iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Bob Burnett

GET UPDATES FROM Bob Burnett
 

Campaign 2012: Show Me the Money

Posted: 05/04/2012 9:10 am

Six months before the November 6th presidential election, Barack Obama leads Mitt Romney by three percentage points. The most common explanation for the closeness of a race that should be Obama's to lose is the weak economy. Another explanation is the polarization of electorate: the right has solidified behind Romney but the left hasn't embraced Obama with the same fervor. But money is the culprit; Republicans have spent more money to affect the final outcome.

It's estimated that as much as $8 billion will be spent this election cycle. That compares with $3 billion in the 2010 election -- a record for a mid-term election -- and $5.3 billion in 2008. Most observers agree that the reason for the 50 percent increase is the 2010 Supreme Court Citizens United ruling that permitted unlimited political expenditures for independent groups -- corporation and interest-group spending increased by 500 percent in the last mid-term election.

2012 political spending will likely follow the pattern established in 2008; 87 percent of ads will be concentrated in 11 battleground states such as Colorado, Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. If you live in one of these states, you'll be overwhelmed by radio and television commercials.

If you're offended by the humongous amounts of money being spent on political campaigns, you're not alone. A 2010 CBS News/New York Times poll found that 86 percent of respondents felt it was important to limit campaign spending. Nonetheless, Americans are trapped in the byzantine system. To prepare for the ad avalanche, it's useful to examine where the money comes from.

The most authoritative source of information on political funding is OpenSecrets.org. There are four sources of funds for a presidential campaign: donations to a campaign, political Party, or political action committee, and independent expenditures.

According to Open Secrets, as of March 31, Obama had raised $191,671,860 from direct donations compared to Romney's $86,631,381. The Democrats also lead in Party donations ($416,604,408 to the Democratic Party and $175,719,337 to the Democratic National Committee); Republicans reported $340,429,878 to their Party and $141,415,033 to the Republican National Committee. Thus Obama has a $215 million lead over Romney and is well on his way to raising the $1 Billion that his presidential campaign committee has set as its target. While it would seem that the President has a safe fundraising lead over his Republican opponent, that doesn't take into account contributions made to PACs and independent groups.

As of May 1st, Political Action Committees have expended $114, 147,398 and independent groups have spent $20,150,136. The problem for Obama (and Democratic candidates, in general) is that conservatives fund most of these organizations. Open Secrets reports that of the top-ten "Super PACS" (entities that "raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, associations and individuals") the top seven are conservative and the number one Super PAC, "Restore our Future" -- a pro-Romney organization, has raised $53,549,228 - more than the other nine combined.

The Super PACs most often discussed are the Crossroads groups run by Karl Rove: American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS. Rove's objective is to raise $300 million and, so far, he's garnered more than $100 million. The bulk of this will be raised in Crossroads GPS, which was established as a 501(c) (4) "charitable" organization and, therefore, does not have to reveal its donors. (Recently, political commentator Cenk Uygur reported that 90 percent of Crossroads' funds come from 24 conservative donors.) A similar organization is Americans for Prosperity funded by the notorious Koch brothers.

The Washington Post reported that of the political ads run so far, 90 percent -- $28.5 million - have been funded by 501(c) (4) entities that do not have to disclose their donors. That's why, if you look at the list of top donors to outside political spending groups you won't find the names of conservatives Charles and David Koch; we know they are spending millions to defeat Obama, but they are doing it behind the scenes.

To counter this tide, Obama formed his own Super Pac, Priorities USA, which has raised far less than have the conservative Super PACs, $8,995,171

One might argue that the net effect will be that during the 2012 election Republicans will have the same amount of money to spend as Democrats. But a large amount of the Republican funds will not be identified as such; they'll come from organizations like Crossroads GPS and Americans for Prosperity. These groups will continue to run stealth ads blaming Obama for the sputtering economy or high-energy prices or border violence or whatever. That's why Obama thinks he needs to raise $1 billion; to counter the conservative Super PACs and their pernicious stealth attack ads.

One of the most famous quotes of the Vietnam War came after the battle of Ben Tre when a US military officer said, "It became necessary to destroy the town to save it." That's the situation Obama and Democrats are in -- those of us who want to place commonsense limits on political expenditures. In 2012 it may be necessary to destroy the political process in order to save it.

 
FOLLOW POLITICS
 
 
  • Comments
  • 15
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
Bloggerrogr
Fired Up - Ready To Go!
12:40 PM on 05/05/2012
The framers of the Constitution did not intend that there would be political parties. They also designed our 'republican form of government' with a weak President and a Congress that would be directly accountable to it's constituency. Political parties make such an ideal highly unlikely, if not impossible.

"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Time has come to dissolve Congress and start anew. There is already Historical precedent...

