Which super PACs did Richard Haworth fund in 2020?

Americans for Prosperity Action ($1.4M), Republican National Committee ($53K), NRSC ($50K), Better Future Mi Fund ($20K), Congressional Leadership Fund ($10K).

Which candidates did Richard Haworth's money end up backing or attacking in 2020?

for David A. Perdue (Georgia Senate, about $334K, lost); for Thom Tilllis (North Carolina Senate, about $221K, won); for John Cornyn (Texas Senate, about $83K, won). Amounts are the donor's share of each group's spending.

← All donors

Donor

Richard Haworth

Individual

Chairman, Haworth Inc. · Michigan

18 reported gifts; 5 recipient groups listed, as reported to the FEC by the groups that received them.

Mixed results

Richard Haworth gave $1.5M to super PACs and other outside groups in the 2020 federal elections, and 100% of it helped Republicans (FEC filings with varying coverage dates; the most common larger-campaign cutoff is Dec 31, 2020). Among dollars with a matched election-stage result, 57% were on the winning side ($698K won, $535K lost). $6K had no matched result and is excluded.

Gave to outside spenders

$1.5M

100% of it helped Republicans

Winning share of scored dollars

57%

$1.2M scored (80% of gifts)

Spent on the losing side

$535K

Not allocated or result unknown

$304K

$298K not allocated to tracked outside spending; $6K has no matched result. Neither is cash on hand.

Where the checks went

A person writing checks from their own fortune. Each gift is split the way the group that received it split its spending between winners and losers, so a $10M check to a group that spent 80% on losers counts as $8M on the losing side.

✓ Backed the winner or attacked the loser ✗ Backed the loser or attacked the winner Result not matched

Group	Gave	Won / lost
Americans for Prosperity Action $209K not allocated to tracked outside spending	$1.4M	$681K / $509K
Republican National Committee $52K not allocated to tracked outside spending	$53K	$0 / $412
NRSC $33K not allocated to tracked outside spending	$50K	$10K / $7K
Better Future Mi Fund $2K not allocated to tracked outside spending	$20K	$0 / $18K
Congressional Leadership Fund $1K not allocated to tracked outside spending	$10K	$7K / $1K

The trail

What the money bought

The candidates Richard Haworth's money was spent for or against, pro-rated by Richard Haworth's share of each group's funding.

Candidate	Race	Spending	Their share	Paid off?
David A. Perdue	Georgia Senate	Supporting	$334K	✗ No
Thom Tilllis	North Carolina Senate	Supporting	$221K	✓ Yes
John Cornyn	Texas Senate	Supporting	$83K	✓ Yes
Jon Ossoff	Georgia Senate	Attacking	$82K	✗ No
Roger Marshall	Kansas Senate	Supporting	$72K	✓ Yes
Steve Daines	Montana Senate	Supporting	$71K	✓ Yes
Cal Cunningham	North Carolina Senate	Attacking	$66K	✓ Yes
Barbara Bollier	Kansas Senate	Attacking	$30K	✓ Yes
Cory Gardner	Colorado Senate	Supporting	$19K	✗ No
John James	Michigan Senate	Supporting	$19K	✗ No
Gary Peters	Michigan Senate	Attacking	$17K	✗ No
Nick J. Freitas	Virginia 7th District	Supporting	$12K	✗ No

Individual as classified from the FEC entity type and public reporting.

Questions people ask

How much did Richard Haworth spend on the 2020 elections, and did it win?: Richard Haworth gave $1.5M to super PACs and other outside groups in the 2020 federal elections, and 100% of it helped Republicans (FEC filings with varying coverage dates; the most common larger-campaign cutoff is Dec 31, 2020). Among dollars with a matched election-stage result, 57% were on the winning side ($698K won, $535K lost). $6K had no matched result and is excluded.
Which super PACs did Richard Haworth fund in 2020?: Americans for Prosperity Action ($1.4M), Republican National Committee ($53K), NRSC ($50K), Better Future Mi Fund ($20K), Congressional Leadership Fund ($10K).
Which candidates did Richard Haworth's money end up backing or attacking in 2020?: for David A. Perdue (Georgia Senate, about $334K, lost); for Thom Tilllis (North Carolina Senate, about $221K, won); for John Cornyn (Texas Senate, about $83K, won). Amounts are the donor's share of each group's spending.