Alexandra Duszak stories from The Center for Public Integrity

Expenditure profile: Mentzer Media

2013-01-25T13:24:31-05:00

Rank: 1

Clients’ expenditures: $204 million*

Year founded: 1991

Principals:

Bruce Mentzer (founder)

Clients:

Restore Our Future
Americans for Prosperity
American Future Fund
Crossroads GPS
American Crossroads
60 Plus Association
Independence USA PAC
Americans for Tax Reform
American Commitment
American Unity PAC
Hispanic Leadership Fund
U.S. Chamber Of Commerce
Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee
Center for Individual Freedom
FreedomWorks for America
Conservatives for Freedom PAC
Veterans for a Strong America
Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va.
Republican Governors Association
Club for Growth
Progress for America Voter Fund
American Commitment

Biography:

Bruce Mentzer, 49, began his career at the Goodman Agency, a Baltimore public relations firm that specialized in creating TV ads for political campaigns. He opened Mentzer Media in 1991.

Mentzer Media is a media buying firm that works primarily with Republicans. Its two most notable customers during the 2012 election were the pro-Mitt Romney super PAC Restore Our Future and the conservative super PAC American Crossroads, which was co-founded by Republican strategists Karl Rove and Ed Gillespie.

The firm works closely with McCarthy Hennings Media Inc. Mentzer was the media buyer for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ad campaign that helped sink Democrat John Kerry’s 2004 presidential bid. The agency was paid more than $18 million for that work.

It also placed a $1.6 million, three-state ad buy in 2010 for “Stop Too Big to Fail,” a mysterious group opposing finance industry regulation.

Last updated: Jan. 18, 2013

* Total consists of independent expenditures made to the firm in the 2012 election cycle as reported to the Federal Election Commission.

Expenditure profile: Crossroads Media

2013-01-25T13:25:07-05:00

Rank: 2

Clients’ expenditures: $163 million*

Year founded: 2001

Principal:

Michael Dubke (founder)
Patti Heck (president)

Clients:

American Crossroads
Crossroads GPS
Americans for Job Security
Cooperative of American Physicians
Republican Governors Association
Susan B. Anthony List
Republican National Committee
National Republican Senatorial Committee
National Republican Congressional Committee
American Energy Alliance
Family Research Council
Freedom Born Fund
CULAC, the PAC of the Credit Union National Association

Biography:

Crossroads Media was founded by Michael Dubke, a longtime political player who is also president of the nonprofit group Americans for Job Security.

The firm’s president is Patti Heck, a media buyer for more than 20 years. Heck’s career spans all 50 states and every level of elected government. Some of her most notable clients include the Republican Governors Association and the Republican National Committee.

Crossroads Media lies at the center of a web of powerful conservative media firms and political committees.

The company has strong ties to Republican strategist Karl Rove, who is a “senior adviser” to the firm, according to the public relations trade publication O’Dwyers. It counts the super PAC American Crossroads and the nonprofit Crossroads GPS, both co-founded by Rove, among its top clients.

And it shares an office suite in Alexandria, Va. with three other firms that have connections to the pro-Mitt Romney super PAC Restore Our Future and Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign.

Black Rock Media Group is one of those firms. It was co-founded by Republican strategist Carl Forti, the director of both American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS, and Dubke. Forti is also the founder of Restore Our Future.

TargetPoint Consulting and WPP Strategies are likewise located at the same address.

TargetPoint Consulting advised both Restore Our Future and Romney’s campaign. WPP Strategies is headed by Katie Packer Gage, the deputy manager of Romney’s campaign, who is married to the head of TargetPoint Consulting, Alexander Gage.

Last updated: Jan. 18, 2013

* Total consists of independent expenditures made to the firm in the 2012 election cycle as reported to the Federal Election Commission.

Export push reframes debate over fracking

2013-01-22T20:58:21-05:00

When Pennsylvanians agreed to a massive increase in natural gas drilling in the state, they were told that the economic benefit would outweigh any potential risk to the environment.

The drilling employs a controversial technology known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, that backers say will help the nation become energy independent and provide jobs and lower heating costs for Pennsylvanians.

But with gas prices collapsing thanks to an unforeseen glut, energy companies are pushing for permission to export the commodity to countries such as Japan and South Korea. Exports will lead to more drilling, more damage to roads and the environment, and higher, rather than lower, gas prices, say critics.

Pennsylvanians are “surprised, stunned, angry and upset” about the export push, said Delaware Riverkeeper Maya van Rossum. “And that’s whether or not they’re supportive of fracking.”

Some history

Fracking involves injecting millions of gallons of water, sand and toxic chemicals into holes drilled into underground shale deposits.

The technology, which became popular in Pennsylvania around 2008, enabled drilling companies to access enormous, previously unreachable supplies of natural gas — and brought hope to a state long-mired in a recession.

Despite its economic potential, fracking has a dubious environmental record. Exempt from the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act and the Clean Air Act, it has been blamed for contaminating residential wells and sparking explosions.

Drilling rigs don’t make great neighbors, either. The fracking process — which requires trucking in billions of gallons of water — is unsightly and tough on roads. But those concerns took a backseat to drilling in Pennsylvania, where a pro-fracking governor, Republican Tom Corbett, was elected in 2010.

Natural gas production in the U.S. has been so prolific that the price of gas has fallen to approximately $2.50 per million British thermal units from a previous high of about $15.

Low prices were great for consumers, who were able to heat their homes at record-low cost, but not so great for natural gas producers, whose profits and stock prices spiraled downward.

Shares of Chesapeake Energy, for example, the No. 1 producer in Pennsylvania and No. 2 nationwide, reached nearly $70 in 2008 but are now trading around $17.

New markets, more profits

Gas companies are now seeking authorization from the Department of Energy to export the gas overseas, where demand is higher.

They already have permission to export the gas to the nation’s free trade partners, which are not major potential customers. Many are obtaining permits to build the massive facilities that convert the gas to liquid by chilling it to minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit, which allows it to be shipped overseas.

To realize big profits, they need permission to export to non-free trade agreement countries such as South Korea, India, China and Japan, where the price of natural gas has reached more than $18 per million British thermal units.

Requests from 16 gas producers to export to such countries are currently in limbo. Approval may hinge on the conclusions published last month in an Energy Department report on exports. The status of the permits will remain undecided until the closing of a public comment period and additional department analysis.

If the agency approves the permits, natural gas companies would be allowed to export upward of 21 billion cubic feet of liquefied natural gas (LNG) per day — more than one-quarter of current U.S. consumption.

The report claims that although such large-scale exports would cause a slow rise in domestic prices, they would benefit the nation’s economy overall by improving the balance of trade, encouraging foreign investment in the U.S. and creating more income for natural gas producers.

But the macroeconomic benefits of exports don’t mean much to those who have to deal with gas rigs, potholed roads and contaminated water supplies.

“If you think, ‘That’s where we are today and the markets couldn’t be more deflated,’ what happens if the markets open up and the industry is allowed to go hog wild?” asked David Masur, executive director of the Pennsylvania-based environmental advocacy group PennEnvironment.

Masur estimates that approximately 6,000 wells have been drilled in Pennsylvania so far, and said that as many as 50,000 wells could be drilled as the industry grows.

“I think we will continue to see many of the effects we’re seeing now, many-fold over,” he said.

One town’s story

In the beginning, fracking brought a much-needed economic boost to Dimock, Pa.

“There were preachers in church saying this was God’s work, this is a gift from heaven,” said Victoria Switzer, a retired teacher who lives in Dimock.

But the town’s water became so contaminated with methane gas that a private well exploded. Water taps became potential flamethrowers. Fifteen families in the town filed a lawsuit against Cabot Oil & Gas, alleging the company’s drilling practices had contaminated their water supply.

Cabot was barred from drilling in the Dimock area, fined $120,000 and ordered to deliver water to the residents. That hasn’t stopped other drillers.

Switzer, who was one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, said the sky is lit up at night by natural gas flares. Roaring natural gas compressors make sleeping difficult. And these problems continue for days, sometimes weeks, on end, she continued.

“Let’s just plunder and glut the market. How is that going to benefit us?” Switzer asked. “I can’t even heat my home with natural gas.”

Dimock may be a major source of natural gas, but there’s no pipeline to Switzer’s house.

Van Rossum said the drillers’ promise that fracking would be good for Pennsylvania was simply “messaging.”

“It’s not truth,” she said. “It’s not reality.”

For its part, the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an energy industry trade association focused on Pennsylvania, said in a statement that it supports “common-sense natural gas export policies” that “could be a major economic boost for our nation.”

As environmental groups push to regulate fracking and manufacturers seek to keep natural gas prices low in America, producers are primarily concerned with getting back in the black.

More than $170 million has been spent so far lobbying on a variety of liquefied natural gas issues, including transportation and facility siting. At least $6.5 million of that sum was spent specifically to support or oppose LNG exports. The actual figure is probably much higher because of vague lobbying disclosure laws.

From shortage to glut

In the early 2000s, the U.S. was on track to become an importer of natural gas as resources ran low.

Energy companies built multibillion-dollar LNG import facilities up and down the country’s coastlines. But the advent of widespread fracking by companies such as Exxon Mobil, Chevron and Chesapeake Energy made the facilities unnecessary.

The industry invested “tons of money in building these re-gasification terminals, and in less than five years, they’re barely operating,” said Bill Cooper, president of the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas.

Exporting, however, would not only solve the price problem, it would mean the idle import facilities might become useful if energy companies converted them to export terminals.

But the energy companies’ gain could come at a loss for consumers.

A study that the Energy Department’s Energy Information Administration published in January 2012 concluded that domestic natural gas prices would rise dramatically if the U.S. began exporting.

Other LNG export studies, from the Brookings Institution and the Baker Institute Center for Energy Studies at Rice University, also concluded that prices would rise but that increases would be moderate and manageable.

“We do have an astronomical amount of natural gas and the demand predictions in the future will not cause that to go away, even if we do export,” Cooper said.

Dow objects

In addition to consumers, some petrochemical, manufacturing and utility companies have expressed reservations about large-scale exports because of their potential impact on domestic natural gas prices.

Petrochemical companies such as Dow Chemical are among the largest consumers of natural gas in the country, and they use it both as a primary material for products and as a fuel.

Dow CEO Andrew Liveris blasted the Energy Department’s recent pro-export report, saying it “offers the baffling conclusion that the U.S. would be better off using its domestic natural gas advantage to fuel growth and jobs in other regions [of the world] versus strengthening the U.S. economy through manufacturing and benefiting consumers with lower energy costs.”

