Will Steve Sweeney Feel Bad If There's A School Gun Massacre In New Jersey This Month?

Who likes Van Drew more, the DCCC or the NRA?

-by Jersey Jim

On March 26, the New Jersey Assembly passed a package of six gun control bills that Gov. Phil Murphy had promised to sign. Each of the bills had at least 12 sponsors and co-sponsors in the Assembly, and several Democratic state Senators were eager to vote for them, too. But two months later, gun control legislation still hasn’t reached the governor’s desk. Why not?

The bills are stalled in the Senate. They’ve been passed by the appropriate Senate committees, but Senate President Steve Sweeney has refused to put them on the agenda of the full Senate until that body’s next meeting on June 7-- two days after the primary election.

Now is it beginning to make sense? It does if you know anything about the ultra-corrupt South Jersey Democratic machine headed by George Norcross.

With the retirement of Republican Rep. Frank LoBiondo, there’s an open seat in NJ-02. The execrable Jeff Van Drew, the most conservative "Democrat" in the state legislature, is one of four candidates for that seat in the Democratic primary, and he enjoys the Norcross machine’s full support.

Van Drew is also the only one with a long history as an NRA ally-- a history he’s now trying to hide. He’s is so closely identified with the NRA that Parkland massacre survivor David Hogg cited him as an example of a Democrat who’s no better than a Republican.

If Van Drew votes against gun control, he risks offending Democratic primary voters who live in the Congressional district he seeks to represent, but not in LD-1, the legislative district he represents in the state Senate. LD-1 is more conservative than the rest of the Congressional district.

If he votes for any of those measures, he will certainly offend a substantial number of pro-gun voters in LD-1, Democrats, Republicans and Independents alike, without whose votes he might lose in November.

And if he fails to vote on those bills, he’ll offend everybody.

As Senate president, and as the Norcross Machine’s most important single asset in Trenton, Sweeney will do whatever Norcross wants; and DNC member Norcross, who used his clout to install his younger brother in the NJ-01 House seat after Rob Andrews resigned in disgrace in 2014, is all but obsessed with getting control of a second seat in Congress. That’s why Sweeney is delaying the final votes.

For all his flaws, Sweeney himself has a relatively good record on gun control, as do most of the legislators connected with the Norcross machine. In fact, several of them are sponsors or co-sponsors of the pending gun bills. But for Norcross and Sweeney, saving Jeff Van Drew from political embarrassment is apparently more important than saving lives.

Van Drew enjoys the support of the Democratic establishment in Washington, too. He’s not only on the DCCC’s Red-to-Blue list; he’s also been endorsed by both the New Dems and the Blue Dogs-- a corrupt Beltway establishment hat trick!

But will that be enough to get him into Congress?

A Van Drew mailer paid for by Patriot Majority USA, a dark money Democratic establishment group, boasts that Van Drew is "endorsed by every county Democratic party in the state." That wording is misleading. What they mean is not every county party, but every county executive committee. And in South Jersey, the membership of those committees consists almost entirely of insiders connected to the Norcross machine.

Beyond his current Senate district, consisting of Cape May County and a few neighboring communities in Atlantic and Cumberland Counties, Van Drew has little support among rank and file Democrats.

Even in LD-1, he probably couldn’t win a general election without the votes of gun-loving Republicans and Republican-leaning independents. In presidential, gubernatorial and US Senate elections, LD-1 usually goes Republican, while NJ-02 is less consistently Republican. In five of the last seven presidential elections, the Democratic candidates-- Clinton, Gore and Obama-- carried NJ-02. And Democrat Bill Hughes held that seat for 20 years before LoBiondo was first elected in 1994.

Trump won NJ-02 in 2016, but we’re already seeing the same kind of buyer’s remorse there that Trump supporters in Michigan and Wisconsin are feeling after 16 months of a Trump Administration. So Van Drew is no shoe-in in November.

But that doesn’t matter to corporate Democrats who would rather lose with a corrupt candidate of their own choosing than win with a progressive.

A Roll Call story last week reported how Blue Dog PAC co-chair Kurt Schrader approached Van Drew. When Van Drew complained about "having a tough time getting things done" in Trenton, Schrader told him he should run for Congress "because frankly, with Republicans in control, you’re going to find you’re going to have a lot more opportunity than you did back home," adding, "you’ll be the decision-maker, because you’ll be the swing vote."

Schrader must have known how unhappy Van Drew is about being pressured to soften some of his right-wing positions.

In January, Van Drew removed his name from Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 35, which proposes amending the state constitution to permit a law requiring parental notification when a minor seeks an abortion. (In 2000, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that a 1999 parental notification law violated the state constitution.) Van Drew had been listed as a prime sponsor of that resolution in this and the two previous Legislatures, and was the only "Democrat" with his name on it each time.

Van Drew also reluctantly took his name off a bill (S-539) to reinstate the death penalty in New Jersey.

Those capitulations have not gone unnoticed in right-wing circles. The Jersey Conservative web site noted his withdrawal of support for parental notification and the death penalty. And the Daily Caller ran a hit piece by Rick Trader, host of the obscure Conservative Commandos internet radio show (where Sharron Angle is sometimes his co-host!), calling Van Drew "one of the most fake conservative Democrats running for office in 2018."

With the organizational support of the Norcross machine, and with 6.5 times the war chest of his leading primary opponent-- not to mention the outside spending of "centrist" (read, "corporate") Democratic PAC’s-- Van Drew is almost certain to win the primary.

But November won’t be a cinch. He’ll need to hold on to all the Independents and Republicans who have supported him in his state legislative races. He’ll also have to turn out the kind of Democrats who usually don’t vote in the midterms. That will be hard, because conservatives like Van Drew don’t excite the base.

And if he does win in November, it will be no victory for progressives.

Why Does Obama Always Endorse The Worst Candidates In Democratic Primaries?

When notorious drama queen #DebtTrapDebbie Wasserman Schultz set her hair on fire and went screeching to the White House that Bernie's political revolution was coming for her, Obama shut her up with a cynical endorsement of her reelection. It's no secret he wishes she would just disappear off the face of the earth already. In fact, I was on a top secret call recently (ssshhhhh...), discussing a major Beltway group's congressional endorsements, when I decided to throw the Wasserman Schultz/Canova race into the discussion. Everyone on the call-- no one more than myself-- was shocked when the White House representative backed my proposal for a Canova endorsement. They hate her; but Obama endorsed her anyway. She is, after all, his DNC chair. She's become the symbol of Democratic Party disunity but she's his symbol of Democratic Party disunity. Besides, party hacks stick together. And, no matter if you think Obama is the greatest president since FDR or the worst president since Ronald Reagan, no one can accuse him of not being a party loyalist (whether you want to think of that as a "hack" or not).

