State Democrats set up digital ad business with an influential private company. Now a key Dem official is becoming its CEO.
At a meeting in Little Rock, Arkansas last week, the Association of State Democratic Committees — an umbrella group for state parties — voted to recommend state races use one liberal firm, TargetSmart, for a major portion of digital ad buys, which could be worth millions.
TargetSmart announced on May 7 that Liz Walters, outgoing chair of the Ohio Democratic Party, is taking over as CEO this summer. Walters, who made her departure public in a post on X, said she would leave the state party role by June 30. And until the week before the group's meeting, she was part of the ASDC's leadership team as treasurer.
Walters recused herself from the TargetSmart vote. But she has reportedly praised the use of TargetSmart repeatedly in recent years, went to the meeting where the resolution passed, and continues to sit on a key board of state party leaders tied to the deal.
Word of the deal spread through Democratic circles this week, leaving some in the party worried about the possibility of a conflict of interest — or the perception of one — at a time when Democrats are already struggling mightily. Others are concerned that using a sole media-buying platform for many digital ads will stifle innovation and raise costs for campaigns.
'I just don't understand this at all. It's the ultimate solution in search of a problem,' said Rob Flaherty, the former deputy campaign manager for Kamala Harris' 2024 presidential campaign. 'No one who works directly in this space is asking for this, nor should we want it. Even the stated rationale makes no sense: This is a space where competition leads to better pricing. A strategic monopoly doesn't serve us.'
A Democratic campaign veteran who, like others in this story was granted anonymity to speak freely, said the deal is 'a conflict of interest you could see from space.' A Democratic state party chair said 'the perception sucks, the perception is terrible.'
Walters responded in a statement that the decision to leave the Ohio Democratic Party, 'an organization I love,' was 'a hard one.' She added that 'in the interest of transparency, as soon as I decided to join TargetSmart, we made the news public and I recused myself from all matters involving the company.'
Axios first wrote about the existence of a deal between the ASDC and TargetSmart, but concerns about a conflict of interest have not been reported before.
ASDC president Jane Kleeb said in an interview that it was her suggestion, not Walters', to give TargetSmart the special status. Kleeb defended the decision as a way for state parties to save money and solve other problems, such as navigating a bewildering web of new digital firms.
She said that Walters has praised TargetSmart internally over the years but added that 'lots of us' have also spoken highly of the company since they've worked closely with them.
'There is no conflict of interest. We have been talking about this for years,' she said. 'I knew that the vendors would have their guns and knives out for me because they will perceive it as taking business away from them. But it doesn't.'
She added, 'I am trying to innovate and create reliable streams of revenue' for state parties and 'with this system, there will be a 5 percent return to state parties, which is a really wonderful thing.'
Other Democrats in favor of the resolution said that the setup would also help ensure the digital safety of voter files.
A second Democratic state party chair granted anonymity to speak candidly about the deal said that Walters praised TargetSmart at multiple ASDC meetings in recent months, including in Little Rock last week.
'Every single meeting she would talk about the benefit of the tool and why it's really important, and anytime people would raise questions, basically, she was answering them as CEO of TargetSmart, but that wasn't the role she was in,' said the person, who was in the meetings.
'It's an unfortunate way to enter into a relationship, because I think it could be a good tool, but now it's clouded,' the person added.
TargetSmart has worked with the Democratic state parties for years to house their voter files, a precious resource used by campaigns. The ASDC said that it asked TargetSmart to develop its digital ad-buying tool in 2023, and that later it was rolled out to some trial participants, including in Ohio. State parties generate revenue when their voter file is bought and sold, as well as when their voter file data is used on TargetSmart's ad-buying platform.
The ASDC's nonbinding resolution states that members are encouraged to either 'institute a requirement' for voter file users to utilize TargetSmart for digital ad-buying or 'strongly encourage' users to 'explore utilizing' the platform.
A TargetSmart spokesperson said the buying platform is more cost efficient, reliable and enables transparency in ad placements. And TargetSmart senior adviser Tom Bonier said in a statement that 'we're proud to have the opportunity to continue to serve state parties as they provide this cutting-edge resource to their members.' He didn't respond to a question about when TargetSmart began discussions with Walters about the job.
A person close to Walters said that she 'resigned as treasurer well before the meeting, recused herself from the process entirely and it passed unanimously.'
But that has done little to tamp down criticism of Walters among some Democrats.
'Even being there is a way to exert influence, especially when it was already announced that she was going to TargetSmart,' said the Democratic campaign veteran.
Walters submitted her resignation as treasurer of the ASDC on May 20, the person close to her said. The ASDC passed the resolution unanimously on May 29.
