TAMPA, Fla. - The people watching money in politics say the fundraising arms race has gone nuclear.

Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, has been visiting the national party conventions. She expects candidates and their allies to spend a minimum of $5.8 billion on federal campaigns this year, an all-time high. In West Virginia congressional and Senate races, her organization reports candidates have raised more than $5.5 million. She says more of the money nationwide is of a particularly sneaky kind.

"Much more of the money than previous cycles will be made up of unlimited, undisclosed donations."

She says voters need to be very careful about secretive groups with innocent-sounding names that often fund dishonest political ads.

"Despite the patriotic name, it may in fact be one donor. Maybe a member of Congress has jurisdiction over their company or industry through their congressional committee assignments, who knows? We have to all be vigilant in this cycle, because there's a lot of hidden messages."

This year, Krumholz says, many huge super-PACs are masquerading as charities to dodge disclosure. She says the Internal Revenue Service has been investigating...

"But they risk pushback from Congress that doesn't like what they view as meddling in politics. Their hand has been slapped and they're cautiously proceeding."

Krumholz says the disclosure rules for these charities are nearly nonexistent.

"We know ultimately very little, and we will by and large not know, who is funding the biggest and most political of these nonprofits until well after the elections - if we ever learn."

Some fundraisers have defended the system, saying campaign donations are an extension of free speech. But Krumholz says what's really going on is that politicians and donors are building relationships they can use to their advantage. She says everyone in the political elite knows who is helping whom - but citizens are left in the dark.

The website Opensecrets.org is an indispensable source for information on political spending.


get more stories like this via email

The Iowa League of Women Voters plans to ask the Iowa Legislature to rethink the voting restrictions put in place prior to last month's midterm elections. Among other changes, they limited the number of early voting days.

Iowa reduced the number of days that people could cast ballots early this year, from 29 days to 20. Legislators also voted to close the polls an hour earlier, at 8 p.m., and shorten the window for the state to process early ballot requests.

Terese Grant, president of the Iowa League of Women Voters, said they were reacting to claims of fraud surrounding the 2020 election.

"Lots of misinformation about voting, and it was very unfortunate that that national misinformation affected the Legislature here in Iowa, and they felt that they needed to restrict voting," she said. "It was a solution without really a problem."

So, Grant said the League will call on the Legislature in January to reverse or change those restrictions, giving voters more time and opportunity to cast ballots in the future. More than 1.2 million Iowans voted in the midterm election, the second-highest total ever.

While overall voter turnout was good statewide, Grant said, early balloting was down - most likely because of the new restrictions. She acknowledged that the odds could be steep against any less restrictive voting rules, given the current political makeup at the Statehouse.

"I'm not sure that we're going to have any success," she said. "One party controls the House, the Senate and the governor, so we can certainly ask them. I don't know that they'll do anything, but we certainly don't want any more restrictions - and we're going to certainly watch to make sure that doesn't happen."

She said the League is concerned that more restrictions will hinder voter participation and keep more people out of the democratic process.

Support for this story was provided by the Carnegie Corporation of New York.

A decision could come today on Nevada's bid to become the first state in the nation to hold a Democratic primary in 2024.

The Democratic National Committee is meeting to consider whether to change the traditional order of Iowa, then New Hampshire, and then South Carolina.

Judith Whitmer, chair of the Nevada Democratic Party, said Nevada delivered the Senate for the Democrats in the midterms and fits the bill as a small, diverse state which lends itself to retail politics, where candidates must engage with voters in person.

"The criteria are diversity and competitiveness," Whitmer pointed out. "It needs to be in a media market that isn't so overpriced that candidates can't afford it coming out of the gate."

The Nevada Republican Party is expected to hold its primary on the same day as the Democrats. Gov. Steve Sisolak signed a law last year instituting a statewide primary, replacing the former caucus system. No significant opposition has arisen in-state but multiple other states are vying to go first on the primary calendar, including Michigan, Minnesota and New Hampshire.

Emmanuelle Leal, national communications director for Somos Votantes, a group focused on Latino voter engagement, said Nevada provides an ideal location.

"The country does not look like Iowa. The country does not look like New Hampshire," Leal stressed. "The country looks like Nevada: a state with a diverse population of people of color, unions, with rural and urban families."

Leal noted the state chosen to go first will garner a huge amount of national attention and political influence, and will see an influx of millions in election-related spending.

Local candidates that signed onto a no-corporate-money pledge made midterm election gains in Charleston.

Katie Lauer, co-chair of West Virginia Can't Wait, said the organization now has two dozen bipartisan elected officials - including Republicans, Democrats and independents in public office across the state. She said the wins signal Mountain State voters are paying less attention to politics and more on the issues affecting their lives.

"Our goal for this cycle was to double that number to get 22 elected officials into office, and we not only met that goal, but surpassed it. So we now have 24 elected officials across the state," Lauer said. Some are on city council, some are on school boards, some are on county commissions."

Around 35% of voters statewide went to the polls for the midterms, according to a U.S. Elections Project Analysis.

She said Charleston's officials are focused on decriminalizing cannabis, instituting harm-reduction programs for substance use, addressing trauma among youths and families, and increasing minimum-wage and paid sick days for workers.


"And the question we're asking is, are there things that we can do right here at home that address the problems right in our backyard?," she said. "And who from whatever party wants to come to the table and help solve those problems?"

West Virginia Can't Wait was founded in late 2018 and ran its first slate of candidates in 2020.