An Overview of State Campaigns, 2007-2008
By Denise Roth Barber
NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON MONEY IN STATE POLITICS
April 06, 2010
This publication was made possible by grants from:
Ford Foundation
Foundation to Promote Open Society
The Pew Charitable Trusts
Rockefeller Brothers Fund
Sunlight Foundation
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- A Birds-Eye View of State Campaigns in 2007 and 2008
- Judicial Races
- Who Gives to State Candidates?
- Ballot Measures Attract Record Millions
A Birds-Eye View of State Campaigns in 2007 and 2008
More than 15,000 candidates who sought offices ranging from the state legislature to the governor’s seat raised nearly $1.5 billion during state elections held in 2007 and 2008. State office-holders who were not up for election raised an additional $172 million.
The $1.6 billion raised by candidates and office-holders during the 2007–2008 election cycle was slightly more than the $1.4 billion raised during the comparable 2003–2004 elections.
In addition to the above $1.6 billion, committees organized around ballot measures raised $869 million, state political parties raised nearly $370 million, and state legislative caucuses raised $178 million.
A review of the $3 billion raised in state campaigns during the 2007–2008 elections shows that:
For the first time ever, legislative candidates raised more than $1 billion in the 2008 election cycle
- Legislative campaigns were the most expensive ever. For the first time, state legislative candidates broke the $1 billion mark. The $1 billion they raised was 9 percent more than the $962 million raised in 2005–2006 elections, and 26 percent more than the $828.6 million raised in 2003–2004 elections.
- State races were often not truly competitive. Nationwide, nearly two-thirds of the state legislative races were contested during the general elections. However, just one-third of those races were monetarily competitive.1 The same was observed in the gubernatorial races: although all 14 races were contested, just four were monetarily competitive.
- Office-holders attracted most of the cash. Winners attracted two-thirds of the money raised by those running for election. Incumbents seeking re-election collected about half of the money.
- Incumbents sought—and won—re-election in most races. Incumbents sought re-election in 84 percent of the seats up for election—with good reason: the power of incumbency led to a 93 percent success rate.
- Money and incumbency remained nearly unbeatable. Incumbent legislators who had larger war chests than their challengers were nearly unbeatable—94 percent won their re-election campaigns.
- Supreme Court campaigns stayed the course. Candidates running for a seat on their states’ highest court raised $43.5 million, comparable to what they raised in 2000 and 2004 (each about $46 million). Partisan races, in which candidates identify with a political party during the election, attracted 71 percent of the money raised in high court races.
- Democrats and Republicans were evenly-matched. Although Democrats fielded more candidates—7,226 compared to Republicans’ 6,301; they raised comparable amounts on average: $103,439 by Democrats and $106,083 by Republicans.
- Ballot measures continued to amass millions. 210 measures were on the ballots in 2007 and 2008. Together, these measures attracted $869 million, up dramatically from $648 million raised in 2005–2006, when voters in 40 states faced 244 measures on the ballots. Measures related to gambling drew the most attention in 2008, with high-rolling donors pouring $273 million into 12 measures in nine states. Same-sex marriage measures came in a distant second, generating $120 million in three states.
- Ballot measures were not grassroots campaigns. While ballot measures are widely regarded as a means for direct citizen participation in lawmaking, individuals provided just 18 percent of the money raised around measures. Instead, businesses and special interests were the primary financiers, contributing more than two-thirds of the money.
- Those not up for election still raised millions. Incumbent legislators and office-holders raised $172 million, most for future campaigns. Incumbents in California, Illinois and Texas received nearly half of the money raised by these incumbents not up for election.
- State political parties were a huge vehicle for campaign cash. The 100 Democratic and Republican state political parties increased their campaign coffers by 25 percent from their 2003–2004 levels, raising nearly $370 million compared to $297 million they raised in 2003–2004. Funds from political parties are especially important funding mechanisms in the states that limit how much candidates can raise—but do not limit money flowing to and from the parties.
- 1. Defined as when the top-funded candidate raised at least twice what the other candidates(s) raised.
Legislative Campaigns
Since most states do not hold gubernatorial races during presidential election years, campaigns for legislative office dominated the fundraising—attracting two-thirds of the money raised by candidates running for state office in 2007–2008.