Scott Morrison, government affairs manager for the American Public Gas Association, says his organization opposes exporting LNG, because doing so will make natural gas less affordable for the consumers and manufacturers served by APGA’s members. APGA represents local, publicly owned gas utility companies.

Exporting LNG will also negatively affect the affordability of natural gas vehicles and run counter to the goal of U.S. energy independence, Morrison said.

But most trade associations and companies have been loath to speak out, either because their members don’t take a uniform view or for fear of appearing anti-free market.

The National Association of Manufacturers, for instance, wouldn’t say whether it supported or opposed natural gas exports, only that it supports “free trade and open markets” and believes “policies that accommodate growth in domestic natural gas production” are important.

Legislative issue

The release of the most recent Energy Department report sparked a response from Capitol Hill.

Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., the incoming chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, has called for the Energy Department to develop a national energy strategy and to further clarify its criteria for approving pending permits.

In response to the report, Wyden said in a statement that he will continue working to make sure that “unfettered natural gas exports don't harm U.S. consumers and manufacturers.”

Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, has been one of the most vocal opponents of jumping into large-scale LNG exports and says that more careful study and debate on the economic and environmental effects of the practice are needed.

Markey introduced two bills, the North America Natural Gas Security and Consumer Protection Act and the Keep American Natural Gas Here Act, that are likely to be reintroduced in the new Congress, said Eben Burnham-Snyder, a committee spokesman.

Markey also blasted the study.

In a letter to Energy Department Secretary Steven Chu, he wrote that the study contains “fundamental flaws” that cause it to “severely underestimate the negative impacts of large-scale natural gas exporting,”

In addition, there are long-standing concerns that LNG facilities would become terrorist targets. A fire resulting from an LNG spill could severely burn people up to 1 1/4 miles away, according to a Government Accountability Office report.

Sens. Mary Landrieu, D-La., and Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, both support exports.

Louisiana is home to Cheniere Energy’s Sabine Pass facility, the first newly proposed LNG export terminal the Energy Department has approved. Alaska is home to a 40-year-old facility that is the only currently operating LNG export terminal in the U.S.

Lengthy debate expected

The Energy Department’s new report is just one factor in deciding the future of the natural gas exports.

Gaining permission to export natural gas isn’t easy.

First, a potential exporter needs permission to export to free-trade agreement countries. Next, the company needs to get permission from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to build a facility. FERC in turn works closely with the Environmental Protection Agency, the Coast Guard, the Department of Transportation and the states.

If the applicant is given the green light to build a terminal, it can go back to the Energy Department and request permission to export to non-free trade countries, such as Japan, South Korea and India.

Even if their requests are approved, they will have to spend $6 billion to $10 billion on each new or converted facility, and construction is likely to take several years.

Once the facilities are up and running, Pennsylvania and other gas-producing states can expect to see a big increase in drilling, a prospect that has left some in the state fearful that its history of natural resource exploitation will repeat itself.

“Pennsylvania has been the dumping ground for so long,” Switzer said. “I taught history, and people don’t learn from history.”

Donor profile: American Federation of Teachers

2013-01-30T22:03:15-05:00

Ranking: 15

Total contributions to super PACs: $5.8 million*

$2 million to Majority PAC (pro-Democratic)
$1.5 million to Priorities USA Action (pro-Barack Obama)
$1.1 million to Workers’ Voice (pro-Democratic), formerly known as AFL-CIO Workers’ Voices PAC
$700,000 to House Majority PAC (pro-Democratic)
$250,000 to DGA Action (pro-Democratic)
$100,000 to Ohio Families United (pro-Sherrod Brown)
$100,000 to Women Vote! (pro-Democratic)

Notable federal hard money and 527 contributions:

$10,000 to the Ohio Democratic Party

Notable state-level contributions:

$5 million in support of or opposition to California ballot measures (2004-2012)
$1.2 million in support of or opposition to Michigan ballot measures (2006-2012)
$617,500 to the Ohio Democratic Party (2000-2012)
$250,000 to the California Democratic Party (2006)

Total spent on federal lobbying (2007-2012): $6.6 million

Lobbying issues: Federal budget and appropriations, education, labor and workplace issues, health care, Medicare and Medicaid, retirement, taxes, trade, civil rights and civil liberties as well as issues pertaining to the District of Columbia

Biography:

The American Federation of Teachers is the nation’s second-largest teachers union next to the National Education Association. The AFT claims 1.5 million members, and it represents K-12 teachers and school employees in the nation’s largest urban school districts. In addition, the AFT counts teachers in post-secondary schools, public employees and health care workers among its membership.

The union mobilized support for President Barack Obama’s re-election bid with large voter registration, phone-banking, door knocking and get-out-the-vote efforts.

It also launched a bus tour through swing states in the final weeks of the campaign. At a stop in Toledo, Ohio, AFT President Randi Weingarten urged teachers to support Obama, saying GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney had a “binder of bad ideas” for public education.

The union sent donations to candidates in key U.S. Senate races, helping Democrats to victory in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Missouri and Massachusetts. It supported high-profile congressional races featuring women, including Democrat Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, who won a House seat, and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, who won a U.S. Senate seat.

In a statement soon after Obama’s re-election, Weingarten celebrated AFT’s ground game as contributing to a “victory for people power over money power.”

Last updated: Jan. 30, 2013

*2011-2012 election cycle. Source: Center for Responsive Politics and Center for Public Integrity analysis of Federal Election Commission records. Totals include contributions from individuals, family members and corporations that are controlled by the individual super donor.

Donor profile: Michael Bloomberg

2013-03-17T14:01:17-04:00

Ranking: 9

Total contributions to super PACs: $10 million*

$10 million to Independence USA PAC (pro-moderates and independents)
$50,000 to Women VOTE! (pro-Democratic)

Notable federal hard money and 527 contributions:

$25,000 to the Independence Party of Minnesota (2008)
$12,100 to Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn. (2006)
$10,000 to the National Leadership PAC (since 1999)
$8,200 to Rep. John Sweeney, R-N.Y. (since 2004)
$7,000 to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. (since 1998)

Notable state-level contributions (see here):

$2.2 million to the New York State Republican Party (since 2002)
$2.1 million to the Senate Republican Campaign Committee of New York (since 2000)
$175,000 to the Republican Assembly Campaign Committee of New York (since 2000)
$500,000 in support of California’s Proposition 29, which would have raised taxes on cigarettes and tobacco products to fund cancer research (2012)
$250,000 in support of California’s Proposition 86, which would have raised taxes on cigarettes and tobacco products (2006)
$250,000 in support of California’s Proposition 11, which created a state redistricting commission drawn from a voter pool (2008)
$250,000 to FairDistrictFlorida.org, which supported two Florida ballot measures that reformed the redistricting process (2010)

Corporate ownership: Bloomberg Inc.

Subsidiaries: Bloomberg LP

Total spent on federal lobbying (2007-2012): $4.4 million by Bloomberg LP; $830,000 by Mayors Against Illegal Guns

Lobbying issues: Gun control, regulation of radio and television broadcasting, publishing, general finance, trade, telecommunications and antitrust, among others

Biography:

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg — a supporter of stronger regulation of firearms — has seen his profile rise dramatically in the wake of the shooting at a Connecticut elementary school.

Bloomberg, a billionaire publisher, is the ninth biggest super PAC donor of the 2012 election cycle.

The Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-independent gave $10 million to super PACs, nearly all of it going to his own group, Independence USA. Bloomberg is the sole donor to the super PAC. It favors candidates who support gun control, marriage equality for same-sex couples and education reform.

Bloomberg also contributed $3.1 million to Mayors Against Illegal Guns Action Fund, a “social welfare” nonprofit he co-founded and co-chairs with Boston Mayor Thomas Menino.

Bloomberg’s vast wealth has created a challenge to the politically powerful National Rifle Association as the nation revisits the debate over gun control. On Dec. 14, 20-year-old Adam Lanza gunned down 20 school children and six adults in Newtown, Conn., before killing himself.

Bloomberg, now in his third term, ran as a Republican in in 2001 but left the party in 2007. After getting the city to change a law that limited mayors to two consecutive four-year terms in office, he ran for re-election as an independent in 2009, spending $108 million of his own funds and securing a surprisingly narrow 4.6 percent margin of victory.

Bloomberg is a fiscal conservative and liberal on social issues. He supports marriage for same-sex couples and abortion rights.

“Being a fiscal conservative is not about slashing programs that help the poor, or improve health care, or ensure a social safety net,” he said in a speech at the 2007 British Conservative Party Conference, adding, “Fiscal conservatives have hearts too, but we also insist on using our brains.”

On Nov. 1, he endorsed President Barack Obama for re-election because he wanted someone who would “lead on climate change.”

As mayor, Bloomberg has focused on education, economic development and public health, making news by banning the sale of soft drinks larger than 16 ounces in restaurants and similar venues throughout the city.

Bloomberg, 70, was born and raised in the suburbs of Boston and graduated from Johns Hopkins University in 1964 with a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering. He received his M.B.A. from Harvard Business School two years later. Bloomberg was hired by investment bank Salomon Brothers and eventually headed the firm’s information systems department, but was fired during a 1981 merger. He used his $10 million severance package to start Bloomberg LP, a financial news and data service.

Bloomberg LP is well known for its “Bloomberg Terminal,” a software system typically paired with a distinctive monitor and keyboard that provides real-time financial information and stock quotes. The terminal also has an electronic trading platform. In addition, Bloomberg LP operates several media outlets, including Bloomberg News, Bloomberg Businessweek and Bloomberg TV.

The company has been immensely profitable, posting revenues near $8 billion for 2012, according to the Financial Times.

Michael Bloomberg is worth $22 billion, according to Forbes, and gives away hundreds of millions of dollars each year through Bloomberg Philanthropies. The charity has donated more than $2.4 billion to the arts, public health initiatives, government innovation, education and the environment, including a $50 billion donation to the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign in July.

Last updated: Jan. 30, 2013

*2011-2012 election cycle. Source: Center for Responsive Politics and Center for Public Integrity analysis of Federal Election Commission records. Totals include contributions from individuals, family members and corporations that are controlled by the individual super donor.

