2010 ballot measure campaign contributions
From Ballotpedia
[edit]QUICK STATS
A total of 184 ballot questions were certified for 38 statewide ballots in 2010, however only only 80 measures (43.4%) received campaign contributions. A total of $379 million were spent in 2010 according to December 2010 campaign finance reports.
- Statewide
- Highest statewide contributions: California ($217,342,328)
- Lowest statewide contributions: Iowa ($41,250)[1]
- Measures
- Top 5 measures:
- California Proposition 23 ($49,805,741)
- California Proposition 16 ($46,655,827)
- California Proposition 25 ($32,679,003)
- California Proposition 24 ($30,598,177)
- California Proposition 26 ($26,487,706)
- Bottom 5 measures:[1]
- Idaho SJR 101 ($1,718)
- Colorado Proposition 102 ($7,181)
- Arizona Proposition 110 ($10,000)
- Arizona Proposition 112 ($10,100)
- Arizona Proposition 111 ($11,100)
- Top 5 measures:
- Issues
- Highest contribution total: Taxes ($147,652,696)
- Lowest contribution total: Direct democracy measures ($10,100)[2]
NOTE: Campaign contribution reports in various states are still in the process of being submitted. Featured totals indicate totals as of December 2010 and will be updated once final reports are submitted.
References
NOTE: The table below highlights the monetary contributions made in 2010 to both supporting and opposing political action committees. Campaign contribution reports in various states are still in the process of being submitted. The chart below features the contribution totals as of December 2010 and will be updated once final reports are submitted. Totals featured in the chart below are rounded up to the nearest dollar.
|
Legend Top 5 contributions State with no reported contributions |
| State | # of measures per state | Support | Opposition | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 5 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Alaska | 5 | $526,795 | $1,092,188 | $1,618,983 |
| Arizona | 11 | $3,798,526 | $1,030,232 | $4,828,758 |
| Arkansas | 3 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| California | 14 | **[1] | **[1] | $217,342,328[1] |
| Colorado | 9 | $98,056 | $7,657,632 | $7,755,688 |
| Florida | 7 | $9,649,656 | $15,974,820 | $25,624,476 |
| Georgia | 6 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Hawaii | 2 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Idaho | 4 | $494,560 | $0 | $494,560 |
| Illinois | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Indiana | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Iowa | 2 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Kansas | 2 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Louisiana | 12 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Maine | 8 | **[2] | **[2] | $5,365,488 |
| Maryland | 3 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Massachusetts | 3 | $3,223,105 | $5,885,941 | $9,109,046 |
| Michigan | 2 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Missouri | 6 | $20,676,496 | $1,023,497 | $21,699,993 |
| Montana | 4 | $1,811,117 | $361,474 | $2,172,591 |
| Nebraska | 3 | $53,616 | $0 | $53,616 |
| Nevada | 4 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| New Jersey | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| New Mexico | 9 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| North Carolina | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| North Dakota | 2 | $49,853 | $0 | $49,853 |
| Ohio | 2 | $2,419,125 | $0 | $2,419,125 |
| Oklahoma | 11 | $3,865,985 | $1,292,174 | $5,158,159 |
| Oregon | 11 | **[3] | **[3] | $13,121,770 |
| Rhode Island | 4 | $275,331 | $0 | $275,331 |
| South Carolina | 4 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| South Dakota | 4 | $101,753 | $166,649 | $268,402 |
| Tennessee | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Utah | 4 | $133,048 | $0 | $133,048 |
| Vermont | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Virginia | 3 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Washington | 9 | $37,600,252 | $23,632,428 | $61,232,680 |
| Total | 184 | - | - | $378,765,141 |
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 In California, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one proposition. Campaign committees can also give donations to each other. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one proposition, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the propositions it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals proposition-by-proposition would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total. Maplight, a campaign finance watchdog, adjusted for this difficulty and reached an overall campaign finance total for the November 2 propositions of $147 million. Maplight, "147 Million Spent on California's Nov. Ballot Measures ", November 5, 2010
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 In Maine, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one measure. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one measure, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the propositions it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals measure-by-measure would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 In Oregon, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one measure. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one measure, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the measures it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals measure-by-measure would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total.
The following are the rankings for contributions made, both by supporting and opposing campaigns, towards each ballot measure on special, primary and general election ballots in 2010. The order is from most contributed to least. Ballot measures that did not have any contributions made towards it were not included in the rankings.
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 In California, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one proposition. Campaign committees can also give donations to each other. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one proposition, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the propositions it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals proposition-by-proposition would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total. Maplight, a campaign finance watchdog, adjusted for this difficulty and reached an overall campaign finance total for the November 2 propositions of $147 million. Maplight, "147 Million Spent on California's Nov. Ballot Measures ", November 5, 2010
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 In Maine, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one measure. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one measure, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the propositions it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals measure-by-measure would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 In Oregon, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one measure. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one measure, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the measures it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals measure-by-measure would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total.
