| | Advanced Search

 

Side of the Rhode: Who’s Hot and Who’s Not in RI Politics?—Side of the Rhode: Who’s Hot and Who’s…

Finneran: The Rockets’ Red Glare—Finneran: The Rockets' Red Glare

5 Live Music Musts - July 25, 2014—The Newport Folk Festival is the hottest ticket…

From RI to Worcester to Lithuania, Baron Faces Uphill Battle to NBA Dream—From RI to Worcester to Lithuania, Baron Faces…

The Cellar: For the Love of Cabernet (Franc)—One of my favorite grape varietals is Cabernet…

Why URI Providence?—The University of Rhode Island Feinstein Providence Campus…

Gracie’s Executive Chef Matthew Varga Featured in Art Culinaire—Executive Chef Matthew Varga of Gracie’s was featured…

Providence College Ranked RI’s Biggest Party School—NEW: Providence College Ranked RI's Biggest Party School

See Rhode Island in “50 States of Legos”—NEW: See Rhode Island in "50 States of…

NEW: Whole Foods Recall—Whole Foods Market has recalled made-in-store items prepared…

 
 

Rhode Island Special Interests Dropped More than $1.7 Million on 2012 Elections

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

 

Nearly two dozen political action committees (PACs) formed by labor unions, House and Senate Leadership and private sector groups reported spending at least $20,000 during the 2012 calendar year, a review a campaign finance reports shows.

Added together, 202 of the state’s registered PACs reported spending $1,713,980.02 during the election cycle, with a significant chunk of those funds going directly into the campaign accounts of elected officials.

GoLocalProv has closely monitored PAC spending all year and for the top spending groups, the investments often paid off. Records show the top ten spending PACs include five unions, three PACs formed by Senate President M. Teresa Paiva-Weed and House Speaker Gordon Fox and two groups from the private sector.

(Click Here for the entire list)

The biggest spender was the National Education Association of Rhode Island (NEA-RI), which reported spending $113,195.50 as of last week. Those funds include the money the organization spent on rent on utilities, but the largest two expenses were for nearly $36,000 in political consulting from Checkmate Consulting, an agency owned by Brad DuFault. The NEA also made $1,000 max-out campaign contributions to at least seven candidates or elected offices, including State Rep. Spencer Dickinson, Senator-elect Adam Satchell and Representatives-elect Stephen Casey and Gregg Amore.

And while strong efforts were made to oust the few lawmakers who voted against the state’s pension reform overhaul last year, the majority of the 17 nay votes (13 in total) will be returning to Smith Hill for the 2013 General Assembly session. Last month, NEA government relations director Patrick Crowley suggested public employees and progressive groups sent a clear message to the entire state in November.

“EngageRI, RI-CAN, and other anti-pension players proved to be non entries in the election,” Crowley said. “The real players were teachers, public employees, women's organizations, Marriage Equality Rhode Island, Ocean State Action and other progressive groups. Democrats should look to partner with these groups if they want the corner office in 2014 - even if it means re-thinking their current strategy on the pension lawsuit."

The teachers unions weren’t the only unions who spent thousands of dollars in 2012. The second-largest spender, the Rhode Island Laborer’s Political League, dropped $79,194.84 between January and last week, including a $5,000 contribution to the state Democratic party and $1,000 contributions to Congressman James Langevin, Paiva Weed, Senate Majority Leader Dominic Ruggerio, Senator Frank Ciccone and Representative-elect John Lombardi.

Another union, the AFL-CIO, spent nearly $49,000 on a range of consultants, mailers, and campaign contributions. The PAC reported making at least $500 in campaign contributions to Congressman David Cicilline, Langevin, Senator Paul Fogarty, Representatives Deb Fellela and Scott Guthrie and Senators-elect Gayle Goldin and Ryan Pearson.

“They’ll Spend What they Need to Spend”

For some, the union influence has become too overwhelming.

