More Than $1 Billion Donated So Far To Presidential Candidates

A milestone in the intersection of money and politics was reached last month: more than $1 billion has been donated to candidates running for the White House.

The total, first reported by the Center for Responsive Politics, includes money that some candidates (Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney) gave to their own campaign. Nevertheless, added up, the $1,001,204,469 in cash offered to the presidential aspirants represents a historic amount of loot. In 2004, the total amount given topped out at $884 million. In 2000, it was $528 million.

But just how significant is the current haul? While the total represents more money than the GDP of at least 23 countries, it is a pittance compared to the amount spent by companies like, say, McDonald's on corporate advertising.

"It is the first time the candidates themselves have raised more than a billion and we are not into the general election," said CRP's Massie Ritsch. "On the one hand it is more money than anyone really imagined presidential candidates could raise or think they needed. On the other hand Americans will spend more money eating out in restaurants today than the candidates have raised so far."

Other watershed marks have been reached in the world of political financing. Sen. Barack Obama currently has raised more than $287 million for his campaign, besting the previous primary total of George W. Bush in 2004: $269.6 million. Meanwhile, John McCain passed the $100 million threshold, making this election the first time that four candidates (Obama, Clinton, Romney, McCain) have hit that mark.

And yet, the role of cash in this election seems likely only to grow greater, as Obama has announced that he will become the first candidate since Watergate to forgo public funding in the general election. How much money, exactly, did the Senator pass up? According to Ritsch, with public funds Obama would have only been able to spend $1.2 million dollars a day - a "restriction" he no longer will have to contend with. Seem unreasonable? "Here's how much a few major corporations spend per day on advertising alone, based on a recent article in the Washington Post," noted the Center.

* Procter and Gamble: $13.4 million
* AT&T: $9.15 million
* Ford: $7 million
* Johnson & Johnson: $6.27 million

Comments

[bazokbros]

08:32 AM on 06/25/2008

What I remember as kid was that when America was formed the intention distribution of power to the people was the common man had just as much say as the wealthy.Everyone standing on the stage in this photo are millionaires, with the least wealthy, Obama and Huckabee. Yet it's interesting these two are some of the most popular. You shouldn't have to be a multi-millionaire to make a serious bid for office, but the reality is it's necessary. One of the stupidest election ads I've seen recently is Diane Feinstein's recent re-election ad with her granddaughter. The ads said nothing about her positions except save the whales. I wonder how many struggling families in CA paying $5/gal for gas and seeing their jobs disappear give a crap about something so esoteric?

A billion dollars will be a drop in the bucket as far as what's spent unless there are some serious reforms to the election process. When Donald Trump gets standing ovations entering a baseball stadium mainly for being wealthy, we the people have turned our souls and lives over to the wealthy. I'll be the first to say wealthy people don't need to apologize for their wealth, but wasn't that sorta the purpose of the Revolutionary War and emancipating from England?

[BLinCincinnati]

08:53 AM on 06/25/2008

Your memory is faulty or you were taught poorly. The original distribution of power went to people of wealth. You had to be a white male owning a certain amount of land to be eligible to vote. Over half the white men in the country were originally not eligible to vote. Nor were free blacks, woman, or even those that were not Protestant.

"I'll be the first to say wealthy people don't need to apologize for their wealth, but wasn't that sorta the purpose of the Revolutionary War and emancipating from England?"

Uh... no. Not even close.

[eden4barack08]

06:21 AM on 06/25/2008

There's the recession!

[BardEric]

02:53 AM on 06/25/2008

Amazing that we as a society can sit by and watch a campaign system that gobbles up money faster than Oprah at an all you can eat buffet. Where is the outrage of the american people as year after year we waste more and more money on political campaigns?

[BLinCincinnati]

08:59 AM on 06/25/2008

Waste?!?

I'm sure the people that work in the numerous industries that have earned money from the campaign efforts don't feel it was a waste. I bet that guy that runs the printing press for all those mailers, banners, posters, and signs didn't think his salary was a waste. I bet that woman who's small catering outfit served food at an event didn't think her income was a sate. Or that guy that did stage set up at some townhall, or the guy working a phone bank doing polls for a campaign, or the guy renting out office space to a campaign, or the thousands of other people who's income was benefitted by that money.

None of it was "wasted". It is being spent in the US, for US products, on US workers. The money didn't evaporate. It went to pay the salaries of thousands of US workers.

[BardEric]

02:39 PM on 06/26/2008

Evidently you are operating under the false assumption. The majority of campaign staff-workers are volunteers who dont recieve a salary of any kind..ADVERTISING nd travel expenses are the number one drain in the coffers, NOT payroll.Ask our low-income families in this country if they can eat, or pay their house payment with advertising..Or if the universal heath-care coverage that this county supposedly cant afford to provides them could be paid for in part with a billlion or so dollars..