Donor profile: George Soros

Soros Fund Management LLC — 2013-03-17T14:03:59-04:00

Ranking: 18

Total contributions to super PACs: $5.1 million**

$1.1 million combined from son Jonathan Soros, son Alexander Soros and daughter Andrea Soros Colombel to Friends of Democracy (pro-campaign finance reform)
$1 million to Priorities USA Action (pro-Barack Obama)
$1 million to American Bridge 21st Century (pro-Democratic)
$850,000 combined from Andrea, Jonathan and daughter-in-law Melissa Soros to Planned Parenthood Votes (pro-Democratic)
$675,000 to House Majority PAC (pro-Democratic)
$300,000, all from Alexander, to the Jewish Council for Education and Research (pro-Barack Obama)
$100,000 to Majority PAC (pro-Democratic)

Notable federal hard money and 527 contributions:

Between 2004 and 2008, George Soros contributed $32.2 million to a variety of Democratic-aligned 527 committees, including $23.7 million during the 2004 election cycle alone, when he ranked as the No. 1 donor to these political committees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Jonathan Soros and his wife Jennifer gave more than $880,000 to federal candidates, PACs and political parties during the 2012 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Alexander Soros contributed at least $348,500 to federal candidates, PACs and political parties during the 2012 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Notable state-level contributions (see here):

$1.4 million in support of California’s Proposition 5, the Nonviolent Offender Rehabilitation Act (2008)
$1 million in support of California’s Proposition 36, which modified the state’s “Three Strikes” law (2012)
$1 million in support of California’s Proposition 19, which would have legalized marijuana in the state (2010)
$406,000 to oppose Arizona’s Proposition 302, which gave judges more latitude in dealing with drug probation violations (2002)
$400,000 in support of Massachusetts’ Ballot Question 2, which eliminated criminal penalties for marijuana possession (2008)

Corporate ownership: Soros Fund Management LLC

Subsidiaries: Soros Private Equity Fund

Total spent on federal lobbying by (2007-2012): $0. Soros Fund Management has not reported any federal lobbying since 2005.

Family: Five adult children: Robert Soros, Andrea Soros Colombel, Jonathan Soros, Alexander Soros and Gregory Soros

Biography:

Billionaire investor and philanthropist George Soros, a well-known and prolific donor to liberal causes, took it easy in 2012, giving, along with his family, a relatively modest $3.9 million to super PACs this election cycle. That’s down significantly from just a few years earlier when he bankrolled Democrats’ electoral efforts.

Soros was an ardent foe of former President George W. Bush, calling the Texan’s 2004 re-election bid “a matter of life and death.” He gave nearly $24 million to various so-called “527 committees,” the predecessors to super PACs, in an attempt to defeat Bush. Though Soros has continued to make substantial contributions to progressive outside spending groups, he has not given more than $5 million in an election cycle to these organizations since then, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Soros, who with a net worth of $19 billion is the 22nd richest man in the world, has been an active supporter of “open societies” — those that embrace democratic governance, freedom of expression and respect for individual rights — since 1979. He worked to foster free speech in communist Eastern Europe and continued to support the creation of open societies in former Soviet bloc countries after the collapse of the Berlin Wall.

Through the Open Society Foundations, Soros’ massive international network of charitable organizations, he has given more than $8 billion toward an array of causes, ranging from providing humanitarian aid to Burmese war victims to implementing freedom of information laws around the world.

His views are shaped in part by his experiences as a young Jewish teenager during the Nazi occupation of his native Hungary and the subsequent imposition of Stalinism in the country.

After emigrating to England in 1947 and earning a degree from the London School of Economics, Soros found work as a merchant banker in London. He moved to New York City in the mid-1950s to pursue a career in finance and started his signature hedge fund, the Quantum Fund, in 1969.

Soros is perhaps best known for his ability to predict — and profit from — market crashes. He has been dubbed “the man who broke the Bank of England,” profiting more than $1 billion when the British government devalued the pound sterling in 1992.

Soros also profited during the Asian financial crisis of the late 1990s by short selling Thai and Malaysian currencies. He has been accused of causing the crisis, but maintains that was not the case.

His hedge fund company began managing Soros family assets exclusively in July 2011. The company had about $25 billion in assets under management prior to the transition, and returned $1 billion to investors following the announcement.

Soros’ son Alexander, who is pursuing a Ph.D. in history at the University of California, Berkeley, has started his own philanthropic organization. The Alex Soros Foundation supports social justice and human rights.

Soros’ son Jonathan launched his own super PAC called “Friends of Democracy” in April. The group markets itself as an anti-super PAC super PAC, supporting candidates who back campaign finance reform. Jonathan and his siblings accounted for the bulk of the money the organization raised.

“We openly acknowledge the irony of being a super PAC trying to address money in politics,” Jonathan Soros told the Washington Post in July. “But our goal is to eventually decrease the influence of this kind of group.”

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Friends of Democracy spent roughly $2 million against 11 Republican candidates in the 2012 election.

Soros has been married and divorced twice. He is currently engaged to Tamiko Bolton, who is 42 years his junior.

Last updated: Jan. 30, 2013

*George Soros is the chairman of the Open Society Foundation, which provides funding for the Center for Public Integrity. For a list of the Center's donors, visit this page on our website.

**2011-2012 election cycle. Source: Center for Responsive Politics and Center for Public Integrity analysis of Federal Election Commission records. Totals include contributions from individuals, family members and corporations that are controlled by the individual super donor.

Donor profile: Republican Governors Association

2013-01-23T12:59:20-05:00

Ranking: 10

Total contributions to super PACs: $9.8 million*

$9.8 million to RGA Right Direction PAC (pro-Republican), formerly known as the RGA Ohio PAC

Notable state-level contributions:

$8.3 million to the Florida Republican Party (2010)
$6 million to Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett (2010)
$3 million to Texas Gov. Rick Perry (2010)

Background:

The Republican Governors Association’s appearance on a list of top donors to super PACs — formed to spend money on federal races — at first glance appears to be a mistake. But a close look at the Washington, D.C.-based “527” organization’s disclosure filings shows it is using super PACs to funnel funds into state races.

The recipient of the RGA’s generosity is a super PAC called “RGA Right Direction PAC.” The super PAC takes the money it receives from the RGA — which, as a 527, can accept unlimited funds from corporations and wealthy individuals — and spends it on state races.

In an October 2012 filing, Right Direction disclosed a $250,000 contribution to North Dakota’s Republican Gov. Jack Dalrymple, who assumed the job in 2010, when then-Gov. John Hoeven resigned to become a U.S. senator. In North Dakota, corporate donations to candidates are prohibited, but contributions from political action committees to candidates are unlimited, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The Center for Public Integrity has also previously reported that Right Direction gave $1 million to Mike Pence, the Republican House member who won a bid in November to become governor of Indiana, where corporate contributions are limited.

The RGA has maintained that all of its donations have been by the books.

The RGA has been working to put Republicans in the nation’s governor’s mansions for almost 50 years. Its past leaders include some of the biggest names in the Republican Party: former President Ronald Reagan, Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour.

Over the past few months, the Center for Public Integrity has exposed the complex money-moving schemes the RGA uses to benefit Republican governors’ campaigns. In this year’s North Carolina election, the group has spent millions on ads underwritten by corporations who were unaware of how their money was being spent.

In Florida’s 2010 election, the RGA took advantage of a loophole in state law when it gave $8.3 million to the Florida Republican Party, which in turn contributed $5.2 million to winning candidate Gov. Rick Scott.

And in Pennsylvania, the RGA contributed $6 million of the $28.7 million Gov. Tom Corbett raised, including a $1.5 million contribution from an affiliated group whose donors are unknown.

Last updated: Jan. 17, 2013

Donor profile: United Auto Workers

2013-01-30T21:21:38-05:00

Ranking: 7

Total contributions to super PACs: $11.8 million*

$11.4 million to UAW Education Fund (pro-Democratic)
$200,000 to Priorities USA Action (pro-Barack Obama)
$108,000 to Working for Us PAC (pro-Democratic)
$100,000 to Majority PAC (pro-Democratic)
$15,000 to American Votes Action Fund (pro-Democratic)

Federal hard money and 527 contributions:

Has donated more than $1.4 million to federal candidates through its political action committee so far this cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. All but $4,000 has gone to Democrats.

Total spent on federal lobbying (2007-2012): $11.4 million

Lobbying issues: Medicare and Medicaid, banking, appropriations, automotive industry, defense, defense, retirement savings, taxes, trade, unemployment and numerous other legislative issues.

Background:

The United Auto Workers has become a major backer of President Barack Obama and the $81.3 billion federal bailout, which was credited with saving Chrysler and General Motors.

The bailout was a key 2012 campaign issue for Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, especially in the Midwest, where hundreds of thousands of auto workers live.

UAW is the sole funder of the UAW Education Fund, pouring more than $11.4 million into the super PAC during the election. In turn, UAW Education Fund has made major contributions to other Democratic-aligned super PACs, including Priorities USA Action ($1 million), Majority PAC ($700,000) House Majority PAC ($250,000) and Working for Us PAC ($125,000), according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Earlier this year, the Center for Public Integrity reported that the UAW put $1 million toward a Michigan ballot measure amending the state’s constitution to guarantee collective bargaining rights for all Michigan workers.

The Detroit-based United Auto Workers union represents more than just assembly line workers. Its members work in health care, gambling and other jobs. Founded in 1935, UAW says it has more than 390,000 active members and more than 600,000 retired members, with more than 750 local chapters. The union has a strong presence in Michigan and the Midwest and has offices in Canada and Puerto Rico.

UAW has been politically active since its inception, pushing for legislation that benefits its members and their families. The UAW worked to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the Family Medical and Leave Act and the Occupational Safety and Health Act.

Last updated: Jan. 30, 2013

Furniture king a celebrity in Colorado

2012-10-22T19:11:34-04:00

Jacob "Jake" Jabs is not quite a national figure, but he is a celebrity in Colorado — so much so that he was featured in the animated comedy series “South Park,” which is set in the state.

A cartoon version of Jabs made a cameo appearance in 2007, according to Furniture Today. Kyle, one of the main characters, is at a party for high-rollers when he spots a man in a yellow suit with a white tiger in his lap.

“Look over there, it’s that Jake Jabs guy from American Furniture Warehouse commercials!”

Jabs, 81, owns Colorado’s largest furniture chain and is probably best known for his commercials featuring the big cats.

While his commercials are amusing, he is serious about his politics. A document from the Internal Revenue Service shows Jabs pledged $300,000 in seed money to American Tradition Partnership. ATP is a secretive pro-energy nonprofit that’s taken the state of Montana to court three times challenging the state's campaign finance laws.

Jabs, through a spokesman, on Monday said he did not make a donation and has "never heard of" ATP or the group's previous incarnation.

