Raybould Re-Launches Senator.ForSale Website, New Debate Digital Ad Highlighting Sen. Fischer’s Corruption

Following Monday’s debate, Raybould for U.S. Senate re-launched the website, Senator.ForSale and a new digital ad titled “Net Worth” to highlight Sen. Fischer’s corruption and how her net worth swelled from $300,000 to more than $4 million since becoming a United States Senator. The ad includes footage from the U.S. Senate debate held at the Nebraska State Fair on Monday.

Fischer owes Nebraskans answers

Nebraskans deserve an explanation on how Fischer got so rich during the last five years despite drawing a salary of just $174,000 a year. On Monday, Raybould sent a letter to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics requesting an investigation into Sen. Deb Fischer’s explosion of wealth during her time in the Senate while only earning a salary of $174,000 a year.

“Senators are doing work that regulates Wall Street, that keeps industries in check from taking advantage of American families, and if we don’t know where this money is coming from — if we don’t know how Senator Fischer is getting rich, then we can’t know who is influencing her decisions,” Raybould campaign manager Hilary Nachem told KMTV News on Tuesday. “Deb Fischer says there is nothing questionable about her skyrocketing net worth, but I think if you asked any Nebraskan about 4 million dollars appearing out of thin air they’d find that very questionable.”

“Net Worth” will be featured on the website http://senator.forsale/, an information hub illustrating how special interests and corporate political action committees (PACs) have bankrolled Deb Fischer’s re-election campaign while they buy her votes on the Senate floor and she gets rich in Washington.

Cleaning up Washington

Unlike Fischer, Raybould has pledged to reject all corporate PAC donations in her campaign for U.S. Senate. Last week, she continued her leadership of ending the corruptive influence of corporate special interests on members of Congress by announcing a proposal to clean up the corruption in Washington. Once elected, Raybould will propose her very first bill in the U.S. Senate called the “Gone Washington Act,” a necessary piece of legislation to prevent the corruptive influence of corporate special interests on members of Congress.

“Sen. Fischer has accepted nearly $1.5 million from corporate PACs during her time in the Senate. Instead of serving the people of Nebraska, she’s sold her votes in the Senate to the highest bidder and pocketed $4 million in five years despite earning $174,000 annually. Corruption has no place in our state or the U.S. Senate,” said Raybould.

Letter to the Senate Ethics Committee asking for an investigation into how Senator Deb Fischer made $4 million dollars during her tenure as senator despite earning approximately $174,000 a year:

Watch the 40 second “Net Worth” ad here.

“Net Worth” Transcript:
RAYBOULD: “Your net worth has escalated from $300,000 to over $4 million dollars since you’ve been in the US Senate.”

RAYBOULD: “You owe an explanation to Nebraskans about how you got so rich when serving on our behalf.”

FISCHER: “The Senate Ethics Committee approves every single year my financial statement. There’s nothing questionable about it.”

RAYBOULD: “From $300,000 to over $4 million dollars since you’ve been in the US Senate.”

FISCHER: “There’s nothing questionable about it.”

FISCHER: “There’s nothing questionable about it.”

Get the facts

From 2011 To 2017, Fischer’s Overall Net Worth Increased By $4,330,000. [United States Senate, Deb Fischer 2011 Personal Financial Disclosure, filed 4/30/12; United States Senate, Deb Fischer 2017 Personal Financial Disclosure, filed 06/08/18]

  • Fischer’s Net Worth Skyrocketed After She Was Elected To The U.S. Senate From $268,000 In 2013 To $3.38 Million In 2015. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Deb Fischer’s net worth in 2013 was approximately $268,000. In 2014, her net worth rose to $1.13 million. In 2015, her net worth rose to $3.38 million. [Center for Responsive Politics, Accessed 3/6/18]

Fischer Was Elected To The Senate In 2012. “A lifelong Nebraskan, Deb Fischer is the senior senator from Nebraska, and was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2012.” [Office of Deb Fischer, Biography, accessed 6/19/18]

Fischer Received Nearly $1.5 Million From Corporate PACs Over Her Senate Career. A review of Deb Fischer for U.S. Senate’s FEC reports showed that Fischer received $1,463,550 from corporate PACs over her senate career. [FEC]

  • Fischer Received At Least $77,500 From Pharmaceutical Corporate PACs Over Her Senate Career. A review of Deb Fischer for U.S. Senate’s FEC reports showed that Fischer received $77,500 from pharmaceutical corporate PACs over her senate career. Fischer has received corporate PAC money from pharmaceutical companies like Mallinckrodt, AbbVie Inc., Pfizer, Merck, and Bristol-Myers Squibb. [FEC]

  • Fischer Received Over $50,000 From Health Insurance And HealthCare Corporate PACs Over Her Senate Career. A review of Deb Fischer for U.S. Senate’s FEC reports showed that Fischer received $51,500 from health insurance and health care corporate PACs over her senate career. Fischer has received corporate PAC money from healthcare corporations like Aetna, Blue Cross and Blue Shield, and DaVita. [FEC]

Fischer Received Nearly $500,000 From Corporate PACs From Industries That Fischer Oversees On The Senate Commerce, Science, And Transportation Committee, Senate Armed Services Committee And Senate Agriculture Committee. [FEC; Office of U.S. Senator Deb Fischer, Committee Assignments, accessed 8/27/18]

Fischer Voted Against Resolution To Overturn FCC Net Neutrality Decision. “The Senate passed a resolution in a 52-47 vote to overturn a decision last December by the Federal Communications Commission to dismantle Obama-era rules that prevented broadband providers like Verizon and Comcast from blocking or speeding up streams and downloads of web content in exchange for extra fees. The commission’s repeal of net neutrality is set to take effect in a few weeks.” [New York Times, 5/16/18; S.J.Res. 52, Vote 97, 5/16/18]