Supporters and opponents of Colorado’s statewide ballot measures have pumped $41.7 million just this year toward swaying public opinion on issues that could have far-reaching implications if passed in November.

During a presidential election year in which issues such as abortion access hang in the balance, and at a time when many families are struggling to make ends financially, Colorado’s ballot questions are taking on heightened importance. Measures such as a 22-week ban on abortions and having Colorado support the national popular vote for president are receiving attention — and contributions — from across the state and country. With less than a month to go, advocates are making their final pushes to Election Day — including in the money race.

The committee fighting the proposed ban on abortions after 22 weeks has brought in the most contributions of any issue committee at almost $6.5 million in 2019 and 2020, while proponents of Proposition 115 have raised a fraction of that, according to filings with the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office by Tuesday’s deadline. Three committees supporting the measure raised about $369,000.

Opposition to the abortion measure is being led by women’s reproductive rights groups and progressive allies such as ProgressNow Colorado, Colorado Organization for Latina Opportunity and Reproductive Rights, and Cobalt. Supporters of Proposition 115 include Catholic Charities and citizen advocates.

Although Colorado voters have rejected abortion bans three times before at the ballot box, the vote comes at a critical time with the U.S. Supreme Court vacancy left after the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. President Donald Trump has nominated conservative Judge Amy Coney Barrett to replace her, leaving advocates worried about the potential of Roe v. Wade getting overturned.

Colorado is one of only seven states that doesn’t have gestational limits on when an abortion can take

  • Ads from politicians and campaigns accounted for at least 3% of Facebook’s estimated third-quarter U.S. revenue, according to data from Facebook’s ad library and the Center for Responsive Politics.
  • Google has dramatically limited targeting for political ads and Twitter banned them altogether, leaving Facebook as the only game in town for many campaigns.
  • “For better or worse — mostly worse — Facebook is the de facto place you go,” said Nick Fitz, CEO of online donations site Momentum, which powers the Defeat by Tweet campaign.



a man in a suit standing in front of a flat screen television: Former Vice President Joe Biden, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, wears a protective mask during a NowThis economic address seen on a smartphone in Arlington, Virginia, U.S., on Friday, May 8, 2020.


© Provided by CNBC
Former Vice President Joe Biden, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, wears a protective mask during a NowThis economic address seen on a smartphone in Arlington, Virginia, U.S., on Friday, May 8, 2020.

Anti-Trump super PAC Defeat by Tweet launched in June and has run up an advertising bill of more than $800,000 with an online campaign that encourages people to automatically donate money every time the president tweets.

Loading...

Load Error

Thanks to Trump’s habitual tweeting, the group has parlayed its spending into about $3 million of fundraising. However, none of that ad spending has been on Twitter. Instead, it’s taking place exclusively on rival social media site Facebook.

Defeat by Tweet is far from alone. Scores of political candidates and outside groups have loaded up on Facebook spending ahead of next month’s election. That’s partly because Facebook reaches over a quarter-billion users in North America every month and has a family of popular apps, including Messenger, Instagram and WhatsApp. But it’s also because many other ad-supported sites have retreated from politics, leaving Facebook as the only game in town. 

Google, the largest internet advertising company, limited the ability for campaigns to target users with political ads. Twitter banned political advertising altogether after CEO Jack Dorsey proclaimed last October that “political message reach

white-house.jpg
USATSI

A report from USA Today’s Tom Schad revealed the 10 sports owners who have donated the most to political campaigns during the 2019-20 political cycle. The analysis revealed that owners throughout the six major American sports leagues donated upwards of $14.6 million to various political interests.

The numbers themselves come from federal campaign finance records. About two-thirds of the total is connected to the following 10 owners, who have given between $375,000 and $3,25 million throughout the past 20 months.

Leading the list is Charles B. Johnson, owner of the San Francisco Giants, who donated over $3.25 million in federal contributions. USA Today found that pretty much all of the Johnson’s money went towards Republican candidates, donating the maximum individual amount of $5,600 to over two dozen candidates. He also donated $435,200 to a political action committee called “Trump Victory.” 

Next is Woody Johnson of the New York Jets, who donated a hair under $2 million towards exclusively Republican campaigns. Johnson is not only a high donor, but he’s also the current United States Ambassador to the United Kingdom. Dan DeVos, brother-in-law of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and Orlando Magic owner, gave $1.2 million, with all but $10,000 going to Republican causes

Rounding out the top five is James Dolan, owner of the New York Knicks and New York Rangers, and U.S. Senator Kelly Loeffler, owner of the Atlanta Dream. Dolan threw heavy financial support behind Trump during the last election, and this cycle seems no different. Loeffler, a sitting U.S. Senator, has donated over $500,000, with all but $5,000 going to Republican causes, including to the campaigns of her colleagues in the Senate. The Georgia congresswoman came under fire from the WNBA and Dream players earlier this year for comments she made about the Black Lives Matter movement.