"He did not commit to the funds indicated by Athena Dalton in the filing so clearly he did not give them funds," wrote Charlie Shaulis, director of communications for American Furniture Warehouse, Jabs' company, in an email to I-News Network in Colorado.

Dalton wrote a letter to the IRS asking the agency to speed up the process for awarding it nonprofit status. The letter states that the approval was needed quickly, otherwise Jabs would not make a contribution. The agency gave it the thumbs up four days later.

In 2008, he paid for ads supporting a ballot initiative that would have made Colorado a “right-to-work” state, a measure opposed by unions. There were tigers in those ads, too.

Jabs said in a press conference posted on YouTube that he wanted to "hurt the pocketbooks of the unions so they don’t have the millions and millions and millions and millions and millions of dollars to spend."

He is a prolific Republican donor, having given about $150,000 to GOP candidates and parties since 1997, according to Federal Election Commission records.

The son of immigrants, Jabs grew up in rural Montana in a house without electricity, indoor plumbing or running water. His father had only a second-grade education.

Jabs tells his rags-to-riches story in his books, "An American Tiger" and "Thriving In Tough Times." The cover of An American Tiger features Jabs with one of the animals.

His giving extends beyond politics.

In 2010, Jabs gave $3 million to the Montana State University’s business school. He is a 1952 alumnus of the university (then called Montana State College), where he studied vocational agriculture and was on the rodeo team.

Update (Oct . 22, 7:00 p.m.): This story was updated to reflect that Jabs, through a spokesman, denied making a contribution to ATP.

John Dunbar contributed to this report.

Pennsylvania governor benefited from untraceable $1.5 million donation

Wisconsin,United States — 2012-10-18T06:00:01-04:00

At a campaign stop near Philadelphia early in his 2010 bid for governor, Republican Tom Corbett announced “we’ve got to raise money,” that it was the “number-one” priority. In an answer to his prayers, that same July day, a $1.5 million contribution arrived from — Wisconsin?

Officially, the donation was from the Wisconsin affiliate of a D.C.-based political organization called the Republican Governors Association.

The $1.5 million could not travel directly from the RGA to Corbett. Pennsylvania law bans candidates from accepting corporate money and the RGA accepts millions of dollars from some of the nation’s largest businesses.

Also, state law requires all non-individuals to establish PACs in Pennsylvania.

In a single day, the $1.5 million gift traveled from the D.C.-based parent organization to the RGA Wisconsin PAC, to the RGA Pennsylvania PAC and finally to Corbett’s campaign account.

By the time the donation reached Corbett, it was impossible to identify the original source of the cash or whether the donation was permissible under state law.

The well-traveled donation is a prime example of “an elaborate money-laundering scheme, which is legal,” used by the RGA with success in a number of races for governor in 2010, according to Pennsylvania Common Cause Executive Director Barry Kauffman.

The RGA’s funding played a central role in Corbett’s victory. By Election Day he had received a total of $6 million from the RGA — 21 percent of his total fundraising, easily the top donor to the campaign, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.

Corbett’s campaign office did not return calls for comment for this story.

Corbett’s boosters crushed the competition from the D.C.-based Democratic Governors Association, which mustered $1.9 million for Corbett’s opponent, Dan Onorato, using a series of similar funding maneuvers.

The RGA spending spree did not stop in Pennsylvania.

Haley Barbour, then the governor of Mississippi and chairman of the RGA, cultivated an expansive stable of wealthy donors.

“We can’t wait until 2012 to start taking our country back,” said Barbour in an RGA promotional video released 12 weeks before the landmark 2010 election that saw 37 governors’ seats up for grabs.

Republicans won 23 races to the Democrats’ 13, including the Pennsylvania race that landed Corbett in the Pennsylvania governor’s mansion. By the time elections were over, Republicans had knocked Democrats from 10 seats, and could claim 29 governorships nationwide.

In the third quarter of 2010 alone, the RGA topped its total fundraising for 2006 — the last election with as many contested governors’ seats. Its total $87 million haul in 2010 also topped the RGA’s total fundraising for the previous three years combined, a Center for Public Integrity review of data from the Center for Responsive Politics reveals.

“It's hard not to look at the numbers coming out of the RGA and not marvel/quake at the Mississippi governor's fundraising capacity,” wrote The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza on the eve of the 2010 vote.

The spending has continued this election season. The D.C.-based organization has kept money flowing by circuitous routes into several states, including North Carolina, Indiana and Wisconsin. Gubernatorial races are being fought in 11 states, eight of which currently have Democratic governors.

Through September, the RGA has spent $40 million of its $43 million haul — nearly doubling the amount raised by the DGA.

It’s legal, trust us

Life would be simpler for the RGA if it could make contributions to gubernatorial candidates directly from its D.C. bank account. But it receives tens of millions of dollars in contributions from corporations — and corporate contributions to candidates are banned in 21 states, including Pennsylvania.

Even though IRS records show direct contributions to candidates from the RGA in many of those states, including Pennsylvania, the group maintains that its activity in 2010 was legal thanks to its use of state-level PACs.

“The RGA worked with both Pennsylvania and Wisconsin campaign finance authorities in 2010 to ensure we were complying with the law,” wrote RGA spokesman Mike Schrimpf in an email, responding to questions posed by the Center.

In the Keystone State, corporations cannot give to candidates, but individuals can make unlimited contributions to both PACs and candidates.

The RGA Pennsylvania PAC, which retained the same D.C. address of its parent organization and listed the same treasurer, filed reports with the state listing contributions from individuals and not corporations.

Six-and seven-figure donations came to the state PAC from some of the RGA’s most loyal contributors, but only 3 percent of the PAC’s total fundraising came from inside the state. They included $1 million from hedge fund managers Paul Singer of New York, Steven Cohen of Connecticut and Ken Griffin and wife Anne from Chicago. Texas home builder Bob Perry gave $500,000.

Those donations alone comprise more than half of the $6 million that went from the RGA to Corbett.

The DGA Pennsylvania PAC also took contributions from a smaller stable of mostly out-of-state donors, including Texas trial lawyer and Democratic mega-donor Steven Mostyn, who gave $400,000. Mostyn did not return numerous calls for comment.

Though these large gifts are permissible under Pennsylvania law, the RGA and DGA confirm that its donors give to a general fund, not to any specific state. The D.C.-based organizations then make the call on whose money is counted toward which race.

The result is a listing of donors to Corbett and Onorato who were not aware their donations were attributed to a specific campaign.

“It is legal,” said Ron Ruman, spokesman for the Pennsylvania Department of State, “as long as the contribution that went to Pennsylvania was from an individual.”

Still, the practice calls into question the accuracy of the governors associations’ disclosure reports.

Billionaire hedge fund manager Singer, for example, has spent years, and millions of dollars, advocating for the right of same-sex couples to marry. He has a gay son who married in Massachusetts, and The New York Times reports he gave $425,000 to back New York’s gay marriage bill.

Corbett ran as a staunch opponent of gay marriage in the state and has maintained that stance in office.

A spokesman for Singer declined to comment.

How we got here

The RGA took in about $117 million from 2009-2010, according to CRP, while its Democratic counterpart, the DGA, received less than half of that, $55 million.

Like the national political parties, the RGA is a nonprofit political organization, regulated and tax-exempt under Internal Revenue Code Section 527. But because the RGA is focused on state, not federal, elections, it is largely unregulated by the Federal Election Commission.

It is, however, required to comply with IRS rules. The agency collects the RGA’s fundraising and spending reports every quarter.

The RGA has argued in court, with some success, that no single state overseer can regulate its activity because its “major purpose” is to influence elections in a variety of states.

“The governors associations are everywhere,” writes Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, of Stetson Law School, but “are regulated almost nowhere.”

The organization has existed in a legal gray area that has spurred investigations and lawsuits in several states since it emerged as a force in state elections.

It’s “subterfuge,” says former FEC official Bob Biersack, now a senior fellow with the Center for Responsive Politics. “They’ve figured out this weird hole in the legal structure.”

The RGA has maneuvered skillfully, winning in court when states have challenged its practices. In the past four years, says Schrimpf, the organization has “in no state had a final judgment issued requiring us to pay a fine.”

Interstate travel?

If the $1.5 million July contribution from the RGA to Corbett via Wisconsin had come by car, it would have traveled 1,700 miles to get to the Republican’s campaign account in Pennsylvania. Based on state disclosure forms, the money appeared to come from one account and pass through two others — all based in the RGA’s Pennsylvania Avenue headquarters in D.C. — before making it to Corbett.

The triple transfer effectively cloaked the original source of the money, thanks to a loophole in Wisconsin disclosure laws.

Wisconsin law only requires the PAC, which lists the RGA’s D.C. address, to report donations from Wisconsin residents. The vast majority of the RGA Wisconsin PAC’s money, however, came from out of state.

In the months ahead of the 2010 primary vote, the RGA Wisconsin PAC reported spending at least $5 million, including the $1.5 million gift that ended up with Corbett. The PAC listed its in-state donors, whose contributions amounted to barely more than $31,000.

“It’s very difficult to get to the bottom of where their money came from,” said Nathan Judnic at the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board.

When the money arrived in Corbett’s campaign account, no one, including the Pennsylvania Secretary of State, could decipher the source.

The RGA attached a letter to its campaign filings with Pennsylvania in September 2010. While the origin of the $1.5 million Wisconsin donation was not detailed, the RGA assured the state that it was composed of individual, not corporate, donations.

“In the interest of complete transparency,” wrote RGA Counsel Michael Adams, the organization enclosed its full list of individual donors between January and June of that year. The list contained more than $1.5 million in contributions, but did not say explicitly which of those donations made up the $1.5 million that went to Corbett.

The RGA also offered to provide copies of bank statements and cleared checks for verification.

“These contributions are aggregated into personal money-only accounts, and are not commingled with other funds,” wrote Adams.

This appears to contradict statements by RGA spokesman Schrimpf, who told the Center in July that “expenditures come out of our general fund.”

Contacted again for this story, he said explained that “general fund” is not a “legal nor a literal term.” Schrimpf said he uses it to convey that contributions aren’t earmarked for specific states. A “clearer way” would be to say that the group “has a general political budget” but “we segregate personal from corporate dollars.”

The mysterious July gift of $1.5 million from the RGA Wisconsin PAC came to Corbett just in time. The candidate had suffered a month of bad press after criticizing the state’s jobless for relying on unemployment benefits.

The contribution helped launch the Corbett campaign’s first ads and a bus tour, which shifted the focus away from the gaffe. By the end of August, his lead in the polls was again more than 10 points, and he was on the road to victory.

