By Harshawn Ratanpal for OpenSecrets.
Broadcast version by Nadia Ramlagan for Ohio News Connection reporting for the OpenSecrets-Public News Service Collaboration

With $11.8 million in the bank, incumbent Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) has far outraised his Republican challengers, who continue to pour their own money into the tightly contested 2024 U.S. Senate race.

But Brown’s war chest may not win him reelection. A poll from Emerson College last week predicts the three-term Democrat losing in a matchup against state senator Matt Dolan (R-Ohio) by two points and Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose (R) by one point. The poll, which has a 4.5% margin of error, has Brown defeating Republican businessman Bernie Moreno by one point. 

Republicans could stand to flip the U.S. Senate if Brown loses reelection. 

Once a bellwether, Ohio has taken a recent rightward shift, electing Sen. J.D. Vance (R), who was endorsed by former President Donald Trump, to the Senate in 2022. Brown is the only Ohio Democrat to be elected to a non-judicial statewide office since 2008. 

Still, Brown has retained his ability to fundraise and attract grassroots support. The incumbent Democrat raised $5.8 million from July to September, a 15% increase from the previous quarter. At least 31% of his funds came from donors who contributed $200 or less, an OpenSecrets analysis of third-quarter Federal Election Commission filings found. 

LaRose came closest to matching Brown’s grassroots support, with 21% of his funds coming from small donors. Less than half of one percent of Dolan’s funds came from small donors and small donors accounted for 3% of Moreno’s third-quarter fundraising haul. 

Moreno and Dolan each loaned $3 million to their campaigns in the last three months. Dolan raised an additional $1.1 million and Moreno raised another $1.2 million. LaRose, who began his campaign in July, loaned his campaign $250,000 and raised another $792,000. 

Brown also garnered support from 97 political action committees that contributed a total $256,000 – an average of $2,600 each. Top supporters included leadership PACs affiliated with Reps. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), which each gave $10,000. 

Brown, who joined striking auto workers on picket lines last month, received at least $43,500 from a dozen unions or PACs affiliated with unions between July and September.

Duty and Country, a super PAC that has been federally inactive since 2020, spent $840,000 in September on advertising for Brown. The group reported having just $15,000 at the end of June, and is not required to file donor information until the end of this year. 

In the 2020 election cycle, the group’s funds came from a nonprofit group called Duty and Honor, an affiliate of Senate Democrats’ Senate Majority PAC and Majority Forward, according to tax records. 

Senate Majority PAC supports Democratic candidates in Senate races and is consistently one of the highest-spending super PACs. It often supports affiliate groups dedicated to specific races, like Georgia Honor and The Georgia Way, which both supported Democratic candidates in Georgia Senate races. 

Brown’s Republican challengers in the Ohio Senate race also received PAC support. 

PACs gave $19,000 to Moreno. Most of it came from fellow Republicans, including the leadership PACs of Vance and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Flo.), who each gave $5,000, as well as local candidates and parties. 

Dolan received $23,800 from PACs between July and September. About 20% of that came from committees affiliated with party members. Unlike the PACs supporting Moreno, his third-quarter supporters were limited to PACs affiliated with state and local politicians, including former fellow Ohio state Sens. Jay Hottinger and Bill Beagle, as well as a handful of municipal politicians. The rest came from PACs affiliated with companies headquartered in Ohio. 

LaRose received $9,000 from PACs, including $7,500 from PACs affiliated with trade associations, $1,000 from a PAC affiliated with a real estate investment trust and $500 from the campaign committee of Ohio state Rep. Thomas Patton (R). 

Brown also spent more than his three challengers combined. He spent $3.2 million from July to September, with $1.2 million on digital acquisition, $540,000 on direct mail and another $27,500 on digital advertising.

Dolan spent $1.3 million, with most of it going to television advertising. Moreno spent $700,000, including $150,000 on mailing and $58,000 on digital advertising and marketing. LaRose spent just $172,000 and reported spending $16,900 on mailing. 

No prominent Democrat has challenged Brown. Primary elections are set for March 19, 2024 and the general election is scheduled for Nov. 5.


Harshawn Ratanpal wrote this article for OpenSecrets.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.


get more stories like this via email

Ohio's U.S. Senate race between the incumbent, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Republican Bernie Moreno has become one of the most expensive in American history, now totaling more than $400 million.

At the heart of the high-stakes election is the role of cryptocurrency. Its backers' financial influence has ignited debate over regulation and transparency. Both sides have been vocal on what it could mean, not only for Ohioans but for the future of cryptocurrency regulation across the country.

Mark Hays, senior policy analyst at Americans for Financial Reform and the advocacy group Demand Progress, shared his skepticism about the money flowing from the crypto sector.

"The money that's being spent is an effort to punish those politicians for trying to maintain strong regulatory standards," Hays explained.

