New Players, Old Game

Submitted by Katie Schlieper on Fri, 10/19/2007 - 3:50pm.

Hillary Clinton seems to be collecting a lot of donors from an unusual demographic: a transient group of immigrants in New York's Chinatown. This article in the Los Angeles Times is interesting in its exploration of why this population gives such large sums relative to its income, what forces are compelling this surge in donations by a population that seldom votes, and how social pressure and hope for personal gain fuel political giving.


Political fundraising really is quite a stew:


At this point in the presidential campaign cycle, Clinton has raised more money than any candidate in history. Those dishwashers, waiters and street stall hawkers are part of the reason. And Clinton's success in gathering money from Chinatown's least-affluent residents stems from a two-pronged strategy: mutually beneficial alliances with powerful groups, and appeals to the hopes and dreams of people now consigned to the margins.


Clinton has enlisted the aid of Chinese neighborhood associations, especially those representing recent immigrants from Fujian province. The organizations, at least one of which is a descendant of Chinatown criminal enterprises that engaged in gambling and human trafficking, exert enormous influence over immigrants. The associations help them with everything from protection against crime to obtaining green cards.


Many of Clinton's Chinatown donors said they had contributed because leaders in neighborhood associations told them to. In some cases, donors said they felt pressure to give.

 

 

Clinton's campaign appears to treating these donations with caution particularly the status of the immigrants making these donations as it relates to FEC rules about the national origin of funds going to federal candidates. All in all the article is a new take on the temptations of the campaign contribution game.

1 comment
. . . . .

Katie,
clean elections is a nice platitude. However, as long as one group is trying to gain power over the other, there will always be dirty money, bloody money and drug money that creep into the collection baskets from the underworld leaders trying to gain influence. On the other side along with welfare checks, pension checks, union dues, big fat contributors, religious leaders trying to gain influence over society by convincing their congregations that God stands on one side or the other and always against the opossing team. The saddness is that while we talk democracy to the world, our leaders are willing to lie, cheat, steal and maybe even kill to gain power over the people for themselves and their friends. Every election cycle people are being disinfranchised. Under Saddam we called it dictatorship, here we call it democracy, another name for WIN AT ANY COST.


Submitted by Clean Elections Friend (not verified) on Fri, 10/26/2007 - 3:41pm.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><p><br /> <i> <b> <img>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Images can be added to this post.
  • Relative links are made to be relative to the drupal root directory.
More information about formatting options