So, yes, Obama endorsed one of the most reviled and detested Democrats in the country, one even he reviles and detests. And he's been on a roll of truly terrible primary endorsements. He allowed Schumer and Reid to dictate endorsements for the weak Katie McGinty in Pennsylvania and the incredibly corrupt and incredibly Republican Florida candidate, Patrick Murphy, presumably to help him with funding for his overly costly presidential library. I mean, Murphy, who not only voted for the Keystone XL Pipeline every time it came up but who was one of the only "Democrats"-- and I use the term lightly-- to back a Republican scheme to remove Obama from the Keystone XL decision-making process!?!?! Murphy, the so-called Democrat to back the Republican witch-hunt against Hillary Clinton by voting for the Benghazi Committee? That Murphy?!?!? Oh, yes-- the Murphy who has been gung-ho on rolling back the Wall Street regulations Obama beats the GOP up over and the Murphy who came into Congress braying like an idiot that cutting Social Security and Medicare benefits had to be on the table. That Murphy.

And the latest inferior candidate to go running to Obama for a rescue endorsement is the little brother of South Jersey machine boss, George Norcross-- dirty li'l Donald, a Democrat literally financed by the Trump family!! Alex Law and candidates like him are the future of a vibrant, progressive Democratic Party. But Obama went for the gutter garbage. Thanks, Barack. In fact, his endorsement statement was a laughably ironic lie. "Donald has been there with me on critical issues before Congress in the last two years-- and has always stood up for what's right." Donald's very first vote in Congress was for the Keystone XL Pipeline-- and that was just the beginning. Norcross opposed Obama on 39 key votes in the short time he's been in Congress. He has the most Republican voting record of any New Jersey Democrat. He also opposed-- and voted against-- Obama's nuclear treaty with Iran, which Obama said at the time was a big deal. And when Obama opposed the GOP's SAFE Act to reject Obama's plans to take in a small number of Syrian refugees, Norcross voted with the Republicans and against Obama. I wonder how much brother George is getting Obama for his library fund.

I know Patrick Murphy's biggest and sleaziest fundraiser, Saudi billionaire Ibrahim Al-Rashid, has a pappy back in Riyadh, ole Nasser Al-Rashid, who gave between one and five million dollars to the Clinton presidential library. That was nice of one of the top 3 advisors to the Saudi royal family, a family that spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to make sure dumbbell Patrick Murphy was on the House Intelligence Committee. Now why would they want their guy on the House Intelligence Committee? (And today Obama will be helping Privileged Patrick raise money in Miami and then golfing up in Murphy's congressional district tomorrow.) If you don't have $5 million to help Obama with his library, contribute what you can to help him accomplish his new goal of expanding Social Security by electing Alex Law, Alan Grayson and Tim Canova (at the thermometer):

The Political Revolution Is Not A Personality Cult And It Isn't Only About Bernie, As He Keeps Explaining

Click on the image to read our message about Alex Law

This evening at 6pm progressive reform candidate Alex Law will be debating the candidate of the pernicious Norcross political machine, corrupt conservative Democrat Donald Norcross. The debate will take place at Rowan College in Sewell (Gloucester County, New Jersey) and Alex has been battling the Norcross forces to allow media coverage. When Norcross grudgingly agreed to do 2 debates, he was clear that he would not participate if they were broadcast. Tuesday's debate was in front of a room full of his cronies-- all of the crooked South Jersey elected officials, union bosses and campaign contributors who owe their livelihoods to Boss George Norcross. Needless to say, the public was not allowed in, specially after the hearty endorsement Law received from the most-read newspaper in the district. Alex gave a blistering speech that called most of the people out in the room, some by name, for their obvious, often blatant, corruption. It was an inspiring speech but at the end, the room was uncomfortably silent while Alex's dad applauded proudly. Over the course of the rest of the "debate" Norcross stuck to his hollow talking points, insisting that Alex wants terrorists to get guns and bombs. Alex laughed in his face but Norcross soldiered on in a course not even his allies take seriously. The handful of undecided voters in the room gathered around Alex afterwards and told him he had earned their votes.

Tuesday, author Will Bunch, in a column for the Philadelphia Daily News put young Law's race against The Machine in a national context, explaining how the Revolution can start in South Jersey. "[I]n Our Dumb Century of reality-show politics," he groused, "it has proven all but impossible to get voters to focus on the so-called down-ballot elections, or to get innovative outsiders to run for political office in that broad band between Congress and your local school board. This is not just a Trump (oops, I said it) thing. In Wisconsin earlier this year, an analysis showed that thousands of Bernie Sanders voters didn't bother to vote in a state Supreme Court race that was narrowly won by a conservative who opposes just about everything that Sanders stands for. That's just stupid-- but it's the People Magazine political culture that we've made for ourselves."

Bunch, like Alex Law, is a Bernie supporter, but writes that the math doesn't add up for Bernie and that he's not going to make it to the White House, something many Bernie supporters dispute. He's as disappointed as I am that "the number of serious candidates in 2016 promising to chase out the money changers is far less than... [what it would take to usher in] a real political revolution... If a real progressive movement is to rise like a phoenix from the ashes of the Sanders insurgency, that won't come until 2018, and it's going to take a ton of work at the grassroots level." The same thing happened in Oregon's 5th congressional district, where Bernie trounced Hillary but where the Berniecrat running against the head of the congressional Blue Dogs-- a sleazy character who introduced an amendment to cut Social Security benefits-- was defeated 67,124 (72.6%) to 25,289 (27.4%). Bernie voters were... what? Not paying attention? Splitting their ticket betweent someone who wants to expand Social Security and end unfair trade agreements with someone who wants to cut Social Security and who aggressively backs unfair trade agreements? Bunch has hope this trend isn't going to carry over among Bernie voters in South Jersey.

[T]here are still a handful of real election plays left in 2016. And if you're serious about starting a second American Revolution, I can't think of a better place to launch your cannonballs than South Jersey. On June 7 in the Garden State's 1st Congressional District, Democratic primary voters can toss one of the worst machine hacks in all of Congress-- the anointed Rep. Donald Norcross-- for an idealistic reformer named Alex Law seeking to be the youngest member of the U.S. House.

