Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) is leaving Congress after 20 terms, and, like a number of his retiring colleagues, it looks like he’ll leave a fair bit of money on the table.

For much of this millenium, Waxman’s seniority and status drove away challengers, and his fundraising was rather lackluster. But in 2012, Waxman eked out a close victory against independent Bill Bloomfield, a multimillionaire. Waxman raised roughly $1.9 million and spent $2.6 million — almost twice the average cost of a winning House race — but was outspent by a huge margin: Bloomfield reached into his own pockets for more than $7.5 million, which made up 95 percent of his spending.

Even though he went into the red in the 2012 election, Waxman had more than $465,000 on hand at the end of September (campaign finance filings for the final quarter of 2013 are due Jan. 31). Waxman told Politico that he believes he could win in 2014, if he chose to run again, and showed strong support from donors in his district , which encompasses parts of Los Angeles, including Beverly Hills. His No. 2 source of money at the end of 2013’s third quarter was the entertainment industry , which accounted for about $55,200. Lawyers and law firms and the real estate industry, both big sources of campaign cash in his district, ranked third and fourth on his top donor list.

Waxman, who was known for his aggressive role in the healthcare overhaul fight and in taking on the tobacco industy, has picked up the most money this cycle from health professionals , who have given him slightly more than Hollywood — $55,400.

According to OpenSecrets.org data reaching back to 1989, that’s the same donor base Waxman has relied on throughout his career . From 1989 to 2014, Waxman raised $9 million, and health professionals are his all-time No. 1 source of campaign cash, accounting for nearly $1.1 million over the course of his career. Hollywood is No. 2, with $786,000 and lawyers and law firms — long a major source of cash for many Democrats — are third, with $620,000.

Waxman also operates a leadership PAC, LA PAC , which first put itself on the map in 2000. That year, it raised $549,000 and spent $429,000. It remained active throughout the 2000s, but in 2012, its fundraising activity dropped off dramatically, possibly because of Bloomfield’s challenge. In that cycle, it raised just $139,000, compared to $410,000 in 2010.

So far in the 2014 cycle, fundraising for Waxman’s leadership PAC had lagged, pulling in just $19,000. As of Dec. 31, LA PAC had $82,000 in cash on hand.

Waxman and other departing lawmakers can use leftover campaign funds to make donations to other candidates or party committees, or to charity. They can’t channel the funds for personal use.

Follow Russ on Twitter: @russchoma

Images: Henry Waxman (AP Photo)

Help us keep government accountable by making a donation today.



For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center: Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics.For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center: [email protected]





Support Accountability Journalism At OpenSecrets.org we offer in-depth, money-in-politics stories in the public interest. Whether you’re reading about 2020 presidential fundraising, conflicts of interest or “dark money” influence, we produce this content with a small, but dedicated team. Every donation we receive from users like you goes directly into promoting high-quality data analysis and investigative journalism that you can trust.Please support our work and keep this resource free. Thank you. Support OpenSecrets ➜