Original. Student reported. Your daily dose of Right-minded news and commentary from across the nation
In California, 95 Percent of Professors’ Donations Go To Democratic Politicians

College Fix survey finds Nancy Pelosi raked in the most support, with $50,500 from professors

With midterm elections looming, an analysis of professors’ recent campaign contributions to California lawmakers found that about 95 percent of their donations went to Democratic politicians.graph1

Dozens of scholars have donated nearly $200,000 to a variety of Democratic representatives, while Republican politicians only netted about $9,000 from scholars, Federal Election Commission records show.

In effect, contributions by professors to Democrat lawmakers outweigh donations to Republican ones by 22 to 1, according to the The College Fix analysis.

The analysis used figures listed on the Federal Election Commission website from January 2013 through 2014 spring filings. Both Political Action Committee and individual campaign contributions were included in the data. Only donors with occupations listed as “professor” were included in the tally.

The survey looked at all 53 U.S. congressional representatives in California as well as its two U.S. Senators, 40 of whom are Democrat and 15 are Republican.

The California lawmaker who appears a favorite among professors is House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) Pelosi’s Victory Fund PAC garnered the largest dollar amount in donations from professors by far at $50,500.

The California Democratic representative received the largest individual donations on record: two gifts of $25,000 by Carol and Terry Winograd – a pair of professors from Stanford University, who also donated to seven other campaigns for California Democrats. winograd-pelosi

The Winograds are longtime Pelosi supporters, and met with the California representative at a luncheon during the 2009 inauguration, where Carol Winograd described Pelosi as “people savvy, charming and engaging.”  (Pictured, at right.)

“It was amusing to be outside afterwards and see Nancy Pelosi getting in her car to leave, amidst a crowd of cheering people, just like a rock star!” Winograd said in 2009.

Pelosi is up for re-election this November, and is currently serving her fourteenth term in Congress. Contributions to her campaign also came from another Stanford professor and a Columbia University professor, who gave her $250 each.

Freshman Rep. Ami Bera (D-Calif.), considered vulnerable by Roll Call, followed Pelosi with more than $23,000 in donations.

Freshman Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.) – also up for re-election –came in third, netting just shy of $20,000 from university professors.

Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.), who will face primary challenger Carl DeMaio in November, was the fourth Californian to top the $17,000 mark, followed by Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.) and Rep. Julia Brownley (D-Calif.) straddling $14,000.

Nineteen of the remaining 34 Democratic representatives received contributions from professors across the country: the typical donation total per candidate averaging about $3,000.

Only six California Republicans received donations from professors, resulting in a combined sum of $9,000. Rep. Ken Calvert received the highest sum of donations of any Republican, netting $3,600. The average donation total for Republican candidates was $300.

Neither Sen. Dianne Feinstein nor Sen. Barbara Boxer received donations of more than $750 from professors, FEC records showed.


Ami Bera (D):  23,435

Julia Brownley (D): 13,943

Lois Capps (D): 19,425

Tony Cardenas (D):  1,166

Judy Chu (D):  3,333

Jim Costa (D):  1,000

Susan Davis (D): 3,100

Anna Eshoo (D):  2,950

Sam Farr (D):  2,800

John Garamendi (D):  2,320

Janice Hahn (D): 300

Mike Honda (D): 14,480

Barbara Lee (D): 4,350

Zoe Lofgren (D): 4,000

Alan Lowenthal (D): 983

Doris Matsui (D):  1,500

Jerry McNerney (D): 5,400

Nancy Pelosi (D): 50,500

Scott Peters (D): 17,732

Raul Ruiz (D): 5,900

Loretta Sanchez (D): 1,000

Adam Schiff (D): 4,300

Jackie Speier (D): 2,000

Mark Allan Takano (D): 8,570

Mike Thompson (D): 300




Ken Calvert ®: 3,600

John Campbell ®: 1,000

Ed Royce (R): 3,200

Dana Rohrabacher (R): 1,200

Kevin McCarthy (R): 500

Darrell Issa ®:  100


College Fix contributor Vivian Hughbanks is a student at Hillsdale College.

Like The College Fix on Facebook / Follow us on Twitter

IMAGE: Main, U.S. Govt; Inside, Internet screenshot.

About the Author
College Fix reporter Vivian Hughbanks is a student at Hillsdale College, with a focus on politics and German. She served as the summer 2014 journalism fellow at The Hill on behalf of The College Fix/Student Free Press Association, and has also held an editorial position at Townhall.com.

