Federal Politics

Published — October 30, 2010 Updated — May 19, 2014 at 12:19 pm ET

Some anti-spending candidates’ businesses have government contracts, tax breaks in their past

Introduction

In his quest for West Virginia’s Senate seat, Republican John Raese frequently attacks “professional politicians’ out-of-control spending spree” as he promises voters that he’ll rein in the federal budget.

What the businessman-turned-politician leaves unspoken is that his own company has benefited from taxpayer spending. Greer Industries Inc. sold $2.7 million of products to the federal government and $29 million in raw materials to the state in the last five years.

Raese is among roughly two dozen Republican and Democratic candidates in this fall’s congressional elections who attack federal largess but have benefited from it through companies, employers or relatives who got contracts, grants or tax breaks, the Center for Public Integrity and the Huffington Post Investigative Fund have found.

Discrepancies between statement and deed, of course, are nothing new in politics. Because candidates assume that the public loathes excess federal spending, they rail against it. But the ubiquity of federal largess means there’s so much money out there, even those who hate it seem to benefit from it.

“Despite red-faced anger about government, it plays an increasingly important role in the lives of all Americans,” noted Lawrence Jacobs, a University of Minnesota political science professor. “A country that is now increasingly dependent on government is now increasingly hostile to government.”

The most common target of criticism has been the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Passed in February 2009, the stimulus promised to revitalize the economy by sending $787 billion around the country to create jobs and spur economic activity. Twenty-one months later, the role of government spending — and especially the stimulus — has become a flashpoint in elections around the country.

Stimulus in Wisconsin, Missouri, Kentucky

Appleton, Wis., Republican House candidate Reid Ribble bashed the stimulus even though a construction firm owned by members of his family won a contract for $130,000 in stimulus funds to repair the roof of a local elementary school, the candidate’s nephew and new owner of the company, Troy Ribble, confirmed.

Democrats critical of stimulus program effectiveness also had family members who received benefits. In Missouri, Senate candidate Robin Carnahan has called for a halt to expanded stimulus spending proposed by President Barack Obama. But her opponent points out that a company owned by Carnahan’s brother, Wind Capital Group, received $107 million in stimulus funds last year. Carnahan’s campaign did not respond to requests for comment.

In some races, the discrepancy has drawn attention. The operator of a restaurant owned by the family of Rob Portman, the GOP Senate candidate in Ohio, had requested tax credits for a historic restaurant and hotel Portman’s family owns. Portman’s campaign said that the request for aid was later withdrawn.

In Washington state, Republican Senate candidate Dino Rossi owns a share of a minor-league baseball team; state government tax breaks have supported construction at the stadium where the team plays. A spokeswoman for Rossi said the stadium received the money, not the team itself.

Controversy has also beset Democrat Ben Chandler, who represents the 6th district of Kentucky.

Chandler came under fire last year when it was revealed that the state hired his wife, at a salary paying nearly $80,000 a year, to help administer stimulus funds for Kentucky transportation projects. Now in a tough re-election race, Ben Chandler’s ads emphasize his independence and seldom identify him as a Democrat. His campaign did not respond to requests for comment, but Chandler has previously said he had nothing to do with his wife’s hiring.

While hostility toward Washington is the hallmark of this election season, government “is still where Americans look in times of a crisis,” whether it’s an oil spill in the gulf, a bank failure or a broader economic crisis, says the University of Minnesota’s Jacobs.

Second thoughts by auto dealers

Other candidates say that at the time their private firms took government money, they thought the initiatives might help the struggling economy and decided only later that the programs had been a mistake.

Republican businessman Tom Ganley, running a well-funded campaign for Ohio’s 13th District, south of Cleveland, is one of several auto dealers seeking congressional seats who now denounce the “cash for clunkers” program but earlier took advantage of part of it.

Before he ran for Congress, Ganley’s auto dealership received almost $3.7 million in “cash for clunkers” funds. He was initially in favor of the program, but later came out against it. Asked about the switch during the campaign he said, “Initially the program looked to be a success. … But the next few months showed we were wrong,” as sales dropped and the industry continued to struggle.

What was learned from cash for clunkers is that “we cannot rely on big government to fix the private sector,” Ganley said.

In southern Virginia, House candidate Scott Rigell, who has decried the stimulus and other government spending, participated in the program with his auto dealerships netting $568,500 for 137 sales, according to data from the Transportation Department.

Rigell said his company and its 240-person staff would have been at risk if he had not participated in the clunkers program. Customers would have sought business elsewhere, cutting company revenue and putting employees at risk, he said. “I resent the government for putting our family business in that position,” Rigell said, adding that he eliminated his own pay in December 2008 to avoid layoffs.