NOTE: All measures on 2010 ballots were included in the chart below. However, due to the fact that some measures fell into more than one category, some totals may include measures featured under other categories. For a detailed number of measures for the 2010 ballot, please visit the official 2010 ballot measure article. A detailed chart of measures listed under each issue category can be viewed here.
Campaign contribution reports in various states are still in the process of being submitted. The chart below features the contribution totals as of December 2010 and will be updated once final reports are submitted. Totals featured in the chart below are rounded up to the nearest dollar.
|
Legend Top 5 contributions Top 5 issues |
| Issue | # measures per issue | Support | Opposition | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abortion | 2 | $119,009 | $1,127,490 | $1,246,499 |
| Administration of government | 25 | $1,934,695[2] | $723,024 | $2,657,719[2] |
| Affirmative action | 1 | $81,000 | $10,000 | $91,000 |
| Alcohol | 3 | $11,715,667 | $9,330,904 | $21,046,571 |
| Bond issues | 21 | $2,900,633 [2][3] | $0 | $2,900,633[2][3] |
| Business regulation | 1 | $16,010,021 | $1,335,069 | $17,345,090 |
| Elections and campaigns | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Civil rights | 1 | $105,076 | $0 | $105,076 |
| Constitutional conventions | 4 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Constitutional language | 2 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Earthquakes | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Education | 7 | $3,940,511[2] | $1,292,174 | $5,232,685[2] |
| Elections and campaigns | 15 | $75,271,923[4] | $16,027,012[4] | $77,990,606 |
| Eminent domain | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Energy | 4 | $47,397,254 | $135,771 | $47,533,025 |
| English | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Firearms | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Gambling | 4 | $6,033,964 | $1,136,188 | $7,170,152 |
| Government accountability | 2 | $63,335 | $1,092,188 | $1,155,523 |
| Health care | 7 | $5,095,238 | $252,000 | $5,347,238 |
| Housing | 2 | $58,495 | $1,150,318 | $1,208,813 |
| Hunting | 6 | $281,674 | $460,035 | $741,709 |
| Immigration | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Direct democracy measures | 2 | $10,100 | $0 | $10,100 |
| Insurance | 1 | $16,010,021 | $1,335,069 | $17,345,090 |
| Judicial reform | 9 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Labor | 8 | $4,334,204 | $6,082,367 | $10,416,571 |
| Law enforcement | 6 | $10,996 | $298,869[2] | $309,865[2] |
| Marijuana | 4 | $3,372,505 | $352,134 | $3,724,639 |
| Marriage | 0 | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| Natural resources | 5 | $46,756 | $0 | $46,756 |
| Property rights | 2 | $984,944 | $12,140,820 | $13,125,764 |
| Redistricting | 5 | $31,574,242[4] | $19,190,876[4] | $37,456,789 |
| State budgets | 15 | $19,326,051 | $28,533,562[4] | $47,859,613[4] |
| State legislatures | 2 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| State spending | 4 | $2,314,086 | $22,200,231[4] | $24,514,317[4] |
| Taxes | 39 | $99,196,198[4] | $48,456,498 | $147,652,696[4] |
| Term limits | 2 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
| Tobacco | 1 | $72,917 | $153,198 | $226,115 |
| Transportation | 5 | $82,459 | $0 | $82,459 |
| Veterans | 7 | $298,653[2] | $0 | $298,653[2] |
| Water | 1 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 In California, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one proposition. Campaign committees can also give donations to each other. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one proposition, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the propositions it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals proposition-by-proposition would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total. Maplight, a campaign finance watchdog, adjusted for this difficulty and reached an overall campaign finance total for the November 2 propositions of $147 million. Maplight, "147 Million Spent on California's Nov. Ballot Measures ", November 5, 2010
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 In Maine, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one measure. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one measure, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the propositions it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals measure-by-measure would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 In Oregon, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one measure. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one measure, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the measures it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals measure-by-measure would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total.
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 In California, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one proposition. Campaign committees can also give donations to each other. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one proposition, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the propositions it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals proposition-by-proposition would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total. Maplight, a campaign finance watchdog, adjusted for this difficulty and reached an overall campaign finance total for the November 2 propositions of $147 million. Maplight, "147 Million Spent on California's Nov. Ballot Measures ", November 5, 2010
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 In Maine, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one measure. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one measure, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the propositions it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals measure-by-measure would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total.
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 In Oregon, campaign committees can register to support or oppose more than one measure. When a campaign committee registers as playing a role for more than one measure, it is not possible to say with precision how much of the money it raised was spent for or against any particular one of the measures it registers as playing a role in. This also results in a situation where adding up the contribution totals measure-by-measure would result in an overall total that is greater than the actual overall total.
| |||||||||||||||||||
Cite error:
<ref> tags exist, but no <references/> tag was found
