Over the next 10 months, Colorado voters can expect to see millions of dollars’ worth of ads fill airwaves and mailboxes as supporters of candidates and causes — some disclosed, others anonymous — seek to push their point of view.
Much of that won’t be directed by the campaigns, either.
More than $4 million has been raised by outside committees already in the Democratic primary for governor between U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet and Attorney General Phil Weiser, offering a preview of what’s to come.
Independent expenditure committees, colloquially known as state super PACs, can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money so long as they don’t coordinate with the campaigns they’re supporting. While the committees often report the names of contributors, the donors are sometimes cloaked in anonymity, either through obscure business entities or separate nonprofits that don’t need to disclose their donors.
That’s true of some of the money flooding into the independent committees in the Bennet-Weiser race. While some large checks have been cut by big names like New York City billionaire Michael Bloomberg and figures well known in the local or national business worlds, others have come from deep pockets that are harder to identify.
The vast majority of the super PAC money in the primary, $3.6 million, has gone to Rocky Mountain Way, the committee supporting Bennet’s bid. About $563,000 has gone to Fighting for Colorado, the committee supporting Weiser’s candidacy.
Bennet and Weiser have largely cleared the field on the Democratic side of the race, which also has several declared lesser-known candidates. On the crowded Republican side, where there are 20-odd contenders, there’s been little fundraising by independent expenditure committees so far. The GOP field also lags significantly behind the Democratic side in direct campaign fundraising. Coloradans have elected only one Republican as governor — Bill Owens, who won in 1998 and 2002 — since the 1970s.
The outside cash backing them likely represents the tip of the iceberg this year, observers said — especially in the first competitive Democratic governor’s race in over a decade where one candidate doesn’t promise to steamroll the competition’s spending with self-funding.
In 2018, Democrat Jared Polis spent more than $22 million of his own money on his way to winning the governor’s office. Polis is now term-limited from running again.
Differing rules for direct, outside donations
Statewide races can cost tens of millions of dollars to organize and get a campaign message across. But Colorado candidates can raise only $725 from an individual donor for each leg of the race, or $1,450 combined for the primary and general elections.
That, in effect, caps wealthier donors at a fraction of what they might want to give directly to candidates.
In the Democratic primary alone, 34 individuals and organizations have cut checks of $10,000 or more to the independent committees. The single largest donor, Bloomberg, has contributed $750,000 to the committee backing Bennet’s bid — a sum more than 500 times greater than what he’d be able to give to Bennet’s campaign directly.
The lack of limits on donations or spending by outside groups that operate independently of campaigns stems from the fallout of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, which found such spending was protected as free speech.
“Because direct campaign contributions in Colorado are capped at $725 per individual, these independent expenditure groups are really key for building cash at scale,” said Aly Belknap, executive director of Colorado Common Cause, a government watchdog group.
Add in the ability for other nonprofits to donate to the committees, she said, and “this effectively washes the money and obscures the original donors, and creates a lack of transparency for the public and the voters about what kinds of special interests are contributing to the campaigns.”
(Common Cause is also a nonprofit that is not required to disclose its donors. Belknap said the organization has a policy of disclosing all donors who give more than $2,500 automatically, and of making the smaller donor list available for inspection at its Denver office.)
Ian Silverii, a Democratic political strategist, said the independent expenditure committee arm’s race is an “ironic” side effect of state campaign finance reforms. Silverii worked on the Weiser campaign when it was first starting up last year but has since stepped back from the race.
The caps on campaign contributions didn’t stop big money from pouring into races. They merely shift where the big checks go and how they get spent, Silverii said.
The separate pot of money also comes with its own drawback.
Candidate campaigns get favorable ad rates from TV stations and other outlets compared to independent expenditure committees, meaning direct donations go further.
When it comes to candidate fundraising, Bennet’s campaign has directly raised about $3.5 million and started the year with about $1.6 million in the bank, according to the most recent campaign finance reports that cover activity through the end of December. The Weiser campaign has directly raised about $4.6 million and started the year with about $3.5 million in the bank.
Lack of control over message
Since candidates legally can’t coordinate with the independent committees, they thus lose the ability to control the story they want to tell when the money goes to outside groups. That can result in candidates sustaining collateral damage if they end up tied to messages or messengers that repel voters.
Silverii used ultrabillionaire Elon Musk’s massive spending on last year’s Wisconsin state Supreme Court election as an example. Voters associated the Republican candidate with Musk as overall views of the billionaire were cratering amid his involvement in Trump administration initiatives, and his preferred candidate lost by 10 percentage points.
“It is probably always better to have more resources to tell your story than it is to have fewer resources, but there is also a risk of your support being a liability,” Silverii said.
Case in point: Each of the gubernatorial campaigns, asked to comment generally on the outside money sure to flood the race, attacked the other’s third-party support while highlighting its candidate’s own direct donor base.
“The momentum behind Phil’s campaign is surging, so it’s no surprise that out-of-state billionaires and special interests are dumping millions into this race to try to stop him,” Anna Huck, Weiser’s campaign manager, said in a statement. “Phil isn’t beholden to special interests, corporations or out-of-state-billionaires — he’s powered by the people of Colorado, with more in-state donors, more local endorsements and more than double the cash on hand than Michael Bennet.”
Jordan Fuja, a campaign spokesperson for Bennet’s campaign, highlighted contributions to third-party committees that supported Weiser’s prior campaigns. She claimed Weiser had “a clear conflict of interest” because of donations from attorneys and people with ties to the oil and gas industry that may have business before the attorney general’s office.
She also singled out support for the Weiser-backing independent expenditure committee from Blair Richardson, a private equity CEO who donated to President Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign, though he has also contributed to Democratic causes.
“Michael is honored to have the grassroots support in this race with more supporters, more contributions, and a lower average donation than any other candidate in this primary,” Fuja said in a statement. “Phil Weiser, on the other hand, publicly condemns billionaire money while quietly taking it himself — including millions in donations from billionaires in past races.”
In a statement, the director of Rocky Mountain Way, Sarah Andrews, said the committee exists to bolster Bennet’s story and “is focused on ensuring voters understand Michael Bennet’s long history of steady leadership and real results for Colorado.”
“This effort is about making sure Coloradans hear clearly about the proven leadership that delivers for hardworking people and provides more opportunity for Colorado families,” Andrews said.
Attempts to reach representatives from the committee supporting Weiser and some of the largest donors to both committees — including Bloomberg and Paramount President Jeff Shell on the pro-Bennet side and Richardson and investor Tom Ray on the pro-Weiser side — were unsuccessful.
Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.