November has come and gone. Journalists, readers and viewers don't want to hear or see the words "red" and "blue" in the same sentence as the word "state." The 2004 presidential election is long over. But story ideas abound for enterprising journalists who want to use computer-assisted reporting to find out what happened in the elections and explore possible connections between campaign contributions and political favors.
"Who paid for this election, and what do they want?" asked Ron Campbell, a staff writer at The Orange County Register. Journalists can answer these questions with the help of campaign finance data available on the Web or from the IRE and NICAR Database Library. Campaign contributions can explain why some bills pass Congress and other stall in committee. In 2001, after the previous presidential election, The Wall Street Journal investigated campaign, inaugural and recount fund contributions by industry.
A yearlong series of stories by the Journal showed the GOP's top 10 contributors. Journal reporters tracked the policy interests of the contributors and found the administration and Congress supported (or opposed) legislation in line with the interests of contributors. Tom Hamburger, who was the Journal's money and politics reporter at the time, says once the data analysis by The Center for Responsive Politics was complete, Journal staffers on every Washington beat were involved in the reporting.
Says Hamburger, analyzing contributions to the administration and legislators shows the public how the government works and affects lives. The problem with donation stories, Campbell says, comes from the necessity of joining three databases together. For example, to find out who gave money to which candidates in California, reporters need Federal Election Campaign data, 527 contribution data available on the IRS Web site and data from the California secretary of state.
Campaign data also can help journalists look at structural changes in politics and provide context. "Why is [billionaire George] Soros writing all these checks?" Derek Willis of The Washington Post asks. "It has to do with structural changes." Changes in tactics, laws and procedures affect donors, parties and committees. In October, The Washington Post published an article detailing the results of the paper's analysis of 527 data maintained by The Center for Public Integrity.
They found six out of 10 donors to 527 groups are billionaires. The McCain-Feingold campaign finance law prohibited soft money contributions to political parties. The Post used data to show how the 2002 law affected the process. To make up for the new constraints, donors gave more money to state parties. Some of the structural changes are so minute, Willis says, that reporters have to understand campaign finance law as well as political science professors and campaign lawyers do.
He points to a radio ad that aired before the election. The campaign ad criticized a proposal by Democratic candidate Sen. John Kerry. At one point, words were added to include liberals in Congress. Willis says doing this allowed the campaign to share a cost of the ad with the party. Changes that might seem insignificant to people are deliberate. "It's got to be the data," Willis says. "You can't see them in meetings making decisions about what to do, but you can see where the money goes." Structural changes made before the election might not be apparent until afterward.
Now is a good time to figure out first what the changes are, and next how did they affect the election. It's best to have earlier data, Willis says. Compare contributions, results and policy to the last election. If power changed hands, fundraising might change. Who shifts allegiances? Check out the newcomers in the legislature. "Okay, they got in – now what?" Willis asks. Know who has campaign debt.
Know not only how much money was spent, but know where the campaign put money. Willis suggests creating timelines in Excel or Access of when and how campaigns spent contributions. Even if the end result doesn't make it into the paper, knowing this information will help during the next campaign. Journalists can also use voter registration data to check up on registration and voting patterns. The Sarasota Herald-Tribune, like a number of other newsrooms, has a database of historical election results and Census data.
Adding the 2004 results would yield a database that could show shifts in demographics and an increase in voter registration. "We could spend a few months with that database we have," says Matt Doig, a reporter at the paper. Florida reporters could follow up on absentee ballot stories by using geographic information system software and absentee-ballot data to find out how many "snow birds" voted and where they live the rest of the year, he says.
And of course, any analysis done for the 2004 elections will add context to 2006 and 2008 federal elections. If you took a breather from the red and blue state madness, now is a good time to get back; the data is waiting.