The Life of the Party:
Hard Facts on Soft Money
“Housekeeping” Accounts in New York State
A Common Cause/NY Report
May 2013
Endorsed by:
New York Public Interest Research Group
Citizens Union
New York League of Women Voters
About Common Cause:
Common Cause is a nonpartisan, nonprofit advocacy organization founded in 1970 by John
Gardner 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. Common Cause/New York is a state level
chapter focusing on state and local government in New York. We work to strengthen public
participation and faith in our institutions of government, ensure that government and the political
process serve the public interest rather than special interests, curb the excessive influence of
money on government policy and elections, and promote fair and honest elections and high
ethical standards for government officials.
Acknowledgements:
This report was written by Brian Paul and Susan Lerner with some portions directly adapted from
the 2006 Common Cause/NY report of the same name, written by former Common Cause/NY
staff Liam Arbetman, Megan Quattlebaum, Rachel Leon, and Kailin Clarke.
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Key Findings….…………………………………….……...………4
Introduction: A Rule That’s Made to Be Broken………..………..….…6
Who Gives Soft Money? ......................................................................... 9
Top 20 Donors and the $100,000 Club…………………………….………….….11
“Giving and Getting”………………………………………………….……….13
Who Gets Soft Money?…………………………………………….17
How is Soft Money Used?..…………………………………...……21
Recommendations: Close This Loophole Now…………………..….…27
Appendix A – Methodology and Data……..…………………..….…28
Appendix B – Top Soft Money Donors …….…………………..….…29
Appendix C – Top Soft Money Recipients….…………………..….…35
3
KEY FINDINGS:
-
Soft money is a growing source of political dollars in New York State. From 2006-2012, a total of
$87.1 million was contributed to the parties’ “non-campaign housekeeping” accounts.
-
Soft money contributions to the state parties and state legislature grew by 24% when comparing
the seven year periods of 1999-2005 and 2006-2012.1
-
By far the largest category of soft money donors is businesses, which account for $45.4 million or
52% of all soft money contributions.
o Individuals comprise the next largest category of donors at $23.3 million (27%). Soft money
donations from political committees account for $9.4 million (11%) while labor unions come
in a distant fourth at $7.7 million (9%). However, two of the top five overall donors are
unions.
-
Soft money contributions are often given in amounts that dwarf what would be legal if the funds
were given to candidates or hard money committees, despite the fact that New York State has
some of the highest campaign contributions limits in the nation.
o The single largest soft money contributions were checks for $1 million from hedge fund
executive Robert Mercer to the Conservative Party in 2010 and Mayor Michael Bloomberg
to the Senate Republican Campaign Committee in 2012.
o 65% of soft money is raised through contributions of $10,000 or higher and over 34% of soft
money is raised through contributions of $50,000 or higher.
o Businesses made 1,652 contributions greater than $5,000 that raised a total of $32 million
dollars, illustrating how soft money is a gaping loophole that renders the state’s $5,000
annual limit on corporate donations completely meaningless
-
132 donors gave $100,000 or more in aggregate, accounting for $54.7 million or 63% of all soft
money contributions since 2006. Among these top donors, businesses and business associations
dominate, accounting for 86 of the 132.
o The top twenty donors are Mayor Michael Bloomberg ($7.2 m), New York State United
Teachers ($3.2m), the Greater New York Hospital Association ($3.0m), 1199/SEIU Healthcare
Workers East ($2.0m), Cablevision ($1.6m), Verizon ($1.5m), the Pharmaceutical Research
and Manufacturers of America ($1.4m), Time Warner Cable ($1.2m), Philip Morris ($1.2m) ,
the Healthcare Association of New York ($1.1m), Robert Mercer ($1.0m), the Rent
Stabilization Association ($941k), Wal-Mart ($929k), the estate of Henry Sanders ($813k),
the Red Apple Group and John Catsimatidis ($780k), Coca-Cola ($664k), the Law PAC of New
York ($651k), AT&T ($624k), and Diageo Guinness ($566k). See Appendix B on page 29 for
the full list of $100,000+ donors.
-
From 2006-2012, the State Legislature party committees were the top recipients of soft money
contributions, accounting for a total of $33.8 million (39%). County parties across the state raised
a total of $25.7 million (30%), state parties raised $24.1 million (28%), and local level parties raised
$1.9 million (2%).
1
Before 2006, soft money contributions at the county and local level were not reported to the New York State Board of
Elections. Comparing soft money in the state parties and the state legislature, $46.7 million was raised between 1999 and 200 5
while $58 million was raised between 2006 and 2012, an increase of 24%.
4
-
Overall, Republican committees raised more soft money than their Democratic counterparts -$37.9 million (43.5%) to $33.9 million (38.9%).
o The overall Republican advantage is entirely due to the fundraising prowess of the State
Senate Republican Committee, which raised a towering $19.9 million in soft money
compared to only $5.3 million for the State Senate Democratic Committee.
o In the State Assembly, Democratic outraised Republicans $7.0 million to $1.7 million.
o The New York State Democratic Committee outraised the New York Republican State
Committee $7.0 million to $4.9 million.
-
The top ten committees took in a total of $64.3 million (74%) and include the NYS Senate
Republican Campaign Committee ($19.9m), the NYS Democratic Committee ($7.0m), the NYS
Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee ($7.0m), the Conservative Party NYS ($5.7m), the
Democratic Senate Campaign Committee ($5.3m), the New York Republican State Committee
($4.9m), the Independence Party of NYS ($4.5m), the Monroe County Republican Committee
($4.4m), the Queens County Democratic Party ($3.5m), and the Kings County Democratic Party
Committee ($2.1m)
o During the period from 1999-2005, the New York State Republican Committee was far and
away the largest recipient of soft money at $17.6 million. From 2006-2012, the New York
State Republican Committee took in dramatically less soft money at only $4.9 million. On the
other hand, soft money fundraising by the New York State Senate Republican Committee
more than doubled from $8.5 million during the 1999-2005 period to $19.9 million during
2006-2012.
o Another notable shift is the rise in the clout of the NYS Independence Party (which raised
only $191,000 in soft money from 1999-2005 but jumped to $4.5 million from 2006-2012)
and the Working Families Party (which raised $481,000 from 1999-2005 but jumped to $2.0
million from 2006-2012).
-
Without clear guidelines and consistent auditing, it is impossible to rely on accurate self-reporting
of expenditures by the parties.
o The largest single category of soft money expenses is “Other” at a total of $37.3 million.
o Nearly $3.8 million in expenses have no purpose code or a purpose code not identified by
the BOE.
o Less than 0.2% of expenses are itemized as “Voter Registration Materials or Services” which
is often the type of expenditure used to defend the need for soft money
-
“Non-campaign” soft money housekeeping expenditures regularly peak in election season of each
election year, indicating that much of the spending is campaign related.
o The election season spikes in housekeeping expenses are due to sharp increases in hiring
high-priced political consultants and spending on advertising and mass-mailing
-
With no limits to the size of donations or enforcement of “non-campaign” spending, soft money
accounts have become an integral part of Albany’s “show me the money” culture and an
important contributor to the power of wealthy special interests at both the state and local levels
of New York State government.
5
A Rule That’s Made to Be Broken
New York State’s Election Law establishes numerous limitations on the size of campaign contributions
that contributors may give and political candidates and parties may receive. No individual may give
more than $150,000 in the aggregate in any single year, and no corporation may give more than $5,000
in a single year. Political party committees may accept no more than $102,300 from an individual and
$5,000 from a corporation.
The aim of these laws is to prevent corruption by ensuring that our lawmakers are not beholden to
wealthy special interests. This goal is already undermined by the by the fact that these limits are
extraordinarily high compared to other states and the federal government. Even the relatively low
$5,000 limit for a corporation can be avoided by contributing through numerous legally separate
subsidiaries or LLCs.
But what is even more shocking about our campaign finance law is the gaping “soft money” loophole
that renders the limits that we do have completely meaningless:
“The contribution and receipt limits of this article shall not apply to monies received and
expenditures made by a party committee or constituted committee to maintain a permanent
headquarters and staff and carry on ordinary activities which are not for the express purpose of
promoting the candidacy of specific candidates”
(NYS Election Law §14-124)
Any corporation, individual, union, or other interest wishing to evade campaign contribution limits need
only give to a type of party committee that is supposedly reserved for administrative tasks and “party
building” purposes. These party accounts, commonly referred to as “soft money” or “housekeeping”
accounts, can accept unlimited sums of cash.
