The fundraising totals for the RNC and DNC are a lot more even, though: $26 million and $27.7 million respectively.

Obama also managed to pass 2 million donors last month.

Post from: EveryJoe

July Totals Are In

There have been several attempts to rectify the matter since 2003, but none as serious as the current push to pass S.223. S.223 would require Senate candidates to file electronically, providing for both faster and cheaper processing. S.223 has bipartisan support but is being blocked by several senators, including John Ensign (R-NV).

If you’re interested in helping pass S.223, more information is available at pass223.com.

Post from: EveryJoe

Push the Senate to Disclose Electronically

Barack Obama, in contrast, relied on about 500 fundraisers to bundle donations, as well. But Obama’s bundlers brought in only a fifth of the donations that he has collected — a little more than $50 million.

If you look at the list of McCain’s top fundraisers, nearly a fifth of those 500 people are lobbyists (or work for lobbying firms). A lot of the names on the list have connections to to some interesting people, making you wonder just what they expect to get for their donations down the line.

Tom Loeffler, for instance, is listed among McCain’s top fundraisers. Loeffler is also known as the main lobbyist for the Loeffler Group, a lobbying firm. The Loeffler Group’s clients include Saudi Arabia.

Photo — nmfbihop

Post from: EveryJoe

Who’s Funding McCain?

Image details: Obama Campaigns At Virginia School served by picapp.com

Over the weekend, Politico ran a great run down on 5 presidential campaign cash myths. I found one particularly interesting: the fact that lobbyists and PAC aren’t exactly big spenders in presidential campaigns despite all claims to the contrary.

Obama has encouraged this idea to tout his refusal to accept
contributions from federal lobbyists and political action committees
and criticize McCain’s unwillingness to follow suit.

But lobbyists and PACs historically have not been major contributors to
presidential campaigns, and this cycle has been no different.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, McCain through May had received $1.1 million from PACs and $686,000 from employees of lobbying firms. That’s less than two percent of his $110 million total haul (LED) for the campaign.

Post from: EveryJoe

5 Myths On Campaign Money

Image details: served by picapp.com

The Supreme Court has been busy this week. One of the decisions they released was an overturn of the ‘Millionaires’ Amendment’ — a piece of campaign legislation law stating that the opponents of candidates self-financing their runs can accept more donations.

Jack Davis, a 2006 congressional candidate in New York, brought the suit to the Supreme Court, after he lost the race. Davis had spent over $2 million of his own funds to finance his run, but the Millionaires’ Amendment kicked in and his opponent was able to out-fundraise him. The amendment was originally written in order to help less wealthy candidates get fair footing — the idea was to prevent millionaires from outspending other candidates and essentially buying a race.

The Supreme Court overturned the amendment on First Amendment grounds: Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote a majority opinion stating, “The argument that a candidate’s speech may be restricted in order to ‘level electoral opportunities’ has ominous implications because it would permit Congress to arrogate the voters’ authority to evaluate the strengths of candidates competing for office.”

Don’t think that too many candidates are going to be able to pull out their checkbooks and win, though. We saw a pretty good example of how well that doesn’t work in the Republican primary with Mitt Romney spending tens of millions of dollars of his own money.

Post from: EveryJoe

Supreme Court Overturns Millionaires’ Amendment

Image details: Hillary Clinton Holds Primary Night Rally In Indianapolis served by picapp.com

On the tail of the news of Hillary Clinton’s less than spectacular win in Indiana last night and her outright loss in North Carolina comes the news that Clinton loaned even more money to her campaign last month. On top of the $5 million Clinton lent her campaign in January, she transferred an additional $6.425 million over to her campaign in April and May.

It’s becoming a question of good money after bad. Clinton didn’t pull off the spectacular win she predicted last night, and plenty of people just don’t see how she can continue campaigning, especially in light of the fact that Barack Obama’s fundraising efforts are going much better than hers. She can continue to loan the campaign money, but at some point the Clinton checkbook will run dry. We’re not talking about Mitt Romney here — Clinton can’t afford to toss $50 million of her own money at a campaign run.

I think these loans are the beginning of the end, but Clinton won’t go out quietly. She’s like a business owner rifling through her personal savings, her kids’ college funds, and any other money she can get her hands on just to keep her dream alive for a few more days.

Post from: EveryJoe

Clinton Loans Her Campaign Even More Money

Just a week ago, I wrote about Hillary Clinton’s big deficit. The story of this past weekend just drives home the point that her campaign is on poor financial footing. To put it plainly, Clinton hasn’t been paying off her campaign debts. Instead, she’s been spending money on media buys and other attempts to win just a few votes.

