The Pardu

The Pardu
Watchful eyes and ears feed the brain, thus nourishing the brain cells.
Showing posts with label Center for Responsive Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Center for Responsive Politics. Show all posts

Friday, November 15, 2013

The "Upton Option" Passes The US House On A Path To RIP! (UPDATED: List of 39 Dems)

As we move through trials and tribulations of US healthcare reform, the path to full assimilation has grown comparable to a Richter Scale Nine earthquake. 

The United States is the only remaining industrial power without some form of single payer or universal healthcare.  I have read the Australian program is an ideal model and the Canadian model is workable (very good) with issues waiting times. After watching resistance to healthcare reform from President Obama's first mention, the level and scope of obstruction and outright resistance is stupefying. The amount of money spent to defeat healthcare reform could never have been predicted by anyone other than a few clairvoyants. The Kochs are reported to have spent $200 million on efforts to repeal the ACA. If that figure is accurate, imagine the amounts spent behind the scenes and imagine the subservience of those who accepted anti-ACA money. Regardless of political contributions or contributions in forms far less reported (hopefully legal), the politician has accepted a 'mark' that will come due in short order. That mark becomes a binding obligation that, in comparison, relegates Grover Norquist's paper pledges to the level of a Kindergarten Crayon (tm) time finished project. 

After noticing the words "Upton Option," I thought "why not probe a bit."  It took two minutes in Open Secrets to validate the power of money and contribution over the ultimate good of district constituents.  

First, an update on the House vote and a reminder of squeamish Democrats who know the good of the ACA, yet vote to cut the core out of the law. We will publish their names once we have official vote results. 

Huffington Post

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican-controlled House has passed legislation letting insurance companies sell individual coverage to all comers, even if it falls short of standards set in "Obamacare." 
The vote was 261-157, and came after GOP lawmakers said the bill would ease the plight of millions of consumers reeling from cancellation notices.

As promised, the "Upton Option" and insight into the money. Intriguing!  If you view Upton's top five donors in the 2014 Cycle, hit the link to view the complete donors list. You will see Upton is a Kochite! 

Open Secrets The "Upton Option" (Linked)
Bill NameTitleRelated BillDateOrgs  Lobbying
To authorize health insurance issuers to continue to offer for sale current individual health insurance coverage in satisfaction of the minimum essential health insurance coverage requirement, and for other purposes.

Open Secrets (Center for Responsive Politics)
Fred Upton

Fred Upton

Select cycle and data to include:
  • Campaign Cmte Only
  • Leadership PAC Profile Only
  • Campaign Cmte & Leadership PAC Combined

Committee Assignments: 

Leadership PAC (1): 

Cycle Fundraising, 2013 - 2014, Campaign Cmte

Raised: $1,214,841 Sparklines Explanation coming soon
Spent: $392,318
Cash on Hand: $893,111
Debts: $0
Last Report:Monday, September 30, 2013

Top 5 Contributors, 2013-2014, Campaign Cmte

Blue Cross/Blue Shield$10,500$500$10,000
Steptoe & Johnson$10,200$5,200$5,000
Berkshire Hathaway$10,000$0$10,000
Boeing Co$10,000$0$10,000

Top 5 Industries, 2013-2014, Campaign Cmte

Health Professionals$139,000$16,000$123,000
Pharmaceuticals/Health Products$92,900$3,900$89,000
Electric Utilities$86,500$1,500$85,000
Oil & Gas$76,750$5,750$71,000
Lawyers/Law Firms$56,900$17,900$39,000

Total Raised vs. Average Raised

2009-2010 Fundraising

Cycle Source of Funds, 2013-2014, Campaign Cmte only

Individual Contributions About Size of Contributions
 - Small Individual Contributions
 - Large Individual Contributions
$18,477    (2%)
  $313,544   (26%)
legendPAC Contributions$882,150(73%)
legendCandidate self-financing$0(0%)
NOTE: All the numbers on this page are for the 2013-2014 election cycle and based on Federal Election Commission data available electronically on November 15, 2013 (for Fundraising totals, Source of Funds and Total Raised vs Average) and on October 28, 2013 for Top Contributors and Industries. In the "Source of Funds" chart, "Large Individual Contributions" refer to all contributions from unique individuals aggregating to more than $200 within a cycle, and "Small Individual Contributions" refer to all contributions from unique individuals totaling $200 or less within a cycle. ("Help! The numbers don't add up...")
The organizations themselves did not donaterather the money came from the organizations' PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

End Open Secrets......

