How would you feel if you were a candidate in a competitive Democratic primary — meaning there are other Dems running for the same nomination — and you learned that the chair of your local party was working for one of your opponents? And being PAID to do so?
This is the situation that a number of candidates faced in Democratic primaries across Kentucky this spring. And the by-laws of the Kentucky Democratic Party and of some local parties are unclear on whether this is a problem.
Here’s the statement in the KDP bylaws:
“No Democrat Committee governed by these By-Laws, or any Democratic Party Officer acting in his or her official capacity, shall endorse or support one Democratic candidate over another Democratic candidate in a Democratic Primary Election.”
The sticky phrase, of course, is “acting in his or her official capacity.” What, exactly, does that mean? It seems obvious that “endorse” means that a party official cannot say “As party chair, I endorse Candidate A.” But what about “support”?
Making money as a political operative
One of the things that campaigns spend money on is staff. And while some of those staff may be the young college-age worker-bees who work the field, organize literature distribution, and set up call banks and such, others are veterans of multiple campaigns, valued for their experience and their insights.
And some of those staff are also valued for their knowledge of the local political scene — because they come from the district where the race is happening.
The amount of money to be made varies, of course, with the size of the race and the fund-raising abilities of the candidate. Some campaign chairs make as little as $500 or $1,000 per campaign (with the primary and the general being two separate campaigns.) Others can make well into six figures, especially for high-profile state and federal races.
Making a grand for running a local candidate’s race doesn’t sound like much. (And on an hourly basis, it probably isn’t.) But if you can line up two or three such races in the same district, and get that pay rate up higher, like maybe $550 a month, you can put together a nice part-time gig.
So, what’s the problem with this? Nothing at all, if you’re just a regular citizen. But if you are connected to the party in an official capacity, it leads to issues.
Impact of party officials supporting one candidate in a competitive primary
Here are some of the issues caused by this situation:
Conflicts of interest. If the party is holding a debate, and you are in charge of making sure the debate is fair, how can you do that when you are being paid by one of the candidates? If the party has a robo-call capability, and you know how to work it to best advantage, what is to keep you from doing that for your candidate? Frankly, NOT to do it is a violation of the responsibilities you owe to your candidate.
Horrible optics. No matter how much you, as a party official, try to play this down the middle, it LOOKS really bad. I called one political analyst and told them about these situations, and their first comment was “As Andy says, you can’t be doing that.” He went on to say that anyone learning of this would say “See, I told you all politicians are corrupt.”
Negative impacts on current and future candidates. One candidate learned that a party official was running their opponent’s campaign, and decided to drop out of the race, assuming that the party was behind his opponent.
Another candidate said to me, “We are conflating the party structure with a campaign structure, and it’s bad for both.” He went on to say that based on results in the past, hiring certain people as your campaign manager seemed to also guarantee you certain endorsements and certain donations. “From the outside, it looks like a package deal.”
And worst of all, what does this do to our bench? How many possible candidates will look at this situation and decide that the game is rigged, so what’s the use of even running? How many donors will refuse to support a given campaign, because they’ve learned that the “party is supporting the other guy”? How many voters will learn of this, and become even more disgusted with the process than they already are?
How to fix this
The solution to this is simple: Put the prohibition right in the KDP bylaws, and make plain that it applies to any competitive primary in the state. “No party official or member of a local or state executive committee may be hired by a candidate in a competitive Democratic primary.”
You want to work for candidates, even in primaries? That’s great – we need good people on campaigns. BUT, you have to resign your position with the party.
You want to serve in some official capacity in the party? That’s great – we need good people doing public service like that. BUT, you can’t work for a Democratic candidate against other Democratic candidates, for money or for free.
KDP, you need to close this loophole. Otherwise, the optics will continue to be horrible, and cries of “favoritism” and “rigged” will dog our primaries into the future.
–30–