Maryland Democrat David Trone dropped $3 million into his campaign last quarter. Tennessee radiologist George Flinn Jr. added $1.4 million. A former California lottery winner has spent $2 million, so far.

The growing number of departures by House incumbents this cycle is leaving a Wild West of open-seat races, some of which feature deep-pocketed candidates elbowing for a two-year stint in Congress.

The top self-funded candidates so far include familiar faces from elections’ past, such as Trone and Flinn, both of whom spent millions in failed House bids two years ago. And new ones, such as former California Mega Millions Lottery winner Gil Cisneros, a Democrat who appears to be the party’s pick in a congested primary race.

The 400-plus House candidates running for open seats this year have spent more than $32 million on their campaigns. Fourteen have spent at least $500,000.

Open-Seat House Candidates With At Least $500K in Self-Funding

Candidate Party Race Self-Funded David Trone D MD-06 $5,281,939 Andy Thorburn D CA-39 $2,335,900 Gil Cisneros D CA-39 $2,052,762 Paul Kerr D CA-49 $1,612,728 Bob Corlew R TN-06 $1,300,000 Sara Jacobs D CA-49 $1,087,461 Lena Epstein R MI-11 $990,100 Mark Green R TN-07 $620,025 John Ward R FL-06 $614,442 Dan Meuser R PA-09 $550,540 Donna Shalala D FL-27 $533,666 David Richardson D FL-27 $506,656 Kevin Hern R OK-01 $502,700 John Rose R TN-06 $500,000

Competitive seats

In the 16 most competitive open House races, 111 candidates have loaned or contributed to their campaigns a combined $14 million. Just 24 candidates make up 91 percent of it. Each has given at least $100,000. Overall, self-financing makes up about one-quarter of the money raised by candidates in these races, so far.

$8.4 million of that $14 million in self-financing has come from candidates in California’s 39th and 49th Congressional Districts, two of the 12 competitive open seats currently held by a Republican and considered “competitive” by Cook Political Report.

The top four self-funded candidates in competitive races – Andy Thorburn, Cisneros, Paul Kerr and Sarah Jacobs – hail from those two California districts. One of the districts is represented by Republican Darrell Issa, the wealthiest member of Congress many years running.

Self-Funding for Competitive Open House Seats

Race Candidates Self-Funding Seat Held By Party Leaning* CA-39 13 $5,112,028 Edward Royce R D CA-49 12 $3,261,582 Darrell Issa R D FL-27 21 $1,357,363 Ileana Ros-Lehtinen R D MI-11 10 $1,190,344 David Trott R Toss Up NH-01 11 $470,894 Carol Shea-Porter D D KS-02 10 $462,125 Lynn Jenkins R R WA-08 12 $383,177 David Reichert R Toss Up NJ-11 7 $355,437 Rodney Frelinghuysen R Toss Up AZ-02 11 $346,044 Martha McSally R D PA-07 6 $334,800 Vacant R D NV-03 11 $308,534 Jacky Rosen D D MN-01 9 $182,375 Tim Walz D Toss Up NJ-02 5 $80,233 Frank LoBiondo R D WI-01 4 $56,198 Paul Ryan R R NM-02 6 $27,242 Stevan Pearce R R MN-08 5 $202 Richard Nolan D Toss Up

*Party lean in the 16 most competitive open-seat races, according to Cook Political Report.

Whether a wealthy person capable of bankrolling the rising costs of a campaign makes for a qualified candidate is another question, one of perception and branding.

“Iron Stache” Randy Bryce is campaigning as a blue-collar, man-of-the-people alternative to Speaker Paul Ryan and his newly open seat. His campaign is heart and hard hat — with odds against him.

President Trump, meanwhile, rode a mainstream nomination to the White House, but his brand was more of a wealthy third-party candidate, free of special interest despite a swamp that still smells.

For candidates, it’s how well you sell it.

Help us keep government accountable by making a donation today.

“Some voters are favorable to candidates who claim not to be beholden to special interest,” Brendan Glavin, data manager at The Campaign Finance Institute, said. “Other voters will resent a candidate who appears to be buying an election.

“It can cut both ways.”

Trump, of course, was not an entirely self-funded candidate. He dropped $66 million on his campaign, but another $75 million in outside spending — much of it funded by wealthy individuals — didn’t hurt.

“Trump and others who self-finance often make the claim that self-financing lets them be more independent from donors,” UC-Irvine law professor Rick Hasen said in an email. “Whether it is actually true that self-financed candidates are less swayed by the wealthy who would fund their campaigns remains to be seen – after all, self-financed candidates by definition are already wealthy and likely to know and socialize with other wealthy people, exposed to their views and concerns.”

Open-seat money

In the 2016 cycle, House incumbents raised 48 percent of their funding through PAC contributions. Lacking name recognition and fighting off primary challengers, newcomers have to rely more on individual donations and their own money than party or PAC funding.

About a quarter of the money raised by House candidates running for open seats last cycle came through self-financing, Glavin said.

Half of the 28 candidates who have self-financed at least $500,000 this cycle are competing in open races. And again, open-seat candidates are outspending incumbents and challengers by a wide margin.

﻿

Money has its limitations. Just ask Linda McMahon, who spent nearly $100 million on two failed Connecticut Senate campaigns before landing in Trump’s cabinet last year.

Or Texas Republican Kathaleen Wall, whose $6 million couldn’t buy a spot in the primary runoff for the state’s 2nd Congressional District. But that’s not surprising. Self-funded candidates typically lose.

“You can drop all the money you want into the race,” Glavin said, “but if the voters don’t like you, it’s not going to work out.”



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 ➜