Tuesday, November 18, 2014

Billionaires vs Billioneires: Re: Low turnout, a factor? NO!

Chay, Ricky,


Since you can not open the links, I opened it for you. Yahoo was just asking you to click on the icon to proceed. Here again, I was just answering your post that billionaires favor Republicans. Now Ricky as his usual with his red colored glasses and hat proceeded to his near moronic proclamation, which is becoming like a drone.

Ricky, do me favor and stop this nonsense. You are like a left wing nut whose nuts are missing. Any post contrary to your belief is from a moron. Please don't flatter yourself, Cesar and I gave figures and you gave hunches and you expect me to say thank you.??

..HMC


Democrats funded by billionaires complain about Republicans funded by billionaires

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on Google Plus
Share via Email
More Options
Resize Text
 
Print Article
 
Comments 185
By Jennifer Rubin March 27  
The left’s fixation with the Koch brothers is akin to CNN’s obsession with the Malaysian Airlines disappearance. It’s 24/7 speculation and conspiracy theories mixed with endless repetition. It’s hard to describe the nonstop onslaught from the Democrats’ PACs and campaigns against the billionaire libertarian brothers. Democrats run ads, complain about them in mailers and jabber about them on cable TV shows. The brothers seem, in some cases, their prime issue. So far it’s been a frightfully expensive lark, not doing much to up the ante against Republicans. But the Democrats seem to think it’s the only way to boost their base. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid goes on tirades like this:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev., faces reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 11, 2014, following a caucus lunch. Reid said that he stands behind Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., after she accused the CIA of undermining congressional oversight and the separation of powers under the Constitution. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev., faces reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 11, 2014 (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
The Koch brothers and other moneyed interests are influencing the politics in a way not seen for generations. Republican senators have come to the floor to defend the Koch brothers’ attempt to buy our democracy. Once again, Republicans are all in to protect their billionaire friends. Not only have Senate Republicans come to the floor to defend the Koch brothers personally, they have again and again defended the Koch brothers’ radical agenda – and it is radical, at least from the middle-class perspective.
We get it — billionaires are bad, bad guys. Now, it wouldn’t be so despicable — anyone in politics these days can come up with a distracting, unsuccessful bogeyman — if it were not for the sheer hypocrisy of it all.
The Senate Majority PAC ads have gone up in Louisiana and Colorado harping on “out-of-state billionaires” trying to “rig the system.” It’s very similar to Reid’s assault on the Koch brothers from the Senate floor. According to reports, the Senate Majority PAC has only just begun.
News reports tell us that the Senate Majority PAC is going up with a $3 million TV ad attack against Republicans in Arkansas, Colorado, Louisiana, Michigan and North Carolina based on this message. But when you look at Senate Majority PAC and those taking their money, it is hard to miss — you guessed it — the out-of-state billionaires trying to rig the system.
Who is the biggest donor to the Senate Majority PAC? Out-of-state billionaire Michael Bloomberg, according to the latest FEC filings. But he is not alone. There are a whole gaggle of billionaires giving to the Senate Majority PAC who hail from states which don’t have Senate races in 2014. The list of billionaire donors to the outfit condemning out-of-state billionaire donors includes billionaires Eli Broad, Jon Stryker, Steven Spielberg and Dirk Ziff. Also ponying up money to the Senate majority fund are not-quite-billionaire Hollywood donors such as Jeffrey Katzenberg and the Weinstein Company. (All you have to do is compare the contributor list on OpenSecrets.org to the Forbes billionaire list.)
The candidates the Senate Majority PAC is supporting also take moneydirectly from out-of-state billionaires. Using the donor look-up search on OpenSecrets you can find, for example, Sen. Mary Landrieu – whose campaign has been blasting the Koch brothers – got money from a different out-of-state billionaire, Eli Broad.
What about North Carolina Senator Kay Hagan? Her campaign gripes about the billionaire Koch brothers but she took billionaire money directly from television mogul Haim Saban. Not to be left out, Sen. Mark Pryor, who also decries billionaires flooding the state, eagerly rakes in cash from Colorado moneyman Charles Ergen. Sen. Mark Udall is upset about all that billionaire money but has his own billionaire donors — Soros and Leonard Lauder, for example — in addition to the benefit of the Senate Majority PAC’s billionaire-financed ads decrying the role of billionaires in politics. Billionaires also route money to these Democrats through the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
Now, I’ve got no problem with third-party money or with billionaires giving money directly to campaigns; neither do most Republicans. But it is Democrats who brought up the Koch complaint and who have been impugning the Koch brothers. In 2010 Democrats attacked the nefarious and non-existent “foreign money” from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; now it’s two businessmen. But if it’s all that terrible to take billionaires’ money then the Democratic candidates and the Senate Majority PAC should give back their billionaires’ cash.
If not, the next time the aggrieved Democrats are on a cable TV new show, someone should ask them: Why are your billionaires any better than your opponent’s billionaires?


