Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RandySF

(58,823 posts)
Sun Jan 11, 2015, 05:58 PM Jan 2015

Billionaire Tom Steyer mulls run for Sen. Boxer's seat

Billionaire environmental activist Tom Steyer is aggressively exploring a run for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Barbara Boxer and is expected to make a decision within days, according to multiple sources close to Steyer.

The former hedge fund titan has been huddling with advisors, polling California voters, buying website addresses and meeting with political and labor leaders as he weighs a bid, the sources said.

Boxer's announcement Thursday that she would leave her post in 2016 set off a frenzy of speculation about who would run for the first open U.S. Senate seat in California in more than 20 years. If Steyer opts in, with the ability to fund a race expected to cost tens of millions of dollars, he could upend a field that would otherwise be crowded with other ambitious Democrats.

"Steyer has the greatest incentive to plant his flag early," said Dan Schnur, head of the Jesse M. Unruh Institute of Politics at USC. He "has the capacity to scare other people out of the race."


http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la-me-pol-boxer-steyer-20150110-story.html

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
1. Well that's just great. The last thing we need is another one trying to buy the office
Sun Jan 11, 2015, 06:05 PM
Jan 2015

Because that always works out so well

itsrobert

(14,157 posts)
2. We don't need idiot Antonio Villaraigosa
Sun Jan 11, 2015, 06:12 PM
Jan 2015

I'll take the billionaire or a dead Gary Coleman over Antonio.

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
3. Good point! Or a governator, for that matter.
Sun Jan 11, 2015, 06:19 PM
Jan 2015

Still, I am always wary of the self-funded campaign.

RandySF

(58,823 posts)
5. Being rich does not automatically make one insensitive.
Sun Jan 11, 2015, 06:32 PM
Jan 2015

We've had a lot of great progressives in Congress who came from wealthy backgrounds.

Divernan

(15,480 posts)
4. His financially independent candidacy would be like sunlight to the Big Corporate vampires
Sun Jan 11, 2015, 06:28 PM
Jan 2015

Last edited Sun Jan 11, 2015, 08:19 PM - Edit history (1)

Given the pressure to sell one's political soul which has been the predictable result of the Citizens United decision, I am glad to see an independently wealthy environmentalist like Steyer running. He won't have depended upon corporate special interest bribes to be elected or to run for re-eletion. He and his votes would never be for sale to Big Oil, Frackers, Wall Street, etc. And another positive, is he won't have to spend half his time raising funds for his next campaign. Senators like him would be to Big Corporate interests as sunlight is to a vampire!

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/01/tom-harkin-retire-senator-fundraise-money

Those of us who follow political money read reports and op-eds, listen to speeches and panels and testimonies, and often the criticism is that big money in elections "drowns out" the voices of everyday Americans. But rarely do we hear about the impact of all that money on members of Congress themselves and how they do their jobs (or don't). Only when lawmakers like Sen. Harkin, with an eye on the exit, pipe up do we get that insider's view of what's gained—and lost—in today's cash-soaked politics. To be clear, the disgusting amount of time lawmakers spend raising money doesn't just stymie real friendships and make the Senate less fun; when few senators get along, it makes the Senate less functional.

Harkin is not the only senator to point this out. Last year another liberal stalwart, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), memorably told Alex Blumberg of NPR's Planet Money that Americans "would be shocked—not surprised, but shocked—if they knew how much time a United States senator spends raising money." He added, "And how much time we spend talking about raising money, and thinking about raising money, and planning to raise money."

And how much time are talking about here? It varies from lawmaker to lawmaker, but here's a PowerPoint slide prepared by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee that outlined the "model daily schedule" for incoming freshmen Democrats (the presentation was first obtained by the Huffington Post): (click link to see chart: it details 4 hours per day spent fundraising.)

"Call time" means fundraising time: hours spent on the phone calling up current and potential donors and asking for campaign cash. The DCCC tells its freshmen to spend more time calling donors than they spend on anything else. Ezra Klein called it "the most depressing graphic for members of Congress." I'm sure Tom Harkin would agree


The OP's article has been updated.


div class="excerpt"]UPDATE

9:58 a.m. Jan. 10: This post has been updated to reflect former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigos's announcement that he may run for Sen. Barbara Boxer's seat.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Billionaire Tom Steyer mu...