Not according to the itemized contribution sources listed on Ray McBerry’s recent disclosure. For those who don’t know, campaigns have to itemize all single contributions or groups of contributions from a single source that total to $101.00 or more, listing a lot of details about them including name, complete address, date received, amount, and a couple of other details such as occupation and employer if the source is an individual.
As I mentioned yesterday morning, $8,000 of the $18,000 Mr. McBerry has raised so far came from Michael and Stephen Petroutka of Maryland. Now, it turns out these two are very involved with the Constitution Party, which is really what McBerry’s positions line up with much moreso than the GOP.
However, doing some analysis this afternoon, there is something even more disturbing:
McBerry reported $13,711.11 in itemized contributions, plus another $1,000 in In-Kind donations, for total itemized contributions of $14,711.11
While the Petroutkas represent 54% of this, McBerry also got a contribution of $250 from South Carolina, $500 from Alabama, and $111.11 from Texas, bumping the total contributions from OUTSIDE the State of Georgia to $8,861.11 – or 60% of the total itemized contributions McBerry received. (Almost 45% of the total funds raised, including all contributions less than $101.00 and In-Kind donations.)
If you remove the $1200 McBerry or his company donated to his campaign, the OUT of state contribution percentages rise to just over 65% of all itemized contributions or 48% of total funds raised.
So depending on how you look at it, either right at 2/3 or almost 1/2 of the contributions to a campaign that bills itself as ‘Georgia First’ came from OUTSIDE the State of Georgia.
‘Georgia First’? Not really.
Apparently Ray has some friends outside of the state. Wow, Imagine that! Not being an “insider” Ray has to depend on people who believe in States Rights to help fund the campaign. He might even get some from Quebec before it’s all said and done. I don’t think he has any Insurance companies giving large contributions like some others do. I do know that he has turned down at least one large contribution. The contributor wanted him to soften his stance on abortion. Ray wouldn’t take the money. I guess those folks in those other state think that if Ray can win in Georgia with his platform maybe it will be contagious in other states.
Ed,
One of the reasons I put so much stock in the ‘working man’ contributions is because let’s face it, a politician at least has the appearance of being beholden to whoever gives him the most money. For ‘Georgia’ First, that appearance right now says that he will actually be more beholden to those outside this State than those inside the very State McBerry says he wants to serve.
You don’t have to be an ‘insider’ to get money from inside the State – again, the ‘working man’ contributions. Blaming ‘insiders’ for your own lack of fundraising is lazy, at best. Take some responsibility for your candidate and work to get him more money, and if he can’t raise the money he has no one to blame but himself.
This is good for McBerry; you’re obviously bending over backwards to manufacture a story, ostensibly because you can find little else to make him look corrupt.
I suppose you don’t think Rand Paul can support “Kentucky first” given that the vast majority of the millions he’ll end up raising will come from out of state. Can you explain how the governor could really be “beholden” to parties outside the state in any perverse way? Or, for that matter, how being “beholden” to fundraisers in your own state could be any better?
Being beholden to donors – even large donors – in your own state means you’re at least listening to your own citizens, even if you give some of them preferential treatment.
And I’m not trying to make anyone look corrupt with this series. I’m simply pointing out where the money’s coming from and telling y’all my conclusions/thoughts on that. If you agree, cool. If you don’t, no skin off my back. My one and only goal with this site is to provide more information than the voters have ever had easy access to, and that is the reason I’m doing this series as well as the ‘Candidate and Liberty’ series and even the House and Senate bill commentary series.
Whether or not this information helps any particular candidate or party is, truly, irrelevant to me.
I admit that I read this post in isolation from the other posts in the series. Thus I read into your post an implication that wasn’t as clear as I thought at first.
That said, although you didn’t explicitly allege corruption, the implication from your belief that McBerry has “disturbing” conflicts of interest and your suggestion of the insincerity of his “Georgia First” platform are hard to separate from at least an expectation of future corruption. This expectation from the kind of evidence you presented is an ad hoc shot in the dark for McBerry or for anyone. This is true especially for McBerry, considering his consistency on (dare I say obsession with?) states’ rights, which is the real meaning of “Georgia first”. Almost anyone would agree that he’s likelier by far to attempt an independent Georgian nation than to sell it out to “foreign” interests!
Now, I’m no mindless drone pinning all hope on McBerry, but as I have thus far been impressed with his integrity (particularly compared to most other candidates) and principled states’ rights stance, I found your commentary a bit off the mark. Do you see what I mean?
Steve,
You are right, I DO suspect that with so much money coming from out of state, McBerry may – and more than likely, will – be put in compromising positions in regards to what his out of state donors – who thus far have provided most of his money – want vs what is best for Georgians, and that he may not make the best decision for Georgians because of it.
That said, with his focus on mostly national issues such as states’ rights and abortion, I would think he would be a better fit running for Congress rather than Governor. Of course, at this point the same can largely be said of both Ox and Handel as well regarding them focusing on national issues rather than things they actually have a degree of power over as Governor. Thus, I think my commentary is decently spot-on, and I stand by it. You are perfectly free to feel otherwise, and I thank you for reading and hope you continue to read and give us your feedback.
As far as his integrity goes, honestly so far there is truly only one candidate whose integrity I would really call into question – Ox. I’ve had personal interactions with everyone else in the GOP race other than Deal, and they’ve all struck me as honest and sincere in their beliefs. I think a few of them are misguided, but I’m sure they think the same of me.
These out of state donors are Southerns and southern organizations showing there support for Ray and his States rights stance. Ray is a man of true honor and can not be bought with Federal Reserve Notes.