During the 2006 election cycle, which resulted in Democrats winning back both the House and the Senate, one of the most effective initiatives to spur Democratic fundraising was the Use It or Lose It campaign. The campaign urged "safe" House Democrats to contribute significant sums to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to put towards bolstering the efforts of Democrats in more competitive races. The end result, as mentioned, was a solid, new Democratic House majority, to which the Use It or Lose It effort no doubt played a helpful role. I'm sure it also played a very helpful role in encouraging Democratic donors to contribute all they could, seeing as many Democratic legislators were leading by example.
Republicans, particularly in the Senate, were much stingier when it came to contributing to their campaign committees. One of my favorite factoids from the '06 cycle was the case of then-Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee Chairman Dick Shelby:
Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee Chairman Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) gave $15,000 to the NRSC, leaving $11.5 million in his account even though he will not face reelection until 2010.
Dick Shelby's actions should be regarded as a cautionary tale. Back in 2004, Shelby won 68% of the vote against token opposition, spending all of $2.6 million. Keep in mind that he raised $9.3 million during the cycle, hence his current hefty warchest. Though Shelby will be 76 on Election Day 2010, we can assume that, due to his stinginess, he is at least planning on keeping his options open for a re-election bid, if he is not already committed to one. So he will need money. But, given his ability to raise funds and the relative safety of his red-state seat, he most certainly could have afforded to cough up more than $15,000, which is the absolute minimum amount Senators are traditionally expected to contribute to their respective Party's campaign committees.
Would Shelby chipping in, say, a cool $1 million instead of the mere $15,000 have made a difference in 2006? Given that the Senate race in Virginia, in which Democrat Jim Webb bested Republican incumbent George Allen, was decided by only 7,231 votes out of over 2.3 million votes cast, and given that the Senate race in Montana, in which Democrat Jon Tester beat Republian incumbent Conrad Burns, was decided by an even closer 2,847 votes out of over 400,000 votes cast, an extra million dollars to spend by the National Republican Senatorial Committee between Virginia and Montana could have definitely made the difference. It is perfectly rational to suggest that, had Shelby contributed $1 million (that he wouldn't miss anyway) to the NRSC instead of just $15,000, Republicans may have very well held on to both the Virginia and Montana Senate seats and, however slimly, maintained the Senate majority. And Dick Shelby would still be a Committee Chairman, with a hefty campaign bankroll of $10.5 instead of $11.5 million.
(Much more below the fold.)
So here we are at the end of 2007, looking ahead to the 2008 Senate races. With Republicans now defending 23 seats (once Trent Lott resigns), compared to Democrats having to defend 12 seats, and with far more vulnerable seats among those held by Republicans, nobody in their right mind is suggesting that Republicans have a chance to reclaim a Senate majority in 2008. But, given the historic obstructionism by the Republican minority, Democrats' goal shouldn't just be limited to holding the majority; rather, Democrats' goal should be a 60-seat majority to put an end to Republicans' frivolous filibustering. Given the number of vulnerable seats Republicans will also have to defend in 2010, it is a very attainable goal by then. But there is an albeit slim chance that Democrats could achieve that goal in the 2008 cycle. Many stars would have to align, and we would need an even more significant fundraising advantage than we already have. But it's not impossible.
As Republican Senators' stinginess was one of the many reasons for their electoral failures in 2006, it is worth taking a look at how much Senators from both Parties have given so far to their respective campaign committees as they ramp up efforts for 2008. (The figures represent Senators' giving from February 2007 through October 2007 and indicate whether the money came from each Senator's campaign account or leadership PAC.)
| Dem Senator | Amount | Breakdown | GOP Senator | Amount | Breakdown | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ted Kennedy | 515,000 | 500K campaign; 15K PAC | Trent Lott | 115,000 | 100K campaign; 15K PAC | |
| Dianne Feinstein | 250,000 | campaign | Orrin Hatch | 115,000 | 100K campaign; 15K PAC | |
| Tom Carper | 240,000 | 225K campaign; 15K PAC | John Ensign | 100,000 | campaign | |
| Bill Nelson | 150,000 | campaign | Johnny Isakson | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Dan Inouye | 115,000 | 100K campaign; 15K PAC | Lindsey Graham | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Kent Conrad | 115,000 | 100K campaign; 15K PAC | Richard Burr | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Blanche Lincoln | 100,000 | campaign | Thad Cochran | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Jeff Bingaman | 100,000 | campaign | Judd Gregg | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Max Baucus | 100,000 | 85K campaign; 15K PAC | Mike Crapo | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Patty Murray | 100,000 | campaign | Mike Enzi | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Sherrod Brown | 100,000 | campaign | Ted Stevens | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Harry Reid | 85,000 | campaign | Bob Bennett | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Ben Nelson | 65,000 | 50K campaign; 15K PAC | Craig Thomas | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Bob Menendez | 65,000 | 50K campaign; 15K PAC | John Thune | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Debbie Stabenow | 40,000 | 25K campaign; 15K PAC | Richard Shelby | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Byron Dorgan | 25,000 | 10K campaign; 15K PAC | Wayne Allard | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Pat Leahy | 25,000 | campaign | Charles Grassley | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Amy Klobuchar | 15,000 | PAC | Kit Bond | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Joe Biden | 15,000 | PAC | Pat Roberts | 15,000 | PAC | |
| John Kerry | 15,000 | PAC | Elizabeth Dole | 15,000 | campaign | |
| Kent Conrad | 15,000 | PAC | Jim Inhofe | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Mary Landrieu | 15,000 | PAC | Jim DeMint | 15,000 | PAC | |
| Russ Feingold | 15,000 | PAC | Chuck Hagel | 15,000 | campaign | |
| Barbara Mikulski | 10,000 | campaign | Norm Coleman | 7,500 | PAC | |
| Ben Cardin | 10,000 | campaign | Feb-Oct Total | 637,500 | ||
| Maria Cantwell | 10,000 | campaign | ||||
| Richard Durbin | 5,000 | PAC | ||||
| Feb-Oct Total | 2,315,000 |
We see that 27 Democratic Senators have already contributed over $2.3 million to the DSCC, while 24 Republican Senators have given a total of only $637,500 to the NRSC - and all but 3 of those GOP Senators have given the bare minimum $15,000 or less. Republican Senators don't seem too committed to contributing to their own campaign to win Senate seats and fight their way out of their current minority status. And if they won't enthusiastically cough up their own dough, how can Republican donors be too enthused about giving?
