Who Wins the PACs or the Candidates?

           Paul Herrnson states in Congressional Elections that, “A PAC can be best understood as the electoral arm of an organized interest. Interest groups form PACs to give campaign contributions or services directly to federal or, in some cases, state or local candidates in the hope of influencing election outcomes, the formation o public policy, or both” (133). I know I have talked about money and how important it is, but this post is different I am going to mostly focus on PACs and what it means for a candidate to receive money from one.

            Both Rep. Murphy and Caligiuri have received contributions from PACs, Caligiuri $9,000 which accounts for only 1% of his campaigns financing. While 33% of Murphy’s campaigning finances is covered from contributions from PACs to the total of around $685,000 from 450 different PACs.

According to Herrnson “PACs make most of their contributions to candidates in close elections, in which the PACs have the biggest chance of affecting an election outcome.” (141) Using that theory from Herrnson, then interest groups think it would be best and also that they have a better chance to get want they want done if Murphy is reelected both hurts and helps his campaign. It helps Murphy in that he has over $675,000 more than Caligiuri does, but at the same time it hurts him because it just makes Murphy seem like any other disliked DC politician. Which in today’s political time may not be the best thing for him, seeing how there is such a big movement for ‘clearing the House’.

 As can be seen in polls by Gallup, were more Republicans are ready/energized to vote than Democratic voters in the up coming election. Also according to Gallup more registered votes prefer a Republican candidate to a Democratic one (Gallup Graphs). So come November we will have to see if the PACs worked for or against Murphy and also if Herrnson is correct with the idea that “Interest groups, like parties, play important supporting roles in congressional elections.” (165)


Both candidates PAC breakdown (PAC info for CT-5)


Chris Murphy (D)

Business	$485,824
Labor	$181,500
Ideological	$29,000

Sam Caligiuri (R)

Business	$3,000
Ideological	$6,010

What Can YOU Do For CT-5?

           As Paul S. Herrnson points out in Congressional Elections “Contemporary House elections are usually fought on local issues” (p.88). Which is true for the race going on with Connecticut’s 5^th district, but also at the same time the two candidates are focusing on the main issues at are affecting their district and the larger national issues that play a role in it.

            This can be seen in both candidates campaign websites, starting with incumbent Murphy.  On his website under there are articles from 2009/2010 which show about $3 million in grants to Connecticut towns like Torrington and Waterbury to improve roads and town centers. Other than that there was not too much talk on specific topics for Connecticut but more on major topics like education, energy, government reform, and healthcare which are relate well to Connecticut and its residents.

            Caligiuri on the other had, has barely any information on what kind of change he wants to bring to Connecticut. He has more lofty proposals dealing with Iran, Israel, and handling government reform (Proposed strategy for Israeli Relations and Government Reform). The only thing Caligiuri can talk about is what he disagrees with on how Murphy has handled issues that have come across the House’s desk. Also riding on the coattail of ‘Dump Dodd 2010’ movement, there is a Dump Murphy 2010 website (link). Which Caligiuri has made mention to on his facebook a couple of times.

            In all there both candidates mostly focus on major national topics that have an affect on Connecticut without going too in depth on issues, unlike Caligiuri who has drafted plans on some national topics. The only advice I can give the two candidates are to become more specific on how they can help Connecticut, and also at the same time keep an eye out for mud throwing to come as November 2^nd comes closer.

                            Signs from around the CT-5

            


*Added 9/26*
After sending an email to both Murphy and Caligiuri about how they sand on issues that are important to CT-5, this is what I have gotten so far.

Dear Andrew,

Thank you for reaching out to Sam’s campaign, and we’re thrilled you chose our race to cover for your class!

I am not sure we are focusing on any Connecticut-specific issues because Sam’s candidacy is for federal  office and therefore is focused on legislation that applies to the nation as a whole.  Having said that, there is no doubt that the policies made at the federal level have an enormous impact on states, and certainly on residents in Connecticut’s Fifth District.  For example, if the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are allowed to expire, the average family in our District will face paying an additional $1,800 in taxes next year.  This is sadly getting closer to happening as Congress is not addressing this issue until after the elections – they refuse to make the tough decisions in a tough election year. 