How many billionaires support the Democratic vs. Republican parties?

By Lauren Carroll on Monday, June 23rd, 2014 at 4:28 p.m.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said the GOP has more billionaire supporters than the Democrats do.
Recently, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has been on a crusade against what he believes is undue influence from wealthy individuals and corporations in campaigns, enabled in part by Supreme Court decisions in the Citizens United andMcCutcheon cases.
A reader pointed us to one of Reid’s latest comments on the subject from the Senate floor.
"The decisions by the Supreme Court have left the American people with a status quo in which one side's billionaires are pitted against the other side's billionaires, except one side doesn't have many billionaires," he said in a floor speech.
This comment quickly prompted the Republican National Committee to circulate aYouTube video of Reid’s comment, with the mock-incredulous headline, "Harry Reid Claims Democrats Don't Have Billionaire Backers."
At first, we thought Reid said, "one side doesn’t have any billionaires" -- as did some critics on social media. If he had said "any," that would have been a false statement. But a close listening shows that Reid said "many."
That makes our job harder -- how many of America’s 492 billionaires do you need to have the backing of "many" billionaires? And do Democrats have fewer than Republicans?
We can’t answer the question of which side has more because it’s impossible to know exactly who donates to elections and how much they give. Certain types of political nonprofits are not required to disclose all their funders, although some do so voluntarily.
For example, despite being Reid’s biggest rhetorical targets, brothers David and Charles Koch do not appear as donors on any of the campaign finance information we reviewed. The two businessmen co-founded Americans for Prosperity, an influential conservative super PAC.
But by looking at some publicly available information -- mostly from the Center for Responsive Politics’ Open Secrets database, which collects disclosure data from the Federal Election Commission -- we were able to get an idea of what role America’s billionaires play in each party.
We cross-checked the Open Secrets list of the top 100 individuals donating to outside spending groups in the current election against the Forbes list of the world’s billionaires and found that, as of June 19, there were 22 individuals on the Open Secrets list who were billionaires. Of those 22 billionaires, 13 -- or more than half -- gave predominantly to liberal groups or groups affiliated with the Democratic Party. The other nine gave predominantly to conservative groups. (A list of billionaires and how much they donated can be found here.)
Among the liberal-leaning donors are former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and business magnate George Soros. On the conservative side are S. Daniel Abraham, who founded SlimFast, and Vincent McMahon, who owns World Wrestling Entertainment.
These lists aren't complete due to the disclosure rules protecting donors' identities. Both sides are spending more of this "dark money" than ever before, said Robert Maguire, a political nonprofit investigator at the Center for Responsive Politics.
Still, from what we know about this cycle, the Democrats do have significant billionaire backing. The top donor from either party so far this cycle is pro-Democratic -- California billionaire Tom Steyer, who has given more than $11 million and has pledged to spend at last $50 million. His group, NextGen Climate, plans to attack Republican candidates in several competitive races on climate change. Some have called Steyer’s initiative a liberal answer to the Koch brothers.
In other recent election cycles, though, Republicans have had the upper hand.
According to Open Secrets, Republicans had a larger share of the billionaires -- and their contributions to outside spending groups -- in the 2012 election cycle. Among the top 100 donors in the Open Secrets list, 33 were billionaires, and of those, 14 gave primarily to liberal groups while 19 gave to conservative groups.
In addition, the top 100 donors of 2012 gave 41 percent of all the money collected by outside spending groups, and of their donations, 71 percent went to conservative groups.
Some of the leading Republican-oriented donors were Jon Huntsman, Sr., father of the 2012 Republican presidential hopeful; Richard and Bill Marriott of the hotel chain; and casino mogul Sheldon Adelson. Adelson topped the list at more than $90 million in donations -- three times what the next top donor gave.
The Republican advantage in 2012 is even more visible in a Forbes list of the top 40 billionaire backers on each side -- including more than just those who donated to outside spending groups, such as direct campaign donations or those who fundraise for a candidate. Of those 40, 29 supported conservative groups and candidates, and just 11 supported liberals.
Republicans tend to donate to and use non-disclosing groups more than Democrats do, said Center for Responsive Politics spokeswoman Viveca Novak. Conservative political nonprofits spent almost five times as much as liberal ones in 2012, according to Open Secrets data. So far in 2014, they have spent almost twice as much.
That said, there were some notable liberal billionaire donors in 2012, as well, including filmmaker Steven Spielberg and LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman.
Also, neither party is pleading poverty these days due to funds raised from people below the billionaire bracket. So far in the 2014 election cycle, the top Democratic Party committees have raised more than $725 million, according to Open Secrets. The top Republican Party committees have raised more than $600 million. In the 2012 election, the Democrats and Republicans each raised about $1.7 billion.
Democrats may have closed the gap this cycle by getting more support from the growing number of young, ultra-wealthy liberals in Silicon Valley -- like Hoffman, who is worth $3.2 billion at 47 years old -- suggested Forbes reporter Clare O’Connor, who has covered the subject. At the same time, an increasing number of the very rich are splitting their support between the parties, she said.
We can’t make a final call on whether or not Reid was right in saying the Democratic Party "doesn't have many billionaires." We know that both parties have billionaire backers. In 2012, the advantage went to the Republicans. So far in 2014, the Democrats have the edge in terms of public donations to outside spending groups. But this is far from a full picture because of current donation disclosure rules.
"We’ll never know," O’Connor said.
..HMC

