WASHINGTON • About 22 cents of every dollar Jason Kander has raised in his campaign challenging incumbent Roy Blunt for the U.S. Senate has come from lawyers or law firms. Blunt depends heavily on the financial industry and lobbyists to finance his re-election effort.
And both men have received substantial amounts of money from other politicians for their bids in the Nov. 8 election.
Those are some of the top-line findings of a campaign finance analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics in what could be one of the nation’s pivotal contests determining control of the U.S. Senate in 2017. The analysis covers donations through March.
Blunt, R-Mo., is a 20-year veteran of Congress whose campaign finance profile demonstrates his deep ties to the Washington political establishment. Kander, Missouri’s secretary of state, has tapped connections he made as a lawyer along with Democratic donors around the country to underwrite his campaign.
The Missouri Senate race is already attracting big advertising buys from outside groups, especially on Blunt’s behalf.
Blunt ended March with roughly twice the amount of money on hand as Kander, but the challenger raised eyebrows when he slightly outraised the incumbent Blunt in the first three months of 2016.
According to the CRP data, Blunt’s most prolific backers have been other politicians. Through March, he had received just under $500,000 in donations from the political action committees of fellow Republicans. Kander had received about $217,000 from the PACs of other Democratic politicians.
It’s part of the “leadership PAC” system that has proliferated in Washington over several decades. In it, politicians — many of whom may not face election or have serious challenges themselves — raise money for a separate but affiliated entity to help elect other politicians. It helps politicians build chits with other politicians.
The CRP analysis shows that the sectors most likely to support Blunt after leadership PACs were securities and investment, lawyers and law firms, lobbyists and retirees.
Behind lawyers and leadership PACs, Kander’s support has depended most heavily on retirees, securities and investment-related donors and those who work in real estate.
Kander has attacked Blunt’s ties to lobbyists, pointing out that Blunt’s wife, Abigail, is a top lobbyist for Kraft Foods and that Blunt’s son and campaign manager, Andy, is a top lobbyist in Missouri. Kander surrogates also have attacked Blunt for relying on a cadre of ex-congressional staffers-turned-lobbyists to help him raise money.
Blunt “relies on his true constituency of Washington politicians, lobbyists and Wall Street to prop up his campaign” and “enrich his family,” Kander spokesman Chris Hayden said.
Blunt says his wife does not lobby the Senate, and his son’s lobbying is confined to Missouri. Blunt’s advisers point out that through March, Kander had himself raised more than $77,000 from lobbyists.
“If attacking lobbyists and special interests is the central theme of your campaign, probably best to not take their money or attend their D.C. fundraisers,” said Blunt spokeswoman Burson Snyder.
“Our campaign will raise the resources to ensure Missourians understand the clear choice in this election,” she said.
Both sides cite specific votes in arguing that donations affect their opponent’s votes.
Hayden said there is a direct connection between Blunt’s vote against a controversial Department of Labor rule requiring financial advisers to put their clients’ interest first, and Blunt’s hefty donations from the securities and financial industries.
Hayden also pointed to other votes throughout Blunt’s career, including those helping to bail out Wall Street after the financial meltdown of 2008, and others lessening consumer protection, as proof of Blunt’s fealty to an industry that contributes heavily to his campaign.
“You don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to see the connection,” Hayden said. “Goldman Sachs and its employees are the biggest donors to Blunt’s campaign because he has consistently voted for their interests.”
Republicans, including Blunt, opposed the recent Labor Department rule on financial advisers because they said it could cut off advice to lower-income investors. The financial bailouts of post 2008 were controversial between the political parties, and within political parties, with supporters arguing that without taxpayer bailouts of Wall Street, the U.S. economy would have suffered even more catastrophic damage and faced a longer recovery.
But those bailouts of big banks also spurred outrage among many Americans and were the basis of one of insurgent Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders’ chief talking points about a “rigged” economy.
Blunt advisers say that Kander receives heavy support from lawyers and law firms is because of pro-lawyer positions he took while a member of the Missouri Legislature, including one favoring a judge-selection process that Blunt says favored trial lawyers.
Blunt says it’s hypocritical for Kander to attack him for relying on “special interests” to fund his campaign, while Kander is so dependent upon lawyers and other sectors which might themselves be considered special interests.
“Attacking anonymous ‘millionaires, huge corporations, and lobbyists’ is the easiest thing to do and the standard procedure for Democratic candidates who do not have their own ideas or a successful record on which they can run a campaign,” said a Blunt campaign document supplied by Snyder.
Kander aide Hayden argued that both sides are getting a lot of donations from lawyers.
Lawyers and law firms “are donating to both candidates in this race,” Hayden said. “Jason represented some of Missouri’s most vulnerable as an attorney, and understands the value of strong and accessible legal representation in court, which is one of the reasons why folks who agree with him on that are supporting his campaign.”
Chuck Raasch • 202-298-6880
@craasch on Twitter
———
©2016 the St. Louis Post-Dispatch
Visit the St. Louis Post-Dispatch at www.stltoday.com
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
