# Super PAC effect on House races?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/super-pac-effect-on-house-races/635106>\
**Category:** Politics & Elections\
**Created:** [September 18, 2012, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/super-pac-effect-on-house-races/635106 "2012-09-18T21:01:01Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Dwindlehop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/65b543/32.png) [@Dwindlehop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dwindlehop)\
**Post date:** [September 18, 2012, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/super-pac-effect-on-house-races/635106/1 "2012-09-18T21:01:01Z")

</div>

> **[Big-spending groups turn their sights on local races](https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/nation_world/20120918_Big-spending_groups_turn_their_sights_on_local_races.html)**
>
> Democrat John Tierney might normally be a shoo-in for reelection in his deep-blue northeast Massachusetts district. But a well-funded outside group is trying to change that.

> [@](#):
>
> Most of the public’s attention this year is focused on the presidential race, where big-spending advocacy groups are lining up to drown swing states in political ads. But the biggest impact of all that money may come in down-ballot contests, particularly in House races, where even a few hundred thousand dollars can decide the outcome.

Dan Eggen in the Washington Post today claimed that a few hundred thousand dollars spent in a U.S. House of Representatives election can swing the result. Are there examples of this occurring? I am somewhat dubious of his claim, which he does not back up with evidence at all.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\
**Post date:** [September 19, 2012, 10:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/super-pac-effect-on-house-races/635106/2 "2012-09-19T10:39:20Z")

</div>

He’s just quoting the conventional wisdom. There is no evidence to support this, it’s just what most people believe, so he doesn’t need to prove it.

Well, he is partly right. If we assume a race where an incumbent has raised $400,000 and his challenger has $50,000, the incumbent is pretty much certain to win. But if a Super PAC comes in and spends $350,000, then that could very well get the challenger enough exposure to overcome an incumbent. Thus, the election has been “swung”. 🙂

But to me, that’s not a problem. I don’t see how anyone could consider that situation to be a problem. Other than the incumbent of course, who will go on TV and lament how money has corrupted politics. And the friends in the media who he has built up relationships with over the years will portray him in the most sympathetic light.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BigAppleBucky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigapplebucky/32/178_2.png) [@BigAppleBucky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigAppleBucky)\
**Post date:** [September 19, 2012, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/super-pac-effect-on-house-races/635106/3 "2012-09-19T19:28:39Z")

</div>

[http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/the-end-of-a-kansas-tradition-moderation/#more-34631](http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/19/the-end-of-a-kansas-tradition-moderation/#more-34631)

In Kansas, formerly a fairly moderate conservative state, now more like Alabama or Mississippi:

> [@](#):
>
> That conflict set up the recent “moderate” vs. “conservative” Republican primaries. And the conservatives, backed by Mr. Brownback and an avalanche of outside money, won. Americans for Prosperity, financed by the Wichita-based Koch brothers; the Kansas Chamber of Commerce, who also received a large Koch check; and **other groups spent hundreds of thousands of dollars during the campaign.**

If Obama wins, and the rest of the ticket loses, Obama might as well have lost.