The Harris Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee set up by Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign with the Democratic National Committee, is still charging monthly recurring donors two months after Harris’ loss to Donald Trump. Some donors are expressing frustration at the ongoing charges, feeling that it is taking advantage of their loyalty.
While some donors may have expected a December charge for wrap-up expenses, they were surprised to see charges in January without explicit approval to continue the donations post-election. The committee had sent emails stating that donations would continue unless donors contacted them to stop.
This situation has sparked a debate over the ethics of online fundraising, particularly regarding recurring credit card contributions that are set on autopilot. The Trump campaign faced backlash for similar tactics in hiding monthly automatic donations in fine print, resulting in a high number of refunds.
The Harris Victory Fund situation differs in that donors knowingly signed up for monthly withdrawals. However, the question remains whether these contributions should continue after the victory has slipped away. Harris herself encouraged Democrats to stay in the fight, and while the fund is now defunct, donations made through the ActBlue page go directly to the DNC.
Redirecting funds raises ethical concerns about fairness to donors who contributed to an entity with Harris’ name on it. As Harris evaluates her political future, donors may question where their contributions are going. Some political professionals argue that it should be a best practice to stop drawing on donor bank accounts after Election Day.
A senior digital staffer from Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign criticized the Harris fund for continuing to tap small-dollar donors post-election, calling it “super shady.” Others, like Mike Nellis from the Democratic online fundraising firm Authentic, are comfortable with the DNC continuing to pull donations from Harris donors as long as it is transparent and compliant with regulations.
In conclusion, the ongoing charges from the Harris Victory Fund highlight the complexities of post-election fundraising and the ethical considerations surrounding it. Donors may feel conflicted about their contributions going to a different entity than originally intended, raising questions about transparency and accountability in political fundraising.
