MCCE Report PACs Unlimited

7/31/2019 MCCE Report PACs Unlimited

1/191

PACs Unlimited:How Legislator PACsDistort Mai e Politics


2/19

The Money and Politics Project is a programo Mai e Ci ize f r Clea Elec i , anonpartisan organization that has beenworking in the public interest to advocateor, increase public support or, de endand improve the Maine Clean Election Actand related campaign nance law since1995. MCCE is a 501(c)(3) organization.www.MaineCleanElections.org

The Money and Politics Project teamincludes Andrew Bossie, Ann Luther,Alison Smith, and John Brautigam. MCCEappreciates the e orts o many otherswhose contributions enhanced this report.

MCCE welcomes your comments, questions,and suggestions. Please contact us at:

Mai e Ci ize f r Clea Elec i P.O. Box 18187Portland, ME 04112

207-831-MCCE

in [email protected]


3/19

2

Executi e SummaryIn the era o the Maine CleanElection Act, a majority o leg-islators and legislative lead-ers rely on public nancing toconduct their own campaigns.Even those candidates whorun privately nanced cam-paigns do so with strictcontribution limits. This hasgreatly reduced the direct roleo money in determining whowins and loses individualraces and has helped ensurethat our lawmakers are notbeholden to wealthy specialinterest contributors.

But there is a shadowy sys-tem o campaign nance ac-tivity operating in parallel tothe unding system or candi-date campaigns, and legisla-tive leadership and caucusPACs are at the heart o thissystem. While undraising orcandidate campaigns oper-ates under strict limits thatkeep big money rom buyinginfuence or access to rank-and- le members, undrais-ing by legislative leadersthrough political action com-mittees is subject to virtually

no restrictions. There is nolimit on the amount o moneyone contributor may give to aPAC, and corporate and unioncontributions are permitted.

Using publicly availabledata, this report nds thatvast sums o big money fowthrough PACs controlled bylegislators. These PACs existor the purpose o advancingpersonal interests and partyagendas, and big donors con-tribute to these PACs or thepurpose o shaping the leg-islative agenda and assuringaccess to legislative leader-ship. The legislative process

whereby policy initiativessucceed or ail cannot be ullyexplained without under-standing the continuing roleo money in Maine legislativeelections.

Over the ten years o thisstudy (2002 2012), morethan $ 12 million fowedthrough PACs controlledby candidates and legisla-tors. Thats a lot o money in

Maine politics. During thatperiod, legislators raised over$ 5 million rom a hand ulo major players with com-mercial, vested interests,each o whom gave over$ 60,000. Tobacco giant Altria(Philip Morris) was the larg-est corporate contributor at$ 122,576. Contributions romthese major donors ar exceedcontributions o any size romindividuals, and they dwarcontributions rom Mainepeople o ordinary means.Only 13% o all unds given tothese PACs came in amountso $ 350 or less.

The specter o legislativeleaders disavowing privatemoney or their own cam-paigns while raising tens othousands o dollars throughPAC undraising has led to

Money inPoliticsProjectRepoRt #1pACs Unlimi d:How LegislatorPACs DistortMai e Politics

Contributions o $50 or less

Contributions between $50 and $350

Contributions o more than $350

Small Co tributio sCo stitute a Tiy Fractio oThe Fu draisi g By Caucus

a d Leadership PACs

M o n e y i n P o l i t i c s

P r o j e c t R E P O R

T # 1


4/19

3

charges o hypocrisy. But thisis not just a problem or CleanElections. Privately nancedcandidates who abide by low,$ 350 contribution limits intheir own campaigns are al-lowed to raise unds withoutlimit or their leadership andcaucus PACs. Contributorswho reach the $ 350 contribu-tion limit to candidate cam-paigns are only too happyto seek urther infuence by

making separate, unlimitedcontributions to PACs con-trolled by those same private-ly unded candidates. Propos-als to close these loopholeshave been put orward ineach o the last three legisla-tures, but none has ever comeclose to passing.

ConclusionsPAC reporting rules providea degree o transparency tolegitimate political activity,but the in ormation containedin this report raises seriousconcerns about the ability omoneyed special interests tohave an outsize infuence inMaine elections and govern-ment.

Leadership a d caucus PACsare viewed as crucial or each

partys ability to keep or seizethe majority i their legisla-tive chamber.

A elite group o leadershipa d caucus PACs raise mil-lio s o dollars i large co -tributio s rom people a dbusi esses that o te have avested i terest i legislativeoutcomes.

Legislators rise to leader-ship a ter raisi g substa tialamou ts o private u dsrom those with a i terest ilegislatio .

Leadership a d caucus PACco tributio s rom i dustrygroups ar exceed co tribu-tio s rom typical Mai ei dividuals.

I dustry groups make sys-tematic a d targeted co tri-butio s to e sure access a di fue ce i the legislativeprocess.

Legal PAC activity u der-mi es the limits applicableto ca didate campaig s a ddistorts the legislative pro-cess i avor o corporate a dother special i terests.

PAC re orm is ecessary toreduce the impact o speciali terest mo ey o the Mai elegislature.

As Maine people work towarda campaign system that re-duces special interest infu-ence and puts people rst,re orm o the states PAC lawsis essential. The wide-opennature o these laws is out o

sync with the rest o Mainescampaign nance system.Until the problem o unlim-ited money fowing throughlegislator-controlled PACsis addressed, Maine peoplewill be rightly concerned thatlegislative leaders might bebeholden to large donors..

K y Da afr m R r #132political action committees controlled legislators raised o er$12 m between 2002and 2012.

The lack o contribution limits or PACs aone contributor, the Republican State Lea

Committee, to gi e ag bu f$100,000.

The largest o erall contributor was ther pub a s a l ad h p c mm ,wh bu a d $796,386.

Thea g indi idual contributor was nanciD a d su ma , whose contributions totale$379,000.

