Politics

There’s a new wedge issue playing out in Senate Dem primaries

Published

2 months ago

March 13, 2026

Democrats in competitive primaries keep fighting about corporate PAC money. It has opened up a muddy and sometimes performative debate.

The issue has played out in contested Senate primaries, where Democrats have pledged not to accept corporate PAC money to signal their support for campaign finance reform and show voters that they are not beholden to special interests. Among the Democrats seeking to distinguish themselves: Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton in Illinois, Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan in Minnesota, and both state Sen. Mallory McMorrow and former public health official Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan.

Corporate PACs, which raise money from their employees and distribute it to candidates, usually give in similar amounts to Republicans and Democrats. For several cycles, a growing number of Democratic candidates have sworn off the money, citing the outsized influence of business interests on politics.

But for many, the pledges not to take the money are mostly symbolic. Candidates who aren’t currently in office receive almost no corporate PAC donations anyway, as more than 99 percent of those funds have gone to sitting senators or representatives this cycle, according to a Blue Light News analysis of data from the Federal Election Commission. And rejecting one specific type of donation doesn’t actually mean candidates can’t receive support from outside interests — often in much larger amounts than corporate PACs are allowed to send.

Corporate PAC money can also still end up indirectly supporting new candidates: A majority of Democratic senators receive the funding, as do official party groups, both of which donate to and otherwise help Senate hopefuls.

As a result, the escalating debate over corporate PAC money has comparatively little impact on Democratic candidates’ ability to raise money — but it has created an opening for heated attacks from all sides.

Stratton rejected donations from corporate PACs, but millions of dollars in support she has received from a super PAC has been the focus of a flurry of attack ads from Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), one of her top rivals who himself has received millions in super PAC support. Flanagan and McMorrow have both faced criticism for accepting corporate money in past roles, despite their pledges not to do so in their respective Senate races now.

While the push by some Democrats to reject corporate money goes back several cycles, even emerging as a point of contention in the party’s 2020 presidential primary, the focus in Senate primaries is newer.

For Democrats looking for any advantage in crowded races, rejecting the money carries potential electoral benefits. Polling shows the issue resonates not only with a Democratic base interested in money-in-politics reform but also with independent and Republican voters.

“Pledging to forego corporate PAC money is one way that candidates signal to voters that they reject business as usual in Washington and want to work to fix our broken campaign finance system,” said Michael Beckel, director of money in politics reform at Issue One, a nonprofit advocacy group.

Still, “even when a candidate rejects a PAC check, there are still ways for corporate interests to curry favor,” Beckel said.

The debate among Democrats comes at a time when corporate PACs account for a smaller share of funds influencing races. Corporate PACs face strict limits for their political giving, $5,000 per cycle, a number that has not changed in decades, even as individual giving limits are indexed to inflation. Far more funds now flow through super PACs — which candidates are free to criticize but don’t have to reject.

And the questions are unlikely to fade: The Democratic National Committee has sought to explore how it could limit corporate money, along with harder-to-trace “dark money” that flows through nonprofit groups, in the party’s 2028 presidential primary.

“I think it just shows this fundamental shift even inside the Democratic Party, that running on anti-corruption is no longer a niche position,” said Tiffany Mueller, president of End Citizens United, which backs Democrats supportive of campaign finance reform and has, since 2018, had candidates sign pledges that include a promise to reject corporate PAC money.

The group’s pledge this cycle, which includes several money-in-politics reforms, has gotten signers quicker than past pledges, Mueller said.

In Illinois, where early voting is already underway ahead of Tuesday’s primary, Stratton has made rejecting corporate PAC money a key component of her campaign in a three-way primary against Krishnamoorthi and Rep. Robin Kelly. The lieutenant governor, who was endorsed by End Citizens United, accused both opponents of benefiting from a “broken” campaign finance system.

“I’m the only candidate rejecting corporate PAC money, because my campaign is about the people of Illinois, not special interests,” she said in a statement.

Kelly, in an interview, defended her own record of accepting some donations from corporate PACs, saying that the funds over the years supported Democrats and never influenced her voting record. She noted the much greater flow of super PAC money supporting both of her opponents.

“When I came to Congress, I didn’t know my dues were going to be the level that they were. I didn’t know that I was expected to give money to my other colleagues, or people that wanted to be my colleagues,” Kelly said. “And frankly, the money I collect, that’s where a lot of it has gone through the years, paying dues to the DCCC.”

