Clinton fundraising leaves little for state parties
The Democratic front-runner says she's raising big checks to help state committees, but they've gotten to keep only 1 percent of the $60 million raised.
By Kenneth P. Vogel and Isaac Arnsdorf
05/02/16 05:21 AM EDT
In the days before Hillary Clinton launched an unprecedented big-money fundraising vehicle with state parties last summer, she vowed “to rebuild our party from the ground up,” proclaiming “when our state parties are strong, we win. That’s what will happen."
But less than 1 percent of the $61 million raised by that effort has stayed in the state parties’ coffers, according to a POLITICO analysis of the latest Federal Election Commission filings.
The venture, the Hillary Victory Fund, is a so-called joint fundraising committee comprised of Clinton’s presidential campaign, the Democratic National Committee and 32 state party committees. The setup allows Clinton to solicit checks of $350,000 or more from her super-rich supporters at extravagant fundraisers including a dinner at George Clooney’s house and a concert at Radio City Music Hall featuring Katy Perry and Elton John.
The victory fund has transferred $3.8 million to the state parties, but almost all of that cash ($3.3 million, or 88 percent) was quickly transferred to the DNC, usually within a day or two, by the Clinton staffer who controls the committee, POLITICO’s analysis of the FEC records found.
By contrast, the victory fund has transferred $15.4 million to Clinton’s campaign and $5.7 million to the DNC, which will work closely with Clinton’s campaign if and when she becomes the party’s nominee. And most of the $23.3 million spent directly by the victory fund has gone toward expenses that appear to have directly benefited Clinton’s campaign, including $2.8 million for “salary and overhead” and $8.6 million for web advertising that mostly looks indistinguishable from Clinton campaign ads and that has helped Clinton build a network of small donors who will be critical in a general election expected to cost each side well in excess of $1 billion.
The arrangement has sparked concerns among campaign finance watchdogs and allies of Clinton’s Democratic rival Bernie Sanders. They see it as a circumvention of campaign contribution limits by a national party apparatus intent on doing whatever it takes to help Clinton defeat Sanders during the party’s primary, and then win the White House.
But it is perhaps more notable that the arrangement has prompted concerns among some participating state party officials and their allies. They grumble privately that Clinton is merely using them to subsidize her own operation, while her allies overstate her support for their parties and knock Sanders for not doing enough to help the party.
“It’s a one-sided benefit,” said an official with one participating state party. The official, like those with several other state parties, declined to talk about the arrangement on the record for fear of drawing the ire of the DNC and the Clinton campaign.
In fact, the DNC, which has pushed back aggressively on charges that it is boosting Clinton at the expense of other Democrats, has advised state party officials on how to answer media inquiries about the arrangement, multiple sources familiar with the interactions told POLITICO.
“The DNC has given us some guidance on what they’re saying, but it’s not clear what we should be saying,” said the official. “I don’t think anyone wants to get crosswise with the national party because we do need their resources. But everyone who entered into these agreements was doing it because they were asked to, not because there are immediately clear benefits.”
Some fundraisers who work for state parties predict that the arrangement could actually hurt participating state parties. They worry that participating states that aren’t presidential battlegrounds and lack competitive Senate races could see very little return investment from the DNC or Clinton’s campaign, and are essentially acting as money laundering conduits for them. And for party committees in contested states, there’s another risk: They might find themselves unable to accept cash from rich donors whose checks to the victory fund counted toward their $10,000 donation limit to the state party in question — even if that party never got to spend the cash because it was transferred to the DNC.
Sources working with the Hillary Victory Fund said the committee is sensitive to these concerns and that state parties were asked to submit names of donors they wanted to save for themselves.
Clinton’s campaign and the DNC argue that all Democratic politicians and state parties — even those that aren’t enrolled in the victory fund — will benefit from its fundraising. That’s because the cash will go toward enhancing national voter data, and research and communications efforts that all state parties are entitled to.
And Josh Schwerin, a spokesman for Clinton’s campaign, suggested that a handful of key state parties last month received another $700,000 in transfers from the victory fund, and enjoyed other benefits from it that will be detailed in subsequent FEC reports. (The latest reports cover only through the end of March.)