Soft money is not supposed to be used to support candidates and their campaigns but this legal barrier
does not hold up in practice. Common Cause/NY undertook our first study of soft money in 20062 in
response to an increase in press reports of huge donations and blatantly campaign-related uses. The
federal government had recently banned soft money in 2002 with the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act
(aka “McCain-Feingold), a ban that was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2003’s McConnell v. FEC. The
Supreme Court found that this loophole enabling unlimited donations to the parties raised concerns
about corruption or its appearance and that “the best means of prevention is to identify and remove the
temptation.”
Common Cause/NY’s 2006 report on New York State soft money found the stated purpose of the
housekeeping accounts as funds for “party building” administrative use to be pure fiction. Millions of
2
Liam Arbetman, Megan Quattlebaum, Rachel Leon, and Kailin Clarke, Common Cause/NY. “The Life of the Party:
Hard Facts on Soft Money in New York State.” August 2006. http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%7BFB3C17E2CDD1-4DF6-92BE-BD4429893665%7D/SOFT_MONEY_REPORT.PDF
6
dollars were being raised by the soft money committees from a select group of very large donors that
clearly had an interest in shaping the results of elections and policy-making. Spending by the
housekeeping accounts spiked each election season as monies were used to hire high-priced consultants
and pay for campaign-related advertising thinly disguised as “issue ads.”
Since 2006, the soft money loophole in New York’s campaign finance laws has grown in significance and
abuse. Soft money contributions to the state parties and the state legislature grew by 24% when
comparing the seven year periods of 1999-2005 and 2006-2012. Altogether since 1999, $104.7 million in
soft money has flowed to the state party and state legislature housekeeping committees. Add the $29.1
million given at the county and local level since the State Board of Elections began tracking it in 2006,
and the total sum of soft money given since 1999 amounts to a staggering $133.8 million.
Soft money contributions to
the state parties and state
legislature grew by 24%
when comparing the seven
year periods of 1999-2005
and 2006-2012.
With the Board of Elections undertaking no meaningful auditing and enforcement regarding the
legitimate use of soft money accounts for “non-campaign” expense, the parties continue to push the
boundary of housekeeping uses further and further.
7
In 2013 as the New York State Legislature is poised to pass a serious package of campaign finance
reform for the first time in many years, it’s critical that soft money is not overlooked. Whatever our
state’s intent when it created the loophole, soft money has become in practice a way to evade the spirit,
if not the letter, of campaign finance law. The ability of special interests to contribute unlimited sums to
soft money accounts helps engender a “show-me-the money” culture of corruption and dysfunction.
Alongside establishing a Fair Elections system of public matching funds, which would reduce the
dependency of politicians and parties on big checks from special interests, it is essential that we lower
that state’s sky-high campaign contribution limits and finally close New York’s notorious soft money
loophole for good.
8
Who Gives Soft Money?
To complete this study, Common Cause/NY assembled full datasets of all soft money receipts and
expenses in New York State (see appendix a – methodology, on page 28 for details). For a spreadsheet
of the full data set, email Brian Paul at [email protected].
Our analysis of the data shows that by far the largest category of donors is businesses, which have given
$45.4 million since 2006, or roughly 52% of all soft money contributions. The dominance of business
interests in soft money contributions is likely due to the relatively low limit on corporate hard money
contributions compared to other classes of donors (a $5,000 aggregate limit compared to a $150,000
aggregate limit for individuals)
Individuals comprise the second largest category of donors, at a total of $23.3 million (27%). A large
portion of the total for individuals comes from Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who is the top donor of any
type to soft money accounts during this period, with $7.2 million in spending.
9
Overall, labor unions give a relatively small portion of soft money donations -- $7.7 million or roughly 9%
of the total. The majority of labor contributions, nearly $5.2 million, come from just two powerful unions
– the New York State United Teachers (NYSUT) and 1199/SEIU Healthcare Workers East. With no
aggregate limits on the amount of hard money they may give through PACs, unions do not need to
exploit the soft money loophole in order to give large amounts of campaign cash. In the most recent
“Capital Investments” report on combined hard and soft money fundraising in the 2012 cycle, NYPIRG
found that businesses outspent unions by $38 million to $14 million, less of a gap than the $45.4 million
to $7.7 million advantage for businesses that Common Cause/NY has found here for all soft money from
2006-2012.
The remaining portion of soft money contributions are given by other party or candidates committees
($9.4 million, 11%), advocacy groups ($367,000), and unitemized contributors ($938,000). These findings
are highly similar to those of the 2006 Common Cause/NY report on the 1999-2005 period, which found
businesses accounting for 60%, individuals for 20%, and labor unions for 9% of soft money contributions.
Whether the donor is a corporation, a labor union, or an individual, huge sums of soft money are raised
through mega-donations that dwarf what would be legal if the funds were given to candidates or hardmoney party committees.
10
65% of all soft money comes in five figure sizes or above and roughly 23% comes in truly giant donations
of $100,000 or higher.
During this period, businesses made 1,652 contributions greater than $5,000 that raised a total of $32
million dollars, illustrating how soft money is a gaping loophole that renders the state’s $5,000 annual
limit on corporate donations completely meaningless.
However, it is interesting to note that a large number of soft money contributions by individuals are
small donations of $200 or less (13,610 out of 24,214 contributions by individuals). These small
individual donors to housekeeping accounts are typically local elected officials, their staffs, and other
individual party members who give small checks multiple times each year. This is perhaps how the
housekeeping accounts have been traditionally used – party members collectively paying towards a
central administrative account for the party.
Compared to these small donors, the number of wealthy individuals abusing the soft money loophole
with huge donations is tiny, but these large donors provide the overwhelmingly majority of the total
monies raised from individuals. The 41 donations by individuals in the amount of $100,000 or higher
account for $10.4 million while the 13,610 small donations of $200 or less account for only $1.1 million.
The lack of contribution limits on soft money empowers a wealthy few with tremendous influence over
the party at the expense of rank and file members.
Top 20 Donors and the $100,000 Donor Club
The following are the top 20 donors who account for a total of $30.8 million, or 35% of all soft money
contributions.
NYS Top 20 Soft Money
Power Donors
(excluding political committees as donors.
See Appendix B on page X for full list of $100,000+ donors)
Soft Money
Contributions Industry Category
2006 – 2012
$7,170,000.00
GOVERNMENT ; FINANCE ;
MEDIA
$3,150,694.28
LABOR -- EDUCATION
$2,965,500.00
HEALTHCARE -- HOSPITALS
4. 1199 SEIU
$2,029,775.00
LABOR -- HEALTHCARE
5. CABLEVISION
$1,573,041.52
TELECOM
6. VERIZON
7. PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND
MANUFACTURERS OF AMERICA (PhRMA)
8. TIME WARNER CABLE
$1,465,734.96
TELECOM
$1,421,000.00
PHARMACEUTICALS
$1,227,773.24
TELECOM
9. PHILIP MORRIS / ALTRIA
$1,207,750.00
TOBACCO
1. MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG
2. NEW YORK STATE UNITED TEACHERS (NYSUT)
VOTE/COPE
3. GNYHA MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
11
NYS Top 20 Soft Money
Power Donors (continued)
Soft Money Contributions
2006 – 2012
Industry Category
10. HEALTHCARE ASSOCIATION OF NY (HANYS)
$1,058,500.00
HEALTHCARE
11. ROBERT MERCER
$1,010,000.00
12. RENT STABILIZATION ASSOCIATION
$940,550.00
FINANCE –
HEDGE FUND
(RENAISSANCE TECHNOLOGES)
REAL ESTATE
13. WAL-MART
$928,500.00
RETAIL
14. ESTATE OF HENRY SANDERS
$812,710.10
ESTATE
15. RED APPLE GROUP / UNITED REFINING CO. /
JOHN CATSIMATIDIS
$779,600.00
CONGLOMORATE : RETAIL-SUPERMARKET ;
REAL ESTATE ; ENERGY
$663,500.00
BEVERAGES
$651,300.00
LAW
18. AT&T
$634,800.00
19. DIAGEO NORTH AMERICA / DIAGEO-GUINESSS
$566,000.00
20. LAWRENCE AND SUSAN KADISH
$559,500.00
TELECOM
BEVERAGES -- BEER ; WINE ;
LIQUOR
REAL ESTATE (FIRST FISCAL
FUND CORP)
16. COCA-COLA COMPANY / COCA-COLA BOTTLING
COMPANY
17. LAW PAC OF NEW YORK
The list of the top 20 overall soft-money donors reads like the top of an annual power list in New York
State politics, a “who ’s who” of the state’s most influential political players.
