Money And Midterms: Political Campaign Spending

Political campaigns in the United States are costly affairs, with billions of dollars spent on advertising, marketing, and other activities to influence voters and shape policy outcomes. The money comes from various sources, including individual candidates, political parties, and outside groups, such as super PACs and dark money organizations. The total amount spent on midterm election campaigns has been increasing over the years, with the 2018 midterms costing around $5.7 billion, and estimates for the 2022 midterms reaching over $9.3 billion. These figures highlight the significant financial resources required to run competitive political campaigns and the potential influence of wealthy donors and special interest groups on the political process.

Explore related products

Political Control of the Economy

$45 $50

A Citizen's Guide to U.S. Elections: Empowering Democracy in America (Citizen Guides to Politics and Public Affairs)

$24.59 $51.99

The Transformation of American Politics: Activist Government and the Rise of Conservatism (Princeton Studies in American Politics: Historical, International, and Comparative Perspectives Book 94)

$33.67 $55

The Political Cost of AIDS in Africa

$84.32

10 Costly Medicare Mistakes You Can't Afford to Make

$9.99 $9.99

The Cost of Rights: Why Liberty Depends on Taxes

$9.47 $21.95

Spending by political action committees

Political action committees, or PACs, are committees that make contributions to other federal political committees. Independent-expenditure-only political committees, also known as "Super PACs", can accept unlimited contributions, including from corporations and labour organizations. Spending by political action committees increased more than eightfold from 2008 to 2020.

In the 2020 election cycle, campaigns raised over $9 billion between January 2019 and April 2020, about $10.6 billion when adjusted for inflation. Over 65% of that money, around $5.6 billion, came from PACs. During the run-up to the 2020 elections, campaign spending reached $4.8 billion between January 2019 and April 2020, $5.7 billion when adjusted for inflation. By the end of the election cycle, expenditures topped $15.4 billion, or $18.2 billion inflation-adjusted.

In 2020, nearly $14 billion was spent on federal election campaigns in the United States, making it the most expensive campaign in US history. Critics have asserted that following a number of Supreme Court decisions, particularly Citizens United v. FEC (2010), the very wealthy are now allowed to spend unlimited amounts on campaigns through Political Action Committees, especially Super PACs. Consequently, critics, such as the Brennan Center for Justice, allege that "big money dominates US politics".

In the 2022 election cycle, an estimated $16.7 billion was spent, exceeding that of the last mid-term election. Between January 2023 and April 2024, US political campaigns collected around $8.6 billion for the 2024 House, Senate, and presidential elections. Most of the money spent so far has come from PACs – nearly $2.2 billion, or 56.5% of total expenditures as of April 2024.

Spending by individual candidates

During the 2024 election cycle, political action committees (PACs) contributed significantly to the funding of campaigns, with over 65% of the total funds raised, amounting to about $5.6 billion. This has been a growing trend, with PACs spending nearly $2.2 billion between January 1, 2023, and May 9, 2024, which is more than half of the total expenditures during that period.

While the 2024 elections saw a substantial increase in overall campaign funding, it is worth noting that the sources of this funding are diverse. Individual candidates have played a significant role in fundraising, with their direct spending amounting to roughly $1.1 billion during the same period. This highlights the importance placed on individual candidates' abilities to raise funds and compete in an increasingly expensive political landscape.

The spending by individual candidates in US political campaigns has also been influenced by the emergence of super PACs, which have further intensified the financial aspect of elections. Billionaires, such as Elon Musk, and other wealthy individuals have taken advantage of the opportunities presented by super PACs to exert influence. This has resulted in a surge in spending, with billionaires pouring 160 times more funds into campaigns in the years following the Citizens United ruling, according to an ATF report.

In addition to super PACs, individual candidates have also benefited from contributions by wealthy donors. For example, during the 2024 elections, Linda McMahon, a former wrestling promoter and business executive, contributed $25 million along with her husband. Similarly, Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, contributed more than $21 million to the Republicans. These large sums of money have been directed not only towards presidential elections but also towards securing control of the government in down-ballot races.

Spending by party committees

In the 2024 election cycle, party committees raised over $929.9 million, with the Democratic National Committee bringing in $188.6 million and the Republican National Committee raising $130.1 million. The remaining funds came from various party committees at the local, state, and national levels, demonstrating the diverse sources of financial support within political parties.