Talk about a slam dunk.

Norcross is exactly the kind of Democrat who makes you want to burn your voter registration card-- a tool of special interests and big donors. Since a clear path for his ascendancy to Congress was carved with the resignation of another machine pol-- Rep. Rob Andrews-- in 2014, Norcross has used his safe seat to spit on both the environment (siding with Republicans on the destructive Keystone XL pipeline) and world peace (opposing the Iran nuclear deal). He's sided with the reactionary GOP on 39 key votes, more than any other Jersey Democrat.

But his lousy votes aren't even the best argument for dumping the incumbent. He's also the Washington branch office for arguably the most arrogant political machine in America, run by his brother George Norcross. As a state lawmaker, Donald Norcross's crowning achievement has been corporate welfare for campaign donors and other big companies who move a few miles and create a handful of jobs in return for huge state tax breaks-- a tool that's been exploited by the likes of George Norcross and their GOP pal Chris Christie. The program has done little to lift citizens of poverty-plagued cities like Camden from poverty, its alleged purpose.

Replacing Norcross with 25-year-old Alex Law, a former IBM consultant, would be the political equivalent of an earthquake. Law would oppose the Keystone XL pipeline and other projects that contribute to climate change, raise the minimum wage to $15, work toward changing the campaign finance system that makes the Norcross political machine possible, overhaul student debt, and push for legalized marijuana.

Recently, Law said in a video that the Norcross gang is "is a machine made up of the worst kind of politicians, ones loyal to machine first and constituent second. It is a machine with parts oiled by money plundered from the state and our hometowns. It is a machine people are afraid of." He's fighting back by spurning big-money politics just like Sanders-- whom he supports-- and using his computer savvy to target likely voters, especially millennials.

So, yeah, it's an uphill climb. Norcross has money, trade-union support, name recognition. But he's also a poster child for everything that rank-and-file voters say is what's wrong with American politics. One week from today, South Jersey Democrats have a chance to show that American revolution is more than just a Molly Pitcher rest stop on the Turnpike-- that it's a living, breathing thing.

If you go to the debate at Rowan College this evening, please say hello to John, the Blue America mobile billboard truck-driver, who's helping us get our message out about Alex... and about Norcross. And, if you can, please contribute to Alex Law's get-out-the-vote efforts by tapping on the thermometer below:

UPDATE: Scratch That Debate Thing Tonight

Looks like Tuesday's closed mini-debate was too much for Norcross to handle. Late last night, he had his crony, Loretta Winters (a kind of junior Wasserman Schultz creature), cancel today's, after finding out it was going to be live-streamed by NJ Pen. Alex explained what happened in a Facebook posting but the short version is that Winters has allowed her personal friendship with and allegiance to Norcross to get in the way of the rights of the Democratic Party voters in the first district to see a debate. She's been a saboteur very much the way Wasserman Schultz was a saboteur on behalf of Hillary. And Norcross has some kind of a gun rally already scheduled for tonight.

An Impossible Dream Coming True In South Jersey?

Grassroots candidates CAN smash the corrupt machine

When I met Alex Law for the first time last year he seemed like a smart kid with a big dream and a lot of idealism and no money. He kind of reminded me of New Hampshire progressive activist Carol Shea-Porter, circa 2006-- a full decade ago. Carol had an impossible dream. She wanted to defeat a powerful entrenched incumbent, Jeb Bradley, who had a load of money-- and Carol had none. Worse, yet, the head of the DCCC, Rahm Emanuel, decided Carol was "too progressive" and "too anti-war" for New Hampshire and he was backing House Majority Leader Jim Craig, a consummate establishment insider. With Emanuel's help, Craig spent $381,290 on the primary, more than Carol spent on the primary and the race against Bradley combined! Carol beat Jim Craig 54-34% and the DCCC abandoned the district, Emanuel declaring it was unwinable. Bradley barely broke a sweat raising $1,111,590 and Carol had almost no money and was smothered in unanswered ads from the GOP while the DCCC and DNC sat on their hands and sneered. But Carol had a magic weapon: genuine, values-driven grassroots activism-- and in November she beat Bradley 100,899 (51%) to 94,869 (49%). Emanuel was furious-- although he and other DCCC saboteurs ran to the media and tried taking credit for Carol's win!

Today Carol-- still as independent-minded and grassroots oriented as ever-- is running for Congress again, against Tea Party extremist Frank Guinta. She's on the same Blue America ActBlue page as Alex Law, which you can access by tapping on the thermometer on the right. As of the May 18 FEC filing deadline, Alex had raised $67,331 to entrenched incumbent Donald Norcross' $1,404,335 (thousands of dollars of which have come from the Trump family-- although Norcross masquerades as a Democrat). The shady Patriot Majority PAC has spent another $174,083 bolstering Norcross, whose brother George controls the corrupt South Jersey Democratic political machine. But Alex's little-campaign-that-could has done so well that a panic-stricken Norcross just left his campaign another $85,000, bringing the total in self-funding to over $100,000.

Norcross' brother George also brought the widest-read newspaper in the district, the Philadelphia Enquirer and then lost control of it. No one thought there was any chance that they would ever endorse against Alex, a leader of the Bernie for President movement in South Jersey. In fact, Sunday, the Inquirer endorsed Hillary-- and Alex, sending shockwaves through New Jersey politics. The congressional primary is June 7, a week from tomorrow. After claiming Clinton "is better prepared for the office," the editorial board, which had done extensive interviews with Norcross and Law, wrote that Law would make a better member of Congress.

South Jersey Democrats will also decide three congressional nominations. The most heated contest is in the Camden County-based First District, whose freshman congressman, Donald Norcross, likes to say he's just an electrician in a tie.

But Norcross harnesses a lot more power than the average working man. The son of a labor leader and brother of South Jersey's top Democratic power broker, Norcross headed the regional AFL-CIO before his path to political office was cleared by the precisely timed midterm retirement of the state Assembly speaker himself. The party organization immediately anointed Norcross the prohibitive front-runner in a safely Democratic district. A week after he was sworn in to the Assembly, he was promoted to a vacated state Senate seat. Four years after that, yet another midterm exit - by U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews amid a campaign-finance probe-- put Norcross on a short circuit to Congress, powered once again by party unanimity.

