Democrat Christine Hallquist pledged Monday to return all corporate contributions that were made to her campaign for governor. The move comes more than two weeks after rival Democratic candidate James Ehlers called on Hallquist and Republican Gov. Phil Scott to return corporate donations.
In a press release, Hallquist indicated she was changing her campaign’s policy to draw a contrast with Scott.
“After watching Phil Scott take large sums from Monsanto and other out of state corporations, it has become clear that my leading on the issue of campaign finance is more important than ever,” Hallquist said. “I realize that I should have had my personal connections donate through their personal accounts.”
As of July 15, corporate contributions made up $20,610 of Hallquist’s $132,340 fundraising total. The contributions were made up of $16,160 in cash and $4,450 of in-kind gifts, such as $450 for event space at the Great Northern restaurant in Burlington.
Half of Hallquist’s corporate cash came from Vermont Telephone Company and its subsidiary, VTel Wireless, which each contributed the maximum legal donation of $4,080.
Hallquist’s mention of Monsanto echoed a July 18 statement from Ehlers calling on Hallquist and Scott to stop taking corporate contributions.
“Scott regularly takes campaign contributions from Monsanto,” Ehlers said in the release.
As of July 15, Scott’s campaign had raised $44,150 from corporations in the current election cycle, including $2,500 from Monsanto. Campaign manager Brittney Wilson said Monday that Scott is not considering returning the contributions.
Ehlers campaign spokesperson Sarah Anders said Scott’s record — particularly this year’s vetoes of bills to raise the minimum wage to $15 and to hold corporations liable for harm caused by toxic chemicals — shows that he’s beholden to his corporate donors.
“His priorities couldn’t be clearer,” Anders said. “It’s all about corporate interests and putting those ahead of the people of Vermont.”
The other Democrats in the race, Brenda Siegel of Newfane and Ethan Sonneborn of Bristol, reported no contributions from corporations as of July 15. (None of Sonneborn’s reported donations amounted to more than $100, so he was not required to disclose any of his donors.)
In his July 15 campaign finance filing, grocer Keith Stern, who is challenging Scott in the Republican primary, reported corporate donations from three different produce companies totaling $1,310.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
If corporations (and corporate donations) are to be vilified for trying, on behalf of their vested interests, to have a say in the outcome of elections why does Ehlers get a pass for not returning his donations from the AFL-CIO and other unions? How does that make him not any less in someone’s pocket…according to the logic employed in the call to shun and return corporate donations?
– I realize that I should have had my personal connections donate through their personal accounts. –
She entirely misses the point of not accepting corporate money. Taking $$$ from wealthy business types with personal relationships to you is worse than taking money from faceless corporations, because this is Vermont and they are your friends so you dont want them to ignore you at the next cocktail hour, especially if they give you 1/3 of the typical persons yearly paycheck.
Time and time again it seems that Hallquist has spent too much time as a CEO among other 1% CEOs and not enough time working and living and befriending regular folks.
Job: because the interests the AFL-CIO represent are working people and not corporations. Get it? Don’t like the union? Don’t join one. Nowadays you can enjoy all the benefits without having to pay dues.
Lassy2-
I’m not litigating whether I should join a Union or not…I could say: “don’t like corporations? Don’t work for one.”
I’m reminding James that by accepting donations from any organization he is then susceptible to the charge that he has been bought off by that organization and an indentured servant to their various causes. I don’t think that’s true but taking donations from corporations is tantamount within the same vein of thinking.
In the above article Ehlers’ campaign is quoted saying Scott’s veto of the min wage and paid family leave bill shows that he’s beholden to his corporate overlords…but a simple google search shows that all of the companies listed provide a comprehensive wage and benefits package far exceeding the min wage and leave time sought in those bills.
If Scott received many donations from small businesses would they be equally villified?
Just like the typical politician, Scott just thinks about money! But he hasn’t really done anything this year except get the marijuana bill passed which doesn’t do much of anything when you look at how it’s written. I like the democrats way of thinking. They aren’t on the side of taking money from big super pacs like Scott is.
I am for taking all money donated from PACS or all groups out of politics. That means ALL, all corporate, all union, all other groups. Allow just individual donations
But he hasnt really done anything this year except get the marijuana bill passed . . .
GI Gripe, you continue to be defined by your First Grade style whining.
In fact, Scott pushed for and signed landmark gun control legislation. Name the last Democratic or Republican Governor who was willing to go anywhere near guns. Shumlin? He ran away from the issue so fast it was pathetic. And the sainted Bernie won his seat in Congress in 1990 by rallying the NRA against incumbent Peter Smith, who had supported gun control.
You simply have no idea.
Job- The difference is that a union PAC has a process of who to support through a democratic process in the union. So everyone has a voice in how the union decision is made. In a corporation, the employees have no voice is the decision making of the corporation with respect to political contributions. That is a significant difference. Also, a corporations responsibility is to the shareholders, not the employees (by definition for those corporations that are publicly traded), so again, the decision of the corporation is not necessarily in the interests of the employees. These are significant differences. So to put them in the same category is not accurate.
Lt. Gov – Corporations are made up of people though. A board of directors elected (usually) through democratic shareholder meetings and they operate under a strict set of bylaws and a good deal of govt regulation and oversight. They’re not inhuman machines – they operate with the goal to deliver for their shareholders (which, more often than not, include their own employees).
Does the VTNEA vote on every candidate they donate to…every cycle? Every cause they throw their weight behind? How much “democracy” do you really believe went into the AFL-CIO’s $500 donation to James? I assure you, precious little – Which is fine!
Similarly, but definitely different, should candidates return donations they receive from Planned Parenthood? Not a union, but an organization with an obvious agenda – and an expectation that their political dollars ensure a certain legislative outcome.
If you accept from any organization you open yourself up to the criticism that you’ve been bought. My point to James, if you’ll allow a little Scripture (since Churches remain unable to donate to political causes), don’t point out the speck in your opponent’s eye when you’ve got a log in yours.
Know,
He may have passed what you said but he vetoed a lot of good bills such as paid family leave, minimum wage increases and much more. It’s time to get someone else…