I'll leave it to others to assess the impact of the Internet and bloggers on the Connecticut race; my sense has been (and still is) that absent the $4 million of his own money that Ned Lamont was able to put into his campaign, and the millions more he can potentially spend down the road, we'd be focusing more on other inumbents who lost yesterday instead of on Sen. Joe Lieberman.
Continue readingBloggers Dig Out Last-Minute Lieberman Donors
Kudos to the folks at MyDD who painstakingly compiled a list of the names of the last-minute contributors to Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (D-Conn) campaign. It took two volunteers five hours to do the work. To do it they had to download 14 PDF files from the FEC, then enter the names by hand into an Excel spreadsheet.
They also compiled state-by-state totals of where the money came from. Only 12% came from inside Connecticut.
This is exactly the kind of information that should be available to anyone without going through all that trouble. But the U.S. Senate exempted itself from the rules that all other federal candidates, PACs and parties have to live by – namely electronic reporting of their campaign contributions.
Continue readingLamont’s Last-Minute Donors
Earlier, Larry documented how Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) is flush with campaign contributions as his primary battle comes to a close tomorrow. Lieberman has received contributions from numerous political action committees and political allies along with contributions from people across the country. Lieberman’s challenger, Greenwich businessman Ned Lamont, is his own biggest campaign contributor having given himself $2 million dollars over the past 15 days. Lamont has also brought in contributions from a wide variety of people including top Democratic fundraisers, liberal philanthropists, and investors.
Continue readingMoney from All Over Flowing to Connecticut Senate Race
Donations to the Connecticut Senate race between incumbent Sen. Joe Lieberman and businessman Ned Lamont are coming in from all over the country. Literally.
Even by the end of June – the last contributions available in computerized form from the Federal Election Commission – Lieberman’s beleaguered reelection campaign had drawn donors from 44 states and Puerto Rico. Lamont’s money came from 27 states.
While Connecticut led the list for both candidates, it was a much more important source of funds for Lamont than for the incumbent. Between January 1, 2005 and June 30, 2006 Lieberman collected 75% of his individual contributions from outside Connecticut, while Lamont drew only 20% of his from outside the state. The totals include only contributions above $200. Smaller amounts are reported only in bulk and not itemized.
Continue readingLieberman’s Last-Minute Donors
As the uphill fight by Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) to hang on to his Senate seat reaches its final stages, the money is flowing in so fast to his reelection campaign that there’s hardly even time for neat handwriting.
For the past couple of hours I’ve been poring over 165 pages of handwritten reports filed by the campaign with the Federal Election Commission – the 48-hour notice reports that outline the contributions received between July 20 and August 3rd.
Continue readingLosing the Initiative
With Congress finally clearing out of town for a month’s recess, I thought I could relax a little, but then I saw the headline in Saturday’s Oregonian – the state’s largest paper, based in Portland: “N.Y. Cash Colors Oregon Ballot.”
Okay, I know this is money in politics at the state level – and in a state, moreover, that has something the federal government doesn’t have: ballot initiatives. But if you think congressional election races are tainted by big money, just take a look at what’s happened to the initiative process in those states – mostly west of the Missisippi – that allow them.
Continue readingMillionaires and the Minimum Wage
Cynicism is a human-borne disease that is caused by a variety of factors, one of which includes paying close attention to the actions of politicians in crafting laws.
If you were up and awake at 1:41 a.m. Saturday morning and watching the roll call vote in the House of Representatives on C-SPAN, your cynicism levels would no doubt have leaped alarmingly.
In that vote, the House attached a double-edged amendment to an overhaul of the nation’s pension policies. On the one hand, it included a $2.10-an-hour raise in the minimum wage, to be phased in over the next three years – a popular idea with the public, according to recent polls. On the other hand, it slashed the rate on estate taxes for multi-millionaires – an even more popular idea if your net worth exceeds $5 million.
Continue readingWhen does a contribution go bad?
This year has seen a whole sale rejection of campaign contributions provided by certain undesirables to campaign committees. Last December it was Mitchell Wade and Brent Wilkes, in January it was Jack Abramoff, Mike Scanlon, and the various Indian tribes they swindled, and then came Abramoff associates Neil Volz and Tony Rudy. The guilty pleas and investigations into these top donors was the equivalent of a political tsunami forcing congressmen and Senators to donate the dirty money to charity. The past few weeks, however, have brought some different stories about giving back campaign contributions. It isn’t always clear when a campaign should reject a contribution or by what measures it should take to ensure the political safety of said contribution.
Continue readingOff and Running: US Chamber Fires First Salvo
And we’re off... The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is advancing its political and business plan for the 2006 elections by firing an opening $10 million salvo of election ads in the districts of more than 30 of their allies in Congress. Allies that they’d like to see safely reelected, whatever the national mood toward Congress. The ads are slated to run in August, with another wave to follow after Labor Day.
This opening salvo – the biggest in the Chamber’s history – is as sure a barometric reading as you’re likely to find this election year that the nation’s business community is growing nervous about a potential shift in the balance of power in Congress.
Continue readingSelf-Funders: Ever Hopeful, Despite the Odds
Every two years the same political phenomenon repeats itself, like a rerun of Groundhog’s Day. A new crop of congressional candidates with stars in their eyes – and money in their pockets – take aim at a coveted seat in the U.S. Congress by plugging their personal fortunes into the campaign.
If the past is any indication, come sunshine or clouds on Election Day, nearly all these self-funded candidates will lose.
The latest fillings with the Federal Election Commission show that so far this election cycle, 16 candidates have anted up $1 million or more of their personal fortunes. (You can find the list on Open Secrets.) Some 53 have given $250,000 or more.
Continue reading
59063