“About $4.5 million has already been transferred to state parties and there is an additional $9 million on hand that will be distributed over the coming months as state parties ramp up for the general election,” he said in an email. He added that in April, “money raised through the HVF has started to be used to fund Democratic coordinated campaigns across the country, which will help strengthen the party and elect Democrats up and down the ballot.”
But Schwerin did not respond to follow-up questions about how much of the $700,000 in victory fund transfers to the state parties was subsequently transferred to the DNC.
DNC spokesman Mark Paustenbach pointed out that the national party committee “offered to engage in the same joint fundraising efforts with all the major presidential candidates early in the cycle, and we welcome the efforts of the candidates to help raise money for the DNC and state parties now to ensure we can build out the infrastructure to win in November.”
Sanders' campaign late last year signed a joint fundraising agreement with the DNC, but the committee has been largely inactive. Instead, after Sanders was chided by Clinton allies for not helping down-ballot Democrats, he sent out appeals to his vaunted email list that helped raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for a trio of progressive House candidates, who got to keep all the cash.
The Hillary Victory Fund, by contrast, allows the Clinton campaign to maintain tight control over the cash it raises and spends. The fund represents by far the most ambitious use to date of a joint fundraising committee — and arguably one of the most ambitious hard-dollar fundraising efforts in modern presidential politics. Until 2014, the most an individual could have given to such a committee was $123,200. But in April of that year, the Supreme Court, in a case called McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, struck down aggregate limits on total giving to federal campaigns, allowing maximum donations to as many different committees as a donor wanted.
That paved the way for massive joint fundraising committees that could accept ever-larger checks based on the number and type of committees that agreed to participate. In the case of the Hillary Victory Fund, the maximum donation in 2016 is $356,100, based on maximum donations of $2,700 to Hillary for America for the primary election, $33,400 to the DNC and $10,000 to the federal accounts of each of the 32 state parties.
After POLITICO revealed that the victory fund was asking for couples to donate or raise a whopping $353,400 in order to sit at a table with Clinton, Clooney and his wife, attorney Amal Clooney, at a fundraiser last month in San Francisco, Clooney admitted that was "an obscene amount of money." But he justified it by saying "the overwhelming amount of the money that we're raising is not going to Hillary to run for president, it's going to the down-ticket."
According to the agreements signed by the participating committees, which were obtained by POLITICO, the money is required to be distributed, at least initially, based on a formula set forth in joint fundraising agreements signed by the participants. The first $2,700 goes to the Clinton campaign, the next $33,400 goes to the DNC, and any remaining funds are to be distributed among the state parties.
But what happens to the cash after that initial distribution is left almost entirely to the discretion of the Clinton campaign. Its chief operating officer, Beth Jones, is the treasurer of the victory fund. And FEC filings show that within a day of most transfers from the victory fund to the state parties, identical sums were transferred from the state party accounts to the DNC, which Sanders’ supporters have accused of functioning as an adjunct of the Clinton campaign.
For example, the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party received $43,500 from the victory fund on Nov. 2, only to transfer the same amount to the DNC that same day. The pattern repeated itself after the Minnesota party received transfers from the victory fund of $20,600 on Dec. 1 (the party sent the same amount to the DNC the next day) and $150,000 on Jan. 4 (it transferred the same amount to the DNC that day).
That means that Minnesota’s net gain from its participation in the victory fund was precisely $0 through the end of March. Meanwhile, the DNC pocketed an extra $214,100 in cash routed through Minnesota — much of which the DNC wouldn’t have been able to accept directly, since it came from donors who had mostly had already maxed out to the national party committee.
A similar pattern transpired with most of the participating state parties. As of March 31, only eight state parties (most of which were in battleground states such as Colorado, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Virginia) had received more from the victory fund than was transferred from their accounts to the DNC.
But even if state parties aren’t getting to keep the victory fund cash, they benefit from money spent to enhance the DNC’s data, research and design services, said Jeremy Kennedy, the executive director of the Maine Democratic State Committee, which is a victory fund participant.
“In my opinion, strengthening the state parties strengthens the DNC and vice versa,” Kennedy said. “I’d be the first one to tell you if I felt differently.” His party received $59,800 from the victory fund, but transferred that exact amount to the DNC, though Kennedy said he hopes that money will find its way back to benefit the party in Maine.
