What's "Street Money"? Or "walking-around money"? Or "get-out-the-vote money"?

[parocks]

Certain things, as in a locked thread below, are not legal. Other things are legal.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2008/10/whats_street_money.html

It's cash that's given to help get people to the polls. The money can go toward perks like coffee and doughnuts for door knockers, gas for volunteers to chauffeur elderly voters, or pocket money for kids who distribute fliers and sample ballots on Election Day. Also known as "walking-around money" or "get-out-the-vote money," it's most common in poor areas of Philadelphia; Chicago; Newark, N.J.; Baltimore; Los Angeles; and other big cities. Both parties use street money, but it's more common among Democrats, who tend to be better represented in the areas that rely on it.

In 2004, John Kerry spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Philadelphia street money, and ward leaders received checks for as much as $8,000. Individual volunteers can generally expect anywhere from $10 to $200, depending on the location and the type of work they're doing.

The practice is legal everywhere—it's protected by the First Amendment—but some states have tougher restrictions than others. In Philadelphia, committee people can hand out cash for any reason, as long as they're not paying someone for their vote. (The U.S. Code prohibits vote purchasing.)

During the primaries, Hillary Clinton's campaign gave $38,000 to an Ohio state legislator, who distributed the money to "get-out-the-vote" workers in Cleveland, plus tens of thousands of dollars to people in Houston and other Texas towns near the Mexican border.

In 2000, Jon Corzine paid volunteers $75 each to increase turnout for his Senate campaign.

In Kentucky, a practice called "vote hauling"—paying people to drive sympathetic voters to the polls—often translates into vote buying.

[parocks]

http://www.votelaw.com/blog/archives/003057.html

Kentucky: What is "vote hauling"?

The Cincinnati Post carried this editorial in January 1998: For those unfamiliar with the practice, money - $50 to $100 a day - is paid by campaigns to individuals to ''haul'' voters to the polls. Payment must be made by check and a report must be made. Outside of that there are no other restrictions.

More often than anyone knows or would ever admit, those paid to haul voters actually only hauled themselves or maybe their spouse to the polls to vote. In some cases, people who were paid for vote-hauling in 1996 didn't even own a car or have a driver's license. The reality is ''vote-hauling'' is just legalized voter fraud - the money buys votes.

[parocks]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/29/us/where-prosecutors-say-votes-are-sold.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

http://connecticutblog.blogspot.com/2006/10/what-bloggers-are-saying-about.html

[parocks]

http://newjersey.craigslist.org/npo/2686462789.html

Anybody who is interested in working to help out our Democratic candidates on Tuesday, November 8th (Election Day) feel free to send me a private message or e-mail me back immediately. Canvassers will make $45 for the day, $60 if you have a car. The hours are 3:30pm-8:00pm.

[parocks]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_money

[parocks]

http://bigjournalism.com/sright/2010/10/25/msnbcs-andrea-mitchell-saves-democrat-party-boss-from-embarrassing-buying-votes-gaffe/

Ms Mitchell asked, “What is the secret here to turn out? In the old days, the old machine days, what we called ‘walking around money,’ handing out money to get people to vote. Is it still the case? What do you do, what is the magic in Philadelphia?”

Rep. Brady (who looks and sounds like he came right out of central casting for the part of shady, party boss) shockingly acknowledged that the cash-on-the-streets strategy is not an antiquity but still part of the Democratic Machine’s playbook in 2010: “We still have the street money and we’re very knowledgeable,” he said.

[parocks]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/28/walking-money-alive-election/

[parocks]

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=8Xw1AAAAIBAJ&sjid=bjMDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2034,7403520&dq=walking-around-money&hl=en

[parocks]

I'm putting these links up to give an idea about what type of things are legal and commonplace and what type of things might not be legal.

[PauliticsPolitics]

I'm putting these links up to give an idea about what type of things are legal and commonplace and what type of things might not be legal.

Yes, it is good for everyone to know what is legal and commonplace.
It is also good to know what is illegal, so we can certainly avoid it while also keeping an eye out for other campaigns behaving illegally.

Useful thread.

[parocks]

My thinking is more to encourage us to do those things which are legal and commonplace. It would be almost impossible for us to determine if other campaigns are doing something illegal. We could look at oddities in FEC reports? When you see the same white van showing up at the same polling place 20 times in one day, something is happening, but you really don't know if it's illegal or not.

Giving people money to drive their friends to the polls does not seem to be illegal, but I'm not an expert. It would be presumably less illegal if the campaign isn't doing it.

Clearly, this type of thing happens all the time, by official campaigns, if you look at the links.

