Tundra's Take - Buttigieg's Wine Cave...

My fully woke Siberian Husky avidly watched Thursday night's debate. She has a passion for politics and is disclosing her preference for Bernie Sanders. So here is her commentary in full:

This debate was particularly substantive - or not - depending on which candidate was speaking. The honor of least substantive and most sleazy goes beyond a shadow of a doubt to Pete Buttigieg and his wine cave. 

Pete Buttigieg Raking in the big bucks from big donors...

But the comeuppance on Buttigieg's large donor fundraisers combined with his feckless flip-flops on issues vital to average voters was long overdue. According to Norman Solomon in his article on Pete Buttigieg , over 50% of Mayor Pete's individual contributions were over $200. By contrast, only 25% of Sanders contributors are in that category as are 30% of Warren's. He is gunning for the big bucks, big time. 

And what that means for millions of underinsured...

It has not passed unnoticed that Buttigieg jettisoned his support for MedicareForAll, just as his large donor list started to include an impressive portfolio of contributors from big pharma and insurers. In the October debate, he made a 180 degree pivot on MedicareForAll by introducing his NEW plan "MedicareForAllWhoWantIt" which is code for "MedicareForAllWhoCanAffordIt". He used his new-found epiphany on this subject to attack Warren and Sanders on the cost of their plans. 

To me, it seemed that it was a slick attempt to flip his position to a plan that his donors would accept while maintaining his reputation as a "progressive". As an added measure, he kept the reassuring words "MedicareForAll" in the plan. It's a neat trick if you can pull it off. 

Sure enough, the Washington Post analysis of the plan (made public in September 2019) was that it does no more than Biden's plan to increase coverage for the uninsured and the underinsured. 

Big donors are fair game for other candidates...

Eventually, Buttigieg was going to be called to account for his policy flip-flops neatly reflecting his growing large donor list. The wine cave event was frankly, way too irresistible a target for the other candidates to pass up.  It had been in the news and was all over Twitter as well:

https://twitter.com/teddyschleifer/status/1206670862356819968

The venue included a glass chandelier with over 1500 Swarovski crystals and an onyx banquet which is much classier than simple hardwood I guess. And not to be too fancy about it, the $900/bottle wine flowed freely. (I guess they save the $1000+/bottle wine for the upper, upper crust.) With a guest list that included the CEO of Netflix (Reed Hastings) and Google co-founder Eric Schmidt, the whole guest list read like a Who's Who of Silicon Valley. 

But who are these hosts - Craig and Kathryn Hall?

The Hall's are hardly strangers to politics and donor galas...According to Scott Bixby in the Daily Beast, the wine cave owned by Craig and Kathryn Hall has played host to many a Democratic candidate seeking to pitch their candidacy to well-heeled donors. The likes of which include Governor Gavin Newsom along with nearly 100 other Democratic candidates.  Attendees also have at various times included House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, as well as former representative Leon Panetta. As to which donors get to sit under that chandelier, it's a good bet that it is not the likes of anyone reading this post. 

According to the Daily Beast article, beyond merely hosting galas, the Hall's have given a great deal of money to campaigns themselves. Most recently, they donated $100,000 to Hillary Clinton's PAC in 2016 and $50,000 to the DCCC in 2018. 

But it doesn't really end there. According to the NY Post, the host were Craig Hall, was implicated in the savings and loan scandals of the late 1980s. The Daily Beast goes into more detail. Here is a brief summary. 

At that time, House Speaker Jim Wright held up a bill that was supposed to recapitalize the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation which was failing under the weight of the S&L scandal. The reason for this hold up was an apparent attempt to force the hands of regulators to permit Craig Hall's insolvent company to restructure its debt. Wright later resigned from Congress due to his role in the S&L scandal. Hall wound up paying $102.5 million to an asset management company that had paid out $364 million to bail out Hall's savings-and-loan.

Suffice it to say that you really can't make this stuff up. 

Defending the status quo on campaign finance...

Buttigieg's response was to attack Warren for doing pretty much the same. I'm not ignorant of some of her own shape-shifting, but the kind of blatant pandering that Buttigieg has engaged in and his 180 degree turns on issues such as healthcare needed to be called out. It is also very important for the average voter to know when a single candidate is getting a disproportionate amount of the donor class largesse. These donors aren't giving away their money for their health. What favors have been asked and what polices have been tweaked as a result of such galas and donations, we can only guess at. 

Further, let's give credit where credit is due. By shining a light on Buttigieg's fundraising practices with large donors, Warren had to know that she was inviting that same light to shine on her. It was something that desperately needed to be done. However, she could have left it for someone else to do, but she didn't. 

Buttigieg's response was also very troubling. According to Mayor Pete, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. He was doing it because "they" (the Republicans) were doing. He wasn't going to fight the Republicans "with one arm tied behind his back". 

Note to Pete: You don't score brownie points with your base by doubling down on a corrupt system that has been disenfranchising your core constituency for the last 40 years. Using that line of reasoning, I guess it would also be OK to claim you can shoot anyone in the street and get away with because Trump did.  

Covering himself with even more glory...

Buttigieg's mocking remarks about the 100 years of worth of experienced legislators on stage, didn't shower him in glory either. Dissing the knowledge and experience of older opponents may fly with the "OK Boomer" crowd, but not with the older GenX and Boomer generations who are more inclined to actually vote in a primary. 

Don't believe ANYTHING a candidate says - look at what they DO...

This is a cautionary tale. Buttigieg hit the ground running earlier this year. He was young, fresh, and supposedly a progressive looking to help the little guy. He still talks a good game, but I wouldn't trust his sincerity as far as I can throw a piano. 

If you want to predict policies a candidate is likely to get behind once in office, you need to look at their donor list, the company they keep and what they SAY.  In fact, don't ever pay attention to what they SAY. Instead, watch what they DO.

On a personal note: I'm just a Siberian Husky. I love and respect my human who types this blog for me. But sometimes I wonder how humans - who are so much smarter than dogs, manage to mess things up so badly. It's just a final thought from one species to another. 

Post Script - Sometimes it really is about the company that you keep...

Sometimes you have a gift that keeps on giving. This P.S. comes in under that heading and is also in the broad political category of "You just can't make this stuff up".

In order to calm the waters of Pete's wine cave problem, one of the attendees generously wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post. The writer is  Bill Wehrle who is coyly referred to by the Washington Post as a vice president of a health care company.  But this isn't some Mom & Pop healthcare company. It is none other than Kaiser Permanente, one of the biggest insurers in the nation with 12.2 million members on health plans in 2018 and an income of $3.2 billion for Q1 of 2019. 

So THIS is the writer they picked to calm people's doubts? One of the biggest issues Buttigieg has with the progressive base is that he has completely flip-flopped on MedicareForAll after getting hefty donations from insurers. Picking a VP from one of the biggest insurers in the nation to debunk these concerns is downright hilarious. I mean, this man just "happened" to be there because he likes Buttigieg? Or maybe he went to a major fundraiser on a whim?  Surely they jest.

You just can't make this stuff up. You really can't.