"That's not much different than Rep. Shadegg (R-AZ), seeking Delay's old position, said of his competitors: Yeah, I took, but I didn't take as much as they did."
From capitaleye:
Contributions to Roy Blunt (R-Mo) Total = $8,500
Recipient Donor Total Cycle
Rely on Your Beliefs, Leadership PAC of Roy Blunt (R-Mo) Abramoff, Jack A & Pamela $1,000 2004
Rely on Your Beliefs, Leadership PAC of Roy Blunt (R-Mo) Abramoff, Jack A & Pamela $1,000 2002
Rely on Your Beliefs, Leadership PAC of Roy Blunt (R-Mo) Abramoff, Jack A & Pamela $6,500 2000
Contributions to John Boehner (R-Ohio) Total = $30k
Recipient Donor Total Cycle
Freedom Project, Leadership PAC of John Boehner (R-Ohio) Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians $5,000 2004
Freedom Project, Leadership PAC of John Boehner (R-Ohio) Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians $2,000 2002
Freedom Project, Leadership PAC of John Boehner (R-Ohio) Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana $10,000 2004
Freedom Project, Leadership PAC of John Boehner (R-Ohio) Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana $5,000 2002
Freedom Project, Leadership PAC of John Boehner (R-Ohio) Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians $1,000 2004
Freedom Project, Leadership PAC of John Boehner (R-Ohio) Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians $1,000 2002
Freedom Project, Leadership PAC of John Boehner (R-Ohio) Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians $5,000 2000
Freedom Project, Leadership PAC of John Boehner (R-Ohio) Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe $1,000 2002
Shadegg isn't on the list, so it appears he didn't get any.
Shadegg also has some good ratings from various Conservative sources:
House candidates' ratings
The Washington Times ^ | January 28,2006 | The Washington Times - Editoria
Posted on 01/28/2006 9:07:14 AM PST by Seattle Conservative
The editorial page of The Washington Times has reviewed the interest-group and ideological ratings and rankings of the three Republican House members -- John Boehner of Ohio (first elected in 1990), John Shadegg of Arizona (1994) and Roy Blunt of Missouri (1996) -- seeking the post of House majority leader, which Tom DeLay permanently vacated recently.
>snip
Mr. Shadegg, who has compiled five 100% ratings in 10 years from the American Conservative Union (ACU), has a lifetime ACU rating of 97.6. With four 100% ratings over 14 years, Mr. Boehner's lifetime ACU rating is 93.4. Mr. Blunt, who has received two 100% ratings from the ACU in eight years, has a lifetime rating of 92.9. Over the latest three years (2002-2004), the average annual ACU scores have been: 98.7, Shadegg; 94.7, Blunt; and 90.7, Boehner.
>snip
The National Taxpayers Union (NTU), whose mission is the pursuit of limited government and low taxes, has issued a "fiscal snapshot" for the leader's race. For 2004, NTU gave Mr. Shadegg an A, Mr. Blunt a B and Mr. Boehner a B+. NTU reports the following "lifetime percentage of A ratings": Shadegg, 90%; Boehner, 14%; Blunt, 0%.
>snip
On the liberal end of the ideological continuum, Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), which selects 20 key votes each year, reports that none of the three candidates supported an ADA position in 2005, 2004 or 2002.
>snip
The candidates' lifetime AFL-CIO ratings are: Blunt, 9.5%; Boehner, 3.6; and Shadegg, 2.5. Their lifetime ratings from the ACLU are: Shadegg, 14.2%; Blunt, 12.2; and Boehner, 8.9.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
In addition,
National Journal derives composite conservative and liberal scores. In 2004, Mr. Shadegg's composite conservative score was 94.5, compared to 85.5 for Mr. Boehner and 80.3 for Mr. Blunt. On the other hand, Mr. Blunt, who achieved a perfect composite conservative score in 2002, recorded a composite conservative score of 90.3 in 2003, compared to 87 for Mr. Boehner and 74.8 for Mr. Shadegg.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1566867/posts
WALLACE: Congressman Shadegg, we've been talking about your two rivals' history with lobbyists. Frankly, you have a history, too, and let's put that up on the screen, if we can.
You've returned $6,900 in campaign contributions from sources connected to Jack Abramoff. You held fund-raisers at sporting events in suites provided by an Abramoff associate. And in 2002 you wrote to the interior secretary taking a position that benefited Abramoff's Indian tribe clients.
Question, are you the man to clean up the House?
SHADEGG: Well, my record is dramatically different, quite frankly, than theirs. That number for me is a fraction of what it is for either one of them. But I never took a dime from Jack Abramoff.
What happened in my instance was there was one individual who happened to have previously worked for the House who came to me and proposed each of those events. I had no idea that Jack Abramoff was involved in any way, shape or form. And more importantly, the minute I discovered last year, in December, that there were links to Mr. Abramoff, long before he was indicted, I returned all of that money either to the tribes that were involved or gave it away to charities with regard to the money that came from Abramoff's associates.
Neither of my opponents have returned all of that money. And indeed, you know, I believe my record in terms of the level of taint that's there is dramatically different from either of them.