The situation was even more dire for Jim Renacci, a Republican candidate who owned Renacci-Doraty Chevrolet in Wadsworth, Ohio. Though his business received $168,500 for 39 transactions under the clunkers program, according to the Transportation Department, his dealership was eliminated by General Motors earlier this year as part of a government-mandated restructuring. Forty employees lost their jobs.

State film tax credits

In Connecticut, Republican Senate candidate Linda McMahon has also faced criticism. She is running a campaign tirade against big government with ads blasting “reckless spending, bloated bureaucracy and … unthinkable debt.”

But in 2009, McMahon’s high-profile company, World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., reaped $9.8 million in state film tax credits from the two previous years. This year, the company took $5 million in state infrastructure tax credits.

McMahon says that the company has been run solely by her husband since she stepped down as CEO in September 2009 to run for office. In any case, she says that the publicly traded company had a responsibility to shareholders to seek the credits.

Kimberly Leonard is a reporter for the Huffington Post Investigative Fund. Aaron Mehta is a reporter for the Center for Public Integrity. This story was a collaboration between the Huffington Post Investigative Fund and the Center.

Read more in Federal Politics

Share this article

Join the conversation

Show Comments

11
Leave a Reply

avatar
9 Comment threads
2 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
SOUTH JERSEYTed SiroisMark SullivanTom LarkinAnonymous Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Mark Sullivan
Guest
Mark Sullivan

Trump needs to conduct these activities because the entire MSM media, excluding Fox, is campaigning against him 24/7/365.

Didn’t Monica’s boyfriend’s wife and various criminal enterprises outspend Trump by almost 2-1?

CapitalistRoader
Guest
CapitalistRoader

Why wouldn’t he get an early start on fund raising? Hillary outspent him two-to-one in 2016. The Dem’s are the party of big money. The President knows this and is attempting to get a jump on it. Of course the Dem candidate will outspend him in 2020 so it’s only rational that he starts fund raising now.

George Young
Guest
George Young

Oh brother. We just 8 years of the Campaigner – in – Chief. Where was this journalistic rectal thermometer then. Just another article about 2000 words too long that merely takes another slap at Trump for something he far from initiated.

j stevenson
Guest
j stevenson

The big difference between Trump and all the rest is his refusing to accept funds from lobbyists, so they don’t have the White House access they are used to. These are the donors who buy the presidency and are as pixxed off that he won the election as are the media and the Dems. Lobbyists have never been shut out of the WH and Trump has told them he is not for sale.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Trump needs to be impeached and tossed in prison. Then have the key thrown away so he will never be free. Then he can see how it feels not to have freedom.

Mark Sullivan
Guest
Mark Sullivan

Thank you for the usual insightful leftist low IQ Snowflake response.

barney
Guest

hes not imprisoning them hes sending them back to their country chill tf out

SOUTH JERSEY
Guest
SOUTH JERSEY

WHY DONT YOU HAVE FREEDOM?

Tom Larkin
Guest
Tom Larkin

First, something positive. I was happy to learn of empirical information in article. BUT, the article was so slanted against President Trump as to be deemed fake news (“Perhaps Trump just lied.” (Two different issues)). The article mentions that President Trump raised over $67 million, but ended 2018 with $19 million. President Trump spent over $40 million 2016 and 2017. President Trump conducted 57 political rallies. The article notes the hats and T-shirts sold, but NEVER MENTIONS THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF REPUBLICAN SENATORS during a mid-term election that lost the House and the number of political rallies in… Read more »

Ted Sirois
Guest
Ted Sirois

At least Trump is getting donations from willing donors. Fresh from his first election, Obama used billions of our children’s tax dollars to save thousands of union jobs in the car industry and bailed out the banks and many Wall Street businesses. This secured his source of reelection funds for his reelection four years later.

South Jersey
Guest
South Jersey

TRUMP 2020; IS AN AMAZINGLY SMART MAN! VERY ORIGINAL & CREATIVE. I AM HAPPY TO HAVE HIS AS POTUS.

SOUTH JERSEY
Guest
SOUTH JERSEY

THIS ARTICLE WAS OBVIOUSLY WRITTEN BY, A TRUMP-HATE-GROUP. THAT FEELS; IT IS NOT NORMAL TO BE SUCCESSFUL WITH YOUR OWN BRAND NAME. WHEN, IF FACT, IT IS NORMAL! >>>>> THIS IS >>> FAKE NEWS!!! <<<< ie: A PACK-OF-LIES; SPUN INTO; DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER. FOR A SINISTER-AGENDA OF; FASCIST DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST, COUP D'ETAT