Date post: | 07-Aug-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | alex-warren |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 10
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
1/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 1
In the 2012 election, 28 percent of all disclosed political contributions came from just 31,385
people. In a nation of 313.85 million, these donors represent the 1% of the 1%, an elite class
that increasingly serves as the gatekeepers of public office in the United States.
More than a quarter of the nearly $6 billion in contributions from identifiable sources in the last
campaign cycle came from just 31,385 individuals, a number equal to one ten-thousandth of the U.S.
population.
In the first presidential election cycle since the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. FEC,
candidates got more money from a smaller percentage of the population than any year for which we
have data, a new analysis of 2012 campaign finance giving by the Sunlight Foundation shows. These
donors contributed 28.1 percent of all individual contributions in the 2012 cycle, a record high.
One sign of the reach of this elite “1% of the 1%”: Not a single member of the House or Senate
elected last year won without financial assistance from this group. Money from the nation’s 31,385
biggest givers found its way into the coffers of every successful congressional candidate. And 84
percent of those elected in 2012 took more money from these 1% of the 1% donors than they did from
all of their small donors (individuals who gave $200 or less) combined.
This elite 1% of the 1% dominated campaign giving even in a year when President Barack Obama
reached new small donor frontiers (small donors are defined as individuals giving in increments of less
than $200). In 2014, without a presidential race to attract small donors, all indicators are that the 1% of
the 1% will occupy an even more central role in the money chase.
OpenGov Voices
A megaphone for
the movement
Tech Tuesday
How we use
technology to
In-Depth Series
All Technology Policy Investigations Multimedia
F o l l o w U s
L O G I N
BLOG TOOLS APIS POLICY ISSUES PRESS ABOUT CONTACT JOINDONATE
by Lee Drutman
The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012
JUNE 24, 2013, 9 A.M.
The 1% of the 1%
How a small
minority funds
our elections
Where are the 1% of the
1%? Big donors of
elections past already
fueling 2016
More top-heavy, more
Republican: The One
Percent of the One Percent
over time
The Political One Percent
of the One Percent:
Megadonors fuel rising
cost of elections in 2014
Robust Lobbying
Disclosure Needed to
Address Advantage of the
1% of the 1%
More Stories
Tweet 3.1kLike
http://sunlightfoundation.com/https://www.facebook.com/sunlightfoundationhttps://twitter.com/sunfoundationhttps://github.com/sunlightlabshttp://sunfoundation.tumblr.com/https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fsunlightfoundation.com%2Fblog%2F2013%2F06%2F24%2F1pct_of_the_1pct%2F&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&text=The%20Political%201%25%20of%20the%201%25%20in%202012&tw_p=tweetbutton&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsunlightfoundation.com%2Fblog%2F2013%2F06%2F24%2F1pct_of_the_1pct%2F&via=sunfoundationhttp://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/series/1of1/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/27/robust-lobbying-disclosure-needed-to-address-advantage-of-the-1-of-the-1/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2015/04/30/the-political-one-percent-of-the-one-percent-megadonors-fuel-rising-cost-of-elections-in-2014/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2015/05/13/more-top-heavy-more-republican-the-one-percent-of-the-one-percent-over-time/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2015/09/11/where-are-the-1-of-the-1-big-donors-of-elections-past-already-fueling-2016/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/author/ldrutman/http://sunlightfoundation.com/donate/http://sunlightfoundation.com/join/http://sunlightfoundation.com/contact/http://sunlightfoundation.com/about/http://sunlightfoundation.com/press/http://sunlightfoundation.com/issues/http://sunlightfoundation.com/policy/http://sunlightfoundation.com/api/http://sunlightfoundation.com/tools/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/http://sunlightfoundation.com/login/sunlight/http://sunfoundation.tumblr.com/https://github.com/sunlightlabshttps://twitter.com/sunfoundationhttps://www.facebook.com/sunlightfoundationhttp://sunlightfoundation.com/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/multimedia/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/investigations/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/policy/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/technology/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/series/tech-tuesday/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/series/opengov-voices/http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-02-08/politics/35444797_1_small-donors-campaign-finance-institute-reelection-campaignhttp://bulk.sunlightfoundation.com/1of1/one_pct_of_the_one_pct.csv
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
2/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 2
The nation’s biggest campaign donors have little in common with average Americans. They hail
predominantly from big cities, such as New York and Washington. They work for blue-chip
corporations, such as Goldman Sachs and Microsoft. One in five works in the finance, insurance and
real estate sector. One in 10 works in law or lobbying. The median contribution from this group of elite
donors? $26,584. That’s a little more than half the median family income in the United States.
THE POLITICAL 1% OF THE 1%
Watch a video summary of The Political 1% of the 1%
Visualizing the inequalities
What does 31,385 people look like? This elite group of donors would occupy a little more than a third
of the seats in Fedex Field, where the Washington Redskins play football (Figure 1). But they pay a
much higher price of admission than ticket-holders there. The smallest contribution required to make it
into the 1% of 1% of political donors last year? $12,950.
Figure 1.
How unequal was political giving in 2012? If we let the Verizon Center (capacity of about 20,000) stand
in for the entire U.S., it would be as if just two people bought out the best 5,610 seats. Figure 2 shows
what that looks like.
Figure 2.
transform
government
Wednesday's
Winners
Transparency
triumphs and
opengov victories
Outside the
Beltway
Shining a light on
the opengov world
beyond Washington
Elections 2016
How money in
politics and civic
tech are shaping the
2016 cycle
Dig Into Data
Scout
Party Time
Influence Explorer
Follow UsGet news, videos, tips and more
from Sunlight.
Flickr
YouTube
Tumblr
RSS Feeds
Sunlight Foundation blog
1% of the 1%
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/rss/series/1of1/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/rss/http://sunfoundation.tumblr.com/https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDCQQPn-ROl_47x3s9ED84Qhttp://www.flickr.com/sunlightfoundationhttp://twitter.com/#!/sunfoundationhttp://www.facebook.com/sunlightfoundationhttp://influenceexplorer.com/http://politicalpartytime.org/https://scout.sunlightfoundation.com/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/series/elections-2016/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/series/outside-the-beltway/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/series/wednesdays-winners/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=042xZQZPZjU
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
3/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 3
The price of entry to be in this elite group of donors has risen steadily over the years (Figure 3). In
1990, a single $2,000 contribution (about $3,700 in 2012 dollars) could put you in the 1% of the 1%.
