Nuggets from the notebook while wondering why Americans Elect’s effort to get a third-party presidential candidate on the 2012 ballot seems so appealing to progressive voters . . .
Americans Elect is a nonprofit organization currently trying to obtain ballot access for a yet-to-be determined bipartisan presidential ticket next year. The group is well-funded, backed by hedge fund mangers and other wealthy donors. It’s message is well-worn, but eternally populist: The only way to end the dysfunction of hyper-partisan politics is to engage the moderate electorate.
The group’s unconventional effort has drawn some favorable coverage from the national media, including New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal and others.
However, the group is also facing scrutiny because of its undisclosed donors. Campaign finance watchdogs have already moved to challenge Americans Elect’s nonprofit status, arguing that the group is a political organization.
Meanwhile, Democrats are increasingly concerned that the third-party candidate that emerges from AE’s online convention will ultimately siphon left-leaning moderates from President Obama’s re-election bid. Some are beginning to think that splitting the progressive vote – which happened in Maine’s 2010 gubernatorial election – is exactly what AE was created to do.
Measuring the results of Americans Elect’s “true colors” online survey probably won’t do much to assuage such fears.
The survey asks participants to rank the issues that are most important to them followed by specific questions on a host of hot-button topics. After each question, the site spits back results to show the respondent how their views align with others who have taken the survey.
Check out some of these results:
* 79 percent support for full marriage rights for same-sex couples.
* 69 percent support for the establishment of a Palestinian state.
* On climate change, the survey offers five responses, including attributing it to natural causes, entirely man-made or a combination of both; 54 percent said human activities were entirely responsible.
When a Gallup poll in April asked the exact same climate change question, it found that 47 percent believe climate change is a natural phenomena. Just 34 percent said it was caused by humans.
The left-leaning responses on AE dominate other policy areas, including energy and social issues.
Elliot Ackerman, the CEO of Americans Elect, acknowledged to the Sun Journal that the majority of respondents to “true colors” have been “socially liberal and fiscally moderate.” However, Ackerman expects the numbers will balance as Americans Elect gains exposure.
Others aren’t so sure. In fact, there’s an emerging narrative that AE is part of some Republican scheme to split the Democratic vote. That theory is mainly housed in the progressive blogosphere, which frequently notes that Ackerman is the son of Peter Ackerman, a man who made millions off junk bonds during the Savings & Loan crisis of the 1980s. He’s also a member of the Cato Institute, an alleged tentacle in the so-called Kochtopus, the conservative network of nonprofits funded by the billionaire Koch brothers.
The Kochs haven taken a lot of heat for using lax enforcement and new campaign finance laws to transform allegedly nonpartisan groups into nonprofit political organizations.
Democrats have also tried to get in the game. Democracy 21, a campaign finance watchdog, recently accused several nonprofits of abusing tax laws to run “shadow campaign organizations.” Included in the complaint was AE, Republican operative Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS and Priorities USA, a group run by two former Obama White House aides.
It’s not clear if AE shares the same political motives as Crossroads and Priorities. However, as long as AE is willing to use the same methods as those groups, skeptics will likely question its intentions.
Costs of LePage’s plan
Gov. Paul LePage last week reiterated his plan to remove income taxes from retiree pensions, a move that would cost the state about $100 million a year in annual revenues.
The administration acknowledges that removing all income taxes on all pensions, including 401(k)s (but not IRAs), is a lofty goal that the state may not be able to afford. That means the Legislature may have to consider cutting some income taxes on retirement plans and not others. That’s tricky politics, which may be why LePage said eliminating taxes on military pensions is a priority.
The following is a breakdown from the Maine Revenue Service of what it would cost to eliminate income tax on certain plans:
* $14 million from exempting Maine Public Employee Retirement System income (teachers and state workers).
* $13 million from exempting federal civilian employee pension income (excluding postal workers).
* $11 million from exempting military pension income.
* $55 million from exempting private sector pension income (401(k)s and other pensions).
The mural in reverse
Another reference to LePage and the mural, this time from Wisconsin.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported last week that assembly Democrats had submitted a bill to take down the state house portrait of long-dead Republican Gov. Jeremiah Rusk. Rusk apparently ordered the state militia to keep the peace during labor strikes in Milwaukee in 1886. The militia killed five people, including one boy.
The move immediately drew comparisons to LePage’s decision to removal of the 36-foot mural depicting the state’s labor history from the Department of Labor.
As one local political junkie tweeted, “Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.”
smistler@sunjournal.com
Send questions/comments to the editors.