Add to the Discussion

  • Ed Selby

    Important fact not included in this article. Armitage was not a researcher, professor, or instructor at CSU. He was working there as the Manager for the Electron and Confocal Microscopy. He was an electron microscope technician, and, it would seem, a very qualified one.

  • rational38

    This should not be at all surprising. As college professors are among the most highly educated segment of the population, it is logical they prefer the party that is open to reason and empirical evidence (this is a generalization, of course, but a fair one)

    • selfactual

      And what party might that be? Are you referring to the science-rejecting Democrats or Republicans?

      • rational38

        A dangerous false equivalence.

        • selfactual

          False? Because you say so? I’m impressed with your thoughtful reply. Now cogitate on this, liberals believe that one role of government is to alleviate human suffering, but do their policies achieve this goal in the long run? Empirically no! Liberals believe that man is perfectible. Empirically no! Liberals believe that war is unnatural and avoidable and amassing military power is dangerously counterproductive. Empirically no! Liberals believe that society should be run based on ‘the articulated rationality of man in general and of the most intellectually and morally advanced people in particular.’ If desirable results are not attained, subsidies should be offered ‘to those whose social backgrounds would handicap them in competition with others.’ Empirically, does not work. Twice as many Democrats believe in Astrology as do Republicans. Even in the much-maligned “Tea Party-dominated” House of Representatives, the GOP budget proposals provided more funding for the NSF than those of the Senate Democrats for the 2013 fiscal year. Shall I go on? OK I will. 41 percent of Democrats are young Earth creationists, and 19 percent doubt that Earth is getting warmer. Obama killed the Yucca Mountain project to help develop nuclear energy because Republicans supported it. Liberals tend to be antinuclear because of the waste-disposal problem, anti–fossil fuels because of global warming, antihydroelectric because dams disrupt river ecosystems, and anti–wind power because of avian fatalities. The underlying current is “everything natural is good” and “everything unnatural is bad.” False equivalence you say? Or inherently biased you are…

          • rational38

            It is hard to respond to nonsense not written in good -faith, but since you insist, I shall give it a try. You begin by ascribing principles to liberalism, like perfectibility, that are not part of American liberalism. Yes, liberals generally believe government can reduce or ameliorate some suffering and the empirical evidence overwhelmingly bears that out as during the liberal age human suffering has been greatly reduced (look at Pinker’s work and others). Violence and suffering is certainly less in the advanced industrial democracies than in other less liberal places; so you are simply babbling for reason i do not understand.
            Yes, plenty of Democrats believe stupid things and your astrology example is very good, but who cares. Name one serious liberal or Democratic legislator who recommends basing policy on astrology; there are none. That is why such casual intellectually lazy sentiments like both side are so disingenuous. Republicans work politically to actively promote the teaching of ‘intelligent design’ in schools. How many liberals work to actively promote teaching astrology in schools.
            Some of your statements are truly incomprehensible. The vast vast majority of liberals (and you should not conflate them with Democrats) favor wind-power, and indeed, the only ones against it are those engaging in the very bipartisan NIMBY-ism.
            Picking examples to try and prove your point is not serious analysis. Looking at the behavior of the two great American political parties and how they use their power is.

            P.S. Do you have a cite for the budget numbers, they sound fishy.

          • selfactual

            The main point of my post was a reaction to your implication “As college professors are among the most highly educated segment of the population, it is logical they prefer the party that is open to reason and empirical evidence…” Take 15 minutes to watch Jonathan Haidt and David Sloan Wilson. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9kJkuuedw0

          • Nullifidian

            Twice as many Democrats believe in Astrology as do Republicans.

            I know this is an old post, but I can’t resist pointing out that only one president let his public schedule be dictated by his horoscope, and that was the right-wing’s plaster saint, Ronald Reagan.

            Aside from that, rational38 does have a point that there is a difference between a quirk of private belief and the advocacy of basing policy on pseudoscience or elevating pseudoscience to the same level as real science in the classroom and elsewhere. But your point that being a rational human being is not necessarily related to political affiliation is well taken.

            If you want to argue that Democratic pseudoscience can be just as damaging as Republican pseudoscience, a better bet would be the anti-vaxxer movement. I’ve seen far-right anti-vaxxers who claimed that flu vaccines were dispersal agents for diseases that Obama would use to cause an epidemic and then use the epidemic as a reason for declaring martial law (I’m not kidding, sadly), but overall it’s primarily an upper-middle class, white, liberal movement. They’ve managed to create such a comfortable cocoon around themselves that they forget the advances in technology and medicine that make their lifestyle possible, so they’re now going to end up killing themselves through heedless stupidity. Even then, the rebound in measles and such, though sadly fatal in some cases, still doesn’t match both the already occurring and the foreseeable consequences of, for example, ignoring climate change. But the cynic in me says that the Democrats aren’t really interested in mitigating climate change any more than the Republicans are; they’re just more willing to talk, talk, talk, talk, talk, talk (you get the picture) about it.