In the three weeks before the vote, the RGA would send about $3.6 million more to Corbett to help seal a victory.

States of play

Pennsylvania is not the only state where the RGA directed its funds.

The RGA was “the Laundromat and the repository for a lot of the money that was spent all over the country in 2010, there’s no question about it,” said Jay Heck, executive director of the good government group Common Cause Wisconsin.

In Iowa, the RGA gave about $1.2 million directly to Terry Branstad, according to data from CRP. As in Pennsylvania, Branstad could not receive corporate money, but could take unlimited sums from individuals. Similar to what it did in Pennsylvania, the RGA fed it through its RGA Iowa PAC, and listed individuals as donors to the PAC.

Also as in Pennsylvania, the RGA Iowa PAC received donations from the RGA’s PAC in Wisconsin totaling $340,000.

In Texas, the RGA gave $3 million directly to Gov. Rick Perry, according to the CRP data. The donation was routed through its PAC in Michigan, apparently in an attempt to comply with a state law banning corporate donations.

On Perry’s campaign filings, the donation appears as a contribution from the RGA Michigan PAC — because PACs can give candidates unlimited funds to candidates in Texas, as long as the money isn’t corporate.

The seed money for the RGA Michigan PAC came again from wealthy individuals, including prolific political donor Texas homebuilder Bob Perry (no relation to Rick). The homebuilding magnate gave the RGA $4 million earlier in 2010.

The RGA also gave contributions in the millions directly to Republican parties in states where corporate contributions to parties are banned. Through its PACs in Michigan and Pennsylvania, it sent $5.3 million to Michigan’s Republican Party and $2.3 million to bolster the Pennsylvania Republican Party’s efforts.

By contrast, the RGA uses a more direct method in states where corporate contributions to candidates are unlimited.

The organization sent roughly $2.5 million directly to Oregon Republican Chris Dudley, according to both data from CRP and state campaign finance reports. Dudley, who lost a close race for governor, reported the donations as coming from the RGA’s “Corporate Unlimited Account” — no pass-through and no state-affiliated PACs were necessary for the corporate cash infusion.

A repeat performance

Republican candidates are leaning heavily on the RGA again as 11 more governors’ races head to the November finish line. The organization continues its maneuvers through state and federal election law, and is on pace to break Barbour’s prodigious 2010 fundraising record.

It continues to tap the deep pockets of hundreds of donors who have pledged at least $25,000 annually as members of the RGA’s Executive Roundtable — led by venture capitalist Fred Malek, who worked in the White House under Presidents Nixon and Ford and served as campaign manager for President George H.W. Bush in 1992.

Hundreds of these executives met with Barbour, Malek, American Crossroads strategist Karl Rove and presidential candidate Mitt Romney in August for an Aspen fundraising and strategy session, according to Politico. Republican gubernatorial candidates Rick Hill of Montana and Rob McKenna of Washington were also present.

The RGA is devoting millions to four possible pickups as Democrats leave open governorships in North Carolina, Washington, Montana, and New Hampshire. The RGA has dedicated millions to challenge Democratic incumbents in four additional states, including Missouri and West Virginia.

The RGA also dropped about $8 million to protect Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker from being recalled, and has shored up incumbents in Utah, Puerto Rico and Indiana.

In the Hoosier State the RGA used its RGA Right Direction super PAC to sidestep the state’s corporate ban and give $1 million to candidate Mike Pence while obscuring the original donors.

The RGA has also used the super PAC, registered to make independent expenditures on federal races, to sponsor ads attacking Democratic candidates for governor in West Virginia and Montana. Donors and spending on these ads were not reported to the states in question after they ran. They were finally reported, however, in mid-October filings with the FEC.

Whether the RGA and the DGA are intentionally evading state laws is difficult to say because of the structure of the organizations.

"Their structure provides plausible deniability to underlying donors,” said Stetson’s Torres-Spelliscy. Donors can “pretend” they're only giving to the associations and not influence policy in a particular state, “but only that donor and the staff at the governors association knows if this money is given without strings attached.”

John Dunbar contributed to this report.

D.C.-based governors' associations provide back door for corporate donors

Pennsylvania,United States — 2012-10-18T10:31:55-04:00

It was no secret in the 2010 race for governor of Pennsylvania that Republican Tom Corbett, the state’s attorney general, was the favorite of the burgeoning natural gas industry.

Corbett collected almost $1.3 million from donors with oil and gas interests, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.

Aubrey McClendon, the CEO of Chesapeake Energy, the nation’s No. 2 natural gas producer and the top driller in the lucrative Marcellus Shale region of Pennsylvania, gave the campaign $5,000 while his company’s political action committee contributed $12,000.

But that’s a small fraction of what Chesapeake gave to Corbett’s top donor.

McClendon’s company gave a little over $300,000 in 2010 to a so-called “527” organization called the Republican Governors Association, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The RGA gave Corbett’s campaign more than $6 million, 21 percent of the $28.7 million he raised, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.

The RGA acts as a central depository and distributor of funds from wealthy individuals and corporate treasuries that are used to underwrite governors’ races in the states.

The organization routinely accepts six- and seven-figure contributions and deals out the funds to state candidates and parties. In states like Pennsylvania, where corporate contributions are banned, the group appears to be skirting the law.

But the RGA says it keeps track of where the money comes from and adheres to all state laws and regulations. Corporate and non-corporate funds are segregated. Critics say, however, that such segregation is meaningless thanks to the wide variation in state campaign finance laws.

Nothing, for example, would prevent Chesapeake’s donations to the RGA from being spent on state races that allow corporate contributions — and a like amount from individual donors being shifted to Corbett’s campaign.

Donors can say “they're not trying to influence policy in a particular state,” said Ciara Torres-Spelliscy of Stetson Law School. “But only that donor and the staff at the governors association know if this money is given without strings attached.”

RGA spokesman Mike Schrimpf said the group “fully complied with all Pennsylvania campaign finance laws” during the 2010 election.

Chesapeake did not respond to a request for comment.

Pennsylvania’s gas boom

Times were tough in Pennsylvania in 2010 — unemployment peaked in February and March at 8.7 percent. Economic issues were at the forefront of the state’s race for governor. But a controversial technology that allowed access to deposits of natural gas deep underground brought with it the promise of new jobs and new revenue for the state.

Hydraulic fracturing involves the pumping of millions of gallons of water into wells to break up layers of shale and release natural gas deposits. Environmentalists say the practice — exempt from portions of the Clean Water Act and other laws — contaminates private wells, lowers property values and ultimately harms communities, not helps them.

During the 2010 campaign, Corbett promised not to impose a gas extraction tax on drillers and said he would eliminate red tape and regulations, said Brian Nutt, his adviser and former campaign manager, in an interview with the Center.

His opponent, Democrat Dan Onorato, then-chief executive of Pittsburgh’s Allegheny County, urged the passage of the same tax Corbett opposed, calling the Republican a representative of Pennsylvania gas drillers instead of Pennsylvanians.

Corbett’s position attracted large contributions from major players in the state’s natural gas industry.

Christine Toretti gave nearly $98,000 to Corbett’s campaign, support that was reported to state campaign regulators. Unlike in federal races, contributions from individuals are not capped.

Toretti is the former chairwoman and CEO of the S.W. Jack Drilling Co., which was the largest privately held, land-based driller in the U.S. She also gave $110,000 in 2009-2010 to the Pennsylvania Republican Party, which was the No. 2 donor to Corbett at $2.1 million.

What wasn’t reported to the state was $50,000 in donations she made to the RGA, according to CRP.

Likewise, Texan Trevor Rees-Jones, founder and chairman of drilling company Chief Oil & Gas, gave Corbett’s campaign $50,000 and the RGA $100,000.

Toretti and Rees-Jones could not be reached for comment.

Donors get say in future development

Some of Corbett’s biggest contributors were awarded spots on his Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission, a group that included executives from Chevron, Exxon Mobil and EQT, each doing business in the Marcellus Shale region.

Terry Pegula gave Corbett $100,000 and wife Kim gave $180,000; Terry sits on the commission. The Pegulas founded East Resources and built it into a major independent natural gas exploration and development company before selling it to Royal Dutch Shell in 2010.

Terry Bossert, a senior executive at Chief Oil & Gas, also has a spot on the commission.

A 527 like the RGA — and its Democratic counterpart, the Democratic Governors Association — is not regulated by the Federal Election Commission and cannot make contributions to federal candidates. It is required to report its donors and expenditures to the IRS.

The DGA gave Onorato $1.9 million out of $25.3 million raised, according to the National Institute on Money in State Politics.

Companies with an interest in the development of the natural gas industry in the state, including Chesapeake, gave at least $4 million in corporate treasury funds to the RGA in the 2009-2010 election, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis of CRP data.

Among them were Exxon Mobil ($704,900), CONSOL Energy ($338,200), Encana (151,400), the American Natural Gas Alliance ($101,000) and two natural gas-consuming electrical utilities.

To show that none of that corporate money made it into Corbett’s campaign account, the RGA created a political action committee in the state; actually, its address is the same as that of its Washington headquarters.

Pennsylvania contribution records show the PAC listed contributions from 101 individuals — three of them residents of Pennsylvania. One donation was a mysterious $1.5 million transfer from the RGA’s Wisconsin PAC (also housed in Washington).

Donors listed who were contacted by the Center were unaware their money was headed to the Pennsylvania PAC and into Corbett’s campaign account.

The DGA also created a state PAC to make its contributions.

Finding loopholes

At the same time the Pennsylvania PAC was formed, the RGA was spending large sums in states that do not ban corporate contributions. For example, it gave $8.3 million to the Florida Republican Party, which gave $5.2 million to now-Gov. Rick Scott, the Republican winner.

Corporate contributions in Florida are capped at $500 per candidate, but there are no limits on how much corporations can give to parties. Parties can make unlimited contributions to candidates as long as they are earmarked for campaign costs like research, events and staff.

“It’s such a gigantic loophole that you can drive a truck through it,” said Peter Butzin, volunteer state chairman of the Florida chapter of Common Cause.

In some states, there are no corporate limitations. In Virginia in 2009, Republican candidate Bob McDonnell collected nearly $2 million directly from the RGA.

Corbett, as governor, has been a friend to the gas companies.

Act 13, signed into law in February, was a comprehensive update of Pennsylvania’s 28-year-old Oil and Gas Act. Though the law contains updated environmental protections, the measures take a back seat to industry interests, say some anti-drilling activists.

One such group, PennFuture, said the act did not bring in enough money for the state, is weak on environmental safeguards and favors drillers over other businesses.