Tobacco giantA a (Ph p M )was the

largest corporate contributor at$122,576.Thepha ma u a du made 596contributions totaling$442,980 as the legislaturconsidered new regulations to protectpharmaceutical consumers and reduce co

Wealthy contributors had ar more impactsmall donors, withgh - v p f afu d g v am u a g ha $350.

Legislators raised$5,356,553 rom just 152 maplayers in the commercial/labor sector. Tcontributors the Hea y Hitters ga e oa erage$60,000each between 2002 and 201

The players in health insurance, tax, andregulatory re orm e orts ga e hundreds othousands o dollars to legislator PACs prlegislati e battles on these issues.


5/19

4

BackgroundIn recent years control o the Maine Legislaturehas been hotly contested. A ter many electioncycles in which the Democratic Party couldcount on a majority in the Senate or House (orboth), the 2010 election brought Republicancontrol o both chambers. As the 2012 electionseason begins, Democrats appear determined toregain their majorities, hoping to place Demo-crats in the states constitutional o ces andcounteract Governor LePages agenda or the126th Legislature, which convenes in January2013. Republicans seem equally determinedto hold on to their majorities. With legislativeredistricting on tap or 2013, there is much atstake or both parties.

This intense battle or legislative control cre-ates power ul incentives or legislative leaderso both parties to pull out all the stops to identi yand support their candidates in order to maxi-mize their chances or success on Election Day.Political action committees (PACs) are amongtheir most power ul tools or marshaling theresources required or campaign battles.

In the era o the Maine Clean Election Act, a ma-jority o legislators and legislative leaders relyon public nancing to conduct their own cam-

paigns. This has greatly reduced the direct roleo money in determining who wins and losesindividual races and has helped ensure that ourlawmakers are not beholden to wealthy specialinterest contributors.

But there is a shadowy system o campaign -nance activity operating in parallel to the publicunding system. Political action committees some with vague names like ABC PAC andMaine PAC raise and spend millions to infu-ence the outcome o elections and secure politi-cal power or those who operate the PACs. Unlikeindividual candidate campaigns, these PACsmay accept donations o any amount. These en-tities are poorly understood outside a relativelysmall circle o Augusta insiders including careerlobbyists, veteran legislators, and people whohave played both roles.

This report will shine a light on the legisla-tive leadership and caucus PACs that areat the heart o this system. The ongoing powerstruggle over control o the legislature cannot beully understood without analyzing the pivotalrole these entities play in our elections. And thelegislative process whereby policy initiativessucceed or ail cannot be ully explained with-out examining the continuing role o money inMaine legislative elections.

pACs Unlimi d:How Legislator PACsDistort Mai e Politics

About this seriesThe Money in Politics Project is a series otwelve reports about the role and e ect omoney on Maine politics. The reports combinea review o publicly available campaign nancedata with on-the-ground analysis o how moneyinfuences Maines elections, government,and public policy. Mai e Ci ize f r CleaElec i launched this project because moneyin politics is an issue o vital concern to thepeople o Maine, one that goes to the heart o ourdemocratic system.



T # 1


6/19

5

Regulation o Leadership andCaucus PACs in MaineLegislative undraising through political actioncommittees is subject to less regulation thancandidate undraising. There is no limit on theamount o money one contributor may give toa PAC, and corporate and union contributionsare permitted. 1 There are no expenditure limits

on political action committees in Maine, exceptthat a PAC may not give money to a candidatein amounts larger than the legal contributionlimit. 2

State law requires PACs to register and reporton their activities, but those activities are notrestricted. Quarterly reports are required, pluspre-election and post-election reports or pri-mary, general and special elections. State lawrequires PACs to report the names and o cessought by all candidates whom the committeesupports, intends to support or seeks to de eat

(21-A M.R.S.A. 1060), but in practice this in or-mation usually is not reported in advance o thetime expenditures are made.

Leadership PACs and caucus PACs are in ormalcategories; both are political committees underMaine law and are subject to identical reportingrequirements. 3

Leadership PACsAlmost as soon as they take the oath o o ce,some legislators begin working to climb thelegislative leadership ladder. The privileges oleadership include an o ce, sta , and access to1 At least 28 states impose some regulation on the amounts or

sources o contributions that may be accepted by a politicalaction committee, according the National Con erence o State

Legislatures. http://www.ncsl.org/print/legismgt/limits_PACs.pd Application o such restrictions to PACs that make no contribu-tions to candidate campaigns are likely to be challenged post Citizens United .

2 For privately unded legislative candidates, the limit is $350 per election. For privately unded gubernatorial candidates, the limit

is $1,500 per election. Clean Election candidates may not collect their seed money or quali ying contributions rom PACs.

3 For more in ormation about PACs, including proposals or re- orm, see the study published by the League o Women Voters in2006, http://www.lwvme.org/pac_study.html

a caucus budget. Equally important, leadershipscontrol over the agenda and caucus activitiesensures their power and infuence they are thepeople to see when the need arises to exert con-trol over legislative outcomes. A leadership postmay also be a springboard to higher o ce.

Since legislative leaders are elected by voteswithin their respective caucuses, those whoaspire to leadership nd that building supportamong ellow legislators is imperative.

During a legislative session, legislators maysupport each other by co-sponsoring legislationor speaking in avor o anothers bill. Outside othe legislature there are two important ways orleadership candidates to build support amongtheir peers recruiting candidates to run in u-ture elections, and supporting the campaigns othose recruits and others in tight races.

There are many low-cost ways a legislator canhelp a candidate, such as writing a letter to theeditor, going door-to-door, and providing strate-

gic advice. But some o the things legislators doto help other candidates require money. Manylegislators aspiring to leadership will o er cashcontributions to help und the campaigns oprivately unded legislative candidates. Otherexpenses might include state-wide travel to all151 House or 35 Senate districts, public opinionpolls, and administrative and logistical support.Be ore long the leadership aspirant needs a sub-stantial budget and aces a signi cant undrais-ing challenge.