The spectacle of Andrews being confronted on 60 Minutes helped spark Alex Law's interest in politics and ultimately his challenge to the machine that choreographed Norcross' rise. Law, of Voorhees, is the epitome of an upstart, having just turned 25, the minimum age to serve in the House, and quit his IBM consulting job to seek the nomination. He has raised about $40,000 to Norcross' nearly $1 million. (The winner will run against Bob Patterson, who is unopposed on the GOP side.)

While Norcross, 57, was often in the thick of the legislative action in Trenton, his meteoric ascent hasn't helped his resumé in that respect; his achievements in Washington have been limited. The congressman notes that he introduced a bill to raise the minimum wage and has helped bring federal funds to the district.

Law, a Sanders supporter, has staked out positions largely to the left of the congressman, who sometimes sides with Republicans in favor of industry and defense. The challenger has criticized Norcross' votes against the Iran nuclear deal, consumer financial protections, and refugee resettlement. Norcross says he takes pride in sometimes straying from the party line.

Law's most persuasive critique of Norcross concerns his reliance on donors with government contracts. Pay-to-play politics have been elevated to a dark art in South Jersey, but Norcross addresses the issue by insisting he is just an electrician-turned-politician with no special connection to such machinations.

Democratic voters longing for a genuine departure from the entrenched political establishment that Norcross embodies should choose ALEX LAW.

When Norcross "strays from the party line," as the Inquirer puts it so generously, it;'s to vote with the Republicans against the environment and for pet projects of his wealthy campaign contributors like the Keystone XL Pipeline. In fact, Norcross has voted with the Republicans more than any other New Jersey Democrat in Congress. Just above is the Blue America mobile billboard we have driving up and down the streets and highways of South Jersey all month. (Gas money contributions here please.) Saturday the truck spent the day in Collingswood at the May Fair. This is the billboard on the other side of the truck:

When "Good Guys" Do Bad Things

The way they finance their campaigns, Donald Norcross and Patrick Murphy are not just dancing with the devil, they're changing costumes, doing flips and ending the routine with a dip and kiss

We've been writing for almost a year about how the righteous-sounding PAC, End Citizens United is a scam. It was set up and is run by a gaggle of DCCC and DSCC losers to primarily funnel money to their corrupt conservative candidates and campaign finance criminals like Patrick Murphy, Lacy Clay, Ami Bera, Pete Gallego, Monica Vernon, Steny Hoyer, Val Demings, Scott Peters and Lon Johnson. In fact, on Saturday, the Sacramento Bee dug into the campaign finance abuse system Steve Israel thought up that is landing Ami Bera's father in prison and should send Ami Bera, Patrick Murphy, Murphy's parents, Scott Peters and Scott Peters' parents to prison as well. That's specifically the kinds of candidates "End Citizens United" is funding.

Democratic Rep. Ami Bera, whose father is awaiting sentencing on two felony counts of election fraud, for years has engaged in a complex series of campaign donations involving his parents and the families of other congressional candidates, federal records show.

Beginning six years ago, when he unsuccessfully challenged former Republican Rep. Dan Lungren, Bera and his family wrote checks to other Democrats, almost always for the maximum amount allowed under federal law. Those candidates or their families gave similar amounts to Bera, and the contributions often occurred within days of one another.

The practice differs from the reimbursement scheme perpetrated by Babulal “Bob” Bera, 83, in which he repaid donors as a way to direct more money to his son’s campaign committee. Federal officials and Ami Bera maintain the congressman, who has represented a suburban Sacramento County district since defeating Lungren in a 2012 rematch, was unaware of his father’s illegal activities.

The pattern of giving involving other candidates, known as donor swapping, is most often seen among deep-pocketed families. Campaign finance experts said such see-saw contributions generally do not run afoul of federal law, but say they are a way to sidestep individual donation limits and help show fundraising prowess. 
...Larry Noble, general counsel for the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan election reform group, said an argument can be made that coordinated exchanges between candidates’ families evade the law, which prohibits making contributions in the name of another.

Some instances in which Bera’s parents engaged in a pattern of giving with families of other congressional candidates have been reported in the past. Following his father’s guilty plea, the Sacramento Bee reviewed contribution records for four election cycles, finding such a pattern between Bera and his family and at least six other congressional candidates. Nearly $240,000 changed hands. 
Bera’s father, listed in campaign finance records as Babulal, Babulal R., or B.R. Bera, and his wife, Kanta Bera, gave the maximum allowed to their son’s campaigns, and contributed at least $75,000 to candidates whose immediate families gave to Bera.

Candidates can give unlimited amounts to themselves, but donor-swapping makes it appear that they have a larger list of supporters and do not need to rely as much on their own wealth.


...The elder Bera this month admitted to recruiting friends, family and acquaintances to contribute nearly $270,000 to Bera, and then largely reimbursed them with his own money. Prosecutors said as part of the plea bargain the government agreed not to charge Kanta Bera. Ami Bera said he has since given the money to the U.S. Treasury. Babulal Bera faces 10 years in prison, though prosecutors agreed to recommend no more than 2 1/2 years.




...Another series of contributions occurred between Bera and Democratic Rep. Patrick Murphy, now a candidate for the U.S. Senate in Florida.

In 2011, three days after Janine Bera gave $5,000 to the “Friends of Patrick Murphy” committee, Murphy’s father, Thomas P. Murphy, provided $5,000 to “Ami Bera for Congress.” In 2013, the younger Murphy’s mother, Leslie, gave $5,200 to Bera. Babulal and Kanta contributed a total of $10,400 to Murphy two weeks later. Three months later, Janine Bera donated $5,200 to Murphy.

Murphy’s campaign sent $1,000 to Bera in 2014, and Babulal Bera sent $5,000 to Murphy last June.

Murphy spokeswoman Galia Slayen did not respond to specific questions from The Bee, including whether the families coordinated. Instead, Slayen pointed to a recent Treasure Coast Newspapers story quoting an email from her stating Babulal Bera did not arrange an exchange.

Murphy said he recently donated $10,200 he had received from Babulal Bera to a trio of nonprofits: Common Cause Florida, Big Bend Homeless Coalition and Renewal Coalition.

