The Mothership Vortex: A Quick Update

ActBlue announces reforms while the DCCC and DSCC remain silent

I’m on vacation, so I’ll keep this brief. Thank you to everyone who reached out—I’ll do my best to respond when I’m back. My analysis of Democratic fundraising practices apparently struck a nerve, and here’s what’s happened since:

The Good News: ActBlue Announces Changes

ActBlue announced significant policy changes, including requirements for matching program verification and stronger standards against impersonation. These look like good-faith reforms. When platforms take concrete steps to address predatory tactics, we should applaud and encourage the change.

What I Learned from the Response

Mothership Strategies is apparently well-known in DC circles as the epicenter of spam fundraising. Numerous insiders reached out saying they’ve been raising these concerns for years. As someone outside the Beltway, I found it telling that anyone I could have asked would have pointed straight to Mothership.

A Note on the Numbers

Some inquired about the 1.6% efficiency rate. To clarify, I note in the article that there are additional expenditures which could be legitimate. But I don’t know. So I only reported what I could verify via the data in FEC filings. A very generous interpretation might put the efficiency rate at 10-20% (still terrible). However, when PACs build their model on deception, it’s their job to prove their spending serves a legitimate purpose, not mine to assume it does.

(Also, as someone who believes in transparency, alongside the original article I made my code public so that it’s clear exactly how I got to those numbers.)

The Problem is Bigger Than One Firm

Several PACs reached out to distance themselves from Mothership. The House Majority PAC, for instance, noted they haven’t used the firm in several years—which checks out from the data. I’ve heard that even End Citizens United, which was founded by Mothership’s principals specifically to be a client for their firm, has since distanced themselves.

But here’s the thing: they’re still employing the same predatory tactics. Their recent fundraising emails violate almost every one of ActBlue’s new policies that take effect August 20. They might not use Mothership anymore, but the spam fundraising playbook remains unchanged. Other firms appear to be providing similar services. (I’m looking into this more.) The rot runs deeper than any single bad actor.

What Happens Next

I’m not a journalist; I’m a political scientist. I’m not trained to do investigative reporting. But actual journalists should. The response to this piece shows there’s much more to uncover about how Democratic fundraising became a self-enrichment scheme disguised as political activism. (I’ll continue my research in this area.)

One Telling Silence

I’ve heard from numerous groups since publishing—PACs defending themselves, DC insiders telling me that things are worse than they look, donors sharing their experiences. But there’s one notable silence: I’ve heard absolutely nothing from the DCCC, DSCC, or DNC. Not a word.

These are the official national party committees whose former staff founded Mothership and who benefit from the trickle of funds that actually escape the vortex. They have the power to set standards for the entire Democratic fundraising ecosystem.

The problem is bigger than Mothership. But until the party’s own campaign committees are willing to even acknowledge the problem, let alone address it, the extraction will continue.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​