- campaign contributors
- Sep 13:
- Himes top 10 contributors
WASHINGTON -- In the 4th District money race, Republican Chris Shays and Democrat Jim Himes have relied largely on Wall Street heavyweights to build massive campaign treasuries.
Shays, who is seeking his 12th term in Congress, has focused on familiar sources in lower Fairfield County and New York City to raise more than $2.3 million by the start of July.
Himes, who lives in Greenwich, has called on friends and associates from his days as a vice president at Goldman Sachs to raise more than $2.1 million by July 23 for his first run for Congress.
The $4.46 million they reported to the Federal Election Commission places them 8th in the nation among contested House races.
It has also raised the eyebrows of advocates who want public campaign financing for Congress that would mirror a Connecticut law governing its state races.
"The contrast couldn't be greater," says Nick Nyhart, executive director of Public Campaign Action Fund.
Under Connecticut's relatively new law, candidates for the General Assembly can qualify for public funding after passing a relatively low threshold of contributions from within the district. There is an incentive in seeking even $5 contributions that does not exist on the federal level. And it has shown signs of working, he says.
"At the federal level, the reverse is true," Nyhart says.
Congressional candidates need to raise so much money that they have no choice but to chase larger contributions from
"You can't be competitive against an incumbent in a swing seat unless you raise lots of money. And you don't do that unless you go after large contributions," Nyhart says.
In the competitive 4th District, there is a stark split in demographics between the wealthy suburban towns that send millions of commuters each business day into Wall Street and cities like
Bridgeport.
Shays raised $512,000 in Greenwich and $201,000 in Bridgeport in contributions of more than $200 each. Himes raised $563,000 in Greenwich and $8,100 in Bridgeport in contributions of more than $200 each, according to tallies by CQ MoneyLine.
Himes' single biggest source of contributions came from Goldman Sachs employees and their spouses. He collected at least $114,000 from them and more than $10,000 each from Deutsche Bank AG, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Lehman Brothers, Morgan Stanley and Emdeon Corp., according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Shays' top contributor - at $20,200 - is New York Life Insurance. He has also collected at least $10,000 from UST Inc., Goldman Sachs, Dawson-Herman Capital Management, Credit Suisse Group, Kamber Management, UBS AG, Pitney Bowes and Purdue Pharma, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Shays raised nearly $1.7 million from individual contributors and nearly $700,000 from Political Action Committees. Himes raised just over $1.9 million from individuals, nearly $140,000 from PACs, and contributed $28,288 of his own money, according to FEC filings.
Michael Sachse, communications director for the Himes campaign, says that the Goldman Sachs network supports Himes because they know his character.
"Jim is the type of person who has friends who are tremendously loyal to him, and they are doing all they can to support this campaign," Sachse says.
Shays has some financial contributors that have supported his campaigns since he first ran for the state legislature in 1974, says Michael Sohn, campaign director for Shays.
"It says something about Christopher that there are people who know the good work he is doing, care about the good work he is doing and want to continue to support him," Sohn says.
The low-income residents of Bridgeport's neighborhoods "simply don't count in the funding race," Nyhart says.
Himes has collected about $136,000 and Shays $89,000 in small contributions, according to a tally of their FEC filings. That represents about 7.5 percent of the revenues for Himes and 5.8 percent for Shays.
Meanwhile, Shays collected at least $332,771 and Himes $391,254 in large contributions from securities and investment firms, according to a Center for Responsive Politics analysis that was able to match standard commercial codes with nearly 80 percent of their itemized contribution sources.
Candidates are required to identify contributors who give more than $200 to their campaigns, including information on their employer and job.
Sohn says it is "just natural" that they and their opponents turn to financial services employees for contributions.
"That is where the money comes from because that is where people work in the district," Sohn says. "We draw almost 90 percent of our funds from residents of Connecticut. That says a lot about what Chris has done for the people of the 4th District."
"We have been grateful to have tremendous support from donors big and small," Sachse says. "There are many wealthy people who live in this district, and we have been fortunate to have their support. We have also been supported by many small donors, too." The campaign's small donor base numbers "in the thousands," he says.
Among the (second quarter total) 68 percent of contributors gave $100 or less, 44 percent gave $25 or less.
Massie Ritsch, communications director for the Center for Responsive Politics, says that small donors generally outnumber big donors but their contributions pale in comparison to the totals.
"Those of us who follow the money prefer to look at percentage of cash that has come from each set of donors," Ritsch says. "The bigger the contribution the more potential there is for payback. It is only natural to feel a greater obligation to someone who gave you $2,000 versus $20." In the 2000 election cycle, campaigns on average collected about 15 percent of their funds from small contributions -- those less than $200. It is now down to 10 percent on average and less in competitive races, Nyhart says.
"The role of small money has been decreasing," Nyhart says.
The remaining 90 percent comes from the 0.5 percent of the population willing to cough up more than $200 or Political Action Committees formed mostly by corporate executives, labor unions and other special interests.
Nyhart and other public finance advocates claim that the competition for wealthy individual contributors -- even though it is limited essentially to no more than $4,600 per person each election cycle by a law co-authored by Shays in 2002 -- still has a corrupting influence on politics.
Although Ritsch acknowledges it is unlikely -- and illegal -- for a member of Congress to deliver a specific benefit in exchange for a contribution he claims there is an impact on the agenda.
"The money members of Congress have to rely on skews their priorities," Ritsch says. "It might not change their minds but makes certain things seem more important than they probably are." Although Shays relies heavily on lower Fairfield County to fund his campaigns, Sohn contends that it does not overshadow his concerns for every resident in the 4th District.
"Chris lives in Bridgeport. He gets the concerns of Bridgeport," Sohn says. "Because someone donates to the campaign does not mean they carry any more weight than anyone else in Chris' mind." As to the impact of big donors, Sachse says that Himes is talking about the same issues today as he did when he first entered the campaign.
"Before Jim raised a dime for this race he was talked about creating jobs, cutting taxes for the middle class, protecting Social Security, and fixing No Child Left Behind," Sachse says. "Jim has been focused on creating economic opportunity from the start, and economic opportunity will be his focus in Congress."
In the 4th District, Ritsch imagines that some of Shays and Himes contributors think that taxing hedge fund managers at 15 percent is equitable and appropriate. But, ask people making a fraction of the income earned by hedge fund managers who pay the same or higher percentages, and they likely have a different view.
"They hear their donors saying one thing but if they checked in with the larger groups of constituents they might hear something else," Ritsch says.
That focus on wealthy contributors during the campaign season invariably spills over into legislative action or inaction that favors big business at the expense of average Americans, Ritsch and Nyhart claim.
"Look at the financial crisis we now face," Nyhart says. "They are paying a lot of attention to problems within the financial industry that focuses at the top but there is a larger financial crisis that ordinary Americans face. They get far less attention." The Corporation for Enterprise Development, a national nonprofit, issued a report last week that found low- and moderate-income households hit hardest by the current credit crisis.
Since 2006, net worth grew for the top 60 percent of households by income but fell for those in the bottom 40 percent, the report found.
Nyhart says that public financing would also open up congressional races beyond the relatively small circle of wealthy individuals or those with wealthy friends who can now compete.
And, the sheer amount of fundraising that incumbents engage in distracts from their work. They spend less time getting to know their colleagues, building legislative coalitions and studying issues.
"It slows down the legislative process," Nyhart says.
Himes has signed a pledge to bring the Connecticut public financing system to Congress. Shays has not, Nyhart says.
To see a complete list of contributors on the Internet CLICK HERE
Font Resize
