Congressional campaigns had to turn in their quarterly fundraising reports this week, documenting money raised and spent between July 1 and Sept. 30. Information about other elected officials and challengers is below.

Fourth District Rep. Tom Latham, R-Ames, is next on the list, raising $153,507 during the quarter. His campaign has nearly $420,000 cash on hand.

Third District Rep. Leonard Boswell, D-Des Moines, raised $104,132, bringing his cash-on-hand total to $343,215.

Second District Rep. Dave Loebsack, D-Mt. Vernon, raised $101,200 and has $278,404 cash on hand.

Fifth District Rep. Steve King, R-Kiron, raised $70,570 and has $173,833 cash on hand.

Several challengers also filed reports. Republican Dave Funk, who is running against Boswell, raised $16,477and ended the quarter with $6,226 cash on hand. Democrat Mike Denklau, who is running against King, raised $13,615 but has more than $10,000 in campaign debt.

U.S. Rep. Tom Latham, R-Ames

Latham’s PAC, called For America’s Republican Majority (FARM PAC), raised $205,447 during the two-year campaign cycle that led up to the 2008 elections, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Of that total, nearly $52,000 was spent for trips advertised as fundraisers, mostly to well-known golf courses in California. The money paid for travel, hotel accommodations, meals and golf course fees.

That total represents only expenses associated with out-of-state travel and does not include fees paid to fundraising consultants or fundraisers held in the Washington, D.C., area. It also does not include other charges related to the trips, such as a $1,775 payment in August 2008 to Los Angeles-based Summit Limousine for transportation to a fundraising event.

When those expenses are factored in, the PAC spent $80,165 on entertainment and other fundraising costs, or nearly 40 percent of all money raised.

The PAC spent a little more than $70,000 on direct contributions to Republican candidates around the country, a practice that is supposed to be the main focus of these types of organizations, called “leadership PACs.”

Election reform advocates are highly critical of leadership PACs, saying they amount to little more than political slush funds designed to allow elected officials to skirt campaign finance laws. Two trips this year by Latham — a weekend in Atlantic City, N.J., and a golf outing at the prestigious Greenbrier Resort in West Virginia — have already drawn criticism.

Below is a list of expenses associated with out of state travel during the 2008 election cycle.

Trips taken in 2007 (dates reflect when payment was issued):

Boca Raton Resort in Boca Raton, Fla., in February

La Quinta Resort & Club in La Quinta, Calif., in February

The St. Regis Monarch Beach in Dana Point, Calif., in February

Boca Raton Resort in Boca Raton, Fla., in March

Del Mar Thoroughbred Club in Del Mar, Calif., in May

Averills Lodge at Whitefish in Montana in August

The St. Regis Monarch Beach in Dana Point, Calif., in August

Embassy Suites Omaha in August

Caves Valley Golf Club in Owings Mills, Md., in December

Trips made during 2008:

LaQuinta Resort & Club in La Quinta, Calif., in January

The Cliffs Hotel in Shell Beach, Calif., in June

Del Mar Racetrack in Del Mar, Calif., in August

Greenbrier Hotel in White Sulphur Springs. W.V. in September

Hilton Hotel in Minneapolis, Minn., in September

The St. Regis Monarch Beach in Dana Point, Calif in September

Disney Resort Grand Lake in Lake Buena Vista, Fla., in November

That’s because the trips were paid for by Latham’s political action committee and touted as fundraising events, a practice that is legal but that government reform advocates contend turns the PAC into little more than a slush fund designed to skirt campaign finance law.

U.S. Rep. Tom Latham, R-Ames.

And an Iowa Independent investigation found similar trips to prestigious golf resorts around the country throughout 2008, all paid for with PAC money.

These types of political action committees, known as “Leadership PACs,” are designed as a way for lawmakers to raise money to be passed along to other members of their party for their campaigns. By making donations to members of their party, lawmakers can use their leadership PACs to gain clout and boost their bids for leadership posts or committee chairmanships.

But a joint investigation by the nonprofit news site ProPublica, ABC News and the Washington Post found that a majority of the money raised by leadership PACs goes to entertainment, administrative costs, fundraising and other categories that “are so vague that it’s impossible to know for sure how the money was spent.”

ProPublica found lawmakers used money from their PACs to pay for trips to places like Churchill Downs, Disney World and the Country Music Hall of Fame. They found that Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., used nearly $65,000 to commission a portrait of himself.

