Political Contributions

November 5, 2003 10:44 AM

Who gives how much to whom. For those like me who have been wondering about the claim that Republicans get more of their funding from ordinary people and the Democrats get more from foundations and rich individuals here is where we can find out. So far, I have found some surprises.
posted by donfactor (36 comments total)

Lyndon Larouche has raised $5.4 million, with $39,000 on hand.

!?
posted by machaus at 10:47 AM on November 5, 2003

He hee, have no party. [walks away whistling]:Money rules the world, who cares where it comes from but the Opposition.

The ZIP code where Bush has raised the most money is 10021 in New York City ($712,500), which was the biggest source of money overall outside Washington, D.C. in the 2002 and 2000 election cycles. Though NY was Liberal Democrat?
posted by thomcatspike at 10:50 AM on November 5, 2003

I just don't know
posted by tiamat at 10:54 AM on November 5, 2003

Like several other candidates, Clark collected more money from the legal profession than from any other industry
Bush has raised more from lawyers and law firms ($5.4 million) than from any other industry so far this year
Edwards, a former trial lawyer, has collected 20 times the amount from lawyers and law firms than from any other industry.

Is the surprise: source or amount?
posted by thomcatspike at 10:56 AM on November 5, 2003

Dean has raised more from Massachusetts than Kerry has. (Kerry represents Massachusetts in the Senate.)
posted by alms at 11:01 AM on November 5, 2003

Opensecrets has been discussed (or at least referenced) here several times. It is a great site, however, and I use it frequently. It's especially good for looking up bosses and other various higher-ups, just to get a feel for them.
posted by Ufez Jones at 11:02 AM on November 5, 2003

"The theme involves working Americans. Visually, this will involve a sea of hard hats, which our construction and contractor and building groups are working very hard to provide. But the Speaker's office was very clear in saying that they do not need people in suits. If people want to participate--AND WE DO NEED BODIES--they must be DRESSED DOWN, appear to be REAL WORKER types, etc. We plan to have hard hats for people to wear. Other groups are providing waiters/waitresses, and other types of workers."
--Russ Freyman, associate director for media relations at the National Association of Manufacturers, instructing business lobbyists how to dress for a rally on Capitol Hill in favor of the Bush tax cut, Washington Post

heh.
posted by matteo at 11:04 AM on November 5, 2003

For those like me who have been wondering about the claim that Republicans get more of their funding from ordinary people and the Democrats get more from foundations and rich individuals

Where in the world did you ever get this ridiculous notion in the first place?
posted by briank at 11:05 AM on November 5, 2003

(not that you might actually subscribe to it, just that it's ridiculous)
posted by briank at 11:06 AM on November 5, 2003

The conventional wisdom years ago was that the Dems got their money from unions and workers and lawyers. The GOP, from big biz.

I hope things have changed: their our few workers left and I suspect 12-year-old girls making American goods or Chinese workers are not going to make big contributions to the Dems. Fortunately, both parties get from the wealthy, for after all, both parties might be asked for favors.

As Jerry Springer noted the other day on TV: hehas been in every tax bracket possible and now that he is very wealthy, he sees that all our tax lawsws are designed for the wealthy. He knows. Those are now his people.
posted by Postroad at 11:08 AM on November 5, 2003

Why does Clark get all the lawyer money, should Edwards be their darling (he is, afterall, a lawyer)?
posted by mathowie at 11:10 AM on November 5, 2003

It's true that the Republicans get a larger percentage of their money from smaller donors. They have built a fundraising mail machine in the red states (or is it the blue states - well, whatever the heartland states are), while the Democratic party relies to a greater degree on coastal big donors (Hollywood, trial lawyers, etc.)
posted by twsf at 11:14 AM on November 5, 2003

I just don't know

Damn hippie.
posted by monju_bosatsu at 11:15 AM on November 5, 2003

I'm still wondering how Edwards got the gall to run for president in the first place. He's not running for reelection for his Senate seat because he knows we North Carolinians wouldn't put him back in office on a dare.
posted by konolia at 11:16 AM on November 5, 2003

the center for responsive politics (the guys behind opensecrets.org) found that for the 2001-2002 election cycle, the democrats received 92% of all individual donations of $1 million or more. all of the donations of $2 million or more went to the democrats.

the republicans got 64% of all donations of $200 and less. the democrats only got 35% of the $200 or less donations.
posted by wrffr at 11:29 AM on November 5, 2003

Is the surprise: source or amount?

Both, at least for Bush and Lieberman. Both favor tort reform (although Lieberman was very quiet about that particular policy position during the 2000 election cycle), and it's a little surprising either gets any money from lawyers at all.

BTW, konolia, our own mediareport has been blogging a lot of stuff about Edwards with local perspective, and seems to be concluding that he's not going anywhere.
posted by Slithy_Tove at 11:34 AM on November 5, 2003

mathowie

because at this point even the lawyers know very well that Edward's toast. and he's not even running for reelection in the Senate, so...

konolia
of course God forbid somebody question the judgement of the good who kept reelecting Jesse Helms for, what, 45 years?
posted by matteo at 11:40 AM on November 5, 2003

Why does Clark get all the lawyer money, should Edwards be their darling (he is, after all, a lawyer)?