Sam’s priorities are growing jobs and getting the economy back on track.  He opposes raising taxes on anyone, especially in this very difficult time, and disagrees with Chris Murphy’s insistence on letting them expire.  Sam would also vote to repeal and/or defund the $1 trillion health care bill, and replace it with fiscally responsible health care reform that does not grow the size and cost of government.

I hope this is helpful, and best of luck with your project!

All best,

Tiffany

Tiffany Romero Grossman

Communications Director

Sam Caligiuri for Congress (CT-5)

www.SamforCongress.com

Incumbency Hard to Beat....

           Incumbency is key to winning an election or reelection, as most House members know. The book Congressional Elections by Paul Herrnson points out that almost all House members run for reelection unless age, illness, or scandal is affecting the candidate, and for the most part incumbents win not only their parties primary but also their districts election. This is due to the fact that with incumbency there also comes name recognition, party backing and finances.

            For Rep. Murphy this is the case, Murphy was able to win his parties nomination uncontested for reelection, while Sam Caligiuri had to run in the districts Republican primary. Murphy also had a clear head start over Caligiuri, just by people knowing his name. Personally I am from the 5^th district and know that about twice a month there was always something in the mailbox from the office of Rep. Murphy.

            Murphy’s ads were in fact paid by the taxpayers, which is another tool that Murphy has over Caligiuri. Also today Murphy has been able to raise almost $2.1 million, and as of late June still have $1.5 million on hand. Over 30% has come from PAC contributions totaling around $700,000 and has no personal financing funds tied up. While Caligiuri has raised almost $850,000, and has only $80,000 at hand, and has only received $9,000 from PAC and has self funded around $4,500 to his campaign.

By looking at the numbers it is clear that the incumbent factor has been helping Murphy twofold, but at the same time a race is not all about the numbers, well not until election day; as Congressional Elections points out it is about where a candidate stands on the topics and how they affect their prospective voter. The only advice I can give Caligiuri to try and overcome Murphy’s finances and gain as many votes has he can is to appear as ‘Right’ as he can in order not to alienate any Republican/Independent voters. For Murphy the best thing he can keep doing is to make sure his name is out there and known by the voters of his district which can be seen in Murphy’s 'Forty-one Towns in Forty-one Days' (Link to: Forty-one Towns in Forty-one Days), which Caligiuri challenged in an open letter to Murphy with 'Forty-one Debates in Forty-one Towns'.  

Hard To Call

           Democratic Representative Chris Murphy, who won his seat in 2006 and reelection in 2008, currently holds the state of Connecticut’s fifth congressional district. Murphy is now seeking his second reelection against Republican nominee Sam Caligiuri. This is a race to watch, because even though Caligiuri is the clear underdog, there is a seemingly large chance that he may win election. There things that are working in favor and against both candidates, and for that reason it is hard to call the race as of right now

            For Representative Murphy it is easy to see what is helping him run for reelection, the major thing in his favor is that he is an incumbent. While this helps him it also works against him a bit as there is an anti-incumbent movement. Another thing working in the favor of Rep. Murphy is that as of June 30^th he has raised almost $2.1 million, but also at the same time has only spent a small amount of his funds.

            The same goes for Sam Caligiuri, there are also factors working in his favor one being the rating of the Democratic party in the polls and Rep. Murphys voting history, with the Democratic party’s approval rating dipping down and Rep. Murphy voting with the party 98% of the time this can only help Caligiuri by backing up his claim that he is going to bring change for the fifth district. A major thing working against Caligiuri is the fact the he has yet to raise half the funds of Rep. Murphy has. In my opinion if Caligiuri wants to overcome the incumbent factor in favor for Rep. Murphy he needs to out spend him.

            In all there are many reasons as to why we should keep an eye on Connecticut’s fifth congressional district. The main reason being that both candidates have factors working in their favor like for Rep. Murphy, were almost 90% of all incumbents are reelected, and for Caligiuri the thing working in his favor is that he is change from the increasingly more unpopular Democratic Party. With polls being so close Rep. Murphy 41% and Caligiuri 39% this is a district to keep an eye on to see if Connecticut will get a Republican representative.