All five of Iowa’s congressmen and both senators have leadership PACs (Sen. Tom Harkin has two). But Latham’s organization, dubbed For America’s Republican Majority (FARM PAC) is getting the lion’s share of attention.

Latham, along with House Minority Leader John Boehner, Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss and North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr, held a golf outing touted as a fundraiser for their leadership PACs at the Greenbrier Resort in West Virginia in July.

In June, Latham hosted an Atlantic City weekend to benefit his PAC. Lodging at the Trump Taj Mahal Casino Resort cost FARM PAC $1,377.36.

Disclosure reports filed in 2008 with the Federal Election Commission show FARM PAC paid for hotel accommodations at prestigious golf resorts around the country, including the Greenbriar Resort in September;  The St. Regis Hotel-Monarch Beach in Dana Point, Calif. in August; and the LaQuinta Resort & Club near Palm Springs, Calif., in January.

Since returning to the capitol from the August recess, Latham has held two D.C. fundraisers for FARM PAC, with a third scheduled for Oct. 27.

FARM PAC has raised more than $75,000 this year. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the largest donors to FARM PAC in 2009 include Altria Group (formerly Philip Morris), AT&T, California Dairies Inc. and Latham for Congress. The PAC raised $205,447 during the 2008 election cycle, with almost all of it coming from lobbyists, PACs and corporate leaders.

For some reason, ProPublica did not include Latham’s PAC in their breakdown of more than 400 leadership PACs. The site did, however, look at rest of Iowa’s congressional delegation and found that they have not followed down a similar path as Latham.

More than 80 percent of money spent during the 2008 election cycle by Democratic Rep. Bruce Braley’s leadership PAC, Bringing Leadership Back PAC, was spent on campaign contributions to fellow Democrats.

Republican Rep. Steve King’s Conservative Principals PAC spent nearly 50 percent of its money on what ProPublica classifies as “entertainment, events and travel,” mostly on payments to the fundraising telecommunications company Liberty Phone Center.

Democratic Rep. Dave Loebsack’s I-PAC and Democratic Rep. Leonard Boswell’s BOSPAC spent almost all of the very small amount of money raised in 2008 on campaign contributions.

A little more than 70 percent of the money spent by Harkin’s Independent Action Inc. during the 2008 election cycle went for administrative costs. As for his To Organize a Majority PAC, more than 57 percent of its expenditures went to campaign contributions for Harkin’s senate colleagues, with 25 percent going to “fundraising consultants.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley’s Hawkeye PAC spent nearly 78 percent of its money on campaign contributions.

Responding to a request for comment, Latham’s spokesman, Fred Love, said in an e-mail to the Iowa Independent that the congressman’s official office does not work with or speak on behalf of any campaign committees. Phone calls to the number listed for the Alexandria, Va., offices of FARM PAC were not answered.

For more background on the controversy surrounding leadership PACs, read ProPublica’s report here.

He is also facing criticism for once again defending the debunked urban legend that a provision in a health care reform bill currently in the U.S. House would give the government authority to euthanize the elderly.

Last month, a fundraising letter Grassley sent to supporters found its way to the blog of Washington Post writer Ezra Klein. In it, Grassley made it clear to potential donors that he is strongly opposed to health care reform legislation, despite public statements where he promises to work for a bipartisan bill.

Over the weekend, the liberal blog ThinkProgress.org reported from a fundraising event for Grassley in Miami that once again calls into question the senator’s commitment to crafting health care reform legislation.

As we previously reported, ThinkProgress attended a closed-door health care town hall forum in Hialeah, Fla., this past Tuesday, where Sens. Mel Martinez (R-FL), John McCain (R-AZ), and Mitch McConnell (R-KY) discussed their opposition to Obama’s health reform plan. After the event, the three senators took a trip across town to the ritzy Biltmore hotel in Miami where they attended a fundraising reception sponsored by the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

ThinkProgress attended the closed-door reception. Upon arriving at the venue, we were surprised to see a conference room that was marked as a fundraising reception room for Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA). Grassley was not listed on the official invitation. Minutes later, Grassley arrived, where he joined his fellow colleagues McConnell and McCain. In his remarks, Grassley told the wealthy Republican activists that he was committed to fighting Obama’s health care plan.

Tom Fiegen, a Cedar Rapids bankruptcy attorney and one of two Democrats hoping to challenge Grassley in 2010, condemned the “secret fundraiser” and called on the senator to come clean on his position on health care reform.