    • Spiny Norman

      As college professors are among the most highly educated segment of the
      population, it is logical they prefer the party that is open to reason
      and empirical evidence…

      No, not at all. It’s much more simple than that. They know which side their bread is buttered – where their paychecks come from. They work at government-funded institutions and, like actual government employees, want more taxpayers’ money, for their research and their salaries. Who is offering them more and more funding? The Democrats.

      • rational38

        You do realize many professors work at private institutions and their views are no different??

        • Spiny Norman

          “Private” universities get public funding as much as “public” institutions do. Surely you must be aware of this.

  • john

    University employee workers in the SCIENCE department must be fired if they believe in any of the following:
    -Earth is flat
    -Cigarettes strengthen lungs

    Creationism is a false idea.
    Mark Armitage didn’t get fired because of his religion but rather for his inability to reason and think cogently, which required traits for scientists and especially those in academia.

    • AceTrace

      Wrong. Armitage was indeed fired because religious discrimination and because they didn’t want to further investigate his findings.
      You are obviously a left-winger hell-bent on trolling this site.

      • Bam_Pow

        lol, the guy isn’t even a scientist, and is laughed out of any real scientific debate due to a complete lack of evidence or credentials.

        • Youn Gearther

          Which must explain why he was published so oftenexplain . . .

          • Bam_Pow

            Anyone can get published, study the peer review on any of his topics and you will understand. Do a bit of research M’kay 😉

    • PraiseJesus

      It’s a matter of TIME before Evolution is completed extinct! You better get ready for a major change when that day comes! Start begging the Lord for mercy for your absolute ignorance!

      • Bam_Pow

        rofl…wow you believe anything to keep your faith alive…the man is a quack, you’d know this if you read more than one book.

      • Luke

        That’s not a good way to “convert” a person out of the faith….

      • Hiram D. Walker

        @PraiseJesus There are some sheep that refuse to join the flock, whose destiny is to be eaten by the wolves. Don’t waste time with them, but seek out the sheep that see the light and desire to join the flock.

  • R2D3

    Soft sheets of fibrillar bone from a fossil of the supraorbital horn of the dinosaur Triceratops horridus
    by Mark Hollis Armitage, Kevin Lee Anderson

    Soft Tissues in Triceratops Horn

    ‘We Will Not Tolerate Your Religion!’ School Fires Scientist for Questioning Evolution




    I wonder how many students in schools, colleges and universities would say they have the academic freedom to critique evolution in their science classes? There should be school district and state polls of high-school and college/university students studying evolution, asking two questions:

    In this class:
    a) Is evolution taught as fact, theory, or both fact and theory?
    b) Do you have the academic freedom to critique evolution?
    [Students should answer anonymously.] The same questions should be asked of their instructors.

  • gerry d welder

    So, our constitution is bad, conservative thinking is bad, our founding fathers are bad, math is consensus, sexual promiscuity and deviation is good and must be mandatory starting with pre-teens, the global warming scam must be pounded into students daily, religion is bad and has no place in school unless it’s Islam, our 2nd amendment and right to defend ourselves is bad, free liberal progressive speech is good, conservative speech is prohibited, open borders and overwhelming our hospitals and economic stability is good, encouraging students to leave school during class to protest in the streets with anarchist trouble makers and Marxist adults (and not having a clue why) is good.

    …while ‘educators’ use indentured student’s loan debt for over priced speeches to enrich progressive elites, give each other awards for excellence and cry for increased taxation for education and higher tuition …for the kids.

    No time for the US Constitution or the Federalist Papers? Of course not, not enough time and if students discovered this information progressives would never be let near any future office.
    “What’s the Federalist Papers?”

    “Dice has now successfully managed to persuade Americans in his area to agree to repeal the First, Second, Third, Fourth , Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Amendments, as well as the entire Bill Of Rights.”
    “What’s a FEMA Camp?”

    Students Sign Petition To Have Gun Owners Executed In Concentration Camps. You can read it on : http://www.infowars.com/students-sign-petition-to-have-gun-owners-executed-in-concentration-camps/

    ““They was like…’ university student???