In addition, those seeking leadership usuallyhave a tacit agreement with their caucuses re-quiring them to raise money through their ownPAC and trans er large sums to one o the ourcaucus PACs controlled jointly by the partyleaders in each chamber. Discussed below, thesecaucus PACs are power ul undraising machinesin their own right. 4

4 In each chamber there are typically three leadership positions or the majority party and two or the minority. In the Senate,the President, Majority Leader, and Assistant Majority Leader represent the majority party. The House majority party controlsthe positions o Speaker, Majority Leader, and Assistant Majority Leader. For the minority party in either chamber, the positionsare usually the Minority Leader and Assistant Minority Leader.


7/19

6

The sheer number o PACs controlled in whole or in part by legis-lators makes clear that this is a common and success ul strat-egy. In recent history ew legislative leaders have secured theirposts without playing a controlling role in their own leadershipPAC, a caucus PAC, or both.

Caucus PACSIn addition to the leadership PACs controlled by individual legis-lators, each o the our legislative caucuses operates its own PAC.The purpose o the caucus PAC is to help ensure the electoral suc-

cess o the members o that caucus and to recruit new membersor upcoming elections. The ultimate goal is to either hold themajority in that chamber or seize it rom the opposing party. Thecaucus PAC is controlled jointly by the leaders o the caucus.

Unlike leadership PACs, caucus PACs requently make indepen-dent expenditures in targeted elections, paying or mailings andengaging in other direct campaign activities on behal o candi-dates. They train candidates, hire sta , design literature, and pro-vide logistical support or the overall campaign e ort. The abilityo individual legislators to raise money or their caucus PAC ortrans er unds rom their individual leadership PAC to the caucusPAC is an important means o solidi ying their leadership withinthe caucus. 5

Data O er iewThis report analyzes the undraising by 32 o the largest legisla-tor PACs active between January 2002 and May 2012. Each PAChas been controlled in whole or part by one or more legislators.Some legislators were in positions o ormal leadership, and oth-ers were rank-and- le. 6 These PACs raised a total o $ 12,568,396 7 during that period. 8

5 The lines between leadership, caucus and issue PACs are sometimes unclear. For ex-ample, individual leaders in the legislature occasionally orm PACs to promote legislationor to participate in a peoples veto campaign. Such temporary PACs are not included hereand may be addressed in a uture report.

6 Key committee chairs may also be considered quasi-leadership positions, and it is not uncommon or these legislators to be deeply involved in political action committee und-

raising even though they are not in an o fcial leadership position.7 Trans ers between the PACs included in this study could be considered double count-

ing since they do not increase the overall pool o unding available to these entities. Suchtrans ers are included in the total cited here.

8 Current legislative leadership includes Senators Raye (R), Plowman (R), Courtney (R), Al ond (D) and Hobbins (D); and Representatives Nutting (R), Curtis (R), Cushing (R), Cain(D) and Hayes (D). Each is connected with one or more leadership or caucus PACs. Someo the PACs re erenced in this chart continue to exist, while others have been terminated.

This chart lists the32 legislator PACsa alyzed or this study: 9

9 Names o legislators associated withsome o these PACS change requently. Reports fled with the Commissionon Governmental Ethics and Elec-tion Practices record who has been ormally involved with each PAC over the years.

l ad h p/cau u PAc

Senate Democratic Campaign CommitteeHouse Democratic Campaign CommitteeHouse Republican FundMaine Senate Republican CommitteeMaine Senate Republican MajorityMaine UnlimitedLeadership or Maines FutureMajority 2004Majority 101Committee or a Responsible SenateAl ond Business, Community & DemocraSenate Republican Leadership or the 21sHouse Republican Majority FundDiamond PACResponsible Action Yields Excellence orHigh Hopes PACPingree Leadership FundBerry or MaineCain or Maine

Mitchell Leadership FundEdmonds For LeadershipTime or ChangeCummings Leadership FundBusiness Minded DemocratsRepublican Speakers FundMaine Senate PACEmpowering Maine Leadership PACClean House Political Action CommitteeDemocratic MajorityAroostook PACStrengthening MaineRespect Maine



T # 1


8/19

7

These leadership and caucus PACs are huge players inMaine campaign nance unding. Between 2002 and2012 they raised more than twice as much as all the undsraised by privately unded legislative candidates com-bined.

Who Is Funding Leadership and Caucus PAThe Commission on Governmental Ethics and ElectionPractices maintains a searchable database o all contribu-tions made to all political action committees. Using thatdatabase, it is possible to analyze the undraising activi-

ties o both leadership and caucus PACs rom 2002 to thepresent, providing a comprehensive picture showing whois contributing to these PACs.

The average single gi t to these 32 PACs was $ 793 morethan twice the $ 350 maximum contribution that may beaccepted by privately unded legislative candidates intheir own campaigns.

Legislator PAC Co tributio Facts 2002-2012

La g na nal PAC c n :Republican State Leadership Comm.$746,385

La g nd v d al c n :Donald Sussman $379,000La g Ma n PAC c n :Maine Truck PAC $197,220

La g c p a c n : Altria/Phillip Morris $122,576

La g ngl c n n:Republican State Leadership Committee$100,000

M c n n : Maine Truck PAC 138

l g a Am u

Phil Bartlett; Barry Hobbins $2,626,009Emily Cain; Seth Berry $2,308,145Josh Tardy $1,503,062Richard Rosen; Carol Weston $1,130,832Jonathan Courtney; Ke in Raye $726,093Rick Bennett $445,341Andre Cushing; Josh Tardy $425,281John Richardson $409,440John Richardson $247,870Karl Turner; Ed Youngblood $198,678Justin Al ond $192,471Paul Da is $182,348Phil Curtis $162,391Bill Diamond $162,292Ke in Raye $161,148Phil Bartlett $144,845Hannah Pingree $139,922Seth Berry $123,780Emily Cain $122,891

