Rhode Island’s Top 40 Campaign Donors
Thursday, January 26, 2012
The top 40 donors to state-level campaigns in Rhode Island contributed more than $5 million in the 2008 and 2010 elections, based on data obtained by GoLocalProv.
The bulk of that money, about $4.5 million worth, was spent in 2010, when all the general officers were on the ballot. Governor Lincoln Chafee topped the list, with $1.6 million that he either loaned or contributed to his campaign, exceeding the entire amount of money that was available during the election in terms of public financing. (See below charts for the top 20 in 2010 and the top 20 in 2008.)
GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLASTThe GoLocalProv analysis also found the following:
■ Self-financers: The 2010 list, which includes individuals and organizations, is largely split between self-financed candidates and a few labor unions. After Chafee, the largest donors were self-financers such as Ken Block, the Moderate Party contender for Governor, and Attorney General candidates Stephen Archambault and Joe Fernandez, both Democrats, according to data obtained from the National Institute for Money in State Politics.
■ Individual unions at the top: The organization that dumped the most into the election was Local 1033 of the Laborers’ International Union of North America, which donated $54,000 total to more than one hundred candidates, mostly for the state House and Senate. The second highest organizational donor was the local Laborers affiliate for construction workers, following by the state chapter of the NEA.
■ Just one non-labor organization made the top 40: The Rhode Island Medical Society, which donated $23,195 in the 2008 election cycle.
■ Lawyers and lobbyists dominate: In all, public sector union contributions totaled $331,000 in 2008 and $402,000 in 2010, based on a breakdown of contributions by industry and sector. But public union contributions were dwarfed in both years by those of lawyers and lobbyists: between January 2007 and December 2010, lawyers and lobbyists accounted for $1.9 million in political money, constituting the biggest single source of campaign contributions in the last two elections, excluding public financing and self-financing.
■ Business sectors lagging: Real estate agents and companies contributed just $391,528 during the same period—far less than lawyers and lobbyists, but still ahead of other individual business sectors, such as health, securities and investment, and insurance. (See below chart.)
Top donors—lawyers and lobbyists
The head of Common Cause Rhode Island, a local watchdog organization, said it makes sense that lawyers and lobbyists would outpace the other sectors. “Lobbyists and lawyers have an obvious stake in who’s elected because of the business they get from the state, which is tremendous and because many lawyers are also lobbyists, it’s not surprising that they show up on lists like these,” said John Marion, the executive director of Common Cause.
But Quest Research pollster Victor Profughi said lumping all lobbyist contributions into one group could be misleading because lobbyists work for a wide range of clients, and some might be on opposite sides of an issue—meaning that their contributions might actually cancel each other out.
Marion said self-funded candidates have the advantage of not being beholden to any special interest. State Senator Ed O’Neill, an independent from Lincoln who funds most of his campaigns, agreed. “That allows me to be truly independent because I’m not beholden to anyone except my constituents—all of my constituents. So I don’t owe anything,” said O’Neill, a retired Texas Instruments executive.
‘Broken system’
Both Marion and O’Neill said they favor a more robust system of public financing for campaigns in order to eliminate the influence of special interests. “That would get us cleaner and more balanced government,” O’Neill said. “That would benefit … the people who unfortunately can’t afford to finance their own campaigns. If you don’t have the money you’ve got to go to the devil.” O’Neill added that he was referring to lobbyists and others who aim to influence legislation.
Marion said campaign finance in Rhode Island is fundamentally flawed. “It’s a broken system when we have private interests who are trying to seek private gain from public officials and they’re allowed to contribute to their campaigns to curry favor,” he said.
He said Common Cause favors a public finance system like the ones in Connecticut and New York City. Rhode Island does offer public financing to candidates, but only candidates for the general officers—and only after they have won a primary. Marion backs a reform of the system that would make such funding available before primaries and extend it to General Assembly candidates.
