21 votes

How a single US consulting firm extracted $282 million from a network of spam PACs while delivering just $11 million to actual campaigns

Posted by AnthonyB
Tags: politics.usa, usa, democratic party, political action committees, consulting, investigation, fundraising, substack.on data and democracy, author.adam bonica
https://data4democracy.substack.com/p/the-mothership-vortex-an-investigation?r=ez5w&triedRedirect=true

Link information

This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.

Title
The Mothership Vortex: An Investigation Into the Firm at the Heart of the Democratic Spam Machine
Authors
Adam Bonica
Word count
1451 words

5 comments

  1. AnthonyB
    Link

    To understand the scale of this operation, consider the total amount raised. Since 2018, this core network of Mothership-linked PACs has raised approximately $678 million from individual donors. (This number excludes money raised by the firm's other clients, like candidate campaigns, focusing specifically on the interconnected PACs at the heart of this system.) Of that total fundraising haul, $159 million was paid directly to Mothership Strategies for consulting fees, accounting for the majority of the $282 million Mothership has been paid by all its clients combined.

    But the firm's direct cut is only part of the story. The "churn and burn" fundraising model is immensely expensive to operate. Sending millions of texts and emails requires massive spending on digital infrastructure. For instance, FEC filings show this network paid $22.5 million to a single vendor, Message Digital LLC, a firm that specializes in text message delivery.

    The remaining hundreds of millions disappeared into a maze of self-reported categories: $150 million to consulting/fundraising, $70 million to salaries and payroll. There are some disbursements to what seem to be legitimate advocacy and organizing–for instance Progressive Turnout Project reports paying Shawmut Services $19 million for canvassing. However, most of the unclassifiable expenditures appear to be administrative costs or media buys that feed back into the fundraising machine itself.

    After subtracting these massive operational costs—the payments to Mothership, the fees for texting services, the cost of digital ads and list rentals—the final sum delivered to candidates and committees is vanishingly small. My analysis of the network's FEC disbursements reveals that, at most, $11 million of the $678 million raised from individuals has made its way to candidates, campaigns, or the national party committees.

    But here's the number that should end all debate:

    This represents a fundraising efficiency rate of just 1.6 percent.

    9 votes
  2. [2]
    rosco
    Link
    Man, I get texts and emails all the time from them - I think because I have donated to progressive candidates through ActBlue in the past. I even emailed the Democratic Training Committee because...

    Man, I get texts and emails all the time from them - I think because I have donated to progressive candidates through ActBlue in the past.

    I even emailed the Democratic Training Committee because their texts and emails are so freaking annoying, just to tell them as much. Honestly, if I were on the fence and I got those over the top emails I'd probably vote in the other direction. I wonder beyond being an absolute money sink, how much damage have they done to progressive politics with their hyperbolic rhetoric.

    8 votes
    1. Spoom
      Link Parent
      I unsubscribed from these in the Obama days because they were just over-the-top, all the time. Everything was an emergency, and the only way to solve it was money. I'm still voting for Democrats...

      I unsubscribed from these in the Obama days because they were just over-the-top, all the time. Everything was an emergency, and the only way to solve it was money. I'm still voting for Democrats (because they are as close as I can get to my preferred policies) but it certainly doesn't look like they're very good at actually running things.

      2 votes
  3. Baeocystin
    Link
    I knew things were bad on the fundraising front (I get spammed by these folks all the time, starting after I made a few donations to Mark Kelly), but goddamn, this is awful. Thanks for posting this.

    I knew things were bad on the fundraising front (I get spammed by these folks all the time, starting after I made a few donations to Mark Kelly), but goddamn, this is awful. Thanks for posting this.

    3 votes
  4. Minori
    Link
    The thing I feel the article gets wrong is that PACs legally can't donate to campaigns. The whole point of PACs is to get excessive amounts of money beyond the official campaign donation limits...

    The thing I feel the article gets wrong is that PACs legally can't donate to campaigns. The whole point of PACs is to get excessive amounts of money beyond the official campaign donation limits set US campaign-finance laws. PACs legally can't coordinate with official campaigns.

    Though I fully buy the article's main point. There are definitely scummy PACs that raise funds to fund more fundraising. A depressing number of nonprofits operate the same way. Even "mission-driven" non-profit organizations like colleges and churches often fall into the same pattern.

    1 vote