TABLE 1: Money Raised in State Campaigns, 2007–2008 Elections
|
Office |
Candidates |
Office-Holders Not Up for Election |
Total |
|
Legislature |
$1,049,757,145 |
$52,841,541 |
$1,102,598,686 |
|
Governor/Lt. Governor |
$241,346,816 |
$69,787,509 |
$311,134,325 |
|
Other Statewide |
$109,455,538 |
$47,038,181 |
$156,493,719 |
|
Judicial |
$63,420,051 |
$2,592,271 |
$66,012,322 |
|
TOTAL |
$1,463,979,550 |
$172,259,502 |
$1,636,239,052 |
During the 2007–2008 elections, more than 6,400 state legislative seats were up for election across the country. Nearly 14,000 candidates raised more than $1 billion while vying for those seats.
The 2,846 candidates who ran for 1,292 state senate seats raised $390 million, an average of $137,015 per candidate. The 11,081 candidates who ran for 5,114 house/assembly seats raised $660 million, an average of $59,545.
The median raised by general-election senate candidates was $55,501, more than double the $20,540 median raised by those running for the state House/Assembly.
TABLE 2: Average and Median Raised by Legislative Candidates in the General Election, 2007–2008
|
Legislative Chamber |
Number of Candidates in the General Election |
Average Raised |
Median Raised |
|
Senate |
2,266 |
$157,699 |
$55,501 |
|
House/Assembly |
8,883 |
$68,490 |
$20,540 |
|
TOTAL |
11,149 |
$86,622 |
$25,165 |
Democratic and Republican candidates raised comparable amounts on average: 5,421 Democrats raised $506.8 million; 4,812 Republicans raised $451.5 million.
Nationwide, 67 percent of the general-election senate races and 64 percent of house races were contested. However, of those contested races, 68 percent of the senate seats and 66 percent of the house seats were not monetarily competitive; in other words, the top-funded candidate raised more than twice what the other candidate(s) raised (For more information on how the Institute determines monetary competitiveness, click here).
Eighty percent of the candidates who were uncontested in the general election were uncontested during the primary elections as well.
Overall, just one-fourth (1,571) of all legislative races had contested primary elections. Most of those contests (1,212) were house primaries. Michigan and Mississippi had the most contested primaries—each with 71—and South Carolina was not too far behind with 67 contested primaries. The 2,568 candidates who were eliminated in these primaries raised an average of $30,308, a median of $5,776.
The average cost of legislative races varied greatly among the states. California’s general-election assembly races averaged $888,491, while New Hampshire’s house races averaged $4,472. A comparable disparity between the two states was seen in 2003–2004 elections, as well.
Senate races are typically more expensive than house races. However, three states bucked that rule in 2007–2008. In Oregon, the average senate race cost $171,996, while the average house race was $265,460. And in Indiana, the average race for the Senate cost $139,215, while the average house race cost $166,549. In Arizona, where legislative candidates receive public funding, the average general-election senate race was $84,994, while the average house race was almost double at $156,905. That disparity can be explained in part by the public funds received: house candidates received, on average, $115,147 of public funds, which is 73 percent of the cost of the average house race. Senate candidates garnered 55 percent of their funds from public funding.
Winners raked in $743 million, 71 percent of all the money raised by legislative candidates. Those who lost in the general election raised just $222 million, while those who lost in the primary raised $78 million.
Incumbents who sought re-election raised 77 percent of the money raised in their races. On average, incumbents raised $109,818, while their challengers averaged just $32,155.
Given the power of incumbency and their significantly heftier campaign coffers, legislative incumbents were nearly unbeatable—95 percent won their re-election campaigns.
Legislative incumbents were nearly unbeatable—95 percent were re-elected
Just one-fifth of the legislative races were open, where the incumbent did not seek re-election. In these races, those who raised the most money enjoyed a 76 percent success rate.
