For Maryland Lawmakers, Campaign Funding Loosely Tied to Committee Membership
Many of Maryland’s representatives in the U.S. House and Senate get a significant portion of their campaign funding from industries affected by the committees on which they sit. For example, nearly a quarter of Sen. Ben Cardin’s contributions came from the financial sector, which is affected by legislation overseen by the Finance Committee on which Cardin sits.
Only the donations in 2013 and 2014 from the top five sectors for each U.S. House member are shown. Donations from 2009 to 2014 are shown for both senators. The percentages were calculated from all donations where the donor’s industry is known — about 90 percent of contributions for each lawmaker. The “other” category includes retirees, educators and government employees. Source: Open Secrets.
Capital News Service data reporting and visualization by Karen Mawdsley. Sector icons by Teddy Amenabar.
Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D)
Committees: Appropriations; Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Intelligence
Health
16%
$649,533 or 16 percent of Mikulski’s funding came from the health sector.
Lawyers/
Lobbyists
13%
$525,564 or 13 percent of Mikulski’s funding came from lawyers & lobbyists.
Ideological/
Single-Issue
12%
$470,983 or 12 percent of Mikulski’s funding came from ideological/single-issue groups.
Finance/
Insurance/
Real Estate
11%
$452,763 or 11 percent of Mikulski’s funding came from the finance, insurance & real estate sector.
Other
9%
$347,044 or 9 percent of Mikulski’s funding came from other sources.
Committees: Environment and Public Works; Finance; Foreign Relations; Small Business and Entrepreneurship; Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe
Finance/
Insurance/
Real Estate
23%
$1,295,319 or 23 percent of Cardin’s funding came from the finance, insurance & real estate sector.
Health
15%
$854,599 or 15 percent of Cardin’s funding came from the health sector.
Lawyers/
Lobbyists
13%
$760,335 or 13 percent of Cardin’s funding came from lawyers & lobbyists.
Ideological/
Single-Issue
10%
$566,743 or 10 percent of Cardin’s funding came from ideological/single-issue groups.
Misc. Business
9%
$504,225 or 9 percent of Cardin’s funding came from misc. business.
Committees: Appropriations
Health
40%
$319,035 or 40 percent of Harris’s funding came from the health sector.
Other
10%
$77,455 or 10 percent of Harris’s funding came from other sources.
Misc. Business
8%
$67,567 or 8 percent of Harris’s funding came from misc. business.
Energy/
Natural Resources
8%
$61,200 or 8 percent of Harris’s funding came from the energy & natural resources sector.
Finance/
Insurance/
Real Estate
7%
$59,247 or 7 percent of Harris’s funding came from the finance, insurance & real estate sector.
Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D)
Defense
22%
$154,250 or 22 percent of Ruppersberger’s funding came from the defense sector.
Labor
14%
$100,350 or 14 percent of Ruppersberger’s funding came from the labor sector.
Finance/
Insurance/
Real Estate
12%
$81,700 or 12 percent of Ruppersberger’s funding came from the finance, insurance & real estate sector.
Commun-
ications/
Electronics
11%
$78,750 or 11 percent of Ruppersberger’s funding came from the communications/electronics sector.
Health
10%
$68,050 or 10 percent of Ruppersberger’s funding came from the health sector.
Committees: Energy and Commerce
Other
34%
$204,200 or 34 percent of Sarbanes’s funding came from other sources.
Finance/
Insurance/
Real Estate
22%
$132,200 or 22 percent of Sarbanes’s funding came from the finance, insurance & real estate sector.
Lawyers/
Lobbyists
17%
$98,314 or 17 percent of Sarbanes’s funding came from lawyers & lobbyists.
Misc. Business
10%
$61,050 or 10 percent of Sarbanes’s funding came from misc. business.
Health
7%
$40,300 or 7 percent of Sarbanes’s funding came from the health sector.
Committees: Science, Space and Technology; Transportation and Infrastructure
Labor
34%
$151,000 or 34 percent of Edwards’s funding came from the labor sector.
Transp-
ortation
17%
$75,500 or 17 percent of Edwards’s funding came from the transportation sector.
Other
10%
$42,450 or 10 percent of Edwards’s funding came from other sources.
Ideological/
Single-Issue
9%
$38,250 or 9 percent of Edwards’s funding came from ideological/single-issue groups.
Lawyers/
Lobbyists
6%
$28,150 or 6 percent of Edwards’s funding came from lawyers & lobbyists.
Committees: Minority Whip
Finance/
Insurance/
Real Estate
22%
$660,050 or 22 percent of Hoyer’s funding came from the finance, insurance & real estate sector.
Health
14%
$403,670 or 14 percent of Hoyer’s funding came from the health sector.
Energy/
Natural Resources
9%
$275,750 or 9 percent of Hoyer’s funding came from the energy & natural resources sector.
Misc. Business
9%
$275,375 or 9 percent of Hoyer’s funding came from misc. business.
Labor
9%
$268,515 or 9 percent of Hoyer’s funding came from the labor sector.
Committees: Financial Services; Joint Economic Committee
Finance/
Insurance/
Real Estate
47%
$354,885 or 47 percent of Delaney’s funding came from the finance, insurance & real estate sector.
Lawyers/
Lobbyists
10%
$72,750 or 10 percent of Delaney’s funding came from lawyers & lobbyists.
Labor
9%
$65,000 or 9 percent of Delaney’s funding came from the labor sector.
Energy/
Natural Resources
5%
$40,700 or 5 percent of Delaney’s funding came from the energy & natural resources sector.
Misc. Business
5%
$39,954 or 5 percent of Delaney’s funding came from misc. business.
Committees: Oversight and Government Reform; Transportation and Infrastructure; Joint Economic Committee; Select Committee on Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi
Labor
32%
$213,000 or 32 percent of Cummings’s funding came from the labor sector.
Transp-
ortation
18%
$116,300 or 18 percent of Cummings’s funding came from the transportation sector.
Health
10%
$62,700 or 10 percent of Cummings’s funding came from the health sector.
Finance/
Insurance/
Real Estate
7%
$48,950 or 7 percent of Cummings’s funding came from the finance, insurance & real estate sector.
Energy/
Natural Resources
7%
$47,650 or 7 percent of Cummings’s funding came from the energy & natural resources sector.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D)
Finance/
Insurance/
Real Estate
21%
$154,800 or 21 percent of Van Hollen’s funding came from the finance, insurance & real estate sector.
Labor
18%
$129,000 or 18 percent of Van Hollen’s funding came from the labor sector.
Health
15%
$113,900 or 15 percent of Van Hollen’s funding came from the health sector.
Lawyers/
Lobbyists
9%
$69,400 or 9 percent of Van Hollen’s funding came from lawyers & lobbyists.
Other
9%
$68,900 or 9 percent of Van Hollen’s funding came from other sources.
For Maryland Lawmakers, Campaign Funding Loosely Tied to Committee Membership Many of Maryland's representatives in the U.S. House and Senate get a significant portion of their campaign funding from industries affected by the committees on which they sit. For example, nearly a quarter of Sen. Ben Cardin's contributions came from the financial sector, which is affected by legislation overseen by the Finance Committee on which Cardin sits. Only the donations in 2013 and 2014 from the top five sectors for each U.S. House member are shown. Donations from 2009 to 2014 are shown for both senators. The percentages were calculated from all donations where the donor's industry is known — about 90 percent of contributions for each lawmaker. The "other" category includes retirees, educators and government employees. Source: Open Secrets.