Upton may very well represent a district with few people in need of medical and dental coverage. We suspects many Republicans legislate and vote based on their districts without any regard for the nation as an ultimate legislative responsibility. An understandable dynamic as politicians win elections in districts. Yet pandering to and subservience to plutocrat libertarians on the surface seems to ring-out against democratic principles. Of course, I have not witnessed an example of democratic principles from the GOP (and Blue Dog Dems) for many years. 

UPDATED: Here they are.....39 members of the House who voted with Republicans on HR 3350. Sadly, a good number of the 39 have not preserved their seats, they like many Blue dogs will get voted out of office by their conservative constituents.

Ron Barber D AZ-2
John Barrow D GA-12
Ami Bera D CA-7
Timothy H. Bishop D NY-1
Bruce Braley D IA-1
Julia Brownley D CA-26
Cheri Bustos D IL-17
Jim Costa D CA-16
Peter A. DeFazio D OR-4
Suzan K. DelBene D WA-1
Tammy Duckworth D IL-8
Bill Enyart D IL-12
Elizabeth Esty D CT-5
Bill Foster D IL-11
Pete Gallego D TX-23
John Garamendi D CA-3
Joe Garcia D FL-26
Ron Kind D WI-3
Ann McLane Kuster D NH-2
Dave Loebsack D IA-2
Dan Maffei D NY-24
Sean Patrick Maloney D NY-18
Jim Matheson D UT-4
Mike McIntyre D NC-7
Jerry McNerney D CA-9
Patrick Murphy D FL-18
Rick Nolan D MN-8
Bill Owens D NY-21
Gary Peters D MI-14
Scott Peters D CA-52
Collin C. Peterson D MN-7
Nick J. Rahall II D WV-3
Raul Ruiz D CA-36
Brad Schneider D IL-10
Kurt Schrader D OR-5
Carol Shea-Porter D NH-1
Kyrsten Sinema D AZ-9
Filemon Vela D TX-34
Tim Walz D MN-1


Thursday, October 24, 2013

Open Secrets: How The Democrats And Republicans Spend Campaign Contributions

I receive few Facebook News feeds with more excitement than feeds received from The Center for Responsive Politics (Open Secrets). The website consistently provides reliable and credible data related to US Politics.

Data feeds the brain when human conversation and opinion fail.  While data can be interpreted in many ways, and often at the mercy of one's bias. In the political realm, data insulates against politicking if viewed and assimilated with an open mind. 

The following information from The Center for Responsive Politics (along with interpretation), is interesting. Interesting for the 'high information voter, I should say.  After viewing the information behind the second bullet, my suspicion that Republicans spend more on political operatives is validated. Thus, the GOP life-line for people like Karl Rove and other political strategist. Fortunately, of late, those consultants have failed miserably. The Rove GOP product is flawed and no amount of consulting fees can fix a party that is flawed both fiscally, socially, and flawed in serving business interest over the interest of the people.  Example, the GOP rails about the ACA as something the people want to repealed despite data to the contrary, and the GOP works to destroy the ObamaCare. Yet the same party completely ignores the fact 92% of polled Americans want background checks for firearm purchases. Could the GOP lack of interest in gun legislation relate to gun lobby money? The question is rhetorical, we know the answer.

Re-blog courtesy Open Secrets

Campaign Spending Habits: Democrats v. Republicans

Pundits and partisans have had nearly a year since the 2012 election to speculate about how differences between Democratic and Republican campaign tactics helped determine the outcome. While there’s more to electoral strategy than spending money, deciding how to allocate its precious funds can make or break a campaign.

