Table Of Content?
DAVID B. MAGLEBY
J. QUIN MONSON
EDITORS
The Last
Hurrah
Soft Money and
Issue Advocacy
in the 2002
Congressional
Elections
file 00 isbn0-8157-5436-1 Magleby front.qxd 3/11/2004 10:17 AM Page i
the
Last Hurrah?
file 00 isbn0-8157-5436-1 Magleby front.qxd 3/11/2004 10:17 AM Page ii
file 00 isbn0-8157-5436-1 Magleby front.qxd 3/11/2004 10:17 AM Page iii
the
Last Hurrah?
Soft Money and
Issue Advocacy in the
2002 Congressional Elections
David B. Magleby
J. Quin Monson
editors
Brookings Institution Press
Washington, D.C.
file 00 isbn0-8157-5436-1 Magleby front.qxd 3/11/2004 10:17 AM Page iv
ABOUT BROOKINGS
The Brookings Institution is a private nonprofit organization devoted to research, educa-
tion, and publication on important issues of domestic and foreign policy. Its principal pur-
pose is to bring knowledge to bear on current and emerging policy problems. The Institu-
tion maintains a position of neutrality on issues of public policy. Interpretations or
conclusions in Brookings publications should be understood to be solely those of the
authors.
Copyright © 2004
THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION
1775 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036
www.brookings.edu
All rights reserved
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data
The last hurrah? : soft money and issue advocacy in the 2002 congressional
elections / David B. Magleby and J. Quin Monson, editors.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-8157-5436-1 (cloth : alk. paper)
ISBN 0-8157-5437-X (pbk. : alk. paper)
1. Campaign funds—United States. 2. Pressure groups—United States. 3. United
States. Congress—Elections, 2002—Case studies. I. Magleby, David B. II. Monson,
J. Quin. III. Title.
JK1991.L37 2004
324.973'0931—dc22 2004000215
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
The paper used in this publication meets minimum requirements of the
American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for
Printed Library Materials: ANSI Z39.48-1992.
Typeset in Sabon
Composition by Betsy Kulamer
Washington, D.C.
Printed by R. R. Donnelley
Harrisonburg, Virginia
file 00 isbn0-8157-5436-1 Magleby front.qxd 3/11/2004 10:17 AM Page v
Contents
Preface vii
1 The Importance of Outside Money in the 2002
Congressional Elections 1
David B. Magleby
2 Party Money in the 2002 Congressional Elections 36
David B. Magleby and Nicole Carlisle Squires
3 Interest-Group Electioneering in the 2002
Congressional Elections 63
David B. Magleby and Jonathan W. Tanner
4 Get On TeleVision vs. Get On The Van: GOTV and
the Ground War in 2002 90
J. Quin Monson
5 From Intensity to Tragedy: The Minnesota
U.S. Senate Race 117
William H. Flanigan, Joanne M. Miller,
Jennifer L. Williams, and Nancy H. Zingale
6 Battle for the Bases: The Missouri U.S. Senate Race 137
Martha Kropf, E. Terrence Jones, Matt McLaughlin,
and Dale Neuman
v
file 00 isbn0-8157-5436-1 Magleby front.qxd 3/11/2004 10:17 AM Page vi
vi contents
7 The More You Spend, the Less They Listen:
The South Dakota U.S. Senate Race 159
John Bart and James Meader
8 Strings Attached: Outside Money in Colorado’s
Seventh District 180
Daniel A. Smith
9 Incumbent vs. Incumbent in Connecticut’s Fifth District 205
Sandra M. Anglund and Sarah M. Morehouse
10 When Incumbents Clash, Fundamentals Matter:
Pennsylvania Seventeen 225
Stephen K. Medvic and Matthew M. Schousen
11 When Redistricting Means Never Having to Say
You’re Sorry: Utah’s Second District 241
Kelly D. Patterson
12 The Consequences of Noncandidate Spending,
with a Look to the Future 258
David B. Magleby and J. Quin Monson
appendixes
A Studying the Noncandidate Campaign:
Case Study and Survey Methodology 281
J. Quin Monson and Stephanie Perry Curtis
B Interviews Conducted by CSED Researchers 299
Contributors 303
Index 305
file 00 isbn0-8157-5436-1 Magleby front.qxd 3/11/2004 10:17 AM Page vii
Preface
This book examines campaign finance in federal
elections in 2002, the last time campaign financing was governed by the
Federal Elections Campaign Act (FECA). The surge in party soft money
spending that we document here continued a trend begun in 1996 when
parties began using large amounts of soft money for candidate promo-
tion purposes. The day after Election Day 2002, FECA was superseded
by the substantially different Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA),
which bans party soft money, a fact used by both parties to encourage
even more soft money contributions in 2002.
Interest groups have also recently expanded their expenditures on
federal elections through a device called issue advocacy. As interpreted
by the Supreme Court under FECA, communications that did not use
words such as vote for or vote against were determined to be about an
issue and not the election or defeat of a candidate. This narrow and
unrealistic definition allowed groups to expend unlimited and undis-
closed amounts of money in a small set of competitive races with the
clear intent ofinfluencing the outcome.
