Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Broadcasters, consultants benefit from millions spent on campaigns

By James Paton, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

Published October 31, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  
Consultant Rick Reiter of Reiter & Associates has earned $800,000 of management fees, according to campaign expense reports.

Photo by The Rocky

Consultant Rick Reiter of Reiter & Associates has earned $800,000 of management fees, according to campaign expense reports.

More More Business

More stories »

It's a ballot measure bonanza.

Dozens of lobbyists, political consultants, advertising firms, lawyers and others have received millions of dollars for their work promoting or opposing the 14 proposals facing Colorado voters this election year.

The pro-or-con campaigns have reeled in $68 million. That's big money they can spend to push their agendas.

Television advertisements are the largest expense, making broadcasters huge beneficiaries, but fees for consultants such as Rick Reiter in Colorado and Field Works in Washington also add up to significant sums.

Some have been more transparent, detailing even the most inexpensive items, including the costs of a private investigator, a dentist, a TV actor and meals.

Clean Government Colorado hired a private investigator, Republic Investigations, for $3,000.

Protect Colorado's Future, which covers health care costs for its three staffers, listed a $238.80 charge at Westwood Dental Group in Lakewood and has disclosed spending at eateries, from Cherry Creek Grill to Fazoli's.

Defend Our Economy, a pro-Amendment 47 group, paid "TV talent" Scott Whatley $800.

Reiter & Associates has received about $1.2 million over the past few months, according to the expense reports the campaigns are required to file. The veteran consultant, who assembled a temporary team of 30 staffers, has reeled in $800,000 in management fees. The remainder is reimbursement for expenses.

"This is why we have public disclosure, so the public knows where the money is coming from and where the money is being spent," Reiter said. "I always think that is a good thing."

Reiter has advised:

* Coloradans for a Stable Economy, the group battling a measure that would boost state tax revenue from oil and gas drilling.

* Coloradans for Community Colleges, which is backing a bid to expand gambling in three of the state's former mining towns.

* Coloradans for Responsible Reform, the coalition that was fighting four labor-backed ballot measures until they were pulled.

Field Works has received more than $2 million, mostly for gathering signatures and reaching out to voters, state documents filed with the secretary of state's office. Protect Colorado's Future, which opposes Amendment 47, relied heavily on the group.

A lot of the money flowed back to the local economy, however, since Field Works hired organizers in Colorado.

A fierce fight over the three anti-union measures - right- to-work, government dues deductions and political contributions - has attracted more than $34 million, with opponents getting the lion's share.

"It's a complex and sophisticated campaign," said Jess Knox of the anti-47 team.

The backers of the gambling measure, Amendment 50, said television, radio, newspaper and Web advertising accounted for more than 80 percent of their costs. They have raised more than $7 million, leaving about $1.2 million for consultants, lawyers, compliance, signature gathering and a variety of other items.

If all the groups spent about 80 percent of the $68 million money on advertising, they would still have $14 million left for the political operatives.

That's money that is dished out, mostly in modest sums, to local firms such as David J. Cole & Associates, which earned nearly $60,000. Katy Atkinson and associate Kathleen Finger received $80,000 for Amendment 50, and Axiom Strategies got $42,000.

A Better Colorado gave Lori Weigel's firm, Public Opinion Strategies, more than $100,000 for polling, consulting and research, the filings show.

Protect Colorado's Future gave Las Vegas-based Gail Tuzzolo & Associates more than $100,000 for consulting, and several campaigns have paid about $240,000 to Rick Ridder, the Democratic strategist in Denver.

Ridder said it's a growing but cyclical business.

"I compare it to retail, except for us Christmas comes every two years," he said.

The players in the game who lack funding, like Scott Yates, tend to feel overwhelmed.

"I guess the sun is shining on political consultants," said Yates, a critic of Amendment 50 who launched the Web site KeepVegasOut.com to fight the casinos. "It's one of the few growth businesses we have right now."

Consultants can be pricey. TV is much more expensive.

The groups said they are paying a significant premium this year for TV ads. Broadcasters are required by federal mandate to charge the lowest available rates to the presidential and U.S. Senate candidates, who have gobbled up air time in Colorado. The same rates do not apply to the ballot groups, and the demand for the remaining time slots is high.

"It is difficult to read a story on how much is being spent on campaigns without any mention of the king's ransom that is being charged by the 12 TV stations across the state," Reiter said.