TABLE 3: Cost of General-Election Legislative Races, 2007–2008*
|
State |
Senate Total |
Senate Average |
House Total |
House Average |
|
|
Alaska |
$862,007 |
$86,201 |
$2,728,693 |
$68,217 |
|
|
Arizona |
$2,549,830 |
$84,994 |
$4,677,152 |
$155,905 |
|
|
Arkansas |
$2,017,603 |
$112,089 |
$4,236,952 |
$42,370 |
|
|
California |
$28,245,063 |
$1,412,253 |
$71,079,242 |
$888,491 |
|
|
Colorado |
$2,401,834 |
$126,412 |
$5,341,734 |
$82,181 |
|
|
Connecticut |
$5,207,196 |
$144,644 |
$5,262,324 |
$34,850 |
|
|
Delaware |
$1,000,905 |
$100,090 |
$2,286,889 |
$55,778 |
|
|
Florida |
$11,259,735 |
$536,178 |
$25,876,533 |
$215,638 |
|
|
Georgia |
$6,258,805 |
$111,764 |
$11,538,108 |
$64,101 |
|
|
Hawaii |
$1,930,180 |
$160,848 |
$2,791,154 |
$54,729 |
|
|
Idaho |
$1,535,698 |
$43,877 |
$2,376,609 |
$33,952 |
|
|
Illinois |
$22,733,532 |
$568,338 |
$39,569,825 |
$335,338 |
|
|
Indiana |
$3,480,374 |
$139,215 |
$16,654,890 |
$166,549 |
|
|
Iowa |
$5,042,923 |
$201,717 |
$15,269,249 |
$152,692 |
|
|
Kansas |
$5,204,004 |
$130,100 |
$5,015,513 |
$40,124 |
|
|
Kentucky |
$4,840,809 |
$254,779 |
$4,726,520 |
$47,265 |
|
|
Louisiana |
$16,687,268 |
$427,879 |
$19,770,577 |
$190,102 |
|
|
Maine |
$1,775,707 |
$50,734 |
$1,632,899 |
$10,814 |
|
|
Massachusetts |
$7,361,231 |
$184,031 |
$12,484,305 |
$78,027 |
|
|
Michigan |
N/A |
N/A |
$13,062,027 |
$118,746 |
|
|
Minnesota |
N/A |
N/A |
$8,191,541 |
$61,131 |
|
|
Mississippi |
$4,544,606 |
$87,396 |
$5,529,492 |
$45,324 |
|
|
Missouri |
$7,480,507 |
$440,030 |
$13,127,303 |
$80,536 |
|
|
Montana |
$668,772 |
$26,751 |
$1,609,957 |
$16,100 |
|
|
Nebraska |
$2,874,728 |
$110,566 |
N/A |
N/A |
|
|
Nevada |
$4,429,850 |
$442,985 |
$7,843,936 |
$186,760 |
|
|
New Hampshire |
$2,524,485 |
$105,187 |
$460,594 |
$4,472 |
|
|
New Jersey |
$22,013,042 |
$550,326 |
$19,183,526 |
$479,588 |
|
|
New Mexico |
$3,519,670 |
$83,802 |
$3,621,026 |
$51,729 |
|
|
New York |
$43,866,132 |
$707,518 |
$21,566,093 |
$143,774 |
|
|
North Carolina |
$14,530,667 |
$290,613 |
$13,215,479 |
$110,129 |
|
|
North Dakota |
$437,998 |
$19,043 |
$395,533 |
$17,197 |
|
|
Ohio |
$10,519,593 |
$657,475 |
$33,231,610 |
$335,673 |
|
|
Oklahoma |
$6,607,587 |
$275,316 |
$9,554,982 |
$94,604 |
|
|
Oregon |
$2,735,938 |
$170,996 |
$15,927,576 |
$265,460 |
|
|
Pennsylvania |
$19,325,222 |
$773,009 |
$43,286,041 |
$213,232 |
|
|
Rhode Island |
$1,540,254 |
$40,533 |
$2,357,104 |
$31,428 |
|
|
South Carolina |
$8,936,420 |
$194,270 |
$6,682,497 |
$53,891 |
|
|
South Dakota |
$1,956,772 |
$55,908 |
$1,380,636 |
$37,314 |
|
|
Tennessee |
$6,525,315 |
$407,832 |
$7,931,285 |
$80,114 |
|
|
Texas |
$17,582,391 |
$1,172,159 |
$64,472,778 |
$429,819 |
|
|
Utah |
$2,039,254 |
$135,950 |
$3,439,687 |
$45,862 |
|
|
Vermont |
$403,797 |
$31,061 |
$778,987 |
$7,213 |
|
|
Virginia |
$29,672,959 |
$741,824 |
$31,530,213 |
$315,302 |
|
|
Washington |
$6,030,548 |
$231,944 |
$14,774,173 |
$150,757 |
|
|
West Virginia |
$1,887,409 |
$111,024 |
$3,551,687 |
$61,236 |
|
|
Wisconsin |
$4,072,434 |
$254,527 |
$7,655,752 |
$77,331 |
|
|
Wyoming |
$224,039 |
$14,002 |
$719,877 |
$11,998 |
|
|
TOTAL |
$357,345,096 |
$608,400,563 |
* Alabama and Maryland did not have legislative races in the 2007–2008 election period. Michigan and Minnesota had no senate seats up for election, while Nebraska has a unicameral (one-body) legislature.
