TresSugar

Biggest Headlines of 2008: Barack Obama Shatters Fundraising Records

CitizenSugar — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 03:00:17 -0800

During his successful bid for the White House, President-elect Barack Obama raised $750 million to help him get there. In 2004, Kerry and Bush brought in a combined $504.2 million during the primaries, and took $74.6 each in public money. But since Obama made the unprecedented and controversial decision to forgo public money, he could keep raking in the money from small and large donors alike.

Only weeks before the election, Obama got some financial (and psychological) momentum when he filed his September fundraising numbers with the FEC: Barack had raised $150 million in September alone. Obama was able to use the money to buy 30-minutes of prime time TV for a special appeal a few days before voters officially went to the polls. Obama spent a total of $240 million on TV ads, compared to John McCain's $126 million and President Bush's previous record of $190 million.

With the extra money, the Obama campaign decided to pay the staff's salaries and health insurance until Dec. 31. Obama's fundraising abilities, one of the biggest stories of 2008 and will surely impact future elections.

Source

Briefing Book! McCain Gets FEC Audit, Obama Gets a Pass

LibertySugar — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 12:00:00 -0800

Campaign Finance: Winner's luck? FEC to audit McCain's campaign but not Obama's. - Donklephant
Lieberman: Lieberman off the hook? Obama camp says "we don't hold any grudges. - Talking Points Memo
Culture: Are the culture wars over? Some evidence that they are not. - Red State
Jobs: Which country has the most employed mothers? Take a guess! - SavvySugar
Military: Why are there any holdouts? New survey shows that 79 percent of nonserving Americans hold a favorable view of the military. - 23/6

Source

Obama Campaign Takes Money Now, Asks Questions Later

CitizenSugar — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 08:00:31 -0700

Is Obama's campaign piggy bank a murky shade of sneakiness? By allowing donors to use prepaid credit cards, which are for the most part untraceable, the Obama campaign could be allowing donors to dodge limits or hide a donor's identity. That combined with a huge chunk of donations being given online, basic security measures to stop illegal or anonymous money from hitting the campaign account are nonexistent. The campaign's solution is to take the money now, and study the list for illegal donations or discrepancies later.

The campaign says the FEC rules don't require screening of the money before it's been accepted, but their methods seem problematic. Recent filings have included donations from the likes of "Doodad Pro." The biggest problem seems to be the prepaid cards, which makes it impossible to check for any of the identity or contribution limits, as well as whether the money is coming from a foreign source, a problem they've faced all campaign. An investigation of the money situation was prompted in part by a $174,800 donation from one person listed in a FEC report - the limit is $2,300. Problematic in itself, but made worse by the fact that the person didn't even do it - someone else was using her name.

This can't be the campaign finance reform Obama's in favor of - can it?

Source

Barack Obama Raises $150 Million in September Alone

LibertySugar — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:00:38 -0700

Today Barack Obama and John McCain must file their September fundraising numbers with the Federal Election Commission; but yesterday, Obama's campaign manager shared some good news with supporters: Barack raised a record of $150 million in September alone.

Perhaps more impressive, the campaign added 632,000 new donors to the cause. The average donation was $86. McCain is busy spending $84 million from the public financing, and the RNC raised an unexpected $66 million in September.

Obama has big plans for the money. He's apparently going to spend $5 million in West Virginia, a state thought to be in the bag for McCain, and he's buying up as much TV time as he can find. While some point to Obama's opt-out of public financing as an unfair advantage, the Obama campaign says they're building a movement for change from the bottom up.

Source

Obama Buys 30 Minutes For Prime Time Appeal: Smart Move?

LibertySugar — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 15:45:34 -0700

On Oct. 29, six days before the election, Barack Obama will appear on at least CBS and NBC to make a final 30-minute case for his candidacy. Obama purchased the large block of national airtime for what is essentially a more personalized, and lengthy, campaign commercial.

Thanks to cheap TV time and lack of campaign finance laws, direct appeals were commonplace during the 1960s and '70s. As the 1952 Republican VP nominee, Richard Nixon, one of the first to appeal to voters directly via TV, gave the infamous "Checkers Speech" denying that he accepted illegal donations. His effort to reach out to voters was essentially successful, as the Eisenhower/Nixon ticket went on to victory. Ross Perot was the last to air low-rated campaign infomercials in 1992.

Networks will offer McCain a similar time at a similar price, but Obama's fund-raising advantage may mean only he has the resources. Obama often makes his message demographic specific, for example buying ads on MTV. By appealing to the entire nation, Obama can convey a unified message. I'm still left wondering what details he has up his sleeves for the mega-ad. An economy-heavy speech would have an historical hook, considering Oct. 29 marks the anniversary of Black Tuesday, the start of the Great Depression.

Source

Don't Look Now! Both Campaigns Take Money From Foreigners

LibertySugar — Thu, 21 Aug 2008 06:00:02 -0700

Back when Elton John put on a concert for Hillary Clinton, we learned that presidential candidates cannot take money from foreign donors. But Barack Obama and John McCain won't let a silly rule get in the way of their fundraising momentum. A little investigating by the Associated Press revealed that both candidates accept overseas money, saving the crucial details for later.

Out of 123 overseas donors interviewed, only five said that either the McCain or Obama camp asked to see their passports as required by the FEC. In addition, three non-citizens had successfully donated to Obama. One Canadian Obama fan even wrote a note with his donation that said, "I am not an American citizen!" The contribution (and the note!) got entered into Obama's records. To see how other foreign money sneaks in, read more.

