OpenSecrets, a nonpartisan research organization, released an eye-opening report titled “The Nationalization of Political Contributions and the Rising Role of Out-of-State Donations.”
This study delves into the increasing trend of political donors and activists channeling their attention and funds towards races beyond their home states.
Al Gross, who ran against Sen. Dan Sullivan in 2020, made the list, raising nearly 91% of his campaign war chest from non-Alaskans.
The report sheds light on the impact of out-of-state contributions on political campaigns. In a list that contains data from 2020 to 2022, Al Gross was #19 for having the most out-of-state contributions. For 2020 alone, Gross was #13, after people like first-placer Amy McGrath, a Democrat from Kentucky, who raised more than 97% of her campaign funds from non-Kentuckians. Jamie Harrison, a Democrat from South Carolina came second, with more than 95% of his funds coming from out of state.
The top five who won those out-of-state dollars were all Democrats and few Republicans showed up on the list. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine and Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky were Republicans who did.
Dr. Gross was a registered independent, but had been a Democrat until making a calculated decision that he could not win under the blue flag. He had the endorsement of the Alaska Democratic Party, which now calls him a “loser.”
Although had the national support of the anti-Republican operation called the Lincoln Project, Gross lost in the general election in 2020, even with Democrats not advancing their own candidate, but accepting him as their own.
Sen. Dan Sullivan won with 54% of the vote, with Gross getting 41.2%
“All politics is local, but OpenSecrets also finds that the inverse is true: all politics is increasingly national, said OpenSecrets Research Director Sarah Bryner, the author of the report. “While a donor might not expect a candidate from Vermont to help fill potholes down the road, they may justifiably see that the same candidate might cast a decisive vote on a tax bill or health care package with far-reaching implications.”
In 2021, OpenSecrets merged with the National Institute on Money in Politics and the Center for Responsive Politics, giving it greater ability to analyze the trove of election data.
A recent Supreme Court race in Wisconsin serves as a prime example of the growing nationalization of state and local political contests. In this particular race, the victorious Janet Protasiewicz managed to outfundraise her conservative opponent Daniel Kelly by a staggering five-to-one margin. Of the $14 million she raised, over $2.6 million came from out-of-state donors, underscoring the influence of external contributors on state-level campaigns, including Supreme Courts in states where they are elected offices.
As federal races have become progressively more expensive, federal candidates have gradually reduced their dependence on funds from within their respective states. OpenSecrets data reveals a declining percentage of money derived from in-state donors since the turn of the millennium.
While Republican candidates still rely more heavily on in-state funding compared to Democrats, the gap has narrowed in recent years, indicating a shift in donation patterns.
Interestingly, not all candidates are compelled to seek out-of-state fundraising. Candidates with a lower rate of out-of-state donors may still enjoy popularity within their home states or encounter unique circumstances during general elections. Moreover, candidates from larger states and those perceived as long-shot contenders tend to heavily rely on in-state donors.
Read the OpenSecrets report at this link.