..HMC

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Ricky Sobrevinas <ricksobrevinas@yahoo.com> wrote:
Mar, I don't castigate Honorio for his idiotic ideas. I castigate him for not using his rusting brains to think through the ideas he slavishly absorbs from Fox News to determine their veracity, and using those same unconfirmed, untruthful ideas to hurt the interests of Filams and American that have literally destroyed the middle classes in a country that was once so great it was the shining example of the world.

Now all we have are middle class suffering on top of the oppressed Poor that ha brought down the inequality to Third World levels and consigned the country to mediocrity and decay. It is the height of idiocy for Filams to be so ensconced with the ultra right wing who are paid minions of the billionaires in this country that actually hurt families and the future. When obviously intelligent people start acting like they're retarded and work against their own interests totally refusing to critically assess the assumptions of the ideas they propound, that is what I find objectionable. A brain is too precious a gift to waste which deserves being castigated when deliberately used for nefarious policies.

Now why should anyone castigate you as a Progressive when you have Truth on your side as you never have to use prevarications in expressing your ideas?

Ricky

On Monday, November 17, 2014 10:53 AM, Cesar Lumba <lumbacesar@gmail.com> wrote:


Oyo,
I clicked on the two links you provided and surprise, surprise, I got this message in both instances:  Page Not Found.
By the way, you are right: the $113 billion is a ridiculously low figure.  It has been estimated that $3.4 billion was spent in the last elections (federal, state and local governments).
Now we're back to the logic of the climate change debate. The Huffington Post article talks about known contributions of billionaires.  It does not include contributions of multimillionaires, millionaires and rich and ultra-rich. It does not include contributions of grass-roots activists on both sides.  It does not include the contributions of politicians themselves who tapped their own campaign war chests.
We're talking about billionaires, and the known distribution of billionaire contributors favors the Republicans lopsidedly.
I can't be any more empirical than that.  And I hope you will not argue that the unidentified contributions must have favored the Democrats because that is pure speculation. The Tea Party people and conservatives think alike - it's a fact if they say so. This is not the climate change debate redux, where you argue that because 97% of the scientists did not participate in one survey they must not have an opinion, or they must be climate change deniers too.
C

