Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Republican Alfredo Alves of Fall River, Mass., who is gay, contributed $250 to Rep. Barney Frank’s 1996 campaign, because the Massachusetts Democrat is an “excellent politician” and an outspoken supporter of gay rights. Alves was unhappy, though, when he learned from Mother Jones that Frank gave $7,250 of his campaign money to eight other Democrats — all of whom supported the Defense of Marriage Act, which denies federal recognition of gay marriage.

Frank says party leaders urged Democrats to share their campaign money with struggling candidates when it looked like the Democrats could regain a House majority. “When the question of control of the House was not an issue,” Frank says, “I used a finer screening process.”

That’s not good enough for Alves. “It’s not fair for a candidate to take money from citizens and give it to other candidates with different views,” he says. “It’s violating the intent of my contribution.”

Single-issue contributors, beware: In the world of campaign finance, candidates share the kitty with other candidates. Last year, $3.7 million passed between congressional candidates. Democrats gave $1.8 million and Republicans $1.9 million — all to members of their own party, but often to members with very different opinions:

Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.), who introduced a “human life amendment” to ban abortions except to save the mother’s life, took $1,500 from the National Right to Life Committee but gave $7,000 to seven Democrats who opposed the late-term abortion ban (which Clinton vetoed).

Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas), who vociferously opposed the minimum wage hike, received $4,000 from the like-minded National Federation of Independent Business, but gave $5,000 to two Republicans who supported the increase.

Recently retired Sen. Paul Simon (D-Ill.), a welfare supporter who told the New York Times in 1995 that Congress was “celebrat[ing] Christmas by trashing poor people,” used $6,500 of his leftover campaign money to support six Democrats, all of whom backed the controversial welfare reform bill. The biggest chunk — $2,000 — went to Illinois Democrat Dick Durbin, who succeeded Simon as senator.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate