Over at the Politico, former Representative Earl Pomeroy is complaining today about how “SuperPACs” did him in in 2010.
The North Dakota Democrat blames outside third-party groups — funded largely by insurance money — for his loss in 2010.
“The super PAC represents the double-barrel assault on the public’s right to know who’s paying for massive amounts of political advertising,” said Pomeroy, now at Alston & Bird. “Big money had a lot of influence before with the advent of super PAC with Citizens United; they now have a great deal more.”
Now, Earl Pomeroy, in addition to all the advantages of incumbency, outspent his opponent by nearly $1.6 million dollars in 2010. His opponent, now Representative Richard Berg (R. N.D.), actually outraised Pomeroy by about half a million dollars in small contributions from individuals, but Pomeroy dwarfed Berg with a huge edge in funding from traditional PACs. Pomeroy even had an edge in total independent spending in the race, and in non-party independent spending.
So Pomeroy joins the list of defeated incumbents who lost despite a huge spending advantage over their opponents, in complaining that the system treated them unfairly.
Cue the BeauBrummels .