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 6:35 AM, hmcruzmd <hmcruzmd@gmail.com> wrote:
Ricky,

Once again, you are wearing your Blue Hat. You are the one not using your brain with that stupid assertion. Can you just reread what the thread was, from Cesar L which showed a ridiculously low amount on money $113 Million spent by billionaires to support either parties, not only Republicans, from a left leaning Huffing & Puffington Post. I posted the one from Washington Post and Politifact to show the opposite opinion. All told the campaign contributions from both sides is probably a billion dollars, probably of equal amounts to each party. But that's the problem with you, you go on half cocked, even without reading and understanding my  and the previous posts, only to say that the Republican Party Spends more money coming from the rich. 

If you are alleging that only the Billionaire donors for the Republicans try to circumvent the election rules with secret donations, you are further along in losing your neurons. First of all, do you think you know more than these investigative reporters reporting on these issues. Don't tell me, you are hobnobbing with these billionaires so you know the score. Well, good for you.

..HMC

..HMC

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 11:31 PM, Ricky Sobrevinas <ricksobrevinas@yahoo.com> wrote:
HMC, $113 M to Republican candidates? How naïve can you be? Have you heard of Citizens United. The Republican Supreme Court ruled that  donors can conceal their political contributions to PACs which now have a right to conceal their donors anonymously, supported by Republicans. This anonymous feature kills transparency and allows Republican billionaires to conceal their massive political influence from the public.

Democrats and liberals opposed this lack of transparency as did the Democratic members of the Supreme Court. Any guess as to why Republican billionaires wanted money contributions a secret? You do have a brain don't you?

Ricky

On Monday, November 17, 2014 1:05 AM, Honorio Cruz <hmcruzmd@gmail.com> wrote:


Chay,

Both Parties have Billionaire donors. As to how many and by how much depends on which side of the aisle publishes it or whether they intend to use it for moral or to disparage the other party for being on the side of the rich. The Democrats have traditionally lambasted the Republicans for being in the pockets of the rich. If you are to believe what Huffington Post is recounting, then you have to believe that the Billionaires backing the Republicans as pikers

The Huffington Post reported on Thursday that Americans whose fortunes exceed $1 billion and their families have contributed a total of $113.7 million in this year's races for federal offices

Don't you think that the amount given by Huffing and Puffinton Post of $113.7 million for both parties, is a mere pittance as compared to how much the Democrats got, beginning with Tom Steyer pledging $100 million for 2014.
A billionaire retired investor is forging plans to spend as much as $100 million during the 2014 election, seeking to pressure federal and state officials to enact climate change measures through a hard-edge campaign of attack ads against governors and lawmakers.
The donor, Tom Steyer, a Democrat who founded one of the world’s most successful hedge funds, burst onto the national political scene during last year’s elections, when he spent $11 million to help elect Terry McAuliffe governor of Virginia and millions more intervening in a Democratic 


The truth is that both parties have more or less equal campaign War Chest coming from billionaires. To blame one party as recipient of more funds from the rich is biased reporting.
 
..HMC

On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 6:58 AM, Cesar Lumba <lumbacesar@gmail.com> wrote:
Oyo,

Karl Rove does not have to appear often in Fox News to do his damage.  In fact, he need not appear at all.

His job in this and the 2012 elections was to mobilize the billionaires, to stir them to so much frenzy that they would be willing to part with millions just to see the Democrats lose.

In 2012 it didn't work, so Rove retooled and planned his demolition job more carefully. The result: he discouraged enough Democratic voters to hand the elections to Republicans handily.

Below is an article about the participation of America's billionaires in the elections just concluded.

And these were just the billionaires we know about.  There were a lot of billionaires and millionaires that were never identified because they contributed to so-called nonprofit corporations whose donors, by law, never had to be disclosed.