"They are setting the pace for how much these campaigns cost," he added. "I don't criticize them for that. . . ."

There is a lot of money and a lot at stake.

"To win you have to get your message out, and to do that successfully requires advertising, people on the ground for handshakes and smiles and the media as well," said Kelley Harp of Better Colorado.

Some amounts:

$2.0 million

Money paid to: Field Works

Campaigns:

* Protect Colorado's Future, (anti-Amendments 47, 49, 54)

* A Smarter Colorado (pro-Amendment 58)

$1.2 million

Money paid to: Reiter & Associates

Campaigns:

* Coloradans for Community Colleges (pro-Amendment 50)

* Coloradans for a Stable Economy (anti-Amendment 58),

* Coloradans for Responsible Reform (previously opposed four pro-labor measures)

$412,000

Money paid to: Goddard Claussen

Campaign:

* A Better Colorado (pro-Amendment 47)

$322,000

Money paid to: Isaacson, Rosenbaum

Campaigns:

* Coloradans for Community Colleges (pro-Amendment 50)

* Protect Colorado's Future (anti-47, 49, 54)

* Vote No on Amendment 46

* Savings Account for Education (pro-Amendment 59)

$210,000

Money paid to: Walt Klein Advertising

Campaign:

* Coloradans for Community Colleges (pro-Amendment 50)

$144,200

Money paid to: Dewey-Obenchain Films

Campaign:

* A Smarter Colorado (pro-Amendment 58)

$102,000

Money paid to: Gail Tuzzolo & Associates

Campaign:

* Protect Colorado's Future (anti-47, 49, 54)

$85,000

Money paid to: J. William Artist & Associates

Campaigns:

* Defend Our Economy (pro- 47)

* Coloradans for Responsible Reform

$80,000

Money paid to: Katy Atkinson and Kathleen Finger

Campaign:

* Coloradans for Community Colleges (pro-50)

$61,500

Money paid to: Welchert & Britz

Campaign:

* Coloradans for Middle Class Relief (anti-47), Committee for Fair Wages Benefits (anti-47)

$59,000

Money paid to: David J. Cole & Associates

Campaigns:

* Coloradans for Community Colleges (pro-50)

* Coloradans for Responsible Reform

$42,000

Money paid to: Axiom Strategies

Campaigns:

* Coloradans for a Stable Economy (anti-58)

* Coloradans for Community Colleges (pro-50)

* Coloradans for Responsible Reform

$18,600

Money paid to: Colorado Communique

Campaign:

* Coloradans for a Stable Economy (anti-58)

Source: Secretary of state's office

Amounts may include expenses, ad purchases and other items in addition to fees

Comments

  • October 31, 2008

    8:45 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    jacka writes:

    YES on 47, shouldn't all Coloradans be free of forced unionism?

    YES on 54, it si time to make inside dealing sole source contract holders with government accountable.

  • October 31, 2008

    2:52 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    johne123 writes:

    47 has nothing to do with forced unionism. We've been free from that for over 60 years and a large coalition of labor and business groups agree the status quo has worked just fine.

    From the 1943 Colorado Labor Peace Act:

    "In accordance with the provisions of this article, employees have the right of self-organization and the right to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own free choosing, and to engage in lawful, concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. Each employee also has the right to refrain from any of such activities."

    The backers of Amendment 47 talk about freedom and choice without ever talking about the details of existing laws. Currently workers have the CHOICE to decide what kind of union they want when creating one. After the union is ratified, if a second vote passes by 75% the members may then collect fees from non-members to help pay for the costs of collective bargaining and filing grievances. Amendment 47 would take away this democratic FREEDOM.

  • October 31, 2008

    6:38 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    richardtmyers writes:

    Here's some information on Amendment 54:

    http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk...

    Not just what i think, but some very compelling arguments from newspapers throughout Colorado.

    richard myers

  • November 1, 2008

    4:07 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    SodaPop writes:

    Too bad Frazier, Coors, and Jabs could not see reason and pull 47 like labor pulled its four amendments. Now we have to spend even more money too kill 47, 49, and 54, none of which should be on the ballot in the first place.

    Kudos to labor and business for understanding we did not need a war in this state between them. Shame on Jonathan Coors in particular for putting his own selfish ideology ahead of that of Colorado.