“Pennsylvania citizens will get little in return,” said Jan Jarrett, then-president of the group, days before Corbett signed the act into law.

The act’s most controversial provisions allowed drilling almost anywhere — even in residential areas. Since municipalities are required to abide by state law, Act 13 nullified most residential zoning restrictions on drilling. For example, drilling operations were allowed to be located as close as one football field from buildings.

Patrick Henderson, the governor’s energy executive, says Act 13 was aimed at streamlining regulations allowing drillers to start work more quickly.

Since Act 13’s passage, the zoning provisions have been overturned in court.

Time equals money

“[We’re] making sure we’re protecting the environment,” said Nutt, Corbett’s former campaign manager and current adviser, but dealing with unnecessary regulations takes time, and “time means losses of revenue.”

The act does levy an annual impact fee of $5,000 to $60,000 per well on natural gas drillers, but these monies can be used only to offset the impact of drilling — not for the benefit of the state at large.

Pennsylvania’s impact fee brought in more than $200 million in 2011. In Texas, where each unit of natural gas is taxed at 7.5 cents on the dollar, $1.4 billion was raised in 2009.

James Browning, the author of a Common Cause report critical of the industry’s activity in Pennsylvania, said the state is a “worst-case scenario” for natural resource exploitation.

But the Corbett administration defends its practices.

“[Act 13] helped to realize and maximize economic benefits,” Henderson said. “And we think that’s a good thing.”

Paul Abowd contributed to this report.

Nonprofit profile: Patriot Majority USA

2013-01-22T15:56:17-05:00

Type of organization: 501(c)(4)

Employer Identification Number: 26-2495846

Supports: Democratic candidates

Location: Washington, D.C.

Founded: 2010

Web site: patriotmajority.org

Social media: YouTube channel, Twitter profile, Facebook page

Finances:

For the group's activities during calendar year 2010:

Total Revenue: $5.2 million
Total Expenses: $5.3 million
Net assets: $25,800

IRS Form 990 filing: 2010

Principals:

Craig Varoga (president/treasurer): Varoga, who is head of the Patriot Majority network, is a longtime Democratic political strategist who has worked on the presidential campaigns of Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry and others. He has also been a strategist or consultant in numerous successful gubernatorial campaigns, including those of Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley and former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.
Joe Householder (secretary): Householder is a strategist in the Texas office of the public relations firm Purple Strategies. He specializes in crisis communications. Householder worked with Varoga on the campaign of former Iowa governor and current Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack and was previously a spokesman for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Bill Burke (director): Burke is the executive director of the Foundation for the Future, a nonprofit working to represent the interests of Democrats during the redistricting process. Burke has worked on campaigns in more than 30 states and in the communications department of the Democratic National Committee.

Profile:

Patriot Majority USA is a liberal nonprofit whose multifaceted agenda includes support for workers’ rights, preserving social safety nets and reforming tax laws. It is the most active branch of a family of organizations that includes a 527, a super PAC and a political action committee, all launched before Patriot Majority USA.

The nonprofit and its sister groups can all be traced back to one person: Democratic strategist Craig Varoga.

Patriot Majority USA is not required to disclose its contributors, but its sister organizations historically have been backed by a handful of well-known Democratic political donors and labor unions, especially the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.

AFSCME is both the largest donor to Patriot Majority’s 527 committee and a co-founder of Foundation for the Future, a nonprofit whose executive director is Bill Burke, the secretary of Patriot Majority USA.

The Center for Responsive Politics reported about the often confusing, circular movements of the Patriot Majority network’s funding. For example: In 2010, AFSCME sent Patriot Majority’s 527 a total of $500,000. Another $350,000 came from a group called Patriot Majority West, another Varoga 527 funded almost entirely by AFSCME.

During the 2012 election cycle, the nonprofit targeted U.S. Senate candidates including Rep. Rick Berg, R-N.D., Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev. and Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont.

In August, Patriot Majority USA launched “Stop the Greed Agenda,” a multi-year campaign aimed at shining a light on the political activities of the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch and related special interests. These entities, the group says, are pursuing a “greed agenda.”

The day after announcing its campaign, Patriot Majority USA released two ads costing $500,000: “Greed Agenda” and “Tycoons.” The ads, which the Center for Public Integrity wrote about about the time, accused the Koch brothers of “buying this year’s election” with their promise to spend more than $400 million to elect their preferred candidates.

Advertisements:

“Greed Agenda” and “Tycoons,” two ads that attacked the Koch brothers.
“Means” opposed Rep. Denny Rehberg, R-Mont.
“Minimum Wage” attacked Rep. Rick Berg, R-N.D., for voting against raising the minimum wage.

Last updated: Jan. 22, 2013

Donor profile: James H. Simons

2013-01-30T21:43:58-05:00

Ranking: 11

Total contributions to super PACs: $9.6 million*

$5 million to Priorities USA Action (pro-Barack Obama)
$3 million to Majority PAC (pro-Democratic)
$1.5 million to House Majority PAC (pro-Democratic)
$75,000 to Planned Parenthood Votes (pro-Democratic)

Notable federal hard money and 527 contributions:

$144,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (since 2007)
$58,900 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (since 2007)
$7,400 to Secretary of State and former Sen. Hillary Clinton (since 2008)
$5,050 to President Barack Obama (since 2008)
$4,800 to Sen. Chuck Schumer (since 2009)
$2,100 to former Sen. Chris Dodd (since 2006)

Notable state-level contributions (see here):

$85,000 to New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (since 2010)
$20,000 to New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (since 2010)
$6,000 to former New York Attorney General and Gov. Eliot Spitzer (2005)

Corporate name: Renaissance Technologies

Total spent on federal lobbying (2007-2012): $1.6 million

Lobbying issues: taxes, accounting, finance

Biography:

James Simons is founder and former CEO of Renaissance Technologies, a Long Island-based hedge fund with $15 billion under management.

The firm uses complex mathematical analyses and computer modeling to make investment decisions. Simons holds a doctorate in mathematics from the University of California, Berkley and a bachelor’s degree, also in mathematics, from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Simons retired as CEO in 2010, but continues to play a role in the company. Robert Mercer, its current CEO, is a prolific Republican contributor and ranks No. 16 on the Center for Public Integrity’s "Super Donors" list, with $5.5 million in super PAC contributions during the 2012 election cycle.

Prior to starting Renaissance Technologies in 1982, Simons was a code breaker at the U.S. National Security Agency and later worked at IBM, where he met Mercer. He also served as chairman of the mathematics department at Stony Brook University in New York.

Simons’ top beneficiary was Priorities USA Action, which supported the re-election of President Barack Obama. He is also a volunteer fundraiser for the group, according to the New York Times. During the Democratic National Convention in August, Simons hosted a fundraising event for Priorities USA Action and other Democratic super PACs at his home outside of Charlotte, N.C.

Simons has donated to a number of well-known Democrats over the years, including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and former Sen. Chris Dodd, but doesn’t say much about his positions, at least not publicly.

“The fact is that I am not seeking any publicity in this matter,” he recently told the Times. “The donations can speak for themselves.”

Simons, whose net worth Forbes estimates at $11 billion, founded the Nick Simons Institute and created the eight-acre Avalon Park and Preserve through the Paul Simons Foundation in memory of two of his sons, who were killed in separate accidents in 1996 and 2003. In addition, he is a supporter of autism research.

He has donated more than $1 billion to the Paul Simons Foundation and at least $210 million to Stony Brook University. The Stony Brook University Foundation, a scholarship-granting organization of which he is chairman emeritus, lost $5.4 million to the Bernard Madoff Ponzi scheme in 2008.

Last updated: Jan. 17, 2013

Daily Disclosure: Super PAC ad compares Mack to Charlie Sheen

Florida,United States — 2012-08-24T12:10:13-04:00

"Tiger Blood” is the name of a new ad from a Democratic super PAC, Majority PAC, targeting Rep. Connie Mack, R-Fla., a reference to the always-entertaining Charlie Sheen’s explanation for his ability to ingest copious amounts of harmful substances without dying.

The ad calls the U.S. Senate candidate “the Charlie Sheen of Florida politics,” accusing him of a having a history of “bar brawls, road rage and resisting arrest.”

Mack, whose real name is Cornelius Harvey McGillicuddy IV, has said he was “minding his own business” and “sober” when trouble found him, according to a report from the Associated Press. The incidents occurred when the 45-year-old Mack was in his early twenties.

Mack is running against incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson, a Democrat. Majority PAC’s mission is to maintain the Democrats’ majority in the Senate.

The ad also attacks Mack’s personal financial history, claiming he has a history of “debts and liens” and has overdrawn his checking account. Both claims are true, according to a February report from The Miami Herald.

“Tiger Blood” also claims that Mack was sued by his yacht club and condo association. Mack was indeed sued by the club, and his Fort Myers-area condo association filed a $2,160 lien against him in 2006, the Herald reported.

The ad is currently only available to Web users who know the link, which Politico published this morning.

Another ad in Florida, “Suffered,” part of the $4.2 million campaign Crossroads GPS announced yesterday, targets Nelson for his vote in favor of the Affordable Care Act, which claims the law “cuts Medicare spending by $700 billion.”

The number comes from a July letter from the Congressional Budget Office. A Washington Post analysis says the cut would come from reductions in reimbursements to doctors and hospitals — not to patient benefits.

In other outside spending news:

Pro-Obama super PAC Priorities USA Action reported a $2.1 million anti-Mitt Romney advertising expenditure to the Federal Election Commission Thursday.
The pro-Romney super PAC Restore Our Future spent $10.1 million on advertising that opposes the president and supports Romney.
Americans for Prosperity’s anti-Obama ad “Still Believe” cost the conservative, pro-free market nonprofit $1.9 million. The video does not appear to be available online.
Majority PAC spent $1.3 million on airtime against U.S. Senate candidates Rep. Rick Berg of North Dakota, Ohio Treasurer Josh Mandel and Indiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock.
Two ads from liberal nonprofit Patriot Majority USA, “Know” and “Means,” cost the group at least $251,000. “Know” targets Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., and “Means” targets Rep. Dennis Rehberg, R-Mont. Both are running for U.S. Senate.

Daily Disclosure: GOP nonprofits continue attacks on Senate Dems

New Mexico,United States — 2012-08-24T08:39:31-04:00

The conservative nonprofit Americans for Prosperity on Wednesday announced a $2.7 million ad buy that will target Democrats in five key Senate races across the country.

The targets are Rep. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., Rep. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., Rep. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., and former Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine.