Libby Mitchell $108,637Beth Edmonds $103,183John Robinson; Richard Cebra $102,346Glenn Cummings $95,091Jeremy Fischer $93,656Robert Nutting $91,182Richard Rosen $84,752Barry Hobbins $83,728Richard Rosen $81,022Beth Edmonds $79,519John Martin $78,625Seth Goodall $77,719Andre Cushing $76,095

TOTAL$12,568,396

Fundraising byCaucus and

Leadership PACs

Legislative PACs Raised More Mo eyTha Privately Fu ded LegislativeCa didates (2002 - 2012)

Fundraisingby Legislati eCandidates

$4.6M

$12.6M


9/19

8

The contribution list reveals a wide assortmento lobbyists, corporate leaders, issue PACs, na-tional corporations, and pro essional and busi-ness associations. It is di cult to generalizeabout what issues motivate these contributors.The most contentious issues usually have con-tributors on both sides, although they are notalways evenly matched. For example, the NRAand rearms manu acturers are well represent-ed, but the Stop Handgun Violence Fund alsocontributes.

The single zip code sending the most money to

leadership and caucus PACs is 04330 in Au-gusta, where contributions totaling $ 1,339,816originated. The zip code with the second great-est total contributions is 20005 not ar behindat $ 1,028,850. Zip code 20005 includes the well-known K Street Corridor in Washington D.C.Approximately 38.6% o the money came romoutside Maine.

Some contributors are perennial donors, refect-ing a long-term involvement with the policyarena and a desire to exert as much sustainedinfuence as possible. Typical o these long-term players is the pharmaceutical industry. Inresponse to a crisis in the a ordability o medi-cines, Maine has aggressively sought price con-

cessions and enacted (or at least considered)many other regulations opposed by pharma-ceutical manu acturers, retail pharmacies, andpharmaceutical bene t managers. Few issueshave generated as much industry opposition inMaine, and ew industry sectors could rival theconcentrated political giving generated by thesecompanies. The pharmaceutical industrys con-tributions to leadership and caucus PACs totaled$ 442,980 spread out over 596 separate gi ts.

The Top Pharmaceutical Co tributors to

These PACs Co stitute a Whos Who othe Worldwide Pharmaceutical I dustry

Contributor Total #

PhRMA $96,250 84

Medco $68,750 68

AstraZeneca $50,600 71

P zer $45,850 40

Rite Aid $38,835 80

Eli Lilly and Company $24,700 56

Caremark RX $23,750 35

Merck $20,100 39

Abbot Laboratories $15,250 19

Johnson & Johnson $15,000 18

Community Pharmacies $9,810 12

Glaxo Pharmaceutical $7,500 11

Wyeth Good Go ernment Fund $7,000 12

Pharmacy Group o New England $6,165 22

Bristol Myers Squibb Co$6,050 16

Other Pharmaceuticals $7,370 13

totAL $442,980 596

Over 94% o pharmaceutical industry contribu-tions to leadership and caucus PACs came romout-o -state. Only $ 24,495 came rom withinMaine.

Even the pharmaceutical industry, however,cannot keep pace with law rms in the overallcompetition or the most active contributors.

In State

Out o State

Out o State Co tributio sto Leadership a dCaucus PACs

$4.8M

$7.7M



T # 1


10/19

9

Leadership and caucus PACs pulled in at least$ 731,292 rom 1,343 contributions rom lawyersand law rms. Every law rm that is a majorcontributor includes lobbyists active in legisla-tive matters. 10

Another active sector is banking, which includesthe Maine Credit Union League, the Maine As-sociation o Community Banks, and the MaineBank PAC. Banking interests gave 389 contribu-tions totaling $ 360,256.

Notably, average Maine households that arenot able to a ord large contributions do notappear to be a major source o unds or leader-ship and caucus PACs. Only $ 211,625 is reportedas contributions o $ 50 or less. An additional$ 1,392,740 was contributed in amounts rom $ 50to $ 350. The remaining $ 10,966,634 was gi ts omore than $ 350. The vast majority o the und-ing comes rom either very large ( ve- gure)contributions rom single donors; trans ers romother political action committees or organiza-tions; or gi ts rom corporations or their execu-tives.

10 The reporting laws applicable to lobbyists and lobbying activi-ties appear to allow some lobbyists to shield their contributions

rom ull disclosure by attributing them to the frm where they are a partner or employee. This may also allow them to circum-vent the session ban, which prohibits lobbyists rom making acontribution to any committee or campaign associated with a

legislator during the legislative session. This issue may be ana- lyzed in a uture report.

The Hea y HittersContributors Giving Over $ 15,000 Since 2002

A complete analysis o all o the industries rep-resented by each o the 15,843 contributions isdi cult because PACs are not required to reportthe industry sector associated with any individ-ual contributor. It is possible, however, to reviewa sample o the top contributors to assess whichindustry sectors are playing a major role.

The ollowing analysis ocuses on every contri-bution by any contributor who gave $ 15,000 ormore to these 32 legislator PACs between 2002and 2012. The 152 contributors who made thislist gave a total o $ 9,133,093 to these PACs,amounting to almost three-quarters o the totalo $ 12 million raised. On average, The HeavyHitters gave $ 60,086 apiece over the ten-yearperiod. Without question, these major contribu-tors dominate the arena o legislator PAC und-raising.

Contributions$50 or less

Hea y Hitters(Contributors$15K or more)

Contributions $50$350

E eryone Else

ContributionsMore than$350

Small Co tributio s Co stitute aTi y Fractio o the Fu draisi gby Caucus a d Leadership PACs

Co tributors Givi g $ 15K orMore Domi ate LegislatorPAC Fu draisi g

$211K

$1,393K

$10,967K


11/19

10

Most o the unding came rom sources associ-ated with a commercial interest, including labor.The second largest group o contributions camerom general purpose or ideological politicalaction committees, such as party PACs or otherleadership or caucus PACs. There were rela-tively ew individual contributors giving over$ 15,000 in aggregate to these PACs. The threegeneral categories o contributions appear in theollowing chart:

The contributors giving at least $ 15,000 in ag-gregate to these leadership and caucus PACs

include major players in some o the businessesmost a ected by the public policy issues oconcern to Mainers, such as health insurancere orm, predatory lending, environmental regu-lations, taxes, and consumer protections. Thecombatants in nearly every major legislativebattle o the last decade are prominent in oneor more o these industry groups. With averagecontributions exceeding $ 60,000 since 2002,these 152 contributors are clearly The HeavyHitters in Maine campaign nance. A list othese contributors appears in Attachment A.