“Will the real Chuck Grassley stand up?” Fiegen said, later adding: “What good are Mr. Grassley’s town meetings in Iowa when he’s telling Iowans one thing and telling something else to the big-money contributors from out of state?”

Tuesday morning Grassley was a guest on C-SPAN. He was asked about the infamous “pull the plug on grandma” line he delivered several times during town hall forums around the state. Grassley said if you “connect several dots” and read between the lines that it is fair to conclude that “the government is going to be in the middle of end of life issues just like they are in England.”

On the issue of “death panels,” Grassley has both defended and walked back his original claims in recent weeks. When he began being criticized for the statements, Grassley at first defended them, using an argument similar to what he used on C-SPAN, that end-of-life counseling should be feared due to the likelihood that health care will be rationed.

By mid-August, a Grassley spokesman told the Washington Post that despite statements to the contrary, the senator “does not think the House provision would in fact give the government such authority in deciding when and how people die.”

By the end of August, Grassley was both disavowing the rumor and continuing to spread it at a town hall forum in Pocahontas.

Here’s how the letter, obtained by the Washington Post’s Ezra Klein, begins:

I had to rush you this Air-Gram today to set the record straight on my firm and unwavering opposition to government-run health care.

And ask your immediate support in helping me defeat “Obama-care.”

I’m sure you’ve been following this issue closely. If the legislation sponsored by Speaker Nancy Pelosi in the House of Representatives and Chairman Ted Kennedy in the Senate is passed it would be a pathway to a government takeover of the health care svstem. lt would turn over control of your health care decisions to a federal bureaucrat … and take it away from you and your personal physician.

It would mean government rationing in the name of cost controls.

Even the simple act of using the word “Obama-care” serves as a dog-whistle for conservative health reform opponents, reassuring them of Grassley’s opposition and encouraging them to open their wallets. (The word Air-Gram may also be a dog-whistle for whatever group thinks that an Air-Gram is something other than a cheesy trademark that you can affix to a letter to make it seem more important.)

One sentence in the letter does recognize that Grassley is attempting to work with others to find a health care compromise that would not include a public option, but it’s almost like he’s downplaying that fact because of his audience. As Klein writes, “The question of whether Grassley wants to compromise on health care is increasingly being overtaken by the reality that Grassley is not leaving himself political room to compromise on health care.”

Boswell has raised $309,184 this year, with nearly 75 percent coming from Political Action Committees. As of June 30, the Des Moines Democrat had $296,451 cash on hand.

Next up with Republican Rep. Tom Latham of Ames, who has raised $299,180 this year, nearly half of which came from PACs. Latham has $303,241 cash on hand.

First District Democrat Bruce Braley has raised $298,614, nearly 60 percent from PACs. Braley has the most cash on hand of any of Iowa’s congressmen, with $348,125.

Republican Rep. Steve King brought in $200,956, with less than 20 percent coming from PACs. He has $216,301 cash on hand.

Bringing up the rear this quarter is Second District Rep. Dave Loebsack with $60,558, more than half of which came from PACs. Loebsack has $144,317 cash on hand.

As the saying goes, once elected, a member of Congress must raise $10,000 a week to get re-elected. It sounds like hard work, but it doesn’t always have to be.

The nonprofit Sunlight Foundation, which was founded with the goal of increasing transparency in the United States Congress, has tracked down invitations to many of the exclusive get togethers that help fill a member of Congress’ campaign coffers and posted them on PoliticalPartyTime.org for the public to see. It’s surely not an exhaustive list, since the group relies on tipsters sending in their invites. But it does offer a glimpse of the D.C. lives of the Hawkeye State’s congressional team.

The most prolific party host in Iowa’s delegation, according to the Sunlight Foundation, is Fourth District Republican Rep. Tom Latham. He has started hosting his own “Supper Club” every month at different D.C. hotspots. The parties are limited to 10 attendees and feature a different special guest each month, which so far include congressmen from Kentucky, Georgia and California. To attend this months’ event, scheduled for Wednesday night at the ritzy Oceanaire Seafood Room in downtown D.C., will cost $2,500 per PAC and $1,500 for individuals. Latham will also host a golf outing to raise money for North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr and Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss on July 17.

Next up is Third District Democratic Rep. Leonard Boswell. The six-term incumbent has not always been the best fundraiser, a fact that landed him a spot on the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee’s “Frontline Program,” which seeks to protect incumbents in potentially vulnerable districts by assisting with organizing and fundraising. Boswell has hosted two fundraising party’s this year at the National Democratic Club Townhouse in D.C., with another scheduled June 3 that could cost as much as $5,000 to attend.