Money Raised by Legislators Not Up for Election
The 759 lawmakers who were not up for election in 2007–2008 nonetheless raised nearly $53 million. Sitting senators in 28 states, who typically have a four-year term, raised $47 million. The state representatives in three states—Alabama, Maryland and North Dakota—that also have four-year terms, raised nearly $5.5 million.
Twenty California state senators together amassed $9.9 million during their off-election year, followed closely by 16 Texas senators who raised $8 million. 184 legislators in Maryland raised $9.4 million.
Races for the Governor’s Mansion
Just 14 states held gubernatorial races in 2007 and 2008, typical of a presidential election year. The candidates raised $241 million, which is 12 percent more than the $215 million raised in the comparable 2003–2004 elections.2 Incumbent governors and lieutenant governors not up for election raised an additional $69.8 million.
North Carolina and Louisiana held the two most expensive races. The open race in North Carolina, which garnered $41 million, cost more than twice the $18.7 million in 2004. However, it was $9 million less than the cost of the open race in 2000, which garnered $32 million.
TABLE 4: Total Raised in Governor’s Races, 2007–2008
|
State |
Governor Race |
Lt. Governor Race |
Total |
Percent Change from 2004 |
|
North Carolina* |
$31,909,644 |
$9,139,752 |
$41,049,396 |
119% |
|
Louisiana* |
$35,117,604 |
$5,333,745 |
$40,451,350 |
16% |
|
Kentucky |
$36,926,540 |
$0 |
$36,926,540 |
48% |
|
Missouri* |
$25,804,426 |
$6,346,436 |
$32,150,862 |
10% |
|
Indiana |
$26,741,520 |
$0 |
$26,741,520 |
-21% |
|
Washington |
$23,395,431 |
$227,268 |
$23,622,699 |
69% |
|
Mississippi† |
$17,883,586 |
$5,624,993 |
$23,508,579 |
-5% |
|
Delaware* |
$4,816,242 |
$1,043,522 |
$5,859,764 |
74% |
|
Montana |
$2,511,503 |
$0 |
$2,511,503 |
-26% |
|
North Dakota |
$2,354,586 |
$0 |
$2,354,586 |
13% |
|
Vermont |
$1,970,638 |
$271,504 |
$2,242,143 |
31% |
|
West Virginia |
$1,657,701 |
$0 |
$1,657,701 |
-85% |
|
New Hampshire |
$1,284,484 |
$0 |
$1,284,484 |
-80% |
|
Utah |
$981,672 |
$4,018 |
$985,691 |
-85% |
|
TOTAL |
$212,693,269 |
$28,653,548 |
$241,346,816 |
12% |
*The governor’s race was open, but the lieutenant governor ran for re-election.
† The governor sought re-election, but the lieutenant governor’s race was open.
Gubernatorial races were monetarily competitiveduring the general election in just four of the 14 states:
- Kentucky’s then-incumbent Gov. Ernie Fletcher was defeated by Democratic challenger Steven Beshear. Fletcher raised $7.6 million, 31 percent less than the $11 million raised by Beshear.
- The 2007 open Louisiana race saw three candidates raising large sums. Republican Gov. Jindal, who won handily, raised $13.7 million, followed closely by $12.6 million raised by John Georges, who came in a distant third, and Walter Boasso, who raised $7 million.
- Missouri’s open race was the least monetarily competitive. Jay Nixon, who won with 58 percent of the vote, raised $15 million. By comparison, his Republican opponent, Kenny Hulshof, raised $8.5 million and received just 39 percent of the vote.
- The 2008 re-match between Gregoire and Rossi in Washington was once again highly competitive. Rossi, who very narrowly lost to Christine Gregoire in 2004, raised $11.5 million, while Gregoire raised $11.8 million. Gov. Gregoire fended off Rossi’s challenge, garnering 53 percent of the vote.
Incumbent governors sought re-election in eight of the 10 races that were not monetarily competitive. In the other races, incumbents from a different office were running to fill the open seats.