C


Top Billionaire Campaign Donors Favor Republicans In 2014

Posted: 09/26/2014 8:58 pm EDT Updated: 09/26/2014 8:59 pm EDT
2014 ELECTION BILLIONAIRES
  • Share on Google+



WASHINGTON -- The wealthiest Americans are playing a larger role in politics these days, thanks to campaign finance laws loosened by the Supreme Court's conservative majority. Billionaires can now make unlimited contributions to super PACs, or, if they prefer discretion, to nonprofit groups that don't disclose their donors.
At the same time, the rich are making contributions directly to candidates and political parties. In fact, the Supreme Court ruled in April in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission that those with the means may contribute to as many candidates and political party committees as they please.
The Huffington Post reported on Thursday that Americans whose fortunes exceed $1 billion and their families have contributed a total of $113.7 million in this year's races for federal offices. Billionaires have given $27.4 million directly to parties, political campaigns and leadership PACs, with more than one-quarter of those direct contributions from just 20 billionaires. Contributions from individuals and their families come from Federal Election Commission records for party committees, candidate committees and leadership PACs affiliated with candidates.
Donors are limited to giving $2,600 per election to each candidate. A donor who gives the maximum to a candidate in both a primary and a general election contributes a total of $5,200. For candidates who have run in a special election and face a subsequent election within the same two-year cycle, donors can give up to $10,400. National party committees can receive $32,400 per year from a donor, and may accept an additional contribution in the event of a recount. State party committees can receive up to $10,000 per year. Leadership PACs may accept an annual maximum of $5,000.
Below are the 20 top billionaire donors to these committees for the 2014 election, so far:
1) Sheldon Adelson, Las Vegas: $814,300 (100 percent to Republicans) Sheldon Adelson
Photo by Ethan Miller/Getty Images
Casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, the top donor to super PACs in the 2012 election, has flown under the radar so far in this year's midterms. Adelson has not registered a single super PAC donation this cycle. Instead, the CEO of Las Vegas Sands Corp. has chosen to make contributions to dark money nonprofits, allowing him to avoid publicity. Politico reported that Adelson had donated $10 million to the Karl Rove-founded nonprofit Crossroads GPS.
Adelson, with a fortune estimated at $28.5 billion, has reached the top of billionaire donors to campaigns and parties with help from his family. His contributions are combined with those of his wife, Miriam, his daughters, Shelley, Sivan and Yasmin, and the latter two daughters' husbands. All contributions have gone to Republicans. The Republican National Committee received $324,000 from the Adelsons, while the National Republican Congressional Committee brought in $226,800. Rep. Joe Heck (R-Nev.) was the leading recipient among candidates, with $36,400.
While Adelson's interests include stability for his business in China, and banning online gambling, a threat to his profit at home, his main political concern is the unflinching support of the U.S. for Israel. Adelson is a major supporter of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and spent tens of millions to support pro-Israel charities.
2) Richard DeVos, Holland, Michigan: $692,450 (100 percent to Republicans) Richard DeVos
AP Photo/Phelan M. Ebenhack
Richard DeVos, the Amway co-founder worth a reported $6.8 billion, heads a large family active in Republican Party politics and conservative causes. The DeVos family has given $692,450 to Republican Party committees and candidates in 2014. The Michigan-based family has, for decades, funded conservative causes, including thepassage of anti-labor right-to-work laws, opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage, and the creation of charter schools. All of their contributions have gone to Republicans, with more than half going to candidates.
3) Charles Koch, Wichita, Kansas, and David Koch, New York: $682,100 (100 percent to Republicans) David Koch
Ron Galella via Getty Images
Brothers Charles and David Koch, heirs and operators of the nation's largest private company, Koch Industries, have become the most prominent faces of billionaire politics through their vast and well-financed political machine. In addition to the millions spent by groups connected to them, the Kochs and their families have contributed $682,100 to Republican Party committees and candidates in 2014. The Koch political network includes groups like Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce. These groups plan to spend close to $300 million on the midterm elections.