First District Democratic Rep. Bruce Braley has hosted two parties this year, with the last on April 29 at Johnny’s Half Shell in D.C. The “suggested” contribution for those who attend was $1,000. Braley, who this year earned himself a leadership position in the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, helped a fellow Democrat from Oregon raise money in March as part of a fundraiser titled “Comedy Bailout: CEO’s get in Scot-free.”

Second District Democrat Dave Loebsack has hosted two parties in 2009, with a third scheduled for June 16 at the National Democratic Club Townhouse in D.C. Expected contributions range from $500 to $5,000.

Fifth District Republican Steve King hasn’t hosted a D.C. party since September. Before that it was July.

According to an analysis of campaign contributions by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, Democrat Barack Obama has received nearly six times as much money from troops deployed overseas at the time of their contributions than has Republican John McCain, and the fiercely anti-war Ron Paul, though he suspended his campaign for the Republican nomination months ago, has received more than four times McCain’s haul.

Among all military personnel (deployed and not deployed), Obama beat McCain in contributions by about $55,000.  This is a reversal of conventional wisdom, which generally holds that the military is more Republican than Democratic.

“It was a little confusing and, at times, felt a little dirty,” Hedges said and laughed at the memory. “I’d spend the morning placing high-energy fund-raising calls that bashed Democrats and flip, often in the same day, to placing soft, more relaxed calls for the Democrat I’d been bashing.”

The Iowa-based telemarketing company Hedges worked for was hired, by way of a Washington, D.C.-based marketing firm, to do fund-raising calls on behalf of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a Republican front-runner in the presidential race. The company was subsequently also hired to do identification and outreach calls on behalf of the campaign for New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democrat ranking highest in national polling. The calls went out to households in Iowa as well as several eastern states.

“Giuliani was hard-core — money, money, money — always make the ask,” he said. “I would get so mad at myself because I would go home at the end of the day and still be just so completely amped up after doing the Rudy calls. I mean, there was no caffeine or anything in me, but you had to get yourself in that frame of mind to do those calls and work with the pressure that was put on us.”

Team leaders would come around as the workers in the call center made the pitch for Giuliani, Hedges said, and they wanted the workers to be noisy, be energized and get what they were requesting.

“We were considered the trenches,” he said. “So, there was just a lot of pressure. We were constantly told to step it up, be more powerful or be more positive — Rudy is the only one that can save this country. Of course, you can’t say that on the phone, but, essentially, that’s what you’re supposed to feel when you are making the call.”

While Hedges couldn’t remember the entire Giuliani pitch verbatim, he said there were certain aspects that stuck out in his mind such as telling people that the nation “couldn’t afford to have a Democrat, like Hillary Clinton, in the White House.”

“Sometimes we would switch up Clinton for [Illinois Sen. Barack] Obama, but it would always be one of the big Democratic front runners,” he said. “In fund raising, you are standing up. You’re passionate. You’ve got to make these people believe that Rudy is the savior — even at the expense of the person you know you might be pitching for later in the same day.”

The standard asking price on the Giuliani calls was $250. Callers were told not to take no for an answer and to make a minimum of three asks for the money.

“Personally, I never had anyone give me the maximum of $2,500 — but there were some in the call center who were able to get that figure,” Hedges said. “Rudy’s lists were all good numbers. These were people who had supported Rudy in the past, supported Republicans in the past or otherwise already had a direct connection to the campaign. The lists we were given later showed exactly how much the person we were calling had contributed previously so we could ask again for that figure — and, of course, more.”

The Clinton calls were softer and more conversational, he said, and involved both identifying supporters (or possible supporters), educating those supporting others and setting up “Hillary parties,” house parties where a surrogate or strong supporter would meet with the person called and a small group of friends.

“It was different when we were doing the Clinton calls because we didn’t have the team leaders walking around. People weren’t screaming,” he said. “It was definitely more relaxed — more of a real conversation with the people on the other end of the line.”

The conversation would begin with Hedges identifying himself and saying that he was calling on behalf of the Clinton campaign. Then the person on the other end would be asked if he or she supported Clinton. If the answer was yes, Hedges would feign excitement. If the answer was no, he’d be more subdued and immediately turn the conversation back to Clinton.