While state party officials were made aware that Clinton's campaign would control the movement of the funds between participating committees, one operative who has relationships with multiple state parties said that some of their officials have complained that they weren't notified of the transfers into and out of their accounts until after the fact. That's despite their stipulations in the banking documents that their affirmative consent was required before such transfers could be made from their accounts. But the operative said that the state party officials are reluctant to complain to the DNC about the arrangement out of fear of financial retribution.
“Particularly the parties in states that are not competitive, they worry that the DNC won’t let them keep any of the money, but the historical reality is that they wouldn’t have gotten the money anyway,” the operative said.
Asked about whether the victory fund has taken steps to keep the state parties apprised of the transfers, Schwerin said, “We work closely with all parties involved and all transfers occur in accordance with the joint fundraising agreements.”
Amalgamated Bank — the union-run bank that handles the accounts for the victory fund, as well as Clinton’s campaign and the DNC — did not directly address the complaints about money being transferred without consent of the state party committees.
“We do not comment on the account activity of any customers other than to say that all clients enjoy the highest standards of security protocols and safeguards to ensure only listed account owners or their designated agents are able to execute transactions of any kind and, of course, always in full compliance of all banking laws,” said bank spokesman Loren Riegelhaupt.
Another area in which critics contend the Hillary Victory Fund appears to be pushing the bounds of joint fundraising is in its online advertising campaign, which has included many ads urging readers to “Stop Trump” or to support Clinton.
While joint fundraising committees are allowed to pay for ads as part of their fundraising efforts, they are forbidden from funding campaign advertising urging voters to vote for or against specific candidates. Those types of ads qualify as electioneering expenses that are supposed to be paid for directly by the campaign or by party committees.
Schwerin said the “Stop Trump” ads aren’t urging readers to vote against Trump. “All of HVF's activities, including online ads, are for fundraising purposes,” he said.
Most of the victory funds ads were executed by the same firm that does advertising for Clinton’s campaign, Bully Pulpit Interactive, which has been paid $8.6 million by the Hillary Victory Fund for online advertising, and $9.2 million by Hillary for America for online advertising and media buys.
Those victory fund ads, as well as a direct mail campaign funded by the same committee, “appear to benefit only [the Clinton campaign] by generating low-dollar contributions that flow only to HFA, rather than to the DNC or any of the participating state party committees,” charged Sanders’ campaign lawyer in an open letter sent to the DNC in April. It alleged that the victory fund was essentially a pass-through to allow Clinton to benefit from contributions that far exceed the amount that her campaign could legally accept.
In a news release accompanying the letter, Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver argued “it is unprecedented for the DNC to allow a joint committee to be exploited to the benefit of one candidate in the midst of a contested nominating contest.”
Clinton’s campaign manager Robby Mook called the letter a “shameful” and “irresponsible” fundraising ploy, and urged Sanders to “think about what he can do to help the party he is seeking to lead.”
The Democratic front-runner says she's raising big checks to help state committees, but they've gotten to keep only 1 percent of the $60 million raised.
By Kenneth P. Vogel and Isaac Arnsdorf
05/02/16 05:21 AM EDT
In the days before Hillary Clinton launched an unprecedented big-money fundraising vehicle with state parties last summer, she vowed “to rebuild our party from the ground up,” proclaiming “when our state parties are strong, we win. That’s what will happen."
But less than 1 percent of the $61 million raised by that effort has stayed in the state parties’ coffers, according to a POLITICO analysis of the latest Federal Election Commission filings.
The venture, the Hillary Victory Fund, is a so-called joint fundraising committee comprised of Clinton’s presidential campaign, the Democratic National Committee and 32 state party committees. The setup allows Clinton to solicit checks of $350,000 or more from her super-rich supporters at extravagant fundraisers including a dinner at George Clooney’s house and a concert at Radio City Music Hall featuring Katy Perry and Elton John.
The victory fund has transferred $3.8 million to the state parties, but almost all of that cash ($3.3 million, or 88 percent) was quickly transferred to the DNC, usually within a day or two, by the Clinton staffer who controls the committee, POLITICO’s analysis of the FEC records found.
