Money Isn’t Everything in Shea-Porter Campaign
FEC SHEA-PORTER
New Hampshire Union Leader
Alyssa Marcus
Boston University Washington News Service
February 20, 2007
WASHINGTON, Feb. 20 – There are many theories on why Democrat Carol Shea-Porter defeated incumbent Republican Jeb Bradley in New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District.
Shea-Porter won because Republican turnout was “drastically lower” than in other elections, according to Andrew Smith, director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center. The center’s polling found that in 2004 Republican turnout was 38 percent while Democratic turnout was 37 percent, Smith said. In 2006, Democratic turnout was up to 43 percent and Republican turnout dropped to 31 percent.
Smith said that a repeat face-off in 2008 would be an interesting race. Shea-Porter’s being the incumbent will make it difficult for Bradley to defeat her, Smith said, but nevertheless, Bradley has a “pretty good chance” of winning, since the district is still mostly Republican.
Fergus Cullen, chairman of the New Hampshire GOP, said that during the last election the people of New Hampshire “weren’t voting against Jeb Bradley, they were voting anti-Republican.” The election in 2008 will be completely different, he said.
Shea-Porter doesn’t share Cullen’s opinion. She said that change was made across the nation, not just in New Hampshire. But she doesn’t agree that the country was anti-Republican. After all, she said, “Republicans who listen to their constituents did win. I go there [to the House] every day and I see Republicans on the floor. Do I need to say anything else?”
Regarding a potential rematch in 2008, Shea-Porter said, “I hope he does run. He said he is, and I look forward to it.”
In the 2006 race, money, or the lack of money, was big news. According to filings with the Federal Election Commission, Bradley raised $1,111,590 as of Dec. 31, 2006. This is over $750,000 more than Shea-Porter’s $360,380. Bradley currently has $71,995 in the bank, while Shea-Porter has $68,714.
The money disparity was one of the reasons Shea-Porter’s victory caught so many people by surprise, according to Susan Mayer, her campaign manager.
“What the media did was ignore us because we didn’t have money,” Mayer said.
Bradley received 52 percent of his campaign money from Political Action Committees, and 48 percent from individuals. Shea-Porter, on the other hand, received 85 percent of her money from individuals and only 14 percent from PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan, non-profit group that tracks money in politics and political campaigns.
Shea-Porter’s campaign donors included Rep. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat whose campaign committee donated $3,000. Democracy for America, a liberal grassroots activism group founded by Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, gave $1,000 to Shea-Porter’s campaign, and Women’s Action for New Directions, an organization that attempts to reduce military spending favor of social priorities, donated $100 through its political action committee.
Bradley’s campaign contributors included the Anheuser-Busch PAC, which donated $2,500, Oklahoma GOP Rep. Tom Cole’s Conservative Opportunity Leadership and Enterprise PAC, which gave $5,000, and fellow New Hampshire Republican Sen. Judd Gregg, who donated $2,500 through the Judd Gregg Committee.
Bradley received most of his money from within New Hampshire, with only 32.3 percent coming from out of state, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. For Shea-Porter, 82 percent of her money came from in-state.
###