Additional analysis reveals the industries rep-resented by these major players. The ollowingchart breaks down the commercial and laborcontributors by industry sector:



T # 1

Commercial/Labor

Most Leadership/CaucusPAC Fu di g is Giveby Co tributors withCommercial Co ectio s(I cludi g Labor)

Political Indi idual

$619K

$3.2M

$5.4M LegalHealthcareBanking/FinancePharmaceuticals

Telecom/UtilitiesManu acturing

LaborEnergy

AlcoholTobacco

Transportation

RetailInsurance

Real Estate/De elopment

LobbyingWaste

ConstructionGaming

Firearms

Pri ate Education

$ 6 0 0 K

$ 4 0 0 K

$ 2 0 0 K

$ 0

Large Commercial/LaborCo tributors to Legislator PACs2000-2012 (Grouped by Sector)


12/19

11

Only eight individual contributors made it ontothe list o The Heavy Hitters. Their total con-tributions to these legislator PACs added up to$ 619,078. The single largest individual contribu-tor was Donald Sussman. Sussmans contribu-tions o $ 379,000 exceeded all the other indi-vidual contributions among The Heavy Hitterscombined.

Who is not well represented among the com-mercial contributors to leadership and caucusPACs? Interestingly, a ew mega-corporations

such as Bank o America ( $ 17,650) and Micro-so t ( $ 16,000) made a hand ul o contributionsbut ailed to reach the top 50 on this list. Inaddition, although labor unions were once or-midable political undraisers, organized laborhas a relatively small role in proportion to theother entries on this list. Their contributions o$ 302,950 constitute just 3.3% o the overall totalo $ 9,133,093 given by these large players.

This is not to say that any particular entityis not playing the game o campaign nance.There are many other avenues or expressing

their pre erences and winning access and infu-ence, including contributions to the politicalparties, contributions to individual candidates,and direct expenditures. These are importantareas or urther analysis in subsequent reports.

E idence o Pay to PlaySome undraisers and contributors claim thatthe widespread practice o making large, sys-tematic contributions does not buy infuence orspecial treatment. Instead, the argument goes,

these contributors are just showing their sup-port or someone who shares the same views.

That contention cannot be reconciled with thedata or the simple reason that most o the bigcontributors give to both sides o the aisle. Theythere ore could not possibly be showing theirsupport in the zero-sum game o election poli-tics. For example, Hollywood Slots (a.k.a. BangorHistoric Track) handed out $ 62,475 between theHouse and Senate, and within each chambercontributed to both Democratic and Republicanleadership and caucus PACs.

Likewise, Maines largest health insurer An-

them/Wellpoint gave$

87,665 to leadership andcaucus PACs, but showed no particular avorit-ism between the Democrats and Republicans.Anheuser Busch spread $ 80,900 relativelyequally between the Democrats and Republi-cans, as did chemical giant Monsanto with itsrelatively modest sum o $ 38,000.

There are exceptions contributors who giveout o ideological alignment with one candidate,PAC or caucus. For example, James F. MitchellCompany gave $ 44,900 predominantly to Demo-cratic PACs, while Robert Bahre gave $ 49,000

IssuE In FoCus

Regulatory Re orm (2011) Legislation: LD 1 (125th Legislature)

Summary o Legislation: Eliminating state regula-tions was the top legislative initiative o GovernorLePage and many o the leaders o the 125th Legis-lature. LD 1 had more than 25 hours o testimonyover seven public hearings, and it drew the atten-tion o 161 lobbyists and clients. In its originalorm the bill was highly controversial, pitting busi-ness and developers against environmentalists.As passed, LD 1 streamlined permitting and madechanges to the Board o Environmental Protectionto expedite regulatory review. It also rede nedrules or certain hazardous materials and placedincreased emphasis on the cost-bene t analyseso proposed regulations.

Number o Paid Lobbyists and Clients: 161Contributions rom these lobbyists, their rms,and clients to Leadership and Caucus PACS in theyears leading up to consideration o the bill:

2 years (2010 2011) .......................$490,6984 years (2008 2011) .........................$1,001,16110 years (2002 2011) ....................$2,292,808

Maj rPr p e :

Maine StateChamber oCommerce;Manu acturers

Maj ropp e :

EnvironmentalGroups

o c me:

Greatlymodi ed billwas enactedand signedinto law.


13/19

12

almost exclusively to Republican entities. Hisson Gary Bahre gave $ 17,000 in a similar pattern.Tobacco Giant R.J. Reynolds heavily avoredRepublican-leaning PACs, but also gave a smallamount to Democrat Bill Diamonds leadershipPAC. These examples, however, dont dimin-ish the act that many o the largest contribu-tors are paying to play that they are buyingaccess with both sides. Their money cannot beconstrued as a show o support or two opposingpolitical organizations.

Legislator PACs and Clean ElectionsLeadership and caucus PACs existed well be orethe Maine Clean Election Act public undingsystem was approved by voters in 1996. The in-terplay between the public unding system andthese power ul PACs has prompted questionsabout the continuing role o private money orsome legislators.

Legislators who quali y or and accept publicunding are prohibited rom raising and spend-ing private unds or their own election cam-paigns. Many people nd it inconsistent to allowthose same candidates to raise private unds orother purposes such as a leadership or caucusPAC. Yet that is permitted under current law.

In a recent analysis by the Ethics Commission,o the 58 legislators listed as principal o cers,

undraisers and decision makers or leadershipor caucus PACs, 46 used public unding in one ormore campaigns.

