PACs had role in Gilchrest defeat | Maryland Gazette (HometownGlenBurnie.com)

Almost $1 million was used by those committees, or PACs, for "independent" expenditures on behalf of or against candidates in the 1st Congressional District's Republican primary, according to Federal Election Commission records.

For perspective, that number is equivalent to a quarter of the $4 million raised by the seven Republicans and the four Democrats on their own.

The money helps illustrate a quirk in federal campaign laws that allows such groups - which don't have to be based in the district of a race - to spend unlimited cash for or against candidates as long their activities are not directly coordinated with the politicians.

Whereas their direct contribution influence cannot exceed $5,000 per primary or general election, PACs can multiply that exponentially on advertisements or direct mailers, leading public watchdog groups to classify the practice as a campaign finance loophole.

About $727,000, or 74 percent, of the total independent expenditures in the campaign came from a single organization supporting Republican nominee and State Sen. Andy Harris: the Club for Growth, a conservative group based in Washington, D.C., that advocates for tax cuts, lower government spending, privatization of Social Security and expanded free trade.

The race was largely marked by a debate over who truly represented the interests of conservative voters after Mr. Gilchrest took part in high-profile policy splits from the Republican party over issues such as the Iraq War.

"We were pretty influential," said Nachama Soloveichik, the communications director for the Club for Growth. "What makes it amazing is incumbents are hard to unseat."

Individual contributions sent through the Club for Growth also accounted for about 25 percent of Dr. Harris' $1.5 million fundraising total. The money helped the Harris campaign reach more people, said

Chris Meekins, the campaign manager.

"It allowed us to be able to get the message out to a broader audience," he said. "It was very helpful to say the least ... but it's the message that mattered more."

PACs, which include everything from the Walt Disney Company Employees PAC to the American Association for Nude Recreation, often make some of the largest single donations to political campaigns.

Under federal law, a PAC can directly give a candidate up to $5,000 per election. Therefore, for a primary and general election, a candidate could get $10,000 combined from a single PAC.

In the contentious 1st Congressional District race to unseat the incumbent, however, PACs were also responsible for money far beyond $5,000 donations.

Federal law allows PACs to spend unlimited amounts for a candidate in the form of television advertisements, direct mail and other initiatives, as long as they do not coordinate directly with the actual campaign.

Such activity was limited to the Republican side of the ballot in the 1st Congressional District. Counting money spent for Dr. Harris and against State Sen. E.J. Pipkin and Mr. Gilchrest, Club For Growth alone shelled out $727,000.

Mr. Gilchrest also received some of the same help from PACs, albeit far less substantial. The Republican Main Street Partnership PAC, which gave $5,000 to the congressman's campaign, also used $50,000 for a radio ad in January against Dr. Harris. About $209,000 was spent to support Mr. Gilchrest by several other groups, including the League of Conservation Voters, Inc.

Mr. Pipkin did not have any PACs make expenditures on his behalf.

Overall, the federal system's lack of oversight on PAC spending can lead to independent spending that isn't so independent, said Ed Davis of Common Cause, a nonprofit watchdog group. For example, a politician's staffer could leave his or her job, create a PAC, and then begin to buy television ads for the former boss.

"It's a way of getting around limits," Mr. Davis said. "In our view, there ought to be a closer regulation of those activities.

But its important to analyze the platforms of the PACs and see if they align with the desires of the voters, said Mr. Meekins of the Harris campaign.

"What matters most is where these groups stand," he said.

The Club for Growth's assistance for the Harris campaign was not limited just to the independent contributions. About $372,000, approximately a quarter of Dr. Harris' campaign fund, was comprised of contributions sent by individuals through the Club for Growth.

Federal campaign laws allow individuals to choose a candidate and have their money sent to the politician through a PAC, thereby allowing the PAC to stay below its $5,000 per election cap.

"We're just a middleman," said Ms. Soloveichik of the Club for Growth. "We just process it and pass it on."

The organization has started spending money in campaigns across the nation, from Pennsylvania and Louisiana to New Mexico and California. The result in the 1st Congressional District shows candidates they cannot consistently vote against the wishes of other candidates, Ms. Soloveichik said.

"Wayne Gilchrest was one of the most liberal members of the Republican caucus," she said. "(The primary result) sends a message to other congressmen."