By contrast, the victory fund has transferred $15.4 million to Clinton’s campaign and $5.7 million to the DNC, which will work closely with Clinton’s campaign if and when she becomes the party’s nominee. And most of the $23.3 million spent directly by the victory fund has gone toward expenses that appear to have directly benefited Clinton’s campaign, including $2.8 million for “salary and overhead” and $8.6 million for web advertising that mostly looks indistinguishable from Clinton campaign ads and that has helped Clinton build a network of small donors who will be critical in a general election expected to cost each side well in excess of $1 billion.
The arrangement has sparked concerns among campaign finance watchdogs and allies of Clinton’s Democratic rival Bernie Sanders. They see it as a circumvention of campaign contribution limits by a national party apparatus intent on doing whatever it takes to help Clinton defeat Sanders during the party’s primary, and then win the White House.
But it is perhaps more notable that the arrangement has prompted concerns among some participating state party officials and their allies. They grumble privately that Clinton is merely using them to subsidize her own operation, while her allies overstate her support for their parties and knock Sanders for not doing enough to help the party.
“It’s a one-sided benefit,” said an official with one participating state party. The official, like those with several other state parties, declined to talk about the arrangement on the record for fear of drawing the ire of the DNC and the Clinton campaign.
In fact, the DNC, which has pushed back aggressively on charges that it is boosting Clinton at the expense of other Democrats, has advised state party officials on how to answer media inquiries about the arrangement, multiple sources familiar with the interactions told POLITICO.
“The DNC has given us some guidance on what they’re saying, but it’s not clear what we should be saying,” said the official. “I don’t think anyone wants to get crosswise with the national party because we do need their resources. But everyone who entered into these agreements was doing it because they were asked to, not because there are immediately clear benefits.”
Some fundraisers who work for state parties predict that the arrangement could actually hurt participating state parties. They worry that participating states that aren’t presidential battlegrounds and lack competitive Senate races could see very little return investment from the DNC or Clinton’s campaign, and are essentially acting as money laundering conduits for them. And for party committees in contested states, there’s another risk: They might find themselves unable to accept cash from rich donors whose checks to the victory fund counted toward their $10,000 donation limit to the state party in question — even if that party never got to spend the cash because it was transferred to the DNC.
Sources working with the Hillary Victory Fund said the committee is sensitive to these concerns and that state parties were asked to submit names of donors they wanted to save for themselves.
Clinton’s campaign and the DNC argue that all Democratic politicians and state parties — even those that aren’t enrolled in the victory fund — will benefit from its fundraising. That’s because the cash will go toward enhancing national voter data, and research and communications efforts that all state parties are entitled to.
And Josh Schwerin, a spokesman for Clinton’s campaign, suggested that a handful of key state parties last month received another $700,000 in transfers from the victory fund, and enjoyed other benefits from it that will be detailed in subsequent FEC reports. (The latest reports cover only through the end of March.)
“About $4.5 million has already been transferred to state parties and there is an additional $9 million on hand that will be distributed over the coming months as state parties ramp up for the general election,” he said in an email. He added that in April, “money raised through the HVF has started to be used to fund Democratic coordinated campaigns across the country, which will help strengthen the party and elect Democrats up and down the ballot.”
But Schwerin did not respond to follow-up questions about how much of the $700,000 in victory fund transfers to the state parties was subsequently transferred to the DNC.
DNC spokesman Mark Paustenbach pointed out that the national party committee “offered to engage in the same joint fundraising efforts with all the major presidential candidates early in the cycle, and we welcome the efforts of the candidates to help raise money for the DNC and state parties now to ensure we can build out the infrastructure to win in November.”
Sanders' campaign late last year signed a joint fundraising agreement with the DNC, but the committee has been largely inactive. Instead, after Sanders was chided by Clinton allies for not helping down-ballot Democrats, he sent out appeals to his vaunted email list that helped raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for a trio of progressive House candidates, who got to keep all the cash.
The Hillary Victory Fund, by contrast, allows the Clinton campaign to maintain tight control over the cash it raises and spends. The fund represents by far the most ambitious use to date of a joint fundraising committee — and arguably one of the most ambitious hard-dollar fundraising efforts in modern presidential politics. Until 2014, the most an individual could have given to such a committee was $123,200. But in April of that year, the Supreme Court, in a case called McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, struck down aggregate limits on total giving to federal campaigns, allowing maximum donations to as many different committees as a donor wanted.