The specter o legislative leaders disavowingprivate money or their own campaigns whileraising tens o thousands o dollars through PACundraising has led to charges o hypocrisy. Atthe same time, privately nanced candidateswho abide by low, $ 350 contribution limits intheir own campaigns are allowed to raise undswithout limit or their leadership and caucusPACs. Contributors who reach the statutorycontribution limit to candidate campaigns havethe opportunity to double dip or triple dip ormore by making separate, unlimited contribu-tions to a PAC controlled by that same privatelyunded candidate. Proposals to close these loop-holes have been put orward in each o the lastthree Legislatures but never passed.

Conclusion: The Re orms AheadOver the past year action by the courts and thelegislature resulted in signi cant changes tothe Clean Election system. Most importantly,the matching unds that candidates receivedto respond to a high spending opponent havebeen eliminated. In addition, the initial und-ing amounts have been lowered. Consequently,Clean Election candidates have access to arless money now than in prior cycles. There ore

IssuE In FoCusTax Re orm (2009) Legislation: LD 1088 (124th Legislature)

Summary o Legislation: This bill wouldhave reduced the income tax rate to a fatrate o 6.5% and created a household taxcredit to bene t lower income taxpayers. Itwould have maintained revenue neutralityby imposing a sales tax on certain exemptservices and by increasing the sales tax onprepared ood and lodging.

Maj r Pr p e :Maine Center orEconomic Policy

Maj r opp e :Merchants, Hospitality,Realtors, Automotive,Miscellaneous Services

o c me:Bill was passed butrepealed by a peoplesveto.

Number o Paid Lobbyists and Clients: 124Contributions rom these lobbyists,their rms, and clients to Leader-ship and Caucus PACS in the yearsleading up to consideration o thebill:

2 years (2008 2009) ..........$385,5754 years (2006 2009) ..........$734,2908 years (2002 2009) ........$1,564,612



T # 1


14/19

13

the role o leadership and caucus PACs is likelyto increase substantially as private undingseeks to replace the public unds previouslyavailable. It has never been more important toscrutinize leadership and caucus PACs in Maine.

The data presented here provides a glimpse oa small sliver o state campaign nancing. Itaddresses only the phenomenon o political ac-tion committees controlled by legislators. ThosePACs are viewed as important tools in the battleor control o the legislature. They und the ca-reer aspirations o the next generation o leaderswhile also greasing the skids or industry ac-cess at the highest levels o policymaking.

This report does not attempt to address thesubstantial amounts o money that fow directlyto privately unded candidates or independentexpenditures made to assist those candidates.Nor does it analyze the prodigious undraisingby the political parties themselves, at the ed-eral, state, and even local level. Those subjectswill be addressed in subsequent reports.

Although the scope o this data review is nar-row, the records show a tremendous amount omoney in the hands o a very select group oAugusta insiders. In Maine, savvy businessesand individuals are opening their checkbooks toincrease the odds o winning key policy battles.The records also show out-o -state corporationsspending large amounts to drive their policyagenda in the state.

Maines Clean Election system has been a re-markable success in breaking the ties betweenrank-and- le legislators and the power ul spe-cial interests. Future re orms, however, must ad-dress the use o PACs as a conduit or unlimitedprivate contributions to those who aspire to leadthe Maine legislature whether those legisla-tors are publicly or privately unded in their owncampaigns.

UPCOMINGREPORTSThis is the rst in a series omonthly reports on the role omoney in Maine politics. Futurereports will be released on theollowing topics:

Top legislati e undraisers

Gubernatorial undraising

Top contributors to pri atelyunded campaigns

Independent spending inrecent Maine elections

And many more


15/19

14

DONOR AMOUNT #Maine Truck PAC $253,120 155

Maine Assn. o Community Banks$

148,200 120McTeague, Higbee $140,750 54Altria $136,468 61Friends o Maine Hospitals $132,300 114Plum Creek $125,135 98MSEA $121,050 13Maine Bankers Assn. $115,870 122Anthem/Wellpoint $108,115 109PhRMA $106,400 92Maine Credit Union League $104,600 110Bernstein, Shur, Sawyer and Nelson $102,715 142Casella Waste Systems $93,890 40R. J. Reynolds $90,850 40

Time Warner$

90,250 38Anheuser Busch $89,900 77MARPAC $88,350 56Maine Health Care Assn. $85,960 132Build Maine PAC $82,100 66Pierce Atwood $77,600 125Verizon $75,050 84Medco $74,000 73Verrill & Dana LLP $73,863 107AFL CIO $71,400 28Eaton & Peabody $69,168 126Maine Chiropractic Assn. $67,650 43Pfzer $67,500 49

Bangor Track (Hollywood Slots)$

62,475 58Wal Mart $60,250 22Bushmaster Firearms $60,000 7Maine Education Assn. $59,900 55Federal Express PAC $57,250 33AT&T $56,550 93FPL $56,250 45Maine Oil Dealers Assn. $53,785 77Maine Medical Assn. $52,856 102IP PAC $52,500 21Maine Automobile Dealers $52,250 68Duke Energy $52,050 78AstraZeneca $51,850 73

Drummond Woodsum$51,700 107Waste Management $51,140 65

Diageo North America $50,907 55Grocery Manu acturers $48,650 24James F. Mitchell Company LLC $48,150 78MBNA $47,450 20Maine Beer and Wine Wholesalers $45,550 46Rite Aid $45,185 89Maine Dental Assn. $44,695 105UNUM $43,215 117Monsanto Company $41,750 53Spectrum Medical Group $41,500 54New England Cable & Telecom. $41,200 41

DONOR AMOUNTPenobscot Energy Recovery $40,500 60

Central Maine Power$

40,470 100Fairpoint $39,350 43Maine Optometric Assn. PAC $37,950 80Distilled Spirits Council $37,700 53Miller Brewing Co $37,250 34Nestle Waters $37,000 45I.B.E.W. $35,100 37Telephone Assn. o Maine $33,500 41Public A airs Group $33,450 80Penn National Gaming $30,050 32Howe & Company $29,693 95Mead Westvaco $28,000 6MIA PAC $26,675 57

