The Experienced Leadership Matters super PAC, reported this month raising nearly $90,000, almost half of which came from the parents of Jake Auchincloss, one of nine Democrats running for the seat being vacated by Representative Joseph P. Kennedy III, the Globe reports.
The PAC hasn’t spent any money yet but Auchincloss’ stepfather, Gregory Petsko, said “it wouldn’t be surprising” to see the super PAC help Auchincloss,
Weirdly surprising are the rest of Petesko’s comments…
….Petsko said he has “no idea” who makes that decision. “It wouldn’t be surprising, given his track record,” he said.
Petsko said he didn’t know who was running the PAC, nor could he pinpoint how he was alerted to its existence, saying he gets a “dozen, maybe two dozen e-mails a day from various PACs and candidates.”
He also couldn’t say who directly solicited his donation. “I think her name was Beth,” an apologetic Petsko said. “I’m lousy with names.”
UPDATE: The Super PAC filed paperwork Thursday to announce plans to run $180K in ads backing their son.
Jake outta step out of race now. Not a good look.
We privileged suburbanites need to do whatever we can to ensure that Jake “Thanksdad” Auchincloss is able to give corporate America the unwavering political representation that it deserves.
Not a good look. The field of candidates in this contest is deep enough for this to be a potential disqualifier.
How is it different from candidates loaning their campaigns large sums of money?
There’s a big difference between a super PAC that won’t even acknowledge why it exists (or whose behind it) and a candidate investing their own money (not their parents money or even a spouses money) as a campaign loan.
Achincloss father or anyone else for that matter could not donate or loan the campaign $30K. But they can give it to a PAC.
@ Lucia–that’s right! Another candidate has already loaned almost a MILLION dollars to their campaign. This is public data. How about balanced coverage, Greg?
Greg, American citizens are free to donate their own hard-earned money to PACs. It is called freedom of speech. You may not like that, but such is the country you live in. Almost all serious candidates benefit from PACs.
The idea that a mother and father might donate a modest amount of money to a PAC toward their son’s candidacy is a NON-STORY. What kind of family *doesn’t* support a candidate to the extent they are able?
On a side note, I am increasingly disappointed in how you and Sean Roche are using Village14 to trumpet your own political views over others. Perhaps I was naive to believe that this was a community site with editorial integrity that provided equal time to a variety of views. You reported a story here; fine. Maybe it is not the editor’s place to chime in and try to rebut every community comment on the thread that he does not like. And maybe it is time that you and your co-editors apply similar scrutiny to other candidates in this race.
Oh Michael Singer. You’re reading so much more into this than exists. I admire Councilor Auchincloss and expect that he’d be a good congressman. But this bothers me. A lot. Sorry it bothers you that this bothers me. But expressing opinions is very much the substance and purpose of an opinion blog, which is what Village 14 is.
Why can’t you simply respond by explaining why aren’t troubled by this Super PAC rather than turning this into some sort of indictment of the range of folks who post on V14?
Or is it that you don’t have a good counter argument so you resort to the Trumpian tactic of seeking to blame the messenger?
Have a great day.
@ other “Michael”: Dude, you’re just paranoid. What appears on top of the Globe’s home page is very likely driven by algorithms, nothing more nothing less.
Gee, it’s fun to be back!
Lucia, this is a Super PAC (“Experienced Leadership Matters PAC”) designed to disguise the influence of big donors – in this case not only Auchincloss’ own wealthy family, but also the shareholders of the corporations (allegedly!) pulling Auchincloss’ strings – Hill Holliday, Century Bank, the Kraft Group, Greylock Partners, Fireman Capital, Rockpoint Group, etc.
I’m not sure if you have access to the Globe article, but it’s a real hoot – the Auchincloss team was genuinely surprised to have gotten caught. Auchincloss’ stepfather gave a bumbling response that he had “no idea” whether Auchincloss would benefit from the super PAC, but “it wouldn’t be surprising” if it were Auchincloss. Oh and he also couldn’t remember who solicited his donation – “I’m lousy with names”! Good grief.
It was funny to see how this was the top headline on the Globe website for a grand total of about five minutes before descending into oblivion – the same powers-that-be who arranged Kevin Cullen’s cringeworthy puff piece on Auchincloss last fall evidently made another phone call yesterday afternoon.
Micheal singer
“Perhaps I was naive to believe that this was a community site with editorial integrity that provided equal time to a variety of views”
The blog does not pretend or claim that. Although it seems to be getting much worse recently.
Cullen is absolute thrash. For those that don’t know he made up the Globe story about the Martin family at the marathon. Complete gutter scum.
This came up during the student-run debate that happened online last night (2 hours, totally worth the watch). Cavell came out hard against Auchincloss on this.
