{
  "id": 2897,
  "title": "At the Deadline",
  "url": "/competitions/cir-prospect/discussion/2897",
  "author_name": "",
  "post_date": "2012-10-15T23:22:04.433Z",
  "votes": null,
  "comment_count": 5,
  "views": 3628,
  "content": "<p>Evening,</p>\r\n<p>I'm fininshing up two projects for this and just checked the hour of the deadline (40 minutes from now).&nbsp; I've done too much work that I think is interesting to just not submit it.&nbsp; So, if the submission portal is open 41 minutes from now, I'll put them\r\n in there later tonight.&nbsp; If not, I'll post them on my blog (civilsociology.wordpress.org) and you can contact me directly for the code.</p>\r\n<p>Best</p>\r\n<p>Jason</p>",
  "messages": [
    {
      "id": "15665",
      "postDate": "10/15/2012 23:22:04",
      "content": "<p>Evening,</p>\r\n<p>I'm fininshing up two projects for this and just checked the hour of the deadline (40 minutes from now).&nbsp; I've done too much work that I think is interesting to just not submit it.&nbsp; So, if the submission portal is open 41 minutes from now, I'll put them\r\n in there later tonight.&nbsp; If not, I'll post them on my blog (civilsociology.wordpress.org) and you can contact me directly for the code.</p>\r\n<p>Best</p>\r\n<p>Jason</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "",
      "votes": null
    },
    {
      "id": "15666",
      "postDate": "10/15/2012 23:30:49",
      "content": "<p>Hi Jason,</p>\r\n<p>30 minutes to go as of now. &nbsp;Why don't you post what you've done so far, so it can be eligible for the judging, and provide link to your blog in case judges are willing to consider supplemental materials.</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "",
      "votes": null
    },
    {
      "id": "15667",
      "postDate": "10/15/2012 23:32:49",
      "content": "<p>We're absolutely willing to consider supplemental materials, but if you've got time to even drop in a placeholder entry briefly describing what you're up to, we'd appreciate.</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "",
      "votes": null
    },
    {
      "id": "15678",
      "postDate": "10/16/2012 00:58:42",
      "content": "<p>Hi,</p>\r\n<p>Sorry, I was on the phone with my fiance over the past half hour (long distance relationships...).&nbsp; For what it's worth, the first project examines the most powerful and most independent committees.&nbsp; I break down power by influence and dominance.&nbsp; I define\r\n influence as giving the most money to the most committees and find that the most influential committees tend to be party superPACs like Every Republican is Crucial (ERIC) and The Freedom Project as well as private PACs sponsored by the likes of AT&amp;T, Honeywell,\r\n and the American Bankers Association.&nbsp; I define dominance as giving a lot of money to a few campaigns.&nbsp; Most of the findings rank self-financed campaigns like Linda McMahon's as the most dominated (which makes sense) as well as some odd relationships between\r\n PACS and specific candidates.&nbsp; For example Freedom Path made only two large donations, one to Romney and one to Utah Senate Candidate Jim Liljenquist.&nbsp; Likewise, the Chamber of Commerce has donated larges amounts of money to only a handful of campaigns and\r\n PACs.&nbsp; I measure committee independence and dependence on a similar scale, the former receiving many, smaller donations from other committees while the dependent receiving few, large donations from a few committees.&nbsp; I find that the most independent committees,\r\n fortunately, are major senatorial committees such as those for Orin Hatch and Christine Gillibrand.&nbsp; The most dependent committees are actually state-based PACs like the California Real Estate PAC, Florida Freedom PAC, and Californians for Integrity in Government.&nbsp;\r\n</p>\r\n<p>The second study looks at who donates money to campaigns based on profession.&nbsp; I take the profession straight from the Individual Contributions file, so I had to collapse a number of different listed professions into a single type.&nbsp; Doing this, the top professions\r\n donating the most money are: Executives (including VP-level executives and members of boards of directors) donating $259 million, Retirees donating $126 million, Lawyers donating $90.5 million, Homemakers (yes, homemakers) donating $68 million, and &quot;Owners&quot;\r\n (an uncollapsed category) donating $30 million dollars. Surprisingly, only one person labelled their occupation as &quot;Job Creator,&quot; donating $2000 to a Republican candidate.&nbsp; Executives, homemakers, and owners donated at a rate slightly above 2:1 Republicans\r\n to Democrats, though the vast majority of their money was donated to unknown or missing parties.&nbsp; Lawyers donated at an exactly inverse rate of 2:1 Democrate to Republicans.&nbsp; While retirees were closer to a 50:50 balance.&nbsp; In wrapping up this analysis, I am\r\n comparing the top two hundred occupations based on which donate in the most partisan way.</p>\r\n<p>Sorry, for putting all of this together late.&nbsp; It's my first time.&nbsp; I hope the people at the Center for Investigative Reporting will find some of it interesting.&nbsp; I'll put out copies of the top donating professions and the top 200 dependent/independent and\r\n dominant/influential committees as appendices for the report in case anyone wants to look at the raw lists.</p>\r\n<p>Best,</p>\r\n<p>Jason</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "",
      "votes": null
    },
    {
      "id": "15679",
      "postDate": "10/16/2012 01:00:15",