Each of the special interests on the list has a critical stake in influencing crucial government policies and
regulations that affect all New Yorkers such as the rate of Medicaid reimbursement (GNYHA and
HANYS), teacher evaluation policy (NYSUT), tax breaks for biotech (PhRMA), control of
telecommunications franchises (Cablevision, Verizon, Time Warner, AT&T), rent regulation policy (RSA),
and proposed taxes or regulations on soft drinks (Coca-Cola).
Looking at the larger list of 132 top donors that gave at $100,000 or more is even more revealing (for
the full list of soft money mega-donors, see Appendix B on page 29). From 2006-2012, a total of 132
donors gave $100,000 or more in aggregate. These top donors account for $54.7 million, or 62.8% of all
soft money contributions during this period. 86 of these top donors are corporations, business
associations, or a combination of a corporation and its individual owner/top executive. The dominance
of businesses in this group of mega-donors again illustrates how soft money contributions are used by
businesses to evade the state’s $5,000 limit on hard money corporate contributions.
22 of these top donors are individuals or couples, led by Mayor Bloomberg as the top overall donor at
$7.2 million. The largest group of individual soft money mega-donors is in finance, including nine hedge
fund managers including Paul Singer, Jonathan Pollock, and Richard Sokolow of Elliot Management,
Robert Mercer, Henry Laufer, and James Simons of Renaissance Technologies, Bruce Kovner of Caxton
Associates, and Daniel Loeb of Third Point Management. Other individuals include major nationwide
12
political donors Ken Langone, David Koch, and Bernard Schwartz as well as current New York State GOP
Chairman Ed Cox and former Governor Eliot Spitzer.
Just 8 of the top donors are labor unions, led by the New York State United Teachers as the second
highest overall donor at $3.2 million and the 1199/SEIU Healthcare Workers East as the fourth highest
overall donor at $2.0 million. The other six labor union mega-donors include SEIU International, the
United Federation of Teachers, the Mason Tenders District Council, the New York State Correctional
Officers PBA, and the National Education Association, which each contributed between $100,000 and
$255,500.
Giving and Getting
In response to the recent string of corruption scandals in Albany, U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara
proclaimed that “the show-me-the-money culture seems to pervade in every level of New York
government.”3 Unfortunately for New Yorkers, Mr. Bharara’s power to reign in the Albany money
culture only extends to cases of blatantly illegal bribery and grift.
The following stories are just a few examples of how the soft money housekeeping loophole helps to
create a systemic legalized form of bribery and corruption in our state and local government.
Walmart and Other Chain Retailers Score Big with Minimum Wage Subsidy
In 2013, the New York State Legislature and Governor Cuomo enacted an increase in the state’s
minimum wage to $9 an hour, phased in over the next three years. At a late hour, unannounced to the
public, the Legislature slipped in a generous subsidy for employers to provide tax credits for those who
hire seasonal employees ages 16-19 who are still in school. The subsidy is estimated to be worth $20 to
$40 million annually.4
From 2006-2012, several chain retailers known for hiring young minimum wage workers gave very
generous sums to the State Legislature’s soft money accounts. Walmart gave a total of $928,500 in soft
money, making the company the #14 overall soft money donor in the state, with $753,000 going just to
the Senate Republicans. CVS Caremark, Walgreens, Duane Reade, Rite Aid, and the National Association
3
Colin Campbell. “U.S. Attorney: New York’s Corruption Cases ‘Feel Like a Scene From Groundhog Day.” Politicker. April , 2012
http://politicker.com/2013/04/u-s-attorney-new-yorks-corruption-cases-feel-like-a-scene-from-groundhog-day/
4
Michael Gormley. “Walmart Campaign Contributions Influenced New York Minimum Wage Deal, Unions Claim.” The
Associated Press. April 15, 2013. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/15/walmart-new-york-minimumwage_n_3086683.html
13
of Chain Drug Stores combined to donate a total of $287,750 in soft money during this period, including
$147,250 to the Senate Republicans, and $91,000 to Assembly Democrats. Small investments compared
to the payoff these retailers will receive from the new subsidy.
Mayor Bloomberg Buys the Party Line
It’s no secret that Mayor Michael Bloomberg has employed his vast personal fortune ($27 billion at most
recent Forbes estimate) to fund his high-priced campaigns. What’s less well known is the important role
that his outsized soft money (the #1 donor overall at $7.2 million) contributions have played in securing
his party lines on the Republican and Independence Party tickets.
Bloomberg’s giant donations to NYS Independence have single-handedly made the party the fourth
largest state party soft money recipient after the Republicans, Democrats, and Conservatives. “In many
ways, we are the party of Bloomberg," said Chairman Frank MacKay in 2008 after Bloomberg donated
$1.2 million.5 In addition to buying MacKay’s loyalty, a portion of the 2008 donations were used on
campaign ads, mailings, and outreach primarily for Queens Republicans Serf Maltese and Frank Padavan.
In 2009, Bloomberg again donated $1.2 million to the NYS Independence Party, $750,000 of which the
party gave in a single expense to Republican political operative John Haggerty through an LLC.6 Haggerty
was supposed to use the funds for “poll watching” but was caught instead using the check to buy a
house. Needless to say, none of these machinations are the kinds of benign administrative “partybuilding” uses that “non-campaign” housekeeping funds are supposed to be reserved for. In the 2009
election, the Independence Party line provided Bloomberg with roughly 150,000 votes, greater than his
margin of victory over Bill Thompson.
In 2009, Bloomberg also needed the permission of Republican county leaders to run on the Republican
ballot line via a Wilson-Pakula waiver. $50,000 soft money donations to each of the city’s Republican
county committees in April and May 2009 helped make Bloomberg’s registration as an independent a
non-issue. More recently 2013 Republican mayoral candidate John Catsimatidis (the #17 overall soft
money donor) has helped fill some of Bloomberg’s role as a soft money payee in exchange for county
organization support. But Catsimatidis is not enough to fill the void left by Bloomberg, leaving New York
City Republicans grasping for new funding sources. This search for cash recently crossed the line from
the pseudo-legal corruption enabled by soft money to the realm of pure corruption as Bronx Republican
Chair Jay Savino and Queens Republican official Vincent Tabone were ensnared in a scheme to allegedly
sell access to the party line for cash payments from State Senator Malcolm Smith7.
5
Tom Robbins. “Bloomberg’s Double Deal.” The Village Voice. March 11, 2009. http://www.villagevoice.com/2009-0311/columns/bloomberg-s-double-deal
6
David W. Chen and Colin Moynihan. “G.O.P. Consultant Accused of Stealing Campaign Money.” The New York Times. June 14,
2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/15/nyregion/15haggerty.html?_r=0
7
Michael Wilson and William K. Rashbaum. “Lawmakers in New York Tied to Bribery Plot in May Race.” The New York Times.
April 2, 2013. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/03/nyregion/state-senator-and-city-councilman-accused-of-trying-to-rigmayors-race.html?hp&_r=0
14
1199/SEIU and the Greater New York Hospital Association Win Powerful Role in
Medicare Redesign
The Greater New York Hospital Association, representing over 200 New York State Hospitals, and the
1199/SEIU Healthcare Workers East, representing over 350,000 healthcare workers in the Northeast US
and Florida, have long been known as two of the most powerful special interests in Albany.8 Since the
late 1990’s, the two groups have worked together to coordinate aggressive lobbying and advertising
campaigns to influence healthcare policy in New York through the 1199/SEIU and GNYHA Healthcare
Education Project.
It’s no surprise that GNYHA and 1199 are also major contributors to soft money accounts, giving $3.0
million (#3 overall donor) and $2.0 million (#4 overall donor) since 2006. These investments paid off
most recently in 2011, when the Governor and Legislature allowed 1199 and GNYHA to dominate the
shaping of Medicare reforms9 at the expense of patient advocates and other interests.10 Being near the
top of the list of annual lobbying spenders and soft money donors is a surefire way to buy results in
Albany.
Wine in Grocery Stores? Think again.
At first glance, the question of whether supermarkets should be allowed to sell wine does not seem like
the kind of issue that could incite a frenzy of political money. But since it was first proposed by Governor
Paterson in 2009, liquor companies and liquor stores engaged in a furious battle with supermarket
interests over this issue.11 Supermarket magnate Daniel Wegman led a public relations and lobbying
push to try pass the measure and made $103,000 (#122 overall donor) in soft money contributions.