By 2000, the minimum contribution had risen to $5,700. It crossed the $10,000 mark for the first time
in 2008, reaching $11,000.
Figure 3.
Why the increase? No doubt, the Citizens United and SpeechNow decisions, which paved the way for
unlimited contributions to super PACs, are a key factor. Of the 1% of the 1%’s $1.68 billion in the 2012
cycle, $500.4 million entered the campaign through a super PAC (including almost $100 million from
just one couple, Sheldon and Miriam Adelson ). However, more money ($670.5 million) went directly to
parties. The vast majority of 1% of the 1% donors – 87.5 percent – contributed absolutely nothing to
super PACs, giving instead directly to candidates, parties and traditional PACs. Only 5.5 percent of the
1% of the 1% donors (1,635 individuals) contributed more than $10,000 to super PACs.
We should also note that this total does not include the at least $305 million in “dark money” in the
2012 election, since the donors behind that spending remain anonymous. But we can reasonably
http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/outside-spending/noncommittees/http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/tag/Sheldon%20Adelson/
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
4/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 4
speculate that most of them are in the 1% of the 1%, and had we been able to include them, the share
of 2012 money coming from the 1% of the 1% would almost certainly have been higher.
The rising tide of the 1% of the 1%
The 28.1 percent of total money from the 1% of the 1% marks a dubious new landmark in the history
of modern elections – well above the previous high of 21.8 percent in 2006 (Figure 4). In 2010, 20.5
percent of the money going to federal candidates and campaign committees came from the most
generous 0.01 percent of Americans.
It’s especially striking – and surprising – that the new record should have been set in a presidential
election year. The race for the White House attracts more small donors than mid-term elections. In
recent presidential election cycles (2000, 2004 and 2008), the slice of donations coming from the 1%
of the 1% held solidly around 17 percent. This year’s 28.1 percent share marks a significant break with
the past. It is a new level in political contribution inequality.
Figure 4.
Our data also cast doubt on the stereotype about big money being politically pragmatic. Less than four
percent of the most generous political donors spread their money close to evenly between the two
parties (a 60-40 split or less). Four out of five 1% of the 1% donors were pure partisans, giving all of
their money to one party or the other.
While both parties draw on the generosity of these elites, 40 percent more 1% of the 1% donors
predominantly supported Republicans than predominantly supported Democrats. We also find that
conservative Republican members of Congress depend more on 1% of the 1% donors than moderate
Republicans do, suggesting a polarizing effect of big money, at least on the political right. There is no
corresponding relationship among Democrats.
Why we should care
The 1% of the 1% are the political gatekeepers of American politics. Through countless independent
phone calls and fundraising events, they set the boundaries of acceptable political topics and positions
(i.e., what they care about and believe). They determine who is an acceptable candidate (i.e., those
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-05-08/small-donors-may-make-politics-even-worse.html
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
5/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 5
individuals whom they trust to represent their interests).
Their influence is very rarely found in simple favor trading. Rather, their influence arises from something
subtler yet far more significant: shaping the limits of acceptable political discourse, one conversation
at a time.
In the 2012 cycle, winning House members raised on average $1.64 million, or about $2,250 per day
during the two-year cycle. The average winning senator raised even more: $10.3 million, or $14,125
per day.
That money has to come from somewhere. And while it could come from small donors, it’s much more
time-efficient to host a $1,000-a-plate fundraiser, or spend an afternoon calling corporate executives,
hedge fund managers, lawyers, lobbyists, political action committee managers and others in a position
to give a few thousand dollars. Rare is the candidate with enough small donor appeal to bring in the
kind of money needed to run a successful campaign.
This places limits on what is politically possible. As Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., put it succinctly at a
recent event at Yale University, recalling his time fundraising in his recent (2012) campaign: “I talked a
lot more about carried interest inside of that call room than I did in the supermarket.” (“Carried
interest” refers to profits that private equity and hedge fund managers earn on investments.)
Murphy knows it is much easier to raise the kind of money he needs if he remains sympathetic to the
concerns of private equity and hedge fund managers – and much harder if he supports increasing the
tax rate on carried interest. Murphy is not alone. Every member of Congress faces the same concern.
They don’t want to upset the people most likely to fund their campaigns, and will try their best to avoid
doing so. As costs of elections for office run higher and higher, candidates and parties have less
freedom to cross a potential donor. It amounts to what Lawrence Lessig has called “dependence
corruption” – the way in which political discourse must necessarily shift to reflect the demands and
opinions of the most active donors.
These concerns are likely even more acute for the two parties. In 2012, the National Republican
Senatorial Committee raised more than half (54.2 percent) of its $105.8 million from the 1% of the 1%,
and the National Republican Congressional Committee raised one third (33.0 percent) of its $140.6
million from the 1% of the 1%. Democratic party committees depend less on the 1% of the 1%. The
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee raised 12.9 percent of its $128.9 million from these top
donors, and the Democratic Congressional Committee raised 20.1 percent of its $143.9 million from
1% of the 1% donors.
Party aside, what all these donors have in common is the personal wealth that allows them to
contribute tens of thousands of dollars in an election cycle. And as political scientists Benjamin Page,
Larry Bartels and Jason Seawright explain in a recent paper, the rich are not like the rest of us – and
not just because they have more money. They also have very different political priorities, particularly on
issues of economics and government spending. And as political scientist Marty Gilens has shown,
when rich people and poor people disagree on policy, elected officials almost always side with rich
people.
