Union contributions to MGP candidates
MGP candidates should be permitted to accept donations from labor unions:
The Green Party, nationally and state-wide, is the only national party to refuse corporate money, as they should. We see that many Democratic Party candidates in 2016 have also espoused refusing to accept such contributions, in a sense, co-opting one of our basic tenets. However, many of those candidates were able to fund their campaigns themselves, from wealthy donors, or from spouses (like O’Rourke), giving the false impression that they don’t owe anything to corporations. The American voting public is easily fooled.
A primary reason for the Green Party not accepting corporate contributions is because that money, from its PACs or straight out corporate line items for such expenditures, comes from the profits of the company, where if necessary, such loss is passed on to the consumer. But the reality is, is that they are simply buying candidates.
It is because of all of this that the Maryland Green Party ought to reconsider its ban on union contributions. By federal law, union contributions to candidates are voluntary. No member is forced through their dues to contribute to a particular union’s PAC. The money that is donated is from members and same members can withdraw from it or withdraw their contributions if they do not agree to the unions’ endorsements.
The Green Party, at all levels, is at a disadvantage during elections, for reasons that are far too numerous and well known. As we have to abide by state laws regarding ballot access, campaigning, finance reports, etc., we should at least permit ourselves to accept legal limits of campaign contributions. If some of that money comes from union PACs, then we show that we can compete, not on an even playing field, but at least not hamstringing and denying ourselves possible victories.
The two-party corporate duopoly has consistently failed to represent the needs of labor unions. If the Maryland Green Party continues to refuse donations to candidates who prioritize people over profit, then the union PACs will have no other options, and the MGP will continue to lose the leverage to positively influence policy.
For these reasons, the Maryland Green Party ought to allow union PAC money as contributions to our election campaigns.
Please add any relevant comments, and we plan to wrap up discussion and voting on this topic by May 2, 2019.
Poll Created Mon 22 Apr 2019 2:45PM
MGP Candidates to accept donations from unions Closed Thu 2 May 2019 2:01PM
With 12 out of possible votes and with 9 yes votes this motion passes. Maryland Green Party candidates have permission from the party to accept donations from Union PACs up to the legal limit.
MGP candidates should be permitted to accept campaign donations up to the legal limit.
Results
| Results | Option | % of points | Voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Agree | 77.8% | 7 |
|
| Abstain | 11.1% | 1 |
|
|
| Disagree | 11.1% | 1 |
|
|
| Block | 0.0% | 0 | ||
| Undecided | 0% | 2 |
|
9 of 11 people have participated (81%)
Andy Ellis-Baltimore City-Delegate-He/Him
Tue 23 Apr 2019 12:14AM
Our current rules allow candidates to take donations from Union PACs(in fact it does not preclude candidates from taking donations from any PAC) this clarification affirms that Union’s have a special place in the PAC landscape as the collective political voice of workers, and makes explicit what our current non stance makes implicit, that as Greens we believe organized labor is a necessary part of a transition to a more just world.
Brian Bittner
Tue 23 Apr 2019 2:10AM
I believe accepting PAC money is a violation of Green values on political speech. Unions should have the same speech rights as all incorporated entities, whether those rights are broad or narrow. This does not mean Greens should take advantage of those rights when they are too broad, as the Green Party has consistently advocated. Also, this is not a proposal. There is no indication of what language would be added to our rules if this idea were approved. For those reasons I must vote no.
Mary Tyrtle Rooker
Thu 2 May 2019 2:27AM
I can see both sides of this, so I'm abstaining.
Brian Bittner Mon 22 Apr 2019 3:44PM
One reason to not support this proposal is that the Green Party fundamentally disagrees with assigning personhood rights and associated privileges (such as making political contributions) to entities like PACs. This is the actual motivation behind the GPUS's and MGP's policy of refusing corporate, union, and PAC contributions. The fact that unions and their PACs are funded by workers is immaterial. Workers contribute to corporate PACs and we don't take their money. Arguing that union PACs are different than corporate PACs requires us to assign some motivation to them, which is impossible because they are not persons. This proposal concludes that "the union PACs will have no other options" if we don't take their money, which assumes that PACs have a normal and natural role in our electoral system as persons with speech and donation rights. Which they are not.
Andy Ellis-Baltimore City-Delegate-He/Him Mon 22 Apr 2019 3:59PM
We do not currently have a prohibition on candidates taking union PAC money, we do have one on the party taking Union PAC money.
My campaign received a check from SEIU in 2018 and would gladly do so again, i was one of three 2018 candidates that received such donations and I fully support a proposal that explicitly allows Green Candidates to take this money.
I will add more to this later in the conversation.
Renaud De'Aundre Brown Mon 22 Apr 2019 5:10PM
I can support Brian's personhood argument as this is the case for the Democracy Amendment resolution to Overturn FEC case in 2010 that is entering a 7th year with union opposition and Common Cause (Curse) stirring mass confusion over an Article V convention. However, unions are being undermined by the right to work in the majority of the states and with guidelines, we could accept their funds. Theresa has a good case for this and with Kevin, I lean to support it.
Kevin Zeese (Delegate, Maryland Green Party) · Mon 22 Apr 2019 2:54PM
I lean toward supporting this proposal and would like to hear arguments why I should not do so.