But to the point above about other candidates that also put in personal money, Jake called out Leckey who has put $800,000 of her own money into the race. Jake pointed out that the funds came from Leckey’s husband’s investments in the energy industry. That brought out a pretty strong retort from Leckey.
My takeaway from the debate itself was that everyone’s polling probably shows Jake out ahead since most of the candidates seemed to be gunning for him.
A recording is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MsOKh_3vevM&feature=emb_err_woyt
It seems to me that there are 2 bottom lines here. One is that there is absolutely nothing illegal or wrong or even questionable here. The rules are the rules and is anyone really suggesting that candidates should somehow pick and choose which rules to follow even if doing so hurts their campaigns? Should Joe Biden stop accepting Super PAC money and hand a formidable advantage to Trump? Does anybody think that? The second bottom line is that Jake, unlike Grossman and Leckey, apparently doesn’t have hundreds of thousands of dollars to contribute in his own name. Grossman threw in $350k. Leckey ponied up $800k! Was any of that family money? Does it somehow make it better that the funds came directly from the candidate’s account rather than from family members? Does it somehow make it better that Grossman’s politician father-in-law, who may or may not be responsible for some of Becky’s $350k personal contribution, hasn’t contributed to a PAC benefitting Becky but instead is out strong-arming virtually everyone he knows for cash and endorsements for Becky’s campaign? Raising the necessary funds to run for office is the toughest part of campaigning. Until the rules are changed candidates will continue to abide by them, as they should. Maybe those who are whining about this candidate simply following the rules as they’re laid out should get off their high horses and try to do something about changing those rules instead of just lobbing grenades from afar.
I am getting some pretty ugly online attack ads against Jake from some woman’s political PAC. Why is this PAC worse?
Many groups, Sierra Club, MoveOn, LWV, have PACs. I think Chuck’s assessment is probably right.
Jake supporter – his sign is in our yard.
Let’s hope this race gets ugly. Will make it more fun. Someone is going to spend 2milplus to make 175k.
Doesn’t this seem entirely appropriate – maybe even prerequisite – for a candidate taking over a seat from a Kennedy?
Self-funding at high levels or PACs – all the same to me. Did anyone really think that any of these candidates weren’t going to have a major influx of some form of self-funding?
It’s too bad this race has devolved into negative campaigning rather than focusing on the issues. What a waste at a time when the world is crashing and burning all around us.
@Jane if you have time to check out the debate it’s worth it. The majority of it focused on larger issues, including climate change, COVID response, education, race, gun control, and reproductive rights. It was remarkably well-run, especially given the number of candidates in this race. The fireworks came later.
The article above buries this, but there are a number of candidates who haven’t put significant funds into their own campaign.
I can’t believe I am about to say this, but I agree 100% with Gerry Chervinky lololol. I understand both sides. Quite frankly I wish corporate funds and pacs weren’t legal, but thanks to Citizens United and a conservative court system we are stuck with it. Why do you want to shoot people in the foot. If you really opposed super pacs you would spend your time in between elections and overturn citizens united. We all know money wins elections, it helps get the word out, why would Jake shoot himself in the foot and not except it (if asked). Also, before citizens united, corporation owners would get around this by giving money to their family and employees to give to specific candidates (in other words, this isnt new and there are ways around it). I have seen in past financials where Steve Grossman, his wife, his kids all donated maximum to the same candidate all with family money. There’s no doubt in my mind he gave money to employees to give to candidates as well. Your shooting the party in the foot everytime you take a stand on this. It’s just another issue to divide everyone. It’s legal period.
thats accept it, not except it
I will make this decision based on personal and online discussions, and so will most voters in the district I imagine. I’m wondering what this kind of money will even be used for.
Emily Lists PAC, Women Vote! Is running the attack ads against Jake that keep popping up in my online articles. They imply Jake is anti abortion, when his website states he supports safe legal abortions accessible to all.
This is much ado about nothing and Greg R is trying to make it into more than its worth. I agree with the comments about calling out the very large personal contributions made by Leckey and Grossman. These bother me much more as candidates trying to come over as just like the rest of us but clearly are not. My sense is that Jake has a fairly wide base of contributors that reflects well on his campaign. I’m not sure that Leckey or Grossman can say the same.
Actually I thought it was “worth” exactly one blog post here. My work is done here.
@donaldross
Emily Lists super PAC Women Vote! doesn’t like Alan Khazei either. According to them AK is best buddies with Trump.
These ads seem to believe women are uninformed voters, easily manipulated with scare tactics.
Donald very funny and true
What is Kennedy going to do for work when he losses? Go to Harvard Kennedy like Setti?