“As long as the public sector unions are allowed to continue running a mandatory worker dues system, they will maintain a huge cash advantage for their PAC activity for elections and so it’s little surprise that their PACS are disproportionately larger than most other independent efforts,” said Donna Perry, executive director of the Rhode Island Statewide Coalition (RISC).

Perry argued that when special interests are spending nearly $2 million “playing to their base and informing their worker members on who to vote for, and who to vote against,” It can be very difficult for other candidate to mount successful campaigns.

“This year demonstrated very vividly that the unions will spend what they need to spend to either install people—or try to remove people—from the legislature, seat by seat, in their quest to defend their current levels of compensation, benefits, and especially pensions,” Perry said. “Most of their campaign efforts and targets this year all seemed closely aligned with the pension vote and the wider issue.”

Engage RI Mystery Donor Revealed

But those on the union side argue that they’re simply fighting fire with fire. While the pension reform-focused EngageRI PAC reported spending just under $14,000, the organization as a whole has spent nearly $740,000 in lobbying, polling and advertising since last year, according to Wall Street Journal article published online Tuesday.

The Wall Street Journal also reported that billionaire John Arnold made a six-figure contribution to the group.

In some ways, the revelation that an outside funder would make $100,000-plus contribution to a Rhode Island group changes the narrative in a state that, with the exception of the 1st Congressional District race, saw very little outside spending.

Still, Rhode Island College professor told GoLocalProv earlier this year that local organizations still have plenty of influence when it comes to the elections. He agreed that PACs probably have too much influence.

“For many officeholders, government has become an occupation and not a service with the price of admission reduced to seeking and listening to those who can most easily afford to be heard,” Israel said. “It may not be as expensive in Rhode Island, but the situation is the same.”

Dan McGowan can be reached at [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter: @danmcgowan.

 

Enjoy this post? Share it with others.

Comments:

So EngageRI spent 10 to one more than labor and labor still kicked their butts at the polls? Hi Gina.

Comment #1 by Malachi Constant on 2012 12 12

Corruption, payoffs and bribes...at their finest.
Gotta love it.

Comment #2 by pearl fanch on 2012 12 12

Only 2 million, they got off cheap!

Comment #3 by Walt Barrett on 2012 12 12

What a waste of money that could have gone to much more better uses. Especially with all the needs that need to be addressed in our society

Comment #4 by Mark St. Pierre on 2012 12 12

bottom line..you can buy off anyone in the state house with pocket change

Comment #5 by steven richard on 2012 12 12

The democratic PACs better watch out. If GOP sugar daddy Sheldon Adelson finds out how cheap it is to bribe our state reps, the GOP party will be able to implement their conservative agenda without blinking. Oops, I just let the cat out of the bag.

Comment #6 by Charles Marsh on 2012 12 12

Once again, GoLocalProv runs a piece equating special interests to PACs, probably in order to further the myth that labor dominates Rhode Island politics. Leaving out 501(c)4 organizations, the favored tool of big money, completely distorts the picture of outside spending. Known as "c4s" for short, these shadowy groups can raise unlimited amounts of money from corporate and individual donors. As a result, the vast majority of big-money special interests organize as c4s. Engage RI, Twin River, RI-CAN, and the other big Rhode Island special interests are all c4s. In fact, it's these groups that dominate outside spending.

Many PACs aren't so much special interests as groups that ordinary citizens use to pool small contributions together in order to make a bigger difference. PACs are banned from taking corporate cash or contributions over $1000. They cannot contribute more than $25,000 per election cycle to candidates. PACs are largely a way for small dollar contributors to make their voices heard over the sea of special interest cash from corporations and the wealthy.

Comment #7 by Samuel Bell on 2012 12 12

Dan what are you trying to say thesee people thta gave all the money are doing it cause they want good government-----if you believe that i have some swamp land id florida for you
Howie Auburndale Fl

Comment #8 by Howard Miller on 2012 12 12

Just think about it. Why would any union, when faced with thousands of various charities that they can donate their money to, choose politicians to hand their money to?

I wonder why that would be.

Comment #9 by pearl fanch on 2012 12 13




Write your comment...

You must be logged in to post comments.