Where the money goes
Figure 5 breaks down all the sources of money in the 2012 election, comparing 1% of the 1% donors
with other over-$200 donors, small donors and a few other sources of money. (PACs are not included
separately in this total because they are conduits for individual donations). This figure also breaks
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2012/08/15/what-do-rich-political-donors-get-for-their-contributions/http://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/~jnd260/cab/CAB2012%20-%20Page1.pdfhttp://www.ted.com/talks/lawrence_lessig_we_the_people_and_the_republic_we_must_reclaim.htmlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEysKkI5v7c&feature=share&list=PLqHnHG5X2PXAo8rhYsOVedp0V8Kiwnylhhttp://politicalpartytime.org/
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
6/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 6
down where the 1% of the 1% money went. In brief: $410 million went directly to candidates ($235
million to Republicans, $173 million to Democrats); $671 million went to party committees ($405 million
to Republican committees, $265 to Democratic committees); $500 million went to super PACs; $89
million went to traditional PACs.
Figure 5.
For those more interested on the inequality of giving within the 1% of the 1%, we have more detail
here. The quick summary: Those in the top 10 percent of the 1% of the 1% (the top 3,139 givers in
American politics) account for about half of the total spending by the 1% of the 1%. More than half of
their contributions went to super PACs.
Congressional dependence
Every single member of Congress elected in 2012 received at least some money from the 1% of the
1% (Figure 6). Only Reps. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., ($4,750 from eight 1% of the 1% donors) and Jose
Serrano, D-N.Y., ($7,000 from six 1% of the 1% donors) received less than $10,000 total. Both
represent safe seats in poor, urban districts, and both get roughly 75 percent of their campaign money
from PACs.
Figure 6.
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/where-the-1-of-the-1-money-goes/
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
7/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 7
Of the 435 House members elected in last year, 372 (86 percent) received more from the 1% of the 1%
than they did from every single small donor combined (Figure 7). And almost half (202, or 46.4 percent)
received more than three times as much money from these large donors than they did from all small
donors combined.
The 33 senators elected in 2012 were only slightly less dependent on the 1% of the 1%. The majority
(20, 61 percent) got more money from the top donors than from all small donors combined. And one
third (11) got three times as much money.
Figure 7.
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
8/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 8
For an interactive version of the above graph, click here or on the above graph.
For bulk data on all members elected in 2012, click here.
Combined, winning House and Senate candidates in 2012 received 17.1 percent of their direct
campaign contributions from the 1% of the 1%, as compared to 13.0 percent from all small (under
$200) donors. Overall, the largest share of funding for Congress comes from PACs, which contributed
32.8 percent of the money congressional candidates received. If we combine PAC contributions and
1% of the 1% contributions, that’s exactly half of all winning Congressional candidate campaign
contributions coming from either very wealthy individuals or political action committees. (Of course,
some of the PAC money was originally 1% of the 1% money, since 1% of the 1% donors gave $89.4
million to PACs in 2012).
Overall, a total of 32 members of Congress (24 House members and eight senators) elected in 2012
got at least 25 percent of their total funds from 1% of the 1% donors. And 72 House members and 19
senators got at least 20 percent of their funds from these donors.
Table 1 (below) highlights the 20 members of Congress who depended on the 1% of the 1% for the
biggest share of their contributions in 2012. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., tops the list.
Four out of every ten dollars contributed to her campaign came directly from 1% of the 1% donors (as
http://bulk.sunlightfoundation.com/1of1/candidates.csvhttp://sunlightfoundation.com/content/1of1/small_donors_to_1of1/
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
9/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 9
compared to just five percent from small donors). House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, is also in the
top 10 with 31.8 percent of his contributions coming from 1% of the 1%, as is House Majority Leader
Eric Cantor, R-Va., at 34.2 percent.
For more on key Congressional leaders, click here
Boehner also had the highest number of donors from the 1% of the 1% giving to his campaign (2,525
individuals), and accordingly received the most total money from them ($6.8 million). That puts him just
ahead of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., for most 1% of the 1% donors (Warren had 2,361) and
ahead of Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., for most money from 1% of the 1% donors (Kaine raised $5.1 million).
However, since Warren and Kaine both ran in highly competitive Senate raises and raised remarkable
sums (Warren at $42 million, Kaine at $18 million), they don’t show when we look at the top 20 by
share of funds from the 1% of the 1%.
The top 20 list (ranked by share of contributions from the 1% of the 1%) includes slightly more
Democrats (12) than Republicans (8). Even though 1% of the 1% donors concentrate in major cities,
the geographic diversity of these top candidates is impressive. Only New York (3) and Florida (3) have
more than one representative on the list.
Table 1.
Members of Congress with the highest share of donations from the 1% of the 1%,
2012
Candidate State ChamberShare from the 1%
of the 1%
Share from small
donors
Total
raised
Nancy Pelosi (D) CA H 40.4% 4.8% $2,298,844
Roger Williams (R) TX H 38.7% 1.5% $2,736,485
Sheldon Whitehouse
(D)RI S 36.5% 6.4% $3,280,685
Nita M. Lowey (D) NY H 34.2% 3.9% $2,125,851
Eric Cantor (R) VA H 34.2% 4.9% $7,619,202
Jeff Flake (R) AZ S 33.3% 13.9% $8,967,955
Joe Kennedy III (D) MA H 32.6% 0.0% $4,193,094
Bill Foster (D) IL H 32.3% 11.8% $2,956,287
John Sarbanes (D) MD H 31.8% 5.4% $1,010,367
John Boehner (R) OH H 31.0% 26.7% $21,981,789
Jon Tester (D) MT S 29.7% 13.1% $11,881,646
Ron DeSantis (R) FL H 29.1% 6.1% $1,145,859
Ted Cruz (R) TX S 28.8% 17.2% $13,627,317
Jerrold Nadler (D) NY H 28.4% 2.4% $1,114,468
Orrin G. Hatch (R) UT S 28.3% 0.6% $8,829,902
John A. Barrasso (R) WY S 28.3% 4.5% $4,007,574
Tim Kaine (D) VA S 28.2% 17.0% $18,008,380
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/house-leaders/
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
10/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 10
Ted Deutch (D) FL H 27.9% 2.6% $1,263,534
Kirsten Gillibrand (D) NY S 27.6% 8.5% $15,577,940
Debbie Wasserman
Schultz (D)FL H 27.6% 21.0% $3,610,339
For complete data on all members elected in 2012, click here.
