New Members of Congress are PAC'n

Newly-elected members of Congress may still be learning the ropes about etiquette on Capitol Hill, but they're learning fast about the role of money in politics.

Capitol Eye -- website of the Center for Responsive Politics -- reports today that, since the 2006 mid-terms, "at least seven Democratic lawmakers and one Republican have already established leadership committees to raise money for their colleagues."

Among the pols that have rushed to set up PACs to raise and dispense money to their colleagues:

Both Virginia Sen. James Webb and Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill developed leadership committees within weeks of the elections. Neither Democrat has reported any activity yet, according to information available Jan. 29. [...]

Although they have been in office since before 2007, Democratic Reps. David Scott of Georgia, Carolyn Kilpatrick of Michigan, Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, Gwen Moore of Wisconsin and Republican Sen. Jim Bunning of Kentucky have also created leadership committees since the 2006 midterm elections. [...]

Several freshmen members of Congress have formed a single committee together.

In the election fundraising arms race, "leadership" PACs have become a fixture on the political scene. Disgraced Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX) pioneered their use as a vehicle to funnel special-interest money, spread good will (or fear) among one's colleagues, and build political clout. Republicans have benefited the most:

About 215 returning lawmakers reported having leadership PACs in the 2006 election cycle. The 298 leadership PACs that were active in 2006 raised about $156 million and doled out roughly $53 million to other federal candidates, two thirds of which went to Republicans, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor’s "Every Republican is Crucial" (or ERIC) PAC contributed the most to other lawmakers that cycle, giving about $1.2 million.

Apparently, the pressure on new lawmakers to raise vast sums of money is so intense that many are immediately leaping into the PAC game:

The reason for establishing a leadership PAC so early on may not be any more complicated than politicians trying to meet their party’s demands for money, said Bill Frenzel, guest scholar at the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based think tank. “Your caucus assigns you quotas depending on the status of your big-shotness, and members have to start raising it right away to meet that quota,” he said. “Nobody knows what happens if you don’t meet the quota assigned to them, but they don’t want to find out.”