      "content": "<p>Sounds interesting! Looking forward to digging into the details.</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "",
      "votes": null
    },
    {
      "id": "15694",
      "postDate": "10/16/2012 06:12:55",
      "content": "<p>The report on committee power is finally up (http://civilsociology.wordpress.com/2012/10/16/research-fugue-measuring-power-in-political-campaigns/). I'll put up both codes and wrap up the other write-up hopefully tomorrow.</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "",
      "votes": null
    }
  ],
  "comments": [
    {
      "id": 15666,
      "author_name": "glider",
      "author_url": "",
      "post_date": "10/15/2012 23:30:49",
      "content": "<p>Hi Jason,</p>\r\n<p>30 minutes to go as of now. &nbsp;Why don't you post what you've done so far, so it can be eligible for the judging, and provide link to your blog in case judges are willing to consider supplemental materials.</p>",
      "votes": null,
      "replies": []
    },
    {
      "id": 15667,
      "author_name": "cjdd3b",
      "author_url": "",
      "post_date": "10/15/2012 23:32:49",
      "content": "<p>We're absolutely willing to consider supplemental materials, but if you've got time to even drop in a placeholder entry briefly describing what you're up to, we'd appreciate.</p>",
      "votes": null,
      "replies": []
    },
    {
      "id": 15678,
      "author_name": "jsradford",
      "author_url": "",
      "post_date": "10/16/2012 00:58:42",
      "content": "<p>Hi,</p>\r\n<p>Sorry, I was on the phone with my fiance over the past half hour (long distance relationships...).&nbsp; For what it's worth, the first project examines the most powerful and most independent committees.&nbsp; I break down power by influence and dominance.&nbsp; I define\r\n influence as giving the most money to the most committees and find that the most influential committees tend to be party superPACs like Every Republican is Crucial (ERIC) and The Freedom Project as well as private PACs sponsored by the likes of AT&amp;T, Honeywell,\r\n and the American Bankers Association.&nbsp; I define dominance as giving a lot of money to a few campaigns.&nbsp; Most of the findings rank self-financed campaigns like Linda McMahon's as the most dominated (which makes sense) as well as some odd relationships between\r\n PACS and specific candidates.&nbsp; For example Freedom Path made only two large donations, one to Romney and one to Utah Senate Candidate Jim Liljenquist.&nbsp; Likewise, the Chamber of Commerce has donated larges amounts of money to only a handful of campaigns and\r\n PACs.&nbsp; I measure committee independence and dependence on a similar scale, the former receiving many, smaller donations from other committees while the dependent receiving few, large donations from a few committees.&nbsp; I find that the most independent committees,\r\n fortunately, are major senatorial committees such as those for Orin Hatch and Christine Gillibrand.&nbsp; The most dependent committees are actually state-based PACs like the California Real Estate PAC, Florida Freedom PAC, and Californians for Integrity in Government.&nbsp;\r\n</p>\r\n<p>The second study looks at who donates money to campaigns based on profession.&nbsp; I take the profession straight from the Individual Contributions file, so I had to collapse a number of different listed professions into a single type.&nbsp; Doing this, the top professions\r\n donating the most money are: Executives (including VP-level executives and members of boards of directors) donating $259 million, Retirees donating $126 million, Lawyers donating $90.5 million, Homemakers (yes, homemakers) donating $68 million, and &quot;Owners&quot;\r\n (an uncollapsed category) donating $30 million dollars. Surprisingly, only one person labelled their occupation as &quot;Job Creator,&quot; donating $2000 to a Republican candidate.&nbsp; Executives, homemakers, and owners donated at a rate slightly above 2:1 Republicans\r\n to Democrats, though the vast majority of their money was donated to unknown or missing parties.&nbsp; Lawyers donated at an exactly inverse rate of 2:1 Democrate to Republicans.&nbsp; While retirees were closer to a 50:50 balance.&nbsp; In wrapping up this analysis, I am\r\n comparing the top two hundred occupations based on which donate in the most partisan way.</p>\r\n<p>Sorry, for putting all of this together late.&nbsp; It's my first time.&nbsp; I hope the people at the Center for Investigative Reporting will find some of it interesting.&nbsp; I'll put out copies of the top donating professions and the top 200 dependent/independent and\r\n dominant/influential committees as appendices for the report in case anyone wants to look at the raw lists.</p>\r\n<p>Best,</p>\r\n<p>Jason</p>",
      "votes": null,
      "replies": []
    },
    {
      "id": 15679,
      "author_name": "cjdd3b",
      "author_url": "",
      "post_date": "10/16/2012 01:00:15",
      "content": "<p>Sounds interesting! Looking forward to digging into the details.</p>",
      "votes": null,
      "replies": []
    },
    {
      "id": 15694,
      "author_name": "jsradford",
      "author_url": "",
      "post_date": "10/16/2012 06:12:55",
      "content": "<p>The report on committee power is finally up (http://civilsociology.wordpress.com/2012/10/16/research-fugue-measuring-power-in-political-campaigns/). I'll put up both codes and wrap up the other write-up hopefully tomorrow.</p>",
      "votes": null,
      "replies": []
    }
  ],
  "raw_markdown_by_id": {
    "15665": "",
    "15666": "",
    "15667": "",
    "15678": "",
    "15679": "",
    "15694": ""
  },
  "source": "meta"
}