.
Feedback

What Did Your Congresswoman's Seat Cost?

Do you have a guess of how much Rep. Jackie Speier had to raise to win her seat in the House of Representatives?

Rep. Jackie Speier won reelection to the U.S. House of Representatives last fall, now representing the San Francisco Peninsula for her third term.

But how much did her House seat cost her?

When we put the question to our Facebook readers earlier this week, they focused on Speier's non-monetary value.

"None," said Kristi on Pacifica Patch Facebook. "I think she did it by name recognition, same as Boxer and Feinstein."

"No matter how much it cost, Jackie has given back to San Mateo," said Peter on San Carlos Patch Facebook. "Speier was shot at Jonestown on a fact-finding mission when she was a young aide. Jackie has worked tirelessly for our best interest and she is a great!"

But in terms of dollars and cents, Speier raised $969,474 during the 2012 election cycle, according to MapLight, a non-profit that tracks money in politics.

That's well behind the curve: the average House member raised $1,689,580, or $2,315 a day, according to MapLight.

Victor, on Redwood City-Woodside Patch Facebook, characterized Speier's fundraising in terms of a different metric: "My entire paycheck," he said.

Are you surprised by the cost of a House seat? Tell us in the comments section below.

Jo Tog March 14, 2013 at 03:33 pm
Commie lovers really don't have to do much to get a political seat in California, just tow the commie manifesto line. She just pretends to be catholic and hopefully will be shamed for all the damage she has done. Oh, yes. She is disgustingly rich, that is one of the requirements, to be a rich commie who pretends to care for the poor. No peasants allowed.
Joe March 14, 2013 at 11:59 pm
She is "rich" which is a requirement to be "rich" that is really profound.
Tom March 15, 2013 at 12:08 am
Many, many years ago a San Mateo County deputy DA told me she considered her "wasted rations". Cruel, no doubt. I'm liberal and I can't stand her. She doesn't give a hoot about the rights and important concerns of men; latches on to every can't-lose idea that crops up, and is all about herself and for herself. I remember right after the San Bruno gas line catastrophe - she was immediately calling for remote-control-actuated valves...as if it was her idea, an original thought. Over two decades ago I made an appointment with her when she was a county supervisor, this about an extremely important issue to me and right as I sat down in her office for my appointment her phone rang and she waved me off, basically told me to get lost.
Day-Oh March 15, 2013 at 02:44 pm
How does one spend almost a million dollars on a basically uncontested House seat?
Bob Farkas March 15, 2013 at 04:05 pm
I like Jackie Speier. But, obviously something is wrong when people spend over a million for a 2 year house seat. It does not pay as much as it costs. So, it is set up to require politicians to accept money from others to just break even. That's not a good system. Admittedly, politicians are not complaining about it and they mostly end up rich after their "public service". I wish we could set up a better system.
Sue Bullis March 15, 2013 at 05:31 pm
As a san bruno survivor,let me tell you you have got it totally wrong. The day after the disaster I met her and let me tell you she was there not for notoriety but for me and the others who suffered from the loss of their families,. she continues to offer support to me and others involved.. She has been there for all the people, not only for San Mateo County but for the Nation. I feel very proud to know her.
1Diane March 15, 2013 at 06:47 pm
The article above says that she "raised" almost a million dollars, not that she spent that much. The question posed by the headline is never really answered in the article. How much of that $ is still in her "war chest" for the next election? She should be set for life, in more ways than one, unless a substantial challenger comes along.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Carlos Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Bob Winters June 18, 2013 at 08:51 am
Best of luck finding good homes, we already have two cats. You may want to consider this advertisingRead More technique: http://i41.tinypic.com/2s17tk0.jpg
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:07 pm
Marl Olbert said this right after refusing to second Matt Grocott's motion for 2 week delay of vote.Read More I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary. both in terms of compensation and provision I think part because he has never been a city manager before. and he had to prove himself. you can make a argument that that wasn't fair. if you think the person is capable for doing the job not necessarily the fact that they don't have the experience. it happens all over the place it happened to me personally it's just a part of the accepted process but another part of the accepted process is that if the person proves themselves you have to keep faith with them and if you don't you're actually sending a message You're saying that you can't trust us and i totally think that Mr. Maltbie is worth the pay, but besides that i think it is a issue of integrity and maintaining the integrity of the negotiation process and the hiring process that's why I'm going to vote yes for it.
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:08 pm
I would like to know who those various people were who gave Mark Olbert that understanding.
Michael G. Stogner June 17, 2013 at 04:54 pm
Council member Mark Olbert one who refused to second Mr. Grocott's motion made an interestingRead More statement. "I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary." I know for a fact that he didn't talk to Matt Grocott who was there. That leaves 3 potentials, 2 of them are deceased and the 3rd was Andy Klein who did not attend that meeting so he didn't vote. I would like to know who the "various people who were" are.
Marc Parent June 11, 2013 at 07:50 am
San Carlos just spent 10 Million after lawsuit from the "Bay Keepers", more activistsRead More wanting more money?
Holly Bell June 8, 2013 at 01:23 pm
Unbelievable!! Many voters are watching this issue closely and will remember this vote. Evidently,Read More these commissioners believe that resident's have no voice in city decision-making. Someone please name those commissioners who disregarded the loud-and-clear preference of the people. Time to clean house.
Bob Farkas June 8, 2013 at 02:01 pm
The two commissioners who voted for turf were John Seiling and Ray Merala. It was Ray's lastRead More meeting as a commissioner since he has termed out after 9+ years of service. I think they felt that the needs of the elite CYSO program should take precedence over neighbors and others who use the park. Youth sports seems a principal influencer at Parks and Rec. as they are the largest organized user of the facilities. I agree with many other opponents of this project that we all need to support adequate fields for youth sports. I just think these needs have to be in balance with those of the rest of the community. It was very disappointing that, although it is field availability which is purportedly driving this initiative, there was no available recent data to demonstrate the problem or an analysis of how much of the problem would be addressed by this measure. To a businessman like me, this seems a very unprofessional approach.
Concerned Taxpayer June 8, 2013 at 07:08 pm
This is purely a NIMBY issue. Lets just all be honest about that. The folks who live across fromRead More Highlands Park were the loudest opponents there and were citing all kinds of crazy issues when they should have just been honest and said,"I really don't want to look at more people and cars at the public park that is across the street from me and was there when I moved in." That is essentially the true gripe. NIMBY!!! A very weak argument and unelectable dishonest. Unless you can create more land we have to extend the use at existing parks and fields. This is very logical. We live in California and having to use astro turf stinks but we also live where there is no more available land to utilize. The commissions punted this to the council pure and simple. Well we already know who will vote against it. I am curious who will vote for it?????
Bill June 5, 2013 at 02:53 pm
This post makes zero sense. Bike lanes are a visual reminder to drivers that they must share theRead More road with riders. For every cyclist who is not observing the rules of traffic, I will show you 100 texting drivers. Removing bike lanes is not the answer.