The impact of party committee spending is evident in Senate races, where outside groups, such as super PACs and dark money groups, can heavily influence the outcome. For example, the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC connected to Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, has spent millions of dollars on ads in competitive Senate races in states like Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. This influx of money can sway these races, affecting the composition of the Senate and, ultimately, the direction of public policy.

The role of party committees in political spending has evolved with the emergence of super PACs, which can substantially affect the political environment. While super PACs are required to disclose their donors, dark money groups, which are often connected to party committees, can spend millions of dollars on elections without revealing the source of their funding. This lack of transparency in political spending has raised concerns about the influence of hidden interests in American politics.

Additionally, it is worth noting that political spending by party committees and other entities has been increasing over time. For instance, the total spending in the 2018 midterm elections was approximately $5.7 billion, while projections for the 2022 midterms estimated a significant jump to more than $9.3 billion. This upward trend in political spending highlights the growing financial investment in elections and the potential impact on the democratic process.

Explore related products

A Republic No More: Big Government and the Rise of American Political Corruption

$10.88 $17.99

Democracy or Republic?: The People and the Constitution

$15 $25

The High Cost of Good Intentions: A History of U.S. Federal Entitlement Programs

$17.99 $45

Cost-Benefit Analysis: Concepts and Practice

$53.78 $73

The Profiteers: How Business Privatizes Profits and Socializes Costs

$13.77 $32

Why Not Build the Mosque?: Islam, Political Cost, and the Practice of Democracy in Greece (Contemporary Ethnography)

$38.89 $44.95

Spending by outside groups

In the 2022 midterm elections, outside groups spent a record-breaking amount, contributing more than $1.3 billion, according to OpenSecrets. This figure represents a massive escalation from previous years, with double the amount spent in 2014 and a 32% increase from 2018. The biggest outside spender in these elections was the Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC aligned with Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell, which spent $219 million in eight states, including Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio.

During the 2020 election cycle, outside spending, which includes super PACs and "dark money" organizations, totalled nearly $3.3 billion, almost doubling the amount from the 2016 election. Super PACs, which first emerged in the 2010 election, have become an increasingly significant source of funding for political campaigns. In the 2019-2020 election cycle, there were 2,415 groups organized as super PACs, with total receipts of over $2.5 billion and independent expenditures of nearly $1.3 billion.

"Dark money" groups pose a challenge to transparency in campaign financing. While the recipients of these funds know the identity of the donors, the public does not. This lack of disclosure allows special interest groups to exert influence on political campaigns without full accountability. According to OpenSecrets, "dark money" groups spent more than $1 billion at the federal level in the 2020 election, with a significant portion coming from ""opaque political nonprofits and shell companies."

The impact of outside spending is not limited to monetary contributions. Conservative groups, in particular, have leveraged their financial resources to influence congressional races. In 2010, outside spending by conservative groups was nearly twice that of similar groups in the previous midterm elections, according to the Sunlight Foundation. This spending surge was driven by the prospect of Republicans seizing control of the House of Representatives, demonstrating how outside groups can shape the political landscape through strategic investments.

Spending by super PACs

Super PACs, or political action committees, are committees that can receive unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations, unions, associations, and other PACs. Unlike traditional PACs, super PACs cannot contribute directly to candidates or political parties. Instead, they use these funds for independent expenditures, such as ads that advocate for or against a specific candidate without coordinating with that candidate's campaign. This independence is a key condition that allows super PACs to accept unlimited contributions.

The emergence of super PACs can be traced to the 2010 Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court, which held that independent expenditures could not be corrupting and were protected as a type of "speech" under the First Amendment. This ruling, along with legal loopholes, has led to massive increases in political spending by outside groups, particularly the ultra-wealthy, corporations, and special interest groups. From 2010 to 2022, super PACs spent approximately $6.4 billion on federal elections, with at least $2.7 billion spent in the 2024 election cycle.

The sources of super PAC funding are not always transparent, as they can receive donations from dark money groups that do not disclose their donors. This lack of transparency has raised concerns about political corruption and the influence of secret money in elections. In some cases, super PACs have received the majority of their funding from these anonymous sources, obscuring the true source of their financial support. This dynamic has fostered a culture of hidden influence by wealthy individuals and special interests, undermining voters' right to know who is financing political campaigns.

To address these concerns, some in the government have introduced legislation to increase transparency and curb secret spending in political campaigns. However, despite these efforts, super PACs continue to play a significant role in American politics, often working in tandem with candidates and parties to influence elections and shape public policy.

Frequently asked questions