The first of the ads targets Baldwin and began airing in Wisconsin last week, according to a press release from Americans for Prosperity.

“Tammy Baldwin: Stop Wasteful Spending,” features a handful of Wisconsinites who believe that “Washington can sure learn a lot from Wisconsin, especially how to tighten their belts and balance the budget.”

The Americans for Prosperity ad also points out Baldwin’s vote in favor of the Affordable Care Act, which it claims will cost $2 trillion — “double what was promised.”

In March, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the net cost of the Act would be $1.1 trillion over nine years.

Two other ads that are part of the buy were released online yesterday. “Smarter Spending Not Higher Taxes” targets Kaine, while “Nevada Taxpayers First” targets Berkley.

The remainder of the ads will air over a two-week period. It is not clear when that period began.

The ads are separate from the $25 million ad campaign targeting President Barack Obama that Americans for Prosperity announced in early August.

Americans for Prosperity is not required to disclose its donors thanks to its nonprofit status, but is connected to billionaire industrialists Charles and David Koch. Koch-backed organizations plan to spend an estimated $400 million on the 2012 elections, Politico reported in May.

Americans for Prosperity alone spent at least $1.3 million on political advertising during the 2009-2010 election cycle and has already spent at least $14.7 million this cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The organization bills itself as a “grassroots” advocate for free markets and limited government. It has also been called an “incubator” for the tea party movement.

Senate races have also drawn spending form Crossroads GPS, the nonprofit sister organization of super PAC American Crossroads as well as other conservative groups.

The organization announced a $4.2 million ad campaign targeting key Senate races in Ohio, Montana, New Mexico and Florida. Florida — where Democratic incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson faces Club for Growth-endorsed Republican Rep. Connie Mack — is a new target for Crossroads this year. The campaign also represents the first reported negative spending from the Crossroads camp in the New Mexico Senate race, where former Republican Rep. Heather Wilson faces current Rep. Martin Heinrich, a Democrat.

The conservative nonprofit American Future Fund announced yesterday that it spent $600,000 on two ads opposing Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., and former North Dakota attorney general Heidi Heitkamp. Both are running for Senate in their home states. The North Dakota ad, “Choice,” attacks Heitkamp for her support of Obama and the Affordable Care Act. The anti-Berkley ad, “Battle Born,” targets Berkley for corruption allegations she has faced in recent months.

In other spending news:

The nonprofit Republican Governors Association began airing an ad targeting Montana Attorney General Steve Bullock on Wednesday. “The Real Steve Bullock” claims the attorney general has been endorsed by “extreme environmentalists” — the Montana Conservation Voters, which calls itself “the political voice of Montana's conservation and environmental community.” The ad also derisively cites his C+ rating from the National Rifle Association. “Those aren’t Montana values,” the ad says.

Correction: A previous version of this story said Nevada was part of Crossroads GPS's new ad campaign. The four states that are part of the campaign are Ohio, New Mexico, Florida and Montana.

Donor profile: Robert Rowling

2013-01-23T12:59:20-05:00

Ranking: 14

Total contributions to super PACs: $6.1 million*

$6 million to American Crossroads (pro-Republican), including $2.5 million from TRT Holdings
$100,000 to Restore Our Future (pro-Mitt Romney)
$35,000 to Texas Conservatives Fund (pro-David Dewhurst)

Federal hard money and 527 contributions:

$95,000 to the Republican National Committee

Notable state-level contributions:

$113,000 to Texas judges and politicians (2012)
$103,000 to former Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas (2010)
$129,000 to Republican Texas Gov. Rick Perry (2010)
$100,000 to Greg Abbott, Texas attorney general (2002)

Corporate name: TRT Holdings, Inc.

Corporate subsidiaries: Gold’s Gym, Tana Exploration Co. and Omni Hotels and Resorts

Robert Rowling, the president, chairman and CEO of corporate conglomerate TRT Holdings, reached super donor status in August 2012 thanks to two $1 million contributions to the conservative super PAC American Crossroads, co-founded by fellow Texan Karl Rove. He ultimately gave $6 million to the conservative juggernaut.

Rowling made his fortune when he sold his father’s company, Tana Oil and Gas, to Texaco for $476.5 million in 1989. The proceeds of that sale were used to create and develop TRT Holdings, which now owns the Omni hotel chain, Gold’s Gym and Tana Exploration Co.

The Dallas Morning News described his eclectic holdings in a 2008 profile, saying, “He has amassed a grab bag of hotels, fitness centers, oil and gas assets, financial and energy stocks, a fifth of downtown Corpus Christi real estate, even a chain of Mexican dollar stores.”

Forbes estimates Rowling's worth at $4.8 billion.

In 2010, TRT Holding gave three donations totaling $2.5 million to American Crossroads, sparking controversy within a San Francisco Bay Area Gold’s Gym franchise, which disaffiliated from the brand after learning of Rowling’s contribution. The source of the problem was American Crossroads’ support for candidates who are opposed to gay rights.

Rowling had already been active in the 2012 election cycle before attaining super donor status, with two other $1 million donations to Crossroads and smaller donations to Restore Our Future and Texas Conservatives Fund, the super PAC that backed Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst in his failed bid for the U.S. Senate against tea party candidate Ted Cruz.

Rowling was born in Corpus Christi, Texas, in 1953. He earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of Texas at Austin and his law degree from Southern Methodist University. Rowling and his wife have two adult sons and currently live in Highland Park, Texas.

In January 2012, TRT announced it would move its headquarters from Irving, Texas, to Dallas, home of campaign finance bigwig Harold Simmons. The move — to a site developed by campaign finance heavyweight and commercial real estate magnate Harlan Crow’s Crow Holdings — will be complete in 2013.

Last updated: Jan. 17, 2013

Environmental groups target New Mexico Senate race

New Mexico,United States — 2012-08-22T11:48:22-04:00

U.S. Senate candidate Heather Wilson, a moderate Republican, has been on the receiving end of more than $1.4 million to date in attack ads urging voters in New Mexico not to vote for her.

But it’s not big-business-backed super PACs that are targeting her — it’s a who’s who of the nation’s largest environmental groups. Meanwhile, only $250,000 has been spent urging voters to reject her opponent, Democratic Rep. Martin Heinrich, all of it by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

The contest has gained national attention thanks to the retirement of highly popular, five-term Democratic incumbent Sen. Jeff Bingaman, which gives the GOP a chance to pick up a seat that was otherwise out of reach, and bring the party closer to seizing control of the Senate.

It is also a race where the lines are clearly drawn: Voters have a choice between a pro-union, conservationist in Heinrich and a pro-business, pro-energy candidate in Wilson.

The anti-Wilson spending seems to be helping. Polling group FM3 showed Heinrich with a 3 point lead in mid-May, a dead heat when considering the poll’s 4 point margin of error. The lead stretched to 9 points in the first week of August.

The ads are for “express advocacy,” meaning they urge voters to support or oppose a candidate — not included are “issue ads” that mention a candidate by name, usually in a fairly nasty way, but do not urge a yes or no vote. The Federal Election Commission does not require spending on those ads to be reported until 60 days prior to the general election.

New Mexico, the “Land of Enchantment,” possesses extraordinary beauty and complex politics.

President Barack Obama won the state by 15 points in 2008, yet it has a Republican governor, Susana Martinez. Once considered a potential running mate for presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, she has criticized the candidate’s immigration policy.

Former President George W. Bush eked out a victory in the state in the 2004 election, thanks to adequate support among Hispanic voters, who currently make up nearly 47 percent of the population. Obama is favored to win in 2012.

Wilson represented New Mexico’s 1st District — the same seat her opponent now holds — from 1998 to 2009. She then ran for Senate, losing in the primary to Rep. Steve Pearce, who was ultimately defeated by then-Rep. Tom Udall, now New Mexico’s junior U.S. Senator. She sat on the Energy and Commerce Committee, and energy companies were among her major backers.

Employees and political action committees from the oil and gas industry gave her more than $781,000 during her career in Congress, more than any other industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. So far in the 2012 race, oil and gas is again her top industry donor, having contributed more than $217,000 to her campaign.

Heinrich’s career top donor is the League of Conservation Voters, whose political action committee and members have given his campaigns more than $145,000, according to CRP. He is also a favorite of labor unions.

The sums expended by outside groups thus far have been considerable — especially with the race still more than two months away.

When including positive ads, the New Mexico race has so far attracted more than $2.7 million in independent expenditures made by outside groups, according to an analysis of FEC data by the Center for Public Integrity. The total includes spending by nonprofits and super PACs freed by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which allows them to accept unlimited contributions from individuals, unions and corporations.

As for the candidates themselves, Wilson has raised $3.9 million through June, according to FEC records, while Heinrich has raised $3.8 million.

The politically active arms of big-name conservationist groups like the Sierra Club, the League of Conservation Voters and the Natural Resources Defense Council have all run ads attacking Wilson. The League of Conservation Voters has spent more than $350,000 on independent expenditures opposing Wilson this cycle.

The groups have long opposed Wilson’s voting record, which is the reason for the attack ads, said Lonna Atkeson, a political science professor at the University of New Mexico.

“They want to influence the voters, but they also have a history with these candidates,” Atkeson said.

The League regularly releases a scorecard evaluating the pro-environmental voting record for every member of Congress. It gave Wilson a 15 percent favorable rating and Heinrich a 92 in its most recent release.

One anti-Wilson ad, jointly released by the League of Conservation Voters and the Defenders of Wildlife Action Committee, titled “Emma,” features a young schoolgirl drinking from a water fountain while the voiceover accuses Wilson of letting oil companies “off the hook” for using MTBE, a fuel additive that reduces harmful emissions in car exhaust and can contaminate groundwater.

The ad criticizes Wilson’s vote for a provision in energy bills from 2003 to 2005 that would protect oil companies from lawsuits involving MTBE contamination, a measure that was not included in the bill that eventually passed and became law.

Wilson is generally described as a moderate, but “she was going right along with George W. Bush and Karl Rove when she was in Congress,” said League of Conservation Voters spokesman Jeff Gohringer.

Wilson’s campaign dismisses the spending by conservation groups as the work of “environmental extremists” who have poured in “millions of dollars to falsely attack” Heather Wilson because she doesn’t support their “extremist job-killing agenda,” said campaign spokesman Chris Sanchez.

It is hard to say who is paying for the ad.

The Defenders of Wildlife Action Committee is a super PAC funded entirely by the League of Conservation Voters, Inc. and the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund, both nonprofits that do not disclose their donors.