That paved the way for massive joint fundraising committees that could accept ever-larger checks based on the number and type of committees that agreed to participate. In the case of the Hillary Victory Fund, the maximum donation in 2016 is $356,100, based on maximum donations of $2,700 to Hillary for America for the primary election, $33,400 to the DNC and $10,000 to the federal accounts of each of the 32 state parties.
After POLITICO revealed that the victory fund was asking for couples to donate or raise a whopping $353,400 in order to sit at a table with Clinton, Clooney and his wife, attorney Amal Clooney, at a fundraiser last month in San Francisco, Clooney admitted that was "an obscene amount of money." But he justified it by saying "the overwhelming amount of the money that we're raising is not going to Hillary to run for president, it's going to the down-ticket."
According to the agreements signed by the participating committees, which were obtained by POLITICO, the money is required to be distributed, at least initially, based on a formula set forth in joint fundraising agreements signed by the participants. The first $2,700 goes to the Clinton campaign, the next $33,400 goes to the DNC, and any remaining funds are to be distributed among the state parties.
But what happens to the cash after that initial distribution is left almost entirely to the discretion of the Clinton campaign. Its chief operating officer, Beth Jones, is the treasurer of the victory fund. And FEC filings show that within a day of most transfers from the victory fund to the state parties, identical sums were transferred from the state party accounts to the DNC, which Sanders’ supporters have accused of functioning as an adjunct of the Clinton campaign.
For example, the Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party received $43,500 from the victory fund on Nov. 2, only to transfer the same amount to the DNC that same day. The pattern repeated itself after the Minnesota party received transfers from the victory fund of $20,600 on Dec. 1 (the party sent the same amount to the DNC the next day) and $150,000 on Jan. 4 (it transferred the same amount to the DNC that day).
That means that Minnesota’s net gain from its participation in the victory fund was precisely $0 through the end of March. Meanwhile, the DNC pocketed an extra $214,100 in cash routed through Minnesota — much of which the DNC wouldn’t have been able to accept directly, since it came from donors who had mostly had already maxed out to the national party committee.
A similar pattern transpired with most of the participating state parties. As of March 31, only eight state parties (most of which were in battleground states such as Colorado, Florida, Nevada, New Hampshire and Virginia) had received more from the victory fund than was transferred from their accounts to the DNC.
But even if state parties aren’t getting to keep the victory fund cash, they benefit from money spent to enhance the DNC’s data, research and design services, said Jeremy Kennedy, the executive director of the Maine Democratic State Committee, which is a victory fund participant.
“In my opinion, strengthening the state parties strengthens the DNC and vice versa,” Kennedy said. “I’d be the first one to tell you if I felt differently.” His party received $59,800 from the victory fund, but transferred that exact amount to the DNC, though Kennedy said he hopes that money will find its way back to benefit the party in Maine.
While state party officials were made aware that Clinton's campaign would control the movement of the funds between participating committees, one operative who has relationships with multiple state parties said that some of their officials have complained that they weren't notified of the transfers into and out of their accounts until after the fact. That's despite their stipulations in the banking documents that their affirmative consent was required before such transfers could be made from their accounts. But the operative said that the state party officials are reluctant to complain to the DNC about the arrangement out of fear of financial retribution.
“Particularly the parties in states that are not competitive, they worry that the DNC won’t let them keep any of the money, but the historical reality is that they wouldn’t have gotten the money anyway,” the operative said.
Asked about whether the victory fund has taken steps to keep the state parties apprised of the transfers, Schwerin said, “We work closely with all parties involved and all transfers occur in accordance with the joint fundraising agreements.”
Amalgamated Bank — the union-run bank that handles the accounts for the victory fund, as well as Clinton’s campaign and the DNC — did not directly address the complaints about money being transferred without consent of the state party committees.
“We do not comment on the account activity of any customers other than to say that all clients enjoy the highest standards of security protocols and safeguards to ensure only listed account owners or their designated agents are able to execute transactions of any kind and, of course, always in full compliance of all banking laws,” said bank spokesman Loren Riegelhaupt.
Another area in which critics contend the Hillary Victory Fund appears to be pushing the bounds of joint fundraising is in its online advertising campaign, which has included many ads urging readers to “Stop Trump” or to support Clinton.
While joint fundraising committees are allowed to pay for ads as part of their fundraising efforts, they are forbidden from funding campaign advertising urging voters to vote for or against specific candidates. Those types of ads qualify as electioneering expenses that are supposed to be paid for directly by the campaign or by party committees.