“We didn’t really talk about other candidates at all, except to ask who the person was supporting,” he said. “If the person wanted to talk about another choice, we’d work to bring the focus back on Clinton, her plans, policies and stances on the issues. As I said, it wasn’t a high-energy sales call, it was soft and relaxed. We wanted to give information and get information. That was the goal.”

Was it difficult to play at high-energy on both sides of the political aisle?

“No, not really,” Hedges admitted. “It would be a little strange to start off some mornings forcefully telling people that we can’t afford to have Hillary Clinton in office and then, by the end of the day, be having these easy conversations supporting Clinton. But that was my job.”

One of the most interesting things in relation to the Giuliani work, according to Hedges, was the de-emphasis of Sept. 11.

“We were told not to emphasize anything about September 11th,” he said. “Matter of fact, on September 10, 11 and 12, we stopped making calls to New York and the New Jersey area. We thought that would probably be his strong asset. That’s where he got his national name, but he didn’t want anything to do with it.”

The call script, which provided information on a wide variety of issues, did not include references to that date and those making calls were instructed not to include it in the pitch.

“They really wanted us to stress Rudy’s record on crime,” he said. “They wanted the people we called to know that Rudy was tough on crime and had reduced it by 66 percent when he served as mayor.”

Those called were also informed that by helping Giuliani get on the airwaves with advertising, they would help bring the Republican message to the nation, which would help all Republicans in the race.

“It was important for us to connect Giuliani’s message with the overall Republican message,” he said. “By Rudy being the front runner, when money was given to him, the callers were told they could help propel the Republican message and help other members — and then you’d mention other candidates like Mitt Romney or Mike Huckabee. I personally liked to use Huckabee because he simply wasn’t that well known at the time. We wanted the callers to feel like that by giving to Rudy, that by supporting Rudy, they were helping the Republican cause.”

And, it worked. Hedges estimated that during the first month alone, the call center brought in several thousand dollars for the Giuliani campaign. He was hesitant to estimate how much might have been raised during the entire time the call center was contracted.

“Rudy Giuliani pulled all of his support out of Iowa — for fundraising — no rhyme or reason,” he said. “He just pulled the plug.”

Hedges, who left employment shortly after Giuliani pulled support, says his departure from the call center was a “mutual decision,” but otherwise didn’t get into specifics. He has since found another job not associated with politics and, since leaving his former employer, has decided that on Thursday night he will be attending the Democratic caucus and utilize his skills of persuasion for Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd.

The Obama campaign reported that since announcing his presidential candidacy earlier this year, Obama had received donations from 1,864 Iowans. Of those donations, 1,737 or some 93 percent were less than $200 each.

“Each donation to this movement is a show of commitment to the idea that we can change our politics and elect a leader who will inspire and unite this country,” said Josh Earnest, Obama’s Iowa communications director. “Senator Obama doesn’t accept contributions from Washington lobbyists or PACs, so small contributions from average Americans are the foundation of this effort. We are thrilled that thousands of people across Iowa contributed to this movement for change.”

Former Sen. John Edwards campaign reported strong Iowa contributions as well.

Dan Leistikow, Edwards’ Iowa communications director, told Iowa Independent that nearly 2,500 Iowans have donated to Sen. Edwards’ campaign for president.

He said 2,468 contributions came from Iowa in the first two quarters of 2007, and 2,355 are less than $200.  He also added that 2,004 donations or some 95 percent were less than $50.

“According to the FEC Iowans have given more to Senator Edwards than any other Democratic candidate.  But this is not a fundraising contest. It’s a contest of issues and ideas and who would be the strongest Democratic nominee for President,” Leistikow said.  “There’s a long way to go, but Senator Edwards is in a strong position and will continue to make his case to Iowans as they make this important decision.”

Tom Reynolds, the communications director for New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson’s Iowa campaign, declined to release figures on Iowa donors.

“Our efforts in Iowa are focused on grassroots campaigning, not raising money,” Reynolds said. “We are talking to the voters about the issues and growing strong political support throughout the state.”

Obama’s campaign has touted itself as a grassroots movement with support from hundreds of thousands of Americans. The campaign reports that in the past five months it has received contributions from more than 258,000 Americans.

Obama’s campaign is unique in its fund-raising because it sells merchandise such as hats and keychains.

Tommy Vietor, Obama’s press secretary in Iowa, told the Des Moines Register that the campaign counts merchandise sales as donations but that there aren’t any tricks or gimmicks involved when it comes to the reporting of donors.

“The fact that we’ve sold so many items is a testament to the excitement we’ve generated,” he told the Register.