On Monday, we took a look at just where the money for the legislative districts is coming from. (See: Follow the Money - A Look at O'Halleran and Pierce Donations ) While Steve Pierce has raised the majority of his money from local contributors (57.55%), Senator Tom O'Halleran received 76.7% of his money from out-of-district donors.

The information on where individual contributions comes from is really only part of the story. If you look at just the amounts the two candidates have raised from individual contributors, they're about even. O'Halleran has received $55,858 and Pierce has received $55,481, which is of minor interest, since Pierce is the challenger.

But, what about the other money? The money from Political Action Committees (PACs) and the loans to their campaigns they've received? This money is significant. And, does it matter if the money comes from Democrats or Republicans? Does that say something about the candidates?

Steve Pierce's Personal Loans

Prescott's Mayor Jack Wilson disapproves of the fact that Pierce has loaned personal funds to his own campaign. Quite a lot, actually - as of the latest Financial Disclosure Statement, Pierce had put $160,000 of his own money into his campaign.

When Prescott eNews ran the editorial press release, "Democrat Activists Funding Republican Primary Candidate", Mayor Wilson posted two comments at the end of the story:

The Arizona Republic reported today that Steve Pierce has loaned his campaign $160,000!!! Steve Pierce continues to refuse to debate Senator O'Halleran and instead throws mud at him. Have you watched Pierce in a debate? Without his notes, he has no answers. How about a list of the contributors for the other $60,000 raised for his campaign? Let's see who they are.

...and:

After the August 21, 2008 Campaign Finance filing deadline, Steve Pierce lent his campaign another $40,000! That plus the $160,000 in previous loans makes $200,000 he has lent his campaign. He also reported $6,000 of in-kind contribution so his total contributions to his campaign are now at $206,000 for an elected office that pays $24,000 per year.

Considering that Mayor Wilson put in a large sum of money into his own campaign for Mayor a year ago, it seems inconsistent that he would now complain about Pierce's decision to do the same.

Actually, one alert reader noted the same thing, writing in part:

Unless someone has used Mayor Wilson’s name, I think we have a pot calling the kettle black situation. (Jack D. Wilson authored the post about Mr. Pierce donating to himself). Here is an excerpt from the Prescott Daily Courier dated September 1, 2007 about Jack D. Wilson’s fund raising, “And - fueled largely by his own money - challenger Jack Wilson easily outdistanced all eight of this year's council candidates…Wilson's records show that he made a number of contributions to his own campaign throughout the reporting period - for a total of $13,250.”

13,250 out of 19,000 (total amount raised by Mayor Wilson) dollars is almost 70 percent of his election fund. During the campaign Mr. Simmons loaned his campaign 2,750 dollars. If my math skills are holding out; that is close to a 500 percent difference. The total money may be less, but the area that Mr. Wilson sought to control is considerably smaller than district 1.

Prescott eNews asked Mayor Wilson by email why he is so upset about Pierce's decision to put that much money into his own campaign, writing:

Apparently you feel that Steve Pierce has donated too much money to his campaign. But, you donated a large sum to your own campaign, I know that Georgene Lockwood, who you support, has donated a good chunk to her campaign, Lora Lopas, who you also supported donated money to her own campaign; as a matter of fact, almost everyone has donated to their own campaign.

So, what's the problem with Steve Pierce doing the same? And if you think his contributions are excessive, at what point do they cross the threshold of being appropriate into excessive in your opinion?

In reply, we received a partial, terse answer from Mayor Wilson:

The amount.

Why Do It?

Pierce explained why he has put so much money into his campaign with one simple sentence, "I have loaned money to my campaign because I believe in what I am trying to do."

O'Halleran admits that Pierce can put in however much he wants to, although he also echoed Wilson's comments, "No, he's entitled to donate as much as he wants. It's his campaign and if he wants to spend as much as he wants, that's what the law says he's entitled to. The only thing that I look at is this is a $24,000 a year job. But, if he wants to spend $200,000 or $300,000 to get a $24,000 a year job, that's his business."

