“Vermonters deserve to know who ‘Phil Scott for governor’ is paid for by, so they can understand just what he will stand for if elected,” VDP spokeswoman Christina Amestoy said during a conference call announcing the site.
But the party doesn’t seem to think that its own candidates, including Democratic gubernatorial nominee Sue Minter, will be influenced by their donors, which include many of the same corporations.
“There are going to be national interests on both sides playing,” Amestoy conceded during the call. “But I think it’s important to recognize that Vermont values are much more closely aligned with national Democratic interests.”
In an interview later Thursday, Amestoy argued that “private prisons have not been effective” and that CCA’s work “doesn’t quite align with what Vermonters are facing.”
But Scott is hardly alone in accepting money from CCA. Since the start of Gov. Peter Shumlin’s administration, when the company donated $1,000 to his inaugural ball, the Democrat has repeatedly accepted money from the state contractor. When he ran for reelection in 2012, Shumlin took at least $1,000 from CCA, and when he ran again in 2014 he took another $500.
During Shumlin’s two-year tenure as chairman of the Democratic Governors Association, the organization accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars from CCA: $150,000 in 2013 and another $160,000 in 2014, according to Internal Revenue Service records. On Wednesday, the DGA launched its first television advertisement supporting Minter.
But according to Amestoy, that’s old news.
“I’m focusing on this election cycle and the contributions made in 2016,” she said in the interview.
OK. What about the $500 the VDP took from Walmart in July?
“That doesn’t tell me anything about the Democratic Party,” Amestoy said, noting that the company had donated to Republicans as well. “If they looked at the Vermont Democratic Party platform, they would recognize that we are strong advocates for unions — and we will continue to fight for that, no matter who is donating.”
Well, what about the $500 that Reynolds American, Inc. — the second largest tobacco company in the country — gave the VDP last December?
“Phil Scott and the Vermont Republican Party have received drastically more funds from RAI and other big tobacco in the past,” Amestoy said.
Because Vermont only recently mandated electronic filing of campaign finance reports, it would be difficult to prove or disprove that assertion. What’s clear from Seven Days‘ previous reporting is that RAI and rival Philip Morris have given generously to Vermont politicians of both parties. During Shumlin’s 2014 reelection race, Philip Morris gave him $3,000, while RAI gave him $2,000.
Asked if those contributions reflected on Minter and her values, Amestoy changed the subject to the DGA’s counterpart, the Republican Governors Association, which has spent at least $523,000 backing Scott.
“What the RGA stands for and what their top donors stand for ideologically — that is what I’m concerned about,” she said.
Shouldn’t she be equally concerned about what the DGA’s top donors stand for?
“The DGA has continually elected strong Democratic candidates who stand up for working families, minority communities, women’s reproductive rights and strong education systems across this country,” Amestoy responded. “That’s what the DGA stands for, and those values are in line with Vermont values.”
While Amestoy seemed keen to talk about Scott’s corporate contributions, she was less interested in discussing those received by the party’s two delegates to Congress: Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Congressman Peter Welch (D-Vt.). In the past six years, Leahy has accepted $1.34 million from special-interest political action committees. Welch, meanwhile, has raised more than $512,000 in PAC money since he last faced reelection two years ago.
Amestoy declined to comment on whom Leahy and Welch were “paid for by.”
She did confirm that the party is holding on to money it raised from Florida real estate developer Ariel Quiros, whom federal and state authorities accused in April of orchestrating a $200 million “Ponzi-like” scheme in Vermont’s Northeast Kingdom. In the past four years, Quiros and his wife, Okcha, donated at least $32,000 to the Vermont Democratic Party.
Apparently, the answer was no.
“At this point, nothing has been done with the contributions received in 2014,” she said Thursday. “It was a contribution from a past cycle. The contributions we receive this cycle were given with the understanding that they would go to elect Democrats up and down the ballot.”
Asked whether Quiros’ values “align” with those of the Vermont Democratic Party, Amestoy provided a one-word answer: “No.”
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
is Andrew Maclean related to Alex?
WTF! This is unbelievable! How kafkaesque can it get? The Vermont Democratic Party lashes out against the Scott gubernatorial campaign for accepting campaign donations from the exact same corporations that the Vermont Democratic Party is accepting money from?! Really?!
Corporations and Companies that donate to both party’s are out of touch and part of the problem. Get some balls and pick a stance. Dems, liberals want to put you out of business.
The democrat Amestoy woman, are you a certified idiot or do you play one in Montpelier. Wake up uou, the demo party do it too.
Hey, knowyourassumptions, that’s unfair. It’s only Kafkaesque if Scott becomes a lame little allegorical short story that every 9th grader is forced to read in English class.
This is just supreme hypocrisy.
Christina, your stumbling defense of VT Dems’ acceptance of corporate money reminds me so much of Bill Clinton claiming that, when it came to marijuana, he smoked it but he didn’t inhale: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bktd_Pi4YJ…
Thanks for the memories.
Also, your tortured responses to Paul Heintz were darkly Orwellian. It is almost as if you were saying, “Two legs good, four legs bad.” Try reading George Orwell’s essay “Politics and the English Language” sometime.
Hypocrisy, thy name is vermont.
Re: “She did confirm that the party is holding on to money it raised from Florida real estate developer Ariel Quiros.”
Wait, what?!?! Here’s an idea Ms. Amestoy that will REALLY align with Vermont values. Figure out a way to take that money and get it to the poor contractors here in the Northeast Kingdom and elsewhere who are still waiting to be paid for services rendered to Burke Mountain and Jay Peak. Until then, the VDP has no moral authority to be using negative advertising against Phil Scott that implies he is subject to strings being pulled by people who don’t have “Vermont values.”
This is why the Vermont Progressive Party refuses corporate donations.
Otherwise it’s always a “lesser of two evils” argument.
I’m glad to see that 7-days, as well as a growing number of Vermonters, refuse to accept this talk without question. We know that actions are speak louder than words.
“This is why the Vermont Progressive Party refuses corporate donations.” ???
Isn’t that special . Exactly when will they refuse to endorse candidates who run as both Democrats and Progressive’s . Talk about sanctimonious .
Ah yes, the VDP, the “do as we say, not as we do” party. Paul Heintz is one great investigative journalist! Kudos to you Mr. Heintz for your politically unbiased reporting.
I usually vote Dem but I loved this article and its spotlight on hypocrisy. Thanks Paul.
And this doesn’t even mention the many checks cashed by Vermont Democrats from anti-environment industrial energy donors like David Blittersdorf and Duane Peterson. No wonder legislation favorable to these donors has repeatedly been enacted in Montpelier.
Many of us voted Democrat for years because when it came time to protecting the environment and defending Act 250, they supposedly were better than Republicans. What we forgot is that money talks louder than principles.
And the website is STILL up. Once BS was exposed by Paul, great job!, the best thing the VDP should have done was take it down and admit they were wrong.
Leaving it up only makes them laughable. 🙂
The part of this I find the worst is that despite the hypocrisy, the voters will believe it and follow without questioning or verifying
Cool. Is this manufactured wordstream what passes for “journalism” this week? Headline: “Despite Ad Criticizing Specific Funraising By Scott, Other Parties Also Engage in Fundraising”.
Despite Paul’s effort to equate the one with the other, it’s another fake Paul Heinrz controversy…remember, folks, it’s only news if Paul can make himself part of the story. That’s his favorite.