Skip to content
Subscribe

Spending Wrap-up For South Carolina Special Election

Published:
south-carolina-election

Going into election day on Tuesday, May 7, Elizabeth Colbert Busch (Democrat) and former Governor Mark Sanford (Republican) are closely matched in both poll numbers and funds in the South Carolina special election. The tense first and only debate between the two last week has split spectators on the outcome. However, most favor Colbert Busch given Sanford's recent trespassing debacle.

Likewise, competing polls have either Colbert Bush leading slightly or tied with Sanford. The race has become surprisingly close given the significant lead Sanford enjoyed at the outset of his campaign and the historically conservative lean of the district.

According to OpenSecrets.org, the candidates have spent a combined $1.5 million on the race. Colbert Busch leads Sanford in fundraising, while both are evenly split in cash on hand. Colbert Busch's fundraising strength comes from stronger support among small donors, yet she's been able to keep up with Sanford regarding large donors as well.

"[B]oth candidates received roughly equal funding from large individual donors -- those who give more than $200. Those donations, which are itemized in FEC reports, amounted to $432,000 for Colbert Busch and $405,000 for Sanford. But when it came to small individual donors, giving $200 or less, Colbert Busch had a huge lead. She received $339,000 from small donors, while Sanford picked up just $35,000."

Independent expenditures from organizations like Super PACs have poured in as well. Recent spending from groups either supporting Sanford or opposing Colbert Busch include Freedomworks, Independent Women's Voice, and the National Right to Life Victory Fund.

House Majority PAC, South Forward, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee have either spent in support of Colbert Busch or against Sanford. Spending from these groups has produced a number of online and television advertisements attempting to sway voters one way or another, or simply dissuade them from voting altogether.

This one is from House Majority PAC:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERK_pExyer8&feature=player_embedded

Independent Women's Voice bought nearly $90,000 in advertising to close out the race, according to filings with the FEC. The advertisement titled "Elizabeth and Rich" is not available online yet.

With less than 48 hours before polls open on Tuesday, South Carolinians face an uncanny choice between a familiar, yet potentially unforgivable Sanford, and the Democratic newcomer, Colbert Busch.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

Spending Wrap-up For South Carolina Special Election

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us