Moreno has gained substantial backing from the Defend American Jobs super PAC, a group aligned with pro-crypto interests. This PAC has launched a $41 million ad campaign promoting him. Hays argued it is all part of a broader push for lenient crypto regulations in Congress, which Brown strongly opposes.

At a campaign stop in Columbus on Monday, Moreno defended the support from crypto backers, stating, "The reason they supported me is because they agree with me, not because I agree with them." He also addressed questions about his personal connection to cryptocurrency.

"I sold my Bitcoin, so I didn't want to have any nonsense from liberal reporters saying that I'm pro-crypto because of financial interest," Moreno asserted. "And the crypto community understands that this election is an existential threat to their existence here in America."

Brown, who chairs the Senate Banking Committee, has been a key figure in Congress advocating for strong regulatory oversight of the crypto industry. He has not shied away from addressing what he sees as significant risks posed by digital assets.

"The fraud, the scams and the outright theft; you can lose big in crypto's huge price swings," Brown pointed out. "They didn't tell you about the high fees pocketed by the crypto companies. Without regulation, stablecoins can endanger our economy, our payment system, our hard-earned money."

With control of a Senate seat in play and unprecedented levels of funding, Ohio voters are seeing firsthand how digital currency backers can shape political discourse.

Election Day is inching closer and the battleground state of Wisconsin will see more visits from the two main party presidential campaigns.

It was also the setting of a forum featuring a popular historian linking past events to the current debate over democracy.

Doris Kearns Goodwin, the renowned presidential historian, was the featured guest earlier this week at a discussion in suburban Milwaukee hosted by the United to Preserve initiative. When asked about present-day divisions and how they compare with similar turmoil in U.S. history, Goodwin pointed to the Industrial Revolution, noting it had the same effect on society as today's tech boom has.

"Globalization and the tech revolution have shaken up the economy, much as the Industrial Revolution did at the turn of the 20th century," Goodwin explained. "Think of what we went through then: It was the first time, really, that there was a gap between the rich and the poor, the first time, really, that people were from moving from the farms into the cities in record numbers."

She pointed out it fueled resentment among smaller communities, paving the way for an urban/rural divide seen today. Goodwin noted it took leaders such as former President Teddy Roosevelt, who had dealt with adversity in his own life, to channel that reflection and moderate his tone in a way that resonated with Americans from all kinds of backgrounds.

Goodwin said down the road, Lyndon Johnson had a heart attack while serving as a U.S. Senator. She said recovering from the medical scare inspired him to balance the quest for power with the need to serve the people.

"All of a sudden, one day, he just woke up and he said, 'Get me shaved, I'm ready to be back.' And he (a staffer) said, 'Well, what happened?' And he (Johnson) said, 'Well, I was lying here thinking what if I died now, what would I be remembered for? I have accumulated a lot of power, I've accumulated wealth, but have I really done something to make a difference in people's lives?'" Goodwin recounted.

Goodwin emphasized Johnson then became laser focused on advancing civil rights policy, even when the odds were stacked against him while serving as president. She noted it does not mean there weren't hard lessons learned along the way, with Johnson known for sometimes yelling at colleagues in humiliating fashion and regretting it the next day. Conversely, she pointed out Abraham Lincoln would write out a letter in anger but would set it aside and never have it delivered to the recipient, with it serving as a "cooling off" tool.


get more stories like this via email

As cryptocurrency becomes more prevalent, it's also making its way into the political arena. With millions of dollars being funneled into campaigns across the country, including here in Ohio, questions are arising about the impact this new wave of funding will have on elections - and, more importantly, what it means for voters.

Mark Hays, a senior policy analyst in financial technology with Americans for Financial Reform, said it's important for Ohioans and everyone across the country to be aware of the money's origination.

"There's a small group of wealthy individuals tied to the crypto industry pouring unprecedented amounts of money into campaign spending to dictate a particular policy outcome that will help them to continue to profit from scammy and predatory practices," he cautioned.

Hays highlighted concerns that the influx of crypto money could sway political decisions to favor industry players. The FBI recently reported more than $4 billion lost in crypto-related scams in 2023 alone. Meanwhile, proponents of cryptocurrency argue it is a valuable tool for economic growth, suggesting that it could help modernize financial systems. However, critics warn that the current push for less regulation might leave consumers vulnerable to fraud and financial instability.

On the other side of the conversation, supporters of cryptocurrency see potential benefits, but some in Ohio are voicing concerns about the influence of large crypto donors on local elections.

Melissa Cropper, Ohio Federation of Teachers president, offered another perspective.

"Why are the cryptocurrency people pouring money into this election? Are they pouring money into the election because they want to make sure that the business stays unregulated? And if that's the case, that's not what we want here in Ohio," she questioned.

As more money from the crypto industry pours into Ohio's elections, the debate over how to regulate this relatively new technology intensifies. Proponents point to the potential for job creation and financial innovation, while critics worry that Ohioans may end up paying the price if regulations are weakened. With $174 million already spent nationally on the 2024 elections by the crypto industry, Ohio remains a key battleground in this debate.