Rochester-based Constellation Brands, the second largest producer of wine in the nation, has given
$293,000 (#38 overall donor) in soft money contributions since 2006.12
But the money on the supporting side has been outweighed by a coalition of liquor interests, including
Diageo Guinness with $566,000 (#21 overall donor) in soft money contributions, the Distilled Spirits
Council with $133,000 (#85 overall donor), and the coalition of liquor stores (the Metropolitan Package
Store Association and their “Coalition for the Last Store on Main Street with a combined $164,150, #73
overall donor).
8
Brian Paul and Susan Lerner, Common Cause/NY. “Lifting the Veil: A Report Analyzing Grassroots Lobbying in New York State
and Recommending Amendments to the Lobbying Act.” June 2011. www.commoncause.org/ny/liftingtheveil
9
Jacob Gershman. “Cuomo Criticized Over Medicaid Team.” The Wall Street Journal. January 8, 2011.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704739504576068170498603248.html
10
Mark Brenner. “New York Governor, SEIU 1199 Raise Hackles with Medicaid Deal. Labor Notes. January 9, 2012.
http://www.labornotes.org/2012/01/new-york-governor-seiu-1199-raise-hackles-medicaid-deal
11
Ali Touhey. “Wegmans CEO Backs Wine in Grocery Stores.” Rochester Home Page. March 16, 2010.
http://rochesterhomepage.net/fulltext/?nxd_id=163202
12
Ben O’Donnell. “In New York Battle over wine in Groceries, Money Talks.” Wine Spectator. March 30, 2010.
http://www.winespectator.com/webfeature/show/id/42423
15
The battle over wine in grocery stores illustrates how special interests regard soft money contributions
as a crucial lever of influence when threatened (or potentially rewarded) by legislative action.
Normal Communications and the Republican Party –
Soft Money Friends with Benefits
Rochester-based advertising firm Normal Communications ($121,000, #102 overall) has developed a
generous intra-housekeeping friendship with the Republican Party. The company, the parent of
Mediascape Marketing fka Growth Marketing Group of NY, gives generously to the Monroe County
Republican Party and in return, receives the business of putting the State and Senate Republicans’
housekeeping funds to work in advertising. In 2012, the firm received payments of $101,000 from the
NYS Senate Republican Campaign Committee –Housekeeping on October 25, 2012, and $101,022 from
the Republican State Committee Housekeeping on October 29, 2012
These five “giving and getting” stories are just a handful of the hundreds that could be told if all the
major soft money donors were analyzed in detail. Many of these stories have been told in press
accounts shortly after key contributions are made. But these accounts often fail to emphasize the
systemic role of New York State’s “soft money” loophole in enabling and perpetuating this corrosive
culture of “show me the money.”
16
Who Gets Soft Money?
From 2006-2012, state and local party committees in New York raised a total of $87.1 million in soft
money. Overall, Republican committees raised more soft money than their Democratic counterparts -$37.9 million (43.5%) to $33.9 million (38.9%).
The State Legislature party committees were the top recipients of soft money contributions, accounting
for a total of $33.8 million (39%). County parties across the state raised a total of $25.7 million (30%),
state parties raised $24.1 million (28%), and local level parties raised $1.9 million (2%).
$1.5 million of the contributions listed as under “schedule p” housekeeping by the Board of Elections are
clearly misfiled by PACs and candidates that are not legally allowed to operate housekeeping funds.
17
The overall Republican advantage in housekeeping receipts is entirely due to the fundraising prowess of
the State Senate Republican Committee, which raised a towering $19.9 million in soft money compared
to only $5.3 million for the State Senate Democratic Committee. Overall soft money in the State Senate
has boomed as the chamber became highly competitive during these years. From 1999-2005, State
Senate Republicans outraised the Democrats $8.5 million to $1.1 million.
In the State Assembly, the majority Democrats outraised the Republicans in soft money by a margin of
$7.0 million to $1.7 million. Assembly Democrats have also become more prolific in raising soft money
compared to the earlier 1999-2005 period when they raised only $4.7 million. The total for the Assembly
Republicans remained constant between the two periods.
18
Among the State Party committees, the Democrats led the way with $7.0 million in soft money
contributions. The New York Republican State Committee housekeeping account raised $4.9 million.
This represents a major shift from the period of 1999-2005 when the Republicans were in power at the
statewide level with Governor George Pataki. During that period, the Republican State Committee raised
$17.6 million and was the top overall recipient of soft money, while the Democrats raised only $5.3
million. This shift once again shows how soft money tends to coalesce around those in power.
From 2006-2012, the State Conservative Party raised a total of $5.7 million through its various soft
money accounts, roughly equivalent to the $6.1 million it raised from 1999-2005.
The New York State Independence Party ($4.5 million) and the Working Families Party ($2.0 million)
raised much more soft money from 2006-2012 than they did in the earlier period. From 1999-2005, the
New York State Independence Party raised only $191,000 and the WFP $481,000. The rise of the
Independence Party in significance is largely due to the efforts of Mayor Bloomberg described above
and the increase in donations from the Real Estate Board of New York and other elite New York City real
estate interests.
From 1999-2005, it was the Liberal Party of New York State that was the second major third party to the
Conservatives, raising $1.1 million, but this party all but dissolved shortly after 2006.
19
At the County level, the Monroe County Republican Committee is the single largest soft money
fundraiser. The rest of the top county committees list is dominated by the New York City Democratic
county machines, whose support is crucial for any election within the City.
Overall, the top ten committees took in a total of $64.3 million (74%) and include the NYS Senate
Republican Campaign Committee ($19.9m), the NYS Democratic Committee ($7.0m), the NYS
Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee ($7.0m), the Conservative Party NYS ($5.7m), the
Democratic Senate Campaign Committee ($5.3m), the New York Republican State Committee ($4.9m),
the Independence Party of NYS ($4.5m), the Monroe County Republican Committee ($4.4m), the
Queens County Democratic Party ($3.5m), and the Kings County Democratic Party Committee ($2.1m)
Appendix C on page 35 shows the top 41 power committees that raised $100,000 or more in soft
money. These committees took in a total of $85.4 million or 98% of the total raised in housekeeping
accounts statewide.
20
How is Soft Money Used?
In the “Schedule Q” (Non-Campaign Housekeeping Expenses) portion of the New York State Board of
Elections’ campaign finance disclosure form, a set of nine purpose codes is provide for filers including
“RENTO” – Office Rent, “UTILS” – Utilities, “PAYRL” – Payroll, “POSTA” – Postage, “PROFL” – Professional
Services, “OFEXP” – Office Expenses, “MAILS” – Mailings, “OTHER” – Other - Must Provide Explanation,
and “VOTER” – Voter Registration Materials or Services.
These purpose codes essentially define the “non-campaign” types of expenses that housekeeping
monies are supposed to be used for. Schedule F of the disclosure form for “hard money” expenses
includes a larger set of 22 purpose codes with traditional campaign uses such as “LITER” – Campaign
Literature, “POLLS” – Polling Costs, and “TVADS” – Television Ads.
As noted in the disclaimer at the beginning of this report, New York State campaign finance data is
entered into the electronic databases exactly as it is reported with no formal auditing. If a filer
misreports their expenses on the wrong schedule of the disclosure form, reporting regular expenses in
“Schedule Q” housekeeping for example, those expenses will appear in the data as housekeeping
expenses. This report examines the data as it exists in the Board of Elections database and does not
attempt to account for these errors.
Reported Purpose
Amount
1. Other
$37,325,591.23
2. Payroll/Wages
$26,269,128.45
3. Office Expenses
$16,468,374.88
4. Professional Services
$7,442,511.56
5. Office Rent
$6,316,539.23
6. Unreported/Misreported
$3,766,201.23
7. Mailings
$2,870,982.69
8. Utilities
$1,834,493.14
9. Postage
$1,439,312.75
10. Political Consultants
$522,561.41
11. Polling Costs
$342,954.46
12. Contributions
$192,247.29
13. Fundraising Expenses
14. Voter Registration Materials or Services
$163,423.18
$162,002.65
15. Interest Expenses
$32,934.66
16. Campaign Literature
$16,445.40
17. Petition Expenses
$9,745.69
18. Print Ads
$9,637.90
19. Radio Ads
$2,993.40
21. Constituent Services
$1,007.81
22. Television Ads
$109.41
21
Our review of soft money expenditures by reported expense type reveals that the cost of maintaining an
office and staff constitutes the largest portion. The sum of Payroll, Office Expenses, Office Rent, and
Utilities expenses is $50.8 million. Many soft money expenditures are the unremarkable day-to-day
costs of running an organization such as paying the staff, for health insurance, purchasing equipment,
and paying the phone and cable bills.