Partisanship
Republicans are about 40 percent more common than Democrats among the 1% of the 1%. While
almost half (49.8 percent) of the 1% of 1% gave at least 90 percent of their money to Republicans, just
over one third (35.5 percent) of these donors gave at least 90 percent to Democrats.
Figure 8 bins the donors by their level of partisanship based on how much they gave to parties and
candidates. Since super PACs are technically independent, we do not include donations to these
groups in our totals.
Figure 8.
Meet the 1% of the 1%
Who are the 31,385 individuals who contributed 28.1 percent of the traceable money in the 2012
election?
A few of them are well-known. Sheldon Adelson and his wife Miriam contributed a combined $97
million. Harold Simmons, who built a business empire around buying Superfund sites, contributed $25
million. Bob Perry, the late Texas real estate mogul, contributed $23.5 million. New York City Mayor
Michael Bloomberg is the seventh largest donor, at $10.6 million. Many of the other names atop the list
will be familiar to readers of our “Stealthy Wealthy” series.
But our analysis is not focused on specific individuals, many of whose campaign largesse and
motivations already have been well-scrutinized. Rather, our interest is in examining the role of this elite
group of donors as the collective gatekeepers of public office.
Mostly, these donors tend to come from top corporate positions, most commonly in the worlds of
finance and law. They most frequently hail from New York and Washington. Of donors for whom we
http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/2012/sketch-stealthy-wealthy/http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/2013/bob-perrys-legacy-political-giving/http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/2012/simmons/http://bulk.sunlightfoundation.com/1of1/candidates.csv
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
11/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 11
know the gender, 71.8 percent are male.
For a list of all 31,385 donors in the 2012 one percent of the one percent, click here
Top Professions
While the most common occupation listed among these donors is “Retired” (13.1%), the plurality with
identifiable professions hail from top corporate jobs: 8.8 percent identify themselves as “president,”
8.7 percent as “attorney” or “lawyer” and 8.5 percent as “CEO.” While there is some overlap among
the corporate jobs (for example, various individuals list themselves as “CEO and Chairman,” or
“President/CEO,” etc.), a total of 5,639 top donors (17.0 percent) list themselves as at least one of the
following: “CEO," "President," "Chairman,” “Executive” or “Owner."
Looking purely at the monetary contributions, CEOs and chairmen (frequently the same person)
account for the largest raw percentage of donations, which tells us that they contribute, on average, a
bit more than the average member of the 1% of the 1%. By contrast, retirees give a little less on
average, accounting for only 10.8 percent of the contributions as compared to 13.2 percent of donors.
It’s also worth highlighting that 7.7 percent of the 1% of the 1% list their occupation as “homemaker.”
Since homemakers are rarely compensated for their work, we are left to assume that their ability to
contribute tens of thousands of dollars is due to spousal or inherited wealth. “Homemaker” is the listedoccupation for 27.4 percent of the female 1% of the 1% donors, while “Retired” is the listed
occupation of 17.5 percent of the female 1% of the 1% donors. (As a basis of comparison, 11.5
percent of the male 1% of the 1% donors list their occupation as “retired.”)
Table 2.
Most common professions among the 1 percent of the 1 percent, 2012
Occupation DonorsShare of 1% of the 1%
donors
Total
donations
Share of 1% of the 1%
donations
Retired 4131 13.2% $181,663,338 10.8%
President 2764 8.8% $137,886,277 8.2%
Attorney 2738 8.7% $104,658,811 6.2%
CEO 2671 8.5% $230,678,958 13.7%
Homemaker 2432 7.7% $117,901,507 7.0%
Chairman 2428 7.7% $223,832,610 13.3%
Executive 1886 6.0% $101,835,685 6.1%
Investor 1638 5.2% $106,385,270 6.3%
Owner 1015 3.2% $42,177,945 2.5%
Top Employers
While thousands of different employers are represented among the 1% of the 1%, certain names pop
up more frequently than others. At the top of the list (by far), is Goldman Sachs, with 85 employees
contributing $4.67 million between them. Blackstone, the private equity firm, is next with 49
employees, and the major law firm, Kirkland & Ellis, is third on the list with 40 employees. Financial and
legal/lobbying firms dominate the top 20.
http://bulk.sunlightfoundation.com/1of1/one_pct_of_the_one_pct.csv
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
12/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 12
Besides Goldman and Blackstone, financial firms Morgan Stanley (38 donors), Elliot Management (24),
Citigroup (23), Credit Suisse (23), Fidelity (23) and Bain Capital (21) also make the top 20 list. That adds
up to 248 major donors from top financial firms. Elliot donors contributed on average $184,830, the
highest of any of the top employers. Bain Capital came in second, at $131,634.
The top legal and lobbying firms, after Kirkland and Ellis, are Akin Gump (36), Podesta Group (30),
Skadden Arps (29), DLA Piper (21) and Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck (20). That adds up to 176
major donors from top law and lobbying firms.
Rounding out the list of organizations with the most employees in the 1% of the 1%: Harvard
University at 33, Google at 33, Microsoft at 31 and Comcast at 26. One name that may not be familiar
to Washington insiders is the Rothman Institute, a Philadelphia-area orthopedic group with 23
employees in 1% of the 1%. It is the only healthcare organization on this list. Its 1% of the 1% donors
also gave the least on average: $25,668.
Table 3.
Most common employers among the 1% of the 1% percent, 2012
Employer 1% of the 1% Donors Total donations Average donations
Goldman Sachs 85 $4,670,207 $54,944
Blackstone 49 $2,236,050 $45,634
Kirkland and Ellis 40 $1,526,949 $38,174
Morgan Stanley 38 $1,241,241 $32,664
Comcast 37 $1,222,705 $33,046
Akin Gump 36 $1,643,941 $45,665
Google 33 $1,352,312 $40,979
Harvard 33 $1,236,391 $37,466
Microsoft 31 $1,049,667 $33,860
Podesta Group 30 $1,052,179 $35,073
Skadden Arps 29 $1,239,387 $42,737
Patton Boggs 26 $925,528 $35,597
Elliot Management 24 $4,435,923 $184,830
Credit Suisse 23 $705,788 $30,686
Rothman Institute 23 $590,366 $25,668
Citigroup 23 $746,650 $32,463
Fidelity 23 $726,414 $31,583
DLA Piper 21 $864,496 $41,166
Bain Capital 21 $2,764,306 $131,634
Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck 20 $627,016 $31,351
Top Sectors
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
13/21
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
14/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 14
Washington has the second most 1% of the 1% donors, and a much higher rate per 10,000: 12.87
donors. If the 1% of the 1% were equally distributed across the country, by definition each city would
have one such donor per 10,000 people. Among the cities with the ten most donors, Greenwich,
Conn., has by far the highest rate of 1% of the 1% donors – 39.34 donors. Greenwich is a popular
home for individuals who work in high finance.