Another "liberal" PAC playing with Dark Money has gone bad-- the Patriot Majority USA SuperPAC and phony 501 (c)(3), which has always targeted Republicans (usually completely ineffectively, having lost nearly every race it got involved in) but is now targeting progressive Berniecrat Alex Law in order to assist the most right-wing Democrat in New Jersey, corrupt Machine candidate Donald Norcross. Patriot Majority USA just spent $67,486 sending several illegally coordinated mailings on behalf of Norcross in South Jersey, using messaging illegally originated from Norcross' congressional staff. Although this is the first time the group involved itself in a primary, PublicIntegrity.org warned about their shady practices in 2013.

A liberal, labor union-backed nonprofit that’s not supposed to be primarily political spent $23.7 million last year in the run-up to national elections-- 46 times what it spent in 2011, a non-election year, according to its new Internal Revenue Service tax return.

And although it describes itself as a grassroots group, a single $6 million donation from an unnamed source made up one-fourth of Patriot Majority USA’s $23 million in 2012 revenue. More than half of its haul, $12 million, came from anonymous donors that gave more than $1 million each, its tax return indicates.

Patriot Majority USA states on its website that it advocates for “comprehensive campaign finance reform that increases transparency and limits the influence of greedy special interests who ... buy elections.”

Unlike super PACs and traditional political campaign committees, nonprofits such as Patriot Majority USA aren’t required to disclose their donors because they supposedly exist to primarily promote the public good and social welfare. But nebulous Internal Revenue Service rules have led these “dark money” groups to proliferate and spend millions of dollars on politics. The agency proposed tightening the rules last week.

For its part, Patriot Majority USA reported spending $9.3 million on politics-- almost 40 percent of its expenses. It reported the political spending was for “expenditures and grants for issue advocacy to educate voters on candidates’ views.” More than half of its $1.4 million in grants went to groups considered politically active such as American Working Families Action Fund and No on 3 Inc. in Florida, a group that opposed a constitutional amendment changing the way state revenue caps are set.

Patriot Majority USA also fields a super PAC-- Patriot Majority PAC-- that spent just a small fraction of what its nonprofit sister group did during 2012, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Patriot Majority USA’s overall expenses are nearly three times that of an arguably better-known liberal nonprofit group Priorities USA, which has ties to President Barack Obama.

And although the group doesn’t disclose its donors, the Huffington Post reported labor unions contributed $2.3 million to Patriot Majority USA last year, based on calculations from Department of Labor filings. The Alliance for Quality Nursing Home Care, a trade association, also gave the group $750,000, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Patriot Majority USA was formed in 2008 and technically spun off into a separate entity in 2011. When it applied to do that, it told the IRS it didn’t plan to hire employees and would instead rely on a “large base of volunteers” to developing and disseminating the organization’s message.

This hasn’t proven true. The organization reported no volunteers last year and paid its founder and president, Craig Varoga, $144,053 last year for 25 hours of work per week, according to its 2012 tax return. Other expenses reported include $11.6 million on a “media buy,” $2.5 million for direct mail production and $1.5 million on voter registration efforts.

Varoga, who was national field director for Gen. Wesley Clark’s 2004 presidential campaign, did not respond to questions from the Center for Public Integrity.

Varoga instead emailed a statement that his group “has been recognized by the IRS and has a very well defined, multi-year, bipartisan primary purpose, which is to work on economic solutions and encourage job creation throughout the United States.”

The following year, the same author, Michael Beckel, followed up with an article for Slate called The Dark Arts that featured Patriot Majority USA's shady practices and gross hypocrisy. "Liberals," he wrote, "may blame conservatives for the ongoing surge of political 'dark money' dominating the 2014 midterm elections, but Democrats are now taking full advantage of these secretive, free-wielding political behemoths-- while bemoaning their influence. At the forefront is the nonprofit Patriot Majority USA, which is providing Democrats with a countervailing force against the political machine of conservative billionaires Charles and David Koch. This election cycle, Patriot Majority USA has spent more than $7 million on political advertisements, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission. That makes it the largest Democratic-aligned dark money operation in the country."

And now they've turned their guns on one of the most effective grassroots campaign's in the country, Alex Law's, to assist the most corrupt Machine in the Northeast United State, George Norcross'. (By the way, Norcross, who's is panic-stricken over Law's headway and is sending out coordinated mailings smearing Law, had raised $912,186 to Law's $46,380 as of the March 31 FEC reporting deadline.)

Among the newly identified contributors: the Partnership for Quality Home Healthcare ($500,000), the International Longshoremen’s Association PAC ($50,000), the American Health Care Association ($25,000), and the American Association for Justice PAC ($10,000).

Patriot Majority USA’s top known donor is the Alliance for Quality Nursing Home Care, which gave $1.25 million over two years. That health industry trade group-- which last year merged with the American Health Care Association-- was first identified as a contributor to Patriot Majority USA by the Center for Responsive Politics. Greg Crist, a spokesman for the American Health Care Association, declined to comment, saying, “As a general practice, we don’t comment on our political giving strategies.”

Patriot Majority USA has also collected seven-figure sums from at least two labor unions: $1.14 million from the Service Employees International Union, including $280,000 from the SEIU’s state council in Pennsylvania, and $1 million from the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees.

I wonder if the union members know their dues are going to fund an arch conservative and to try to bury a progressive reformer. If you'd like to contribute to Law's grassroots campaign, you can get to it by tapping the thermometer:

Among The Candidates, Who's For War? Who's For Peace? How Can We Even Know? Take South Jersey...

How do you know if a congressional candidate is more or less likely to support war and aggression? Well, generally speaking Republicans, and conservatives in general, are more likely to be willing to rush to war as an immediate option. Democrats often claim they stand for peace, but the claim is often hollow. In the presidential race we have a rabid, neocon hawk on the Democratic side and an unstable, unhinged and impulsive bully on the Republican side.

In Congress, one way to know who stands for war and who stands for peace is by watching how Members vote on amendments brought up and voted on from Oakland Congresswoman Barbara Lee, who was the only member of Congress to vote against attacking Afghanistan in 2001. Last week she offered an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 that would repeal the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force that pretty much allows any president to attack anyone anywhere. (Imagine Trump with this power.)

Lee's amendment lost 138-285. Most Democrats (125 of them) voted for it and they're joined by 13 Republicans. But 228 Republicans-- virtually the whole party-- voted against repeal and 57 Democrats joined them, obviously the Republican wing of the Democratic Party: Blue Dogs, New Dems, warmongers, Military Industrial Complex shills, etc. Out of deference to Obama-- with a blind eye to her own shameless hypocrisy-- Pelosi voted with the Republicans, probably not thinking about a President Trump with this blanket authorization she was voting for.

