When you look at an organization, you can look at what they claim and what they do.
EMILY's List claims:
"EMILY’s List looks for viable political opportunities and recruits strong pro-choice Democratic women candidates to run."
If that is the case, then why did EMILY's List enable conservative rich Republican men to get unlimited donations?
Yes, that is right it was women, or women manipulated by men, that were responsible for super PACs.
EMILY's List sued the FEC so "they" could get unlimited contributions.
Who were these women at EMILY's List who thought that opening the door so they could get unlimited financing would benefit women? Ten to one the door they opened is money against their cause.
I would prefer to think women are not that short cited and that women were being manipulated to do exactly the opposite of what the group claims:
The result of EMILY's List actions is more conservative Republican men.
So are there women at EMILY's List now that realize what they have done? Or is EMILY's List just a front for conservative Republican men?
Philip B. Maise
p.s. If I have given charge or fire to any women left in America that still cares, and I hope I did, read the Court rulings if you want to know the sad story of how EMILY's List was the source of super PACs. The FEC is going to revisit the rules that EMILY's List forced the FEC to change. Provide comment to the FEC so they get it right this time.
Links:
FEC to revisit laws changed on request of EMILY's List that led to super PACs
The most productive way EMILY's List can promote women, like they claim, is undo the damage they caused to the campaign finance laws.