Wednesday, October 22, 2014

2014 Mid Term Elections to Cost Almost a Whopping 4 Billion Dollars...

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Purveyor of Truth

If one wants to know the problem with our political system they need look no further than the money. has pegged the cost of the upcoming mid term elections at almost four billion dollars. Given the gridlock, political ineptitude, lack of serious statesmanship (predominately on the art of republicans), and the generally dismal state of the nation that has dogged us for the last six years and more shouldn't this colossal waste of resources be questioned?

Almost $4 billion will be spent for this year’s midterm election, the Center for Responsive Politics is projecting. That figure makes this year’s election by far the most expensive midterm ever. The candidates and parties alone will combine to spend about $2.7 billion, while outside groups will likely spend close to $900 million on their own — a figure that veers close to the $1.3 billion spent by outside groups in 2012, when the hyper-expensive presidential race was fueling the fire.

By the end of the battle, when totals for every category are added together, Team Red will outspend Team Blue, CRP projects. GOP and conservative-leaning candidates, party committees and outside groups will spend at least $1.92 billion, compared to at least $1.76 billion their rivals on the Democratic and liberal-leaning side will spend.


As with the 2012 cycle, the explosion in outside money is a dominant theme of this election’s spending story. So far, at least $663.3 million has been spent by outside groups like super PACs and 527s (a figure that is current within the last 48 hours), but CRP’s projections based on the pattern in the 2012 cycle indicate that at least another $233.5 million remains to be spent in the 12 days before Nov. 4; that’s a rate of $19.4 million a day.

Overall, liberal outside groups — including 527s — have spent $308.9 million so far, while conservative groups have spent $327.1 million. CRP is projecting that by Election Day, that dynamic will have flipped, with liberal outside groups slightly outspending conservative outside groups, $433 million to $424 million.

Those figures, however, come with a major caveat. Our estimate is based on spending disclosed to the FEC. Again, certain ads don’t have to be reported, and it’s difficult to get a fix on exactly how much they cost. ...

Overall, it’s likely that at least $100 million in spending is not being counted, and that money leans distinctly to the right, records filed with the Federal Communications Commission indicate. If that’s an accurate estimate, any advantage the liberal outside spending groups have over conservative ones will be washed away by Election Day.


Via: Memeorandum


  1. RN: “… until the majority realizes they are being played not much is going to change.

    This statement captures my thinking as well, especially with regard to the following:

    In an Associated Press report today (Oct 23, 2014 - 5:04 AM) - unbeknownst to voters – millions of dollars paid for ballot measures have been funded by large corporations and advocacy groups. These measures are not necessarily in the public interest; all too many of these initiatives defend or expand the business interests of companies that front the money – such as Coca Cola, Monsanto, Exxon-Mobil, as examples.

    Coca Cola, Monsanto, Pepsi, and Smucker are spending $3 million to oppose a ballot measure in Oregon that would require vendors to label genetically modified foods.

    In Colorado, a ballot measure that would expand gambling to horse tracks is backed by Twin Rivers Casino, a corporation based in Rhode Island.

    There are local ordinances that allow food service employees to stay home and recover from colds and flu - thus reducing public health risks. Yet ALEC (representing the business interests of Darden in particular) has successfully introduced boilerplate legislation that overturns such ordinances by giving veto power to state governments. Home rule by local government used to be considered a democratic virtue – until local ordinances come into conflict with corporate interests.

    One of the most secretive closely-held corporations for decades, Koch Industries has suddenly come out of the closet with a spate of new TV ads. Why? Advertisers influence news content, and Koch Industries wants to control network news with their advertising dollars.

    These days, I hold MORE DISTRUST for Corporate America than I have for government. The idea of rogue politicians passing repressive laws that take away our rights and freedoms stills holds true; but the power behind these politicians is more likely to be a corporation. Theoretically at least, our system of government has built-in checks and balances; supposedly an electorate that can “throw the bums out” anytime. In corporate boardrooms, there are no checks and balances – merely a clique that meets in secret and plots strategy to maximize the bottom line.

    The greatest danger to democracy, in my opinion, is not Ebola or ISIS or even the Cringe Fringe and their nihilists of nullification: Rather the invisible hand of corporations and secret PAC money. Regardless of political persuasion, I hope we can find common cause and help raise public awareness.

  2. The Colorado one looks out of place compared to the others, Octo. There, the casino industry is pushing for democracy, not crushing it.

    1. Dmarks,
      My apologies for responding late to this thread. What concerns me in this example is: Democracy for whom? For citizens and voters or ... for the commercial interests of an out-of-state corporation. Admittedly, I haven't studied this contest closely. Is there more I am missing?

    2. (O)ct: I meant that ballot measures mean the matter is up for a public vote.

  3.’s likely that at least $100 million in spending is not being counted, and that money leans distinctly to the right...

    "Red Team" outspends "Blue Team" because the Red Team represents those with the money... wealthy individuals and corporations. The plutocrats who want to screw the working poor and middle class. This is, by the way, one of the effects of Citizens United. But some people think that our elections being purchased by whoever spends the most is "free speech".

  4. The big difference between the Red and Blue campaign money teams is that one represents the wealthy and fatcats... and screws the 99%, and the other represents the rich and plutocrats, and clobbers the middle class and working poor.

    1. So... you're a non-voter? Or do you only vote if you're able to cast your ballot for a Progressive candidate?


As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.