close
close

Pasteleria-edelweiss

Real-time news, timeless knowledge

Spending on legislative races soars as Democrats defend PA House • Agenda PA
bigrus

Spending on legislative races soars as Democrats defend PA House • Agenda PA

HARRISBURG — Elizabeth Moro is trying to reverse Republican resistance in Philadelphia’s mostly blue suburbs and is drawing plenty of support.

Tens of thousands of dollars from local and national interest groups poured into his State House campaign. At least one Hollywood celebrity also attended campaign events (OCs There were prominent figures in the Democratic party, including Adam Brody, a well-known gun control advocate (Fred Guttenberg, whose daughter was killed in a mass shooting), and Governor Josh Shapiro.

The 160th district, which includes parts of Chester and Delaware counties, has been represented by Republican state Rep. Craig Williams since 2021. His unusual situation makes him a prime target as Democrats seek to maintain or grow their one-seat majority in the Pennsylvania House.

“When I ran for Congress, it was very difficult and money was very tight,” Moro said. “This race… (people) came to my district like the governor. “They are all aware of the importance of this district.”

Moro’s race doesn’t just attract the attention of big names. It’s also one of 21 competitive legislative races bringing a historic wave of cash.

Spotlight PA analyzed campaign spending in these flippable districts between May 14 and October 21, the first financial report candidates filed after the primary and the last full pre-election report.

The analysis found that the average spending in a competitive state House or Senate race was $1.1 million and $3.5 million, respectively. Spending in the three races exceeded $4 million.

These totals represent only the money spent by each campaign and donations of in-kind goods or services, such as food and beverages and mail, to benefit the candidate. The actual price tag is likely to be higher if independent spending by outside groups is included.

There’s a lot at stake on November 5th. In addition to defending their state House majority, Democrats are taking another step toward flipping the state Senate, where Republicans hold a 28-22 advantage.

Control of a single chamber gives the party an advantage in policy negotiations with the governor. Complete control of the legislature by a single party gives it the power to set the agenda on key issues such as abortion, election law and taxes.

Following the most recent redistricting cycle, both the state House and Senate resulted in less competitive seats – means that no major party has an overwhelming majority in a region. This means more attention being paid to the fewer remaining competitive races.

Spotlight PA analysis shows Democrats have a competitive spending advantage in state Senate races, while Republicans have the same advantage in the state Senate.

Lehigh Valley-based Republican political operative Sam Chen recalled that a decade ago, the conventional wisdom was that a state House race could cost tens of thousands of dollars and “if you can raise six figures, you’re going to win.”

Looking at the current price tag, Chen said: “This is crazy. “These are not inflationary figures.”

Pennsylvania has always had a somewhat free-spending policy. The state places no limits on campaign donations, allowing interest groups and the wealthy to pour as much money as they want into state-level races. Governor or Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

But in recent years, that spending has begun to trickle down to state legislative races, fueled by out-of-state groups pouring national money into local elections.

Take Moro. Since May, it has received over $800,000 in major donations from both state and national organizations. Local controls include traditional Democratic allies like the state Democratic party, legislative leaders including state Rep. Matt Bradford (D., Montgomery) and labor unions like the Pennsylvania chapter of the American Federation of Teachers.

One major donor is the Washington, D.C.-based America’s Future PAC, which has contributed more than $150,000 to his campaign since May. PAC’s barebones website says it’s focused on donating “candidates who provide the majority.”

He raised $14 million this year, according to state campaign finance filings; less than 1% of that came from Pennsylvania donors. Instead, the PAC raised its millions from the rich and famous; these included prominent Democratic donor Jonathan Soros, who donated $2 million alone, as well as director Steven Spielberg, comedian Jimmy Fallon, actress Sarah Jessica Parker and heirs to the fortune created. By Walmart and Berkshire Hathaway.

The PAC, in turn, funneled its money to Democrats in swing states; That included nearly $6 million given to Pennsylvania candidates and Democratic campaign committees fighting to defend incumbents and flip seats.

The PAC for America’s Future said in a statement that state legislatures “are the most powerful force for change in this country, and we power campaigns to create majorities committed to defending democracy, protecting civil liberties, and improving the lives of their voters.”

“With so much at stake in this election, we are proud to do our part to bring together Americans who understand the importance of these races and provide the resources and support these candidates need to win,” the statement said.

This isn’t the PAC’s first time being active in Pennsylvania. He first registered with the state in 2020 and donated at least $7.7 million to Democrats in 2022 for their successful effort to flip the state House.

Moro, however, thinks that interest in the state legislature has increased after former President Donald Trump took office. He referred to the US Supreme Court’s overturning decision Roe v. wade and is trying to invalidate the 2020 election results, for example.

“I think more people are paying attention to state and local legislators because of what we saw in the 2020 elections, where states may be on the path to certifying elections,” Moro told Spotlight PA.

Republicans have their own big-money allies. Commonwealth Leaders Fund – a political action committee, funded almost entirely by Pennsylvania’s richest man Jeff Mourning — Spent at least $4.6 million on ads and mailers in competitive districts analyzed by Spotlight PA. Other PACs affiliated with Yass donated directly to candidates or campaign committees.

But spending by the Commonwealth Leaders Fund was not enough to offset national support for the new Democratic state House majority. The party’s campaign committee and candidates outperformed Republicans in at least 13 swing districts, according to Spotlight PA’s analysis.

At least $3.4 million was spent defending state Rep. Frank Burns (D., Cambria) in a district where voters went for Trump by 30 percent in 2020; this was the most expensive state House race analyzed by Spotlight PA.

By comparison, GOP rival Amy Bradley and her allies spent about $885,000. His campaign was funded almost entirely by the Commonwealth Leaders Fund, while the House Democratic Campaign Committee provided nearly all of Burns’ dollars.

The House Democratic Committee’s most recent campaign finance filing was not publicly available as of Nov. 1, so it’s unclear where the money came from. It has historically taken money from unions, trial lawyers and numerous national groups trying to elect Democrats.

A spokesman for the committee said it had raised $15.2 million from Pennsylvania, but did not disclose how much money it had raised in total since May.

HDCC Executive Director Madeline Zann said in a statement that the committee is “deeply grateful for the support that allows us to protect the interests of Pennsylvanians — especially as billionaires like Jeff Yass pour money into these races to buy out the Republican majority.”

The spending gap between Democratic and GOP candidates doesn’t surprise state Rep. Josh Kail (R., Beaver), chairman of the campaign arm of House Republicans. He expressed confidence that GOP candidates and their messages will help them prevail this year, even though Democrats are outpacing them.

“We knew this from the beginning, this was going to be House Republicans versus the world,” Kail told Spotlight PA. “And frankly, my money is on the House Republicans.”

But to build and maintain a majority in future elections, Kail said Republicans need to find their own steady stream of national money.

“The Republican Party needs to issue a nationwide wake-up call,” he added. “If we don’t start taking these State House seats seriously, there will be ramifications across the board.”

While Democrats have a spending advantage as they try to maintain their state House majority, Republican candidates for the state Senate outpaced all but one challenger in five competitive races.

In particular, the Republican leadership and the caucus’ campaign arm poured money into two competitive races outside Pittsburgh; one has a vulnerable GOP incumbent, the other has an open seat previously held by Democrats. Spending on these two races totaled nearly $11 million.

Money for Republican state Senate candidates comes mostly from traditional Republican allies in the state. In addition to checks from Yass-funded groups and the national Republican group backing legislative races in the state, there are also insurers, construction contractors, utility companies and fossil fuel interests; plus $800,000 from Philadelphia landlord and charter school operator Michael Karp.

Sarah Bryner, director of research at Washington, D.C.-based campaign finance tracker OpenSecrets, told Spotlight PA there’s a realization that previously low-profile state legislative and other statewide races could have national ramifications. As such, national political actors also started to pay attention.

But whether it’s a billionaire, a cadre of millionaires, or a group of small donors financing the races, the final say will always belong to Pennsylvanians who live within the borders of an important district.

“Generally speaking, it’s good to have more people supporting your cause,” Bryner said, “but if that many people aren’t alive and can’t vote for the issue they’re involved in, it doesn’t matter.”

The analysis excluded three competitive districts (HD-44, HD-88 and HD-137) because campaign finance information for at least one of the candidates was not publicly available as of Nov. 1.