All but one of the 10 incumbent governors up for re-election won
Incumbency was a key component to victory. All but one of the 10 incumbent governors up for re-election won. The exception to the rule was then-Kentucky Gov. Ernie Fletcher, who was soundly defeated in 2007 by Democratic challenger, Steven Beshear. Fletcher was also the only incumbent who raised less than the challenger. Fletcher raised $7.6 million, about two-thirds of the $11 million raised by Beshear.
The size of a candidate’s war chest also played a key role in determining who went on to become governor. The winners of all 14 contests had one thing in common: more money than any of their opponents.
In the four states with open races (where the incumbent governor did not seek re-election)—Delaware, Louisiana, Missouri and North Carolina—all four winners raised more money than their competitors.
Eight states held separate general elections for lieutenant governor. These races attracted nearly $28 million. In the five races where an incumbent sought re-election, the races garnered $12.2 million, while the races for three open seats raised $15.8 million.
As with the governor’s race, North Carolina’s lieutenant governor’s race was the most expensive, attracting just over $9 million. However, the winner of that race, Democrat Walter Dalton, who was riding on the coattails of his running mate, Bev Perdue, raised just $2.5 million, less than half the $5.5 million raised by his Republican opponent, Robert Pittenger.
Money from the candidates’ own pockets accounted for nearly one of every five dollars raised in the gubernatorial elections. Of the 146 candidates who ran for governor or lieutenant governor, 60 gave $47 million of their own money to their own campaign. That turned out to be a poor investment, however, because none of the 23 candidates who self-financed a majority of their campaign won. In fact, 15 were eliminated during the primary election.
Incumbents Not Up for Election
34 sitting governors collected $53 million in contributions during the 2007–2008 election cycle, when they were not up for election. Leading the pack was California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who raised $14.4 million. While incumbents often raise money during their off-election years for future races, this was not the case with Schwarzenegger, who is prevented from seeking re-election in 2010 due to the state’s term limits.
In distant second was Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who raised $10 million. That money can go toward his 2010 re-election campaign.
Twenty sitting lieutenant governors raised $14.5 million. Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst topped the list with $4.6 million, followed closely by Massachusetts Lt. Gov. Tim Murray.
- 2. The 2004 total used here excludes the $31 million raised during the special California gubernatorial recall election held in 2004.
Judicial Races
In 2007 and 2008, 69 high court seats were up for election in 33 states, and 191 appellate seats were up for election in 30 states.
Nearly $62 million was raised by judicial candidates: $43.5 million in high court races and $18 million raised in appellate races.
Partisan races, in which candidates identify with a political party during the election, attracted most of the money—71 percent of all the money raised by high court candidates and 82 percent of the money raised in appellate races. Nonpartisan races, in which candidates are not listed on the ballot with a party affiliation, accounted for 28 percent of the money raised in high court races and 17 percent of the money raised in all appellate races. Retention elections—in which the current judge is placed on the ballot and voters choose whether the judge remains in office—attracted very little money.
Nearly one-half (48 percent) of the money raised by judicial candidates came from two sources: lawyers and lobbyists, and the candidates themselves. Lawyers, lobbyists and their firms gave more than $18 million, which was 29 percent of the money raised by all judicial candidates. Candidates gave $11.6 million of their own money, or 19 percent of the money raised.
Lawyers, lobbyists, and their firms gave more than $18 million to judicial candidates
The Institute also examined the money raised by high-court and appellate candidates in 2007–2008 to determine if a correlation existed between state-level judicial candidates’ electoral success, their ability to raise money, and their ethnicity, race or gender. The report, Diversity in State Judicial Campaigns, 2007–2008, found that women and members of ethnic or racial minorities were underrepresented on the ballot. But once on the ballot, the advantage of incumbency and the ability to raise money played key roles in the success of a campaign, regardless of a candidate’s gender or ethnicity.
