Independent spending may tip narrowly contested judicial elections

Evidence

Altogether, Gableman’s supporters spent 2.1 million on television ads, compared to 1.5 million by Butler’s supporters. The difference may have been decisive, as Gableman defeated Butler by a narrow 51-49 percent margin. Commenting on his loss, Butler charged, “The system is broken. Third-party issue groups who don’t have to be accountable, don’t have to follow campaign laws, and don’t have to disclose their donors siphoned huge amounts of money into this race.” — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 594

These and other similar ads flooded the airwaves in the weeks preceding the election—more than 4,700 according to the Brennan Center for Justice. Altogether, Gableman’s supporters spent 2.1 million on television ads, compared to 1.5 million by Butler’s supporters. The difference may have been decisive, as Gableman defeated Butler by a narrow 51 percent to 49 percent margin. Commenting on his loss, Butler charged, “The system is broken. Third-party issue groups who don’t have to be accountable, don’t have to follow campaign laws, and don’t have to disclose their donors siphoned huge amounts of money into this race.” — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 427

Categorization

• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 594; G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 427
• XREF: connects to: State supreme court campaign spending has escalated dramatically in recent decades — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 578