Using the Center for Responsive Politics’ overhauled database of expenditures, we broke down more than $10 billion in spending by candidates from the 2002 through 2012 campaign cycles to look at how Democratic and Republican candidates put their cash to use in six major categories: Administrative, Campaign Expenses, Fundraising, Media, Strategy & Research, and Wages & Salaries. (This excludes the Contributions and Transfers categories, since that money doesn’t ultimately influence the outcome of the election for the campaign that spends it, as well as the Unclassifiable category.)
Here’s what we found: 
  • Democratic candidates outspent Republicans on personnel. 13.7 percent of the money spent by Democratic campaigns from 2002-2012 fell into our Wages & Salaries category, which also includes payroll taxes, health insurance, and any other costs associated with fielding a staff. Republicans spent 9.7 percent, or barely two thirds as much. Of course, more money spent on payroll doesn’t necessarily translate into a bigger staff -- it could reflect higher pay all around, a top-heavy payroll focused on senior staff, or a combination of the above.
  • Republicans spent more of their campaign budget on fundraising and consulting. The numbers are almost a mirror image of the salary figures: Republican campaigns used 14.2 percent of their money to raise more money, against an even 10 percent for Democrats. The bulk of the difference comes from the fundraising consulting subcategory, where Republicans outspent Democrats by a ratio of nearly 2-to-1 (5.8 percent to 3.1 percent). Republicans also had a substantial edge in the media consulting and campaign consulting subcategories, which -- along with the higher Democratic payrolls -- may indicate that Republicans outsource some campaign functions that Democrats keep in house.
  • Republican campaigns rely more heavily on direct mail, Democrats on new media.  Perhaps reflecting party demographics, Democrats and Republicans favored different methods of reaching out to voters. Republican campaigns put 13.6 percent of their money into direct mail versus 9.4 percent for Democratic candidates; Democrats, meanwhile, spent almost three times as much on Web advertising as Republicans (2.6 percent to 0.9 percent). While that figure reflects all cycles since 2002, the gap in Web spending was actually even larger in the past cycle -- a fact that probably comes as no surprise to Republican consultants who rued the GOP’s lack of web presence in the aftermath of Mitt Romney’s loss. Even in 2012, however, traditional media reigned supreme: web advertising was barely 10 percent of Democratic candidates’ media budget.
  • Ultimately,  the spending habits of Democratic and Republican campaigns were fairly similar. Both spent more than half of their funds on media, smaller chunks of money on fundraising, salaries, and administrative expenses, and the remainder on campaign and strategy expenses. The resemblance even extends to spending on big subcategories like polling and surveys (1.9 percent for Republicans, 2.2 percent for Democrats) and travel and lodging (4.5 percent for Republicans, 4.8 percent for Democrats). Whatever else may divide them, Democratic and Republican candidates appear to run their races using the same basic playbook.


Friday, October 11, 2013

Open Secrets: Money Towards The 2014 Midterm Elections....GOP Is Winning The Money Battles!

If you do not know, you should know we are in the first quarter (figuratively) of the Mid-Terms elections.  Early in the game , THE GOP IS WINNING the Money battles.   

Would you like to see a tall check on how political contributors are shaping-up for the 2014 mid-term elections.  Before, we go there via Open Secretes, we ash that we all remember how the GOP (via money brokers and hatred of Obama) secured a majority in the House of Representatives.  Do we need say more? 

The Center for Responsive Politics (Open Secrets)


Stats at a Glance


Financial activity for all House candidates, 2013-2014
Democrats: $83,281,825
Republicans: $105,946,622
PartyNo. of CandsTotal RaisedTotal SpentTotal Cash
on Hand
from PACs
from Indivs


Financial activity for all Senate candidates, 2013-2014
Democrats: $54,498,094
Republicans: $40,657,552
PartyNo. of CandsTotal RaisedTotal SpentTotal Cash
on Hand
from PACs
from Indivs
Based on data released by the FEC on 10/11/2013.
To view data for previous cycles, visit our Big Picture section.


Thursday, October 3, 2013

The Dissident 20...An Anomaly? (Look At Dissident Politics GOP Style)

Re-Blog from Open Secrets Dot Org.   

It appears Cantor and company spend far more time parsing out the loot than legislating!

Dissidents Haven't Seen the $ Love from Boehner, Cantor

A new Center for Responsive Politics analysis shows that the House Republican leadership has raised an extraordinary amount of money so far this year and given it out to other House members at record rates. 