Houston, Los Angeles and Chicago round out the top five. To see how many one percent of the one
percent donors are in your city or town, click here for data on donors by location
Table 5.
Cities with the most 1% of the 1% donors
City Donors Donors per 10,000 Total given
NEW YORK, NY 2,259 2.71 $152,697,066
WASHINGTON, DC 814 12.87 $30,820,906
HOUSTON, TX 664 3.07 $68,272,330
CHICAGO, IL 603 2.22 $45,865,679
LOS ANGELES, CA 598 1.55 $40,424,728
DALLAS, TX 507 4.08 $57,075,447
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 498 6.03 $29,840,911
BOSTON, MA 266 4.18 $17,199,606
ATLANTA, GA 262 5.9 $14,270,899
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct_by_state
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
15/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 15
GREENWICH, CT 240 39.34 $13,751,384
The cities with the highest rate of individuals belonging to the 1% of the 1% are all wealthy suburbs. In
Chevy Chase, Md., a wealthy suburb just outside of northwest Washington, 3.6 percent of the
residents are members of the 1% of the 1%. In Bloomfield Hills, Mich., a wealthy suburb of Detroit, 2.2
percent of the residents belong to the 1% of the 1%. Looking at the cities with the highest rate of 1%
of the 1% donors offers another insight into the elite nature of this group of donors.
Table 6.
Cities with the highest percentage of 1% of the 1% donors
City Donors Donors per 10,000 Total given
CHEVY CHASE, MD 105 361.2 $4,718,768
BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MI 89 226.41 $4,073,003
PALM BEACH, FL 142 166.43 $8,387,773
ATHERTON, CA 97 134.89 $5,716,703
WAYZATA, MN 50 132.38 $3,735,813
WINDERMERE, FL 31 120.16 $950,060
MEDINA, WA 36 117.42 $1,729,314
PORTOLA VALLEY, CA 44 98 $4,176,231
GATES MILLS, OH 22 97.39 $816,685
NAPLES, FL 183 90.98 $7,908,364
To explore the 1% of the 1% by state, click here
Conclusions
The U.S. now has a campaign finance system where a tiny slice of individuals – 31,385 people, not
even enough to fill half of a professional football stadium – collectively account for more than a quarter
of all individual contributions (that we can trace), even though they represent just one in ten thousand
Americans. Every single member of Congress elected in 2012 received a contribution from this group
of individuals, and the vast majority of those elected (84 percent) received more money from the "1%
of the 1%" than they did from all small donations (under $200).
A tiny sliver of Americans who can afford to give tens of thousands of dollars in a single election cycle
have become the gatekeepers of public office in America. Through the growing congressional
dependence on their contributions, they increasingly set the boundaries and limits of American political
discourse – who can run for office, what their priorities should be and even what can be said in public.
And in an era of unlimited campaign contributions, the power of the 1% of the 1% only stands to grow
with each passing year.
Data sources: Influenceexplorer.com , Opensecrets.org, Fec.gov
Read the other 1% of the 1% posts:
http://www.fec.gov/http://www.opensecrets.org/http://influenceexplorer.com/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct_by_state
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
16/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 16
Graphics by Amy Cesal and Ben Chartoff . Thanks to Alexander Furnas and Alison Rowland for their
help in preparing this post.
Previous post in series Next post in series
Lobbyists in the 1% of the 1% 1% of the 1% Lobbyist Donations to Obama
Congressional Polarization and the 1% of the 1% What do 1% of the 1% Lobbyists Want?
Profile of a 1% of the 1% donor Lobbying Disclosure and the 1% of the 1%
Notes on Methodology
To conduct the analysis we reviewed disclosed donations for the 2012 cycle to federal candidates,
party committees, congressional campaign committees PACs and super PACs. Our ability to aggregate
campaign finance data by individual donor comes with a few caveats. To calculate totals, we relied on
the bulk campaign finance records provided by the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), and we
summed the totals by a unique ID that CRP adds to the raw Federal Election Commission (FEC) data
for each contributor. CRP, a respected nonpartisan nonprofit, creates these unique ids because the
FEC, which regulates campaign finance in the United States, does not. And because donors – and the
recipients of their funds – aren’t required to accurately and reliably identify themselves in FEC records,
it’s left to CRP to take on the daunting task. In the 2012 election, there were about 1.26 million unique
donors, many with multiple name permutations.
For a good understanding of the challenges of accurate individual counts, we recommend our recent
post, “ What Charles G. Koch can teach us about campaign finance data.” While we do list the
individual members of the 1% of the 1%, we urge caution on the individual donor totals. However,
while there may be some random error in individual totals, we are confident that the aggregate
conclusions are solid, given the large number of cases that make up these aggregate totals.
We also note that our inability to include contributions to “dark money” groups in our individual donor
totals also prevents an exact comparison with our 2010 analysis of the political 1% of the 1%. Back
then, the dark money groups were a small part of the political universe, and 527s (which reveal their
donors) were the bigger vehicle for independent expenditures. The reverse is now true. We also
decided to do a true 1% of the 1% analysis this time around, taking the top 31,385 donors rather than
cutting off at a particular giving threshold, which also mitigates against a perfect comparison (we used
$10,000 as that threshold last time).