I’m all in favor of connecting with as many voters as possible during a campaign, but I think that such a significant debt —$8.7 million owed to a wide variety of vendors — makes Clinton a far worse candidate. If an individual can’t manage the finances of a campaign, how well will she be able to manage the budget of an entire nation?

And who does Clinton owe money to? There’s a list of high-priced consultants, but there are far more small companies and organizations. Politico broke it down:

She owed Iowa’s Sioux City Art Center Board of Trustees $3,500 for catering and venue costs, New Hampshire’s Winnacunnet Cooperative School District $4,400 in event costs, Qwest $24,000 for phone service, various branches of the Iowa-based supermarket chain Hy-Vee $15,000 for food, beverages and catering, and $7,700 to Ohio and Massachusetts branches of the theatrical stage employees’ union, for equipment costs.

In fact, about a third of the nearly 700 individual debts Clinton reported at the end of February were for various types of “event expenses,” including $319,000 for catering and venue costs, $420,000 for equipment, $11,000 for photography and $9,000 for security.

Politics boils down to trust. If Clinton is losing the trust of the companies she relies on to run her campaign, how long until she loses the voters’ trust too?

Post from: EveryJoe

Hillary’s Horrible Money Problem

One word that always gets thrown around during campaign season is “deficit.” There’s a pretty general consensus that deficits are bad — just like debts in general. I certainly can’t think of a candidate who’s promised to raise deficits after all.

I’m concerned, though, about Hillary Clinton’s willingness to spend her campaign into her own personal little deficit — totaling $8,733,609 at the end of February.
Voters have to ask how much of a deficit is Clinton is willing to run up as President if she lets her own campaign get in so much debt. It’s not even a party issue — we’re facing a recession and big deficits can cripple an economy.

As a contrast, Barack Obama’s campaign has only about $600,000 in debts. John McCain is at $4,340,981. Clinton is definitely leading the pack.

She’s struggling with fundraising, as well: according to the Wall Street Journal, Obama had almost three times the cash on hand as Clinton at the end of February. She had approximately $11 million, with $3.7 million owed to various vendors. Is the race for the Democratic nomination about to come down to who can pay their bills?

Post from: EveryJoe

Hillary’s Campaign Deficit

The FEC wants to have some words with the senator from Arizona, and he, in return, wants to have some very different words. The FEC is of the opinion that McCain may have already violated some of the terms of the public financing laws with a bank loan earlier in the campaign (discussed in detail in this Talking Points Memo post). McCain is attempting to withdraw from the public financing system while the FEC is trying to discuss the loan. The real question here is whether a candidate is legally allowed to use public funds for their campaign and then pull out of the public financing system when it becomes convenient.

My knowledge of election law is pretty limited, but it seems to me that if a candidate can do just that then the system is beyond flawed and is just another way for the FEC to take some abuse.

Photo Credit

Post from: EveryJoe

John McCain and the Money: Ongoing Public Financing Issues

This is our last Financial Profile Friday of a single candidate for the primaries. We’ve covered everybody else in the race, although we’ll continue to touch base with how campaigns are spending money. As the primaries draw nearer, the FEC has candidates reporting on a monthly basis, rather than a quarterly basis, so we’ll have more information to look at.

Mike Huckabee is turning into the little train that could — despite lagging in funding from the start, he’s still in the race. Huckabee says that he’s going to stay in the running until the Republicans hold their nominating convention. He doesn’t seem to be in it to win, but to keep certain issues under discussion. So far, he’s raised $12.9 million, compared to John McCain’s $53.7 million. Even Ron Paul, who’s getting a lot less press than Huckabee, has raised $32.6 million.

Huckabee’s ‘big donors’ aren’t individuals associated with banks or industries, like the other candidates. His third biggest is Kenneth Copeland Ministries — individuals associated with this religious nonprofit have donate $18,320. Keep in mind that while individuals associated with non-profits like churches can make donations, they cannot make endorsements — see Taxgirl’s post earlier this week for more information. Huckabee is also getting backing from plenty of individuals who work for the State of Arkansas, his current employer. That pushes the State of Arkansas to his 5th largest donor group, with $12,150.

Huckabee’s campaign spending is pretty lean by necessity. He’s spent just over $12 million, but has managed to keep his administrative costs down to 31 percent of his spending. Most campaigns seem to hover at about 50 percent for administrative expenses (McCain is at 52 percent, Hillary Clinton is at 53 percent). Huckabee is making an effort to direct all of his spending into buying media time: $1.4 million alone has gone for buying broadcast spots.

Whether or not I agree with Huckabee’s politics, I have to say that his use of campaign funds has been amazingly effective, even when he made early missteps.

Post from: EveryJoe

Financial Profile Friday: Mike Huckabee