Schwerin said the “Stop Trump” ads aren’t urging readers to vote against Trump. “All of HVF's activities, including online ads, are for fundraising purposes,” he said.
Most of the victory funds ads were executed by the same firm that does advertising for Clinton’s campaign, Bully Pulpit Interactive, which has been paid $8.6 million by the Hillary Victory Fund for online advertising, and $9.2 million by Hillary for America for online advertising and media buys.
Those victory fund ads, as well as a direct mail campaign funded by the same committee, “appear to benefit only [the Clinton campaign] by generating low-dollar contributions that flow only to HFA, rather than to the DNC or any of the participating state party committees,” charged Sanders’ campaign lawyer in an open letter sent to the DNC in April. It alleged that the victory fund was essentially a pass-through to allow Clinton to benefit from contributions that far exceed the amount that her campaign could legally accept.
In a news release accompanying the letter, Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver argued “it is unprecedented for the DNC to allow a joint committee to be exploited to the benefit of one candidate in the midst of a contested nominating contest.”
Clinton’s campaign manager Robby Mook called the letter a “shameful” and “irresponsible” fundraising ploy, and urged Sanders to “think about what he can do to help the party he is seeking to lead.”
Yesterday at 7:52 am by Rocky
» utube 3/28/24 MM&C Iraqi Dinar - IQD Update - SWIFT - Purchasing Power - Urban Renaissance - Releas
Yesterday at 7:51 am by Rocky
» Al-Mandalawi: Iraq is witnessing competition between major companies...and the House of Representati
Yesterday at 7:49 am by Rocky
» The President of the Republic stresses the importance of the role of programmers in developing the w
Yesterday at 7:46 am by Rocky
» The Minister of Industry and Minerals follows up on the technical and production performance of the
Yesterday at 7:45 am by Rocky
» The Minister of Finance is following up on the field the progress of the newly implemented ASYCUDA s
Yesterday at 7:44 am by Rocky
» Statistics: There are more than 15 million bank accounts in Iraq
Yesterday at 7:42 am by Rocky
» Representative: One paragraph hinders the passage of a general amnesty within the House of Represent
Yesterday at 7:37 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary Finance: “The draft federal budget law will be devoid of new job grades.”
Yesterday at 7:36 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary action to resolve the fate of “food security contracts” in 15 governorates
Yesterday at 7:35 am by Rocky
» 300 factories turned into "iron scrap" in Diyala
Yesterday at 7:34 am by Rocky
» A deputy expects the dollar exchange rate to reach 140 Iraqi dinars
Yesterday at 7:32 am by Rocky
» Al-Yasiri: The American administration is working hard to destroy the Iraqi economy
Yesterday at 7:31 am by Rocky
» Infographic: The highest annual salaries of leaders of Arab countries
Yesterday at 7:30 am by Rocky
» Communications announces that the electronic signature project has reached advanced stages
Yesterday at 7:29 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary Integrity presents a file related to Kuwaiti violations of Iraqi oil
Yesterday at 7:27 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary move to include amendments to Parliament’s internal regulations on the agenda (documen
Yesterday at 7:25 am by Rocky
» The Iraqi President urges the Minister of Finance to expedite the payment of salaries to the Kurdist
Yesterday at 7:23 am by Rocky
» Central Bank of Iraq sales exceeded $251 million at today’s auction
Yesterday at 7:21 am by Rocky
» The Foreign Minister questions the "Iraqi resistance" attacks against Israel: the other side did not
Yesterday at 7:20 am by Rocky
» The Minister of Labor announces progress in the electronic payment system
Yesterday at 7:17 am by Rocky
» Interior Ministry: For the first time, we controlled the smuggling of petroleum derivatives by 98 pe
Yesterday at 7:16 am by Rocky
» International companies offer offers to invest in the Dhi Qar marshes.. What distinguishes them?