Meanwhile, pro-business groups have been running ads attacking Heinrich. Campaign spokeswoman Whitney Potter accused “corporate special interests” of spending millions of dollars in “secret money” to distort Heinrich’s record.

Thus far, the only anti-Heinrich ad reported to the FEC is the $250,000 Chamber of Commerce spot, criticizing him for his votes opposing offshore drilling and extending the Keystone XL oil pipeline. Heinrich has said he supports clean, “home-grown” energy.

But that spending doesn’t include “Stands,” an anti-Heinrich issue ad from a mysterious nonprofit called American Commitment. The ad hasn’t been reported to the FEC, presumably because it falls outside the agency’s regulatory window for disclosure. Other such ads include “Frustrating” from American Future Fund and “Calendar” from Crossroads GPS, both non-disclosing nonprofits.

The Chamber will likely be heard from again before the election.

It plans to spend more than $50 million on the 2012 elections, chamber president and CEO Tom Donahue said in May. The Chamber is the nation’s largest business association, having spent more than $66 million on lobbying in 2011 and a little under $33 million on outside spending on political races during the 2010 election cycle, according to CRP. It has spent at more than $11 million so far this cycle.

“With control of the Senate in doubt there will be lots of interest and likely lots of outside spending there during the fall,” said Bob Biersack, a senior fellow at the Center for Responsive Politics.

Blair Latoff, a spokeswoman for the Chamber, declined to comment on how much the association plans to spend in New Mexico.

Not all the ads in this still-young race have been negative. The super PAC American Crossroads has paid for nearly $430,000 in pro-Wilson ads. Soon after Crossroads hit the airwaves in early June, environmentalist groups began running ads attacking Wilson’s record on the environment.

American Crossroads did not return requests for comment.

The candidates have also been buying airtime. Wilson on July 24 released an ad that attacks Heinrich for voting in favor of a tax on medical devices, calling him “too extreme for New Mexico.”

While it may seem early, Biersack says spending “often has the biggest impact when voters are forming their general impressions of candidates.”

The candidate’s views are subject to interpretation, but based on their advertising, the views of the outside spending groups are not. The election is being portrayed as a showdown between environmentalists and big business. And at least for the moment, the environmentalists appear to have the upper hand.

John Dunbar contributed to this report.

Daily Disclosure: Patriot Majority USA targets Koch brothers

2013-01-23T12:59:19-05:00

Liberal nonprofit Patriot Majority USA is behind two major ad campaigns that kicked off Tuesday. One targets billionaire GOP patrons Charles and David Koch and the other is a coordinated effort with super PAC Majority PAC targeting competitive Senate races in four states.

Patriot Majority USA’s $500,000 ad buy produced spots targeting the Koch brothers called “Greed Agenda” and a shorter version, “Tycoons.”

The minute-long “Greed Agenda” claims the Koch brothers are “buying this year’s election” with $400 million in spending, as Politico reported in May.

Patriot Majority USA claims the Koch brothers and the groups they fund support conservative candidates who will create “tax cuts for the rich, eliminate the minimum wage” and make “big cuts to our schools but big subsidies for oil companies.”

The Koch brothers are known for funding non-disclosing nonprofit groups like Americans for Prosperity, which support an anti-regulatory, free-market agenda. The Kochs are also major funders of conservative think tanks including the Cato Institute and the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

“Greed Agenda” and “Tycoons” are part of a larger campaign that Patriot Majority USA is calling “Stop the Greed Agenda.” The effort will extend into next year and include online and TV ads, direct mail and “citizen participation,” according to a press release from the nonprofit.

The second campaign, coordinated with Majority PAC, costs $1.6 million and features ads that will air in Indiana, Ohio, Montana and North Dakota.

“Means,” from Patriot Majority USA, criticizes Montana U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg’s votes to privatize Social Security. Rehberg is running against Democratic incumbent Jon Tester for U.S. Senate.
“Unconstitutional,” from Majority PAC, opposes Indiana Republican Richard Mourdock’s views on Social Security and Medicare. The tea-party backed Mourdock is running for Senate after besting six-term Sen. Dick Lugar in the state’s May primary.
“Stocked,” from Majority PAC, cites a Dayton Daily News report that says Ohio Republican Senate candidate Josh Mandel hired friends and college buddies when he was Ohio’s treasurer.
“Sly One,” also from Majority PAC, attacks North Dakota Republican Senate candidate Rep. Rick Berg for his votes on Medicare and Social Security.

In other outside spending news:

Super PAC Planned Parenthood Action Fund slams Republican Missouri Rep. Todd Akin for his remark that victims of “legitimate rape” rarely get pregnant and points out a number of other quotes from the congressman regarding his views on abortion.

WOMEN VOTE! spent nearly $662,000 on advertising opposing former Republican Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson, who is running for U.S. Senate in the state.

Union PAC SEIU COPE spent more than $223,000 on advertising to oppose presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.

The pro-life nonprofit Susan B. Anthony List Inc. made a series of independent expenditures targeting Obama and House and Senate candidates across the country.

Daily Disclosure: Republicans attack Obama over cancer ad

2012-08-10T15:14:08-04:00

The Republican National Committee and pro-Republican super PAC American Crossroads are attacking President Barack Obama over an ad released by super PAC Priorities USA Action that all but calls presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney responsible for a woman’s death from cancer.

The response comes in the form of... more ads.

“What Else?” from the RNC accuses the Obama campaign of lying about the extent of its connection to the Priorities ad. Coordination between candidates’ campaigns and super PACs is prohibited, but rules against it are difficult to enforce, as the Center for Public Integrity has reported.

In the Priorities ad, steelworker Joe Soptic says Romney’s former firm, Bain Capital, shut down the company he worked for and he lost his health insurance. His wife developed cancer but avoided going to the doctor because she had no coverage.

“I don’t know the facts of when Joe Soptic’s wife got sick, or when she died,” Stephanie Cutter, Obama’s deputy campaign manager, says during a TV news interview featured in the Republican ad.

The ad then cuts to a recording of a conference call where Cutter thanks Soptic, the steel worker, for “sharing your experiences.”

The ad never says what experiences Soptic was sharing.

“Cancer”, from American Crossroads, tries to pokes holes in the firewall that is supposed to exist between candidates’ campaigns and the super PACs that support them. The video does not come up in Web searches. The ad link was made public by Politico Friday morning.

In other outside spending news:

Conservative nonprofit Americans for Prosperity on Thursday released the ad “Ronald Reagan: Freedom Leads to Prosperity,” featuring a speech from the former Republican president.
Conservative nonprofit Crossroads GPS has announced it will pull the ad “Hiding Taxes,” after its target, former North Dakota Attorney General Heidi Heitkamp, complained, according to the Associated Press. Heitkamp, a Democrat, is running for Senate.
Also in North Dakota: Majority PAC, a super PAC that seeks to preserve the Democratic majority in the Senate, spent more than $106,000 on advertising to oppose Republican Rep. Rick Berg, a Senate candidate.
Pro-Obama super PAC Priorities USA Action spent $884,000 on an ad that will be used to oppose Romney.
Conservative super PAC Club for Growth Action spent nearly $477,000 on TV ads backing its favorite candidate — former Wisconsin Congressman Mark Neumann — and criticizing his two opponents in the Wisconsin Senate GOP primary. The race will be decided Tuesday. The group is attacking the state’s former governor Tommy Thompson and businessman Eric Hovde.
The Club dropped another $440,000 on TV and online ads opposing Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz. Gosar currently represents Arizona’s 1st District but is running for re-election in the 4th District due to redistricting.
The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee spent about $241,000 buying and producing ads in two hotly contested Senate races. The buys pay for ads that oppose former New Mexico Rep. Heather Wilson and Montana Congressman Dennis Rehberg.

Daily Disclosure: Crossroads hits Democratic Senate candidates

2012-08-09T13:07:48-04:00

The pro-Republican nonprofit Crossroads GPS on Wednesday announced a $3.4 million ad campaign attacking Democrats in four key Senate races.

Among them is "Sense," which claims Sen. Jon Tester of Montana was the “deciding vote” on the health care reform law. That’s not a new Republican line of attack, according to a March 2011 story in Politico, and has been used against other Democratic senators.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee claimed Tester was the 60th vote, the story points out. Tester’s office emailed a video of the Senate roll call vote, “which clearly shows Tester casting the 52nd vote,” according to the story.

"Hiding Taxes” targets Heidi Heitkamp, former attorney general of North Dakota, and claims she supports “higher taxes on small businesses” but doesn’t say how.
“People Over Government” targets vulnerable Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill with a similar claim. McCaskill will take on Republican Rep. Todd Akin, an arch-conservative, in November.
“Holes” attacks Tim Kaine of Virginia on taxes and spending.

“Pattern,” another Crossroads ad that is not part of the four-state campaign, attacks Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev. The ad, which cites a story in the Las Vegas Sun, claims she once urged her boss to “buy off judges with campaign cash."

Berkley’s boss was none other than Republican super donor Sheldon Adelson. She “advised Adelson to give favors to judges and county commissioners in return for favorable treatment” while she was an attorney working for his casino empire, according to the article. The tape containing that information emerged during Berkley’s first run for Congress, shortly after she had a falling out with the billionaire.

The Las Vegas Review-Journal in a story Wednesday said Berkley was advising Adelson on the way business was conducted in Las Vegas.

"I gave him the best advice I could under the circumstances," Berkley told reporter Jane Ann Morrison of the newspaper. "I do not agree with or condone the advice."

Crossroads is a nonprofit organization and is not required to reveal its donors. It was co-founded by Republican strategist Karl Rove.

In other outside spending news:

Friends of the Majority, a conservative super PAC, spent $373,000 on ads between July 31 and Aug. 7 opposing Rep. David Schweikert, R-Ariz., who is running for re-election. The ad calls the Republican “not Mr. Right for conservatives.”
Nonprofit Patriot Majority USA spent more than $468,000 on the production of two ads opposing Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., and Andrew Roraback, a Republican state senator from Connecticut, who is running for a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Pro-President Obama super PAC Priorities USA Action spent about $490,000 on digital and radio advertising and production opposing presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.
The New Prosperity Foundation, a Chicago-based super PAC spent $301,000 opposing Tammy Duckworth, Brad Schneider, David Gill, Bill Foster and Cheri Bustos — all Democrats running for the U.S. House in districts across Illinois.
SEIU COPE, the political action committee of the Service Employees International Union, spent more than $275,000 on literature and TV ads and production targeting Obama and Berkley (pro) and Romney (against).