Yet a close look at the expense records reveals that the reported purpose codes can be highly
misleading and inaccurate. The Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee reports its annual golf
fundraiser at the Whippoorwill Club as “Office Expenses.” The Independence Party reported its
$750,000 payment to John Haggerty’s “Special Election Operations LLC as an “Office Expense.”
Without clear guidelines and consistent auditing, it is impossible to rely on accurate self-reporting by the
parties. The largest single category of expenses is “Other” at a total of $37.3 million. Expenses reported
as “Other” range from $200,000+ payments for political advertising to $7 charges for lunch at a pizzeria
and everything in between. We know virtually nothing about these expenses without analyzing them
individually.
Also amorphously classified in the “Other” or “Office Expenses” categories are very large payments by
the NY State Democratic Committee and the Democratic Assembly housekeeping account to American
Express. In fall 2012, the NY State Democratic Committee filed two housekeeping expense records in the
amounts of $181,142.23 and $164,226.97 to American Express. Needless to say, it is impossible to
discern what these payments were used for and whether or not the expenses were campaign related.
In addition, nearly $3.8 million in housekeeping expenses have no purpose code or a purpose code that
is not identified and defined by the Board of Elections. Other expenses that are filed as housekeeping
are identified with purpose codes that clearly blur or cross the line into the realm of “campaign
expenditures” such as polling costs, fundraising expenses, political consultants, campaign literature, and
advertising.
Overall, less than 0.2% of housekeeping expenses are itemized as “Voter Registration Materials or
Services,” a category of activity which is often used by the parties to justify the existence of
housekeeping accounts.
The campaign-related nature of many “non-campaign” housekeeping expenses is also illustrated by the
way in which the expense activity spikes during election years. Since 2006, overall housekeeping
expenditures are 24% higher on average during election years than during non-election years.
22
Moreover, looking at the distribution of expenses by month on election years and non-election years, it
is clear that the spike in spending on election years is due to a higher level of spending during that
occurs during the run up to the election from July to October.
23
During 2010 for example, monthly statewide housekeeping expenditures doubled from an average of
$1.1 million each month from January to June to $2.2 million each month from July to October.
Spending peaked dramatically in October, the month before the election, at $3.2 million.
Looking at the monthly statewide housekeeping expenses in 2011, a non-election year, there is a stable
level of expenditures throughout the year with no spike in any particular month.
The election season spikes in housekeeping expenses are due to sharp increases in hiring high-priced
political consultants and spending on advertising and mass-mailing. Common Cause/NY analysis also
shows that during the height of the election season, money is often expended out of soft money
accounts on or near the same day that hard money committees expend money to the same vendor.
From the current state of the campaign finance records, is impossible to know if the political consultants
receiving housekeeping funds are working on campaigns for individual candidates or not
In recent years it has become disturbingly commonplace for the parties to use housekeeping funds to
pay for political advertising during election season. The Senate Republicans, Senate Democrats, New
York State Republicans, New York State Conservatives, and New York State Independence Party have all
at times used housekeeping money for political advertising, as have many county-level parties on a
smaller scale.
24
With the Board of Elections undertaking no meaningful auditing and issuing no guidance as to what
constitutes a “non-campaign” expense, the parties continue to push the boundary of housekeeping uses
further and further. The following are two examples of especially questionable high-profile uses of “noncampaign” housekeeping monies.
The Conservative Party’s Hedge Fund-Financed “Ground Zero Mosque” Campaign
In July 2010, hedge fund executive Robert Mercer donated a single check in the amount of $1 million to
the Conservative Party NYS Headquarters Account (the name of the Conservative Party’s primary
housekeeping account, which indicates the original purpose of the funds to pay for a central party
headquarters). In August and September 2010, the Conservative Party doled out $662,542 to “Multi
Media Services” to fund a television advertising campaign in support of Republican gubernatorial
candidate Rick Lazio’s stance against the location of the Park 51 Islamic community center, aka the
“Ground Zero Mosque,” in downtown Manhattan.13
The ads are clearly supportive of Rick Lazio, and Conservative Party Chair Mike Long admitted to the
Wall Street Journal that Mercer’s donation was “meant to help” Rick Lazio’s gubernatorial bid14. Yet it
was paid for by non-campaign housekeeping money and itemized with the purpose code “OTHER.”
Senate Republicans Pay the NYS Independence Party to Advertise Against George Latimer and
Terry Gipson
On October 16, 2012, the Senate Republicans’ housekeeping account gave $211,000 to the NYS
Independence Party Housekeeping Account in the form of a schedule p “non-campaign housekeeping”
donation. In the Republicans’ expense report, the payment is described with the purpose code “OTHER.”
On the very same day, the Independence Party gave $210,417.85 to “Stratregic Media Placement” [sic]
and also itemized the expense as “OTHER.”
On October 22, 2012, the same exchange from the Senate Republicans’ housekeeping account to the
Independence Party to “Stratregic Media Placement” [sic] occurred once again, this time in the amount
of $100,000.00.
These funds were used by the Independence Party to run attack ads against Democratic Senate
candidates George Latimer and Terry Gipson.15 The Gipson ad16 is clearly a classic attack ad portraying
Gipson as a servant of the “Albany special interests.” Yet the Independence Party insisted that the ads
13
John Del Signore. “Meet the Man Who Manufacture the Masses’ Mosque Madness.” Gothamist. January 19, 2011.
http://gothamist.com/2011/01/19/meet_the_man_who_manufactured_the_m.php
14
Andrew Grossman. “Hedge Fund Use Donations to Boost Clout.” The Wall Street Journal. April 17, 2012.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304432704577350314102280568.html
15
Kenneth Lovett. “Independence Party goes along with GOP scheme to dodge campaign finance laws, insiders alledge.” The
Daily News. March 4, 2013. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/lovett-independence-party-gop-annex-article1.1278583
16
Joseph Spector. “Ad Hits Democratic Senate Candidate Over Tax Cap.” Politics on the Hudson. October 26, 2012.
http://polhudson.lohudblogs.com/2012/10/26/ad-hits-democratic-senate-candidate-over-tax-cap/
25
were “issue advocacy” because they did not specifically urge viewers to vote against Terry Gipson on
Election Day.
In addition to Mayor Bloomberg’s abuses of the Independence Party detailed in the “Giving and Getting”
section above, these attack ads are yet another example of how that party’s housekeeping account has
become an open slush fund for parties and candidates to launder and disguise blatantly campaignrelated expenses.
These two examples are only the most egregious of many instances of housekeeping funds’ being used
to pay for consulting, advertising, and production of materials. The prevalence of these high-dollar
expenditures during election season strains the public’s ability to believe that the parties’ housekeeping
accounts are entirely used to build the party rather than support particular candidates and engage in
campaigns.
Furthermore, even when soft money accounts are used for their intended purpose of administration
and party building, the mere fact that political parties are able to shoulder some of the administrative
burdens that candidates would otherwise have to bear means that soft money frees up candidates’
funds and leaves them with more money for direct campaign expenditures.
26
Recommendations: Close this Loophole Now
In a poll released on May 6th, 2013,17 78% of likely voters agree that “reforming New York’s campaign
finance laws is key to cleaning up Albany, rooting out corruption, and improving the work of our state
government.”
Establishing a Fair Elections systems of public matching funds, which would reduce the dependency of
politicians and parties on big checks from special interests, is an essential aspect of any such reform. The
Fair Elections system of 6 to 1 matching funds has been highly effective in New York City at encouraging
democratic participation and amplifying the influence of small donors and constituents. In 2009, City
Council candidates who opted into New York City’s public financing system received roughly 25% of their
total campaign cash from small donors giving amounts of $200 or less. The corresponding figure for
State officials is abysmally low at 7% overall, with some individual state legislators clocking in at less
than 2%18
But alongside empowering small donors, it is crucial to lower New York’s sky-high contributions limits
and reign in the loopholes that are systematically exploited by powerful special interests. The soft
money loophole, whereby campaign contributions can be completely avoided, is the most dangerous of
these gaps in our campaign finance law. Over the past twenty years, huge soft money contributions
have come to be seen as a standard practice, a cost of doing business for any special interest seeking to
influence politics and policy in New York.
It is imperative that we close the soft money loophole by abolishing the parties housekeeping accounts.
At the very least, we must reign in the abuses of soft money by establishing meaningful contribution
limits, ensuring that these funds are used only for “non-campaign” purposes, and increasing
transparency by requiring much faster disclosure of donors. Current regulation requires soft money
accounts to files reports only twice a year in January and July. In effect, this allows donors to
housekeeping accounts who give in July or later to remain completely unknown until January of the next
year, a secrecy that has major implications in election years.
