Actor George Clooney has faced protests and political backlash for hosting a high-end fundraiser for Hillary Clinton’s campaign this past weekend. Criticism against these fundraisers, which individuals can attend for as little as $33,400 or chair for as much as $353,400, has come mostly from the Bernie Sanders campaign. However, one more person agrees with the criticism—Clooney himself.
In an interview with NBC, Clooney agreed with Sanders that the amounts of money raised from campaign fundraising is obscene:
“Yes, I think it’s an obscene amount of money. The Sanders campaign when they talk about it is absolutely right. It’s ridiculous that we should have this kind of money in politics. I agree, completely.”
The Sanders campaign has prided itself in relying on small donations rather than on the high-end events that have been associated with the Clinton campaign. Sanders had earlier slammed Clooney’s and similar fundraisers:
“One of the great tragedies is that big money is buying elections. There is something wrong when a few people, in this case wealthy individuals are able to contribute unbelievably large sums of money. That is not what democracy is about. That is a movement toward oligarchy.”
However, Clooney clarified that most of the money he helped to raise would actually help to fund campaigns for democrats running for Congress. He added that the ultimate aim is for Democrats to win back the Senate, confirm a supreme court justice, and overturn the 2008 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling that allowed political spending by big corporations:
“We need to take the Senate back because we need to confirm a supreme court justice, because that fifth vote on the supreme court can overturn Citizens United and get this obscene, ridiculous amount of money out so I never have to do a fundraiser again.”
Ironic, isn’t it? George Clooney uses exactly the type of fundraising that Citizens United allowed—in order to fight it. It may well be a case of the end justifying the means, but would corporates contribute such large sums of money to a campaign that would ultimately take away their influence? Well, the jury is out on that.
Featured image via Getty/Andreas Rentz.
