Why is Dean getting so much $$$ from AOL Time Warner ???

Why is Dean getting so much $$$ from AOL Time Warner, Microsoft, IBM, Citigroup, Vivendi Universal (bankrupt) and Kaiser Permanente????



AOL Time Warner
$46,225

University of California
$25,924

Dean for America
$16,528

Microsoft Corp
$15,675

University of Pennsylvania
$15,100

Stoneyfield Farms
$12,000

IBM Corp
$11,275

Goldman Sachs
$10,750

August Capital
$10,000

Efoora
$8,000

Harvard University
$7,900

Citigroup Inc
$7,774

Skadden, Arps et al
$7,699

University of Vermont
$7,320

University of Texas
$7,125

Vivendi Universal
$7,075

Dartmouth College
$6,550

Auto Parts International
$6,500

State of Vermont
$6,480

Kaiser Permanente
$6,450

Why is he?

Is not Kaiser Permanente some type of insurance company or healthcare provider?

It's all available at www.opensecrets.org. He may not take money from PACS (not all of which are questionable by any means. There are many progressive PACs.) but he takes a LOT of money from corporate employees in much, much larger chunks than Dean.

Why are Dean supporters so defensive?????

Two of those replies were direct answers to your question. Why are you asserting that "Dean supporters" are defensive?

Duh.

:evilgrin:

Let's see your link and then post kerry's list that you know perfectly well is there and much longer with much higher "corporate contributions".

No one here was "defensive" but you sure are projecting as if you wish that were the case.

And later looked a little closer at the disclaimer. I know it's disconcerting, but those are donations from employees of those companies combined together in a lump sum. It doesn't quite click for me either, but there's no evidence to suggest he's selling his positions to the highest bidder.

*On edit- this was meant to be a response to the original post. Sorry about that, I have no idea how I managed to do that!

I tried to click on www.opensecrets.org however, I can get to the website, but it won't let me go to any of the links at all...it says "connection denied". So, I sent an online friend via instant messenger the link to see if she can get into a link, when I did that with the hyperlink thingy, the box comes up where you would insert the url so it makes the link so you just have to click on it---what comes in that box is---ins Patriot Act campaign...What in hell does that mean??? Everyone please try and let me know what happens when you go to that site and try to go to any link on that page. Thanks!

The donors are EMPLOYEES of the corporations.

This has been covered here before, I think.

When you donate, you have to fill out a donor card, (FEC rules), and give your occupation and employer.

On edit:

Go here and see that the DFA campaign has recieved $6500.00 from PACs. You can also look up donors by name, zip code, etc.

http://www.tray.com/cgi-win/x_candpg.exe?DoFn=P40002214*2004

but a combination of contributions from INDIVIDUALS who work for the company, as well as PACs and owners associated with said company. AOLTW can't give directly, but if they have a PAC (I'm sure they do), the PAC can give $5,000. (At least that's the # for Congressional candidates. I'm pretty sure presidential contributions are the same.)

The same report indicates he's received only $15,500 in PAC money total.

So, even if AOL has 4 affiliated PACs (is that even legal?) most of that $46,225 had to come from individuals who work for AOLTW.

There are a lot of people who work for AOLTW. That alone might account for some of it; he may have given a speech in VA near AOL headquarters and gotten a lot of employees to donate that way, too.

Or, I suppose it's possible that 15 AOL execs gave $2,000 each...

http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/summary.asp?ID=N00025663

former candidate for Governor of VA and Northern VA businessman. I'm sure Beyer has contacts in Northern VA who are willing to donate to Dean. Dean is coming to Falls Church, VA on Saturday. I image he is quite popular in Northern Virginia if he chose to come here.

I mean, a corp can't write a check directly into a PAC. Corporations with PACs raise their money from donations from individual employees, no? The corporation controls the PAC, but I think the law doesn't allow corporations to write checks from their corporate accounts.

Whether an employee gives directly to a canidate, or gives to their corporate PAC, which then donates to the candidate might be of little consequence. I think it's obvious that, if you got rid of PACs altogether, that would be a good thing. But, so long as people want to keep their jobs and impress their bosses, you're never really going to be able to completely stop corporate influence on elections unless campaign finance laws change. Candidates will always pay attention to the employers of people who give lots of money.

The only thing that's REALLy going to change this is green (is that what they're called) campaign laws.

You need a system which limits the amount people can give, provides a LOT of public matching money, and gives a great deal of weight to the number of different individuals who donate (rather than giving an advantage to candidates who raise fewer, larger donations).

I mean, a corp can't write a check directly into a PAC. Corporations with PACs raise their money from donations from individual employees, no? The corporation controls the PAC, but I think the law doesn't allow corporations to write checks from their corporate accounts.

Whether an employee gives directly to a canidate, or gives to their corporate PAC, which then donates to the candidate might be of little consequence. I think it's obvious that, if you got rid of PACs altogether, that would be a good thing. But, so long as people want to keep their jobs and impress their bosses, you're never really going to be able to completely stop corporate influence on elections unless campaign finance laws change. Candidates will always pay attention to the employers of people who give lots of money.

The only thing that's REALLy going to change this is green (is that what they're called) campaign laws.

You need a system which limits the amount people can give, provides a LOT of public matching money, and gives a great deal of weight to the number of different individuals who donate (rather than giving an advantage to candidates who raise fewer, larger donations).

with their $200 Mil.(+) during the election?

Some folks just have to be shit stirring bimbo's. Narrow focus and truely dissapointing if I do say myself.

I want *bush out..... Why would anyone bash someone of such good intentions? Have we not suffered enough? Have they no shame?

Hmmmm....

Is that talking nice? :-)

"Mean people are unforgiving. Can't we just try and talk like friends."

None of these entities you listed GIVE to DEAN.

It is the individual donors' place of employment. When you give a donation you are supposed to fill in your place of employment.

So a lot of people who work for AOL/Time give to Dean. What does that mean? The CEOs? The guy who hooked up my cable to the utility pole? Camera operators? Sound engineers? The janitor who cleans the bathrooms at CNN studios?

It's not that big a deal. It's a huge company, lots of employees.

I mean, Univ of Texas was on that list. Couldn't that be seen as a conspiracy if you wanted to?

...Toxic Waste Generator's- NRA-Gun-Toting- Alliance To Euthanize Fuzzy Household Pets.

The Man Must Be Stopped!!!

:eyes:

Don't forget Dean also got $2.8 million as governor from the American Puppy Haters Foundation

and $1.8 million from the Pro-Poverty Alliance.

You just can't trust him!:tinfoilhat:

Most of the ones I talked at the reception did not even know his positions on the issues yet. Giving money is just the way it is done in the Democratic party, and politics in general. Is it really so surprizing that money is coming into his campaign when he has a chance of becoming president?

From the best site when it comes to everything you'd ever want to know about who is spending what in campaign financing:

http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/summary.asp?ID=N00025663
Howard Dean:
Individual contributions $10,525,815 100%

PAC contributions $15,500 0%

Candidate self-financing $0 0%

Federal Matching program $0 0%

Other $6,665 0%

http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/summary.asp?ID=N00000245
John Kerry
Individual contributions $13,314,774 83%
PAC contributions $8,725 0%
Candidate self-financing $0 0%
Federal Matching program $0 0%
Other $2,704,767 17%



And here's the comment about who's actually donating, which is on every candidate's page, but I happen to be on the Dean page:

http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/contrib.asp?id=N00025663&cycle=2004

HOW TO READ THIS CHART: This chart lists the top donors to this candidate during the 2004 election cycle.The organizations themselves did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

Because of contribution limits, organizations that bundle together many individual contributions are often among the top donors to presidential candidates. These contributions can come from the organization's members or employees (and their families). The organization may support one candidate, or hedge its bets by supporting multiple candidates. Groups with national networks of donors - like EMILY's List and Club for Growth - make for particularly big bundlers.

EDIT NOTE: Made a mistake with the Kerry numbers - see the guy who responded to me! Sorry!

...but no, I don't suspect that you're attempting any smear or conspiracy. :evilgrin:

and they are corrected

Kerry and Dean are about the same except Kerry has about 2.7million in "Other" category. I don't see what Other represents but it could be money he's using from other campaigns (ie - leftover money from his Senate campaign).

he's not getting money from these corporations but from people who work at these corporations

you have to list your employer if you donate to a federal campaign

Progressive messiahs can't compete in Presidential elections. Dean is a politician just like the rest of them. I find it hilarious that people speak of Dean's style as "honest." He is a politician born and bred into the elite class. Fiery populist rhetoric is what's selling, so he set up shop at the McCain carnival.

I guess in an America willing to support Schwarzenegger as Governor of California, I guess I have to believe it when people say, "I don't agree with Dean's centrist policies, but he sounds as pissed as I feel."

I've heard about this from a number of people but I'd like a source, if someone has one. I feel sorry for all the college students who could go into debt because of such a card.