While Stratton has sought to carve out a lane as the reformer, Krishnamoorthi’s campaign has gone after her finances, with ads running on both television and digital accusing her of taking “corporate and MAGA money” and calling attention to a super PAC backing her. Krishnamoorthi’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Stratton has benefited from $11.8 million from a super PAC linked to Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, with additional support from the Democratic Lieutenant Governor’s Association. Meanwhile Fairshake, backed by major cryptocurrency interests, has spent nearly $10 million attacking her to help Krishnamoorthi.

The scrutiny on corporate PAC money in primaries comes as a majority of sitting Democratic senators continue to take those donations for their campaigns and leadership PACs. That includes several senators who have actively been endorsing in the primaries, including Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Ct.), who has endorsed Flanagan in Minnesota, and Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), who has endorsed both Flanagan and McMorrow.

Corporate PACs can — and do — give larger donations to party committees. That has been a point of conflict in Minnesota, where opponent Rep. Angie Craig has hit Flanagan for corporate PAC donations accepted by the DLGA while she was its chair. The group is now backing her campaign along with Stratton’s.

Flanagan’s campaign has said she did not have sole decision-making power over the DLGA’s donors. In a statement to Blue Light News, a spokesperson for Flanagan accused Craig of “trying to distract from the fact that she’s taken millions of dollars from corporations and special interests.”

“Peggy is the only candidate in this race to reject corporate PAC money,” the spokesperson said. Craig’s campaign declined to comment.

The divide extends from safe-seat races to the most competitive. In the Michigan Senate primary, which sets up a must-win open seat for Democrats looking to take back control of the upper chamber, the issue has already arisen in candidate forums. El-Sayed, who previously ran for governor, has sought to distinguish himself on the basis that he has never taken corporate PAC money.

“There’s only one candidate in this race who’s understood corporate money to be the central disease of our politics from day one when they ran in 2018,” said Sophie Pollock, a spokesperson for El-Sayed’s campaign, in a statement.

Rep. Haley Stevens, meanwhile, received donations from corporate PACs as a representative and has continued to for her Senate campaign. Her campaign spokesperson, Arik Wolk, noted she repeatedly voted for campaign finance reform and recently received an “A” grade from End Citizens United on its anti-corruption scorecard.

And although McMorrow previously accepted corporate PAC money for her state legislative campaign and leadership PAC, she has rejected it for her Senate campaign.

“As a first-time candidate, there were people who said, ‘We need to fight like the Republicans fight. If we don’t, we will lose,’” McMorrow said in an interview. “And I’ve learned through my time in the legislature that, you can’t talk out of both sides of your mouth, that people won’t trust you. And also, not only can we fund campaigns without corporate PAC dollars, but frankly, we need to.”

Politics

Can America trust AI? David Sacks makes the case.

Published

1 hour ago

May 1, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Can America trust AI? David Sacks makes the case.

lead image

Politics

Hochul’s Dear Tom letter

Published

9 hours ago

April 30, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Gov. Kathy Hochul has sent a letter to President Donald Trump’s border czar about reports of the ICE agent who fatally shot Renee Good operating in New York.

DAYS THE BUDGET IS LATE: 30

ICE WATCH: Gov. Kathy Hochul wants assurances from President Donald Trump’s administration that a very specific federal immigration officer isn’t operating in New York: The ICE agent who fatally shot Renee Good.

The Democratic governor sent a letter this week to Trump border czar Tom Homan insisting he confirm whether the reportedly redeployed agent, Jonathan Ross, is now working in the Empire State.

“If Jonathan Ross has been reassigned to work in New York, I demand that he be immediately removed and not redeployed unless cleared after a full, independent investigation,” Hochul wrote in the previously unreported letter. “I have no confidence that Ross can be trusted to safely interact with the public. Nor should you.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The notice is the latest effort by Hochul to place guardrails around Trump’s sweeping deportation policies — a push that includes direct White House outreach and expected legislative action to limit the reach of federal immigration agencies like ICE.

The two-track approach underscores how New York officials, including the governor, have been desperate to avoid a potentially destabilizing surge of federal immigration officers in the five boroughs, home to an estimated 560,000 undocumented immigrants.