This is a hard article to read, all the figures. The figures are separated then separated again making it difficult to understand: largest; contributor, state and/or industry.
For the most part the candidates mentioned received their largest or larger contributions from lawyer/legal industry. Then add big business has it's lawyers. Why a surprise, their peers.

Will we see a better judicial system with these candidates?; might have been a better question here.
posted by thomcatspike at 11:41 AM on November 5, 2003

the bush campaign is pretty free with the info of who its borg are - see if you neighbors are among the assimilated - then go do the right thing.
posted by specialk420 at 11:45 AM on November 5, 2003

the judgement of the good people who kept reelecting..., of course, sorry misspelling


also, and off the top of my head, a few other North Carolina proud sons who got elected to the Senate: Lauch Faircloth, John East
posted by matteo at 11:47 AM on November 5, 2003

"The Upper East Side zip code 10021 generated the most donations for the presidential campaigns of 2000 of any zip code for both Bush and for Gore."

$712,500 is spit for 10021.
posted by flatlander at 11:51 AM on November 5, 2003

the bush campaign is pretty free with the info of who its borg are - see if you neighbors
Give then vote: expect your vote being private assumed.
posted by thomcatspike at 11:59 AM on November 5, 2003

The aWol campaign contributions from "lawyers" could be more accurately described as "lobbyists."

DC "law firms" don't practice law, they write it for their clients, hand it to Tom DeLay and it becomes law. For a price that includes a generous campaign contribution from lobbyist and client.
posted by nofundy at 12:07 PM on November 5, 2003

of course God forbid somebody question the judgement of the good who kept reelecting Jesse Helms for, what, 45 years?

Edwards is in a different Senate district. Elizabeth Dole took over Jesse Helm's seat.

And actually you might be surprised to know how many liberals live in this state.
posted by konolia at 12:12 PM on November 5, 2003

Oh, slithy_tove, thanks for the link. I bookmarked it for the hubby to read later.
posted by konolia at 12:13 PM on November 5, 2003

The great thing about campaign finance reform is that it keeps everyone distracted from the fact that we continue to hand over more power every year to our elites on the right AND left.

Campaign finance reform is a red herring. As long as there is power to be sold, there will be money to buy it.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 12:32 PM on November 5, 2003

Barbra Streisand gave $1,000 to Al Sharpton.

Hey, this is cool.
posted by ZenMasterThis at 12:43 PM on November 5, 2003

of course God forbid somebody question the judgement of the good who kept reelecting Jesse Helms for, what, 45 years?

Edwards is in a different Senate district.

There are no US Senate districts. All US Senate races are statewide, just like gubernatorial races.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 12:53 PM on November 5, 2003

Pardon the error. I just worked 15 straight hours as a poll judge yesterday and precincts and districts and what not are one big tossed salad in my fevered brain right now. And that was just a city election. Give me another 6 years and I will be an expert on all of it.

But Dole did take over Jesse's seat. Edwards ran against Lauch Faircloth. A run between Edwards and Dole, now THAT would have been entertainment.
posted by konolia at 1:02 PM on November 5, 2003

contrary to what y'all might think, a fair number of us lawyers really don't like our colleagues. . .much less want them in charge of anything.
posted by crush-onastick at 2:44 PM on November 5, 2003

For those like me who have been wondering about the claim that Republicans get more of their funding from ordinary people and the Democrats get more from foundations and rich individuals

Where in the world did you ever get this ridiculous notion in the first place? (not that you might actually subscribe to it, just that it's ridiculous)

No response to the fact that this is not at all ridiculous, briank? I love how wrffr's point is so conveniently ignored here on Pinkofilter. Let's just brush it under the carpet and move on. I love it.
posted by BirdD0g at 2:52 PM on November 5, 2003

My surprises are that after studying this link for a while I don't think I can trust any of them anymore. Follow the money, they say. The end of innocence? I hope not but maybe.
posted by donfactor at 3:57 PM on November 5, 2003

The end of innocence? I hope not but maybe.
That came when parents tell their kids; Life is not fair, now turn the Tv channel to Fox News.
posted by thomcatspike at 4:11 PM on November 5, 2003

I love how wrffr's point is so conveniently ignored here on Pinkofilter.

Hey everyone! Birdrop reads Pinko sites! And he loves it!
posted by nofundy at 6:25 AM on November 6, 2003

Barbra Streisand gave $1,000 to Al Sharpton.

Maybe they met at the hairdresser.
posted by jonmc at 7:18 AM on November 6, 2003

You can search for a company name and state. This is really cool. I now know who to make friends with.

(And I found out that Vlade Divac gave 10 Gs to the DNC! Searched occupation for basketball.)
posted by callmejay at 9:28 AM on November 6, 2003