Contribution Trends in State and Federal Elections
The amount of money being poured into political campaigns is flourishing. This new report takes a look at the past 20 years of data to develop a forecast for the next decade’s contribution trends at the state and federal levels among candidates, parties and political action committees.
Contribution Trends in State and Federal Elections
July 2010
FOREWORD
Sagac Public Affairs is evaluating contribution trends at the state and federal levels to determine giving amounts and trends among candidates, parties and political action committees (PACs).
The purpose of this analysis, prepared from among several sources of data including the National Institute of Money in State Politics, U.S. Census Bureau, Federal Election Commission, Citizens for Responsive Politics and media outlets, is to collect and publish the underlying data as part of the dialogue on campaign spending. The analysis addresses subjective factors such as redistricting, revised state campaign finance laws and relative financial competitiveness.
The following parameters were the basis of our data collection:
- Compile and analyze state and federal contributions from the 1990 – 2010 election cycles where available;
- Analyze the impact of state and federal campaign finance laws;
- Determine the potential impact of the 2010 Census and subsequent redistricting on state and federal campaigns contributions.
This report is intended to be an informative historical review of past two decade’s activities, as well as to project the growth of state and federal dollars in elections.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. State Contribution Trends
A. Contribution Trends
B. Campaign Finance Laws
2. Federal Contribution Trends
A. Contribution Trends
B. Campaign Finance Laws
C. Apportionment
3. Conclusions
A. General analysis
Appendix A: State Data Tables
Appendix B: Federal Data Tables
SECTION I: STATE CONTRIBUTION TRENDS
A. Contribution Trends
The most complete data available for each state compares the contributions made during the 1990 to 2008 election cycles. While state data from 2010 elections is available in some cases the amount of information available for this year is not enough to be statistically significant for the purposes of this analysis. State data before 2000 is only reported based on availability. A mixture of “hard dollars” and “soft dollars” are included in this analysis due to many states permitting both types of funds for state political activities. Data from the 2010 elections is in the process of being compiled by most State Divisions of Elections.
- Average total contributions among state elections increased 43 percent from 2000 to 2008 ($1,671,920,449 to $2,926,539,436[2]).
- During Presidential election years, 2000, 2004 & 2008, the average total contributions among state elections decreased by 18.5 percent per cycle.
- During non-Presidential election years, giving increased by 33.3 percent on average when compared to previous elections.[3]
- The average individual contribution to a state candidate has increased 21 percent over the last four cycles having been as low as $709 in 2000 and up to $900 in 2008 with single contributions ranging in size from $1 to as high as $10,000. [4]
- The average individual contribution to a state candidate has increased 88 percent from 1996 to 2010 with single contributions as low as $465 in 1996. [5]
B. Campaign Finance Laws
- Since 2000, public funding laws have decreased existing limits in; Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Idaho, New Jersey and Nebraska.
- However, Alaska (57%) and New Jersey (4%) are the only states where total giving increased while limits went into effect.[6]
- Public funding limits have increased with opposing results in Washington State, with an average decrease of 18.5 percent from 2000 – 2010.[7]
- States with public funding limit increases that have also had contribution increases since the inception of the new laws are: Arizona (43%), Montana (1%), New York (8.5%), Vermont (18%), and Ohio (74%) between 2000 and 2010.[8]
- California, South Dakota, and Wyoming had unlimited giving in 2000, but have set limits on their contributions, while Nebraska has adopted unlimited giving.[9]
SECTION II: FEDERAL CONTRIBUTION TRENDS
A. Contribution Trends
The most complete data available for federal campaigns is available from the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The data below represents “hard dollar” contributions from 1990 through 2010.
- Total contributions to all federal candidates increased 94 percent from $1.653 billion in 2000 to $2.193 billion in 2010, an increase of 580 percent since 1990.[10]
- Between the 2006 and 2008 election cycles, U.S. House and U.S. Senate candidate contributions from individuals decreased 36 percent.[11]
- Total PAC contributions to federal candidates increased 10 percent from $139 million in 1990 to $174 million in 2008 (a per cycle increase of 17 percent).[12]
- Between the 2006 and 2008 elections cycles PAC contributions to U.S House and U.S. Senate candidates increased 1 percent.[13]
B. Campaign Finance Laws
- Campaign finance reform legislation from 2000 – 2010 increased the maximum contribution to federal candidates from individual donors from $1,000 to $2,400 per election through indexing of individual contributions.
- Contributions from political action committees remain at $5,000 per election per candidate.[14]
C. Apportionment
- Congressional apportionment will primarily affect 18 states during the 2010 election cycle. Texas will gain 4 seats; Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Nevada, South Carolina, Utah and Washington will gain 1 seat; Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania will lose 1 seat; and Ohio will lose 2 seats.[15]
- Apportionment has historically caused the retirement of an average of 42 House members and 5 Senators in the following election cycle.[16]
SECTION III: CONCLUSIONS
A. General Analysis
The amount of money being poured into state and federal political campaigns is flourishing. Contributions from PACs and individuals have increased at a per cycle rate of 17 percent and 9 percent respectively from 2000 – 2008. State campaign contributions have grown at three times the rate (21 percent per cycle) during the last 10 years.
Based on these trends, state and federal campaigns could need almost twice the amount of contributions by the 2020 elections. In addition, the average contribution to a state candidate could grow by an additional $1,000 by 2020.
Term Limit legislation has had little overall affect on state contribution trends, except during the first year when the laws forced officeholder retirements and many legislators seek to run for higher office. Once established, the routine pattern of ascension to higher office has no greater effect on the costs of campaigning than do other factors.
Apportionment and the subsequent redistricting that will occur by 2012 will significantly increase the number of competitive races in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate.
State campaign finance laws have had various effects on campaign contributions and spending. Lower limits have precipitated a 76 percent drop in dollar amount of contributions given in those states. In states where lower limits have replaced higher ones, the volume of contributions have increased.
[2] Appendix A: State Contributions 2000 – 2008
[3] Appendix A: Average Contribution Amount 1996 – 2010
[4] Appendix A: Average Contribution Amount 1996 – 2010
[5] Appendix A: Average Contribution Amount 1996 – 2010
[6] Appendix A: State Campaign Finance Laws 2000 – 2010
[7] Appendix A: State Campaign Finance Laws 2000 – 2010
[8] Appendix A: State Campaign Finance Laws 2000 – 2010
[9] Appendix A: State Campaign Finance Laws 2000 – 2010
[10] Federal Elections Commission
[11] Appendix B: Summary of Candidate Activity 1988 – 2008
[12] Appendix B: Summary of PAC Activity in House & Senate Races 1986 – 2009
[13] Appendix B: Summary of PAC Activity in House & Senate Races 1986 – 2009
[14] Federal Election Commission
[15] Appendix B: Apportionment Population and Number of Representatives by State, U.S. Census Bureau Estimates
[16] Appendix B: Roll Call, Politics, “Looking Homeward”, Van Dongen, February 26, 2001
Click here to download Appendix A and Appendix B.