The push also highlights how Hochul stands to benefit politically from taking an assertive posture against Trump’s immigration policies as she runs for reelection. The president rode back to the White House pledging to remove millions of people living illegally in the United States, only for voter support to quickly erode following the deaths of Good and Alex Pretti during January’s Minnesota crackdown.

A Siena University poll in February found 67 percent of New York voters believe federal immigration tactics had gone too far. The same survey found 59 percent of voters did not want to see more ICE agents flow into New York City.

Trump has dialed back the publicly aggressive deportation effort, but that’s done little to assuage the Hochul administration. The February death of Nurul Amin Shah Alam, a blind refugee who was left in front of a Buffalo coffee shop by federal agents, further inflamed New York officials.

“I have repeatedly stated that any agents involved in these types of incidents must be properly investigated and held accountable to the fullest extent of the law — not simply reassigned to administrative or investigative duties or shuffled to other states,” Hochul wrote in the letter.

Homan, who has become the Trump administration’s blue state ambassador following the deadly unrest in Minneapolis, met privately with her in Albany last month, and the governor urged him to not conduct a similar operation in the Big Apple.

To that end, Hochul and Democratic state lawmakers are also on the verge of approving a package of sanctuary-like measures meant to erect legal barriers around federal immigration enforcement in New York.

The measures would prohibit federal authorities from carrying out civil deportation warrants in sensitive locations like education facilities and houses of worship. It would also ban formal agreements between agencies like ICE and local police departments from coordinating operations and sharing equipment. And New York is poised to make it easier to sue federal officers if a person believes their constitutional rights have been violated.

The expected package of protections amounts to a sweeping blue state rebuke of Trump’s immigration and deportation policies. It also marks a change for Hochul, a moderate who as a local official two decades ago opposed allowing undocumented immigrants to obtain state driver’s licenses.

Yet some left-leaning state lawmakers worry that Hochul’s opposition to a strict ban on local police communicating with federal immigration authorities will leave undocumented immigrants exposed even as existing sanctuary protections will remain in place.

One legislator, granted anonymity to speak frankly, said the likely agreement is “really inadequate, arguably harmful, because her proposal would create an illusion of legal protections while still proactively permitting law enforcement to share info.” — Nick Reisman

FROM CITY HALL

City lawmakers are urging Mayor Zohran Mamdani to automatically enroll low-income New Yorkers in the city’s transit discount program due to current low membership.

FARE-LY AUTOMATIC: A majority of City Council members are pushing Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s administration to automatically enroll low-income New Yorkers in the city’s transit discount program.

Currently, New Yorkers need to furnish proof of identity, age, residence and taxable income to enroll in Fair Fares, which offers a 50 percent discount on subway, bus and paratransit rides for those at or below 150 percent of the federal poverty level.

In a Wednesday letter to Erin Dalton, Mamdani’s social services commissioner, 28 of the Council’s 51 members wrote that the application requirements needlessly keep people out of the program.

The letter, obtained by Playbook, says only about 370,000 of the city’s 1.4 million eligible residents benefit from Fair Faires, largely because many don’t know of its existence.

The city lawmakers, led by progressive Council Member Crystal Hudson, wrote to Dalton that the disparity can be fixed by automatically enrolling all eligible residents by using application information they’ve already provided while applying for SNAP, Cash Assistance, Medicaid and other city-administered public benefits.

“The City of New York has the information on hand and could easily enact automatic enrollment,” wrote the Council members, who included democratic socialist allies of the mayor like Tiffany Cabán and more moderate colleagues like Eric Dinowitz.

“Affordability is a top concern for New York City residents, and one in five New Yorkers struggles to pay the fare,” the lawmakers also wrote. “In short, we can help lower costs for New Yorkers by making it easier to enroll in the Fair Fares program.”

Asked about the letter, Mamdani spokesperson Dora Pekec said Thursday that the administration is “reviewing the automatic Fair Fares enrollment proposal.”

“The mayor remains deeply committed to collaborating with our city and state partners to make transit more affordable for all New Yorkers,” Pekec said.

Mamdani campaigned last year on a promise to eliminate fares on city buses so riding them would become completely free. But he acknowledged in an interview with POLITICO earlier this month that he won’t be able to make good on that pledge this year.

