DOCSLIB.ORG

2002 Campaign Finance Summary

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2002 Campaign Finance Summary STATE OF MINNESOTA CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND PUBLIC DISCLOSURE BOARD 2002 CAMPAIGN FINANCE SUMMARY CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICE CANDIDATES LEGISLATIVE CANDIDATES JUDICIAL CANDIDATES SPECIAL ELECTIONS - DISTRICTS 47A, 40A, 52B and 32B OTHER REGISTERED PRINCIPAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEES POLITICAL PARTY UNITS POLITICAL COMMITTEES AND POLITICAL FUNDS Issued: May 30, 2003 (data as of May 15, 2003) CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND PUBLIC DISCLOSURE BOARD Suite 190, Centennial Office Building 658 Cedar Street St. Paul MN 55155-1603 Telephone: 651/296-5148 or 800/657-3889 Fax: 651/296-1722 For TTY/TDD communication contact us through the Minnesota Relay Service at 800/627-3529 Email: [email protected] Worldwide web site: http://www.cfboard.state.mn.us EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - ELECTION YEAR 2002 The Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board is charged with the administration of the Ethics in Government Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 10A. During an election year campaign committees of candidates who file for office are required to file three Reports of Receipts and Expenditures: pre-primary, pre-general, and year-end. Campaign committees of candidates who chose not to file for office file one year-end report. Offices open for election in 2002 were: Constitutional, State Senate, House of Representatives, and certain Judicial seats. Political party units, political committees, and political funds registered with the Board also filed pre- primary, pre-general, and year-end reports. This summary is based on reports for election year 2002, as filed with the Board by principal campaign committees of candidates for 4 constitutional offices (25 candidates filed) 67 state senate seats (163 candidates filed), 134 state representative seats (324 candidates filed), and by 42 candidates for elective judicial seats. Additionally, this summary includes data supplied by 11 judicial officeholders; 518 committees of candidates who did not file for election in 2002; 382 political party units; and 382 political committees and political funds. Comparison of total data from election year 2002 by principal campaign committee, political committee, or political fund with similar data from election years 2000 and 1998 is included in this summary. The data has not been verified or audited. This summary includes, for each candidate committee, political party unit, political committee or political fund, total contributions received; total transfers to other candidates, political committees or political funds; total expenditures; beginning and ending cash balances; and the total amount of public subsidy received by qualifying candidates. A committee or fund's outstanding loans payable, unpaid bills, or disbursements other than campaign expenditures or transfers to candidates are not itemized but are reflected in the totals reported in the summary. The 2002 election was the first election following the 2000 census. In three legislative districts, two incumbent legislators challenged each other. Seventeen incumbent legislators lost their bid for reelection. Forty-seven incumbent legislators did not run for reelection. Of the 47 legislators who did not run for reelection, seven House of Representative incumbents ran for the Senate and six won; six legislative candidates ran for constitutional office and two won. Contributions totaling $5,445,005 were reported received by candidates for constitutional office (see page 12). Contributions totaling $3,295,513 were reported received by candidates who filed for office for State Senate; contributions totaling $4,286,529 were reported received by candidates for House of Representatives (see page 14); and a total of $616,250 in contributions were reported received by 20 judicial candidates (see page 37). A listing of the names of individuals, committees, or funds contributing in aggregate more than $100 to legislative or district court candidates and more than $200 to constitutional office candidates and to political committees and political funds begins on page 58. Included in the total contributions received by Constitutional office candidates were contributions from 4,318 donations of more than $200 each totaling $3,393,028 (62% of total contributions received). State Senate candidates received 3,696 donations of more than $100 each totaling $1,354,033 (41% of total contributions received). House candidates received contributions from 4,133 donations of more than $100 each totaling $1,429,650 (33% of total contributions received). Judicial candidates received contributions from 478 donations of more than $100 each totaling $441,759 (71% of total contributions received). Most candidates voluntarily agree to limit expenditures in order to receive public subsidies. These subsidies include direct payments to eligible candidates during election years and the right to participate in