The 1% of the 1% How a small minority fundsour elections
Where are the 1% of the 1%? Big donors of elections past already fueling
2016
More top-heavy, more Republican: The One Percent of the One Percent over
time
The Political One Percent of the One Percent: Megadonors fuel rising cost of
elections in 2014
Robust Lobbying Disclosure Needed to Address Advantage of the 1% of the
1%
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/27/robust-lobbying-disclosure-needed-to-address-advantage-of-the-1-of-the-1/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2015/04/30/the-political-one-percent-of-the-one-percent-megadonors-fuel-rising-cost-of-elections-in-2014/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2015/05/13/more-top-heavy-more-republican-the-one-percent-of-the-one-percent-over-time/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2015/09/11/where-are-the-1-of-the-1-big-donors-of-elections-past-already-fueling-2016/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2011/12/13/the-political-one-percent-of-the-one-percent/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/05/koch_donations/https://www.opensecrets.org/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/27/robust-lobbying-disclosure-needed-to-address-advantage-of-the-1-of-the-1http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/28/mysterious-rick-santorum-super-pac-donor-speaks-outhttp://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/26/what-lobbyists-in-the-1-percent-of-the-1-percent-want-hint-a-lot/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/26/1pct_of_the_1pct_polarization/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/25/despite-ethics-pledge-obama-accepted-k-street-moneyhttp://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/25/lobbyists-in-the-1-of-the-1/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/where-the-1-of-the-1-money-goes/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2012/01/26/on-fire-how-the-finance-insurance-and-real-estate-sector-drove-the-growth-of-the-political-one-percent-of-the-one-percent/http://sunlightfoundation.com/people/afurnas/http://sunlightfoundation.com/people/bchartoff/http://sunlightfoundation.com/people/acesal/
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
17/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 17
Lobbying Lobby Lee Drutman Amy Cesal Money in Polit ics Barack Obama
Republicans Democrats political donations Donations Dark Money
one percent of one percent one percent of one percent 2012 one pct of the one pct Politics
data visualization Campaign Finance Transparency Congress OpenGov Open Government
Lobbyists Sunlight Foundation Super PACs Citizens United data
one-percent of the one-percent infographic video dataviz
30 Comments 1
• •
Rollo Smith •
I'm trying yo compile of a list of just who these 1% of 1% are, any help will be
appreciated. The future of mankind depends on knowing who and where they are and
places they will attend meetings and events. Don't fear the NSA, they're on the list too!
• •
ron44 •
No one tells you how to vote and no twists your arm to vote one way or another. It isup to you to gather facts, and cross check them with other information. At least do one
thing ask questions and watch the MSM for signs that they are slanting it one way or
another. If you catch them doing this then pound on them for the truth. Take no
prisoners and don't take no for an answer when you ask questions. It is hard work but
if you love America, then defend it against the barbarians at the gates of freedom and
liberty.
• •
Dudo •
There most certainly is a link between all these people and that link is Israel. Oppose
Israel or support Palestine and you will get nowhere fast in this world. Our government
is controlled by Israel.
• •
Jesse •
The truth will set you free. Thank you so much for this informative post.
Of course, to play devil's advocate, it should also be noted that the 2012
Congressional election results were essentially identical -- for both House and Senate -
- as the 2010 results. So the added money does not appear for the most part to have
swayed the public's political leanings or voting preferences.
ahynes1 •
I would be interested in hearing more about the demographics of this group and how
More Stories
https://disqus.com/by/ron44/https://disqus.com/by/ron44/https://disqus.com/by/ron44/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1646751447https://disqus.com/by/rollosmith/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Sunlight-Foundation/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/one-percent-of-the-one-percent/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/infographic/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/series/1of1/https://disqus.com/by/ahynes1/https://disqus.com/by/ron44/https://disqus.com/by/rollosmith/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-946231008https://disqus.com/by/ahynes1/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-970529774http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1225146941http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1646751447https://disqus.com/by/ron44/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-2025639875https://disqus.com/by/rollosmith/https://disqus.com/home/inbox/https://disqus.com/home/forums/sunlightfoundation/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/dataviz/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/video/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/infographic/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/one-percent-of-the-one-percent/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/data/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/citizens-united/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/super-pacs/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Sunlight-Foundation/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Lobbyists/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Open-Government/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/OpenGov/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Congress/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Transparency/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Campaign-Finance/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/data-visualization/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Politics/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/one-pct-of-the-one-pct/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/one-percent-of-one-percent-2012/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/one-percent-of-one-percent/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/dark-money/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/donations/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/political-donations/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Democrats/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Republicans/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Barack-Obama/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Money-in-Politics/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/amy-cesal/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/lee-drutman/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/lobby/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/tag/Lobbying/
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
18/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 18
• •
closely, or not, it matches the demographics of our country. What these donors
disproportionately members of a specific race, gender, age group, etc?
I'm also interested in how this plays out in state elections. What is the distribution of
high dollar donors in state elections in Connecticut or Maine, for example compared
with the distribution of high dollar donors in state elections in Texas or Florida?
• •
Edward Cate
•
Thank you much for statistically showing exactly how we get a government of the
sociopaths, by the sociopaths and for the sociopaths. The solution is to hold a lotteryof capable citizens who could serve their district in the House Of Representatives for
one year, never to serve again. No campaigning, no mud slinging, and no having to sell
out. Forget political parties, as governing is too important to left to people who like to
party. The Senate and Executive Branch can be left as is to the sociopaths, because
no non-sociopath could stand the stink and smell of doing business in D.C. for more
than one year. Beside that, they've have the 99% 'ers interests at heart because
they've have to come back to their neighborhoods, as well as live the rest of their lives
with their decisions. Wrote this up almost three years ago at
http://GreatRedDragon.com
• •
LongTimeEconomist
•
What about the labor unions?
• •
SustainbleFuture •
Labor unions are made up of individuals, who combine their money and form
Political Action Committees. The issue is not if there money has any influence
on the Politics, it does, the issue is weather that influence is UNDUE based
upon the number of people (i.e. Citizens of these United States) which are
represented by that influence.
Ethically, in an egalitarian democracy, where each person get's one vote, the
idea that money can influence the vote, or decide who gets to run for office, is
anathema to our way of life. We are Americans, not Saudis.