    …and you wonder why the US is in fast track decline?

    It starts in public grammar schools:

    ‘Common Core’ is a strategy for eliminating critical thinking and dumbing down our next generation to facilitate compliance.

    Here’s “Common Core’ (at it’s core):
    “more education increases the threat to sustainability”
    From: ‘Education For Sustainable Development Toolkit’
    By Rosalyn McKeown, PHD

    …Uh? ‘who’s’ sustainability?

    Our ‘teachers’ have no idea of the very real, ugly world they are creating through our youth.

    Liberal left progressives have infested our public school system and many universities, have been wildly successful producing dumbed down millions of low information voters, aggressively propagandize, re-segregate and instill interracial distrust in American citizens and have everything to do with the fall of the USA and the coming, frightening consequences. That’s what we get for having under achiever liberals, Marxists and low information voters charged with teaching our next generation.

    The frightening consequences are real and are just beginning.


    Just need watch the first 30 seconds of each:

    Americans Don’t Know WHY We Celebrate the 4th of July or …

    Can You Name An Author of a Book? Any Author?

    Americans Who Don’t Know the Capital of the United States!!!

    A monumental WORLD embarrassment and IS being shown around the world. What a laughing stock.

    Can you think of two counties that start with the letter ‘U’?
    “Utopia”, “Urope”.

    Lunch Scholars

    The fruit of the wildly successful, left liberal, progressive under achiever, useful idiot infestation of our public schools and universities.

    Great job, you ‘educators’, you and MSM are directly responsible for now millions of low information voters and the resulting imminent cataclysm our country now faces. Your pensions and living standards deserve the destruction coming.

    • Bam_Pow

      As a tin foil hat manufacturer do you find it difficult to make profits off of these false prophets you utilize for the lies you push?

  • gerry d welder

    “It is in the interest of Tyrants to reduce the people to Ignorance and Vice. For they cannot live in any Country where Virtue and Knowledge prevail. The religion and public Liberty of a People are intimately connected; their Interests are interwoven, they cannot subsist separately; and therefore they rise and fall together. For this Reason, it is always observable, that those who are combined to destroy the People’s Liberties, practice every Art to poison their Morals”. Sam Adams

  • George

    It’s too bad The College Fix discredits itself with creationism.

  • rational38

    This should not be at all surprising. As college professors are among
    the most highly educated segment of the population, it is logical they
    prefer the party that is open to reason and empirical evidence (this is a
    generalization, of course, but a fair one).

  • Bam_Pow

    I like to diddle with little boys, and I’m a proud card carrying member of NMBLA! Please show your support for NMBLA by giving me an up vote!


    The church/religion has been at the forefront on suppression from the beginning of time. how did 6 jews get on a arch and wesley snipes and jackie chan get off. talk about macro evolution.

  • JustSomeDude

    Religion by definition isn’t scientific and requires belief without proof. That is the very definition of faith. Delusional people shouldn’t be in scientific positions. The next time you hear the voice of god telling you to go to the top of a mountain to murder your son you should think to yourself “maybe I’m just crazy” and then commit yourself.

  • Nullifidian

    The lawsuit contends that that discovery was the beginning of the end of Artimage’s employment at Cal State Northridge, with one university official storming into his office in June 2012 and shouting: “We are not going to tolerate your religion in this department!”


    In the summer of 2012, while at the world-famous dinosaur dig at Hell Creek Formation in Montana, Armitage discovered the largest triceratops horn ever unearthed at the site, according to his attorneys in a statement.

    The summer solstice in 2012 happened on June 20. So unless the fossil was discovered, prepared, transported to CSU Northridge, and then analyzed by Armitage in under a fortnight with the results being spread all around the campus so that an official (not a scientist, but evidently someone in administration) would come in and make this alleged statement, then the discovery and the statement obviously have nothing to do with one another. Assuming this event actually occurred and doesn’t just spring from the imagination of someone looking to milk his ‘martyrdom’ for a payday, one is justified in concluding that it was motivated by events that occurred weeks or months before June 2012. Probably Armitage was a bad colleague like David Coppedge of JPL who insisted on annoying his fellow workers by preaching creationism at them.

    The claim presented in the lawsuit that the results were “shocking” to scientists is overwrought nonsense. Researchers have been claiming to find remnants of soft tissue in dinosaur fossils for years. At best, it would merit an “interesting”. You can see that from the journal it was eventually published in. Acta Histochemica has an impact factor of 1.552, which makes it minor league journal.