Finance sector gave 51 percent more to House bailout backers

Members of the House of Representatives who supported bailing out the financial sector with $700 billion in taxpayer money have received 51 percent more in campaign contributions from the finance, insurance and real estate sector in their congressional careers than those who opposed the emergency legislation, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) calculated following the 228-205 vote on Monday that defeated the House bill. Examining campaign contributions from the industries that were most eager to see the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 passed, the Center found that the gap between lawmakers who supported the bailout and those who successfully opposed it was especially wide among House Democrats. In this election cycle, Democrats backing Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's proposal have collected 78 percent more from the finance, insurance and real estate (or FIRE) sector than those in their caucus who opposed it and, over time, 88 percent more. In dollar figures, the 140 Democrats who supported the bailout proposal have received $792,744 over their careers from the FIRE sector and $188,572 in this cycle, on average. The 95 Democrats who voted against the bill have received $420,686 over their careers and $105,878 in the 2007-2008 cycle. (CRP's campaign finance data goes back to the 1990 election cycle, or the calendar year 1989.) The 65 Republicans who backed the bill have collected $1,078,533 from the finance sector in their careers and an average of $185,461 toward this election. The 133 Republicans who led the opposition to the bailout have collected, on average, $705,297 over their careers in Congress and $150,381 in this election cycle alone. That translates into a difference of about 23 percent in this cycle and 53 percent over time. Armies of lobbyists from the securities and investment industry, banking, insurance, real estate and other financial industries have been trying to shape the legislation during the last week. Lobbyists for taxpayers, homeowners and consumers have been piping up, too, and countless Americans have personally expressed their views to their elected representatives. "Today's House vote was a reminder that ultimately it's the Americans who elect members of Congress who have the most influence over them -- when they speak up with a loud voice," said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics. "In this case, money from the finance sector -- the biggest campaign contributor of all time -- seems to have played a part in lawmakers' votes, but it didn't win the day. Risking a seat in Congress for campaign cash isn't worth it for politicians when the public is paying attention. And the public is certainly paying attention now." The money gap between Democrats was wider than on the Republican side. Monday's tally in the House showed a correlation between money and votes similar to the last time Congress seriously debated how to regulate the financial industry. As CRP reported last week, in 1999 members of Congress who supported lifting Depression-era restrictions on commercial banks, investment banks and insurance companies received more than twice as much money from those interests as those lawmakers who opposed the measure. Then, as now, the larger difference was on the Democratic side. Overall, the FIRE sector has contributed more than $68 million to House members in this election, and nearly $315 million since 1989 to members who voted Monday. Election after election, the finance, insurance and real estate sector has been the top campaign contributor in federal politics, giving more than $2 billion to federal candidates and political parties since 1989. In this election alone, when the sector's money has been split evenly between Democrats and Republicans, members of the House and Senate have received more than $180 million from PACs and individuals associated with finance, insurance and real estate–the industries with the most at stake in the ongoing legislative debate. The two major presidential candidates have also benefited from the sector's largess; Democrat Barack Obama has collected about $25 million, while Senator John McCain has collected $22 million.