Labor unions represent 7% of our private workforce and as much as 35% of the
public workforce. This is considerably larger than "1% of 1%". This all seems
extremely obvious to anyone who reads and understands this issue, but for
some reason there are always some people who throw "Labor Unions" out as a
corrupting influence upon democracy. The solution is the same, get MONEY
OUT of Politics.
• •
LongTimeEconomist
•
Unfortunately, that requires a Constitutional amendment.
Philosopher3000
•
not really, we've had campaign finance limits, both Federal and
State laws limit individual contributions to campaigns at various
levels. So, we can enact laws locally to limit funds for local
elections, and get congress to pass a new law revoking citizens
united by limiting Political Speech to INDIVIDUAL U.S. CITIZENS.
Then by giving public funding money to candidates, and allowing
U.S. Citizens to run for office and access FREE media over the
public air-waves at any Media Station under U.S. jurisdiction, we
can largely eliminate the political influence of money without
limiting freedom of speech. Corporations are not people, they
can not die, or fight in wars, they are a legal fiction and must not
be allowed to participate in human Politics.
https://disqus.com/by/philosopher3000/https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/https://disqus.com/by/SustainableFuture/https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/https://disqus.com/by/yahoo-KTGVSXMZJD4U57OZ5ALH6JZ2IQ/https://disqus.com/by/ahynes1/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1096922932http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1097004842https://disqus.com/by/philosopher3000/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1096916746http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1096922932https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-945954866http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1096916746https://disqus.com/by/SustainableFuture/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-945954866https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/http://greatreddragon.com/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-946015947https://disqus.com/by/yahoo-KTGVSXMZJD4U57OZ5ALH6JZ2IQ/
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
19/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 19
• •
• •
LongTimeEconomist
•
And all those limits have been worked around by both parties,
who will surely do the same for any new limits.
Sad, but true.
• •
Philosopher3000 •
Actually, the limits on individual campaign donations are strictlyupheld and reported by both parties, as are in-kind donations
from businesses, and all campaign expenses, because scandal
will lose you an election as quickly as a felony conviction. There
is public financing for Presidential races, and there are many
states that have public financing for other races as well. You see,
the trick to having and keeping a democracy is to realize that the
rich will always try to corrupt the system, and to constantly and
consistently fight for the values enshrined in the constitution.
True Americans never give up. That's why Republicans are not
true Americans.
• •
Your Mom
•
Great question Idiot. Obviously you did not read the story. Perhaps your Wet
Nurse can read it to you Gramps....
• •
LongTimeFedupWfoxViewers •
did you read any of this at all?
• •
LongTimeEconomist •
I read all of it. And it is entirely about individuals. No mention whatsoever
of unions, which are far and away the largest contributors to one
particular party and its candidates.
• •
LongTimeEconomist
•
Your total immaturity is exceeded only by your extraordinary
need for psychiatric help..
• •
66stingray •
Hope you are 6 feet under by now. POS
• •
Clarice Hair •
Sheldon Adelson and his wife Miriam made out like bandits during the mortgage
meltdown and sold their bank for a fortune. They should be in JAIL but they must have
donated enough hush money to keep the wolves at bay. Bloomberg, Adelson, what are
some of the other names? It's beginning to sound like the membership list of B'nai
Brith - liberal jews pushing their Marxist/socialist/humanist/anti Constitutional/anti
Christian agenda.
LongTimeEconomist •
Nonsense. Adelson is the antithesis of a Marxist-socialist.
https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/https://disqus.com/by/facebook-100001584909080/https://disqus.com/by/66stingray/https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/https://disqus.com/by/philosopher3000/https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-943513342http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-946188222https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-943513342https://disqus.com/by/facebook-100001584909080/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-982451165http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1310706999https://disqus.com/by/66stingray/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-982448474http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-982451165https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-946061187http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-946187579https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-945954866http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-946061187http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-945954866http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-982446432http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1097009617http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1097350830https://disqus.com/by/philosopher3000/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1097004842http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1097009617https://disqus.com/by/LongTimeEconomist/
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
20/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/ 20
• •
• •
Serious Cat •
Why are we assuming these contributors are necessarily rich? I could give around half
my savings and make it onto this list with $15k in donations. I'd rather not do that and
instead save that money for my first home. But still...
• •
SleepyCat
•
did you read any of this?
• •
Brian Allan Cobb •
Was it ever any different?
• •
PatGinSD •
It's a disgrace that our Congress is OWNED by the filthy rich. THAT is NOT
Government of the People. The only way to wipe out this disgrace is through public
campaign financing, and an amendment to overturn the obscene Citizens United
activist SCOTUS decision.
• •
SustainbleFuture •
Actually, what this says is that our congress is 28% influenced by the super-
rich, and there are many ways to 'wipe out this disgrace' and public financing of
campaigns might be one part of that solution. Citizen's United must be
overturned, and all foreign contributions to our campaigns must be stopped.
Also, it would help if every media company that uses public air-waves was
required to play 2 hrs./day of public service announcements like campaign
commercials without being compensated. This used to be called "the news" but
now that is gone to 'the opinion'.
• •
Maggie_O
•
Go to movetoamend.org and sign the petition to show your support for anamendment that will do exactly that.
• •
Philosopher3000 •
Already did, years ago. But not enough people are educated about
civics.
• •
horace_kent •
I don't have a problem with money as speech.
• •
Philosopher3000
•
Who do I have to pay to get this horace_kent's comment removed?