Apparently the one major thing that you can't do is pay a person to vote for a specific person.

All the 18-29 year old males like Ron Paul already. We just want 18-29 year old males to vote. Period. For whoever they want.

We really would benefit by "rock the vote". Obama is running unchallenged. Everyone should vote in the Republican Primary for whoever they want.

It does not appear that moving bodies to the polls is illegal.

[parocks]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=11300286

Just applied for a "Canvassing" job with the Iowa Democratic Party for the summer. $10/hr, 5 hours a day, Sunday - Thursday. We have to go door to door and get people to sign absentee ballots, and basically convince people to vote Kerry/Democrat.

[parocks]

http://mydd.com/users/itsdrewmiller/posts/so-you-want-some-field-diaries

Our paid canvass was one of the most successful in the state, but still represented maybe a quarter of the total absentee ballots cast by Democrats or identified No Party supporters. (The biggest source of absentee votes was probably the mailing program, where preprinted absentee requests were sent out with instructions on how to fill them out.) We also identified over 100k voters' positions on state races, and found a few hundred people who were interested in volunteering. (In 2004 the canvass teams also raised money, but because of the funding arrangement in 2006 this would have been illegal.) The paid canvass ended in late August, because most of the canvassers were college students who had to go back to school. It was restarted in CD 1 because of the DCCC targeted Braley/Whalen race there.

[parocks]

This is a very long thread where field organizers are sharing their experiences. Very worthwhile

http://mydd.com/2007/1/5/our-field-operation-response-to-stoller

As a paid field director, I've always assumed that volunteers are the way to go. However, last summer, I spent a month in Iowa, became friends with a paid canvass director for the IDP, and got a personal tour through their paid canvass operation. It really was amazing, and it certainly paid off in November, with Democratic victories from state house, to governor, to the 1st, 2nd and 3rd CDs. The IDP was also cutting edge when it came to the utilization of technology in their canvass (note: I originally included more detail, but decided against giving our opponents a birdseye view of the IDPs gameplan.)

So I now think a combined paid-volunteer effort may be a vastly better approach, particularly for coordinated campaigns. I also believe that the typical campaign attitude towards "volunteer coordination", e.g.,
the lowest paid and least experienced staffer, generally hired as an afterthought, is one of the reasons we continuously get pummelled in field. On KE04 in Maine, we didn't even have a volunteer coordinator - field staff
were expected to pull in volunteers to the main offices, and somehow, those volunteers would intuitively then figure out what to do, while the field operatives were where they should be, in the field. It was a nightmare.

[parocks]

bump

[PolicyReader]

Thanks for doing all this research. I have a question for you (sorry if it's answered in the above I haven't read everything at this point)
what would be the situation of an org or PAC were to use the commonplace legal means you've listed above?
Do they still remain above board practices if employed by persons or groups not directly affiliated/sanctioned by the Official Campaign?

[cheapseats]

To the extent that Official Campaigns are not answerable to or for SuperPAC's, can if possibly defy any rules if THESE 20 people elect to feed THOSE 200 people while assembling to register grievances, or if THESE 200 dig in their pockets to feed THOSE 2000?

Mind, I DISDAIN THE PROCESS. When I say the System is broken, I mean BROKEN. Sometimes we drop a beloved thing, even a person, and it's a "clean break". Some Krazy Glue for the thing, some Time for the person...voila, "good as new". Sometimes a thing, even a person, SHATTERS...down for the count.

But within the PREVAILING PARADIGM = STATUS QUO, I think what could be said to fall under PIZZA EXPENSE was the absolute LEAST objectionable aspect of an Expense Report I lately saw floating around here. TRIPLE IT. QUADRUPLE IT. TEN-FOLD is not too much.

FEED THE PEOPLE.

If Volunteers "need" a food per diem, what were they doing at home...FASTING?

Sure sure, feed on-site "Starving Students". But if STUDENTS could use Other People's Money for food, imagine how many OTHERS could use a meal and a morale boost.

[cheapseats]

FEEDING PEOPLE and BUYING SUPPORT are quite different.

The more that people must be PAID to make a "populist" push to get Ron Paul into the White House, the LESS it can be said to be a populist push. Them's brass tacks.

[parocks]

I'm not worried about the philosophical implications. I'm more worried about not enough votes.

I'd like to see more solutions to the "not enough votes" problem.

And this kind of stuff is a solution to the "not enough votes" problem.

[parocks]

these are things that are commonly done to get votes. the grassroots should be doing things like this.

[Lindsey]

:p

[PolicyReader]

Date of OP 11-29-2011

I'm too tired at the moment to explain, but I think some here will know why I'm saying this.