I
A week ago, Jake’s campaign sent a fund raising email that includes…
“ In the last couple of weeks, my competitors have poured a cumulative $1.5 million+ of personal money into their campaigns. Reporter Ted Nesi laid it out here:
Our poll shows us in the lead, but I can’t match the self-funding of my competitors. Can you help me keep pace so we can continue to share my message with voters across the district?”
How is “mummy and daddy” pouring in tens of thousands of dollars any different? This contradiction is what’s concerning for me.
My vote will most goto someone not likely swayed by commercial real estate interests.
https://www.opensecrets.org/races/industries?cycle=2020&id=MA04&spec=N
@matt to be entirely fair, “Retired” and “Education” both put just as much money into Jake’s campaign as “real estate,” though your point is taken.
As for those accusing Greg of making more of this than it needed… this was reported in the Boston Globe! This wasn’t him just linking to a few pieces of raw data and drawing his own conclusions. Frankly, this is one of just a few articles the Globe has written on this race, so posting it on Village 14 is entirely appropriate.
Take a look at some of the other candidates who are not taking Super PAC or corporate industry money. I am voting for Jesse Mermell, who is at the top of the polls with Jake because her issues resonate with people in the 4th Congressional District. Jesse supports Medicare for All, the Green New Deal, and many of the other things that progressives support. Jake is for nibbling at the edges of health care, and has taken significant amounts of contributions from the health care community. You can probably do the math.
Money Changes Everything.
I agree with Ted.
I’m voting for Jake. Will recruit others as well. Reasons why: Military man, pro confederate flag, pro cops.
It’s not a disqualifier personal candidate money has always played a role in elections. Jake is the front runner so everyone now wants to gang up on him.
Is the Grossman family not contributing heavily to advance Becky’s campaign?
@Ted Hess -Mahan: What polls? I haven’t seen anything.
@Peter you can bet your mortgage the Grossman clan is behind her financially.
@Newtoner Jake’s team has claimer they are leading in internal polls. I am familiar with internal polling done by other candidates, which shows Jesse and Jake are among the top candidates.
I don’t think that this issue of candidate funding will mean much in this race. I look forward to the debates ahead and, though I have endorsed Jake Auchincloss, I believe that the field of candidates is strong.
Actually Bob, I think the money will mean a lot. Most voters who will vote in the Sept. 1 Democratic primary are likely doing so to vote in the Markey/Kennedy contest. Who they select for Congress may depend upon who they learn about from TV ads and mailings.
The Globe’s endorsement may be critical too. I wonder if we can expect it soon, as with today’s Markey endorsement, given the push this year for early voting. Two years ago Lori Trahan won the Democratic nomination by a smidgeon in the 3rd District with barely 20 percent of the vote in a ten-candidate race. That pattern seems likely to repeat itself here, though it is, as an old boss of mine always used to say, no way to run a railroad.
I find Leckey and Grossman’s large funds even more unpalatable than Jake’s. Leckey in particular as she’s promoting herself as some kind of Bernie Sanders-esque progressive. Not a good look.
The Globe is garbage. Whoever they endorse means nothing.
Jake’s poll was a classic “push” poll. You thought they were interested in your opinion, but then the majority of the questions were extolling his virtues and reiterating campaign points. I don’t think that kind of poll is predictive of much.
I also don’t think the Globe’s endorsement means anything anymore. I mean who reads that page anymore, whether on paper or online? And if it is read, who values their opinion?
@Paul I’m not sure I entirely agree with you about a Globe endorsement. While I don’t think people make up their minds ONLY based on the Globe, I think it can act as a validator for someone leaning one way or another. Elections are often decided by small swings, so adding to the margin can really help. Also, for the person who gets endorsed, it provides some solid social media and email fodder to encourage viral sharing. Given that friend endorsements are worth quite a bit (think about lawn signs and the emails we’re all getting from folks around town), having the Globe endorsement to share does help in that effort.
From what I see and hear across the district, Jake is well positioned to finish first Globe endorsement or not.
I’m supporting Becky Grossman — I’ll just put that out there up front. From what I’ve seen and heard across the campaigns, all the polling done by the various campaigns show the race as highly competitive with no true front runner. Factoring in the margin of error for each poll (and to be sure, no candidate that I’m aware of has released polling data with cross tabs) no candidate has a clear cut lead. Endorsements and GOTV efforts are incredibly important at this moment for each campaign, and endorsements from the southern part of the district could sway things (which is one of the reasons I think Becky is doing so well — she has a ton of endorsements from key players down south). Nevertheless, I could see any one of five or six candidates winning the primary with 20% of the vote. And let’s be honest — no matter who wins there won’t be much difference in how the winner will vote in Congress compared to those that come up short.
UPDATE: The Super PAC filed paperwork Thursday to announce plans to run $180K in ads backing their son.