Three Little Words
Monday, January 10, 2000
The three most important words in the English language are: "I Love You." Except in a Presidential election year when the three most important words in the English language are: "Cash On Hand." Bradley has it. Gore doesn't. The Republican National Committee has it. The Democratic National Committee doesn't.
The Clinton/Gore re-election team's outrageous fundraising activities so soured the American people on campaigns, one effect has been a serious decline in the number of people who are participating in the three dollar check-off on income tax returns.
That means neither Bradley nor Gore will get as much matching money as they had hoped as early as they had hoped to get it. They have no one to blame but Al Gore.
Senator Bradley's strong edge in Cash On Hand means trouble for Vice President Gore, probably not enough to deny him the nomination, but almost certainly enough to deny him the Presidency.
Why? Because in spite of the drumbeat of Gore's Guys around Washington last week that "Bradley HAS to win in New Hampshire," Bradley's bank balance says otherwise. With his Cash On Hand, Bradley can stay in this thing - probably until California - which means Gore will have to spend every dime he can raise, borrow (or otherwise get his hands on) just to get the nomination.
This has happened before but the Clinton money-raising machine has kicked in to refill the tanks. It's not, according to an excellent article by Rick Berke in Sunday's NY Times, going to happen this time.
Berke's front pager points out the problems the Democrats are having raising money at the national level. This, from Berke's piece: "The concern is a real one," said Alan Solomont, a veteran Democratic fund-raiser who was the national party's finance chairman in 1997. "I don't think our fund-raising operation as a party has really kicked into high gear. Democrats need a little kick in the behind. The problem is we have a relatively small base of donors and so much is asked of them. A lot of us are stretched."
Here's the most important part of that statement by a well-known Democratic fund raiser: � we have a relatively small base of donors." The Republican party has been saying that for 283 years - since about 1717 - without much traction in the national press corps. The GOP has a fund-raising base of millions of small donors, in spite of the bad rap as the party of fat cats. The Democrats have ALWAYS depended on a much smaller group of much larger donors.
Berke's story gets worse, or better depending upon whether or not it is your ox being stabbed. The Democratic National Committee has not been able to find a National Finance Chairman despite three months of a vacancy and many, many entreaties to other well-known names.
The DNC has under $2.5 million Cash On Hand. The RNC's fund raising operation - under the direction of Mel Sembler - has over ten. Even the National Republican Congressional Committee has raised almost $50 million so far this cycle. Why are so many people giving to Rep. Tom Davis' organization if the guarantees about the Republicans losing control of the House of Representatives are so air tight?
What we are talking about, by the way, is that awful soft money that we all hear so much about which goes to activities destructive to our way of life such as phone banks, walk lists, get-out-the-vote efforts, candidate training, and voter education programs.
-- END --
Home | Secret Decoder Ring | Past Issues | Email Rich | Rich Who?
Copyright �1999 Richard A. Galen | Site design by Campaign Solutions.
|