TABLE 5: Total Raised by High Court and Appellate Court Candidates, 2007–2008
|
State |
High Courts |
Appellate Courts |
Total to Court Candidates |
|
Pennsylvania |
$9,464,975 |
$3,985,214 |
$13,450,189 |
|
Texas |
$4,406,234 |
$4,114,643 |
$8,520,877 |
|
Alabama |
$4,472,621 |
$1,481,925 |
$5,954,546 |
|
Louisiana |
$3,686,879 |
$1,155,709 |
$4,842,588 |
|
Ohio |
$2,448,388 |
$1,757,237 |
$4,205,625 |
|
Wisconsin |
$3,522,803 |
$641,460 |
$4,164,262 |
|
West Virgina |
$3,303,480 |
$0 |
$3,303,480 |
|
Illinois |
$1,091,092 |
$2,174,231 |
$3,265,323 |
|
Nevada |
$3,135,214 |
$0 |
$3,135,214 |
|
Michigan |
$2,614,260 |
$443,169 |
$3,057,429 |
|
Mississippi |
$2,976,446 |
$0 |
$2,976,446 |
|
Georgia |
$389,102 |
$779,783 |
$1,168,884 |
|
North Carolina |
$178,273 |
$804,864 |
$983,137 |
|
Washington |
$417,034 |
$218,128 |
$635,161 |
|
Arkansas |
$86,635 |
$521,438 |
$608,073 |
|
Kentucky |
$515,711 |
$0 |
$515,711 |
|
Montana |
$334,446 |
$0 |
$334,446 |
|
Idaho |
$243,190 |
$0 |
$243,190 |
|
Minnesota |
$196,402 |
$34,050 |
$230,452 |
|
New Mexico |
$51,656 |
$0 |
$51,656 |
|
Oregon |
$7,525 |
$2,172 |
$9,697 |
|
TOTAL |
$43,542,365 |
$18,114,023 |
$61,695,388 |
Who Gives to State Candidates?
The Institute classifies contributors according to their economic interests, relying on the occupation and/or employer information of the donors as provided by the reports, and performing additional research as needed.
Using this information, the Institute is able to analyze giving by economic sectors across state lines to discover patterns of giving. The following table shows contributions by economic sector to all candidates running for state-level offices in 2007–2008 elections.
Financing State Political Parties
Political parties provide another important vehicle for raising money for state candidates. This is especially true in those states that limit how much donors can give to candidates, but do not limit state political parties.
During the 2007–2008 elections, 100 Democratic and Republican state party committees raised nearly $370 million. An additional $178 million was raised by 141 legislative caucuses.3
Nationally, the 100 state political parties raised $73 million more in 2007–2008 than they raised in 2003–2004, a 25 percent increase. The increase was due in large part to the money raised in three states: the state parties in California and Florida raised $16 million more in 2008 than they raised in 2004, while in Ohio, an additional $14.5 million more than had been raised in 2004. Together, the party committees in these three states accounted for nearly two-thirds of the $72 million increase from 2004 to 2008.
Democratic state party committees raised nearly $200 million, which is 16 percent more than the $170 million raised by the 50 Republican state committees. The state party committees in California and Florida once again were the top two money-raisers, as they have been since 2000.4
State political parties in half the states raised less than they did in 2004. Parties in the other 25 states raised more than in 2004. Party committees in South Carolina, Montana, Virginia and Mississippi experienced the greatest increase over their 2004 levels.
TABLE 6: Contributions to the 100 State Party Committees, 2007–2008
|
State |
Rank |
To Democratic Party |
To Republican Party |
Contributions Total |
Percent Change |
|
Alabama |
22 |
$2,960,592 |
$1,344,874 |
$4,305,466 |
99.9% |
|
Alaska |
48 |
$60,789 |
$203,583 |
$264,373 |