Among the Democratic congressmembers vying for higher office this cycle, two voted with Lee for peace: Alan Grayson (FL) and Chris Van Hollen (MD). And four decided to join the war camp and vote with the Republicans:

• Tammy Duckworth (IL)
• Ann Kirkpatrick (New Dem-AZ)
• Patrick Murphy (New Dem-FL)
• Loretta Sanchez (Blue Dog-CA)

This is a hot topic in the congressional race in south Jersey's first congressional district where progressive Alex Law is challenging warmonger Donald Norcross, the Machine candidate. Norcross, who has a clear pro-war record and voted against revoking the blanket authorization in 2001 and again last week, is the only New Jersey Democrat to do so. He's often the only New Jersey Democrat to cross the aisle and vote with the Republicans on a whole array of core values issues. Bonnie Watson Coleman, Frank Palone, Bill Pascrell, Donald Payne and Albio Sires all voted for peace; only Norcross showed the poor judgment to leave Trump (or Clinton) with the blanket approval to attack without congressional approval. We reached Alex Law as he was out knocking on doors in Cherry Hill this morning and he told us "Representative Barbara Lee's anti-war amendment is a necessary addition to our defense bill. I am proud to stand with all New Jersey Democrats in Congress, with the exception of my opponent who yet again voted with Republicans, in my support of this amendment. I firmly believe that our unchecked military incursions into the Middle East with little or no oversight by the American people has fundamentally radicalized many in the region. Our goal in fighting terrorism is to end terrorism, but our policy of endless war at what ever cost is doing the exact opposite. The only way we end terrorism is through bringing opportunity to the Middle East and working through diplomacy-- rather than drones-- to solve problems. We have been lucky with President Obama that he has not abused his nearly unlimited War powers too severely. But, without this amendment and a potential President Trump around the corner, we could see total war waged in the Middle East without authorization of the American people. That is a reality we cannot accept."

Click to get close enough to read the truck

The primary between Norcross and Law will be on June 7. Currently Blue America has the mobile billboard, pictured above, driving around the district 6 days a week, making sure voters are aware that there is a progressive alternative to Norcross. If you'd like to help, you can chip in for gas money here-- or you can contribute directly to Alex Law's campaign here:

With The Help Of Jim Kenney, Jersey's Boss Norcross Crosses The Delaware Into Philly

In effect, Jim Kenney was elected mayor of Philadelphia one year ago-- May 19, 2015. That was the day of the 6-way Democratic primary, when Kenney won with 55.8%. His closest rival, Anthony Williams got 26.1%. When November rolled around he beat Republican Melissa Lynn Bailey 85.4- 13.2%. DWT's infatuation with Kenney as a progressive champion was ill-advised and as short-lived as our infatuation with Bill de Blasio was. Both are decent liberals; neither approaches being any kind of movement progressive. I watched with dismay as de Blasio got into a habit of endorsing corrupt conservative candidates and corporate shills like Andrew Cuomo over Zephyr Teachout, Jeff Klein over Oliver Koppell, Wendy Greuel over Ted Lieu and, of course, Hillary over Bernie. Kenney also endorsed Hillary over Bernie but that's politics and many politicians-- including some of the best-- felt that had to endorse Hillary for one reason or another. What made us withdraw our support of Kenney though was his endorsement for the Donald Norcross in the South Jersey district directly across the river from Philly-- conservative, crooked Donald Norcross of one of America's last remaining predatory criminal political machines, his brother George's. The fact that Norcross endorsed him-- and immediately helped him raise money-- as a matter of course despite a credible grassroots challenge by Alex Law moved us to remove Kenney from our endorsed candidates list and moved me to write him a letter asking him to take me off his mailing list and forget we had ever met.

I laughed a few weeks ago when Bernie denounced his regressive soda tax that targets poor people as a way of raising more money in Philly. (Hillary, of course, backed Kenney on the tax.) PolitiFact checked Kenney's defense and Bernie's attack and found Bernie's version true:

Kenney fired back in an editorial on Huffington Post that his proposal, which would levy a three cent per ounce tax on distributors, was a "corporate tax" and said Sanders was siding with beverage corporations. Then Sanders responded with an editorial of his own, in Philly Mag. He basically gave an elongated version of what he said earlier in the week, which was, "A tax on soda and juice drinks would disproportionately increase taxes on low-income families in Philadelphia."

...Kenney has said the tax is not regressive because he believes the money will stay in the neighborhoods. His finance director, Rob Dubow, said most consumers of sugary drinks are in poor neighborhoods. When Dubow suggested distributors would absorb some of the tax, City Council president Darrell Clarke responded, "Fundamentally, I don’t believe that."

Sanders said Kenney’s proposed soda tax would disproportionately increase taxes for low income families. In the only other instance of a soda tax in the United States, studies have shown somewhere between 25 and 70 percent of the cost of the tax gets passed to consumers. Tax experts say if this tax reaches the consumer level it would affect low income residents to a greater extent.

Last week, in another Norcross exposé, Philly journalist Holly Otterbein connected Kenney with George Norcross.

George Norcross slipped in through the back door.

It was May 19th, the day Jim Kenney won the mayoral primary in a landslide. Norcross was with Dan Hilferty, the CEO of Independence Blue Cross, when he got the news. “That evening we had a dinner meeting with a potential business partner,” says Hilferty, “and we hear on the radio that Jim has won the primary. We both say, ‘Let’s stop by and say hi to Jim.’”

So they set off to Vie, a restaurant on North Broad Street where Kenney was holding his victory party. It didn’t matter that Norcross didn’t have an appointment. It didn’t matter that when Norcross arrived, Kenney was minutes away from delivering his first speech as the presumptive next mayor of the fifth-biggest city in America. It didn’t matter that Kenney, in fact, still had a few lines left to memorize. This is George Norcross we’re talking about-- the widely feared, fantastically wealthy all-powerful boss of the South Jersey Democratic Party-- and when George Norcross wants a meeting, he gets a meeting.

So right there and then, the likely next mayor of Philadelphia sat down for a brief tête-à-tête with the lord of South Jersey.