Yesterday at 7:15 am by Rocky
» “Tough” comments on interest rates raise the dollar globally
Yesterday at 7:14 am by Rocky
» Iraq is the fifth largest oil supplier to South Korea in a month
Yesterday at 7:12 am by Rocky
» Recovering more than 100 billion as a result of more than 200,000 employees on social welfare
Yesterday at 7:11 am by Rocky
» The Sudanese consultant announces the completion of Baghdad Metro track designs
Yesterday at 7:08 am by Rocky
» Al-Sudani stresses ending the problem of triple-shift schools
Yesterday at 7:07 am by Rocky
» Iraq begins building two new tankers to transport petroleum products
Yesterday at 7:06 am by Rocky
» Forming a council for “competition and preventing monopoly”
Yesterday at 7:04 am by Rocky
» Features of an Iraqi-Turkish agreement regarding the status of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party
Yesterday at 7:02 am by Rocky
» {Al-Buzrajiya} between the hammer of fraud and the power of the owners
Yesterday at 7:01 am by Rocky
» Ministry of Oil: The gas sector is witnessing great development
Yesterday at 6:59 am by Rocky
» An agreement with Britain in the field of securities
Yesterday at 6:58 am by Rocky
» Discussions between Baghdad and Ankara to open a new port
Yesterday at 6:57 am by Rocky
» Trade: About 11 million citizens updated their new card information
Yesterday at 6:56 am by Rocky
» Electronic payment is sustainable growth
Yesterday at 6:55 am by Rocky
» Experts: Iraq qualifies to be an important tourist country
Yesterday at 6:54 am by Rocky
» Amending the Health Professions Law “robs” scientists of the central appointment 3 years after it wa
Yesterday at 5:20 am by Rocky
» Is the “blessings package” that Erbil paid to the citizens of Kurdistan related to the elections?
Yesterday at 5:19 am by Rocky
» Exceeded 5,000 projects.. Allocating 10 trillion dinars to support governorate reconstruction plans
Yesterday at 5:18 am by Rocky
» “His need no longer exists.” Parliamentary Finance confirms the necessity of returning the retiremen
Yesterday at 5:17 am by Rocky
» To communicate with the bases... 12 directives from Al-Sadr, including blocking numbers for non-gove
Yesterday at 5:15 am by Rocky
» In an interview with "Baghdad Today"... an Iranian researcher reveals the importance of Haniyeh's vi
Yesterday at 5:14 am by Rocky
» After it was 63 trillion in 2023... the 2024 budget deficit will rise to 80 trillion dinars
Yesterday at 5:13 am by Rocky
» Parliament reveals the date of the first evaluation of the governors and determines the party respon
Yesterday at 5:11 am by Rocky
» The President of the Republic informs Al-Araji and Al-Basri: Momentum must be mobilized to eliminate
Yesterday at 5:10 am by Rocky
» Can the Federal Court sue others? A legal clarification of its response mechanism to abuse
Yesterday at 5:09 am by Rocky
» Despite promises to soon stop burning gas.. What is the secret behind Iraq renewing the Iranian gas
Yesterday at 5:07 am by Rocky
» Advisor to Al-Sudani: The dollar is on the way to further decline, and 70% of Iraqi traders have ent
Yesterday at 5:06 am by Rocky
» Iraq exported more than 99 million barrels of oil last February
Yesterday at 5:04 am by Rocky
» Barzani “gives good news” to Kurdistan employees: salaries, land, and loan exemptions
Yesterday at 5:03 am by Rocky
» Alia Nassif: Nour Zuhair returned to the port of Umm Qasr to make deals.. An influential Shiite forc
Yesterday at 5:02 am by Rocky
» The Prime Minister announces the movement of nearly 500 stalled projects
Yesterday at 5:00 am by Rocky
» A government strategy to enhance investments.. Iraq is on the verge of a new era of economic develop
Yesterday at 4:59 am by Rocky
» Ranging between 20% and 50%.. The Kurdistan government decides to reduce service fees, customs dutie
Yesterday at 4:58 am by Rocky
» Al-Sudani: The reform approach in the security services is an integral part of reform in other secto
Yesterday at 4:56 am by Rocky
» Everyone in Iraq wants the Sudanese visit to Washington to be successful, even the factions!