Any defense of soft money is disingenuous. There’s nothing that soft money housekeeping accounts can
do that regular hard money accounts can’t do – except raise unlimited sums of giant donations. As long
as the rules of the game make politicians accountable to narrow special interests, they’re never going to
be accountable to the public who elected them.
17
Global Strategies Group and Mercury Public Affairs. May Polling Memo. May 6, 2013. http://fairelectionsny.org/cms/wpcontent/uploads/2013/05/MayPollingMemo.pdf
18
Michael J. Malbin and Peter W. Brusoe. “Small Donors, Big Democracy, New York City’s Matching Funds as a
Model for the Nation and States .“ Campaign Finance Institute, 2011.
27
Appendix A – Methodology and Data
This report examines the soft money expenses and receipts as filed using the New York State Board of
Elections’ electronic filing system from 2006-2012. The data from the board of elections was
downloaded as ASCII delimited files and imported into a Filemaker Pro database. Soft money receipts
(contributions) and expenses are reported on schedules P and Q, respectively, of the NYSBOE’s
disclosure form. While most party committees maintain distinct “housekeeping” accounts for soft
money expenses and receipts, some use their regular “hard money” committees to file schedules P and
Q and those filings are included in this report. A few committees, most notably the Monroe County
Republican Housekeeping Committee, have a separate committee entitled “housekeeping” but within
this separate soft money committee, file their records expenses as regular hard money contributions
and expenses using schedules A to F. These transactions are also included in this report. According to
testimony given by the Board of Elections on May 20, 2013, either filing method is equally legitimate.
Some of the more significant county and local committees in the state appear to raise little or no money
through soft money housekeeping accounts according to their filings. The most notable such committee
is the Nassau County Republican Party. The Nassau County Republican Party does not have a separate
soft money account but if one were to look only at housekeeping expenses, the Nassau County
Republican Party would be the second highest spender of soft money in the state at nearly $12 million
filed under schedule Q. Yet the Nassau Republicans have less than $6,000 filed as schedule P
housekeeping receipts (contributions). Looking at their full records, it appears that the Nassau GOP is
successful in raising all the money it needs as hard money – there are no corporate donations over
$5,000 that would indicate the party is filing soft money contributions as hard money. But the party is
listing expenses that qualify as “non-campaign” related under the soft money schedule Q section of the
disclosure form. Interestingly, the town Republican committees in Nassau (North Hempstead,
Hempstead, and Oyster Bay) appear to follow the same practice, raising little to no donations in soft
money but raising enough in hard money to cover all the administrative and “non-campaign” expenses
they itemize as schedule Q soft money. If the Nassau County GOP and other such committees are
voluntarily abstaining from using the soft money loophole, they deserve praise, but this subject needs
more inquiry.
In addition to the differences in filing practices described above, the data is riddled with other
inconsistencies and errors. There are nearly 10,000 expense records listed as costing zero or no amount
is filled in at all. Some parties choose to report the transfers between their hard money and soft money
accounts as transfers (schedules G and H), others report them under schedules P and Q. There is also
$1.5 million in schedule P housekeeping receipts that are clearly the result of filer error – these are
candidate campaigns or PACS filing schedule P when only housekeeping party committees should be
filing schedule P.
All of these oddities are due to the fact that filings from committees enter directly into the electronic
database with no auditing or even checking for simple errors. This report did not attempt to up the data
28
– with over 40,000 housekeeping receipt records and 100,000 expense records -- that would have been
an impossible task. Below is the NYSBOE’s own disclaimer on data accuracy.
New York State Board of Elections Data Accuracy Disclaimer: The majority of financial disclosure
reports filed at NYSBOE are entered into the database directly from e-mail, diskette, CD or DVD filings
submitted by committee treasurers or candidates. The information contained in paper filings will be
entered into the database exactly as it appears on the forms. Because database searches retrieve
information exactly the way it is reported and then entered into the database, search results may be
inaccurate and/or incomplete. This will occur, for example, if filers do not adhere to the required
format, do not use the proper codes, misspell words or leave items blank. Although NYSBOE carefully
reviews disclosure reports and requires treasurers to submit amended reports as needed, there will
necessarily be delays before the review process is completed and the information in the database is
corrected.
Appendix B – Top Soft Money Donors in New York State
NYS Soft Money Power
Donors ($100,000 and up)
Soft Money
Contributions
2006 - 2012
Industry Category
1. MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG
$7,170,000.00
GOVERNMENT ; FINANCE ; MEDIA
2. NEW YORK STATE UNITED TEACHERS
(NYSUT) VOTE/COPE
$3,150,694.28
LABOR -- EDUCATION
3. GNYHA MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
$2,965,500.00
HEALTHCARE -- HOSPITALS
4. 1199 SEIU HEALTHCARE WORKERS EAST
$2,029,775.00
LABOR -- HEALTHCARE
5. NCDC OPERATING SBLI / NCDC
HOUSEKEEPING SLBI (NASSAU COUNTY
DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE)
$1,982,563.29
POLITICS
6. CABLEVISION
$1,573,041.52
TELECOM
7. VERIZON
$1,465,734.96
TELECOM
8. PHARMACEUTICAL RESEARCH AND
MANUFACTURERS OF AMERICA
$1,421,000.00
PHARMACEUTICALS
9. TIME WARNER CABLE
$1,227,773.24
TELECOM
10. PHILIP MORRIS / ALTRIA
$1,207,750.00
TOBACCO
11. HEALTHCARE ASSOCIATION OF NY
(HANYS)
$1,058,500.00
HEALTHCARE
29
NYS Soft Money Power Donors
($100,000 and up)
Soft Money
Contributions
2006 – 2012
Industry Category
12. ROBERT MERCER
$1,010,000.00
FINANCE –
HEDGE FUND (RENAISSANCE
TECHNOLOGES)
13. RENT STABILIZATION ASSOCIATION
$940,550.00
REAL ESTATE
14. WAL-MART
$928,500.00
RETAIL
15. ESTATE OF HENRY SANDERS
$812,710.10
ESTATE
16. NYS SENATE REPUBLICAN CAMPAIGN
COMMITTEE
$803,584.60
POLITICS
17. RED APPLE GROUP / UNITED REFINING
CO. / JOHN CATSIMATIDIS
$779,600.00
CONGLOMORATE : RETAIL-SUPERMARKET ;
REAL ESTATE ; ENERGY
18. COCA-COLA COMPANY / COCA-COLA
BOTTLING COMPANY
$663,500.00
BEVERAGES
19. LAW PAC OF NEW YORK
$651,300.00
LAW
20. AT&T
$634,800.00
TELECOM
21. DIAGEO NORTH AMERICA / DIAGEOGUINESSS
$566,000.00
BEVERAGES -- BEER ; WINE ; LIQUOR
22. LAWRENCE AND SUSAN KADISH
$559,500.00
REAL ESTATE (FIRST FISCAL FUND CORP)
$525,400.00
REAL ESTATE
$498,000.00
BEVERAGES
25. EMPIRE DENTAL PAC
$474,250.00
HEALTHCARE -- DENTAL
26. CABLE TELECOMMUNICATIONS
ASSOCIATION OF NEW YORK INC.
$471,119.80
TELECOM
27. BRUCE & SUZANNE KOVNER
$455,000.00
FINANCE -- HEDGE FUND
(CAXTON ASSOCIATES)
28. REAL ESTATE BOARD OF NEW YORK
(REBNY)
$421,000.00
REAL ESTATE
29. HOSPITALS INSURANCE COMPANY, INC.
$403,500.00
INSURANCE -- MEDICAL LIABILITY
30, GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
$400,000.00
CONGLOMERATE -- ENERGY ;
MANUFACTURING ;
MEDIA ; FINANCE
31. SUFFOLK COUNTY REPUBLICAN
COMMITTEE
$383,200.00
POLITICS
32. HOWARD COX
$382,000.00
FINANCE -- VENTURE CAPITAL (GREYLOCK
PARTNERS)
33. THE PIKE COMPANY, INC
$375,600.00
REAL ESTATE -- CONSTRUCTION
23. GLENWOOD MANAGEMENT / LEONARD
LITWIN
24. NEW YORK STATE BOTTLERS
ASSOCIATION, INC.