While Democratic Senators seem to be fully in the swing of contributing to their collective effort through the DSCC, there are a few names I'm surprised haven't given yet. So let's take a look at the list of Democratic Senators who haven't yet given to the DSCC - excluding freshmen Senators (because they need to raise big bucks to ward off challengers when their first re-election bid comes up), Senators up for re-election in 2008 (because they need those dollars right now for this cycle), and Senators running for President (of course, they should give handily to the DSCC if only to curry favor, but they're obviously focused on other spending at the moment - although, Joe Biden has already given; we're still waiting from Clinton, Dodd, and Obama).
| Senator | Cash on Hand |
|---|---|
| Herb Kohl | 13,483 |
| Daniel Akaka | 147,154 |
| Robert Byrd | 173,146 |
| Ron Wyden | 1,375,806 |
| Barbara Boxer | 2,424,601 |
| Chuck Schumer | 10,212,654 |
| Evan Bayh | 10,503,714 |
It's not surprising to see Senators Kohl, Akaka, and Byrd with small cash-on-hand figures given that all three just finished successful re-election campaigns of their own last year; and, at ages 72, 83, and 90, respectively, it would of course surprise no one if they were to announce their impending retirements when the 2012 election cycle comes up. Senators Wyden and Boxer I don't doubt will give to the DSCC at some point; though, while their campaign funds are in seven figures, they will both need significantly more for their respective re-election bids in 2010, especially Boxer in costly California. Senator Schumer's campaign fund is sitting very comfortably at just over $10 million. As Chair of the DSCC, I have absolutely no doubt that he will contribute handsomely to the effort. It's just that he wants to be strategic with the timing of his contributions; and with the DSCC having outraised the NRSC every single month so far in 2007, he hasn't needed to pop in a chunk of change here or there just yet.
This leaves only Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, whose campaign fund rests at a cool $10.5 million. He will be up for re-election in 2010, so, like Republican Dick Shelby of Alabama, he will need to use some of that campaign cash. Like Shelby, Bayh's last re-election bid in 2004 featured relatively weak opposition, against which Bayh took 62% of the vote and spent only $2.9 million, though he raised $7.6 million during the cycle.
In 2006, Shelby had an eight-figure campaign fund, and Republicans had a clear goal of maintaining their Senate majority. Shelby was stingy, and Republicans (for a number of reasons, though one of which was Republican Senators' stinginess) lost their majority. Now, in 2008, Democrats have a clear goal of reaching a Republican filibuster-proof 60-seat majority (or, at least, positioning themselves well to achieve the 60-seat majority in 2010). 2008 will see a large number of very close Senate races, from high-profile races like Oregon, Maine, Minnesota, and Kentucky to lower-profile but still potentially-very-close races like Texas, North Carolina, Oklahoma and Idaho.
In any of those races, an extra $100,000 here or there for television ads, direct mail, or GOTV can make the difference between a win and a loss, between a vote for cloture and a vote for yet another Republican filibuster. Again like Shelby, we see Senator Bayh sitting on an eight-figure campaign fund for, what is for him, a seemingly very safe seat.
The question, then, becomes will Senator Bayh, like the Republican Shelby before him, chip in the bare minimum $15,000 even though he can afford to contribute so much more, or will Bayh demonstrate a true commitment to Democratic efforts to reach a Republican filibuster-proof 60-seat majority and contribute a heftier sum? With more than $10 million in the bank and a proven ability to raise funds effectively should he face more than token opposition in 2010, I hope Senator Bayh wows us and sends the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee a cool $1 million. (The point of this is not to say that any close victory or defeat will be the result of Senator Bayh's giving, but rather to serve as a call to all Democratic Senators to give as much to the collective effort as they can as every single dollar has the potential to help decide any of these many close Senate races.)
While winning seats is always cause for celebration, it sure would feel bittersweet if, on the morning after Election Day 2008, we saw an incoming 59-seat Democratic majority, with one Senate race having been won by a Republican incumbent by, say, a couple thousand votes out of a few million cast. Senator Bayh is now a subcommittee Chairman on the same Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee of which Shelby used to be Chairman; and Bayh has Shelby's stinginess, in part, to thank for his subcommittee Chairmanship. I hope Senator Bayh has seen how the choices Shelby made (and all Republicans who gave much less than they could have afforded to give) contributed to Republican defeats, and I hope that he and other Senate Democrats will lead Democratic donors by example and contribute as much as they can afford toward efforts to claim a Republican filibuster-proof 60-seat majority.
For daily news and updates on the U.S. Senate races around the country in 2008, check out Senate 2008 Guru: Following the Races.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 21 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