4) Charles Schwab, San Francisco: $487,100 (100 percent to Republicans) Charles Schwab
Bloomberg via Getty Images
You've probably seen the rotoscope-animated commercials for his discount brokerage service on television. Behind that business is a major Republican Party donor also linked to the Koch political network. Schwab and his family have given $487,100 to Republicans in 2014. The majority of this has gone to party committees, like the Republican National Committee and National Republican Senatorial Committee.
5) Steve Wynn, Las Vegas: $481,200 (100 percent to Republicans) Steve Wynn
Bloomberg via Getty Images
Steve Wynn, operator of Wynn Casinos in Las Vegas and Macau, became known forpolitical tirades during earnings calls with investors following the election of President Barack Obama. Wynn said that Obama holds a "weird political philosophy," and makes "speeches about redistribution" using language not heard, "except from pure socialists." In 2012, Wynn emerged as a major funder of Rove's Crossroads GPS. Wynn and his family have given $481,200 in 2014 in disclosed contributions. Nearly all of this went to Republican Party committees.
6) Ken Griffin, Chicago: $473,609 (100 percent to Republicans) Ken Griffin
CNBC via Getty Images
Hedge fund billionaire Ken Griffin in 2012 made headlines for saying that the rich have "an insufficient influence" in politics. He proceeded to muddle this statement by becoming one of the leading donors to political campaigns and super PACs. While Griffin and his wife Anne recently announced they were divorcing, their contributions since the beginning of 2013 totaled $473,609. Griffin donated to Obama in 2008, but now all of his contributions go to Republicans.
7) Vince and Linda McMahon, Greenwich, Connecticut: $456,050 (100 percent to Republicans) Vince & Linda McMahon
Jim Spellman via Getty Images
Vince and Linda McMahon, operators of World Wrestling Entertainment, emerged as major Republican Party donors in recent years as Linda McMahon attempted to launch her own political career. After two failed Senate runs, Linda McMahon has fallen into place as one of the party's most prolific donors. She and her husband have given $456,050 to Republicans in 2014, with large amounts to the party committees. Linda McMahon also provides strong support to Republican women candidates and incumbents.
8) Paul Singer, New York: $451,700 (100 percent to Republicans) Paul Singer
Associated Press
Hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer is known for buying distressed foreign debt and then reaping big rewards when the payments come through. He is also a major Republican Party donor who has expanded his profile within the party in recent years. The billionaire financier runs a super PAC, a nonprofit and a joint fundraising committee to funnel his money around the country, giving to other unlimited money groups and directly to candidates and parties. Singer is also a major supporter of right-wing political parties in Israel and advocates a hawkish foreign policy in support of Israel and against its enemies. Overall, he and his family have given $451,700 to Republicans, in addition to the millions to super PACs.
9) James Simons, East Setauket, New York: $341,100 (98 percent to Democrats) James Simons
Bloomberg via Getty Images
James Simons, founder of the high frequency trading hedge fund Renaissance Technologies, is the top donor to Democratic Party candidates and committees in 2014. Simons, a major super PAC donor, also has given $341,100 to political candidates and parties, almost entirely to Democrats. His sole contribution to a Republican was $5,200 to Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.).
10) Philip Anschutz, Denver: $323,200 (100 percent to Republicans) Philip Anschutz
Associated Press
Billionaire entertainment investor Philip Anschutz has long been a supporter of Republican politics. He is a major backer of evangelical Christian organizations opposed to abortion and same-sex marriage. He also is a major supporter of charter schools, and funded the pro-charter documentary "Waiting for Superman." Anschutz and his family have given $323,200 to Republicans in 2014. Most of that has gone to party committees.
11) Stanley Hubbard, St. Paul, Minnesota: $321,150 (95 percent to Republicans)
12) J. Joe Ricketts, Little Jackson Hole, Wyoming: $320,325 (100 percent to Republicans)
13) Haim Saban, Beverly Hills, California: $310,000 (100 percent to Democrats)
14) Charles Johnson, Hillsborough, California: $309,400 (100 percent to Republicans)
15) Stephen Bechtel, San Francisco: $307,601 (100 percent to Republicans)
16) John Catsimatidis, New York: $284,550 (85 percent to Republicans)
17) John Fisher, San Francisco: $279,400 (96 percent to Republicans)
18) Kenny Troutt, Dallas: $261,400 (100 percent to Republicans)
19) Bruce Kovner, New York: $257,600 (92 percent to Republicans)
20) Marc Rowan, New York: $256,600 (63 percent to Republicans)
ALSO ON HUFFPOST:

No comments: