Gavin Aronsen

Gavin Aronsen

Reporter

Gavin is a Mother Jones reporter in the DC bureau.

Full Bio | Get my RSS |

Gavin is an Iowa native, and covered the 2008 first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses for the Ames Tribune. He has also contributed to the Agence France-Presse, Daily BeastIowa Independent, Manhattan Media, and Village Voice.

Americans Elect's Enthusiasm Gap

| Thu May. 10, 2012 12:01 AM PDT

Nearly two years ago, former junk-bond financier Peter Ackerman founded Americans Elect in hopes of fielding an independent presidential candidate in 2012. The organization's big idea was that a diverse field of contenders would compete in a series of online caucuses, bypassing the party system and "politics as usual." The resulting "nonpartisan" ticket, consisting of a Democrat and a Republican, would seize the popular imagination and the rest would be history.

Yet by last week, not a single candidate had qualified for Americans Elect's first online caucus, forcing the group to push it back to May 15. This week, after a midnight deadline passed on Tuesday morning and there were still no qualified candidates, the caucus was moved again, to May 22.

This isn't Americans Elect's first stumble. It got off to a rocky start when it switched from being a 527 group, which must disclose its donors, to a secretive 501(c)(4), a dark-money group that does not. Campaign finance watchdogs say the group is actually a political party and should be registered as such. In March, AE quietly changed its bylaws so that no single donor could cover more than 20 perecent of its total budget, meaning that future small donors would be reimbursing the group's wealthy angels. Its website does not accept donations over $10,000. Ackerman, who has reportedly contributed $8 million of AE's $40 million budget, says the new rules will ensure that big donors don't unduly influence the process.

And then there's the question of whether AE can effectively challenge the two-party system. "The Democratic and Republican parties have, over the years, been able to build huge barriers to entry for any other organization or individual who wants to compete in the election process," says Darry Sragow, a Democratic strategist and member of Americans Elect's board of advisers who spent four months discussing the group with prospective high-profile candidates last fall. Sragow says that every politician he spoke with agreed that the political process was broken and left their meeting with a "high level of comfort" with the group's goal of chipping away at the two-party duopoly. "We briefed one sitting United States senator who said, 'If I was running for reelection, I would vote against myself. The system's gridlocked, and I think we ought to throw everybody out,'" Sragow recalls. "He literally said that." Yet ultimately, every potential candidate was too "risk-adverse" to ditch their party and pursue an independent presidential bid.

Advertise on MotherJones.com

This Week in Dark Money

| Fri May. 4, 2012 3:00 AM PDT

A quick look at the week that was in the world of political dark money.

Can Obama be swift boated? That's the idea behind this attack ad from Veterans for a Strong America, which slams the president for taking too much credit for Osama bin Laden's death. The group's founder tells Mother Jones' Adam Weinstein that he's recruiting Navy SEALs to openly criticize Obama: "We're gonna be rolling some of those folks out soon." Want to know who's funding the group? Sorry, it's a 501(c)4, so it doesn't have to reveal its donors or how much money it has.

Wall Street donors are bearish on Obama: In the New York Times Magazine, Nicholas Confessore reports on President Obama's uneasy relationship with lords of finance who don't think he's been friendly enough to their industry. "This administration has a more contemptuous view of big money and of Wall Street than any administration in 40 years," one Obama donor explains. Also in the magazine, Adam Davidson profiles Edward Conard, one of Romney's former partners at Bain Capital and a major (and once semi-secret) donor to the pro-Romney super-PAC Restore Our Future. Conard is putting the finishing touches on his book, Unintended Consequences: Why Everything You've Been Told About the Economy Is Wrong, which argues that the wealth and influence of the superrich are signs of economic strength. 

Occupiers want to get back on the airwaves: The group behind a series of Occupy Wall Street ads that aired last fall is trying to raise $150,000 to revitalize the movement and counteract the influence of super-PACs with a new ad campaign. "You have ten billionaires controlling all the political messaging in this country," Occupy Spots organizer Gina Levy explained to TechPresident. The relaunched campaign is encouraging supporters to submit their spots for consideration by May 21.

