Incumbents squash challengers in fundraising

By Patrick Gannon | Aug 25, 2014


RALEIGH – Chalk it up as another way that incumbent legislators in
general have a distinct advantage over challengers in N.C. General
Assembly races this and every other election year.

Besides the name recognition and the drawing of legislative districts
to favor one political party over the other, most incumbent lawmakers
also have more money than their opponents to spend on ads, mass
mailings and other campaign activities.

That was clear in a recent report from the left-leaning government
watchdog group Democracy North Carolina.

The group's review of campaign finance reports filed with the State
Board of Elections shows that the 79 incumbent House and Senate
members with major party opponents in November had more than $5.8
million on hand as of June 30, or an average of about $74,000. The 79
challengers to incumbents had roughly one-fifth of that, or about $1.2
million in the bank, an average of about $15,000.

That means most challengers are starting the major push toward the
Nov. 4 election at a disadvantage financially.

Bob Hall, Democracy North Carolina executive director, pointed out
that 55 of the 79 challengers had less than $10,000 in the bank at the
end of June. That isn't much considering the cost of advertising,
which challengers need to get their names and messages out to voters.
Only six challengers in 170 House and Senate districts had more cash
than their incumbent foes.

And it's only going to get worse for challengers. Hall also said
current legislators from both parties can expect windfalls of
donations from political action committees, or PACs, after the General
Assembly session ended last week. PACs aren't allowed to contribute
during legislative sessions and routinely give to candidates after
adjournment, with more than 95 percent of the cash going to sitting
lawmakers.

Hall deemed the PAC dollars "gratitude money" for incumbents' votes
during the session. He pointed out that two years ago, in the seven
weeks after the July 2012 adjournment, the Duke Energy PAC sent checks
to 72 legislators totaling $152,000.

He also said the chiropractors’ Healthy Network Solutions PAC wrote
checks to 28 legislators worth $24,000 in August 2012, and the McGuire
Woods lobby/law firm’s PAC sent $43,000 to 27 lawmakers.

Some PACs waited until after Labor Day, Hall noted. In September 2012,
the First Citizens Bank PAC sent a donation to nearly every legislator
– 112 checks adding up to $87,500. A week later, the Petroleum
Marketers PAC wrote 48 checks to legislators for $41,250.

PACs donated $9.9 million directly to legislative candidates in 2012,
according to Democracy North Carolina, and Hall expects that figure to
increase this year. PACs also give directly to caucus committees –
bank accounts within the Democratic and Republican parties that
incumbents use to steer funds to competitive races.

Many challengers also have difficulty raising money because they are
vying for office in districts drawn in such a way that they favor the
other party. Potential donors don't jump at the opportunity to
contribute cash to candidates who are unlikely to win, just like
gamblers are more likely to pick favorites when they risk their money.

It all adds up to a system that rewards incumbents' campaigns
financially for the work they do in office, while making life rough
for challengers come Election Day.

Comments (6)
Posted by: Scott Lilly | Aug 25, 2014 13:37

This columnist is fair.  Good choice.

 

I wish there were a way to overhaul all this rigging of elections.  Perhaps some way to agree on overhauls that will take effect 10 years in the future and then make it a "toxic issue" for anyone to tinker with it as the deadline approaches.



Posted by: Penny R Wallace | Aug 27, 2014 09:13

Just make it illegal for special interest groups to contribute. PACs, corporations, churches, and businesses should not be able to bully individual voters through monetary bribery.  An individual giving maximum should be set as well. We should be considering a constitutional amendment eliminating the electoral college. We have the technology to count each individual vote now. A true plebiscite would eliminate the problems caused by gerrymandering.



Posted by: Joe Vescovi | Aug 27, 2014 15:20

And how about only allowing money/persons to contribute to candidates who are running in their own district?  If the candidate is not representing them why should they have such an influence on the outcome of an election?

Also, lets have an all out effort to do away with all the gerrymandered districts.  Some states have done it, why can't NC, so people can have a fair choice in the election?



Posted by: Scott Lilly | Aug 27, 2014 17:05

Awesome.  Let's do that next time Democrats are in power though.  ;-)



Posted by: Joe Vescovi | Aug 27, 2014 18:03

Why wait???  Sounds to me some are afraid of the results.  It surely would be easier to do it now when one party has control of the Senate, House and the governorship.



Posted by: Charles Zimmerman | Aug 27, 2014 18:29

               Gerrymandering is a fools effort that is contrary to equal protection nor the principle of a republic. It is outright discrimination by selective segregation. Permanent areas should be drawn and stuck to. No one should become a minority because of someone drawing lines after the fact. N.C. could be sliced up into jurisdictions by merely deciding how many are necessary & running straight lines N.to S.

                Those that are in power now in N.C. are afraid of those constituents that did not vote for them. Voter ID laws quite clearly show that. Honest upstanding person would help all get their voice heard.

 

                     C.Z.

                



If you wish to comment, please login.