Bill Burton Explains Why Super PACs Have Such Lame Names

Test Ticker

MOTHER JONES NEEDS YOUR HELP

Our fiscal year ends today, and we still need upwards of $60,000 in online donations to finish our budget at break-even, or as close as we possibly can. We’ve already cut $1 million in costs. We can't afford to come up short. And there’s more about why this is so urgent here, or in this primer about our nonprofit journalism and finances. Straight up: We can get there, but it's going to take more people who care enough about our journalism to be reading this blurb to pitch in and support it than normal. Please help if you can.

Mother Jones needs your help. Our fiscal year ends today, and we still need $60,000 in online donations to get to break-even, or a lot closer. We’ve already cut $1 million in costs. We can't afford to come up short. Learn more about why this is so urgent in “News Never Pays,” or about our finances and nonprofit operation here, and please support the journalism you get from us if you can right now. We need more help than normal.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

When I read Robert Draper’s piece this morning about Priorities USA Action, a Democratic super PAC, the first thought that popped into my head was, “Why do all these super PACs have such lame names?” As it turns out, though, PUSAA founder Bill Burton answered my question about halfway through:

It took several weeks for Burton and Sweeney to come up with a name for their start-up. To their irritation, every slogan they considered had already been trademarked by Republicans. “We gave our lawyer 10 more names,” Burton recalls. “Then like 50. We’re literally trying every combination of whatever. You can’t come up with a name that has the word ‘future’ in it that the Republicans don’t control. Romney’s Restore Our Future — that doesn’t even make sense, and that’s probably why they were able to get it.

So there you go.