Posted February 5, 2007 by Catie Hinckley

Bundlers Rising

News reports indicate Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) will categorize her largest campaign contribution bundlers for her presidential bid with names like “Hillraisers” and “Pathfinders.”  This practice was first established in President Bush’s 2000 campaign when contributors who were able to corral $100,000 and $200,000 worth of contributions earned the monikers “Pioneer” and “Ranger,” respectively. 

The fact that Senator Clinton plans to designate big money contribution bundlers comes as no surprise; she has already opted out of the presidential public financing system for the primary elections and plans to opt out in the general elections as well if she is the Democratic candidate.  Two startling differences between Clinton’s “Hillraisers” and Bush’s “Pioneers” are: 1) the amount of money it will take to earn the title; Clinton’s bundlers will be asked “to raise at least $1 million for the honor of being in her top echelon of supporters”; and 2) the fact that the Clinton campaign has not yet decided whether to disclose the identities of those who bundle the millions into her campaign coffers.    

Of course, the only reason we know the identities of some of President Bush’s Pioneers and Rangers is that the White House decided to reveal that information voluntarily.  Voluntary “disclosure,” however, is not the answer.  Federal candidates should be required by law to reveal those individuals who funnel huge sums into their campaigns.

The emergence of $1 million bundlers is a significant—and disturbing—marker in the history of presidential campaign funding.  Rather than candidates using new fundraising tools like the Internet to focus on small dollar donors, as Howard Dean did in his 2004 campaign, candidates are showing an increasing dependence on the Rolodex of their wealthy supporters.  In addition, those who can “dial for dollars” and earn one of the prestigious bundling titles will be rewarded with a degree of access and influence to the candidate (and potentially the next President) that most Americans will never have.  The specter of buying influence and access is even more troubling because many of these bundlers will be lobbyists or other parties seeking to influence legislation and policy. 

Both the focus on large contributions and the special regard that bundlers earn from the candidates they support will certainly give the impression that the White House truly is up for sale to the highest bidder.

The problems posed by the now common practice of bundling, however, will be exacerbated in 2008.  The presidential public financing system, which was created to contain the spending arms race in presidential campaigns, is no longer a viable option for the most competitive candidates.  Congress has neglected the system for years and it has now fallen into disrepair.  Leading candidates from both parties can raise far more money outside the system than they would receive through the current public funding option.  Any candidate with a serious shot at the White House in 2008 looks likely to opt out of the system and the spending limits that come along with the public funds.  Once outside of the system, these candidates will have no incentive to focus on small dollar donors for the sake of matching funds, and instead will look for the fastest way to raise huge amounts of money quickly, i.e. bundlers.  It is a vicious and alarming cycle:  With candidates outside of the public financing system in a race against each other to raise and spend money, their reliance on bundlers will further increase.   

Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Representatives Chris Shays (R-CT), Marty Meehan (D-MA) and David Price (D-NC) have introduced legislation to repair the system which would reinvigorate presidential public financing for the 2012 election.  (For details of the bill, click here.)  

In the meantime, however, Congress can increase the transparency of “bundling” in the 2008 presidential cycle.  Representatives Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Marty Meehan introduced a bill to require lobbyists to disclose the candidates, leadership PACs, and political party committees for whom they collect and arrange contributions.  The Van Hollen-Meehan bill mirrors the language already passed in the Senate’s lobbying and ethics reform legislation.  This legislation would disclose the names of lobbyist bundlers and how much they are delivering or arranging to be delivered to federal candidates. It is worthy of support by every House member who believes the American people have the right to know whose money is financing our national elections.   

Bundlers will have an even more prominent roll in the 2008 elections as candidates grow increasingly reliant on their fundraising.  The public should know exactly who it is that will be financing these elections and what interests they represent.