Midterms: $80M spent so far by outside groups, conservatives outspend Dems 7 to 1

Interest-group spending for midterm up fivefold from 2006; many sources secret

By T.W. Farnam and Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, October 4, 2010; 3:01 AM


Interest groups are spending five times as much on the 2010 congressional elections as they did on the last midterms, and they are more secretive than ever about where that money is coming from.

The $80 million spent so far by groups outside the Democratic and Republican parties dwarfs the $16 million spent at this point for the 2006 midterms. In that election, the vast majority of money - more than 90 percent - was disclosed along with donors' identities. This year, that figure has fallen to less than half of the total, according to data analyzed by The Washington Post.

The trends amount to a spending frenzy conducted largely in the shadows.

The bulk of the money is being spent by conservatives, who have swamped their Democratic-aligned competition by 7 to 1 in recent weeks. The wave of spending is made possible in part by a series of Supreme Court rulings unleashing the ability of corporations and interest groups to spend money on politics. Conservative operatives also say they are riding the support of donors upset with Democratic policies they perceive as anti-business.

"The outside group spending is primarily being driven by the political climate," said Anthony Corrado, a professor of government at Colby College who studies campaign finance. "Organized groups are looking at great opportunity, and therefore there's great interest to spend money to influence the election. You've got the possibility of a change in the control of Congress."

The increase in conservative spending has come both from established groups and from groups only a few months old. On the left, major labor groups such as the Service Employees International Union have also ratcheted up their expenditures compared with 2006 but are unable to keep up with groups on the right.

more...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/03/AR2010100303664.html

If corporations can use their before tax profits to inundate the population with propaganda, we're doomed.

My god, they're writing this off as a "cost".

If they spend the money for advertisements that just puts money back into media networks. And supports shows that are liked by choices of those groups. So it is more of a control system then a spending of money.

It is a consequence of media consolidation, and wealth consolidation, that much of that spending is not generating better conditions for many people. Which fits the idea of electing people that would only support the wealthy.

I agree government has corruption issues, and they have to be rooted out, but the fix is not to remove the government but to fix the problems in government.



(Side note the Sanchez comment was probably done so anyone that later criticizes media, will be thought to be criticizing a religion. It is PR to create a perception with many Jewish people, playing on fears of antisemitism. They are not Jewish, the don't follow laws from Old Testament. For many it is about money. However like any group, many in media are really good people.)

I know, the only one evermentioned is Soros, but surely there has to be more than just ONE!

I'd prefer to have federally funded elections, but if we can't have that, I'd at least like the Dems to be competative!

:thumbsup:

giving to both Democrats and Republicans and they play them off against each other every damn cycle!!!

They think money can buy anything -- oh how I'd love them to be schooled on the lessons of unmitigated greed.