So, if money is the great pacifier on Capitol Hill, why can't Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) and his No. 2, Majority Leader Eric Cantor(R-Va.) snap their caucus in line, on the government shutdown or on other matters?

Maybe because the hardcore dissidents in the Republican caucus get almost no money from the leadership. Boehner can't pull strings he hasn't tied.

Yesterday, the New York Times identified 20 Republican House members "standing their ground" against Boehner, dissidents who have been a consistent thorn in Boehner's side and who seem to be pushing the current shutdown. 

We analyzed how much money those 20 have received from the leadership PACs of top Republicans in the House and how much assistance they were given in the 2012 election by the National Republican Congressional Conference. 

According to data, there's been almost no money going to these 20 from top party leaders, and most were elected without any help from the NRCC. In other words, they don't owe party leadership much.

That fact is particularly striking because in the first six months of 2013, Cantor gave away $875,000 to other candidates through his leadership PAC, ERIC PAC. That's a record: No leadership PAC has ever given as much to candidates in the first six months of an election cycle. So far in the 2014 cycle, ERIC PAC has given money to 122 other House Republicans, but only eight members of the group of dissidents have received any cash from Cantor this cycle. Altogether those eight received $55,000 from Cantor's PAC. (A full list of donations from Cantor and other members of the leadership to the 20 is below.)

Boehner, whose leadership PAC, the Freedom Project, has given out $213,000 to 39 candidates this cycle, gave to just one member of this group of 20: Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who received $5,000. 

The other top members of the House Republican leadership follow the same pattern. House Majority Whip Kevin McCartthy (R-Calif.) has given just $7,500 combined to two of the 20 (his leadership PAC has given a total of $155,000 to 38 members). Deputy Whip Peter Roskam (R-Ill.) has given $71,000 to other candidates this cycle, but no money to these 20.

No Help From the Party

Leadership PACs aren't the only tool for creating financial ties that help ensure a member's loyalty. The GOP party committee for the House plays a major role, and while Cantor gives an unprecedented amount of money directly to other candidates, Boehner gives far more -- at least $2.3 million in the first six months of the year -- to the NRCC, which then uses it to help candidates directly.

But there are even fewer ties between the NRCC and these 20 Republicans. NRCC contributions to candidates in the 2012 and 2014 cycles combined come to roughly $460,000 combined, so far. The amount that went to any of these 20 Republicans? $5,300. 

The NRCC's current chairman, Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) has not given any of the 20 a dime from his leadership PAC in either the 2012 cycle or the current one.

Nor did the NRCC knock itself out making independent expenditures on behalf of the 20 in the 2012 cycle. While it spent $62.7 million in 59 races, it helped just one member of the dissident faction, according to data: Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who benefited from about $521,000 in NRCC-paid ads, mostly attacking his Democratic opponent. 

In his bid last fall, Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.), received some very minor assistance from YG Network, a politically active nonprofit associated with Cantor, which spent $12,966 supporting him. 

Donations from NRCC & Republican House Leadership

Graves, Tom$5,000$0$0$0$5,000$0$0
Labrador, Raul$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
Amash, Justin$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
Duncan, Jeff$7,500$0$0$5,000$2,500$0$0
Mulvaney, Mick$5,000$0$0$5,000$0$0$0
Culberson, John$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
DeSantis, Ron$5,000$0$0$5,000$0$0$0
Yoho, Ted$10,000$0$0$10,000$0$0$0
King, Steven A$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
Massie, Thomas$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
Bridenstine, James$10,000$0$0$10,000$0$0$0
Salmon, Matt$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
Schweikert, David$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
Gohmert, Louis B Jr$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
Huelskamp, Tim$0$0$0$0$0$0$0
Bachmann, Michele$5,000$0$0$5,000$0$0$0
Jordan, Jim$5,000$0$5,000$0$0$0$0
Stockman, Steve$5,000$0$0$5,000$0$0$0
Fleming, John$10,000$0$0$10,000$0$0$0
Gingrey, Phil$0$0$0$0$0$0$0

Follow Russ on Twitter: @russchoma

Images: Boehner on Capitol Hill today. J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press.