the Political Contribution Refund (PCR) program. Agreements to abide by spending limits in order to receive money from the State Elections Campaign Fund were signed by 99% of registered constitutional and legislative candidates filing for office. A total of $4,442,829 in public subsidy was distributed to constitutional and legislative candidates. Campaign expenditures are made for the purpose of influencing the nomination or election of a candidate and apply toward the expenditure limit applicable to partisan candidates who signed a Public Subsidy Agreement. In 2002, 25 constitutional office candidates reported making total campaign expenditures of $6,957,873; a 37% decrease in campaign spending compared to $10,976,129 in 1998. Campaign expenditures for 163 candidates who filed for state senate totaled $4,496,989; a 13% increase in campaign spending when compared with total expenditures of $3,916,752 in 2000. Campaign expenditures by 324 house candidates totaled $5,027,261; a 14% increase in campaign spending compared to total expenditures of $4,336,825 in 2000. According to statistics compiled from candidate reports, winners outspent losers in 80% of the state senate races and 80% of the house races. Candidates in 2 state senate districts and 5 house districts ran without opposition in the general election. Constitutional candidates reported receiving a total of $4,889,605 in contributions from individuals, lobbyists, political committees, and political funds, $1,942,781 from public subsidy, and $555,400 from political parties. State senate candidates reported receiving a total of $2,972,317 in contributions from individuals, lobbyists, political committees, and political funds; $1,223,850 from public subsidy; and $323,196 in contributions from political parties. House candidates reported receiving a total of $3,892,701 in contributions from individuals, lobbyists, political committees, and political funds; $1,234,283 from public subsidy; and $393,828 in contributions from political parties. Other candidate committees who did not file for office reported receiving $2,740,304 in contributions, and making total campaign expenditures of $3,130,275. This summary includes selected data from reports filed by political party units, political committees and political funds. Reports filed by 382 political party committees and 382 political committees and political funds disclosed receipt of contributions totaling $46,852,209 from which they made total contributions of $15,087,343 to state candidate committees, political committees, and political funds. Included in the $46,839,021: $17,406,596 was contributed to Democratic Farmer Labor party units which made $2,369,308 in contributions to state candidates and other committees; $12,916,670 was contributed to Republican Party of Minnesota party units which made $1,203,940 in contributions to state candidates and other committees; $78,613 was contributed to Independence Party of Minnesota party units which made $3,906 in contributions to state candidates and other committees; and $84,703 in contributions to the Green Party of Minnesota party units which made $1,617 in contributions to state candidates and other committees. Contributions made by individuals to qualifying political party units also qualify for a refund under the PCR program. Also included are names of donors who contributed in aggregate more than $1,000 to candidate committees, political committees, political funds, and political party units during 2002 (page 232) and a list of political committees and political funds that made independent expenditures expressly advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate (page 189). TABLE OF CONTENTS Entities in this Summary ............................................................................................................... 1 Abbreviations................................................................................................................................ 1 Campaign Expenditure Limits....................................................................................................... 1 Cash Balances / Contributions Received .............................................................................................2 Expenditures Made................................................................................................................................3 2002 Statistics ............................................................................................................................. 4 Comparison of Reports Filed by State Candidates....................................................................... 5 State Public Subsidy Program.....................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1 " · , . 11~~ D [}{]Q!Juijiej[Ru
