ShareThis Page
Political Headlines

Lamb, Rothfus have more than $3m between them to spend on fall election

| Monday, April 16, 2018, 5:30 p.m.
Conor Lamb
Dan Speicher | Tribune-Review
Conor Lamb
Congressional candidate Keith Rothfus addresses supporters at the Ross Twp. Holiday Inn Tuesday, November 6, 2012.
Tribune-Review file
Congressional candidate Keith Rothfus addresses supporters at the Ross Twp. Holiday Inn Tuesday, November 6, 2012.

Newly sworn-in Democratic Congressman Conor Lamb has more money in the bank than his likely opponent in November's election, Republican U.S. Rep. Keith Rothfus, but Lamb raised most of the cash while campaigning in another race, campaign finance reports show.

Lamb had about $1.7 million in his campaign account at the beginning of this month, according to a report filed with the Federal Election Commission. Rothfus had about $1.5 million.

Lamb raised about $6.4 million in his campaign for a March 13 special election against Republican Rick Saccone, and spent about $4.6 million on the race. The election, held to replace former Republican Rep. Tim Murphy in a Republican-leaning district, garnered national attention — and money from individuals around the country — as a bellwether for how Democrats might perform in midterms this fall.

Since the election, Lamb has raised about $135,000, according to the finance report. He faces Rothfus in the newly drawn 17th Congressional District, which covers Beaver County along with parts of Allegheny and Butler counties.

Rothfus raised about $443,000 from Jan. 1 to the end of March, according to a finance report.

Neither candidate has to spend money on a primary campaign after Democratic challengers dropped out to support Lamb , leaving the two with hefty sums to put toward the general election in the fall.

Wes Venteicher is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 412-380-5676, or via Twitter @wesventeicher.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me