• •
ctmany •
Some people have MUCH more $ than others, so you would give them MUCH
more speech as well? So you're anti-democracy? #StayClassy
• •
Gene Conway •
Names, I need names and addresses and pictures!
https://disqus.com/by/fuk_mi/https://disqus.com/by/ctmany/https://disqus.com/by/philosopher3000/https://disqus.com/by/horace_kent/https://disqus.com/by/philosopher3000/https://disqus.com/by/Maggie_O/https://disqus.com/by/SustainableFuture/https://disqus.com/by/PatGinSD/https://disqus.com/by/brianallancobb/https://disqus.com/by/serious_cat/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-940723322https://disqus.com/by/fuk_mi/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-940747484http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-962286086https://disqus.com/by/ctmany/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-940747484http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1097351783https://disqus.com/by/philosopher3000/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-940747484https://disqus.com/by/horace_kent/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-981947399http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1097351509https://disqus.com/by/philosopher3000/http://movetoamend.org/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-940986258http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-981947399https://disqus.com/by/Maggie_O/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-940986258http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-1096923673https://disqus.com/by/SustainableFuture/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-940986258https://disqus.com/by/PatGinSD/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-942544084https://disqus.com/by/brianallancobb/http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-943479677http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-946061782http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2013/06/24/1pct_of_the_1pct/#comment-943479677https://disqus.com/by/serious_cat/
8/19/2019 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
21/21
3/6/2016 The Political 1% of the 1% in 2012 - Sunlight Foundation Blog
New bill would create easy online
access to U.S. laws and statutes
•
Avat — Wouldn't it be better to
focus on a user interface that can access
the sites that already have Statutes at …
There are now 8 super PACs supporting
Ted Cruz's 2016 run
•
Avat — and no other candidate
has super pacs?
Politwoops U.S. is back!
•
Avat — HTTPS for politwoops
please? :)
New spending bill prevents agencies
from regulating dark money •
Avat — Does anyone know who
the actual representatives were that
inserted these two provisions into the bill?
SUNLIGHT FOUNDATION
yo ur email add res s you r zip code
202-742-1520
Contact Us
1818 N Street NW Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
C O N T A C T |
A B O U T |
J O B S
Our privacy policy details how personally identifiable information that is collected
on our web sites is handled. Read our terms of service.
This work by Sunlight Foundation, unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Donate to the Sunlight Foundation
59063
Sign up
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=13197#.UmqVsZTXSG0http://www.cfctoday.org/http://sunlightfoundation.com/donate/http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/http://sunlightfoundation.com/legal/terms/http://sunlightfoundation.com/legal/privacy/https://www.youtube.com/user/SunlightFoundationhttp://sunfoundation.tumblr.com/http://instagram.com/sunfoundationhttps://github.com/sunlightlabshttps://www.flickr.com/photos/sunlightfoundationhttps://twitter.com/sunfoundationhttps://www.facebook.com/sunlightfoundationhttp://sunlightfoundation.com/jobs/http://sunlightfoundation.com/about/http://sunlightfoundation.com/contact/https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/1657951?utm_source=disqus&utm_medium=embed-footer&utm_content=privacy-btnhttps://publishers.disqus.com/engage?utm_source=sunlightfoundation&utm_medium=Disqus-Footerhttps://disqus.com/http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsunlightfoundation.com%2Fblog%2F2015%2F12%2F18%2Fnew-spending-bill-prevents-agencies-from-regulating-dark-money%2F%3AkaxqA7faE5k18J2l93JKf0c45ns&imp=6p0993i1ur46eo&prev_imp&forum_id=520009&forum=sunlightfoundation&thread_id=1430399225&thread=4415559697&zone=thread&area=bottom&object_type=thread&object_id=4415559697http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsunlightfoundation.com%2Fblog%2F2015%2F12%2F18%2Fnew-spending-bill-prevents-agencies-from-regulating-dark-money%2F%3AkaxqA7faE5k18J2l93JKf0c45ns&imp=6p0993i1ur46eo&prev_imp&forum_id=520009&forum=sunlightfoundation&thread_id=1430399225&thread=4415559697&zone=thread&area=bottom&object_type=thread&object_id=4415559697http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsunlightfoundation.com%2Fblog%2F2016%2F02%2F09%2Fpolitwoops-u-s-is-back%2F%3ArG6v8-Qqv1O2l9wrUNacT72PhB0&imp=6p0993i1ur46eo&prev_imp&forum_id=520009&forum=sunlightfoundation&thread_id=1430399225&thread=4565326959&zone=thread&area=bottom&object_type=thread&object_id=4565326959http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsunlightfoundation.com%2Fblog%2F2016%2F02%2F09%2Fpolitwoops-u-s-is-back%2F%3ArG6v8-Qqv1O2l9wrUNacT72PhB0&imp=6p0993i1ur46eo&prev_imp&forum_id=520009&forum=sunlightfoundation&thread_id=1430399225&thread=4565326959&zone=thread&area=bottom&object_type=thread&object_id=4565326959http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsunlightfoundation.com%2Fblog%2F2015%2F12%2F11%2Fthere-are-now-8-super-pacs-supporting-ted-cruzs-2016-run%2F%3A4mCGofshdNpf0SnVLMtAdl9Eoik&imp=6p0993i1ur46eo&prev_imp&forum_id=520009&forum=sunlightfoundation&thread_id=1430399225&thread=4395592201&zone=thread&area=bottom&object_type=thread&object_id=4395592201http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsunlightfoundation.com%2Fblog%2F2015%2F12%2F11%2Fthere-are-now-8-super-pacs-supporting-ted-cruzs-2016-run%2F%3A4mCGofshdNpf0SnVLMtAdl9Eoik&imp=6p0993i1ur46eo&prev_imp&forum_id=520009&forum=sunlightfoundation&thread_id=1430399225&thread=4395592201&zone=thread&area=bottom&object_type=thread&object_id=4395592201http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsunlightfoundation.com%2Fblog%2F2015%2F11%2F19%2Fnew-bill-would-create-easy-online-access-to-u-s-laws-and-statutes%2F%3AlQeogFwW4RQxWpKj12aADnbUSMg&imp=6p0993i1ur46eo&prev_imp&forum_id=520009&forum=sunlightfoundation&thread_id=1430399225&thread=4333331432&zone=thread&area=bottom&object_type=thread&object_id=4333331432http://disq.us/url?url=http%3A%2F%2Fsunlightfoundation.com%2Fblog%2F2015%2F11%2F19%2Fnew-bill-would-create-easy-online-access-to-u-s-laws-and-statutes%2F%3AlQeogFwW4RQxWpKj12aADnbUSMg&imp=6p0993i1ur46eo&prev_imp&forum_id=520009&forum=sunlightfoundation&thread_id=1430399225&thread=4333331432&zone=thread&area=bottom&object_type=thread&object_id=4333331432