In the meantime, transportation advocates are ramping up pressure on him to find other ways to make transit more affordable. The letter from the Council members comes after a coalition of transit advocates earlier this month called on the mayor to usher in automatic Fair Fares enrollment.

Such a measure would likely come with a cost increase for the city-funded program. And that could prove tricky for Mamdani, who’s scrambling to address a multibillion-dollar city budget deficit.

Council Speaker Julie Menin, who’s in negotiations with Mamdani on the budget, did not sign Wednesday’s letter. “She doesn’t always sign on to colleague letters as speaker, but she is on record supporting automatic enrollment for Fair Fares,” her spokesperson Henry Robins said. — Chris Sommerfeldt

PIED-À-TERREABLE MATH: City Comptroller Mark Levine released a reality check for the mayor and governor, who are hoping to raise $500 million annually through a pied-à-terre tax to help the city’s ailing budget.

Levine found by using past proposals as a rubric that the tax would only reach those heights under the most ideal of scenarios. When factoring in otherwise eligible properties that are rentals — meaning they would be exempt — and pied-à-terre owners who would either sell or rent to avoid the tax, the yearly take-home for the city would be between $340 million to $380 million.

“As we continue to work toward budget agreements at the City and State levels, it’s imperative that government leaders, advocates and New Yorkers know how major new revenue proposals might reliably impact our budget,” Levine said in a statement.

The mayor’s office countered that the proposal is not yet fully baked, and that it will be designed in concert with the governor in a way that ensures it nets at least $500 million.

“The Comptroller’s report makes one thing very clear: thoughtfully crafting and implementing this legislation will do exactly that,” a spokesperson said. — Joe Anuta

VOUCHER FIGHT: Menin is playing to both sides of the debate over the costly rental subsidy known as CityFHEPS.

She joined advocates and Council members at a rally Thursday morning to urge Mamdani to drop a lawsuit fighting a voucher expansion — which the mayor pledged to do on the campaign trail. But Menin also agreed the costs “are not sustainable” and said a settlement the council has offered will contain them, while still expanding the program in some form.

“We have come in, with the leadership of Council member [Pierina] Sanchez and the advocates, with a responsible, reasonable settlement,” Menin said at the rally, where Council members and advocates chanted, “Mayor Mamdani, keep your promise!”

Menin declined to elaborate on the specifics of the settlement proposal since talks are ongoing.

The vouchers are already growing in cost at a rate of 4 percent per month, and the laws to expand eligibility — which the Council approved in 2023 — are estimated to increase costs further by somewhere between $6 and $22 billion over five years, according to the city comptroller’s office.

“We do agree that there has to be a change to the cost structure,” Menin told reporters at a press conference later Thursday. “We have been working very closely with the advocates on that. We have put forward a reasonable settlement, which is why we believe that continuing to litigate delays our ability to reach the settlement.”

Hochul has reportedly asked the mayor to look at the rental subsidies as one place where the city can find savings. Asked whether she’s spoken to the governor about the program, Menin said “she and I both agree we need to have cost containment.”

“We recognize the cost has grown exponentially,” Menin said. “I think we’re in a very good place on cost containment that literally contains the cost but also protects vulnerable New Yorkers.”

Mamdani has argued that if the city were to drop its appeal, it would be on the hook for billions in additional costs over just the next few years.

“Mayor Mamdani has been clear that CityFHEPS is an invaluable tool to prevent homelessness and support homeless New Yorkers,” City Hall spokesperson Matt Rauschenbach said in a statement on Thursday’s rally. “That is why our team is working hard to ensure that it is fiscally sound and sustainable for the long-term.” — Janaki Chadha and Gelila Negesse

IN OTHER NEWS

— COMMUNITY SAFETY: Advocates are worried Mamdani’s police reform efforts in cases involving mentally ill people may sideline the anti-domestic violence office at City Hall. (The New York Times)

— BOARD OF REJECTIONS: A candidate for an Albany assembly district seat is contesting the state election board’s decision to reject his bid after he was disqualified for allegedly failing to meet residency and party enrollment requirements. (Times Union)

— BEHIND THE BARS: New York state prisons are seeing a sharp rise in violence with staff and incarcerated people both sounding the alarm of increased assault rates. (NY 1)

Missed this morning’s New York Playbook? We forgive you. Read it here.