Friend --
I wrote something for our blog about our decision to support Priorities
USA, the Super PAC that can help neutralize the avalanche of
special-interest spending to defeat President Obama. Every supporter
should read it; it's pasted below.
I just want to add something for you specifically about your role in
all of this.
We
decided to do this because we can't afford for the work you're doing in
your communities, and the grassroots donations you give to support it,
to be destroyed by hundreds of millions of dollars in negative ads.
It's a real risk.
In 2011, the Super PAC supporting Mitt Romney raised $30 million from
fewer than 200 contributors. Ninety-six percent of what they've spent
so far, more than $18 million, has been on attack ads. The main engine
of Romney's campaign has an average contribution of roughly $150,000.
That's why it's up to us -- the grassroots organization -- to win this
election where we have the real advantage, and that's on the ground.
More than 1.3 million Americans have already donated. Our average
donation is $55, and 98 percent are $250 or less.
The stakes are too important to play by two different sets of rules. If
we fail to act, we concede this election to a small group of powerful
people intent on removing the President at any cost.
If you can volunteer, please sign up now:
http://my.barackobama.com/Volunteer-for-2012
If you can give, please give now:
https://donate.barackobama.com/Donate-for-2012
Thank you,
Messina
Jim Messina
Campaign Manager
Obama for America
------
We will not play by two sets of rules
By Jim Messina
In 2010, the Supreme Court's decision in the
Citizens United
case opened the door to a new wave of so-called Super PACs --
non-candidate political committees that can receive and spend unlimited
money from special interests. For the first time, these committees
could accept money from corporations, not just wealthy individuals.
The decision has accelerated a dangerous trend toward a political
system increasingly dominated by big-money interests with
disproportionate power to spend freely to influence our elections and
our government.
It's a trend the President has fought against, coming into office with
a mission to limit special-interest influence in Washington. He put in
place the most sweeping ethics reforms in history to close the
revolving door between government and lobbyists. And he's overseen the
most open administration ever -- reversing Bush-era policies designed
to limit Freedom of Information Act requests and disclosing White House
visitor records so that Americans can see how their government works.
The President opposed the
Citizens United
decision. He understood that with the dramatic growth in opportunities
to raise and spend unlimited special-interest money, we would see new
strategies to hide it from public view. He continues to support a law
to force full disclosure of all funding intended to influence our
elections, a reform that was blocked in 2010 by a unanimous Republican
filibuster in the U.S. Senate. And the President favors action -- by
constitutional amendment, if necessary -- to place reasonable limits on
all such spending.
But this cycle, our campaign has to face the reality of the law as it
currently stands.
Over the last few months, Super PACs affiliated with Republican
presidential candidates have spent more than $40 million on television
and radio, almost all of it for negative ads.
Last week, filings showed that the Super PAC affiliated with Mitt
Romney's campaign raised $30 million in 2011 from fewer than 200
contributors, most of them from the financial sector. Governor Romney
personally helped raise money for this group, which is run by some of
his closest allies.
Meanwhile, other Super PACs established for the sole purpose of
defeating the President -- along with "nonprofits" that also aren't
required to disclose the sources of their funding -- have raised more
than $50 million. In the aggregate, these groups are expected to spend
half a billion dollars, above and beyond what the Republican nominee
and party are expected to commit to try to defeat the President.
With so much at stake, we can't allow for two sets of rules in this
election whereby the Republican nominee is the beneficiary of unlimited
spending and Democrats unilaterally disarm.
Therefore, the campaign has decided to do what we can, consistent with
the law, to support Priorities USA in its effort to counter the weight
of the GOP Super PACs. We will do so only in the knowledge and with the
expectation that all of its donations will be fully disclosed as
required by law to the Federal Election Commission.
What this change means practically: Senior campaign officials as well
as some White House and Cabinet officials will attend and speak at
Priorities USA fundraising events. While campaign officials may be
appearing at events to amplify our message, these folks won't be
soliciting contributions for Priorities USA. I should also note that
the President, Vice President, and First Lady will not be a part of
this effort; their political activity will remain focused on the
President's campaign.
But here's what this doesn't change: the fact that ordinary people
stepping up to take control of the political process is essential to
our strategy.
This decision will help fill a hole on our side. But it's only one part
of the overall effort.
Supporting Priorities USA means that our side will not concede the
battles on the air in the months to come, but we continue to believe
that this election will be won on the ground. Super PACs haven't opened
offices. They haven't hired organizers. They haven't registered voters.
They haven't knocked on doors or made the kind of personal contact with
voters that we know is the single most effective way to persuade people
and turn them out on Election Day.
And this is where we have the advantage. It will be up to us -- the
grassroots organization, funded by an average donation of $55 -- to win
this election.
It's a point of pride that 98 percent of all our donations are $250 or
less. Mitt Romney won't reveal that number about his own campaign, but
filings show that just 9 percent of the Romney campaign's money in the
fourth quarter of last year came from people giving less than $200.
Americans across the country are supporting the most extensive
neighbor-to-neighbor, grassroots organization in history.
It's my hope that by making this decision and doing what we can to
neutralize the onslaught of special-interest money, we can ensure that
the decisive factor in this election won't be an unprecedented flood of
special-interest spending, and the outcome will be back in the hands of
ordinary Americans.