Planned Parenthood workers, PACs donated $25M to Dems since 2000

[MT Treasurer]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I hope the Republican candidates use this against them in 2018.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/13/planned-parenthood-workers-pacs-donated-25m-to-dems-since-2000/

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Professor Zaino is confusing cause and effect here.  Given the Republican assault on abortion, it's no surprise that Planned Parenthood is unlikely to support Republicans. The idea that political advantage is to be gained by doubling down on existing strategy is odd.

[Gass3268]

Planned Parenthood is viewed more favorably than the candidates running for president on both sides of the aisle

[muon2]

Despite any issue about cause and effect the partisan connection matters. In 2012 a Midwest union leader said to me that Indiana taught him something. When Pubs took over all branches in 2011 the unions weren't surprised that hostile legislation came up. But when they went to lobby, the unions realized they had not a single sympathetic ear to their concerns on the Pub side. They had piled all their donations to the Dems for a decade and now the Pubs could care less about their issues and specifically about any money going to the unions. I'm not surprised that congressional Pubs feel the same way about PP.

[Adam Griffin]

Glorious news!

[Indy Texas]

Despite any issue about cause and effect the partisan connection matters. In 2012 a Midwest union leader said to me that Indiana taught him something. When Pubs took over all branches in 2011 the unions weren't surprised that hostile legislation came up. But when they went to lobby, the unions realized they had not a single sympathetic ear to their concerns on the Pub side. They had piled all their donations to the Dems for a decade and now the Pubs could care less about their issues and specifically about any money going to the unions. I'm not surprised that congressional Pubs feel the same way about PP.

Even if the unions gave money to GOP pols, it would be dwarfed by the money they get from corporate PACs and Koch types, so labor money would always be "outvoted" by management/shareholder money. Plus, given how rabidly anti-labor Republicans elected post-2010 tend to be, if they got a donation from a labor union, they'd probably return the check and make a public show of it to please their base. If they didn't, it would just be something that would be seized on when they got primaried.

Money is about access more than anything else. Politicians only have a fixed number of hours in a day that they can meet with people, only so many staffers with so much time to review draft legislation. If the Chamber of Commerce gave you $10,000 and wants an hour for lunch on Monday, you're going to meet with them. The Pipefitters Local 337 that gave you $500 will just get a phone call from a distracted staffer who's pretending to take notes.

[muon2]

Despite any issue about cause and effect the partisan connection matters. In 2012 a Midwest union leader said to me that Indiana taught him something. When Pubs took over all branches in 2011 the unions weren't surprised that hostile legislation came up. But when they went to lobby, the unions realized they had not a single sympathetic ear to their concerns on the Pub side. They had piled all their donations to the Dems for a decade and now the Pubs could care less about their issues and specifically about any money going to the unions. I'm not surprised that congressional Pubs feel the same way about PP.

Even if the unions gave money to GOP pols, it would be dwarfed by the money they get from corporate PACs and Koch types, so labor money would always be "outvoted" by management/shareholder money. Plus, given how rabidly anti-labor Republicans elected post-2010 tend to be, if they got a donation from a labor union, they'd probably return the check and make a public show of it to please their base. If they didn't, it would just be something that would be seized on when they got primaried.

Money is about access more than anything else. Politicians only have a fixed number of hours in a day that they can meet with people, only so many staffers with so much time to review draft legislation. If the Chamber of Commerce gave you $10,000 and wants an hour for lunch on Monday, you're going to meet with them. The Pipefitters Local 337 that gave you $500 will just get a phone call from a distracted staffer who's pretending to take notes.

Note that my example was at the state level and unions can have a significant impact on campaign funds there. As an example there's an IL GOP legislator who took in a little over $25K from PACs in the 2nd quarter this year with a campaign fund of about $100K. Half of that $25K was from union sources. Yes that legislator has a decent record on labor issues, so it matters.

[Joe Republic]

Why would PP ever want to donate to the GOP though?

[YaBoyNY]

How are the Republicans even going to use this as an attack?

Nobody is going to be swayed by this.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Why would PP ever want to donate to the GOP though?

Battered wife syndrome?

[muon2]

Historically they would make donations to select Pubs in primaries in safe Pub districts. That may not be true anymore, though I suspect it may happen at the state level.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Any safe R district is unlikely to choose a pro-choice candidate in the Republican primary. For better or worse, abortion has become a partisan issue.

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Despite any issue about cause and effect the partisan connection matters. In 2012 a Midwest union leader said to me that Indiana taught him something. When Pubs took over all branches in 2011 the unions weren't surprised that hostile legislation came up. But when they went to lobby, the unions realized they had not a single sympathetic ear to their concerns on the Pub side. They had piled all their donations to the Dems for a decade and now the Pubs could care less about their issues and specifically about any money going to the unions. I'm not surprised that congressional Pubs feel the same way about PP.

At risk of derailing this thread, I think this is a very good point to illustrate the partisan polarization of interest groups regarding issues, like labor and abortion.

In addition to this, I think part of this is also the fact that since the late-1960s/early-1970s, unionized labor simply hasn't had the political power that it did from the 1930s - 1960s as the economy transitioned from manufacturing to services.

As the number of voters who were union members entered a steep decline, there simply was no need for Republicans to campaign and govern on providing a business-labor balance (as opposed to the stridently pro-labor Democrats), when they could simply do away with union support and focus on non-union white collar service industry workers (plenty of non-manufacturing blue collar jobs could also be included here) who simply don't care about unions.