-45.6% |
|
Arizona |
21 |
$4,053,106 |
$672,919 |
$4,726,025 |
-7.5% |
|
Arkansas |
25 |
$2,071,024 |
$1,255,367 |
$3,326,391 |
23.0% |
|
California |
1 |
$28,220,511 |
$31,231,424 |
$59,451,935 |
38.8% |
|
Colorado |
42 |
$176,378 |
$389,416 |
$565,794 |
-32.2% |
|
Connecticut |
45 |
$167,814 |
$234,428 |
$402,241 |
-50.9% |
|
Delaware |
30 |
$2,056,805 |
$660,190 |
$2,716,995 |
21.1% |
|
Florida |
2 |
$15,597,356 |
$37,246,976 |
$52,844,332 |
44.3% |
|
Georgia |
14 |
$2,236,189 |
$6,046,085 |
$8,282,274 |
-36.8% |
|
Hawaii |
43 |
$199,560 |
$345,280 |
$544,840 |
-72.2% |
|
Idaho |
40 |
$226,745 |
$444,871 |
$671,616 |
50.4% |
|
Illinois |
15 |
$4,699,896 |
$3,448,626 |
$8,148,522 |
-23.7% |
|
Indiana |
5 |
$10,619,223 |
$5,881,393 |
$16,500,616 |
33.7% |
|
Iowa |
7 |
$9,031,941 |
$4,334,366 |
$13,366,307 |
54.7% |
|
Kansas |
37 |
$1,310,615 |
$309,790 |
$1,620,405 |
31.6% |
|
Kentucky |
34 |
$1,044,011 |
$964,478 |
$2,008,489 |
-19.1% |
|
Louisiana* |
23 |
$1,842,903 |
$2,306,092 |
$4,148,996 |
-32.3% |
|
Maine |
32 |
$1,571,822 |
$948,773 |
$2,520,595 |
82.8% |
|
Maryland |
31 |
$1,901,285 |
$674,156 |
$2,575,441 |
1.8% |
|
Massachusetts |
28 |
$2,286,243 |
$596,960 |
$2,883,203 |
-18.5% |
|
Michigan |
17 |
$4,120,834 |
$2,628,190 |
$6,749,024 |
-14.5% |
|
Minnesota |
19 |
$4,712,731 |
$1,533,365 |
$6,246,096 |
-16.4% |
|
Mississippi* |
16 |
$371,870 |
$6,841,259 |
$7,213,129 |
254.2% |
|
Missouri |
6 |
$7,559,293 |
$5,858,603 |
$13,417,896 |
-39.5% |
|
Montana |
20 |
$3,555,356 |
$2,591,728 |
$6,147,084 |
319.6% |
|
Nebraska |
38 |
$597,400 |
$483,904 |
$1,081,304 |
58.6% |
|
Nevada |
18 |
$5,024,761 |
$1,284,881 |
$6,309,642 |
155.3% |
|
New Hampshire |
36 |
$1,507,150 |
$300,254 |
$1,807,403 |
29.0% |
|
New Jersey* |
12 |
$6,101,228 |
$3,979,309 |
$10,080,538 |
-32.6% |
|
New Mexico |
33 |
$644,581 |
$1,491,602 |
$2,136,184 |
55.3% |
|
New York |
13 |
$6,157,030 |
$2,247,660 |
$8,404,691 |
-25.4% |
|
North Carolina |
9 |
$10,596,016 |
$2,286,993 |
$12,883,009 |
41.6% |
|
North Dakota |
29 |
$1,580,671 |
$1,299,731 |
$2,880,402 |
38.3% |
|
Ohio |
3 |
$15,621,231 |
$8,493,568 |
$24,114,799 |
149.9% |
|
Oklahoma |
41 |
$97,381 |
$468,955 |
$566,335 |
-26.2% |
|
Oregon |
39 |
$391,329 |
$345,774 |
$737,103 |
-52.3% |
|
Pennsylvania |
4 |
$8,514,836 |
$9,631,010 |
$18,145,846 |
62.1% |
|
Rhode Island |
46 |
$178,501 |
$209,151 |
$387,652 |
-37.2% |
|
South Carolina |
27 |
$1,350,673 |
$1,671,368 |
$3,022,041 |
433.1% |
|
South Dakota |
44 |
$208,061 |
$252,838 |
$460,899 |
-50.1% |
|
Tennessee |
24 |
$2,012,169 |
$2,071,715 |
$4,083,884 |
-5.2% |
|
Texas |
11 |
$5,641,698 |
$4,590,761 |
$10,232,458 |
151.7% |
|
Utah |
26 |
$1,558,878 |
$1,664,006 |
$3,222,883 |
112.7% |
|
Vermont |
49 |
$59,937 |
$77,382 |
$137,319 |
-51.3% |
|
Virginia* |
8 |
$9,323,755 |
$3,701,795 |
$13,025,550 |
260.9% |
|
Washington |
10 |
$8,472,631 |
$3,580,426 |
$12,053,057 |
-5.5% |
|
West Virginia |
50 |
$101,054 |
$1,242 |
$102,296 |
-19.2% |
|
Wisconsin |
35 |
$681,807 |
$1,126,998 |
$1,808,805 |
-0.5% |
|
Wyoming |
47 |
$221,498 |
$88,091 |
$309,590 |
-69.3% |
|
TOTAL |
$199,299,169 |
$170,342,606 |
$369,641,776 |
25.00% |
* Election was held in 2007
Who Gives to the Political Parties?
State political parties relied heavily on other party committees and candidate committees, which provided $128.5 million—one-third of the money raised by the 100 state parties. This was similar to 2003–2004, when they provided 30 percent of the money raised.