Both soft money and electioneering issue advocacy activities could
rely on corporate and union general funds, technically referred to as
treasury funds, and allowed corporations or unions to support political
parties or candidates in ways that would otherwise be blocked. BCRA
restores the longstanding ban on the use of corporate and union treas-
ury funds in electioneering. We titled our book The Last Hurrah?
because passage of BCRA may mean the 2002 election cycle is the last
vii
file 00 isbn0-8157-5436-1 Magleby front.qxd 3/11/2004 10:17 AM Page viii
viii preface
hurrah of soft money as we know it. We inserted a question mark in the
title because it remains to be seen how much soft money finds other out-
lets in the campaign finance system in 2004 and beyond. The research
reported in thisbook establishes a benchmark against which to compare
the changes in interest group and party activity under this new cam-
paign finance law.
Our methodology in monitoring noncandidate electioneering efforts
relies on systematic data collection and elite interviewing in a set of
competitive congressional races. To establish a frame of reference for the
competitive races we also studied a set of control races. In 2002 our
sample of competitive races numbered 25, and we also observed cam-
paigns in 17control races. This book builds on similar studies organized
by the Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy (CSED) in 1998
and 2000. Across the three election cycles we have now collected data
on all forms of campaign communication in 81 contests. Our research
on the 2002 election, as well as the earlier studies in 1998 and 2000,
were funded by a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts, whose support
in funding original research in the areas of campaign conduct and cam-
paign finance is extraordinary. We express appreciation to Sean Treglia,
a superb program officer at Pew; Michael Delli Carpini, who directed
the organization’s Public Policy Program; Paul Light, who was the direc-
tor of the Public Policy Program during our initial project in 1998 and
has remained supportive of our work; and Pew President Rebecca Rimel
for her continuing trust and confidence.
This kind of systematic coordinated data collection would not be
possible without academics in the districts and states in our sample com-
mitting significant time and effort to this project. Our association with
them on a truly collaborative effort is one of the most rewarding aspects
of this research. We gratefully acknowledge the good work of Owen
Abbe (University of Maryland); Sandra M. Anglund and Sarah M.
Morehouse (University of Connecticut); Lonna Rae Atkeson, Nancy
Carrillo, and Margaret C. Toulouse (University of New Mexico); Jay
Barth (Hendrix College); Janine Parry (University of Arkansas); David
A. Breaux (Mississippi State University); Chris Carman (University of
Pittsburgh); William Flanigan, Joanne Miller, and Jennifer Williams
(University of Minnesota); Nancy Zingale (University of St. Thomas);
Eric S. Heberlig (University of North Carolina–Charlotte); E. Terrence
Jones and Matt McLaughlin (University of Missouri–St. Louis); Martha
Kropf and Dale Neuman (University of Missouri–Kansas City); Drew
file 00 isbn0-8157-5436-1 Magleby front.qxd 3/11/2004 10:17 AM Page ix
preface ix
Linzer (University of California–Los Angeles), David Menefee-Libey and
Matt Muller (Pomona College); James Meader and John Bart (Augus-
tana College); Stephen K. Medvic and Matthew M. Schousen (Franklin
and Marshall College); Kelly Patterson (Brigham Young University);
Joseph A. Pika (University of Delaware); David Redlawsk (University of
Iowa); Arthur Sanders (Drake University); John Roos and Christopher
Rodriguez (University of Notre Dame); Daniel A. Smith (University of
Denver, now with University of Florida); Frederic I. Solop and James I.
Bowie (Northern Arizona University); Michael W. Traugott (University
of Michigan); Craig Wilson (Montana State University–Billings); J.
Mark Wrighton (University of New Hampshire). Space did not permit
us to include all of these case studies in this book. The initial version of
these case studies can be found at http://csed.byu.edu, and updated ver-
sions of all case studies were published as an electronic symposium in
conjunction with the July 2003 issue of PS: Political Science and
Politics, available at www.apsanet.org/PS/july03/toc.cfm.
We also acknowledge the hard work and professionalism of our
research associates at the Center for the Study of Elections and Democ-
racy (CSED)—Stephanie Perry Curtis, Jennifer Jensen McArthur, Nicole
Carlisle Squires, and Jonathan Tanner. Stephanie, Jennifer, Nicole, and
Jonathan, all recent Brigham Young University (BYU) graduates,
worked full time on the project for a year or more, while Emily Walsh
was involved in the project’s early planning. The research associates pro-
vided assistance to the academics in the field, managed the websites,
coordinated database construction, conducted data entry and cleaning,
scheduled and accompanied us on interviews, analyzed a variety of data,
transcribed interviews, edited the book manuscript, and much more.
Their significant contribution to the overall effort is apparent to anyone
familiar with the day-to-day operations of CSED. Jennifer Jensen and
later Jonathan Tanner worked on our project from space provided us in
Washington, D.C., by the Center for Public Integrity (CPI). We are most
grateful to Charles Lewis and his associates at CPI for their hospitality
and collegiality. BYU undergraduates Analisa Underdown, Jeffrey R.
Makin, Susan Christiansen, Eric McArthur, Andrew Jenson, and Elliott
D. Wise also provided research assistance. Marianne Holt Viray, Eric
Smith, Jason Beal, and Anna Nibley Baker, research associates from the
1998 and 2000 projects, provided timely advice on this project as well.
In addition to the able editorial assistance provided by Nicole Carlisle
Squires, we are grateful for the editing provided by Elaine Tomlinson,
Description:The Last Hurrah presents a comprehensive analysis of the role soft money and issue advocacy play in congressional elections. It also documents the extent of campaigning done through the mail, on the telephone, and in person in competitive races. David Magleby and J. Quin Monson provide detailed cove
