A downpour of campaign literature flooded the mailboxes of voters for a city council member’s seat in Chesterfield, Missouri last March and April. We are told, these mailers — glossy, large, professionally produced — came without the knowledge or permission of the candidate they touted. This is clear evidence that “dark money” has found its way into local elections.
At a city council meeting in Chesterfield earlier this month, an elected official acknowledged that “dark money” existed but since he did not know anything about it or where it was coming from, he was not responsible for it should it turn up in his campaign.
The question this raises for me is: Who is responsible for a candidate’s campaign? Few would argue the answer: Ultimately, the candidate is. The proverbial buck stops with him or her. Claiming ignorance has never been defensible.
While dark money has been made legal by Citizens United, the law does not require a candidate accept or use it. Though preventing it may be a problem in itself. But, shouldn’t one try?
Leadership is needed to harness and effectively limit the effect of dark money in our local elections. I encourage each elected member of the Chesterfield city council to lead the way by going on record:
1) opposing dark money and its influence in elections,
2) pledging to refuse unidentifiable donations of money or collateral materials,
3) publicly identifying unvetted pieces and sources,
4) and disclaiming validity to a campaign
Though no local elections are imminent, I urge members of the Chesterfield city council lead the way with this pledge.
–Mark Kumming, WCD & CTD member
I have noticed that ALL of the pro Prop A collateral I have received is funded by Americans for Prosperity. By law this organization is no longer required to reveal it’s donors, but it was originally funded by the Koch brothers of Wichita, KS. Mark’s comments about dark money apply to local, state and federal candidates AND ballot initiatives as well. Prop A is bad for Missouri and being actively promoted by out-of-state corporate interests.