Romney winning fans in the owners' box: Romney may have "some great friends who are NASCAR team owners," but Businessweek reports that he also has the support of a number of sports bigwigs, from New York Knicks owner James Dolan to the Dallas Cowboys' Jerry Jones. But Obama remains popular with athletes, who tend to support Democrats.

TV stations must post political ad info: As Mother Jones' Andy Kroll reports, the Federal Communications Commission has ruled that TV stations must post online information about the political ads they air. The catch? The ruling only applies to the top 50 TV markets, exempting some battleground states entirely. To see if your local stations are covered by the decision, see this handy map by the Sunlight Foundation. (Green means yes, red means no.)


Lawmakers' super-PAC deal under scrutiny: Rep. Aaron Schock (R-Ill.) could be in hot water for setting up a deal in which $50,000 in PAC money was funneled to a super-PAC backing Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.) in his tight primary in March. As iWatch News' Michael Beckel reports, Schock's move suggests that candidates could use super-PACs to get around limits on campaign donations. (Candidates may not take more than $5,000 from a regular PAC, but super-PACs can spend unlimited money to promote—or attack—a candidate.)

Scott Olsen, Iraq Vet Hurt by OPD Projectile: "I'm Not Alright."

| Tue May. 1, 2012 11:13 AM PDT
Scott OlsenScott Olsen visits the site of the Occupy Oakland protest in downtown Oakland on November 27, 2011. The Iraq War veteran and Occupy activist suffered a head injury after being hit with a police projectile in Oakland in October 2011.

As protesters from Occupy Oakland marched through Downtown Oakland, picketing from bank to bank as Wells Fargo preemptively shut its doors and cops in riot helmets stood by for trouble, I ran into Iraq veteran Scott Olsen. As you might recall, he's the former Marine who suffered a serious brain injury last October, when Oakland Police fired a beanbag projectile into the Occupy crowd, striking him in the head at close range.

It was two and a half weeks before Olsen could speak at all, and about a month "before I was comfortable speaking," he told me. "It took a while." Olsen, who is in his mid-twenties, is now out of formal therapy and has been focusing on activities involving Iraq Veterans Against The War. In the meantime, he is filing a claim against the City of Oakland, which is "already playing games," he says. "The police department is blatantly at fault." He is optimistic, he adds, because "I have the support of the people."

So, is he okay? "I'm not alright," he replies. "I'm good enough to do stuff like this."

He explains that still has PTSD from Iraq, and still has a brain injury from the OPD incident. But he wasn't about to miss the May Day action. "I think today is going to be a real testing day for Occupy," he says. "I don't think people have given up on it. They're afraid to come out for several reasons." Namely, the police presence. Olsen says he's been seeing fewer and fewer children on marches since start of Occupy Oakland. But, he adds "I think we're emulating the society we want to create, and I think that's the main element of Occupy."

Click here for our on-the-ground coverage of May Day protests on both coasts.

Wed May. 15, 2013 5:55 PM PDT
Tue Apr. 23, 2013 3:22 PM PDT
Thu Mar. 21, 2013 3:56 PM PDT
Tue Mar. 19, 2013 8:51 AM PDT
Mon Mar. 18, 2013 1:03 PM PDT
Fri Mar. 15, 2013 3:00 AM PDT
Fri Mar. 1, 2013 3:29 PM PST
Fri Feb. 15, 2013 4:01 AM PST
Fri Jan. 11, 2013 4:01 AM PST
Fri Nov. 30, 2012 4:08 AM PST
Thu Nov. 15, 2012 5:00 PM PST
Fri Nov. 9, 2012 4:03 AM PST
Wed Nov. 7, 2012 2:26 PM PST
Fri Nov. 2, 2012 3:08 AM PDT
Fri Oct. 26, 2012 4:28 PM PDT