ELECTION 2004 Millionaires didn't fare well in races for seats in Congress

Capri Cafaro spent $1.6 million in her failed attempt in Northeast Ohio.
COLUMBUS (AP) -- Twenty-two millionaires, including Ohio's Capri Cafaro, spent nearly $74 million of their own money trying to win their first election to Congress this year.
Eight progressed past their primaries to run in Tuesday's election. Only one was victorious.
The reasons for their losses differ widely. Some ran against popular incumbents, others duked it out against other millionaires in their state's primary election, and a few ran close and credible races only to come up short at the very end.
"Millionaires don't automatically win," said Herb Asher, a political science professor at Ohio State University. "The money just gives them instant credibility and puts them in the position to be able to run in the first place."
Money well-spent
Political newcomers Cafaro, a 26-year-old shopping center heiress, and Jack Davis, a New York businessman, said the reasons for running made the money well spent.
Cafaro, a Democrat, campaigned against a poor economy in Northeast Ohio, which has bled manufacturing jobs. After losing with 37 percent to five-term Republican Rep. Steve LaTourette's 63 percent, she said it was worth it and wouldn't give up.
"I knew getting in that this was going to cost money," said Cafaro, who spent $1.6 million.
Davis, who changed parties to become a Democrat so he could run against incumbent Republican Tom Reynolds, said the $1.2 million he spent was worth it just to get his message out that free trade policies are costing American jobs. He lost to Reynolds 44 percent to 56 percent.
"I don't feel it's wasted. It was something that I had to do," Davis said. "What I did was to prove a point."
Others
Other millionaire candidates who ran against incumbents also failed to win election. Democratic Sens. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Barbara Mikulski of Maryland and Chris Dodd of Connecticut easily swept past their wealthy challengers on Tuesday.
"If they are running against strong incumbents who can raise their own money, that can make a big difference," Asher said.
A new campaign finance rule that went into effect this year helped the incumbents by allowing those running against millionaires to raise $6,000 a person -- three times as much money as is usually allowed.
Open races often present the best possibility for millionaire candidates, but even then, it helps to have experience, Asher said.
Political novice Jeanne Patterson spent $1.5 million of her own money on a race to replace Missouri Rep. Karen McCarthy, but she ended up losing to Kansas City Mayor Emanuel Cleaver 46 percent to 52 percent.
In Texas, Michael McCaul, a former federal prosecutor and a former chief of counterterrorism in the Justice Department, had the experience -- and the cash.
He spent $4 million of his own funds to defeat millionaire Ben Streusand, a Houston-area mortgage banker, in a Republican runoff primary election. Since there was no Democratic candidate, McCaul won election to the U.S House.
But in the North Carolina Senate race, Erskine Bowles, former chief of staff to former President Clinton, was evenly matched experience-wise to Rep. Richard Burr. Bowles lost his campaign to replace vice presidential candidate John Edwards in the U.S. Senate, despite spending $1.5 million of his own money.
Stanley Renshon, a political psychologist at the City University of New York, said it often comes down to whether votes perceive the millionaires as "one of them."
"There are millionaires of the people and then there are just millionaires," Renshon said. "We don't mind people making money, but we don't like people who make money and think they are better than us. The secret is to be rich but not snobby."