There has been a lot of recent discussion lately on the 4th quarter fundraising totals by our two leading Democratic candidates for president. Sen. Sanders raised $33 million, while Sec. Clinton raised $37 million.

Politico reported that in addition to the $37 million Sec. Clinton has raised for her own campaign, she has proudly raised an additional $18 million to help Democrats in many of the state’s downballot races, while Sanders has raised nothing, preferring to focus on creating a “political revolution” to create a wave election that will elect other Democrats into office.

Sec. Clinton’s campaign manager Robby Mook explaindo s that

“Helping Democratic candidates win up and down the ticket is a top priority for Hillary Clinton, which is why she’s also proud to be doing her part to ensure Democrats have the resources we need to win,”

If that’s the case, shouldn’t the money being raised to help elect Democratic candidates at the state level stay at the state level?

Apparently not, because the Alaska Dispatch News is reporting

The Alaska Democratic Party has collected more than $40,000 from a political committee tied to the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton that raises money from billionaire donors, complicating the party’s message as it calls for campaign finance reform. The party, in a monthly report filed Friday with the Federal Election Commission, said it raised $43,500 from the Hillary Victory Fund, with $10,000 donations from billionaires, including hedge fund manager S. Donald Sussman and Hyatt hotel heir J.B. Pritzker. In the same report, the Alaska Democratic Party said it transferred an equal amount of money, $43,500, [back] to the Democratic National Committee -- a move that, while legal, helps to effectively “obliterate” federal limits on donations to the national committee , according to one campaign finance expert. “It just becomes a way to give more to the DNC to support the Clinton campaign,” said Paul S. Ryan, deputy executive director of the Campaign Legal Center, which advocates for campaign finance reform. “It’s effectively Hillary Clinton’s team soliciting Hillary Clinton’s supporters for much bigger checks than they can give to the campaign -- knowing that every penny could be spent on the Clinton campaign.” (bolding mine)

This isn’t just happening with the Alaska Democratic Party, either. The Bangor Daily News reports

Clinton donors use Maine Democrats to skirt campaign cash limits

A Cuban-born sugar tycoon. A California-based registered foreign agent for the government of Sri Lanka. A Chicago billionaire. All of them are recent large donors to the Maine Democratic Party via a complex fundraising scheme called the Hillary Victory Fund. The fund exploits recent court decisions and weakened campaign finance laws to maximize political contributions and funnel them to the Democratic National Committee. [...] But all the contributions haven’t stayed in Maine, or any of the other state Democratic parties to which Hillary Victory Fund donations have been funneled. Federal Election Commission reports show that the two October and November transfers totaling $39,000 from the Hillary Victory Fund to the Maine Democratic Party each sat for less than 48 hours with the party before the exact same amounts were transferred to the Democratic National Committee, or DNC. [...] While individual contributions to the state and national parties are capped, transfers between state and national committees are unlimited. That means that, effectively, donors can skirt contribution limits to the DNC or state parties by giving through joint fundraising committees like the Hillary Victory Fund.

The Huffington Post reports that (bolding mine)

A joint fundraising committee linking Hillary Clinton to the national Democratic Party and 33 state parties is routing money through those state parties and back into the coffers of the Democratic National Committee. So far, 22 of the state parties linked to the Hillary Victory Fund have received $938,500 from the fund and sent the same amount back to the DNC, according to available campaign finance records. The Clinton campaign claims to have raised an additional $18 million for the party committees in the final three months of 2015, although records will not be disclosed until Jan. 31. The movement of money from a joint fundraising committee through state parties and to the national party committee has been criticized by campaign finance reformers as a way to get around campaign contribution limits.

I can’t wait for the reports to come out on January 31, so we can see if additional monies raised by Clinton’s campaign have been sent to the individual state parties only to be returned to the DNC where

the money can easily be sent to the state parties most advantageous to the candidate raising the money -- in a swing state, for example. Or, as is happening with the Hillary Victory Fund, that money can be sent to the DNC, which redistributes it as they see fit.

And you wonder why Bernie hasn’t been collecting any money for the state parties? And has entered into no agreements to do so? Why should he, since that money can legally be transferred back to the DNC to help Hillary Clinton’s campaign?

As the Huffington Post article notes, this “scheme” was all made legal by by the Supreme Court’s 2014 ruling in the McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission case that overturned aggregate campaign contribution limits. When the case was being hears, Justice Alito

called it a “wild hypothetical” that a joint fundraising committee would be used to raise huge sums by one candidate and then have the money directed back into one committee.

If any campaign was going to prove Justice Alito wrong, it would be Hillary with all her Wall Street connections.

To be clear, I’m not accusing the Clinton campaign of doing anything illegal. The Bangor Daily News article notes that transfers between between state and national committees are legal.

But on the other hand, I find it a bit disingenuous for Sec. Clinton to campaign on working to end big money in politics, while at the same time her campaign looks for loopholes to engage in the very actions that she denounces while on the campaign trail.

Bernie’s joint fundraising agreement only calls for him to raise funds for the DNC, but not for the state parties, and that arrangement was only made about six weeks ago, back on November 20.

And to be perfectly honest, I’m surprised he’s even entered into the one agreement that he does have with the DNC. I don’t know how they do it on the Republican side, but on the Democratic side, no other Democratic candidate for president has ever entered into this type of agreement before the caucus/primary votes have been cast. It is unprecedented for Sec. Clinton to enter into that type of agreement before the first caucuses/primaries have been held. It seems a bit presumptuous to me.

Obama entered into a similar arrangement with the DNC back in 2008, but it wasn’t until June of 2008 when he had already won enough delegates to be sure he would be the nominee.

Bernie is not going to campaign about ending big money in politics, and then turn around and look for loopholes to do just the opposite. Bernie Sanders is not that kind of man and that’s not the type of campaign he’s running. And it’s most likely why he hasn’t entered into any agreements to do fundraising for any of the state parties.