State Democratic parties see the race for a new Democratic National Committee leader as a chance to crack open a new fight about how money and power are distributed between national and state parties.
State leaders are using the race for the DNC chairmanship to pressure the national party to return to a 50-state strategy, with less control given to leaders in Washington who want to centralize funds and resources in a handful of battleground states.
Last month, the Association of State Democratic Chairs adopted a proposal that would give states 50% of all funds raised by national leaders through joint fundraising agreements with their state. Some DNC programs would not only have their spending caps raised under the proposal, but they would also be put under the ASDC’s direct supervision.
The goal is to boost monthly funding for states and give the state leaders more of a decision-making role in national affairs. The proposal calls for greater representation on key party committees and staff would join the DNC union, according to the Washington Post.
The organization represents the largest voting bloc of 448 Democratic members who will cast a ballot for the next leader, so gaining their support is key for any leading candidate.
But even Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party Chairman Ken Martin, a leading candidate for the role and leader of the ASDC, cannot commit to the specific demands of the proposal he helped develop.
Martin told the Washington Post he would need to see the budget the national party works with before making any official decision.
“I am the one who has actually made these agreements with the DNC to make these deep investments in the state parties,” Martin said. “There is an opportunity to expand these agreements and essentially renegotiate them.”
ASDC officials said the 50-50 split and other figures in the proposal could be negotiated next year. They also noted that they could endorse more than one candidate ahead of the vote on Feb. 1, 2025, after holding individual interviews and a group forum in January.
Martin said he recused himself from ASDC discussions on whether the organization plans to endorse.
“I certainly think they are headed in the right direction. My commitment is to double down on the 57-state strategy,” Martin said, referring to the 50 states and territories with Democratic representation. “We just need maximum flexibility while also increasing the support we are providing all 57 states.”
Other candidates have signaled support for more state resources, such as Wisconsin Democratic Party Chairman Ben Wikler, former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, and New York state Sen. James Skoufis. Wikler, who was at the ASDC meeting, voted present when the proposal was first shared.
“The key is to expand the pie, not just divide it up differently,” Wikler said in a statement to the Washington Post. “We can raise more funds when we’re united around plans to fight, in every state, that show our millions of donors we know how to stretch their resources to win elections.”
The battle between national and state Democratic parties over power and money has occurred for more than 20 years. State parties argue that they should still receive substantial resources even if they are not considered battlegrounds or do not have high-profile races that could swing control of Congress.
However, national party leaders have expressed concerns that the ASDC’s proposal could dissuade big-dollar donors from writing six-figure checks or investing in battleground states — ultimately decreasing funds for national priorities heading into what is expected to be a difficult fundraising year in 2025.
In the 2024 election, the Democratic Parties of Pennsylvania, Michigan, North Carolina, Georgia, and Wisconsin received the most money from the national committee, per Open Secrets. All five of those states were considered battlegrounds in the race between President-elect Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris, with Trump winning all five and more.
Some Democratic presidential candidates in the past, such as former President Barack Obama, considered the DNC an extension of their own campaign operations, which set off a yearslong argument between the national establishment and state party leaders.
The states felt their campaign accounts were being used to funnel money to other states, and top donors maxed out their donations to the national level, preventing any money trickling into state operations.
“There are a whole lot of donors who thought they were giving money to [Sen.] Sherrod Brown (D-OH) this year who would be horrified to know that their money did not go to him,” Elizabeth Walters, the Ohio chairwoman who helped write the ASDC proposal for 2025 with Nebraska Chairwoman Jane Kleeb, told the Washington Post. “I think where we struggle is that because the map has narrowed so profoundly to seven states, all of the money for all 50 states goes to seven states.”
On the other side, national leaders argue that the money should support the candidate who raised it, and the state already benefits from other national revenue avenues and party activities.
The DNC spent $2.5 million on all 50 state-affiliated Democratic parties in September for the first time in its history, with the goala of breaking up GOP supermajorities in deep-red states and boosting voter engagement.
With 2025 an off-cycle election year with only a handful of governor races and special elections on the calendar, Democratic leaders will be forced to cut down on spending and redirect funds in key areas as they prepare for the 2026 midterm elections. Without the proposal, state parties could see their funding depleted or outright recirculated to states with highly contested races for Congress next term.
“They don’t do any of the work and they are going to have the money?” a Democratic source close to the party’s thinking told the Washington Post, calling the ASDC proposal “not sensible.” “Why would a presidential candidate sign a joint fundraising agreement with them?”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The ASDC is not the first group that has made demands of the incoming DNC chairman.
Progressives released a memo in early December demanding major DNC reforms to rekindle the party’s favor with working-class voters after the 2024 election. Among the reforms include a prohibition on corporate PAC donations and a “push to ban SuperPAC spending in Democratic primaries.”
This post was originally published on here
