Subscribe to The Y’all — a weekly dispatch about the people, places and policies defining Texas, produced by Texas Tribune journalists living in communities across the state.
LUBBOCK — Campaign finance records cannot account for all the money spent on advertising over an anti-abortion policy proposal in Amarillo that voters rejected last month, an analysis by The Texas Tribune and Sunlight Research Center found.
In the months leading up to the vote, thousands of dollars poured into advertising for and against Proposition A, a local ballot measure that garnered national attention. The proposal would have opened the door for private lawsuits against people accused of using local streets and highways to drive someone else for an out-of-state abortion.
Previously filed local campaign records, coupled with social media spending reports and federally required notices for television ads, offer a window into the spending behind the election. However, the true cost of the fight is still unknown and may never be fully disclosed due to certain tax laws.
The campaign finance records, which cover money raised and spent by political committees between August and late October, show that opponents of the ballot measure outspent groups supporting it by more than $20,000 — thanks in part to spending by a statewide progressive organization.
However, thousands more were likely spent on billboard advertisements than is reflected in financial disclosures by any of the groups involved, the analysis found, putting the total in question.
Sherri Greenberg, assistant dean for state and local government engagement at the University of Texas, said campaign finance records rely on transparency and full disclosure. However, she said it’s not unusual for missing information to come up in local campaigns because of inexperience.
“It’s not a candidate running for election or reelection,” Greenberg said. “You have groups funding and either supporting or opposing the initiative, who are not familiar with the specifics of the filings, details, or dates.”
A final round of campaign finance records for the 2024 election are due Jan. 15. However, the Tribune and Sunlight analysis found apparent spending during the earlier reporting period that is not accounted for.
Sunlight, a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization, attempted to identify all spending on political ads in the Amarillo area related to the Nov. 5 ballot measure. Sunlight analyzed billboard photos pulled from social media, blog posts and news coverage. The researchers compared visible nearby signage and other identifiable features in the billboard photos to images on Google Maps Street View to map each corresponding location as closely as possible.
Sunlight then compared the mapped coordinates to the coverage maps, photos and sales details published by Burkett Outdoor Advertising and Lamar, another national advertising company.
Sunlight also searched financial disclosures filed with the Texas Ethics Commission and the City of Amarillo for expenses and in-kind donations, including disclosures of ad spending to specific vendors. The organization examined Instagram and Facebook advertising by searching the Meta Ad Library for ads targeting Amarillo.
Finally, Sunlight searched the FCC public inspection files for political advertising and programming filings from broadcast stations serving the Amarillo area. It also identified political ad spending in the “Political Files” section for each station, selecting filings from 2024 associated with the Proposition A campaign.
At least 21 billboard ads supporting and opposing the ballot measure appeared along Interstates 40 and 27, which both see heavy traffic daily. With messages such as “Keep Texas Roads Open: Say No To Travel Bans” and “Stop Soros: Prohibit Abortion Trafficking,” the billboards cost at least $20,650 to $24,300 in the months leading up to the election.
There were two main political committees that supported the proposition: Project Destiny Amarillo and the Amarillo Area Young Republicans. They were the only organizations to disclose billboard expenses or in-kind donations. Project Destiny Amarillo’s only in-kind contribution labeled “billboards,” cost $750 and was paid for by Green Tree & Landscaping.
[Why a conservative Texas mayor defied his peers and put the brakes on an abortion “travel ban”]
The Young Republicans political committee reported $6,550 in advertising expenses paid to Burkett Outdoor Advertising. However, at least two billboards, valued at $2,200 each, had the disclaimer “paid for by Project Destiny Amarillo.”
Project Destiny Amarillo raised more than $74,000 through Oct. 28 when they filed with the Texas Ethics Commission, including nearly $10,000 of in-kind donations. They spent more than $56,000 campaigning for the proposition, with reported expenses such as $16,164 for printed materials and $35,579.38 to Mike Stevens, a Lubbock political consultant who has worked on other “sanctuary city” campaigns in Texas. The PAC could have spent more money in the final days of the campaign that has not yet been reported.
Nearly $33,000 of the money Project Destiny Amarillo raised was through four large donations from Amarillo residents, including Jim Schrader, a business owner, who donated $10,158. Jennifer Roberts, another business owner and the PAC’s treasurer, donated $9,182 total. Jamie Haynes, who ran for a Texas House seat and lost in the March primary, donated $3,628 in in-kind donations to support an informational event, while her husband, John, donated $10,000.
The group also had smaller donations to boost their efforts, including a $1,100 donation from Don Tipps, the lone city council member who supported the proposition, and $500 donations each from New Mexico state Sen. David Gallegos, and Texas state Rep. Briscoe Cain, who cosponsored the state abortion ban.
According to the analysis, supporters of the ordinance bought broadcast ads worth at least $4,615, though the amount spent may be more. There were several advertising expenses by Project Destiny Amarillo that were listed in FCC records from the local broadcasters that were not in the PAC’s campaign finance filings.
The Amarillo Reproductive Freedom Alliance, the local group opposing the ordinance, formed the Amarillo Freedom political action committee to fight the ordinance directly. It raised a total of $31,783. About half — $15,000 — of the money raised came from three donors, James Whitton, Margaret O’Brien, and Reese Beddingfield, who donated $5,000 each.
Both Whitton and O’Brien come from longtime Panhandle families with ties to the Hastings Entertainment company. Beddingfield is a local business owner.
ARFA members donated $3,061.70 to the committee.
Campaign finance records from July 1 through Oct. 28 show the committee spent $9,821.36, including $3,244.13 in advertising expenses. They did not disclose expenses related to billboards.
Neither representatives from Project Destiny Amarillo nor Amarillo Freedom responded to requests for comments from the Tribune.
Outside of donations, the campaign supporting the ordinance had a boost from conservative news outlets including Texas Scorecard. The outlet published dozens of commentary pieces by Mark Lee Dickson, director of Right to Life East Texas and the leader of the “Sanctuary City for the Unborn” movement. The outlet is owned by Citizens News Guild. Annual filings show Tim Dunn, a Midland oilman and conservative megadonor, is on the guild’s board of directors.
Local opponents were also buoyed by out-of-town groups.
For starters, the Alliance is tied to Ground Game Texas, a political nonprofit that builds local campaigns for progressive issues. A 501(c)4 nonprofit, Ground Game is allowed to shield donors’ identities under federal law.
And Avow, an abortion advocacy organization in Texas, invested more than $74,000 on digital ads, printing, postage and text message campaigns opposing the ordinance, according to filings with the Texas Ethics Commission.
Other state and national organizations including ACLU of Texas, Jane’s Due Process and Women’s March also fought against the ordinance. The analysis found the Women’s March group sponsored some of the billboards against Proposition A, along with signs and social media promotions.
The Potter Randall County Medical Society Board, a local group of doctors and hospital workers, also formed a PAC to oppose the ordinance. The committee’s last campaign finance report from Sept. 26 to Oct. 28 shows $4,468.74 in monetary and in-kind donations. They did not report any expenditures.
During the election season, the medical society was accused of violating Texas Ethics Commission rules by members, including some who donated in favor of the ordinance. An attorney sent the organization a letter saying the board failed to register the PAC before engaging in political activity. An Amarillo-based lawyer responded for the board, saying they deny unethical activity. They only accepted contributions from board members and did not spend organization money on the campaign, the letter said. A spokesperson told the Amarillo Tribune their campaign finance filing was late.
— Research and data analysis provided by Sunlight Research Center’s Audrey Nielsen, Michael Nolan, and Diara J. Town
Disclosure: Facebook and Google have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here.