|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
U.S. Rep. Kevin Mullin is far outraising his challengers in California’s 15th Congressional District, with more than half of his contributions coming from other political committees, including PACs tied to health care, pharmaceuticals and biotech interests, industries affected by his work in Congress.
Mullin, a Democrat seeking reelection in a district considered safely Democratic, reported raising $720,687 through May 13, according to the latest federal campaign finance filings. That far outpaces the two challengers who have filed Federal Election Commission financial disclosures: Democrats Mantosh Kumar, who reported $22,062 in receipts, and Anthony Van Dang, who reported $12,863.
Mullin has been an elected official on the Peninsula since 2007, when he won a seat on the South San Francisco City Council. He later served a decade in the California Assembly before being elected to Congress in 2022.
Other political committees, a category that includes PACs, were Mullin’s largest source of campaign contributions, accounting for about 56% of his total contributions. He received $399,212 from other committees and $319,850 from individual donors.
Kumar and Dang reported no contributions from other political committees. Kumar reported $15,817 from individual donors, $245 in candidate contributions and a $6,000 candidate loan. Dang reported $2,304 from individual donors and $10,559 in candidate contributions.
A common pattern in a safe seat
Brendan Glavin, director of insights at OpenSecrets, said Mullin’s fundraising is “a little bit typical” for an incumbent in a seat that is not expected to be competitive. Safe-seat incumbents often do not need to raise the huge sums needed in competitive House races, he said, but voters should pay attention to which industries are funding their representatives, especially when those industries have business before committees on which the lawmaker serves.
While Mullin’s total “seems like a lot,” Glavin said, it is “not an exceptional amount” for a member of Congress, especially compared with competitive House races where candidates often need to raise millions of dollars.
Because Mullin is running in a safe Democratic seat, individual donors may have less incentive to give, Glavin said. PACs, meanwhile, continue to contribute because Mullin is an incumbent and has influence over policy.
“Common is a better word than normal,” Glavin said of PACs giving to lawmakers on committees tied to their industries. He said such contributions are “not by itself any kind of indictment,” but voters should know where their representatives are getting campaign money and compare those donations with their votes and policy positions.
Federal law bars corporations from giving directly to federal candidates, but corporate-sponsored PACs may contribute within federal limits. Multicandidate PACs may give up to $5,000 per candidate per election, according to the FEC.
Why the committee matters
Mullin represents a Peninsula district that includes much of San Mateo County and part of San Francisco, placing him in the middle of the Bay Area’s technology, biotechnology and health care economy.
He also serves on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has broad jurisdiction over health care, energy, telecommunications, consumer protection, food and drug safety, and interstate commerce.
His campaign has received support from several health care, pharmaceutical and biotech PACs, including Gilead Sciences, Blue Shield of California, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Novartis, Ultragenyx, Genentech, Eli Lilly, AbbVie, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb and BioMarin.
OpenSecrets data reviewed by the Pulse also shows health-related PACs were a major source of Mullin’s PAC support. Glavin said biotechnology was the largest industry within that health sector category.
Glavin said that kind of concentration is something voters may want to watch. He said voters should compare a lawmaker’s donors with the decisions the lawmaker makes in office.
A Gilead spokesperson said the company works with governments on public policy issues to advance its mission.
“Like many U.S. companies, we work in a bipartisan manner to advocate for policies that protect innovation and the people and communities we serve,” the spokesperson said.
AbbVie did not respond to a request for comment by Tuesday.
Challengers reject PAC money
Messages seeking comment were sent to Mullin’s campaign and congressional office. Neither responded by deadline.
Kumar, whose latest FEC filings show no contributions from other political committees, has sought to contrast himself with Mullin on campaign finance.
Kumar said he believes “corporate and special interest PACs are a major corrupting influence” in politics.
In a follow-up email, Kumar said that includes corporate, industry, labor and ideological PACs. His campaign also does not accept contributions from political committees, he said.
Dang’s filings also show no other committee contributions. His campaign reported $2,304 in individual contributions and $10,559 in candidate contributions through May 13.
“My campaign is not accepting PAC money,” Dang said. “I am completely grassroots, funded by the people of the district who want change.”
Dang also criticized corporate PAC money, saying it is concerning that Mullin accepts contributions from industries affected by his committee work. He called it “a direct conflict of interest and an ethical violation.”
Two other candidates listed in the CA-15 race, Jim Garrity, who is running with no party preference, and Republican Charles Hoelter, did not have FEC financial summaries available as of Tuesday, May 26. Candidates generally are not required to file campaign finance reports unless they raise or spend more than $5,000.
The June 2 primary will send the top two vote-getters to the November general election, regardless of party.