    This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp 19{'4 LEGISLATIVE REFERENCE LIBRARY HV98.M6 M46 1998 •;11m1m 11l[l!lii1r111111~i11111~~1~11r 1 " · , . 11~~ d [}{]Q!JuiJiEJ[ru . c...._... I 3 0307 00055 5675 -This booklet is dedicated to all the employees ofthe Department ofHuman Services, past and present, whose many years ofservice to the Department have helped improve the lives ofMinnesotans. April 15, 1998 1 Preface The work of the Department of Human Services has a long history in Minnesota, dating back almost to the inception of statehood. From the opening of the State Institute at Faribault in 1863 and St. Peter State Hospital in 1866, to the development and implementation of such programs as MinnesotaCare and the Minnesota Family Investment Program (MFIP), the Department has helped millions of Minnesotans and their families in need. The origins of the Departments programs almost exclusively began with the history of institutions in this State. Over the years, programs have evolved, taking form under the auspices of each successor; the State Board of Correction and Charities in 1883, the State Board of Control in 1901, the Department of Social Security in 1939, the Depart­ ment of Public Welfare in 1953, and finally under the name of the Department of Human Services, in 1983. Regardless of the title, the charge has remained steadfast, to serve the citizens of this State. This booklet provides a glimpse of our Department and its activities over those many years.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Election Results
    2016 Election Overview The outcome of the 2016 elections has definitely altered the landscape for transportation policy and funding initiatives. From the Presidency down to state legislative races, we face a new legislative dynamic and many new faces. What hasn’t changed: the huge need for resources to increase the nation’s and the state’s investment in the transportation system and bipartisan agreement on that fact. Prior to the outcome of Tuesday’s election we were hearing from candidates on both sides of the aisle that increasing investments in infrastructure was an area of agreement. Candidates for Minnesota’s legislature brought up the need for a comprehensive, long-term transportation funding package over and over again in news stories, candidate profiles and candidate forums. We were hearing more from candidates about transportation than we have in previous election cycles. Voters in other states, made their voices heard by approving ballot initiatives in 22 states that increased and stabilized funding for transportation. As we head into 2017, transportation advocates have a huge opportunity to capitalize on the widespread support for infrastructure improvements. However, it will take the involvement of transportation advocates across the state making their voices heard to rise above partisan squabbling and the many other issues that will be on the table. National Presidential Election Results Electoral Votes Needed to Win: 270 *Remaining: 16 Trump (R) Electoral Votes 290 Popular Vote 60,375,961 Clinton (D) Electoral Votes 232 Popular Vote 61,047,207 Minnesota Clinton (D) percent 46.9% votes 1,366,676 Trump (R) percent 45.4% votes 1,322,891 The race for the White House defied the polls and expectations as Donald Trump won more than the needed 270 votes in the electoral college while Hillary Clinton narrowly won the popular vote.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Final Public Subsidy Payments
    CAMPAIGN FINANCE AND PUBLIC DISCLOSURE BOARD RELEASES FINAL PUBLIC SUBSIDY PAYMENT AMOUNTS FOR 2020 ELECTION During 2020 the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board distributed $2,131,887 in public subsidy payments to 349 candidates running for state senate or state representative. The 349 candidates who received a public subsidy payment represent 78% of the 449 legislative candidates who were on the general election ballot. A list of qualifying candidates and the payments they received is attached. Of the 504 candidates who filed for state legislative office this year, 401 (79.3%) signed voluntary agreements to abide by spending limits and other conditions required to be eligible for public subsidy payments for their campaigns. To qualify for public subsidy a candidate must: • be opposed at either the primary or general election, • appear on the general election ballot, • sign and file a public subsidy agreement with the Board to abide by applicable campaign expenditure limits, and • raise a specified amount in contributions from individuals eligible to vote in Minnesota counting only the first $50 from each donor. Money for the public subsidy program comes from the state general fund. A portion of public subsidy money is allocated to specific parties and districts based on taxpayer checkoffs on income and property tax returns. By office and party, the total public subsidy payments totaled: DFL RPM State Senate $670,054 $393,772 House of Representatives $663,589 $404,471 Total $1,333,643 $798,243 DFL = Democratic Farmer Labor RPM = Republican Party of Minnesota Note: No other major or minor party candidates qualified for a public subsidy payment in 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • Summary by Title
    Summary NEWLAWS 2002 Summary by Title RESOLUTIONS No-fault automobile insurance full medical Resolution supporting personnel responding to expense benefits entitlement..................................................................................94 Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. ..............................................................................................89 Automobile insurance damaged window glass claims Resolution urging delayed termination of LTV pension plan. .........................89 payment basis modified. .............................................................................................94 Real estate industry licensee conduct regulated. ...................................................95 AGRICULTURE POLICY Fire insurance excess coverage prohibitions..............................................................95 Insurance provisions modification; medical malpractice insurance Biodiesel fuel mandate. ............................................................................................................89 Joint Underwriting Association issuance prohibition. .............................95 Phosphorus fertilizer use regulated. ................................................................................89 Cities additional liquor licenses; hotel rooms liquor cabinets Pesticides application prohibition exceptions (gypsy moth bill). .................90 hours of sale restrictions exemption. ..................................................................95 Omnibus agriculture policy bill. .........................................................................................90
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Art in the Minnesota State Capitol March 2013
    This document is made available electronically by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library as part of an ongoing digital archiving project. http://www.leg.state.mn.us/lrl/lrl.asp Minnesota Historical Society - State Capitol Historic Site Inventory of Art in the Minnesota State Capitol March 2013 Key: Artwork on canvas affixed to a surface \ Artwork that is movable (framed or a bust) Type Installed Name Artist Completed Location Mural 1904 Contemplative Spirit of the East Cox. Kenyon 1904 East Grand Staircase Mural 1904 Winnowing Willett, Arthur (Artist) Garnsey. Elmer 1904 East Grand Staircase Mural 1904 Commerce Willett. Arthur (Artist) Garnsey. Elmer 1904 East Grand Staircase Mural 1904 Stonecutting Willett. Arthur (Artist) Garnsey. Elmer 1904 East Grand Staircase Mural 1904 Mill ing Willett. Arthur (Artist) Garnsey, Elmer 1904 East Grand Staircase Mural 1904 Mining Willett Arthur (Artist) Garnsey, Elmer 1904 East Grand Staircase Mural 1904 Navigation Willett Arthur (Artist) Garnsey. Elmer 1904 East Grand Staircase Mural 1904 Courage Willett, Arthur (Artist) Garnsey, Elmer 1904 Senate Chamber Mural 1904 Equality Willett, Arthur (Artist) Garnsey, Elmer 1904 Senate Chamber Mural 1904 Justice Willett. Arthur (Artist) Garnsey, Elmer 1904 Senate Chamber Mural 1904 Freedom Willett. Arthur (Artist) Garnsey. Elmer 1904 Senate Chamber Mural 1905 Discovers and Civilizers Led Blashfield. Edwin H. 1905 Senate Chamber, North Wall ' to the Source of the Mississippi Mural 1905 Minnesota: Granary of the World Blashfield, Edwin H. 1905 Senate Chamber, South Wall Mural 1905 The Sacred Flame Walker, Henry Oliver 1903 West Grand Staircase (Yesterday. Today and Tomorrow) Mural 1904 Horticulture Willett, Arthur (Artist) Garnsey, Elmer 1904 West Grand Staircase Mural 1904 Huntress Willett, Arthur (Artist) Garnsey, Elmer 1904 West Grand Staircase Mural 1904 Logging Willett.
    [Show full text]
  • Minn. GOP Wants Bachmann for Sen., Pawlenty for Pres
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 10, 2010 INTERVIEWS: DEAN DEBNAM 888-621-6988 / 919-880-4888 (serious media inquiries only please, other questions can be directed to Tom Jensen) QUESTIONS ABOUT THE POLL: TOM JENSEN 919-744-6312 Minn. GOP wants Bachmann for Sen., Pawlenty for Pres. Raleigh, N.C. – Despite getting no love from the state’s at-large electorate against President Obama in PPP’s Wednesday release, outgoing Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty is the slim favorite of his own party faithful to get the state’s Republican National Convention delegates. In the race to take on popular Senator Amy Klobuchar, however, he does less well despite coming closest to beating Klobuchar in Tuesday’s look at the general election. Instead, newly empowered Congresswoman Michele Bachman is overwhelmingly the darling of hardcore GOP voters. Bachmann pulls 36% support from usual GOP primary voters, with a wide margin over Pawlenty’s 20%, Norm Coleman’s 14%, and a host of prospective contenders bunched in single digits: 8th-District Congressman-elect Chip Cravaack at 7%, Tom Emmer at 6%, 2nd-District Congressman John Kline at 5%, state legislator Laura Brod at 4%, and Erik Paulsen at 2%, with 6% undecided or favoring someone else. Pawlenty trails Klobuchar by only ten points, versus Bachmann’s 18 and Coleman’s 14. There is a huge ideological divide at play. Bachmann, founder of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus, gets a whopping 42% from the conservative supermajority, which makes up almost three-quarters of the electorate. That puts her far ahead of second-place Pawlenty’s 19%.
    [Show full text]
  • December 8, 2020 Governor Tim Walz Speaker Melissa Hortman Majority
    December 8, 2020 Governor Tim Walz Minority Leader Kurt Daudt Speaker Melissa Hortman Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka Majority Leader Ryan Winkler Senator Minority Leader Susan Kent Dear State Leaders: We are jointly and urgently calling upon you to act quickly toward an agreement that will provide immediate economic relief for our small businesses and communities. Rochester and Olmsted County’s business and service sector has been hit due to the pandemic, in a similar fashion to other communities around the state. The entities signed below have come together to work jointly since the pandemic in a local, coordinated effort titled “Rochester Ready” to ensure a safe and resilient recovery for the area. This unique public- private partnership group has assisted and communicate with local businesses and the community. We encourage you to also come together as state leaders during this extremely challenging and dynamic time to assist communities and businesses in need. Local units of governments in our area have thoughtfully and quickly distributed funding received through the Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF), but much of the programs and assistance provided through that funding will expire at the end of the year. It is important that additional assistance continue into 2021, as the impacts of the pandemic will continue as well. Immediate, additional assistance for small businesses that have been impacted by the pandemic and an extension of the unemployment insurance program is critically needed in our community and for the state’s economy. Sincerely, -City of Rochester -Mayo Clinic -Destination Medical Center (DMC) -Olmsted County -Diversity Council -Rochester Area Chamber of Commerce -The Greater Rochester Convention and Visitors Bureau -Rochester Area Economic Development, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • October 2005.Qxd
    Hill & Lake Press Serving the East Isles, Lowry Hill, Kenwood Isles, and Cedar Isles Dean Neighborhoods VOLUME 29 NUMBER 10 OCTOBER 22, 2005 ISLES BIKE TRAIL REPLACED West Bay and North Arm Greening Up Chris Wiencke MPRB Planning The unseasonably warm weather this fall extended the growing season, offering a grace period in which the newly planted grass around Lake of the Isles’ west bay could take hold. Parkland disguised as an unsightly con- struction zone for the past two summers is beginning to look like a park once again. Extremely wet weather has subjected the recently completed improvements to a rigorous test, a test they have passed with flying colors. Recent torrential rains would have completely flooded the parkland surrounding the west bay and north arm; today it remains high and dry. Though the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board’s efforts to renovate Lake of the Isles Regional Park—a project spanning several years—in 2005 were limited by inadequate funding, much has been accom- plished this construction season. The parkland around the west bay and north arm, so prone to flooding in recent years, has been filled in above the 100-year flood level, then graded and seeded. The north arm, not yet green at this writing, was seeded later than the west bay. Depending on weather conditions, that area may not look like parkland until spring. Bike trail replaced Lake of the Isles after October 2005 rain Lake Photos by Dorothy Childers The replacement of the bike trail may be the most enthusiastically hailed development of all.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitol Insurrection at Center of Conservative Movement
    Capitol Insurrection At Center Of Conservative Movement: At Least 43 Governors, Senators And Members Of Congress Have Ties To Groups That Planned January 6th Rally And Riots. SUMMARY: On January 6, 2021, a rally in support of overturning the results of the 2020 presidential election “turned deadly” when thousands of people stormed the U.S. Capitol at Donald Trump’s urging. Even Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who rarely broke with Trump, has explicitly said, “the mob was fed lies. They were provoked by the President and other powerful people.” These “other powerful people” include a vast array of conservative officials and Trump allies who perpetuated false claims of fraud in the 2020 election after enjoying critical support from the groups that fueled the Capitol riot. In fact, at least 43 current Governors or elected federal office holders have direct ties to the groups that helped plan the January 6th rally, along with at least 15 members of Donald Trump’s former administration. The links that these Trump-allied officials have to these groups are: Turning Point Action, an arm of right-wing Turning Point USA, claimed to send “80+ buses full of patriots” to the rally that led to the Capitol riot, claiming the event would be one of the most “consequential” in U.S. history. • The group spent over $1.5 million supporting Trump and his Georgia senate allies who claimed the election was fraudulent and supported efforts to overturn it. • The organization hosted Trump at an event where he claimed Democrats were trying to “rig the election,” which he said would be “the most corrupt election in the history of our country.” • At a Turning Point USA event, Rep.
    [Show full text]
  • Minnesota Citizens for the Arts
    MINNESOTA Vote Citizens for the Arts Legislative Candidate Survey 2016 smART! The election on November 8, 2016 will have a huge impact on the arts and on our country. If you agree with thousands of Minnesotans who believe that the arts matter, you’ll want to know where legislators stand. IMPORTANT: Visit the Secretary of State’s website to fnd out your district and where to vote: http://pollfnder.sos.state.mn.us/ READ: We’ve asked all legislative candidates fve questions about current arts issues so they can tell you how they would vote. Due to limited space, comments were limited to 3 sentences. To see full responses visit our website at www.artsmn.org ALL STARS: Look for the symbol telling you which legislators have been awarded an Arts All Star from MCA for their exceptional support for the arts at the legislature! CONNECT: With MCA on Facebook, Twitter @MNCitizen, and our website www.artsmn.org. We’ll make sure you stay informed. ASK: If your candidates didn’t respond to the survey, make sure to ask them these questions when you see them on the campaign trail! ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★★ ★★★★★★★★★★★★★★ Minnesota Citizens for the Arts is a non-partisan statewide arts advocacy organization whose mission is to ensure the opportunity for all people to have access to and involvement in the arts. MCA organizes the arts com- munity and lobbies the Minnesota State Legislature and U.S. Congress on issues pertaining to the nonproft arts. MCA does not endorse candidates for public ofce. MCA’s successes include passing the Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment in 2008 which created dedi- cated funding for the arts in the Minnesota State Constitution for the next 25 years, and the Creative Minnesota research project at CreativeMN.org.
    [Show full text]
  • March 17Th, 2020 the Honorable Melissa Hortman Speaker of The
    March 17th, 2020 The Honorable Melissa Hortman Speaker of the Minnesota House of Representatives The Honorable Kurt Daudt, Minority Leader of the Minnesota House of Representatives The Honorable Paul Gazelka Majority Leader of the Minnesota Senate The Honorable Susan Kent Minority Leader of the Minnesota Senate CC: Governor Tim Walz, Commissioner Jodi Harpstead Dear legislative leaders, The current pandemic crisis facing Minnesota shows us that we are all vulnerable to threats to our health and safety. No matter where we come from or what we look like, all Minnesotans want to feel safe, get the care we need, and be able to thrive. Yet our state and nation are facing an unprecedented crisis that threatens the health and safety of us all. Minnesotans who rely on basic and essential supports, like child care, health care, mental health care, and other support services administered by the Department of Human Services (DHS) are especially vulnerable during this crisis. On March 16, the Legislature passed COVID-19 emergency funding, shoring up our health care systems and institutions, but failed to pass legislation that would allow the state to take the emergency measures needed to keep all Minnesotans safe. As a broad-based group of advocacy organizations and providers from across Minnesota we urge policymakers to reconvene Wednesday, March 18 to take action that will better ensure our friends, family members, and neighbors who depend on safety net supports can weather this crisis. A wide range of basic critical policy areas administered by DHS are impacted: child care, mental health services, services for persons with disabilities and older adults, health care (Medical Assistance and MinnesotaCare), economic assistance, housing support, children’s services, supports for vulnerable populations, and the direct care and treatment system.
    [Show full text]
  • NRCC: MN-07 “Vegas, Baby”
    NRCC: MN-07 “Vegas, Baby” Script Documentation AUDIO: Taxpayers pay for Colin Peterson’s Since 1991, Peterson Has Been Reimbursed At personal, private airplane when he’s in Minnesota. Least $280,000 For Plane Mileage. (Statement of Disbursements of House, Chief Administrative Officer, U.S. House of Representatives) (Receipts and Expenditures: Report of the Clerk of TEXT: Collin Peterson the House, U.S. House of Representatives) Taxpayers pay for Peterson’s private plane Statement of Disbursements of House AUDIO: But do you know where else he’s going? Peterson Went Las Vegas On Trip Sponsored By The Safari Club International From March AUDIO: That’s right. Vegas, Baby. Vegas. 22, 2002 To March 25, 2002 Costing, $1,614. (Collin Peterson, Legistorm, Accessed 3/17/14) Peterson Went Las Vegas On Trip Sponsored By The American Federation Of Musicians From June 23, 2001 To June 25, 2001, Costing $919. (Collin Peterson, Legistorm, Accessed 3/17/14) Peterson Went Las Vegas On Trip Sponsored By The Safari Club International From January 11, 2001 To January 14, 2001, Costing $918.33. (Collin Peterson, Legistorm, Accessed 3/17/14) AUDIO: Colin Peterson took 36 junkets. Vacation- Throughout His Time In Congress, Peterson like trips, paid for by special interest groups. Has Taken At Least 36 Privately Funded Trip Worth $57,942 (Collin Peterson, Legistorm, Accessed 3/17/14) TEXT: 36 Junkets paid for by special interest groups See backup below Legistorm AUDIO: In Washington, Peterson took $6 million in Collin Peterson Took $6.7 Million In Campaign campaign money from lobbyists and special Money From Special Interest Group PACs interests.
    [Show full text]