

|
Election |
Total Contributions |
Contributions from Individuals |
Contributions from PACs |
Soft
Money Contributions |
Donations
to Democrats |
Donations
to Republicans |
%
to Dems |
%
to Repubs |
|
2002*
|
$11,414,012
|
$2,936,692
|
$4,248,641
|
$4,228,679
|
$2,595,658
|
$8,732,464
|
23%
|
77%
|
|
2000
|
$58,232,942
|
$20,757,085
|
$16,695,382
|
$20,780,475
|
$15,322,231
|
$42,581,597
|
26%
|
73%
|
|
1998
|
$42,337,645
|
$13,372,105
|
$15,840,915
|
$13,124,625
|
$12,280,365
|
$30,015,804
|
29%
|
71%
|
|
1996
|
$49,424,464
|
$15,771,464
|
$17,961,238
|
$15,691,762
|
$12,798,813
|
$36,545,977
|
26%
|
74%
|
|
1994
|
$32,137,563
|
$10,387,329
|
$15,555,787
|
$6,194,447
|
$12,937,511
|
$19,161,205
|
40%
|
60%
|
|
1992
|
$35,627,707
|
$12,967,956
|
$15,457,844
|
$7,201,907
|
$14,147,517
|
$21,429,584
|
40%
|
60%
|
|
1990
|
$19,041,959
|
$5,656,896
|
$13,385,063
|
N/A
|
$8,334,235
|
$10,678,777
|
44%
|
56%
|
|
Total
1990-2002 |
$248,216,292 |
$81,849,527 |
$99,144,870 |
$67,221,895 |
$78,416,330 |
$169,145,408 |
32% |
68% |
Top Agribusiness
Contributors of 2000
Rank Organization Amount Dems Repubs 1
Philip
Morris $3,791,686
18%
82%
2
US
Tobacco Co $1,587,354
10%
90%
3
International
Paper $1,284,224
17%
83%
4
RJ
Reynolds Tobacco $992,427
17%
82%
5
Flo-Sun
Inc $986,650
57%
42%
6
Brown
& Williamson Tobacco $979,982
14%
85%
7
Yucaipa
Companies $972,750
100%
0%
8
Archer
Daniels Midland $936,400
43%
56%
9
PepsiCo
Inc $865,475
17%
83%
10
Food
Marketing Institute $795,233
7%
93%
Rank Candidate Office
Amount 1 Cochran,
Thad (R-MS) Senate
$205,190
2 Hutchinson,
Tim (R-AR) Senate
$191,541
3 Smith,
Gordon (R-OR) Senate
$134,454
4 Bonilla,
Henry (R-TX) House
$125,197
5 McConnell,
Mitch (R-KY) Senate
$116,300
6 Roberts,
Pat (R-KS) Senate
$115,250
7 Sessions,
Jeff (R-AL) Senate
$107,450
8 Chambliss,
Saxby (R-GA) House
$104,233
9 Craig,
Larry E (R-ID) Senate
$93,948
10 Combest,
Larry (R-TX) House
$92,391
Rank Organization Amount Dems Repubs 1
GAF
Corp $903,920
27%
73%
2
Contran
Corp $679,750
2%
98%
3
Harbour
Group Ltd $632,600
1%
99%
4
Dow
Chemical $526,155
13%
87%
5
American
Chemistry Council $504,982
14%
86%
6
RJF
International $481,000
0%
100%
7
DuPont
Co $305,831
29%
71%
8
Huntsman
Corp $289,000
35%
65%
9
Procter
& Gamble $275,640
22%
77%
10
WR
Grace & Co $265,250
22%
78%
From the Open Secrets (opensecrets.org), a website by the Center for Responsive Politics
REAP WHAT YOU SOW
Three years ago,
Congress adopted the "Freedom to Farm Act," phasing out the system of
commodity price supports and acreage set-asides that has protected
the nation's farmers from the vagaries of the marketplace since the
Depression. It cleared the Senate by a vote of 64-32. Passage of the
law was a high priority for agricultural interests, who poured nearly
$30 million into congressional campaign coffers in 1995-96, through
PACs and large individual contributions. The senators who voted for
the bill received 66% more in campaign contributions from
agribusiness, on average, than those who opposed it. Sponsors of the
law promised that it would free farmers to decide what and how much
to plant, save the taxpayers $13 billion in government payments to
farmers, and benefit consumers through lower prices in supermarkets.
Critics predicted that the bill would further undermine the
precarious state of small farmers, driving many of them off the land
and furthering the consolidation of farmland in the hands of a few
big producers. Three years later, the results of the "Freedom to Farm
Act" are becoming clear: consumers haven't benefited, family farms
are being decimated, and taxpayers are paying the bill. Crop prices
have fallen dramatically--corn prices nearly two-thirds, wheat by
half, soybean almost a third, and hog prices by more than half. Part
of this collapse is due to the Asian economic crisis, which has
depressed U.S. agricultural exports. But much is due to
over-production by American farmers. These price drops have not been
passed on to consumers. The cost of most foodstuffs at the
supermarket has stayed flat. Flush with cash, the big corporate
farmers and food processors have embarked on a wave of mergers and
buyouts. Four firms control nearly 90% of the U.S. cereal market.
Three control over 81% of the beef slaughtering industry. This year,
more than half of the nation's food will be grown on the largest 4%
of farms. At the same time, thousands of family farms are going out
of business, driven to desperation by falling crop prices and
unbearable debt burdens. In North Dakota it was expected that nearly
2,000 of 30,000 farms would fail in 1998 after a jolting 98% drop in
farm income. "Auction sales are off the charts," says Rep. Collin
Peterson (D-MN). Hearing the cries from the farm belt, Congress voted
$6 billion in emergency aid last October; federal officials predict a
similar level of help will be needed in 1999. But Congress has taken
no action to investigate why lower prices haven't benefited
consumers, or to explore the economic and environmental implications
of the concentrations of ownership in the agricultural sector. No
such action is in sight. As of October 14, 1998, agricultural
interests had contributed $27.6 million to congressional candidates,
on a pace to match or top their giving in 1995-96.
-From Public Campaign (publicampaign.org)
Americas drinking water, streams, and lakes are being contaminated by animal waste and toxic pollution. Animal factory farms are creating one of the nations worst water pollution problems. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, hog, chicken, and cattle waste has polluted 35,000 miles of rivers in 22 states and contaminated groundwater in 17 states. In addition, polluting industries are dumping millions of pounds of toxic chemicals into Americas waterways each year.
In 1997-98 the livestock and poultry industries gave $3.5 million in political contributions. During the same period, the chemical industry gave $6 million in political contributions to fight efforts to increase public access to information about toxic chemicals.
Although the
publics health is at risk from water pollution, Congress has
failed to strengthen the Clean Water Act to address animal waste
pollution and has refused to act on legislation that would increase
public information on toxics used and transported in local
communities.
-From the Sierra Club
For Information on campaign finance
reform and campaign contributions visit:
Public Campaign (www.publicampaign.org):
national CFR organization
Students for Campaign Finance Reform (SCFR) (www.wesleyan.edu/wsa/scfr):
the CFR group at Wesleyan
Open Secrets (www.opensecrets.org):
find out what interests have what congresspeople in their
pocket
This page was compiled by David Carhart of SCFR.