America's economy has changed and it's simply not necessary for Republicans to try to win labor votes, and the decline has reached a point that Democrats have only given sparing attention to labor over the past 25 years. Organized labor has reached the point where they have to go with the lukewarm Democrats over the GOP that simply doesn't care about their interests and votes, so all their donations go to Democrats, and in turn Republicans increasingly turn against them.

EDIT - I have no hard stats for this, but it is also very important to note that the composition of union members has also completely changed, with public-sector unions dominating and private-sector unions virtually non-existent. Private sector unions may have been more open to Republicans striking a balance between business and labor so their employers prosper and distribute the economic gains, but since Republicans get much of their support for cutting government spending and taxes, public sector unions have literally no reason to support Republicans.

IIRC, the racial demographics of public sector and private sector unions is also radically different, with private-sector unions having mostly been made up of white working class people back in the 1930s whose loyalty to Democrats was pretty much entirely based on Democrats being pro-union, but miles apart from the modern Democratic party on cultural and energy policy issues. Due to strong anti-discrimination policies put in place by the government, public sector jobs have often been a path to greater economic prosperity for minorities (especially among the still-highly discriminated against blacks, but also recently-immigrated ethnic whites before our modern image of what it is to be a "White American" formed before the racial tensions of the 1960s) who would otherwise have had limited private-sector opportunities.

So I think it's safe to say that many White Americans had parents who were pro-labor Democrats but culturally conservative from the Great Depression to the 1960s when the service and knowledge economies took over, and the children of them got college degrees or job training , went into occupations where labor was difficult to organize and non-existent, and achieved a comfortable lifestyle, so when the New Deal coalition fell apart, they switched to the GOP in a heartbeat.

As True Federalist mentioned above, not only has abortion has become a partisan issue, but also the link between voting patterns among racial groups is tied to the partys' histories and governing philosophies. To tie this all together, we're seeing an increasingly polarized electorate by race, occupation, and income, with the history of labor being a big factor in how the last 50 years have played out politically.

Sorry for the jumbled, wordy post. Everything connects in the end.

[CatoMinor]

Why would PP ever want to donate to the GOP though?

For the same reason the NRA supports Democrats?

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Why would PP ever want to donate to the GOP though?

For the same reason the NRA supports Democrats?

The NRA doesn’t believe that Democrats are fundamentally incapable of loving guns, so they simply endorse the most pro-gun candidate without looking at the party label. They also have an incumbent protection rule - If the incumbent and their challenger have similar views on guns, they endorse the incumbent regardless of party.

Planned Parenthood is completely in love with abortion, practically begging all of its customers to get one. They don't want someone who merely supports abortion, they want someone who is in love with the practice. And even pro-choice republicans aren't in love with the practice. Anyone who is not a democrat or other type of leftist is fundamentally incapable of being in love with abortion as planned parenthood demands, so they will never endorse a republican.

[SATW]

Why would PP ever want to donate to the GOP though?

[muon2]

Historically they would make donations to select Pubs in primaries in safe Pub districts. That may not be true anymore, though I suspect it may happen at the state level.

I can confirm that PP does donate to Pubs at the state level. In the 2014 primary for State Treasurer Tom Cross received a donation and endorsement. He had a long history of donations from PP as State Rep for both primary and general elections. Since 2010 at least two other IL Pub legislators received PP donations, but both were knocked out by the 2012 remap election. In one case the donation was to the Pub for the general election in a hotly contested race between two incumbents.

[ElectionsGuy]

Another reason it should be defunded.

[Gass3268]

Why would PP ever want to donate to the GOP though?

For the same reason the NRA supports Democrats?

The NRA doesn’t believe that Democrats are fundamentally incapable of loving guns, so they simply endorse the most pro-gun candidate without looking at the party label. They also have an incumbent protection rule - If the incumbent and their challenger have similar views on guns, they endorse the incumbent regardless of party.

Planned Parenthood is completely in love with abortion, practically begging all of its customers to get one. They don't want someone who merely supports abortion, they want someone who is in love with the practice. And even pro-choice republicans aren't in love with the practice. Anyone who is not a democrat or other type of leftist is fundamentally incapable of being in love with abortion as planned parenthood demands, so they will never endorse a republican.

How are the Republicans even going to use this as an attack?

Nobody is going to be swayed by this.

ND, MT and MO are all red states with many pro-life voters, so...

Planned Parenthood is viewed more favorably than the candidates running for president on both sides of the aisle

The People like Planned Parenthood, so...

[Joe Republic]

Why would PP ever want to donate to the GOP though?

For the same reason the NRA supports Democrats?

The NRA doesn’t believe that Democrats are fundamentally incapable of loving guns, so they simply endorse the most pro-gun candidate without looking at the party label. They also have an incumbent protection rule - If the incumbent and their challenger have similar views on guns, they endorse the incumbent regardless of party.

Thank you Wulfric, that was a perfect response that I couldn't have answered better myself...

Planned Parenthood is completely in love with abortion, practically begging all of its customers to get one. They don't want someone who merely supports abortion, they want someone who is in love with the practice. And even pro-choice republicans aren't in love with the practice. Anyone who is not a democrat or other type of leftist is fundamentally incapable of being in love with abortion as planned parenthood demands, so they will never endorse a republican.

... MAYDAY MAYDAY WE'RE GOING DOWN

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

Wulfric, what happened to your moderate values and views? This is surprising.

I've never been a moderate on abortion.

My moderateness comes from economic issues, entitlement reform, and foreign policy. It doesn’t come from social issues.

[DrScholl]

That's a whole lot less money than PACs have donated or spent on Republicans in a shorter span of time, so that is really no big deal. Planned Parenthood does a lot of good work in communities, most of which can prevent pregnancy.