lost 49% to 50% two years ago. In 2012, Upton won re-election by the smallest margin of his career.

PRESS RELEASE - MAYDAY’s Lawrence Lessig, Ruben Gallego (AZ-7) Join the PCCC for Media Briefing on Growing Movement for Reform

Today at noon ET / 9am PT, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) will hold a media briefing call with this week’s primary winner Ruben Gallego (AZ-7), Harvard professor and MayDay PAC founder Lawrence Lessig, and congressional candidate Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ-12) to discuss the growing movement to reform how campaigns are funded so that our government is accountable to everyday Americans instead of big-money donors.

On Tuesday, MayDay and PCCC-backed Ruben Gallego won big in AZ-7 campaigning on Elizabeth Warren’s economic populist agenda and advocating for major campaign finance reform that elevates the voices of regular people over corporate interests, lobbyists, and billionaire-backed noise.

On the heals of this victory, candidates nationwide are stepping out together in support of major campaign finance reform and holding local grassroots events this week campaigning on bold reform to increase the voice of everyday people in our democracy. Candidates energizing voters on this populist message include Zephyr Teachout (NY-Gov), Kelly Westlund (WI-7), Rick Weiland (SD-Sen), Michael Eggman (CA-10), Shenna Bellows (ME-Sen), Pat Murphy (IA-1), Carol Shea-Porter (NH-1), and Stacy Appel (IA-3).

PCCC members have helped 5 “Warren wing” candidates defeat more conservative opponents in tough primary battles this cycle: Ruben Gallego (AZ-7), Brian Schatz (HI-Sen), Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ-12), Mike Honda (CA-17), and Pat Murphy (IA-1).

Ruben Gallego’s primary win is the first victory for Lawrence Lessig’s new MayDay PAC – “the Super PAC to end all Super PACs” – which backed Gallego because “He’s committed to to fixing a corrupt system for funding campaigns, making sure politicians are responsive to us, not the billionaires.” PCCC members contributed $200,000 in small-dollar donations for MayDay, which ran a $150,000 independent expenditure in Ruben’s district. (See MayDay’s ad for Ruben Gallego here.)

100,000 PCCC members have already taken action to urge reform this year and members nationwide will be joining candidates for grassroots events across the country this month.