[mergina]

02:21 AM on 06/25/2008

The entire process is obscene, a fiasco, a bath for the greedy. If you do not believe that America as you may have known it if you are old enough, is gone forever, dream on.

[jacqmac]

02:02 AM on 06/25/2008

This is the FIRST CAMPAIGN EVER that the DEMOCRATS have had STAFF in ALL FIFTY STATES! That's RIGHT-STAFF in ALL FIFTY STATES! This is making the Republicans extremely NERVOUS! Not only does McCain have to DEFEND EVERY STATE he also has to spend MORE TIME raising $$ for his stuttering campaign! The DEMOCRATS WILL WIN and BIG TIME in November! This is also the FIRST CAMPAIGN that I can recall that the Democratic Candidate is being wholly and COMPLETELY funded BY THE PUBLIC. NOT by the mere pittance that the so-called Public Campaign Fund wil give him, but BY THE PEOPLE WHO WILL VOTE FOR HIM and other Democrats. THIS IS A PEOPLE'S ELECTION!

[ErnestineBass]

01:06 AM on 06/25/2008

Madness.

[ohiomark]

11:38 PM on 06/24/2008

Money that would be better spent on a couple of sports teams.

[KQuarksSuperKollider]

11:38 PM on 06/24/2008

Following is how 0bama has spent his money up until May 27th. Less than half has gone to his media campaign.

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/expend.php?cycle=2008&cid=n00009638

Administrative Salaries & Benefits $31,085,561
Travel $21,474,485
Miscellaneous Administrative $7,975,746
Rent/Utilities $7,215,310
Postage/Shipping $6,114,304
Supplies, Equipment & Furniture $3,072,198
Administrative Consultants $914,825
Food/Meetings $428,863
Campaign Expenses Campaign Events $10,969,461
Polling/Surveys/Research $10,564,418
Materials $4,655,154
Political Consultants $998,567
Miscellaneous Campaign $281,446
Campaign Direct Mail $115,871
GOTV $65,000
Contributions Contrib Refunds $1,042,248
Parties (Fed & Non-federal) $30,690
Candidates (Fed & Non-federal) $3,135
Committees (Fed & Non-Federal) $430
Fundraising Fundr Direct Mail/Telemarketing $16,673,990
Fundraising Consultants $833,887
Miscellaneous Fundraising $801,140
Fundraising Events $162,990
Media Broadcast Media $86,786,731
Internet Media $6,393,767
Print Media $5,263,142
Miscellaneous Media $1,133,690
Media Consultants $50,225
Other Charitable Donations $18,355
Transfers Federal Transfer $7,002
Uncoded not yet coded $21,679
Unknown Insufficient Info $365,323

[AnotherTry]

07:33 AM on 06/25/2008

That's obscene. No candidate for the people would be so lavish.

http://www.youtube.com/user/msbuch72

[nellie]

09:20 AM on 06/25/2008

Lavish? It's all campaign spending. And let's be glad it's coming from a million and a half donors.

It shouldn't cost so much to run for office. Free television ads would change the cost significantly.

[olivia]

09:27 AM on 06/25/2008

Be real. The other candidates spend like this. He cannot win without spending money unless the system is changed.

[mlaiuppa]

10:23 PM on 06/24/2008

Now *there's* a stimulus package.

[Shaddup]

09:38 PM on 06/24/2008

Can we have it back for the infrastructure now?

[mergina]

02:27 AM on 06/25/2008

Haaaaaaaaa! Really. Is there a clause when donating asking if you want to donate 2-20% to flood victims or fire victims or farmers who have lost everything or the unemployed? This 'mine is bigger than yours' approach to choosing a leader of the free world is putrid. Does anyone out there really think that Obama or McCain are the two best prospects in this country to be a president? I know people sitting in coffee houses every morning who would make better leaders of the free world.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$Now make $$$$$$$ure you all $$$$$$$$$$vote in the $$$$$$$$$$coming election $$$$$$$$because you know Obama has the world $$$$$$$$CHANGE$$$$$$$$ in his slogan and $$$$$$$mCCain$$$, well MCCain has some really good barbecues...$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[nogimmicks]

09:00 PM on 06/24/2008

Well, just Exxon Mobile makes 40 B of profit a year thank to Bush's policies . If you add amazing profits of the war-related companies, and the banks getting helped by the taxpayer money, it will become apparent that 1B was worth investing.

[americanalien]

08:36 PM on 06/24/2008

MONEY! MONEY! MONEY! This country is wealthy.

[AbbieXHoffman]

08:34 PM on 06/24/2008

I think Obama should have take the public finanicing, not because he pledged to do so--I really don't care about that. He should take it because

1. He would have more than enough to run and the election won't be over who has more money, but who do people really want more to win.
2. Congresspeople and senators aren't going to be able to raise this kind of money Obama has. His pledging to use public financing helps to even the paying field for regular congressional campaigns as well.
3. Where is the $3 for those of us that gave to public financing for this election going to then? Are they going to give it back to us?
4. Us dumping more money into either campaign at this point is unecessary. We could keep it for our gas tanks.