Walters is also on the board of a linked 'co-op' made up of state party officials that manages its voter file data. She is expected to leave that entity and as head of the Ohio Democratic Party next week.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
28 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump is right about border and criminals, but he's losing voters with mass deportations
President Donald Trump delivered on his key campaign promise: Securing the border. Yet the only thing falling faster than illegal crossings has been his approval rating on immigration. The problem: Instead of building on his win at the border with more popular arrests of criminal threats inside the country, the administration is going after migrants indiscriminately. Democrats can't deny it: The border crisis is over. Border Patrol arrests have fallen nearly 90% since December to near-record lows. Nonetheless, only 40% of voters approved of the president's handling of immigration in a July Quinnipiac poll, while 55% disapproved. The 15-point approval deficit contrasts with a +1 rating in the January Q-poll. Other polls show similarly dramatic declines. Of course, people don't actually want more illegal immigration. Polls consistently show that the president is the most trusted on the border. Instead, it's the deportations from within the United States driving the discontent. Quinnipiac's July poll found that only 38% approve of how the administration is handling deportations. That doesn't mean voters back the other side — 84% of disagree with Democrats who want to suspend deportations completely, according to a March Pew Research Center poll. But Trump emphasized that he would prioritize ending 'sanctuary and protection for dangerous criminals' — the position of 81% of voters. Unfortunately, most voters don't believe the president is doing that right now. Even as late as June, voters told CBS News they thought that the president was prioritizing 'dangerous criminals' over peaceful immigrants 53%-47%. By mid-July, it was 44%-56% the other way — an 18-point swing in a month. What happened? Voters started to see how the priorities shifted. According to The Post's reporting, agents were instructed in late May to focus on 'quantity over quality' to meet a 3,000-per-day 'goal' set by the White House. ICE was advised to target people looking for work at Home Depot and to raid businesses in industries likely to employ illegal workers. Rather than scooping up violent criminals recklessly sent back to the streets by New York City or even cleaning out the homeless shelters costing New York taxpayers a fortune, ICE is arresting immigrants who are helping power the Trump economy. Since the White House ordered the change, there has been a dramatic escalation in arrests of people without criminal records. In June, the number of immigrants arrested without criminal convictions was 1,100% higher than it was even in 2017 during the first Trump term: nearly 6,000 per week. Yet there are still half a million illegal immigrants with criminal convictions out there to remove — and ICE should locate them before spending its time and resources on workers. It's common sense: ICE agents told The Post that the policy was 'leading them to leave some dangerous criminal illegal migrants on the streets.' Setting aside politics and crime, Trump has already publicly acknowledged there's an economic downside to these non-criminal deportations. 'Our aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long-time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace,' he said in June, referencing farms, hotels, and leisure businesses. The president is correct. Besides the border, the president's other primary election issue was inflation. And immigrants reduce inflation — not, as critics claim, by depressing wages for American workers, but by increasing production of goods and services. When supply decreases, prices go up for consumers, as we painfully saw throughout the pandemic. Immigrant workers also benefit their American counterparts: Companies invest more when there is enough labor to quickly construct and fully man facilities, and Americans end up in better jobs as managers and supervisors when immigrant workers fill lesser-skilled jobs. Booting the nearly 2 million illegal-immigrant construction workers will pull Americans out of those better-paying jobs, not into the labor force. Whatever the immigration politics are, Trump's midterm success will ultimately depend most on his economic outcomes. Americans re-elected him because they remember his first term before the pandemic as a period of stable wage and job growth — but random mass deportations are both politically unpopular and economically destabilizing. Although the president has promised 'changes are coming' on deportations, none have yet occurred. In April, Trump floated the idea that employers might be able to sponsor their illegal workers for visas if the workers leave the country and return legally. That's a great starting point: If no employer is willing to vouch for them, deportation likely won't have much economic downside. The president has diagnosed the problem. He's come up with a viable solution. And the One Big Beautiful Bill shows he's capable of navigating controversial legislation across the finish line. With the economy slowing and midterms looming, there's no reason to wait. David J. Bier is Director of Immigration Studies at the Cato Institute.
Epoch Times
29 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
Judge Expands Texas AG's Restraining Order Over Texas Democrats' Fundraising
A judge on Saturday ruled to expand a restraining order against former congressman Robert Francis 'Beto' O'Rourke (D-Texas) and his political organization over its fundraising efforts for Democratic lawmakers who left Texas amid a state House battle over redistricting. In the order, Judge Megan Fahey wrote that O'Rourke, also a presidential candidate in the 2020 election, cannot send money out of Texas. She ruled in favor of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, after Paxton sought to remove the charter of Powered by People, the organization headed by O'Rourke.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Texas Gov. Abbott blasted for special session on gerrymandering failing again
In Texas on Friday, a special session to vote on new redistricted maps by state Republicans failed after not enough Democrats showed up to vote. There is another special session scheduled for Monday. Texas State Rep. John Bucy III (D) joins Alex Witt to discuss the issue.