Block: end the ‘circus’
Block, the Moderate Party candidate for Governor, said public financing would turn races for public office into serious affairs in which issues and ideas are discussed.
He said the need for money is at the root of much that is wrong with politics today. “The ability to raise money is not indicative of a candidate’s ability to govern nor is the circus that we put candidates through that’s part of the campaign,” Block said. “The most effective candidate is not the one with the biggest bullhorn and the biggest bullhorn is given to the candidate with the most money.”
He pointed the GOP presidential primary, in which candidate fundraising is funneled towards attack ads on opponents, rather than touting positive messages—offering voters very little information in order to make an informed choice.
The same might even hold true for the candidates themselves. “Me personally, having sat through 30 some odd debates, I couldn’t tell you anything specific on any of these candidates on how they were going to govern,” Block said. “The substance was missing across the board.”
Full public financing an ‘impossible ideal’?
In Rhode Island, candidates for Governor who are serious contenders and have some base of support should each receive $2 million, removing the distraction of money and allowing them to drill down on their ideas, Block said.
But overhauling campaign finance laws, Block conceded, could be an “impossible ideal.”
It might even take a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court Citizens United decision, which gave rise to the so-called super PACs. Failing his ideal scenario, Block said there are some smaller-scale reforms the state could pass that would improve the system—such as restricting the amount of time that incumbents can fundraise for re-election and banning fundraising during the legislative session.
But not everyone thinks it’s even worth trying. Getting money out of politics is impossible and so is full public financing of campaigns, Profughi said. Instead, he said the emphasis should be on transparency: making sure donor names are always made public. “I think that is a far more effective way of dealing with campaign finance than shifting to public financing,” he told GoLocalProv.
The role of unions
Experts say that the role of unions in state elections differs significantly from other organizations and sectors. Profughi said labor unions are more effective in targeting their donations. “They tend to speak in a more unified voice than the business community does,” he said. In addition to their donations, labor unions have the ability to mobilize grassroots forces in a way that large corporations don’t, Marion said.
The head of the top labor contributor in 2010 largely agreed. “We are an active participant in the system that exists and I think we are the most effective participant,” said Donald Iannazzi, the business manager for Local 1033. He said his union has simply supported those candidates who share its views and values and believe there is a role for government in helping working families.
He added that overall he believes business interests spend more than labor does. “I think, by the way, they are entitled to participate in the process,” he said. “[Under] the system we have, using their strength is something they’re entitled to do.” (When all the contributions from all the separate business sectors—real estate, insurance, etc.—are totaled the amount is higher than public sector unions, a different of $1.1 million to $402,000.)
As for his views on public financing, Iannazzi said: “I think it’s an issue that deserves greater public debate and I don’t think we’ve ever gotten that.”
Surprises in the AG’s race
Other than Chafee and Block, several major candidates for Attorney General made the top 20 list for 2010, including Democrats Stephen Archambault and Joe Fernandez and Moderate Party candidate Chris Little. While both Little and Fernandez’s own contributions to their own campaigns were well known during the election, Archambault’s own personal financing of his election, which placed him above the others in terms of the total amount, was not as well-publicized. (A spokesman for Archambault declined to comment.)
Noticeably absent from the list is the actual winner of the AG’s race, Democrat Peter Kilmartin.
“Spending contributions wisely is key to campaign success,” said Brett Broesder, the manager for Peter Kilmartin’s Attorney General Campaign.
“Peter Kilmartin infused his campaign with a smart spending philosophy—which is also evident in his leadership as Attorney General—from the onset,” Broesder added. “As a result, the successful campaign cut out wasteful spending, worked with the most enthusiastic and purpose driven volunteer base in the Ocean State, and dedicated fiscal resources to ensuring that every Rhode Island voter heard Peter Kilmartin’s message of protecting Rhode Island families.”
If you valued this article, please LIKE GoLocalProv.com on Facebook by clicking HERE.
