Summer iPad Air Giveaway! 20 Under 40

Super-PACs outspending candidates’ campaigns

2012-02-22T00:04:00Z 2012-02-22T17:24:12Z Super-PACs outspending candidates’ campaignsThe Associated Press The Associated Press
February 22, 2012 12:04 am  • 

WASHINGTON -- An unmistakable dynamic is playing out in the money game among Republican presidential candidates: New "super" political action committees are growing more powerful than the campaigns they support.

For two of the GOP front-runners, their supportive super PACs raised more money and have more cash left in the bank than the candidates' own campaigns. Helping their efforts are major financial gifts from wealthy business executives, whose contributions can be essential to the groups' continued operations.

Mitt Romney-leaning Restore Our Future and Newt Gingrich-supportive Winning Our Future raised a combined $17 million last month and spent nearly $24 million during that same period. That financial strength allowed the groups to splash the airwaves in key primary states with millions of dollars in TV ads.

The proliferation of new super PACs continues to underscore how the groups, which can raise and spend unlimited sums, are influencing the race. The groups' fundraising last month offers a periodic behind-the-scenes glimpse into the identities of the rich supporters who will help elect the next president, along with details on how the millions of dollars they donated have been spent.

Restore Our Future, which had $16 million cash on hand, has been boosted by more than two dozen repeat donors. Winning Our Future, which had $2.4 million in the bank, is largely supported by casino mogul Sheldon Adelson and his wife.

Meanwhile, Romney raised $6.5 million last month and had $7.7 million left over for his presidential bid, while Gingrich's presidential campaign raised $5.5 million during the same period and had about $1.8 million in cash remaining.

The super PACs, as well as other groups supporting other candidates and the individual campaigns, were required to disclose how much they raised and the identities of their donors in reports filed with the Federal Election Commission by midnight Monday. Those reports provided a snapshot of fundraising for President Barack Obama's early campaign and for Republican candidates as they battled during important primary elections in January.

During the month, GOP candidates Gingrich and Rick Santorum had briefly surged ahead of Romney but trailed the former Massachusetts governor in fundraising. Since then, Santorum has climbed remarkably in polls while Gingrich's support has eroded just as stunningly following the former House speaker's disappointing showing in Florida's primary.

Restore Our Future has been a boon for Romney, who has benefited greatly from the group's TV ads attacking Gingrich in particular. Such ads were purchased thanks to the financial help of repeat donors, including Marriott International Chairman J.W. Marriott Jr., who has given the super PAC $750,000 to date.

The super PAC also reported new donors, including Hewlett-Packard CEO Meg Whitman. Romney mentored Whitman, recently an unsuccessful candidate for California governor, during the 1980s at Boston-based Bain & Co., the private equity firm Romney headed. Whitman's $100,000 check to Restore Our Future came days after she joined Romney at a celebration of his victory in the New Hampshire primary.

Restore Our Future counted on continued support from at least 30 repeat donors who, along with new contributors, gave a combined $6.6 million in January, according to a review of the reports by The Associated Press.

Meanwhile, Winning Our Future's $11 million in contributions during the same period came almost exclusively from Adelson, a friend of Gingrich's and a staunch supporter of Israel. Adelson and his wife, Miriam, each gave $5 million to the super PAC in January - a move that helped keep Gingrich's struggling campaign alive.

Other GOP-leaning super PACs reported major contributions.

Endorse Liberty, the group supporting Texas Rep. Ron Paul, reported roughly $2.4 million in donations, including $1.7 from the billionaire founder of PayPal, Peter Thiel of San Francisco.

Obama's campaign on Friday reported raising a combined $29.1 million in January among the campaign, the Democratic National Committee and other joint fundraising committees. The major super PAC backing Obama, Priorities USA Action, raised only $58,000 last month - mostly from a $50,000 contribution by Chicago businessman John Rogers - underscoring why Obama encouraged his supporters recently to give to the super PAC.

The reports likely will rekindle criticism of the groups, which were made possible under a 2010 Supreme Court ruling in the Citizens United case. The super PACs must legally remain independent from the candidates they support, but many are staffed with former campaign aides who have intimate knowledge of the campaigns' strategies.

Late Friday, the Supreme Court put on hold a Montana case that bore striking similarities.

Two justices said the newest case provides an opportunity for the court to reconsider whether millionaires and billionaires should be allowed to continue pouring millions of dollars into the presidential election.

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(4) Comments

  1. Ricky Bones
    Report Abuse
    Ricky Bones - February 24, 2012 10:48 am
    Tocqueville said it best in his book!
  2. Dianalicia
    Report Abuse
    Dianalicia - February 23, 2012 7:47 am
    Isn't it totally incredible that this kind of money can be raised in the blink of an eye and yet people are suffering throughout the country with lack of necessities.
  3. fxkane
    Report Abuse
    fxkane - February 22, 2012 12:29 pm


    Super-PACs are the name of the game, thanks to the right-tilted Supreme Court. I guess it wasn't enough that they presented George Bush with the Presidency. Now they have turned the election process over to the billionaires, thus making vote-counting corruption seem small in comparison.

    So much for the importance of our individual votes--and the "democratic process" itself. That is, whatever was left of it.
  4. brian
    Report Abuse
    brian - February 22, 2012 8:16 am
    Just a tip: posting an article with a picture of Christian Taliban leader Rick Santorum is not the best way to drive web traffic.

RULES FOR COMMENTING ONLINE

1) Comments must be contained to the topic of the articles only. Comments that stray from the direct subject of the article will be deleted.

2) Readers are free to comment on and debate other readers' comments, but comments must specifically address the issue(s) raised. Comments containing personal insults directed toward another reader in any form will be deleted.

3) Comments must be civil in tone, and there will be no name calling of any kind. Uncivil or inappropriate comments will be deleted, as will any comment containing profanities.

4) Comments critical of crime or accident victims will be deleted.

5) Comments that are potentially libelous, including those that contain accusations not supported by facts, will be deleted.

Commenters who abuse these policies will have their e-mail registrations revoked.

 

View the full commenting policy.

Thank you, and we hope you enjoy interacting with us and the community.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick

loading...

Search Homes for Sale

Search Classifieds