Kenneth Griffin is a billionaire hedge fund investor who is building one of the most extravagant homes in the world, just down the street from Mar-a-Lago.
With sweeping views of the Atlantic Ocean, Mr. Griffin’s mansion is expected to be worth $1 billion when it’s finished and feature a massive pool, lush gardens and a floor plan that will span 50,000 square feet.
On the other side of the country, billionaire Eric Schmidt is a former CEO of Google who amassed a fortune in tech and oversees a philanthropic organization near San Francisco.
Neither one will be represented by the winner of the U.S. Senate race between incumbent Democrat Bob Casey Jr., and GOP challenger David McCormick.
And yet they are among the biggest contributors to the candidates in what’s now the most expensive Senate race in Pennsylvania's history.
With control of the Senate at stake, the race has captured the attention of some of the wealthiest and most powerful donors in America. So far, hundreds of millions have been funneled into the contest from contributors in Miami, New York, Boston and other places to support both candidates in what's part of a pitched national battle to take control of the highest levels of government.
The money flowing into the contest from out of state is part of a growing trend in modern politics where major donors try to advance the cause of their party by influencing elections far from their own homes.
It's all part of "the nationalization of politics," said Laurel Harbridge-Yong, a political science professor at Northwestern University who studies congressional elections. "Each party thinks it has the ability to gain control."
So far, nearly $169 million has been spent on ads supporting Mr. Casey, while more than $175 million has been plunked down on advertising for Mr. McCormick — a total of $344 million, the second highest amount of any Senate race in the nation.
The goal of the big donors often has little to do with the needs of Pennsylvania voters, but to get the candidate of their chosen party elected and ultimately boost the power of that party in Congress, say experts tracking the campaigns.
“The majority of these out-of-state donors couldn't pick Bob Casey out of a police lineup,” said Michael Heseltine, an expert on American politics at the University of Amsterdam.
In fact, the amount of money that was funneled to support Mr. Casey’s first run for the Senate in 2006 — roughly $21 million — is far less than the funds now pouring in.
The flood of donations is part of a growing trend in which wealthy donors on both sides — with few limits on how much they can spend — are jumping into races across the country to back candidates in fiercely contested campaigns.
In Ohio, where longtime Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown is being challenged by Republican Bernie Moreno in a bitter battle, the vast majority of the money flowing into the race to pay for ads is from out-of-state donors. The total amount: $519 million, more than any Senate race in the country.
In Montana, most of the donations in that Senate contest has come from outside the state’s borders to benefit Democratic incumbent Jon Tester and Republican challenger Tim Sheehy. So far, more than $282 million has funded ads for both candidates — more than has ever been spent on a race in the state’s history.
In Pennsylvania, the largest swing state in the presidential contest, the donors backing Mr. Casey and Mr. McCormick have been fueling a race that has grown closer and more contentious every week.
Once the clear frontrunner, Mr. Casey is now leading his challenger by just three points in one poll. In another, the gap is only 1%. A third survey found the two dead even.
With the race between the two tightening, deep-pocketed super PACs have stepped in and turned over millions of dollars in what's seen as a fight that could ultimately flip the Senate, now barely controlled by the Democrats.
“Big stakes, big money,” said Peter Loge, director of the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University. “It’s control of the U.S. Senate.”
For Mr. McCormick, a former hedge fund CEO and combat veteran who narrowly lost a primary fight for the Senate two years ago, the money from outside contributors has erased Mr. Casey’s earlier cash advantage.
In fact, the out-of-state money has helped him surpass Mr. Casey in spending.
Two of the largest super PACs, Keystone Renewal and the Senate Leadership Fund, have funneled a combined $102 million into ads boosting Mr. McCormick, according to AdImpact.
Another super PAC, WinSenate, has spent about $70 million to pay for ads that favor Mr. Casey.
With all the money moving into Pennsylvania, the political debate once driven by voters now is being drowned out by wealthy contributors who can set their own narratives in ads bombarding every corner of the commonwealth.
In one set of ads, Mr. Casey is accused of allowing unchecked immigration — including terrorists — to slip through the borders. Television ads that support Mr. Casey accuse his opponent of having longstanding financial ties to China.
Mr. McCormick’s single biggest benefactor is Mr. Griffin, the billionaire hedge fund manager and the fourth largest donor of the election cycle. Mr. Griffin has poured $45 million into Keystone Renewal and Senate Leadership Fund.
Mr. Casey’s top supporters include Mr. Schmidt, the tech billionaire who gave $3 million to a super PAC backing Senate Democrats across the country.
Jeff Skoll in Palo Alto, Calif., who once led eBay, and Stephen Mandel Jr., a hedge fund manager from Greenwich, Conn., each has given at least $6 million to the same group supporting Mr. Casey and other Senate Democrats.
The influence of rich donors has long been a part of American politics. But key Supreme Court decisions that erased barriers to the flood of big donations have given rise to a new breed of megadonors.
Coupled with a growing partisan divide, the donors have emerged as driving forces that can keep a candidate competitive.
Consider: One hundred of the country’s wealthiest donors are responsible for at least $1.8 billion — or about 10% of total spending in the 2024 election, according to OpenSecrets, a nonprofit that tracks campaign money.
The largest contributor is Timothy Mellon, heir to the Mellon banking fortune, who has donated more than $172 million this cycle — more disclosed dollars than any donor this election.
So far, he has sunk $30 million into one of the biggest super PACs supporting Mr. McCormick and other GOP candidates.
Experts interviewed by the Post-Gazette say many of the donors are motivated more by the supremacy of their party than the issues in a race or even the individual candidates who are benefitting from their largesse.
“Donors want to help their team,” said Mr. Heseltine. "Everything feels like there's more at stake."
Assuming Republicans flip West Virginia — where Sen. Joe Manchin III, a Democrat, isn’t seeking re-election — the GOP needs to pick up just one additional seat to wrest control of the chamber.
Whichever party captures the Senate will have power over the next president’s legislative agenda, Cabinet appointments, and judicial nominations. Depending on who wins the White House, the Senate could serve as a powerful check on the president.
“Partisans are acutely aware that a single seat could make all the difference,” Mr. Heseltine said.
The national implications of the race are reflected in many of the campaigns’ political ads that focus not on issues specific to Pennsylvania but on topics that have dominated the national debate, such as immigration.
“There's talk of fracking and there's talk of some energy stuff, but it's really been taken over by national issues,” said Matthew Foster, who teaches politics and elections at American University.
While most of the money coming into Pennsylvania is from benefactors whose names are disclosed, a sizable amount is from others whose names are sealed — dark money donors, further complicating the issue of outside contributors impacting races from thousands of miles away.
One of the groups turning over such funds to the McCormick race is One Nation — a nonprofit that spent $21 million on ads that have attacked Mr. Casey and steered millions more to a pro-McCormick super PAC.
For Mr. Casey, a group known as Majority Forward has funneled $43 million to a super PAC that bankrolled broadcast ads to take on Mr. McCormick.
At a time when voters are asking for greater transparency, dark money has created its own problems by putting up barriers that conceal the source of the funds – and the ability to discern what donors may want from the candidates in exchange for the money.
“Even if most Americans, most Pennsylvanians don't know the names of these groups, don't know the long sort of paper trail, they do see all the ads, they do see all the money,” said Nicholas Jacobs, a political scientist at Colby College in Maine.
“And the amount of money that is circulating in politics now makes politics look dirty, makes politics look like the only thing that matters is money.”
While it's not clear whether the surge in outside money will impact the Senate battle in Pennsylvania, experts say the trend of money coming from all the country is now an integral part of elections in the state and elsewhere.
“Senator Casey doesn’t just impact Pennsylvania,” said Mr. Loge. “His votes impact everyone. If he votes on a cost-of-living [measure], that impacts me and I don’t live in Pennsylvania. Campaigns are national -– and national money flows into those campaigns.”
Deputy Managing Editor for Investigations Michael D. Sallah and Assistant Managing Editor for Data Mike Wereschagin contributed to this report.
First Published: November 2, 2024, 9:30 a.m.
Updated: November 4, 2024, 6:42 p.m.