Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (D-MA) presidential campaign finance director resigned over her insistence that she would not hold high-dollar fundraisers, CNN and The New York Times reported Sunday.
Warren first announced in late February that “my presidential primary campaign will be run on the principle of equal access for anybody who joins it. That means no fancy receptions or big money fundraisers only with people who can write the big checks.”
The Times reported that Warren made that decision “only after a robust debate inside her campaign that led to the resignation of her finance director, Michael Pratt, who strenuously objected to the idea.”
That debate occurred on Valentine’s Day, per the Times. The paper reported, citing unnamed Democrats briefed on the conversation, that Pratt urged Warren to consider the campaign cash high-dollar donors could provide, as well as their powerful networks.
“But Mr. Pratt lost the argument to two of Ms. Warren’s closest advisers, Dan Geldon and Joe Rospars, who made the case about standing apart from the field and freeing up her schedule,” the Times reported.
CNN reported that Pratt’s decision to leave the campaign was a “recent” one.
An unnamed Warren campaign aide told the network that Pratt was “still a consultant but winding things down and transitioning out since we made the decision not to have (Warren) do high dollar events.”
I’m actually somewhat impressed by the principled stand on both their parts.
Warren, for actually trying to walk the talk, which is pretty rare in politics; and her finance director, for living by the principle of more money is better money, entrenched corruption be damned.
Regardless of her chances in the primary, I am really glad she is part of the conversation.
Does anyone know how she stands now in the competition to be a top $ fundraiser? Some small donor (whatever that means) models have worked very well.
I find Elizabeth Warren to be consistently principled - I really hope that works out for her; I think a Warren presidency would go a long way towards clearing out the current Washington stench.
And while Beto get criticized for being all style and no substance, despite releasing like 17 different detailed policy proposals, the only media traction Warren can get are stories like these about how she can’t raise any money.
Why are Democratic candidates for president always viewed through the media prism of their weaknesses, while Republican candidates are always viewed through their strengths?
Good for her! Inevitably, a candidates schedules winds up revolving around these “cocktail party” fundraisers, and the campaign gets dominated by pollsters and fundraisers, who don’t care about policy, and care only about image and appealing to big money donors.