Other donors take a sneaky approach, entering fake passport numbers when they give online. After the AP uncovered the errors, the Obama campaign said it would return the money.

Hoping to ward off foreign influence, campaign finance laws allow candidates to accept contributions only from citizens or green card holders. But the sheer amount of donors makes it difficult for the candidates to follow the letter of that law. McCain's camp admits it's unfeasible to ask overseas web-donors to send copies of their passports. Should the official policy adopt the "honor system" routine practiced by both candidates?

Source

Troops Overseas Give More Money to Obama by 6 to 1

LibertySugar — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 06:00:32 -0700

US troops deployed overseas give six times as much money to Barack Obama, compared to John McCain. The Center for Responsive Politics, which conducted the giving-analysis, also made conclusions about the military's overall contribution pattern:

Despite McCain's status as a decorated veteran and a historically Republican bent among the military, members of the armed services overall - whether stationed overseas or at home - are also favoring Obama with their campaign contributions in 2008, by a $55,000 margin. Although 59 percent of federal contributions by military personnel has gone to Republicans this cycle, of money from the military to the presumed presidential nominees, 57 percent has gone to Obama.

Some military personnel might give to the Republicans but not McCain. The totals only include donations over $200, since smaller contributions are not reported to the FEC. Thus, the study explains that "these figures are likely to disproportionately represent the mood of officers, who have more disposable income to spend on politics than do the lower ranks. But because young people tend to be more liberal than their elders, the total dollar figures could lean even more in Obama's favor."

This month, John McCain spoke to disabled veterans in Las Vegas. To see some video of the speech, and to find out how the vets received McCain, read more.

The audience of vets gave the presumptive Republican nominee only a halfhearted reception. After the event the local paper interviewed 14 veterans. Only one said he is a certain McCain supporter. What do you think is going on here? Will the vets come out to support McCain with votes, instead of money?

Source

Barack Obama Gets One 527 to MoveOn

LibertySugar — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 11:00:48 -0700

Perhaps bolstering his argument that he wants a purely people-funded campaign, Barack Obama has succeeded in getting progressive group MoveOn to abandon its 527 arm. It will still raise money as a PAC, however, with more restrictions.

In 2004, MoveOn's 527 group spent $20 million. A spokesperson for the group told Talking Points Memo: "This is an affirmation that we, like Senator Obama, believe that this election can be won by ordinary Americans giving small donations."

That will be MoveOn's challenge, as it will no longer be able to raise large amounts from labor unions and max-ed-out individuals whose donations exceed $5,000 limit.

This seems like a smart move. Since Obama has proven successful with small donors, the moral pressure is now on McCain to reject 527s. If McCain cannot persuade his 527 supporters, Obama will still come out looking like he's in control of his more positive movement.

But do you think people will still be upset by Obama's abandonment of the public financing system, a decision that some say proves Obama is just like very other politician?

Source

Obama Refuses Public Financing. What Does This Mean?

CitizenSugar — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:37:29 -0700

I might be a special brand of crazy, but when I woke up to this news this morning, I started hyperventilating: Obama is not accepting public financing.

In shunning each tax-payer's $3 contribution we kick in when we pay our taxes, Obama is the first candidate to do so since Congress passed 1970s campaign finance laws after Watergate in the 1970s. McCain, the Republican nominee in waiting, has already taken steps to accept the public funds in the general election - matching funds that put a cap on how much each candidate can spend.

Obama said of his decision in a video released to supporters:

It's not an easy decision, and especially because I support a robust system of public financing of elections. But the public financing of presidential elections as it exists today is broken, and we face opponents who've become masters at gaming this broken system. And we've already seen that he's not going to stop the smears and attacks from his allies running so-called 527 groups, who will spend millions and millions of dollars in unlimited donations.

There are a million factors to consider:

Does the above statement mean he's going to police all 527s on his behalf, making sure they're silent and not "broken"?
Obama is the best fundraiser this side of an ATM - he's coaxed $265 million in donations so far. But do his supporters want him raising money? Or focusing on being the best, most prepared person for the job?
Last November he said this: “If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election." Is he going back on his word, or should "publicly financed" be in quotes with a winky-face after it?
The campaigns and respective fight/momentum each has had to work with has been vastly different. Obama's been in a grudge match to the death until two weeks ago. That will inspire the wallets of supporters much more than a candidate who's been assured for months, creating an inequity that starting the general election fresh, with public-financing, would solve.

Those are just some of the thoughts that are racing through my tending toward indignant head. What do you think? Is Obama making the best, fairest decision for his own campaign? Is public financing broken like he says? Or did he just cash a blank check made payable to "The Next President of the United States"?

Source

Paying to Play: Who Spent Their Own Bucks on a Campaign?

CitizenSugar — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:00:51 -0800

Now that Ralph Nader's renaissance has sprung the siren-call of a Bloomberg campaign to everyone's lips, it's worth a trip down memory lane - who raided their own piggy banks for a self-financed play for office?

Radar made a list and checked the bank statements twice. Who can forget the 1992 splurge of the granddaddy of self-financing, Ross Perot? But did you know he shelled out $71.2 million for a price of $2.56 per vote?

That's not the most expensive run though - that honor rests on Blair Hull, who ran for US Senate in Illinois in 2004 - against Barack Obama. Oh noes! Mr. Hull sank $28,658,890 million in at a cost of $213.15 per vote. Oh, for context, it wasn't necessarily Obama's brilliance that sunk his campaign. Most think Hull's ship sank after some nasty, terrible details of spousal abuse came out when his divorce papers were unsealed. Turns out you can't buy off public record. . .

Source