Study: Election spending from outside groups rises

Last edited 1 p.m., Oct. 25, 2016

Political advertising buys by undisclosed groups are more common than ever before, according to a recent analysis of ad-buy data from 2000 to the present cycle.

The study co-authored by the Wesleyan Media Project and the Center for Responsive Politics found ads funded by outside groups - aka dark money - rose to 880,000 in 2012, up tenfold from 80,000 in 2000. Through Aug. 1 this year, spending for Democratic and Republican elections from outside groups totaled 32.5 percent of all ad buys, an all-time high, according to the report. The total for all ads was $1.56 billion, meaning outside groups spent around $507 million. The report indicates more dark money is flowing into Republican coffers. Outside groups accounted for nearly 52 percent of all GOP ad spending in Senate races, compared with nearly 40 percent by outside groups for all pro-Democrat ads, according to the report.

So far, in the 2016 cycle, 72.7 percent of outside groups’ advertising can be attributed to super PACs, which have been around since 2010. Although accounting for less advertising, politically active nonprofits, which have a longer history that extends back to 2000, are the largest source of growth for dark money in elections. Super PACs spend more on Democratic campaigns, according to the report.

One example is the mystery surrounding a $2 million donation made around three months ago to Missouri Republican gubernatorial candidate Eric Greitens, according to the Missouri Times. The American Policy Coalition gave the sum to SEALs for Truth, and the same day, the latter moved the money to Greitens. Since the contribution took place three days after state disclosure deadlines, information about donors didn’t have to be released until three months later, after Greitens had won the Republican primary. Little is known about the American Policy Coalition, but, according to the Missouri Times, David Langdon filed a form about it with the Federal Election Commission. Langdon was featured in a Politico article in May titled, “Meet the Suburban Ohio Lawyer Behind the Right’s Dark Money Making Machine.”

Two Supreme Court cases - Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC in 2007 and Citizens United v. FEC in 2010 - loosened campaign finance restrictions and, the study claims, have led to the rise in ad spends by nondisclosing groups.

“They are basically groups that have to report how much money they are getting, but they don’t have to as often, nor is there any legal requirement that they have to divulge who they’re giving their money to,” said Daniel Ponder, political science professor at Drury University.