Yesterday at 4:55 am by Rocky
» Sources and experts expect the agenda.. in his bag is the Baghdad dollar and the factions’ truce, bu
Yesterday at 4:54 am by Rocky
» The decision to raise gasoline prices arouses the ire of drivers...a reminder of the large demonstra
Yesterday at 4:53 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary services: 3 important hospitals in Baghdad will enter service at the end of the year
Yesterday at 4:52 am by Rocky
» Iraq signs a contract to supply Iranian gas for a period of five years
Yesterday at 4:50 am by Rocky
» Parliament adds a voting paragraph on amending the Penal Code to its agenda
Yesterday at 4:49 am by Rocky
» His political advisor: We are not afraid of Sudanese entering the elections alone
Yesterday at 4:48 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary services explain the reasons for the rise in real estate prices in Baghdad
Yesterday at 4:46 am by Rocky
» Attia, criticizing the government's decisions: "The citizen's feathers will be ruffled without servi
Yesterday at 4:45 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary Communications: Zain Iraq and Asiacell did not pay their debts
Yesterday at 4:44 am by Rocky
» The Governor of Karbala announces the imminent establishment of the largest industrial city in the c
Yesterday at 4:43 am by Rocky
» A government determination to end the issue of displaced persons in the middle of this year
Yesterday at 4:42 am by Rocky
» Iraq buys gas from Kurdistan to generate electricity
Yesterday at 4:41 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary signatures to include an amendment to the internal regulations to decide the choice of
Yesterday at 4:40 am by Rocky
» In Basra.. a demonstration against foreign workers in Iraqi companies (video)
Yesterday at 4:38 am by Rocky
» Al-Samarrai: Presidency of Parliament is an entitlement to the constituents, and calling it a “frame
Yesterday at 4:36 am by Rocky
» Electronic food supplies in 6 governorates... covering 11 million Iraqis and “writing off” about 700
Yesterday at 4:34 am by Rocky
» Corruption of the Ministry of Transport.. Representatives express their surprise at the minister’s s
Yesterday at 4:32 am by Rocky
» The biggest supporter of the invasion of Iraq.. The death of former US Senator Joe Lieberman
Yesterday at 4:31 am by Rocky
» Iraq is ranked “late.” A list of the most and least safe Arab countries for women
Yesterday at 4:30 am by Rocky
» The Council of Ministers exempts the Gulf Interconnection Authority from guarantee fees: it is a gov
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:48 am by Rocky
» The Iraqi government raises the size of the 2024 budget, and Parliament is “surprised”
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:46 am by Rocky
» Popular Movement: We have many economic options away from American hegemony
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:42 am by Rocky
» The Oil Parliament stresses the need to transfer part of the revenues to the producing governorates
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:41 am by Rocky
» It will cover 14 regions in eastern Iraq.. A deputy reveals the “border electricity” project
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:40 am by Rocky
» Experts Warn Mass Migration Threatens US Food Security
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:37 am by Bama Diva
» Al-Fateh: America occupies Iraq through agreements
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:37 am by Rocky
» Anger in Iraq over a "sudden decision"... and a reminder of a "general strike" that paralyzed the co
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:34 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary Committee: Parliament is discussing today a decision that “disturbed” the Iraqis
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:33 am by Rocky
» Ministry of Electricity: Our production will reach 27 thousand megawatts by May
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:31 am by Rocky
» Diagnosing the “most important” problems in the oil file between Baghdad and Erbil.. What is the rel
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:30 am by Rocky
» The Iraqi Fiqh Academy and the Sunni Endowment issue a fatwa to pay Zakat al-Fitr
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:28 am by Rocky
» The National Bank of Iraq continues its digital transformation by launching its new banking system a
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:26 am by Rocky
» Parliamentary Investment and the Central Bank are discussing the housing initiative
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:25 am by Rocky
» The Prime Minister announces the restart of 500 suspended projects
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:23 am by Rocky
» Al-Barti assesses the region's employees: Your salaries are insured and will be paid after resettlem
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:21 am by Rocky
» Iraqi-American discussions in anticipation of the Sudanese visit
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:20 am by Rocky
» Iraq and Turkey hold meetings in Ankara to discuss technical issues related to the development road
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:17 am by Rocky
» A government parliamentary agreement to support budget revenues and governorate allocations for inve
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:16 am by Rocky
» Oil: The gas sector is witnessing great development
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:15 am by Rocky
» A Kurdish-French agreement to develop trade and economic relations
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:13 am by Rocky
» Exchange companies in Mosul demand that they be entered into the currency selling window
Wed 27 Mar 2024, 7:12 am by Rocky