Hollow Endorsement

Sometimes political endorsements seem a bit awkward. Maybe that’s because sometimes they don’t exist.

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


There’s a new bill floating around Congress. The Farm and Ranch Habitat Protection Act, proposed by Rep. Tom Campbell (R-Calif.), would amend the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to allow for “accidental and incidental killings of endangered species.” The bill seems to open up a loophole in the ESA; what’s “incidental” to some is crucial to others. But then again, maybe the bill is reasonable: In a letter to his House colleagues, Campbell even touted the support of the National Audubon Society.

Why would the Audubon Society, an organization that “advocates the stringent enforcement of the Endangered Species Act,” endorse such a bill? Good question—particularly because the Audubon Society had never even heard of the bill, let alone supported it.

Campbell was caught red-handed when Audubon found out he was falsely listing their organization, as well as the Planning and Conservation League, as supporters of his bill in an April 20th letter addressed to fellow Congress members.

Responding to Campbell on April 30, Audubon vice president Daniel Beard set the record straight: “Until we have the opportunity to fully examine your legislation and determine whether it would provide a net benefit to listed species on the national level, we can not, and do not, endorse your bill.”

Given that the Audubon Society didn’t endorse his proposed bill, you’d think Campbell would promptly remove their name from the list of supporters. Nope. Campbell’s revised letter still named Audubon as supporters—despite their continued protest—until finally a third version was sent out which at last omitted mention of the Society altogether.

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate