If money, as a former state official said, is the mother’s milk of politics, neither major CU trade is in danger of being lactose deprived any time soon.
Since the earliest days of American history, concerns about tax policy have prompted individuals and groups to express their opinions, sometimes in dramatic ways. The Pennsylvania State Employees Credit Union has never dumped tea into a harbor, but its political awakening began when Congress considered imposing taxes on credit unions.
The sluggish economy caused CUNA and NAFCU PACs to raise less money, but they each had very different spending patterns during last year's campaigns.
CUNA's and NAFCU's political action committees spread their financial largesse generously this campaign cycle, though they have been raising and spending less than they did two years ago,
CUNA's PAC had $270,933 in its coffers as of last week and NAFCU's PAC had $215,631, according to reports they filed this week with the Federal Election Commission.
CUNA's political action committee made more than $100,000 worth of independent expenditures this week, bringing its total since September to $837,328, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission.
House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who is facing a stronger than expected reelection challenge, lent his campaign $200,000.
Kanjorski (D-Pa.), one of the strongest champions of credit unions on Capitol Hill, is trailing his GOP challenger Lou Barletta, who is making his third attempt to oust the veteran lawmaker.
In politics, the party that controls Congress usually gets the lion's share of the campaign money.
As the fall campaign season kicks into high gear, CUNA's political action committee has $1 million in its coffers for upcoming political activities.