| WASHINGTON
- October 25 - Despite the advances women have made in politics over the past
decade, the world of political contributors is still dominated
by men, according to The Big Picture, a new comprehensive study
of the money behind the 2000 elections by the non-partisan
Center for Responsive Politics.
The Big Picture is the product of more than two years of
research into the funding of last year's record-breaking
elections and more than a decade's worth of tracking the funding
of federal elections in general. It is based on the Center's
data and analysis of reports filed with the Federal Election
Commission for the 1999-2000 election cycle.
The study found that total giving by women has risen along with
the price of campaigns since the early '90s, but contributions
from female donors in relation to those from male donors have
remained constant. Women accounted for about the same proportion
of money given to federal candidates and party committees in
last year's elections as they did in the 1996 and 1992
elections, the Center's study reveals. Women contributed 28
percent of all hard money given by individuals in the 1999-2000
election cycle, compared to 27 percent in 1995-96 and 26 percent
in 1991-92. Female contributors gave 15 percent of all soft
money last year, the same proportion as in 1995-96 and one
percentage point less than in 1991-92.
Why do women give a higher percentage of hard money than soft
money? Because hard money contributions are subject to limits,
and wealthy contributors who have given the maximum amount of
hard money to a candidate often write a check to that same
candidate from their spouse (and sometimes their children). Soft
money contributions have no limits, so "shadow" giving by
spouses is unnecessary, according to the study.
The Big Picture's other findings include:
* Geography of campaign contributions: The most generous metro
area in the country in the 2000 elections was New York city
($104.1 million to federal candidates, parties and PACs),
followed by the Washington, D.C. area ($79.8 million) and Los
Angeles/Long Beach ($57.5 million). The most Democratic-leaning
region in the country in terms of campaign giving was Lowell,
Mass., where 80.2 percent of contributions went to Democrats.
Casper, Wyo. was the most loyal Republican stronghold, with 99.0
percent of its contributions going to the GOP.
* Spreading the wealth: Contributions from incumbents to
candidates and party committees - a necessity for any lawmaker
wanting a leadership post or plum committee assignment -
increased sharply in 2000 over 1998. For example, Democratic
candidates transferred $15.7 million to the party in 1999-2000,
more than triple the $4.6 million recorded in 1998.
Contributions from Republican candidates to the GOP went from
$12.3 million in 1998 to $19.6 million last year, an increase of
59 percent.
* Advantages of incumbency: The cost of beating a House
incumbent last November soared to just over $2 million, nearly
double what it cost just two years earlier. The incumbents that
were defeated spent even more than their challengers - an
average of more than $2.5 million apiece.
* Biggest bundles of Election 2000: The practice of bundling -
when a large number of individuals from the same organization
pool their donations to support a particular candidate - reached
record levels in 2000. Jon Corzine, the Democratic Senate
candidate from New Jersey, recorded the largest bundle ever for
a federal candidate - nearly $533,000 from Goldman Sachs, the
Wall Street investment firm he once led. Emily's List
contributed the second largest bundle of the election cycle -
close to $477,000 to Democratic Senate candidate Debbie
Stabenow. Both Corzine and Stabenow were victorious last
November.
The Big Picture contains numerous other facts and figures from
the most expensive election in U.S. history, including:
* Top organizational contributors, individual contributors, soft
money donors, and PACs;
* Detailed analysis of giving by the major industries and
interest groups in the U.S. economy;
* Timelines showing month-by-month fundraising by the major
presidential candidates;
* Demographic breakdowns of donors by the size of contributions
and giving patterns to each party;
* Spending levels in races in which an incumbent won, an
incumbent lost, and open seats;
* Fundraising by members of the majority party versus that of
members in the minority.
Copies of the 84-page report are available for $25. Visit
www.opensecrets.org or call 202/857-0044 for ordering
information. The Center is a non-partisan, non-profit research
group that tracks money in U.S. politics and its effect on
elections and public policy.
###
|