Businesses and special interests, which gave a collective total of $127 million, were the next-largest source of funds, providing 34 percent of the money raised by state political parties. Individual donors, on the other hand, provided just 19 percent of the money raised.
TABLE 7: Contributions to State Political Parties, by Type of Contributor, 2007–2008
|
Type of Contributor |
Democratic State Parties |
Republican State Parties |
Total |
|
Political Parties And Candidates |
$75,418,291 |
$53,037,748 |
$128,456,039 |
|
Businesses & Special Interests |
$55,817,928 |
$71,452,341 |
$127,270,269 |
|
Individuals |
$32,677,865 |
$37,559,167 |
$70,237,032 |
|
Labor Organizations |
$31,048,849 |
$1,924,232 |
$32,973,081 |
|
Unitemized Donations |
$1,899,906 |
$3,285,326 |
$5,185,232 |
|
Leadership Committees |
$1,807,492 |
$2,677,833 |
$4,485,325 |
|
Public Funds |
$628,838 |
$405,959 |
$1,034,797 |
|
TOTAL |
$199,299,169 |
$170,342,606 |
$369,641,776 |
Donors from three of the six top industries showed a significant preference for Democratic parties. The public sector and general trade unions together gave $26.5 million more to Democratic state parties, and lawyers and lobbyists gave $8 million more.
TABLE 8: Top-Contributing Industries To State Party Committees, 2007–2008
|
Top Industry |
To Democratic State Parties |
To Republican State Parties |
Total |
|
Public Sector Unions |
$17,841,563 |
$1,686,902 |
$19,528,465 |
|
Lawyers & Lobbyists |
$13,016,507 |
$4,453,976 |
$17,470,483 |
|
Real Estate |
$5,199,980 |
$9,381,195 |
$14,581,174 |
|
Gambling & Casinos |
$2,036,756 |
$8,826,530 |
$10,863,286 |
|
General Trade Unions |
$10,544,304 |
$174,040 |
$10,718,344 |
|
Securities & Investment |
$5,475,985 |
$4,798,568 |
$10,274,553 |
|
TOTAL |
$54,115,094 |
$29,321,211 |
$83,436,305 |
Favoring Republican party committees were donors from real estate, gambling and casinos interests —together, they gave nearly $11 million more to Republican state parties.
- 3. Given the changing nature of legislative caucuses over time, it is not feasible to make a cycle-to-cycle comparison of the money these legislative caucuses raised. Therefore the analysis in this report focuses on the money raised by the 100 Democratic and Republican state political parties in the 50 states.
- 4. The Institute began collecting party committee reports in all 50 states beginning in 2000.
Ballot Measures Attract Record Millions
In 2008, voters in 36 states faced 172 ballot measures that covered a broad spectrum of issues, from property taxes and school funding to hot-button issues around same-sex marriage and abortion.
Committees that organized around ballot measures brought in nearly $814 million, significantly higher than in previous years
Committees that organized around ballot measures brought in nearly $814 million, significantly higher than seen in previous years: $55.4 million in 2007, $684.4 million in 2006, $466.1 million in 2005, and $505.1 million in 2004.
Gambling drew the most attention and money in 2008, as high-rolling donors poured $273.2 million into 12 measures in nine states. Same-sex marriage measures generated $120.4 million in three states.
While ballot measures are widely regarded as a means for direct citizen participation in lawmaking, a close look at who funds the campaigns around the measures shows a different story. Individuals provided just 18 percent of the money raised around measures. Instead, businesses and special interests were the primary financiers, contributing more than two-thirds of the money. Labor organizations provided 11 percent of the money.
California measures attracted far and away the most money, at $471.6 million. Second-ranked Ohio trailed with $86.5 million. Colorado measures brought in $73 million. A dozen states saw no money raised around their ballot measures at all.
Seventy-two percent of ballot measure contributions came from donors within the state deciding the question.
For a detailed look at the money raised around 2008 ballot measures, see the Institute’s report, 2008 Ballot Measure Overview.
2007 Ballot Measures
Voters in nine states considered 38 very diverse ballot measures in 2007. The Institute focused on 12 major ballot measures in six states—Alaska, Maine, Oregon, Texas, Utah and Washington—and analyzed the money raised by the committees that raised money to support or oppose those measures.
For a detailed look at the money raised around the 12 high-profile measures in 2007, see the Institute’s report, 2007 Ballot Measures: Overview of 12 High-Profile Measures.
—END—
http://www.followthemoney.org/press/PrintReportView.phtml?r=420