30
NYS Soft Money Power Donors
($100,000 and up)
Soft Money
Contributions
2006 - 2012
Industry Category
34. H.J. KALIKOW & CO. / PETER KALIKOW
$347,000.00
REAL ESTATE
35. FIRST CITY DEVELOPERS /
INNER CITY STRATEGIES
$325,000.00
MYSERIOUS, LIKELY STRAW DONOR
UNDER FBI INVESTIGATION
36. ASTRA ZENECA
$318,450.00
PHARMACEUTICALS
37. DAVID KOCH
$300,000.00
CONGLOMORATE -- INDUSTRIAL ; FOSSIL
FUELS ; CHEMICALS ; CONSUMER GOODS
(KOCH INDUSTRIES)
38. CONTELLATION WINES /
CONSTELLATION BRANDS
$293,000.00
WINE AND LIQUOR
39. GREENBERG TRAURIG / ED WALLACE
$288,550.00
LOBBYIST ; LAW FIRM
40. NY DEMOCRATIC SENATE CAMPAIGN
COMMITTEE (DSCC)
$287,176.86
POLITICS
41. US CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
$275,000.00
BUSINESS ASSOCIATION
42. VORNADO REALTY TRUST / STEVEN
ROTH
$265,600.00
REAL ESTATE
43. CITIGROUP
$264,077.17
FINANCE –
BIG BANK
44. ENTERTAINMENT SOFTWARE
ASSOCIATION
$259,600.00
ENTERTAINMENT -- VIDEO GAMES
45. SEIU INTERNATIONAL
$255,500.00
LABOR
46. DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR'S
ASSOCIATION
$250,000.00
POLITICS
47. PAUL SINGER
$250,000.00
FINANCE -- HEDGE FUND
(ELLIOTT MANAGEMENT)
49. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY
$249,150.00
PHARMACEUTICALS
50. HENRY & MARSHA LAUFER
$244,257.50
FINANCE – HEDGE FUND
(RENAISSANCE TECHNOLOGES)
51. LABELLA ASSOCIATES PC
$237,924.00
ENGINEERING
52. THE SENECA NATION OF INDIANS
$235,000.00
INDIAN TRIBE
53. MERCK & CO. INC.
$234,575.00
PHARMACEUTICALS
54. GLAXOSMITHKLINE
$225,935.78
PHARMACEUTICALS
55. BROOKFIELD FINANCIAL PARTNERS
$225,000.00
REAL ESTATE ; FINANCE
56. YANKEE GLOBAL ENTERPRISES
$218,100.00
SPORTS ; MEDIA
57. THE DONALD ZUCKER COMPANY
/ DONALD ZUCKER
$216,900.00
REAL ESTATE
31
NYS Soft Money Power Donors
($100,000 and up)
Soft Money
Contributions
2006 - 2012
Industry Category
58. TOWN OF ISLIP REPUBLICAN
COMMITTEE
$216,350.00
POLITICS
59. PATRICIA LYNCH ASSOCIATES
$202,501.11
LOBBYIST ; PUBLIC RELATIONS
60. PFIZER INC
$198,000.00
PHARMACEUTICALS
61. THE BENJAMIN COMPANIES / ALVIN
BENJAMIN
$195,200.00
REAL ESTATE
62. SEE FORWARD FUND INC,
$195,000.00
POLITICS -- PROGRESSIVE
63. SARATOGA HARNESS RACING/
SARATOGA GAMING
$193,350.00
GAMBLING ; HORSE RACING
64. ELIOT SPITZER
$182,050.00
POLITICS ; MEDIA
65. BERGMANN ASSOCIATES, INC.
$181,450.00
ARCHITECTURE ; ENGINEERING
66. YONKERS RACING CORPORATION
$180,450.00
GAMBLING ; HORSE RACING
67. JONATHAN & TEA POLLOCK
$180,000.00
FINANCE -- HEDGE FUND
(ELLIOTT MANAGEMENT)
68. SENATOR JOSEPH BRUNO
$175,950.00
POLITICS
69. FABER CONSTRUCTION CO. INC.
$175,800.00
CONSTRUCTION
70. UNITED FEDERATION OF TEACHERS
(UFT)
$169,483.33
LABOR -- EDUCATION
71. EMPIRE STATE LEADERSHIP PAC
$168,790.00
BUSINESS ASSOCIATION
72. O'BRIEN & GERE, INC.
$164,948.00
ENGINEERING
73. METROPOLITAN PACKAGE STORE
ASSOC. / COALITION FOR THE LAST STORE
ON MAIN ST
$164,150.00
LIQUOR STORES
74. SUFFOLK COUNTY CHAIRMAN'S CLUB
$162,100.00
POLITICS
75. REALTORS PAC (RPAC OF NYS)
$161,483.75
REAL ESTATE
76. AHPIA SOLUTIONS INC.
$160,000.00
INSURANCE -- MEDICAL LIABILITY
$157,350.00
REAL ESTATE
$156,000.00
PARKING
79. ROGER HERTOG
$155,000.00
FINANCE (ALLIANCE BERNSTEIN)
80. ALEXANDER "SANDY" TREADWELL
$153,150.00
None (Retired) -- former Chair of NYS
Republicans and Congressional Candidate
77. DESPATCH PROPERTIES / DANTE
GULLACE
78. MAPCO AUTO PARKS / MAPCO CIVIC
CENTER
32
NYS Soft Money Power Donors
($100,000 and up)
Soft Money
Contributions
2006 - 2012
Industry Category
81. ROBERT PRICE
$151,700.00
TELECOM ; POLITICS
82. DANIEL LOEB
$150,000.00
83. THE RENCO GROUP / IRA RENNERT
$150,000.00
84. MASON TENDERS DISTRICT COUNCIL
$145,800.00
LABOR -- CONSTRUCTION
85. DISNEY WORLDWIDE SERVICES, INC.
$135,000.00
MEDIA
86. DISTILLED SPIRITS COUNCIL (DISCUS)
$133,000.00
LIQUOR PRODUCTION ; DISTRIBUTION
87. ELLICOTT DEVELOPMENT / CARL
PALADINO
$132,400.00
REAL ESTATE
88. LU ENGINEERS
$132,200.00
ENGINEERING
89. BERNARD SCHWARTZ
$131,992.57
None (Retired) -- former Loral Space
& Communications Corp CEO
90. RURAL METRO CORPORATION
$131,575.00
HEALTHCARE -- EMT ; FIRE PROTECTION
91. EDWARD COX
$131,000.00
LAW ; POLITICS
92. ECC TECHNOLOGIES INC.
$130,700.00
INFOTECH -- CONSULTING
93. GELLER & COMPANY LLC / MARTIN
GELLER
$130,000.00
FINANCE -- ACCOUNTING
94. ANDREW SAUL
$128,800.00
FINANCE
95. CBS CORPORATION
$127,500.00
MEDIA
96. DELAWARE NORTH
$125,000.00
GAMBLING ; HORSE RACING ; HOTELS ;
FOOD SERVICE
97. ROBERT W. WILSON
$125,000.00
FINANCE -- HEDGE FUND
98. WEITZ & LUXENBERG PC
$124,000.00
LAW -- PERSONAL INJURY
99. ABBOTT LABORATORIES
$123,400.00
HEALTHCARE -- TECHNOLOGY
100. RICHARD SOKOLOW
$123,000.00
FINANCE -- HEDGE FUND (ELLIOTT
MANAGEMENT)
101. THE DURST ORGANIZATION
$123,000.00
REAL ESTATE
102. NATIONAL SHOOTING SPORTS
FOUNDATION, INC.