Aetna$

26,050 16Caremark RX $26,000 38Eli Lilly and Company $25,700 58Signature Capitol $25,000 1STRATEGIC ADVOCACY LLC $25,000 2iGPS Company LLC $25,000 14Bath Iron Works $24,900 36Maine Beverage Assn. $24,200 32Clean Power PAC $24,125 63Pine State Trading Company $24,110 41Maine Forest Legacy $23,725 47Johnson & Johnson $22,250 23Retail Lumber Dealers $21,750 45

Berman & Simmons PA$

21,250 21Cianbro $20,200 45Merck $20,100 39Maine Assn. Nurse Anesthetists $20,000 46National Semiconductor Corp $20,000 18Maine So t Drink Assn. $19,600 25First Atlantic Healthcare $19,050 40Elan $18,950 26VISA USA $18,250 29First Wind $17,850 32Bank o America $17,650 27Maine Distributors $17,559 37NextEra Energy Maine, LLC $17,500 18

Georgia Pacifc$17,500 6Enterprise $17,350 28

Advance America $17,250 19Abbot Laboratories $17,250 21UST Public A airs $17,250 19Doyle & Nelson $16,300 59Microso t $16,000 4Associated Builders and Contractors $15,980 37UFCW $15,500 15NAIFA Maine PAC $15,405 47

TOTAL $5,339,553 5697



T # 1

AttAChMEnt A

C mmercial/Lab r E i y Co tributors Givi g at Least$ 15,000 to Selected Leadership a d Caucus PACs


16/19

15

DONOR AMOUNT #Republican State Leadership Comm. $796,386 25Democratic Legislative Campaign Comm. $421,500 16High Hopes PAC $116,500 16R.A.Y.E. or Maine $110,639 15Pingree Leadership Fund $100,995 12Maine Republican Party $96,650 7Citizens or Justice $88,800 98Edmonds For Leadership $87,000 11Berry or Maine $84,100 14ABCD PAC $81,000 6Empowering Maine PAC $74,545 10Cain or Maine $73,150 9Mitchell Leadership Fund $70,280 8Majority 101 $70,005 13Comm. or a Responsible Senate $66,412 4House Republican Fund $62,146 8Senate Republican Leadership $61,684 5Diamond PAC $58,350 8Strengthening Maine $50,750 6Republican National Committee $50,000 1Robust Economy Maine PAC $50,000 6

Cummings 2006$38,150 5

Clean House PAC $35,606 10Democratic Attorneys General Assn. $35,000 2Leadership For Maines Future PAC $31,900 9Equality Maine $30,350 12Gill Action Fund $30,000 2NRA $29,650 31Common Sense Solutions or MEs Future $29,000 5Dirigo PAC $29,000 9Snowe or Senate $26,866 22Maine Victory 2006 $25,000 1Business Minded Democrats $21,150 9Damon 06 $20,100 5GOPAC $20,000 8Mitchell 2006 $18,000 5Maine Womens Leadership PAC $17,500 5Treat Leadership Fund $17,300 7Maine Democratic Majority $17,000 2Victory 2004 $15,000 1

TOTAL $3,157,462 448

DONOR AMOUNT #Sussman, Donald $379,000 15Bahre, Robert $54,000 12Wasileski, John $35,500 12Monks, Robert C. $35,000 13Al ond, Justin L. $32,978 42Dyke, Richard $30,000 2

Hagge, Cyrus Y. $26,850 13Orestis, John $25,750 33Bahre, Gary $17,000 7

TOTAL $636,078 149



T # 1

AttAChMEnt A

P li ical E i y C rib r Givi g at Least $ 15,000 to SelectedLeadership a d Caucus PACs

I divid alC rib r Givi g at Least$15,000 to SelectedLeadership a d

Caucus PACs


17/19

16

PACs 2007-2010 11pac ty : L ad rshi [L], Issu [I], Caucus [C]

PACTYPE PAC NAME

CANDIDATES INvOLvEDas Principal Ofcers,

Fundraisers & Decision makers(* = no longer in Legislature a ter 2010election)

YEARFOUNDED 2007 2008 2009 2010 TOTAL

L Al ond Business, Community& Democracy PAC Justin Al ond (MCEA) 2009$35,759 $42,100 $77,859

L Aroostook PAC John Martin (MCEA) 2002 $1,000 $22,000 $1,750 $7,025 $31,775L Berry or Maine Seth Berry (MCEA) 2008 $24,291 $20,243 $60,625 $105,159

L Bliss or MaineLawrence Bliss (MCEA)(* as o4/15/2011) 2010

$10,735 $10,735

L Blue Ribbon PAC Da id Hastings (MCEA) 2010 $6,900 $6,900L Bromley Leadership Maine Lynn Bromley (MCEA)* 2003 $1,500 $1,500L Cain or Maine Emily Cain (MCEA) 2008 $7,825 $21,360 $62,091 $91,276

L Carey or Maine Michael Carey (TF) 2008 $3,000 $1,250 $8,475 $12,725L Clark 08 Herbert Clark (MCEA) 2008 $2,250 $2,250L Clean House PAC Richard Rosen (MCEA) 2002 $250 $27,900 $18,527 $4,750 $51,427

L Cleary Business andLeadership PAC Richard Cleary (MCEA)* 2008$1,500 $500 $10,601 $12,601

L Common Sense Solutionsor Maines Future Jonathan Courtney (MCEA) 2009 $10,475 $27,375 $37,850

L Connor Leadership PACChris Babbidge (MCEA)*Gary Connor (MCEA)* 2009

$2,500 $19,905 $22,405

L Cummings Leadership Fund Glenn Cummings (MCEA)* 2005 $9,400 $11,750 $21,150L Damon 08 Dennis Damon (TF)* 2006 $500 $500 $1,000L Diamond PAC Bill Diamond (TF) 2007 $43,150 $15,400 $82,275 $40,608 $181,433

