Developer political contributions in the 2012 FEC cycle

Joining DEVELOPER to the 2012 cycle

Two FEC dimensions meet here: occupation DEVELOPER and the 2012 election cycle. The intersection is $2,695,613 ($2.7 million), 1,410 contributions, and 748 donors. 8.0% of Developer occupation dollars ($33,583,908) fall in 2012.

The 2012 cycle is an even-year FEC window, a presidential-year cycle in federal itemized receipts. This page does not add 2010 or 2014 dollars into the 2012 total. DEVELOPER is ambiguous on FEC forms: real estate and software both appear under the same typed word. LobbyVault does not split the string. Longer titles such as REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER remain on their own occupation pages.

Reading DEVELOPER without merging sibling titles

On the occupation side, $33,583,908 is the Developer total across cycles. Sibling labels (REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER, SOFTWARE DEVELOPER, and REAL ESTATE) stay on other pages. Developer is not a real-estate project pipeline, a software-headcount, or a developer PAC.

All occupations lists other titles without adding them to $33,583,908. The Developer donations page holds the all-cycle occupation table that $2,695,613 is a slice of.

Reading 2012 without treating it as all Developer money

The 2012 election cycle hub holds itemized individual receipts for every occupation coded to that even-year window. This tie keeps only Developer. $2,695,613 is therefore not a cycle-wide total. FEC.gov labels this even-year federal window 2012. It is not a 2010 or 2014 midterm-year filter.

1,410 contributions from 748 donors is closer to one-to-two itemized gifts per person inside this cycle filter, still not a headcount of the occupation. The page does not publish an average gift. $2,695,613, 1,410, and 748 are the three cycle-side facts. Unitemized federal gifts never enter $2,695,613. Committee disbursements and independent expenditures are a different FEC schedule and are not a second way to count $2,695,613. Three numbers define the Developer × 2012 cell: dollars $2,695,613, contribution rows 1,410, unique donors 748. Share of occupation dollars is 8.0% of $33,583,908.

How not to read Developer money in 2012

Matching Developer with 2012 does not measure influence, does not assign party, and does not say Developer donors caused an electoral result. Correlation between an occupation string and a cycle is not causation. The table is also not a real-estate project pipeline, a software-headcount, or a developer PAC.

Itemized individual contributions from FEC.gov only. Independent expenditures, unitemized gifts, and state-office campaigns are excluded. Occupation labels are filer-entered. DEVELOPER is ambiguous on FEC forms: real estate and software both appear under the same typed word. LobbyVault does not split the string. Longer titles such as REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER remain on their own occupation pages. This join does not publish a party split, a recipient-committee list, or employer text. If a reader only needs the occupation, the Developer donations hub is $33,583,908; the 2012 election cycle hub is the even-year inventory across titles. Do not add those hubs together.

Linked Developer and 2012 pages

Developer donations holds the $33,583,908 occupation total. The 2012 election cycle page holds every occupation in that window, not only Developer. All occupations places DEVELOPER beside other titles without merging sibling strings (REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER, SOFTWARE DEVELOPER, and REAL ESTATE). All FEC ties lists other occupation-cycle pairs so $2,695,613 is not added to a different year.

Use the occupation hub for all-cycle Developer dollars ($33,583,908). Use the 2012 cycle hub for the even-year window across titles. Use this tie for the intersection only: $2,695,613, 1,410 contributions, 748 donors, 8.0% of occupation dollars. Those four internal links are the only hrefs this copy may use: Developer donations, the 2012 election cycle, all occupations, and all FEC ties. Keep DEVELOPER as the occupation key and 2012 as the cycle key when joining files. FEC.gov remains the controlling source if a later extract disagrees with $2,695,613.

Using the Developer 2012 figures in a citation

A usable sentence names both sides: occupation DEVELOPER, cycle 2012, $2,695,613 itemized, 1,410 contributions, 748 donors, source FEC.gov. $2.7 million is a rounded form of $2,695,613.

Do not cite $33,583,908 as the 2012 figure. $33,583,908 is all-cycle Developer. Do not cite a cycle-wide total from this page; $2,695,613 is Developer only. Sibling strings (REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER, SOFTWARE DEVELOPER, and REAL ESTATE) remain outside $2,695,613. Independent expenditures remain outside $2,695,613.

Questions

How much did Developer donors give in 2012?

FEC itemized individual contributions from donors listing occupation DEVELOPER in the 2012 cycle total $2,695,613, from 1,410 contributions and 748 donors. Nationwide across cycles, Developer-coded receipts are $33,583,908. 2012 is 8.0% of those occupation dollars. Source: FEC.gov.

Is Developer 2012 money a PAC total?

No. This join is itemized individual contributions grouped by occupation and election cycle. Committee PACs and independent expenditures are not in $2,695,613 or in the $33,583,908 occupation figure used here. The FEC field is the word DEVELOPER as typed. This join does not split real-estate developers from software developers. The 2012 join is $2,695,613 from 1,410 contributions and 748 donors.

Does Developer mean real estate or software?

The FEC field is the word DEVELOPER as typed. This join does not split real-estate developers from software developers. The 2012 cycle filter on Developer is $2,695,613, 1,410 contributions, and 748 donors. The occupation total across cycles is $33,583,908. Labels are filer-entered on FEC.gov itemized receipts.

Why 1,410 Developer contributions and 748 donors in 2012?

The 2012 join includes 1,410 itemized contributions from 748 donors totaling $2,695,613. 1,410 contributions from 748 donors is closer to one-to-two itemized gifts per person inside this cycle filter, still not a headcount of the occupation. The page does not name donors or split rows by committee. Unique-donor count is not a census of the occupation.