Carrier Accepting Special Interest Money After All?

by lewwaters

David Carrier, Democrat challenger to Republican Don Benton for Washington State Senate, 17th District, has maintained on his web page, “I am the only candidate for State Senate who did not accept contributions from lobbyists and PACs. My only interest is to represent the voters of this District.”

Clicking the link provided by David brings us to his page attempting to show his contributions received versus Don Benton’s expenditures, along with the following,

David also provides a link to Washington’s Public Disclosure Commissions search page for us to see how he is not accepting special interest money. It is somewhat complicated to get through, but I found by going to directly to the PDC page, searching the database is much easier. No matter, whichever way I access the page brings back the same results of those who are contributing to Carriers campaign.

For all the noise he makes about not accepting any money from special interests, I was somewhat taken back to see two contributors listed, Bergman & Frockt, PLLC of Vashon, Washington and the Roosevelt Fund of Seattle.

Bergman & Frockt seems to be a Law Firm located in Vashon that specializes on asbestos litigation. In fact, their site lists them as “The Northwest’s Leading Firm In Asbestos Litigation.”

The Roosevelt Fund P.O. Box 9100 Seattle is a Liberal Political Action Committee with a long history of collecting and distributing funds to Liberal Democrats in opposition to Republicans.

It must be said here that receiving these funds from these two special interest groups are neither illegal nor politically improper. However, they do indicate that Carrier either has decided to accept special interest money or isn’t paying attention to donations he receives.

It is David Carrier who complains about similar funds being accepted by Senator Don Benton while posting prominently on his own web page, “I am not accepting contributions from special interest groups.”

Even in articles by the near bankrupt Columbian, Carrier maintains he “has taken no money from special interest groups.”

I have previously addressed Carriers numbers and claims not adding up, here and here. Likewise, these two contributions don’t add up with this prominent claim “I am not accepting contributions from special interest groups.”

Little wonder that the financially troubled Columbian endorses Carrier over Don Benton, even to the point of misrepresenting Benton’s position of the I-5 bridge replacement proposals.

They claim, “[Benton] is even opposed to the proposal for replacing the decrepit and dangerous Interstate 5 Bridge.” Truth is, Senator Benton’s views were published by the Columbian March 2, 2008 with his article, “Third river crossing is best solution

Little wonder the Columbian is in deep financial straits. As much as they point at Senator Benton’s ability to raise funds, you would think they would have seen Carriers ability to receive funds from special interests as well.

With their inability to properly manage and profit from local news, are they sending us another mis-manager?

Either you accept from special interests or you don’t, David. You can’t have it both ways.

4 Responses to “Carrier Accepting Special Interest Money After All?”

  1. I appreciate your diligence in investigating issues regarding campaign financing. When elected, I will do everything in my power to ensure that voters own their elections and legislators, rather than special interests.

    I have demonstrated my commitment to voter-owned elections by refusing all contributions from special interests throughout my campaign. I accepted contributions from the Roosevelt Fund because it is managed by a political party rather than a special interest. The Roosevelt Fund represents the pooled contributions of hundreds of individual donors.

    My campaign has spent a fraction of what Don Benton’s campaign has. I think it is obscene that my opponent raised $240,000 for his campaign. I will maintain my independence and frugality when I am State Senator for the 17th District, because I feel that is what is needed for “we the people” to regain control of our democracy.

    Just to clarify this issue for your readers, my volunteer Treasurer accepted a $1,000 contribution from the 49th Legislative District without knowing this type of contribution was prohibited. Once we were notified by the Senate Democratic Campaign Committee that the contribution was prohibited, we promptly returned the funds on October 13, as noted in the most recent Public Disclosure Commission filings.

    The campaign contribution from the law firm of Bergman & Frockt was donated by an individual who wished to remain anonymous. To the best of my knowledge, Bergman & Frockt is not engaged in lobbying activities.

    I will continue to work tirelessly, not just for the individuals who have contributed to my campaign, but for each and every citizen of the 17th District. We all deserve a State Senator who will value our input, listen to our views, and work on issues that concern us all, whether Democrat, Republican, or Independent.

    again, thanks for your diligence!
    David Carrier

    Like

  2. I like your confidence, David, but you haven’t won the election yet.

    You continue to deny accepting special interest money by “explaining” what each one I noted is. In the case of the Roosevelt Fund, does it not trouble you just a little that a group is formed to collect donations to favor a party instead of having individual donors send their money where they deem proper?

    How are they not a special interest group when their own stated purpose is “To support a Democratic majority in the Washington State Senate?” Democrats are still up in arms over another ‘527’ group who never advocated the Republican, but was formed solely to expose the 2004 Democrat candidate for president.

    As for the Bergman & Frockt donations, I refuse to believe it is dishonesty on your part and instead see it as naivete that you would believe their donation is merely an individual who wishes to remain anonymous. In case you missed it, this “anonymous donor” has been making contributions to other Democrats, apparently still anonymous.

    Apparently, googling their political contribution returns a not so anonymous Matthew Bergman donating massive monies to Democrats. While it is free choice and legal to donate as one sees fit, in accordance with campaign finance laws, that the law firm bills themselves as “The Northwest’s Leading Firm In Asbestos Litigation” and knowing that Republicans favor tort reform, it doesn’t take much imagination to see special interest there.

    Why you chose to mention your acceptance of the donation from the 49th District Democratic Committee I don’t know. I didn’t even mention it, even though I was aware of it and your returning it.

    I am a bit concerned with your campaign pitch, “We all deserve a State Senator who will value our input, listen to our views, and work on issues that concern us all,” though. How can you make such a statement, yet advocate Light Rail across the Columbia River knowing that voters by a 2 to 1 margin defeated it? Do you not see that long time residents do not want it? Can you not see the expense it will cost residents? Is that how you intend to “listen to our views” should you win?

    Or, are you counting on newer residents to over rule long time residents?

    Some other things that trouble me about your candidacy, you have yet to reconcile how you would not vote for an income tax, but advocate a progressive tax at the same time.

    With the state facing a multi-billion dollar deficit and you saying you will not vote for any spending increases or tax increases, how do you justify your call for new programs that obviously will increase spending and must be paid for? Specifically, where would you cut spending enough to balance the budget and pay for your programs?

    Since Democrats gained control of the state in 2004, taxation and spending have increased, even though promises were made to the opposite. Gas tax, tobacco tax, sales tax and several others end up hurting the very people Democrats claim to care the most about, lower income wage earners. How would you give those hurt the most by Democrats increased spending relief?

    We know Benton’s stand, what is yours?

    Simple arithmetic shows all these numbers do not add up. How is it an “economist” fails to see that?

    Like

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply. Comments are moderated. Spam & off topic comments will not be approved at Blog Author's discretion. THIS IS NOT A FREE SPEECH ZONE!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: