Table 1. VITAL STATS OF THE 101st CONGRESS
Member's Name,
State, District Party
Tom Bevill, AL, #4
Tommy Robinson, AR, #2
Norman Shumway, CA, #14
Julian Dixon, CA, #28
Ron Packard, CA, #43
Thomas Carper, DE, @ large
E. Clay Shaw, FL, #15
Philip Crane, IL, #12
Jim Jontz, IN, #5
Jan Meyers, KS, #3
Jimmy Hayes, LA, #7
Barney Frank, MA, #4
Wm. Broomfield, MI, #18
Marty Sabo, MN. #5
Bill Emerson, MO, #8
Chris Smith, NJ, #4
Tom Downey, NY, #2
Ted Weiss, NY, #17
John LaFalce, NY, #32
Tom Luken, OH, #1
Ralph Regula, OH, #16
Peter DeFazio, OR, #4
Wm. Coyne, PA, #14
Liz Patterson, SC, #4
Steve Bartlett, TX, #3
Mickey Leland, TX, #18
Mike Andrews, TX, #25
Owen Pickett, VA, #2
Rod Chandler, WA, #8
Toby Roth, WS, #8
Dem
Dem
Rep
Dem
Rep
Dem
Rep
Rep
Dem
Rep
Dem
Dem
Rep
Dem
Rep
Rep
Dem
Dem
Dem
Dem
Rep
Dem
Dem
Dem
Rep
Dem
Dem
Dem
Rep
Rep
Candidate
Status
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Incumbent
Opponent's
PAC $
PAC $
46%
27
39
59
53
44
44
0
65
55
68
33
24
65
50
38
42
38
58
60
0
71
93
37
30
65
63
49
57
53
Unopposed
0% (REP)
12 (DEM)
Unopposed
2 (DEM)
2 (REP)
55 (DEM)
61 (DEM)
37 (REP)
0 (DEM)
Unopposed
5 (REP)
35 (DEM)
2 (REP)
45 (DEM)
3 (DEM)
0 (REP)
0 (REP)
0 (REP)
15 (REP)
Unopposed
9 (REP)
Unopposed
14 (REP)
0 (DEM)
Unopposed
Unopposed
8 (REP)
37 (DEM)
70 (DEM)
SOURCE: Congressional Quarterly, Politics in America, 1990: the 101st Congress
"PAC $" refers to the percentage of the member's campaign contributions
received from PACs [i.e., Tom Bevill received 46% of his campaign
contributions from political action committees during the 1988 election year].
The variable "Opponent's PAC $" refers to the percentage of campaign contributions
received from PACs by the member's opponent in the 1988 election year.
Table 2. PAC Funding by Party
Affiliation: Actual Frequencies
Party
Affiliation
Percentage of Column 1 Column 2
PAC Funding Democrat Republican
High
A
4
B
0
Moderate
C
18
D
9
Low
E
7
F
15
TOTALS
29
24
Table 3. PAC Funding by Party
Affiliation: Relative Frequencies
Party
Affiliation
Percentage of Column 1 Column 2
PAC Funding Democrat Republican
High
A 13.8%
B
0%
Moderate
C 62.1%
D
37.5%
Low
E
24.1% F 62.5%
TOTALS
100%
100%
Table 4. PAC Funding by
Candidate Status: Actual
Frequencies
Candidate
Percentage of Column 1
PAC Funding Incumbent
A
High
C
Moderate
E
Low
TOTALS
30
Status
Column 2
Challenger
B
D
F
23
Table 5. PAC Funding by
Candidate Status: Relative
Frequencies
Candidate
Status
Percentage of Column 1 Column 2
PAC Funding Incumbent Challenger
A
B
High
C
D
Moderate
E
F
Low
TOTALS
100%
100%
Table 6. VITAL STATS OF THE 105th CONGRESS
Member's Name,
State, District Party
Gary Ackerman, NY, #5
William Archer, TX #7
Charles Bass, NH
Ken Bentsen, TX #25
Sherwood Boehlert, NY #23
Richard Burr, NC
Bob Clement, TN #5
Jerry Costello, IL #12
Tom Davis, VA
Mike Doyle, PA #18
Sam Farr, CA #17
Elizabeth Furse, OR
Porter Goss, FL #14
Wally Herger, CA #2
Amo Houghton, NY
Jay Johnson, WS #8
Patrick Kennedy, RI #1
Tom Lantos, CA
Nita Lowey, NY #18
Carolyn McCarthy, NY #4
Mike McIntyre, NC
Jack Metcalf, WA #2
Sue Myrick, NC #9
Ron Packard, CA
Charles Pickering, MS #3
Silvestre Reyes, TX #16
Bobby Rush, IL
Jose Serrano, NY #16
Pete Sessions, TX #5
Linda Smith, WA
Candidate
Status
Opponent's
PAC $
PAC $
Dem
Rep
Incumbent
Incumbent
31%
14
2% (REP)
0 (IND)
Dem
Rep
Incumbent
Incumbent
54
47
16 (REP)
Unopposed
Dem
Dem
Incumbent
Incumbent
53
29
Unopposed
0 (REP)
Dem
Dem
Incumbent
Incumbent
53
48
8 (REP)
14 (REP)
Rep
Rep
Incumbent
Incumbent
10
46
14 (DEM)
6 (DEM)
Dem
Dem
OPEN
Incumbent
51
27
40 (REP)
3 (REP)
Dem
Dem
Incumbent
CHALLENGER
17
24
1 (REP)
53 (REP)
Rep
Rep
Incumbent
Incumbent
42
43
53 (DEM)
9 (DEM)
Rep
Dem
OPEN
OPEN
37
37
2 (DEM)
1 (REP)
Dem
Rep
Incumbent
OPEN
77
27
Unopposed
31 (DEM)
SOURCE: Federal Election Commission Website, www.fec.gov
"PAC $" refers to the percentage of the member's campaign contributions
received from PACs [i.e., Gary Ackerman received 31% of his campaign
contributions from political action committees during the 1996 election year].
The variable "Opponent's PAC $" refers to the percentage of campaign contributions
received from PACs by the member's opponent in the 1996 election year.
* indicates no opponent in the race.
Table 7. PAC Funding by
Party Affiliation:
Actual Frequencies
Party
Affiliation
Percentage of Column 1 Column 2
PAC Funding Democrat Republican
A
B
High
C
D
Moderate
E
F
Low
TOTALS
Table 8. PAC Funding by
Party Affiliation:
Relative Frequencies
Party
Affiliation
Percentage of Column 1 Column 2
PAC Funding Democrat Republican
A
B
High
C
D
Moderate
E
F
Low
TOTALS
100%
100%
Table 9. PAC Funding by
Candidate Status:
Actual Frequencies
Candidate
Status
Percentage of Column 1 Column 2
PAC Funding Incumbent Challenger
A
B
High
C
D
Moderate
E
F
Low
TOTALS
Table 10. PAC Funding by
Candidate Status:
Relative Frequencies
Candidate
Status
Percentage of Column 1 Column 2
PAC Funding Incumbent Challenger
A
B
High
C
D
Moderate
E
F
Low
TOTALS
100%
100%