|
Edited on Tue Jan-03-06 11:38 AM by CornField
I was just poking around while doing a bit of research on the upcoming Iowa Senate races. Guess who raised the second highest amount for the 2004 campaign season? District 5 Sen. Stew Iverson (Story, Hamilton, Wright & a part of Webster county).
The first highest was an unsuccessful Democratic candidate (Sands). What's interesting was that Iverson wasn't even on the ballot during the 2004 campaign yet he still raised $496,462.
I started checking the list and number four was also a seat not on the ballot and also a republican, Sen. Jeff Lamberti of District 35 (upper Polk Co.). I did a bit more looking and it turns out that he is planning a run against Boswell in US House Dist. 3. His money-hugging at least makes sense now.
The next person on the list who didn't have a seat on the ballot, but gathered funds was Chuck Larson, but he was way down on the list with about $57,467. I figure most of that came from name recognition because of his service overseas.
I checked out Iverson's district... not much to speak of. It's above Polk County and does not include Ames. I believe the largest city in that area is Independence. To contrast, Sen. Mary Lundby who ran in 2004 in the Cedar Rapids metro area, raised $72,124 for her entire campaign.
Did I miss something? Is Iverson planning a bid somewhere else?
And just FYI, of the money Iverson raised: 99.8% came from Business; .2% came from Party Contributions; and 0% came from Labor. His largest contributor was the Insurance industry, followed closely by Real Estate and then General Contractors. Food Processing/Sales and the Healthcare Industry rounded out the top five.
Edited to add: Sorry, I sometimes forget that I'm Queen Geek when it comes to bill tracking and so-forth. The reasons his contributors are so interesting to me is that they would have fallen really closely to the the time that the Iowa House approved HF 833, which called for the implementation of a drug prescription database. It was sent over to the Senate and became stalled when groups like the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa started reading it. Among other things, it would maintain the person's name, the name of the drug, and how the person paid for the drug. Originally it was touted as a way to cut down on meth production, but left big holes for possible abuse.
|