Clinton's Campaign Debt Could Become An Asset

Politico:

Though Hillary Rodham Clinton racked up more than $30 million in debt during her Democratic primary campaign, she could emerge from her loss with a bundle of campaign cash to either play kingmaker or mount another campaign of her own.

At her disposal are a handful of accounting maneuvers -- some never before tried in presidential politics -- that would render her political debt practically insignificant, while at the same time freeing up $24 million in currently off-limits cash, according to interviews with her lawyer and outside campaign finance experts.

Read the whole story: Politico

Comments

[the964kid]

Interesting article. Some of the plans make sense, but I certainly wouldn't describe being in $30 million of debt as an asset. Wouldn't she have been stronger and better off if she had cash on hand rather then being in the situation she is in? Also the article points out that she'd probably lose most of the $11.4 million she put in. I don't see how that could be a positive thing if you're Hillary Clinton. Even with some restructuring she'll continue to be in debt, and owe some of her 'friendly' vendors money for years to come.

[LaurieLee]

Earlier this year I was (still am) supporting Obama and donated the maximum- $2300 was all the campaign was accepting. Many of my friends who were Clinton supporters gave $4600 to her. When I asked them what would happen to the money if she were not the nominee they would smile at me as though I were an idiot and tell me 'Of course she will be the nominee'.

I don't think you should be allowed to fundraise for the general election before you are the actual nominee.

[larry278]

Sen Clinton has an extremely loyal corps of experts who've already looked at these options & will review them again. There are other options too. Sen Clinton may choose the best of a menu of options at the time when it's best for her. Hillary is smart & smart people advise her. To be crude, Hillary is a sharp cookie.
larry lynch

[Gmoney1]

Whatever - as long as my Obama contributions don't go to pay her debt - after losing eleven or twelve states, she should have taken the "option" of getting out of the race - now, she's a "smart sharp cookie" - give me a break - she's always making dumb decisions, just like voting for the Iraq war - yea, the "elite" always have their "extemely loyal corps of experts" - what a hypocrite -

[vippy]

To let yourself get in debt is SMART. Now I have heard it all. Only in America can we say that and
get away with it. Did your parents not teach you better? Hillary's supporters were mostly from
Operation Chaos and they did not send her a dime. It became clear when she had almost the
same amount of votes than Obama but the money did not add up. Obama was the clear winner
in this. She is a loser all the way around. Let her take care of those little vendors she cheated.

[NotMcCain]

Could someone please explain how her debt became $30 million?

A month ago, the LA Times looked at her numbers and said she owed $31 million (this after, supposedly, "making $10 million overnight after PA".

They had to issue a correction saying that her campaign "mistakenly" entered her $11 million loan "twice".
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/21/clinton-campaign-has-31-m_n_102811.html

So, did her campaign make an "error" or did they lie?

How come the debt now really IS $31 million after all?

And...do these people ALWAYS lie???

[Marcospinelli]

They've been dangling that number for a few days now. We won't know until June 20th what her actual debt is, but I'd guess that it's more than $31 million. Put me down for $45 million in the pool.

[KillTheMessenger]

I see... lawsuits!

[olivia]

In this country if your incompetence is huge enough, you get bailed out.

Ask Bear Stearns.

[vippy]

Or we compensate the incompetent. One can lose 72 billion for the banks and yet the CEO still
gets paid his bonus of 32 millions. Awesome!

[anney]

From the link:

=====

The most aggressive approach would be to redesignate the general election contributions to her Senate committee, transfer her debt to the same account, and then use the general election contributions to pay off the debt.

There’s a budding debate in the campaign finance bar about the legality of such of a maneuver. Some contend it would amount to illegally “laundering” general election contributions to pay off primary election bills. But others assert a 30-year-old Federal Election Commission decision regarding “surplus” campaign cash allows flexibility in the brave new world of privately financed presidential campaigns.

=====

How can Clinton claim a "surplus" of campaign cash when she's so deeply in debt?

Furthermore, even if it's legal for her to transfer GE funds to her primary campaign (and that's VERY questionable), she can't transfer funds of donors to her GE fund who already contributed the maximum $2300 to her primary campaign.