I am still voting for Obama, but this amount of money could be better spent on gas or charities. Its sort of a waste.

[ahsaki80]

10:08 PM on 06/24/2008

Um, you've missed the whole point. We want to defeat the Republicans this year and a financial advantage would definitely help! It won't be until we get a Dem back in the WH that the country feels relief from our current recession.

[realtalk]

11:35 PM on 06/24/2008

JOHN McCAIN HAS AT LEAST 22 PEOPLE WORKING FOR HIS CAMPAIGN, THAT HAVE LOBBIED FOR BIG OIL:

OIL COMPANIES ROB CONSUMERS BLIND WITH HELP FROM POLITICIANS LIKE JOHN McCAIN.


BIG OIL LOBBYIST WORKING ON JOHN McCAIN'S CAMPAIGN:


1. Rebecca Anderson (LOBBYIST FOR: Sunoco)

2. Wayne Berman ( LOBBYIST FOR: CHEVRON, TEXOCO, AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE.

3. Charlie Black (LOBBYIST FOR: OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM CORP. , YUKONS OIL CHINESE NATIONAL OFF-SHORE OIL CORPAL PETROLEUM CORP.

4. Carlos Bonilla (LOBBYIST FOR: CHESAPEAKE ENERGY)

5. Eric Burgeson (LOBBYIST FOR: BP)

6. Kerry Cammack (LOBBIST FOR: Exxon Mobil)

7. Frank Donatelli (LOBBIST FOR: Exxon Mobil Dominion Resources )

8. Melissa Edwards (LOBBIST FOR: CHESAPEAKE ENERGY)

9. John Green (LOBBIST FOR: Amerada-Hess, CHEVON, TEXACO, EL PASO ENERGY, American Petroleum Institute)

10. Robert Harding (LOBBYIST FOR: CHEVON, MURPHY OIL PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY)

11. Richard Hohlt (LOBBYIST FOR: CHEVON)

12. James "Jim" Hyland (LOBBYIST FOR: BP, America Independent Fuel Terminal Operators Assoc., OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM CORP., Independent Fuel Terminal Operators Assoc.)

13. Peter Madigan (LOBBYIST FOR: SHELL OIL)

14. Susan Molinari (LOBBYIST FOR: CHESAPEAKE ENERGY)

15. Jack Oliver (LOBBYIST FOR: SHELL OIL)

16. Nancy Pfotenhauer (LOBBYIST FOR: Koch Industries)

17. Steve Phillips (LOBBYISTS: BP America, OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM)

18. Elise Pickering (LOBBYIST FOR: KOCH INDUSTRIES)

19. Sloan Rappoport (LOBBYIST FOR: KOCH INDUSTRIES)

20. Matt Salmon (LOBBYIST FOR: El Paso Energy)

21. Randy Scheunemann (LOBBYIST FOR: BP, AMOCO)

22. Jeffrey Weiss (LOBBYIST FOR: YUKON OIL COMPANY) SOURCE


SOURCE: [Senate Lobbying Disclosure Database]


http://mccainsource.com/corruption?id=0014

[AbbieXHoffman]

11:53 PM on 06/24/2008

I must not have made myself clear in my post. I seem to have incited something in you to think I am a McCain supporter??!?!! I like Obama, want him to win, I just don't know if having a $$ advantage is going to help that much. Obama's clearly going to beat the pants off McCain.

[KQuarksSuperKollider]

12:10 AM on 06/25/2008

Great list thanks. McBush is wholly owned and operated by lobbyists. Anyone who remotely thinks he is a reform candidate is fooling themselves.

[sophistwatch]

08:09 PM on 06/24/2008

That is the highest price per pound for organic fertilizer ever paid. And what do we have to show for it?

Just think, if you bought real manure, you could pay $25.00 for a few 50 pound bags and and you would get way more for your money than you do with the whole lot these imbeciles. And real manure will actually help your garden grow.

Hiring these guys to talk to your plants would cost a fortune and they would kill your plants immediately from methane poisoning.

Maybe the politicians should be selling their excess gas to the oil companies. That way we would all be paying about 5 cents a gallon.

[GuiltyByStander]

07:31 PM on 06/24/2008

"... it is a pittance compared to the amount spent by companies like, say, McDonald's on corporate advertising."

I've never understood the connection. Are we saying. "Our politicians are as crappy as a MacDonald's hamburger, but enough money will sell anything?" Or "We are so stupid that the images have to be hammered into our heads." Or "There is so little difference among candidates that they need a decisive marketing edge." Or "Government is just another form of business."

Why do we use electoral politics to move a billion dollars from public pockets to private? Other countries escape this folly by limiting the duration of the election.