FWIW
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ckdogs
Veritas
11:12 AM on 05/05/2012
The process does not have to be "destroyed"; a few sensible tweaks would fix it. Overturn Citizens United, have maximum fund raising amounts matched by govt. funds, mandate that tv stations have to donate free air time to all major candidates for office.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tom Pumroy
practical dreamer-artist Man Ray
10:49 AM on 05/05/2012
I think I can say unequivocally that it is money and its pursuit as a value of worth that has brought about our demise. We sold out better values for lucre and now it's coming home to pay the piper: we are weeping what we have sown, shoulda seen it coming.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alumcreek
sorry to see humanity repeating errors ad nauseam
10:27 AM on 05/05/2012
The policy of destroying a village in order to save it is precisely what the right wing is doing to the USA.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:49 PM on 05/04/2012
Yes I agree, besides we as American citizens have forgotten respect for one another as well as ourrselves.The congress has forgotten they work for us...It needs restructuring: term limits,limited campaign funds(the lobbyists are doing this daily in rooms with the members of congress)mandatory retirement at age 72. Regulated times for bill discussion, and then if it is not decided, dock the congress salary for a day or 2.Also not allow them to leave with work undone by the end of the year.Also mandatory 25% percent women in the congress..
photo
RUKidding0
Freedom is Fundamental
11:46 PM on 05/04/2012
There is no such thing as “ … commonsense limits on political expenditures.”

Indeed, there is nothing about government or politics that is, in any way, associated with common sense.

Political expenditures in any social democratic state MUST be in proportion to to the size and scope of government, itself.

Social democratic government is no longer the problem Reagan correctly identified.

It is now the enemy … of freedom … and must be defeated if freedom is ever to be restored to the American people.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alumcreek
sorry to see humanity repeating errors ad nauseam
10:29 AM on 05/05/2012
If I am in charge and things go wrong, that's just the luck of the draw. If you are in charge and things go well, it is a major catastrophe and must be impeded at all cost
03:49 PM on 05/04/2012
I have heard he actually stands a better chance at winning the campaign. Some others had to drop out, well due to lacking sufficient campaign funds, resources, etc.
photo
Keagan86
Breaking normal thought patterns
12:33 PM on 05/04/2012
My hope for this election is that the us regular citizens finally see where the real power is in Washington, and that no matter how they vote, money is what determines who runs this country. If this system is destroyed we might be able to find new and creative ways for politics.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DustyMills
A liberal tree-hugging Oregonian...
11:46 AM on 05/04/2012
Imagine what this nation could do with 8 billion dollars spent on education or jobs programs..........

When will people notice that our political class is out of control.......in America you can't get elected unless you are wealthy, you can't get elected unless you have the backing of a large group willing to spend millions to defeat your candidate, nor can one win elections when the 25.00 you donate to your candidate pales in comparison to the clout of Citizens United.

We've been hearing about reforming our campaign system for years, but just like the problems with our tax codes, nothing gets done, nor will anything ever get done until we all band together and demand that it happen............
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MassWG
11:01 AM on 05/04/2012
"86 percent of respondents felt it was important to limit campaign spending. Nonetheless, Americans are trapped in the byzantine system."

Trapped only by their own collective laziness, ignorance, stinginess or apathy. Buddy Roemer began his campaign a year ago, taking only donations of $100 or less, on a platform of removing money from politics. Where was the 86%?
photo
ChiBloger
And the truth shall set us ALL free
10:50 AM on 05/04/2012
"Democrats are in -- those of us who want to place commonsense limits on political expenditures. In 2012 it may be necessary to destroy the political process in order to save it."

This statement makes me think of the movie "Aliens".
Given that the Republicans are these powerful and catastrophically destructive Aliens, I would say yes, please, please, destroy the village!
03:54 PM on 05/04/2012
Who promised to use public funds and then broke that promise when he realized he could rake in millions of anonymous, untraceable credit card donations?

Who's trying to raise a billion dollars for an unprecedented smear campaign?

Who's using super pacs after criticizing everybody else for using them?
photo
ChiBloger
And the truth shall set us ALL free
07:19 PM on 05/04/2012
“promised to use public funds and then broke that promise”
Well the magna cum laude Harvard grad is no fool. That was Obama. All those billionaires buying Republican presidential candidates made cleansed him of that one.
“unprecedented smear campaign?”
What are you nuts? Smearing is a Republican SOP. All Barack has to do is tell the truth. Two classes Republican politicians routinely fail are 1) Contemporary American History 2) YouTube.
“Who's using super pacs after criticizing everybody else”
Again that was Obama. The Republican Supreme Court made that absolutely necessary to compete with their “Citizens United” ruling. This confirmed complete corruption into the process. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. And all that Republican money from a couple of handful of sources is confirmation of corruption.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ally Solver
Problem Solver Extraordinaire
10:48 AM on 05/04/2012
Spending $8 billion on a presidential election; how stupid, what a waste.

Whoever is making contributions to the candidates is very stupid and very evil.

Censorship is evil.