Part of the Bay Area News Group

Tix start at $1k for Obama’s DNC fundraiser in SF

By Josh Richman
Thursday, October 31st, 2013 at 5:34 pm in Barack Obama, campaign finance, Democratic Party.

President Barack Obama will be back in the Bay Area in late November to raise money for Democrats.

The luncheon on Monday, Nov. 25 at the San Francisco Jazz Center will be hosted by novelist Robert Mailer Anderson and his wife, Nicola Miner, who held a fundraiser for Obama in their Pacific Heights home in February 2012.

An invitation to the event says tickets cost $1,000 per person; $5,000 for lunch and a photo reception; $7,500 for lunch and the photo reception for two; $10,000 for lunch and the photo reception for a family of up to five people; or $15,000 for lunch and a special co-chair reception. All money goes to the Democratic National Committee.

The San Francisco luncheon is part of the latest national fundraising blitz the President is undertaking on behalf of the DNC, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

Obama did fundraisers for the DSCC in Palo Alto and Portola Valley this past June, and for the DCCC in April in San Francisco.

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • RRSenileColumnist

    Any protesters coming? Code Pink maybe?

  • Elwood
  • Elwood

    Unbelievable? Follow the money. Big Obama contributor who screwed up website hired to fix it.

    http://nypost.com/2013/11/01/obama-donors-firm-hired-to-fix-web-mess-it-helped-make/

  • Elwood

    Kudlow explains Obamacare to you:

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/101164217

  • JohnW

    Kudlow commentary. What a joke! What a phony supply-sider!

    “Why is it that Americans don’t have the freedom to choose their own health insurance?” “I don’t want lactation and maternity services, abortion services, speech therapy…”

    The exchanges, assuming they can get the federal exchange working, will give buyers a choice of three types of plans from as many insurers as participate in the exchange. In other words, more choice than he gets at work.

    As an MSNBC employee, he likely gets excellent health coverage from Comcast/NBC. But he probably doesn’t have much choice — maybe two or three. Second, the employer insurance probably covers all those things he doesn’t want. Insurance wouldn’t work in either the employer market or the individual market if everybody customized their insurance Chinese menu style based on a long list of items they might want to include or not.

    Also, it’s a good thing if he does get insurance through Comcast/NBC. As a recovering cocaine and alcohol addict, he probably wouldn’t be able buy insurance in the individual market at any price. At least, not until Obamacare.

    He doesn’t like the idea of the young and healthy subsidizing the old and not so healthy. But, of course, that’s the way it works in the employer market. The employee who is on chemo or dialysis pays the same as the 25-year old in perfect health. In the individual market, even under Obamacare, the insurers get to charge up to three times as much based on age.

    His solution is to let the insurance companies charge as much age differential as they want based on age or health status and then give “transparent” direct government subsidies to the higher risk customers. In other words, privatize the profit and socialize the risk!

  • Elwood

    “assuming” “likely” “probably” “probably” “probably”

    Got any facts, John? You seem to know more about what Obamacare contains than the fools who voted for it. In the immortal words of Nancy (General Custer) Pelosi “You have to vote for the bill to find out what’s in it”. And all the good little dimmiecrats (no Republicans) obediently bowed down to the Great Leader Pelosi.

  • JohnW

    Facts? About what? Just because I injected a few qualifier words doesn’t mean I grabbed my observations out of thin air. If you want to challenge anything specific, go for it. Yes, I could probably pass a pop quiz or two on what’s in (or not in) ACA. Some people are Civil War buffs. Others do health care. Weird perhaps, but true.

  • RRSenileColumnist

    Hey rich guys! Donate a million or two and have the prez all to yerself!

  • Elwood

    Kathleen Parker of the WaPost now describes Obamas defense of the ACA as “The big lie”. (CCTimes oped 11/6/13)

  • Elwood

    Three mottoes for our times:

    The ACA is more than just a website

    I am more than just an idiot with a teleprompter who takes a cheering section with him everywhere he goes.

    Blondie is a group.

  • JohnW

    ACA is indeed more than just a website. It’s insurers no longer being allowed to deny coverage or gouge based on health status and gender. That’s something voters overwhelmingly support — a fact the GOP doesn’t have to contend with so long as they’ve got the website and Obama’s “if you like it” tap dance to yak about.

    Speaking of reading from a Teleprompter, at least Obama doesn’t read whole Wikipedia pages verbatim for his speeches, like a certain eye doctor Senator from Kentucky.

  • Elwood

    “insurers no longer being allowed to deny coverage”

    No, they just cancel your policy thanks to Obamacare.

  • JohnW

    No, they terminate your plan and you transition to a new plan with the same insurer or choose a plan from a different insurer. That’s slightly different than before:

    “We’ve really enjoyed taking all your premium money for the past ten years while you were healthy. We’re very sorry you got cancer, and you are now costing us lots of money. Unfortunately, we’ve put our team on your case and have discovered that when you applied for insurance way back when, you neglected to disclose that you had a mole removed when you were 12. That’s what we call a pre-existing condition. Gotcha! Your coverage is hereby rescinded. Good luck with the chemo!”

  • Elwood

    “they terminate your plan and you transition to a new plan”

    At a much higher premium with coverage you neither need nor want.

    Thank you, Obama, Pelosi, Reid et al!

  • JohnW

    Lots of moving parts involved in the individual market premiums, but I don’t think the mandates (maternity, mental health, drugs) are a significant factor.

    The risk pool is changing due to insurers no longer being able to deny coverage or charge higher premiums based on health status, same as employer coverage. Insurers can no longer charge different premiums based on gender, and can no longer charge their oldest customers more than three times the rate for the youngest.

    There are definitely winners and losers in all that. People who benefitted from the cherry-picking and the gender and age based premium structure are net losers.

    But, as for the mandates, insurance has never been an a la carte deal in either the individual or employer market. All those so-called mandates were in my Kaiser individual coverage as a 60+ unmarried male before anybody heard of Obamacare. I had no option of excluding those in exchange for a lower premium.

    Frankly, good health insurance is becoming so costly in both the employer and individual markets, due to underlying health care costs, that I wonder whether the whole concept of health insurance is sustainable in the long run. If people who get their insurance through an employer, typically paying only about 30% of the cost, had to pay the full cost the way people in the individual market do, they’d be shocked.

  • Pingback: Obama’s Fundraiser Favoritism

  • Pingback: Obama’s Fundraiser Favoritism

  • Pingback: Obama’s Fundraiser Favoritism - Erie County Pennsylvania Republican Party

  • Pingback: Obama’s Fundraiser Favoritism - Republican Party of High Point

  • Pingback: Obama’s Fundraiser Favoritism - GOP