Norcross left discreetly, un-spotted by the legions of press there that night (including me). Then Kenney, fresh off his private chat with a walking, talking embodiment of the one percent, took the stage, and his kaleidoscopic mix of supporters went nuts: prominent African-Americans and white working-class voters, LGBT leaders and immigrants, millennial fanboys and old heads. Kenney thanked his “unprecedented coalition of diverse groups” and repeated his mantra that “every neighborhood matters.”

When Philly.com got word of the three-minute private meeting a few days later and posted a story, it set political insiders buzzing. That’s just how significant, how full of implicit meaning, a meeting with Norcross is. Did this one signal that Norcross, after spending 30 years methodically taking over the state of New Jersey, was setting his sights on Philadelphia?

A year later, there’s no question: Norcross is now well entrenched in Philadelphia, and all signs suggest his influence will continue to grow. Businesses and labor unions with close ties to Norcross spent vast sums of money to get Kenney elected, and have teamed up with John “Johnny Doc” Dougherty, the city’s building-trades kingpin. Norcross’s insurance firm has secured government contracts in Philly in recent years, just as it’s done in Jersey. True to form, Norcross has accomplished all this in the dark, granting not a single on-the-record interview about these moves.

He refuses to explain what he’s up to, or why. But murky as Norcross’s motives may be, his record is clear: He’s a conqueror. When he sets his sights on a target, he captures it.

The story of how Norcross built himself into the most powerful man in New Jersey begins with revenge.

Norcross was little more than a regional player 30 years ago. He ran the Camden County Democrats, but the GOP was firmly in control of the board of freeholders. Still, Norcross asked State Senator Lee Laskin, a Republican, for a favor: Would he put Norcross’s dad on the New Jersey Racing Commission? “This would mean the world to him,” Norcross reportedly told Laskin. When Laskin shot him down, Norcross asked again: “This is really important to me personally.” The answer was no. No way.

The slight infuriated Norcross. He recruited John Adler, a Harvard graduate, to run against Laskin in 1991. But that was just the beginning: He developed an elaborate plan to wrest Camden County away from the GOP; then he would move on to other counties, win control of their freeholders, and build alliances that could raise enormous sums of cash for his favored candidates for the state legislature.

To make a long, f-bomb-filled story short, Norcross succeeded. He is now said to have helped elect 50-some county freeholders, state lawmakers and Congressmen currently in office in New Jersey. One of those people is Steve Sweeney, who is kind of a supersized Johnny Doc. A childhood friend of Norcross’s, Sweeney is the New Jersey Senate president and vice president of the International Association of Ironworkers, and is widely assumed to be a big-time gubernatorial candidate in 2017. He wouldn’t be where he is today without Norcross. Norcross also runs the insurance firm Conner Strong & Buckelew, which has helped make him a millionaire many times over, partly from the lucrative contracts it has won from government entities across New Jersey.

There’s no doubt Norcross has done some good works with his immense power: As chairman of Cooper University Hospital in Camden, he built the institution into a giant. And he made South Jersey, once a region laughed off by the glitzier, more powerful North Jersey, a force to be reckoned with. That’s something Philadelphians can surely appreciate, given their city’s lack of clout in Harrisburg.

But if a Camden resident doesn’t like what Norcross is doing, what recourse does she have? She can’t vote him out. She can’t even call his office to complain. The most powerful man in New Jersey has never held public office.

Norcross is just as unaccountable to the media as he is to voters. He wouldn’t talk to me for this story. When Norcross does speak to reporters, he often dictates the terms. In 2014, the New Yorker’s Ryan Lizza landed a rare recorded interview with Norcross. “He told me that he couldn’t remember ever doing a taped interview with a reporter, and glared at my recording device,” Lizza later wrote.

But stories about Norcross’s bare-knuckle tactics occasionally leak out, most famously in the recordings known as the Palmyra Tapes. About 15 years ago, John Gural, a then-Palmyra councilman who claimed he was being pressured and bribed to fire an enemy of Norcross’s, recorded the political boss with a hidden microphone. Though Norcross was never accused of wrongdoing, the tapes are chilling.

In a cool, calculated voice, Norcross brags about his influence with governors and U.S. senators: “In the end, the McGreeveys, the Corzines, they’re all going to be with me. Not because they like me, but because they have no choice.” He talks about his legacy: “No one will ever, ever again not include or look down or double-cross South Jersey. Never again will that happen. Because they know we put up the gun and we pulled the trigger and we blew their brains out.” And he makes clear what he has done to men who have crossed him: “I sat him down … and said, ‘Herb, don’t fuck with me on this one … ’cause I’ll tell you if you ever do that and I catch you one more time doing it, you’re gonna get your fucking balls cut off.’”

For most of his career, Norcross, 60, stayed on his side of the Delaware.

He dabbled in Philly politics a bit. Ed Rendell says Norcross raised about $50,000 for his gubernatorial campaign: “You know, nothing big.” Norcross also had deep connections at the Delaware River Port Authority in the 2000s, where he likely brushed up against Johnny Doc and other Philly power brokers.

Norcross studied the city. He dipped his toes in the water. But he didn’t dive in. He was waiting for the right moment.

That moment came in 2012. Norcross bought the Inquirer, the Daily News and Philly.com in partnership with philanthropist H.F. “Gerry” Lenfest and businessman Lewis Katz. There was plenty of journalistic handwringing over the fact that a powerful political figure now partly controlled a major local media company. But his other moves in Philly went largely unnoticed: That same year, Norcross’s insurance company opened a new headquarters in Two Liberty Place, right around the corner from City Hall. Then, in 2013, the Philly-based Independence Blue Cross sold a 20 percent stake in one of its health insurance subsidiaries to Cooper. “That’s how George and I have gotten to know each other,” says Hilferty, the CEO who was with Norcross on the night Kenney won the primary.

When Norcross lost control of the newspapers in 2014, after a nasty, deeply personal feud between the owners involving lovers, lawyers and daughters, some wondered if he would retreat from Philly.

Not a chance. Later that year, a journalism start-up called PhillyVoice launched, with Norcross’s 20-something daughter Lexie at the helm. The domain of the website was registered to Norcross’s insurance firm-- that is, until Technical.ly Philly wrote about that juicy little detail. Afterward, the registrant suddenly changed to a mysterious company called WWB Holdings, LLC. When the Philadelphia Business Journal asked a spokesman at PhillyVoice whether Norcross owned the site, he “declined to confirm that-- or anything else about PhillyVoice.” To this day, the website refuses to say whether Norcross was an investor.

