Sound Politics: Wealthy out-of-town Democrats trying to buy state Congressional seats

September 19, 2006

Wealthy out-of-town Democrats trying to buy state Congressional seats

In both the 8th and 5th Congressional Districts, the media is applauding the Democrat challengers and their purported fundraising prowess over Republican incumbents Dave Reichert and Cathy McMorris (Seattle Times: "For the third straight filing period, political newcomer Darcy Burner raised more money than [Reichert]"; The Stranger: "Goldmark has been out-fundraising his opponent bringing in more cash than McMorris ..."). A breakdown of the donations confirms that both incumbents enjoy far more support among their constituents than do the challengers.

[Click on images for full-size version]
Both charts are based on itemized individual contributions as reported to the FEC for the election cycle through 8/31/2006. In both charts, the Green bars represent contributions from residents of the respective Congressional district. Black bars represent out of state contributions. In the 8th district race, Red bars represent contributions from the 7th Congressional District (Seattle/Vashon) and the Pink bars represent contributions from Washington not in the 7th or 8th. In the 5th District race, the Red bars represent greater Seattle (1st, 7th, 8th and 9th districts) and Pink everywhere else in the state.

Totals for Reichert include both the standard itemized individual contributions as well as the campaign's gross receipts of roughly $278,000 in individual contributions from the Bush fundraiser, which was technically a separate campaign committee (Reichert-Washington Victory Committee).

Reichert received roughly $621,000 or 54% of $1.16 million in itemized individual contributions from within the district, vs. Burner's $313,000 or 38% of $818,000.

Burner did surpass Reichert in unitemized (< $200) contributions, $267,000 to $199,000. I don't have the data to breakdown the unitemized contributions to in-district vs. out-of-district residents, but observe that if the unitemized contributions fall in the same proportions (54%, 38%) as the itemized contributions, Reichert would still come out ahead on in-district unitemized contributions. It's also clear that Burner is benefitting from national nutroots fundraising, so I wouldn't be surprised if Burner's unitemized donations are even more skewed out-of-district.

McMorris received roughly $275,000 or 59% of $464,000 in itemized individual contributions from within the district, vs.Goldmark's $94,000 or 26% of $353,000.

McMorris also received $190,000 in unitemized individual contributions (< $200) vs Goldmark's $110,000.

The bottom line is that while a $1 contribution still buys $1 worth of advertising no matter who the donor is, it's clear that these Democrat campaign coffers are being buoyed by upscale out-of-district liberals who aren't the best indicator of a candidate's underlying support among their actual constituents.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at September 19, 2006 01:49 PM | Email This

Comments

1. The graphs say it all. Reichert and McMorris will win.

Posted by: Michele on September 19, 2006 03:44 PM

2. NIce job Stefan. Thanks for exposing the smoke and mirrors that Democrats use to try and promote the myth that their candidates have already won. The same is true for Democrat skewed polls. The intent is always to get undecided voters to jump on the bandwagon and conservatives to give up before getting to the election booth.

The reality is that the Dem candidates are Potemkin Cutouts that have to be propped up with a stick in order to stand.

Posted by: Jeff B. on September 19, 2006 04:11 PM

3. Being the paranoid right-winger that I am, I wonder how and where the money will be spent. Who is going to benefit from what appears to be money down a rat hole. Or should that be money UP a 'Rats hole?

Posted by: Elaine on September 19, 2006 08:00 PM

4. Hmmm... so if a republican candidate was up against an incumbent Democrat would you think this was unusual? After all, name recognition is something of a challenge to overcome and the money does have to come from somewhere. People that don't know your name in your district will not give to you will they?

But after having all the Executive branch visitors you would think Dave and Cathy would post better numbers.

But then this post isn't about that or the out of state money that is pouring into the Judicial races is it.

You can do better than this Steph... I mean, I know you like these guys but would it be any different in the incumbent shoe was on the other foot?

Posted by: Jimmy on September 19, 2006 09:22 PM

5. Well said Jimmy. A lot of spin in those comments about Democrat spin and a slip labeled double standard is showing.

If Burner out polls Reichert in a very low turnout, as is the case in these early results, those of a "sound" mind will have to do a lot more mental gymnastics to get the prognosis they want.

Outside money is not shooting the Sheriff, his voting record is doing that, outside money is only leveling the playing field, something hard to do in most very Gerrymandered districts around the country.

Posted by: Steve on September 20, 2006 06:59 AM