L Dill Leadership PAC Cynthia Dill (MCEA) 2008 $3,526 $700 $2,878 $7,104L Dirigo PAC Alexander Cornell du Houx (MCEA)2010 $6,694 $6,694L Edmonds For Leadership Betheda Edmonds (MCEA)* 2003 $21,085 $9,450 $30,535

L Empowering MaineLeadership PAC Barry Hobbins (MCEA) 2009$20,000 $37,650 $57,650

L Equilibrium Maine Nancy Smith (MCEA)* 2004 $6,475 $2,402 $4,325 $250 $13,452L Eves Leadership PAC Mark E es (MCEA) 2010 $6,195 $6,195L GreenME PAC Jon Hinck (MCEA) 2008 $7,920 $200 $1,398 $9,518

LHarmon or Maine: SmallBusiness, Farming,and Family PAC

Ryan Harmon (MCEA) 2010 $1,115 $1,115

L High Hopes PAC Philip Bartlett, II (MCEA) 2006 $21,895 $21,545 $23,025 $52,140 $118,605

L John Tuttle For Leadership John Tuttle (MCEA) 2006$2,475

$3,325

$3,000

$1,800

$10,600

L Leadership or Maines FutureAndre Cushing (TF)Joshua Tardy (TF)* 2000

$20,125 $118,730$21,300 $24,970 $185,125

L Leila or Maine! Leila Percy (MCEA)* 2006 $12,000 $123 $12,123L Maine Senate PAC Richard Rosen (MCEA) 2010 $169,505 $169,505L McCabe or Leadership Je McCabe (MCEA) 2010 $800 $800L Move Maine Forward Donald Pilon (MCEA) 2008 $7,000 $3,850 $10,850

L New Leadership orMaines FutureJarrod Crockett (MCEA)Paul Da is (MCEA) 2009

$2,125 $5,688 $7,813

L Pingree Leadership Fund Hannah Pingree (MCEA)* 2005 $9,500 $52,810 $1,288 $14,165 $77,76311 Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices



T # 1


18/19

17

PACTYPE PAC NAME

CANDIDATES INvOLvEDas Principal Ofcers,

Fundraisers & Decision makers(* = no longer in Legislature a ter 2010election)

YEARFOUNDED 2007 2008 2009 2010 TOTAL

L Prosperity or Maine Stacey Fitts (TF) 2008 $2,250 $2,750 $17,925 $22,925L Republican Speakers Fund Robert Nutting (MCEA) 2010 $21,132 $21,132L Respect Maine Andre Cushing (TF) 2010 $25,225 $25,225

L Responsible Action YieldsExcellence or Maine Ke in Raye (TF) 2004$950 $15,450 $60,200 $76,600

L Robust Economy Lisa Marrache (MCEA)* 2007 $15,150 $13,950 $20,725 $3,750 $53,575L Strenghtening Maine Seth Goodall (MCEA) 2009 $21,700 $37,400 $59,100L Sutherland Leadership PAC Pat Sutherland (MCEA)* 2008 $1,500 $1,500L The Right Direction Debra Plowman (TF) 2010 $13,750 $13,750

L Treat Leadership Fund Sharon Treat (MCEA) 2008 $5,088 $3,825 $11,708 $20,621L Working People ForHope and Change Dale Cra ts (MCEA) 2010 $7,236 $7,236

L Working Peoples PAC Margaret Cra en (MCEA) 2010 $10,935 $10,935 TOTAL FOR THE YEAR TOTAL L

$164,505$366,985$335,052 $839,548$1,706,090 $3,412,1

I Health Coverage or MaineElizabeth Mitchell (MCEA)*Hannah Pingree (MCEA)* 2008

$412,955 $412,955

I Maine RepublicanLiberty Caucus PAC Ryan Harmon (MCEA) 2010$1,800 $1,800

I Maine Womens Leadership PACCynthia Dill (MCEA)Elspeth Flemings (MCEA)Teresa Hayes (MCEA)

2002 $10,875 $13,300 $500 $5,995 $30,670

I No Higher Taxes or Maine PACSeth Berry (MCEA)John Piotti (MCEA)* 2009

$13,950 $612,330 $626,280

I Sportsmans Allianceo Maine PAC Paul Da is (MCEA) 1999$2,976 $2,457 $5,433

TOTAL FOR THE YEAR TOTAL I

$10,875$429,231 $14,450 $622,582 $1,077,138$2,154,2

C House DemocraticCampaign Committee

Seth Berry (MCEA)Hannah Pingree (MCEA)*John Piotti (MCEA)*

1983 $153,065$384,600 $91,240 $420,889$1,049,794

C House Republican Fund Joshua Tardy (TF)* 1996 $90,990 $114,083$65,953 $112,335 $383,361

C House Republican Majority Fund Philip Curtis (TF) 2010 $25,000 $25,000C Maine Senate RepublicanCommittee

Richard Rosen (MCEA)Carol Weston (MCEA)* 2005

$153,058$403,521 $5,206 $561,786

C Maine SenateRepublican MajorityJonathan Courtney (MCEA)Ke in Raye (TF) 2005

$16,990 $142,515 $351,067 $510,572

C Senate DemocraticCampaign Committee Philip Bartlett (MCEA) PRE-2002$169,674$525,623 $181,688$545,937$1,422,922

TOTAL FOR THE YEAR TOTAL C

$566,787$1,444,817$486,602$1,455,228$3,953,435 $7,906,86

GRAnD T OTAL $13,473,

PACs 2007-2010pac ty : L ad rshi [L], Issu [I], Caucus [C]



T # 1


19/19

Mai e Ci ize f r Clea Elec i P.O. Box 18187

Portland, ME 04112

www.mainecleanelections.org

MCCE Report PACs Unlimited

Documents

Transcript of MCCE Report PACs Unlimited