So was it a $10 million Contribution, Then?

So, everybody was all excited that the Dems were going to have their convention in Charlotte.  NC is a key state and all (though the Dems ended up losing the state, in every way possible).

And there was some "formality" about guaranteeing a small loan, just $10 million (gulp!).  As we were told in the Democrat-owned press (i.e., McClatchy, the company tasked with writing ads for the Democratic party, thinly disguised as editorials or news stories):


Duke Energy Corp., whose CEO is leading the fundraising for the Democratic National Convention, is guaranteeing a $10 million line of credit for the event. 

The credit line from Fifth Third Bank is apparently the first time such an arrangement has been used by any Democratic convention organizers. A Duke spokesman said stockholders, not rate-payers, would be on the line if the convention's host committee defaults. 

But the head of the committee said it may never have to draw on the money. "It is just security in the event of a cash shortfall," Will Miller, acting executive director of the Charlotte organizing committee, said Friday. "The host committee is obligated to pay it back, and the host committee will pay it back." 

Some suggest the arrangement is tantamount to a large corporate contribution at a time when the party is touting new rules that bar corporate cash and individual contributions over $100,000. Democrats have pledged "a people's convention" and say the line of credit doesn't violate the new rules.

More after the jump... 



Okey dokey.  But....apparently the Dems DID in fact "draw" on the loan, all of it.  And now they have decided they don't need to pay it back.   They are actually NOT "obligated to pay it back," unless they feel like it.  Here is the N&O story, which does not even mention the $100,000 pledge being abused, though much was made of it during the campaign.  That was the theme we kept hearing:  Obama was going to raise all his money from unions, and small donors.  But in fact the way Obama raised more money than Romney by such a large margin (and he did) was by taking money from corporations.

Now, folks, don't try this at home; Angus and I are trained economists.  Someone with less knowledge might get hurt, so stand back:  I did some checking, and $10 million is actually more than $100,000.  (Technically, that's $10,000,000 > $100,000).   Furthermore, even the sort of people who usually are willing to ignore absurd hypocrisy so long as it serves the Democrats are actually expressing...well, surprise and disappointment:

“This is just a blank check for the party, and it undermines the whole [Obama] message of cracking down on special interests’ influence in Washington,” said Tyson Slocum, an energy specialist for Public Citizen. “It’s clear the administration is hypocritical.”

Mr. Slocum has this wrong.  It is not a "blank check" for the Dems.  It was a $10 million check made out specifically to the Dems.  The amount actually matters. Though I have to say it was a good investment for the Energy Company.  Duke Energy got $200 million in Porkulus funds.  What's a little non-transparency among such very close friends.