Norcross has also been meeting with some of the city’s most powerful politicians, from Council President Darrell Clarke to State Senator Tony Williams to U.S. Rep Bob Brady. Says Brady: “We met at the pub and got to know each other. I told him I’d do whatever I can to be helpful.”

Meanwhile, Norcross’s insurance company, Conner Strong & Buckelew, has secured millions of dollars’ worth of contracts from government agencies in Philadelphia. In 2011, the firm won a $300,000 contract with the city’s Redevelopment Authority. (It was renewed last year, for $310,000.) In 2012, Norcross’s firm scored a $630,000 contract with the School District of Philadelphia. (It was also extended, two years ago, for $500,000.) In 2014, it landed yet another contract, worth $660,000, with the Philadelphia Housing Authority.

None of these contracts have been publicly reported until now. The press in Jersey tracks Norcross’s every move-- as best it can, anyway. So far, in Philadelphia, Norcross has received far less scrutiny.

That was particularly apparent in the 2015 mayoral race, which was the first time super PACs played a role in a big Philly municipal election. Super PACs emerged after the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that enabled PACs to spend unlimited sums on political races provided the PACs didn’t coordinate with the candidates benefiting from the spending.

For anyone who believed money already played too big a role in politics, this was a deeply disturbing development.

In Philadelphia, all eyes were on one super PAC in particular: American Cities, which was backing Tony Williams for mayor. The committee was funded by a trio of multimillionaire hedge fund investors who supported controversial education policies: charter expansion and school vouchers. There were two other super PACs in the race, both of which supported Kenney, but they got far less attention from the media. They weren’t as well-funded or as sexy, and they were backed by known entities: the teachers union and Johnny Doc.

Or so it seemed. In fact, the super-PAC money that made the biggest difference in the mayoral race had nothing to do with American Cities, and plenty to do with George Norcross.

That was hardly obvious at the time, which looks to have been the point. Just a few weeks before the election, a New Jersey-based PAC called the Carpenters Fund for Growth and Progress donated $750,000 to a PAC called the Turnout Project. That PAC in turn quickly cut a $725,000 check to yet another super PAC-- Building a Better Pa. That was the Dougherty-tied PAC supporting Kenney for mayor.

It was all so peculiar. Why would carpenters in Jersey give a damn about Kenney? And why would they cross their Philly brethren in Carpenters Union Local 8, which was backing Williams in the race?

The pieces only came together after Kenney won the primary election: Norcross’s fingerprints were all over the money. He has close ties to Jersey carpenters. One of his longtime Jersey allies is Frank Spencer, a VP at the national carpenters union. South Jersey Assemblyman Troy Singleton is the assistant to the executive secretary-treasurer of the Northeast Regional Council of Carpenters. Patricia Mueller, a friend of Norcross’s, is the treasurer for the Carpenters Fund for Growth and Progress. The Turnout Project also got a $25,000 donation from Parker McCay, a law firm run by Norcross’s brother Philip, as well as a $25,000 check from Brown and Connery, where an attorney who has represented Norcross is a partner. And it was Norcross’s longtime adman, Neil Oxman, who produced the pro-Kenney TV commercials funded by all that super-PAC cash.

The carpenters likely had their own motives for donating so much cash to the elect-Kenney effort: There are plenty of suburban New Jersey carpenters who work on city construction sites. And as far as many carpenters were concerned, Philly carpenters boss Ed Coryell had gone off the reservation. Johnny Doc, Kenney’s most potent ally, was also Coryell’s fiercest political enemy. So helping out Doc and Kenney was a way to weaken Coryell.

But it appears that without Norcross, the most pivotal donation of the 2015 mayoral race never would have happened. He played the role of matchmaker, of deal-broker. Or at least, that was the assumption of all the heavies in Philadelphia’s political class. And if they were hazy on the details, well, all the better.

Says Rendell: “When I ran for mayor and governor, George helped me. Not to the extent that he did with the Kenney election. Not even close.” Bob Brady, characteristically blunt, says of Norcross: “He invested in Jimmy Kenney for mayor.” He then adds, without prompting, “I’ve known Jimmy all my life. There was no quid pro quo there. There was no ‘I’ll do this, you gotta do that.’”

That’s probably true, but it’s clear Norcross is becoming closer with Kenney. A few months after the primary, Kenney was the featured guest at a fund-raiser for Norcross’s brother, U.S. Representative Donald Norcross. At Kenney’s inauguration in January, Norcross sat in the second row, with Kenney’s managing director, Mike DiBerardinis, on his left and Donald on his right. Kenney also recently reappointed Heather Steinmiller, a senior V.P. at Norcross’s firm, to the board of the Convention Center.

And then, in February, Ed Coryell was sacked. The national carpenters union unilaterally removed him as head of the Metropolitan Regional Council of Carpenters. Doc’s biggest labor enemy was rendered impotent, and Norcross’s allies are now in charge of the city’s carpenters.

Both the new mayor and Johnny Doc owe Norcross. Big.

...Since Norcross operates in the shadows, we’re left guessing about his motives. He’s strutted into Philadelphia, landed taxpayer-funded contracts, apparently helped elect the mayor, and perhaps even funded a new media organization. The mystery, the lack of accountability, the unanswered questions about who’s influencing our leaders and to what end … everyone’s worst nightmares about super PACs have been fully realized, right here in Philadelphia.

Bad enough in Philly, of course, but what about South Jersey, the base of Norcross power? That's where Blue America hopes we can make up for our tremendous error in endorsing Jim Kenney for mayor by pushing as hard as we can for Alex Law to win the NJ-01 seat being held by Norcross brother Donald, New Jersey's most Republican Democrat. In fact... starting next week, Blue America has a mobile billboard that will be working the cities and towns of South Jersey. On Alex's website, he makes it clear that his congressional race isn't just about implementing the progressive policy vision he shares with Bernie. "Along with progressive policy ideas and grassroots campaigning," the website explains, "an important piece of Alex's vision for his community is fighting corruption. South Jersey has been plagued by pay-to-play machine politics for decades and Alex hopes to end that with his victory in this election. Alex's opponent seems to make his policy decisions based on what his campaign donors want. Donald Norcross also appears to make sure that those that contribute to his family's political machine get government contracts." We've helped Alex raise some money for his campaign-- and you can contribute by clicking on the thermometer on the right-- but the mobile billboards are a separate and independent endeavor. Here are renderings of the two sides of the truck: