10
Street roots
Jan. 6, 2012
Monied mayoral candidates, left to right; Eileen Brady, Charlie Hales and Jefferson Smith.
Movers, shakers and moneymakers
How Portland’s leading mayoral candidates are stacking up financially in a return to high-priced races
Janice Thompson is
the executive director
fo r Common Cause
Oregon. She is the
former head of
Democracy Reform
Oregon (which was
Previously known as
the Money in Politics
Research Action
Project) Common
Cause is a
nonpartisan,
nonprofit advocacy
organization founded
as a vehicle for
citizens to make their
voices heard in the
political process and
to hold their elected
leaders accountable to
the public interest.
BY JANICE THOMPSON
campaign liquidity. (See Table 1.)
Smith started later than Brady and Hales,
he 2012 Portland mayoral primary
hence his current third place spot in the
season started earlier than usual (in
fundraising race. That Smith has the capacity
the spring of 2011) when two
to catch up with his opponents is indicated by
candidates, Eileen Brady and Charlie Hales, his fundraising per day average of $1,425,
formed their political action committees in
which compares to daily fundraising averages
anticipation of facing Mayor Sam Adams’s
of $1,796 and $1,107, respectively for Brady
reelection bid. Comparatively, when Tom
and Hales. These daily averages also indicate
Potter ran for mayor in 2004 his first
the role that fundraising plays in how
contribution came on Sept. 29, 2003, even
candidates spend their time.
though his major opponent was a City
Both Eileen Brady and Jefferson Smith
Council member, Jim Francesconi, with
supported Voter-Owned Elections, the
significant fundraising capacity.
campaign finance reform program available to
Taking on an incumbent is tough so
Portland candidates from 2006 through 2010.
presumably Brady and Hales perceived
Portlanders voted out this alternative to
Mayor Adams as more vulnerable than typical private money fundraising by a narrow
Portland incumbents. As reported by
margin in November 2010. In order for
Willamette Week in January 2004, City
mayoral candidates to qualify for that reform
Council incumbents had lost only five times
program, they needed to collect at least
in 121 contests since 1970. After Mayor
1,500 $5 contributions. An emphasis on
Adams’ announcement that he wouldn’t run
garnering support from many small dollar
for re-election another candidate, Jefferson
donors is reflected in these candidates’ post
Smith, entered the race.
reform fundraising. Brady has raised money
Though there are other mayoral candidates from an estimated 1,320 contributors
running for election, this analysis will focus
followed by estimates of 828 contributors to
on Brady, Hales, and Smith. This article
Smith’s campaign and 473 contributors to
focuses on these three, because, like it or
Hales’ campaign. (See Table 2.)
not, the political reality is that viability is
The catch is that contributions in amounts
linked to fundraising capacity. Brady has
of $100 or less, even though they come from
raised the most money: $447,085 as reported
many people, comprise relatively small
through Jan. 2, followed by Hales with
percentages of total fundraising. As reported
$249,037, and Smith with $155,358. Hales
through Jan. 2, 20 percent of Smith’s total
and Smith have spent less money, so their
contributions come from an estimated 634
cash availability is $110,466 and $104,258,
respectively, compared to Brady’s $147,959
Election fundraising in Oregon
C O N T R IB U T IN G C O L U M N I S T
T
See MONEYMAKERS, page 11
Oregon candidates in state and local elections can
accept campaign contributions of any size from any
source. This is in contrast to federal campaigns where
contributions from individuals are limited to $2,500
while political action committees can only give $5,000
per election. Direct contributions from corporate
treasury dollars to federal candidates are banned.
independent expenditures are when individuals or
groups spend money on advertising without
consultation of the candidate they support. Even
before the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United
decision independent expenditures could be made by
individuals and political action committees. The door
opened by Citizens United is that independent
expenditures in support or opposing federal
candidates can be made using corporate treasury
dollars.
Independent expenditures in Oregon are relatively
rare in state and local campaigns since there are no
limits on direct contributions to candidates.
Campaign contributions and expenditures are
reported electronically by campaigns to the Secretary
of State and put into a searchable online database
called ORESTAR, Each contribution and expenditure
must be reported within 30 days and within 7 days in
the six weeks prior to an election. This continuous
reporting means that the data downloaded from
ORESTAR on Jan. 2 for this article will have changed
by the time of publication.
Table 1
Fundraising Summaries of 3 Major Portland Mayoral Candidates as Reported Through Jan. 2 *
Candidate
Eileen Brady
Charlie Hales
Jefferson Smith
Established PAC
April 29,2011
May 23, 2011
Sept. 16, 2011
Campaign Days Total Contributions Cash Available
249
$447,085
$147,959
225
$249,037
$110,466
109
$155,358
$104,258
‘ PAC equals political committee. Regarding Jefferson Smith the date noted is when he switched his legislative fundraising committee to
a focus on the mayor’s race. The number of days in the campaign are through January 2nd, which is the date contribution data in this
table and the rest of this article was downloaded from ORESTAR. Contribution figures include cash and in-kind donations and any loans
received.
For more information about the work of Common Cause Oregon,
gotowww.commoncause.org
Fundraising by Three Contribution Size Groups as Reported Through Januarv 2nd-
Dollar Amounts and %s of Total Fundraising and #s of Contributors
dM n n n
j
Candidate
$1,000 and up
$101 to $999
$100 or less* Total Fnnriraieinn
Eileen Brady
Charlie Hales
Jefferson Smith
$291,425
65%
122 contributors
$199,010
80%
45 contributors
$80,614
52%
59 contributors
--------------------- ----------------- - J _ u " u if lit > in g
$111,801
25%
330 contributors
$33,282
1 3%
_98 contributors
$42,890
28%
135 contributors
$43,858
10%
868 contributors
$16,744
7%
330 contributors
$31,855
20%
634 contributors
$447,085
100%
1320 contributors
$249 037
1 QQO/o
473 contributors
$155,358
, u v /o
100%
828 contributors
‘ Contributions of $100 or less dc
not have to be itemized by
individual donor. Rather those
contributions are reported as
aggregated dollar amounts. This
means it is impossible to know
exactly how many donors are
giving in the contribution
category of $100 or less. But an
estimate can be determined by
assuming that each of these
small donations is $50. Total
contributor numbers are derived
by adding the numbers of
itemized contributors with
estimates of numbers of those
JS'"9 contributions of $100 or