But, Pierce surely isn't running for the paycheck. When asked, Pierce wrote, "I am running because I believe that we are not getting the representation we deserve in rural Arizona or here in the Prescott area. Everything is more centered on Maricopa and Pima counties. I am proud to be from the conservative stronghold of Arizona, Yavapai County. I am not proud of the way we have been represented in the legislature since Ken Bennett left. Jake Flake was a good friend. He convinced me that if I wanted to give something back and do some good for rural AZ, run for LD1. Too bad he won't be there to help me... I don't need a job. I have one running the ranch and being a dad and granddad."

While O'Halleran did not make any personal loans of his own to his campaign, his wife made a $15,000 loan to the campaign, and another family member loaned the campaign $3,523.07. Since then, he has repaid $3500 of the loan to his wife.

About Those Spending Limits

In the meantime, having Pierce put in that much of his personal money has a weird sort of benefit for O'Halleran. You see, the campaign laws say that if your opponent puts in his own funds, you are allowed to accept any donations for any amount until you reach the same level of money that your opponent has. So, essentially, that means O'Halleran doesn't have to limit his donors to a meager $390 bucks. He can take much larger checks - and he has. Some of the individual contributions he has received have been as high as $1000 or $1200.

All together, he's had seven checks that have gone over the standard spending limits, which is ok, because those laws don't apply in this case.

And, speaking of limits, PAC money is also supposed to be limited. But, again, because Pierce has loaned money to his campaign, O'Halleran's PAC donors do not need to be bound by such limits. For example, one PAC donation to O'Halleran's campaign was from Greenberg Traurig, an internationl attorney firm out of Miami, Florida. Since O'Halleran didn't have to abide by campaign contribution limits, the firm was able to send him an additional $2000 for a total of $2390.

Who Is Donating?

Evidently, there are a lot of local people who also believe in what Pierce is trying to do, because the vast majority of Pierce's donations come directly from people in Prescott, Prescott Valley or Chino Valley - 129 out of 223 donors are specifically from the tri-city area. There are too many names to list here, but you can check out the individual people who donated at the Arizona Secretary of State's website (see sidebar). Most are well-known Republicans from the area, such as local businessman, Mike Fann, who held a fundraiser for Pierce. Local donors were generous - 35 of those donations were for the fullest amount allowed by law: $390.

Pierce explained why he thinks it's important to receive local donations, "I am a native Arizonan that grew up on a ranch in Yavapai County. I want our area to remain as beautiful as it is for future generations. With so many people that have moved here and more that will move here, we need to look to the future and plan carefully for our infrastructure and resources and do it on a local basis with less government interference, less taxes, less mandates and regulations on our lives so our grandchildren can live and grow with economic prosperity in our beautiful area. I am running for office because I see issues that I feel will hurt our area in the long term. We have growth being directed by outsiders, property rights slowly being taken away by the State government, and our way of living here being changed. We need a voice united in the direction our Ld1 should grow to maintain it as we want, not what someone from somewhere else wants for us. That's why its important that our elections are funded by locals. They know the concerns and are involved with their hearts and their dollars to support the candidate that cares about their issues and will represent them best."

In contrast, O'Halleran had only 27 donations from the tri-city area, 5 of them were for the maximum $390. Of course, O'Halleran's home town is in Sedona, and he did pick up 30 more donations from the local folks there. Three were for the maximum $390, and one even took advantage of the "no limits" situation, donating $1000.

Mayor Wilson is a Tom O'Halleran supporter. Wilson was a little cagey when asked about his party affiliation, writing, "At the time that I attended the Democracy for America (DFA) Grassroots Campaign training, I was a registered Democrat." And, according to public records, he is still a registered Democrat.

O'Halleran's local fundraising event in Prescott, was held at the home of Mayor Wilson, and called a "Meet and Greet". Don't be confused by the name, it was definitely an event meant to raise money. A reminder email which was sent out read, "Tom needs your financial support to help him be reelected. If you are unable to join us, please send checks directly to..."

When asked about whyy he held a fundraiser for O'Halleran, Wilson responded in this manner:

One of the reasons the current political system is broken is that both of the major parties demand strict allegiance along party lines. That is not the principle used by the founders of this country. Our founders were a diverse group of people that discussed their differences and put together a Constitution that has survived the test of time.

I do not endorse “litmus tests.” My political affiliation does not determine whom I will support. I have always been a person who considers all sides of an issue. I try to avoid the myopic viewpoints that our major political parties consider as dogma. I consider myself an issues person.

I look at peoples stand on issues and then I support the person whom I believe has the best stance on the issues. It might surprise you and others that I recently signed on (with the Mayor of Flagstaff) to an op-ed piece in the Washington Post that defended Senator John McCain. The Post had run an editorial that I did not agree with, hence my support of McCain. Senator McCain called me personally to thank me for that.

I conducted a “Meet and Greet” for Senator Tom O’Halleran recently. Tom is a registered Republican. I also did a “Meet and Greet” for Ann Kirkpatrick, a registered Democrat, recently. As I stated above, I consider myself an issues person rather that a political party lemming. I personally felt that both of these people were the best candidates for the offices they are seeking. I have known both of these candidates personally for over two-years. I have worked with both of them. For example, Senator O’Halleran was instrumental in arranging the meetings with NAU President Dr. John Haeger, Arizona Board of Regents members and Yavapai College President Dr. Jim Horton that resulted in the recently announced four-year degree programs offered by NAU on the Prescott Yavapai College campus.

Despite the Meet and Greet, the vast majority of O'Halleran's support came from outside the district, namely Phoenix, Scottsdale and Tucson. Of his 305 donations, 147 came from those three cities alone. And, evidently the folks down south think he's doing a good job, because that's where six of seven additional contributions over $390 came from. (Another was from Paradise Valley, which is in the same metropolitan area.)

PAC Money

Both candidates received PAC money. PACs are Political Action Committees, and according to MSN Encarta, a PAC is an "organization established by businesses, labor unions, and other interest groups in the United States to channel financial contributions into political campaigns. PACs solicit contributions, pool the funds, and make donations to the campaigns of candidates for national, state, and local offices.... Most PAC money goes to incumbent candidates, who usually have a better chance to win than their challengers. Nearly two-thirds of the PACs represent corporations, trade associations, and other business and professional groups. Alliances of bankers, lawyers, doctors, farmers, manufacturers, and merchants all sponsor PACs."

To boil it down to plain words, PACS hope to influence elections by donating money to candidates.

O'Halleran's PAC money comes from groups such as the AEA Fund for Public Education and the Arizona Dental Association PAC. He's also taken PAC money from Pinnacle West and from Qwest to name a few.

Some of the PAC money is from law firms, such as the Lewis and Roca Partners Political Action Committee. As mentioned earlier, Greenberg Traurig PAC donated $2390.

Greenberg Traurig is one of the largest legal firms in the country, and is based in Miami, Florida. In 2001, Greenberg Traurig hired Jack Abramoff, who helped bring in to the firm $25.5 million by 2003. In 2004, Abramoff was fired from the firm, but many of the people he brought with him to the firm were allowed to stay. Since then, there have been a variety of scandals associated with the firm in which Greenberg Traurig itself or the attorneys were fined, disbarred and even sent to jail.

O'Halleran has received donations from 31 PACs in the last two reporting periods.

Steve Pierce has accepted PAC money from 6 PACs. Pierce who's known for the slogan, "I'm a Rancher, Not a Politician," has attracted PAC support that seems to reflect that. He's been given donations from the Western Growers PAC and the AG PAC of the Arizona Farm Bureau Federation. And a $390 donation came from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, which states, "The Club lobbies Arizona lawmakers in support of policies that allow the market to flourish and vigorously opposes policies that hinder private industry."

How Much Does It Matter?

Does it really matter if the money came from PACs or personal donations? Local or out-of-district donors? Shouldn't people have a right to spend their own money without being judged harshly? If it's legal to take money from PACs, isn't it okay?

And, should anyone care if Democrats are supporting Republicans? Does that mean a candidate won't be true to his Republican roots? 

Those are all questions that each voter needs to decide for themselves.

The good news is that voters in Yavapai County tend to be smart and thoughtful. 

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (1)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

...
written by Adam L. Rowling, August 27, 2008

I was ready for Mayor Wilson’s response and intentionally left it out of my first post. The population of Prescott is 33,938. Mr. Wilson used 13,250 of his own money. That is 39 cents per person. Mr. Pierce loaned 200,000 and the population of district one is 641,329 and he spent 31 cents per person. Mr. Wilson, what is an appropriate amount of money to loan yourself in an election?

Links to population data:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/elections/keyraces/census/az/district-1/

http://prescott.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +2