From Friday, but still worth noting, is a rather comprehensive listcompiled by the Think Progress blog of all the monetary pledges conservative groups have made for spending in the upcoming November election: – Americans for Prosperityhas pledged to spend $45 million – Republican State Leadership Committeehas pledged to spend $40 million – American Action Networkhas pledged to spend $25 million – American Future Fundhas pledged to spend up to $25 million – Club for Growthhas pledged to spend at least $24 million – National Republican Trust PAChas pledged to spend at least $20 million – An unnamed health insurance industry coalitionhas pledged to spend $20 million – National Rifle Associationhas pledged to spend $20 million – Faith and Freedom Coalitionhas pledged to spend $11 million – Americans for Job Securityhas pledged to spend $10 million – Susan B. Anthony Listhas pledged to spend $6 million – Our Country Deserves Better (Tea Party Express)has already spent $5 million – Tax Relief Coalitionhas already spent $4 million – Republican Majority Campaignhas pledged to spend $3 million – Campaign for Working Familieshas pledged to spend $2 million – Heritage Action for Americahas pledged to spend $1 million – Financial Services Roundtablehas already spent $0.5 million – Citizens United Political Victory Fundhas pledged to spend $0.2 million Again, these numbers, while staggering, represent what these groups saythey will spend, rather than what they have or necessarily will end up doing. There’s an interesting irony here in that both the conservative groups in question and left-wing blogs like Think Progress have an interest in touting these numbers. The groups’ spokesmen brag about them as a means of signaling strength and popular momentum being on their side, while liberals view them as further evidence that conservative special interests are buying the election.
There’s clearly some merit to both claims, but a lot hinges upon the profile of the average individual donor. With caps on individual and corporate donations to independent political expenditures lifted by the Supreme Court, and no DISCLOSE Act to get a sense of most groups’ major donors, however, suspicions abound that wealthy individuals play an outsize role in funding a majority of these groups.