$122,000.00
FIREARMS
103. DLCC
$119,000.00
POLITICS
104. NORMAL COMMUNICATIONS, LLC /
ARNOLD ROTHSCHILD
$116,000.00
ADVERTISING
FINANCE -- HEDGE FUND
(THIRD POINT MANAGEMENT)
CONGLOMERATE -- HOLDINGS -MANUFACTURING
33
NYS Soft Money Power Donors
($100,000 and up)
Soft Money
Contributions
2006 - 2012
Industry Category
105. CLARK PATTERSON LEE / PHILIP CLARK
& TODD LIEBERT
$115,500.00
ENGINEERING ; CONSTRUCTION ;
PLANNING
106. JOHNSON & JOHNSON
$115,150.00
MANUFACTURING ; HEALTHCARE
$115,000.00
LABOR -- CONSTRUCTION
$115,000.00
POLITICS
109. WILMORITE / TOM WILMOT
$115,000.00
REAL ESTATE
110. CONGRESSMAN JOSEPH CROWLEY
$112,390.00
POLITICS
111. FOOD INDUSTRY ALLIANCE OF NYS INC.
$111,800.00
RETAIL -- SUPERMARKETS
112. STALLER ASSOCIATES
$111,568.00
REAL ESTATE
113. NEW YORK STATE DEMOCRATIC
COMMITTEE
$109,747.00
POLITICS
114. AETNA INC. PAC
$109,500.00
INSURANCE -- HEALTH
115. NEW YORK STATE CORRECTION
OFFICERS PBA (NYSCOPBA)
$109,047.00
LABOR -- CORRECTIONAL OFFICES
116. WARNER BROS ENTERTAINMENT INC.
$109,000.00
MEDIA
117. US AIRPORTS DEVELOPMENT INC.
$107,800.00
AIRPORT SERVICES
118. ROSE ASSOCIATES LLC / ADAM ROSE
$107,000.00
REAL ESTATE
119. THE NYS SOCIETY OF
ANESTHESIOLOGISTS
$106,000.00
HEALTHCARE -- ANESTHESIOLOGY
120. STARR UNDERWRITING AGENCIES, LLC
$105,000.00
INSURANCE
121. UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS
$105,000.00
MEDIA
122. TONIO BURGOS & ASSOCIATES
$103,150.00
LOBBYIST ; PUBLIC RELATIONS
$102,641.00
RETAIL -- FOOD -- SUPERMARKET
$102,584.33
LABOR ; POLITICS
125. IPNY CAMPAIGN ACCNT
$101,527.49
POLITICS
126. NEW YORK STATE BEER WHOLESALERS
ASSOCIATION INC.
$101,500.00
BEVERAGES -- BEER
127. WALGREENS
$101,500.00
RETAIL -- PHARMACY
128. JAMES SIMONS
$101,000.00
FINANCE -- HEDGE FUND
(RENAISSANCE TECHNOLOGES)
107. NYC DISTRICT COUNCIL OF
CARPENTERS
108. REPUBLICAN STATE LEADERSHIP
COMMITTEE
123. WEGMANS FOOD MARKETS INC /
DANIEL WEGMAN
124. A STRONG ECONOMY FOR ALL
COALITION
34
Soft Money
Contributions
2006 - 2012
Industry Category
$100,700.00
FINANCE (SIFMA)
$100,000.00
INSURANCE
131. KENNETH LANGONE
$100,000.00
FINANCE
132. MCIC VERMONT, INC.
$100,000.00
INSURANCE
133. NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
(NEA/NY)
$100,000.00
LABOR -- EDUCATION
NYS Soft Money Power Donors
($100,000 and up)
129. SECURITIES INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION NY
DISTRICT PAC
130. AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
INC.
Appendix C – Top Soft Money Recipients in New York State
Top NYS Soft Money
Recipients
($100,000 and up)
Soft Money
Contributions
(2005-2012)
Party
Committee Name(s)
1. State Senate
Republicans
$19,927,554.54
REP
Two accounts: “NYS Senate Republican Campaign
Committee – Housekeeping, and “NYS Senate
Republican Conference Committee
(Housekeeping)”
2. New York State
Democratic Committee
$7,021,689.65
DEM
“New York State Democratic Committee
(Housekeeping”
DEM
Two accounts: “NYS Democratic Assembly
Campaign Committee (DACC)” and “NYS
Democratic Assembly Campaign Comm.
Housekeeping Conference Acct. (DACC)”
CON
Five accounts: “Conservative Party NYS
(Headquarters Account),” “Conservative Party
Dinner Committee Housekeeping Account,”
“State Conservative Campaign Committee,”
“Conservative Party of NYS (Albany Account),”
“New York State Conservative Party (Conference
Accounts) (NYSCP)”
3. State Assembly
Democrats
4. New York State
Conservative Party
$6,951,799.68
$5,714,475.87
35
Soft Money
Contributions
(2005-2012)
Party
Committee Name(s)
5. State Senate
Democrats
$5,310,610.82
DEM
“Democratic Senate Campaign Committee –
Housekeeping (DSCC Housekeeping)”
6. New York State
Republican Committee
$4,870,158.64
REP
“New York Republican State Committee –
Housekeeping”
Top NYS Soft Money
Recipients
($100,000 and up)
7. New York State
Independence Party
$4,523,201.90
IND
Four accounts: “Independence Party of New York
State – Housekeeping Account,” “NYS
Independence Party Housekeeping Account (NYS
– New York State),” “NYS Independence Party
Chairman’s Club,” “Independence Party
Chairman’s Club.”
8. Monroe County
Republican Party
$4,366,362.21
REP
“Monroe County Republican Housekeeping
Committee”
9. Queens County
Democratic Party
$3,497,817.69
DEM
“Democratic Organization of Queens County”
10. Kings County
Democratic Party
$2,115,455.00
DEM
“Kings County Democratic County Committee”
11. Nassau County
Democratic Party
$2,047,138.65
DEM
Two accounts: “Nassau County Democratic
Committee Housekeeping Account” ; “Nassau
County Democratic Committee Operating
Account”
12. Working Families
Party
$2,001,533.17
WFP
“Working Families Party, Inc.”
13. State Assembly
Republicans
$1,658,336.09
REP
“Republican Assembly Campaign Committee –
Housekeeping Account”
14. Bronx County
Democratic Party
$1,615,046.97
DEM
“Bronx Democratic County Committee –
Housekeeping”
15. New York County
Democratic Party
$1,599,229.05
DEM
“New York County Democratic Committee”
16. UFT COPE Local
$1,320,694.28
*
“UFT COPE Local” – Transfers from NYSUT to UFT
misreported as housekeeping
36
Soft Money
Contributions
(2005-2012)
Party
Committee Name(s)
17. New York County
Independence Party
$1,266,496.16
IND
“New York County Independence Committee”
18. Monroe County
Democratic Party
$1,262,509.05
DEM
“Monroe County Democratic Committee”
19. Erie County
Republican Party
$991,341.90
REP
“Erie County Republican CommitteeHousekeeping”
20. New York County
Republican Party
$930,474.62
REP
Two committees: “New York Republican County
Committee,” “New York Republican County
Committee Housekeeping Account.”
21. Onondaga County
Republican Party
$909,136.18
REP
“Onondaga County Republican Committee
Housekeeping”
22. Erie County
Democratic Party
$829,778.46
DEM
“Erie County Democratic CommitteeHousekeeping”
23. Suffolk County
Republican Party
$819,979.00
REP
“Suffolk County Republican CommitteeHousekeeping Acct (SCRC)”
24. Westchester County
Republican Party
$496,286.12
REP
“WRCC Housekeeping”
25. Suffolk County
Democratic Party
$462,022.00
DEM
“Suffolk County Democratic Committee”
26. Town of Islip
Republican Party
$366,024.10
REP
“Town of Islip Republican Committee”
27. Town of Brookhaven
Democratic Party
$312,725.68
DEM
“Brookhaven Town Democratic Committee”
28. Queens County
Republican Party
$278,825.00
REP
“Queens County Housekeeping Account”
29. Bronx County
Republican Party
$241,278.45
REP
“Bronx County GOP Housekeeping”
Top NYS Soft Money
Recipients
($100,000 and up)
37
Soft Money
Contributions
(2005-2012)
Party
Committee Name(s)
30. Town of Brookhaven
Republican Party
$202,376.34
REP
“Brookhaven Town Republican Committee”
31. Rensselaer County
Republican Party
$177,063.00
REP
“Rensselaer County Republican Committee”
32. Richmond County
Republican Party
$162,935.00
REP
“Richmond County Republican Committee
33. Broome County
Republican Party
$146,633.19
REP
“Broome County Republican Committee (BCRC)”
34. Orleans County
Republican Party
$142,400.49
REP
“Orleans County Republican Committee
Housekeeping Account”
35. Village of Rockville
Centre Republican Party
$137,500.00
REP
“Rockville Centre Republican Club Housekeeping
Account”
36. City of Plattsburgh
Democratic Party
$137,118.19
DEM
“Plattsburgh Democratic Party”
37. Nassau County
Independence Party
$119,695.00
IND
“Independence Party Club of Nassau”
38. Town of Clay
Republican Party
$118,341.69
REP
“Clay Republican Committee”
39. Albany County
Democratic Party
$115,590.00
DEM
“Albany County Democratic Committee”
40. Town of Colonie
Republican Party
$113,559.20
REP
“Town of Colonie Republican Committee Housekeeping”
41. Niagara County
Republican Party
$110,742.33
REP
“Niagara County Republican Committee
Housekeeping Account”
Top NYS Soft Money
Recipients
($100,000 and up)
38
39