Subject: Re: Addressing money and politics: Flint
From: David Donnelly <[email-masked]>
To: Stan Greenberg <[email-masked]>, John Podesta <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2016 18:25:42 +0000

Hi John,

Thanks for your interest in this. I understand that Stan may have sent along the research data about how much Gov. Snyder raised in Bloomfield Hills vs Flint. If raising specific examples of one elected official presents a challenge for her given the exchange from the debate Thursday night, here are some new stats that are systemic rather than personal about one elected… (I’ve attached it as a chart, too.) See below.

David
617-899-1084

Tale of Two Cities

Summary: Bloomfield Hills, despite being 26 times smaller than Flint, gave 16 times more money to Republicans. The average Bloomfield Hills resident gave $810 to Republican candidates since the 2010 election cycle, 338 times the average Flint resident.

Flint is home to about 100,569 residents, ranking it 7th in population in the Michigan. Bloomfield Hills is home to about 3,925 residents, placing it 173rd.

The median home value in Flint is $36,700. Bloomfield Hills' estimated median home value is $690,500.

The median household income in Bloomfield Hills is $163,462 compared to the below poverty level median household income in Flint of $24,679.

Flint’s non-Hispanic white population is 36.9% and its African-American population is 54.9%. Bloomfield Hills’ non-Hispanic white population is 85.5% and its African-American population is 1.4%.

Michigan Republican candidates raised approximately $241,000 from Flint residents since the 2010 election cycle. Over the same period, Michigan Republicans raised $3.2 million from Bloomfield Hills’ donors.

Bloomfield Hills residents have given $810 per capita to Republican candidates since the 2010 election cycle. Flint residents have given $2.40 per capita over the same period.

David Donnelly
President and CEO
Every Voice
202-640-5592 (w) | 617-899-1084 (c)
@everyvoice | @daviddonnelly
e<http://www.everyvoice.org>veryvoice.org<http://www.everyvoice.org>

From: Stan Greenberg <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: Friday, February 5, 2016 at 5:23 PM
To: John Podesta <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Cc: David Donnelly <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: Addressing money and politics: Flint

John,

Let me pass on an idea from David, which offers a smart way to enter the issue in a way where Hillary can be credible.

Stan

Sent from my iPad

Begin forwarded message:

From: David Donnelly <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Date: February 5, 2016 at 1:10:14 PM EST
To: Stan Greenberg <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>>
Subject: memo

MEMO

To:       John Podesta
From:   David Donnelly, Every Voice
Date:    Friday, February 5, 2016
RE:       How to address money-in-politics

Secretary Clinton followed up her historic win on Monday in Iowa with a commanding town hall performance on Wednesday night. Then came the clash over money-in-politics last night.

You are likely receiving a ton of unsolicited emails, so let me cut to the chase:

When Sec. Clinton defends herself on receiving contributions or speaking fees from Wall Street, she is unintentionally sending a message that she is defending the status quo and missing a huge opportunity to connect with voters.

For all of her strengths, the dead heat finish in Iowa was unimaginable two or three months ago. The clarity of Sanders’ message, his credibility in delivering it, and her weakness or weak performance on the very issues he’s championing – reining in the power of Wall Street and the corrupt campaign finance system – contributed heavily to Monday’s narrow results, the wide gap in New Hampshire, and the closing national polling.  Polling we did Tuesday and Wednesday in Iowa<http://everyvoice.org/press-release/new-poll-explains-debate-conflicts-money-politics> shows that five in six voters who caucused with Sanders said money-in-politics was one of the top three issues. Twenty-five percent of all Democratic caucus-goers said it was number one for them.

The problem isn’t simply that Sen. Sanders will continue to erode her support in primaries and caucuses in a protracted fight that threatens the nomination. The problem is he is campaigning on the very issues that expose some of her general election vulnerabilities. “Emails” and “Benghazi” attacks are red meat for the Republican base. They are to be expected and the campaign is right to take them head on as politically motivated attacks. But the Wall Street and campaign finance attacks are different. They resonate with persuadable voters and, the longer they go answered from a defensive posture, could make it harder to mobilize the Democratic base.

Sec. Clinton’s response in early debates – that of course she raises money from Wall Street since they were her constituents and she worked with them after 9/11 – will certainly be reprised in paid communications later this year. From my perspective, she handled these issues in the town hall Wednesday night better by broadening the corporate targets beyond just Wall Street. You know as well as anyone, the Republicans will seek to tar her with these themes because it also defends them against the bigger vulnerability they have on financial regulation and Wall Street money.

That’s why she should immediately lay out a more fundamental argument when asked about Wall Street. She should make the case that she’s the one to tackle Wall Street’s political power by pursuing comprehensive change in the way that money corrupts politics. For her to do so credibly, she would have to speak the god-honest truth in personal terms about the “corrupt campaign finance system.” Use her experience as a way to convince voters she’s the one who knows how to fix it.

While I understand some may have concerns that Sec. Clinton will be seen as a hypocrite if she advocates reforms, there is no sidestepping or avoiding the issue now. It’s in the middle of the table already. The way to handle it is not to defend herself with umbrage. Her demand that Sanders give an example gave him a platform to take his case about the systemic corruption to the viewers at home. That could have been what she did. She must persuade Americans she’s serious about fighting the corporate special interests by laying out a comprehensive reform plan, while defining the Republicans as the party of corporate interests.

The good news is that her positions are already laid out in detail<https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/campaign-finance-reform/> and have been praised by reformers (including me)<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/09/us/politics/hillary-clinton-announces-campaign-finance-reform-plan.html>. The bad news is she’s in a defensive crouch vis-à-vis the public. Here are a few ideas to reorient the message.

(1)        Show up at the NH Rebellion “We the People” Convention<http://www.nhrebellion.org/convention> today, tomorrow or Sunday (before going to Flint). It’s in a tent in Veterans Park in Manchester. Whenever she shows up, she’d get the stage. She could lay out her platform there.

(2)      Connect what is happening in Flint to people not having a voice in politics. Provide help, absolutely. But don’t miss the opportunity to give a clear-eyed diagnosis why it’s happening in Flint, not Bloomfield Hills. You want to drive a national story that blots out what happens in NH on Sunday and Monday? Be both compassionate to people in Flint and steal the spotlight from Sanders by being angry at a political system that devalues Flint’s residents because they aren’t campaign contributors.

(3)       Give a major “new American democracy” speech a few days after New Hampshire that lays out the big argument that Washington won’t work for all of America until it has to listen to all of America. Make the case personal: She knows what big money does to our politics. Discuss how she’s lived through the attack ads and impact that special interests have had on policies she’s advocated for. Talk about how fundraising steals hours from public service and how we need to end the current system. Give a window in to how fundraising is disconnected from reality, like describing how few times concerns about middle America come up at fundraising events. But make it practical, too: Success of people fighting back in Maine, Seattle<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/campaign-finance-reform_us_563a14fee4b0b24aee482a20>, etc. Polling shows people want these policies<http://everyvoice.org/press-release/new-poll-small-donor-driven-solutions>. Give people a sense that she really gets it, wants to change it, and has a platform to do just that.

I’m happy to discuss any of this further.

David Donnelly
President and CEO
Every Voice
202-640-5592 (w) | 617-899-1084 (c)
@everyvoice | @daviddonnelly
e<http://www.everyvoice.org>veryvoice.org<http://www.everyvoice.org>