On the eve of the
50 State Canvass I thought it would be appropriate to look at how the 50 State Strategy is doing. We know that Democrats are running for Congress in record numbers, check out the
Barry Welsh site, but that is only a small measure of success for Democrats. If a candidate doesn't have adequate resources then it is only marginally better than not having a candidate running especially if the candidate is flawed in some major way. In WA we call that candidate, Mike the Mover, a man who periodically runs for office in order to advertise his moving business. More frustrating is having a great candidate who doesn't have the money. In this evaluation of the 50 State Strategy I look at those Democratic House candidates who have raised at least $100,000 by the end of the 1st quarter of 2006 who are either challenging Republican Incumbents or are running for open seats vacated by Republican Incumbents.
Caveats:
$100,000 is an arbitrary cutoff, it doesn't mean that Democratic candidates who haven't raised at least $100,000 won't raise the money they need to compete but it is a good indication that at least these candidates will be able to raise enough money to compete. Plus, DemocraticLuntz already did most of the work picking those candidates out.
In Congressional Districts with more than one Democratic candidate running, the candidate with the highest totals was used for 2006, same for Republicans. For 2004, only the numbers of the Democratic nominee are used, same for Republicans.
Anomalies are ignored in all cases. There are enough races that any anomalies aren't significant enough to invalidate any conclusions. Some examples, in 2004 TX-32 , due to redistricting a Democratic incumbent faced a Republican incumbent and in NY-26 the candidate put $1,000,000 of his money into his campaign. In 2006 we have both the CA-50 race and the TX-22 race. Anomalies tend to happen every year.
Every effort has been made to insure the accuracy of these numbers. In the event of a discrepancy between these numbers and FEC reports or other diaries the FEC numbers shall prevail.
These are the 74 races that met my criteria:
AZ-05, AZ-08, CA-11, CA-19, CA-26, CA-45, CA-50, CO-04, CO-05, CO-06, CO-07, CT-02, CT-04, CT-05, FL-08, FL-09, FL-13, FL-16, FL-22, FL-24, ID-01, IA-01, IA-02, IL-06, IL-10, IL-11, IN-02, IN-03, IN-08, IN-09, KS-02, KY-02, KY-03, KY-04, MI-08, MI-09, MN-01, MN-02, MN-06, MT-AL, NC-11, NE-01, NE-02, NV-02, NV-03, NH-01, NH-02, NJ-05, NJ-07, NM-01, NY-19, NY-20, NY-24, NY-25, NY-26, NY-29, OH-01, OH-15, OH-18, OK-05, PA-04, PA-06, PA-07, PA-08, PA-10, TX-22, TX-32, VA-02, VA-10, VA-11, WA-08, WI-05, WI-08, & WY-AL.
Fundraising by the end of the first quarter
In 2004 Democrats running in these seats raised: $ 7,830,145
In 2006 Democrats running in these seats raised: $34,113,695
Fundraising in the first quarter
In 2004 Democrats running in these seats raised: $ 4,511,842
In 2006 Democrats running in these seats raised: $15,335,921
Cash on Hand at the end of the first quarter
In 2004 Democrats running in these seats had: $ 5,918,927
In 2006 Democrats running in these seats had: $23,659,066
The 50 state strategy looks pretty good here doesn't it. There's more.
In 2004 these Democrats raised a total of $43,414,677 for their elections, only $9 million more than Democrats running in these seats for 2006 have already raised.
In 2004, Republicans in these districts who either had no opponent or faced Democrats who raised less than $300,000 for the year, sent $4,729,220 to other Republican candidates, the Republican National Committee, and Republican PACs. There were 39 of these districts out of the 74 and 13 of them gave more than $100,000 each while another 6 gave $50,000 or more. Republicans in the other 35 districts only sent $1,053,334 to other Republican candidates, the Republican National Committee, and Republican PACs with $563,000 coming from only three districts, IN-02, VA-10, and NY-26 and only 2 other districts gave more than $50,000.
Some Grim News:
In 2004 these Republicans raised $49,461,087 by the end of the first quarter.
In 2006 Republicans raised $70,940,146 by the end of the first quarter.
In 2004 Republicans raised $13,332,482 in the first quarter.
In 2006 Republicans raised $18,454,038 in the first quarter (actually not so grim at all).
In 2004 Republicans had $42,671,156 Cash on Hand at the end of the first quarter.
In 2006 Republicans had $60,791,491 Cash on Hand at the end of the first quarter.
In 2004 these Republicans spent $107,180,360 on their races. 6 Republicans spent more than $3 million, another 10 spent more than $2 million, another 32 spent more than $1 million, 19 more spent over $500,000, and only 7 Republicans spent less than $500,000.
Less Grim News:
In 2006 in 19 of these districts, Republicans have raised less money than they raised in 2004 while 21 have less Cash on Hand at the end of the 1st quarter than they did in 2004.
For Democrats, only in 5 of these district have they raised less money in 2006 than in 2004 by the end of the 1st quarter with only 8 having less Cash on Hand at the end of the 1st quarter 2006 than in 2004.
Some Conclusions:
These numbers are the tangible evidence that the 50 state strategy is working. These Democratic candidates are not just names on the ballot, instead they are the focus for Democratic hopes to regain control of Congress and the agenda for this country.
This year Democrats in these districts will be spending tens (or hundreds) of millions more than in 2004 to educate voters on the Democratic agenda, to educate voters on the Republican record, to get out the Democratic vote. All down ballot races will be impacted by their efforts.
All other Congressional races will feel the impact as these candidates put more pressure on these Republican incumbents. They won't be sending money to help out other Republicans, instead they will be demanding money to defend their seats. Because of these Democratic candidates our Democratic incumbents will have weaker challengers and other Democratic incumbents will have no challengers. That means they will be better able to shift resources to those district where Republicans appear to be most vulnerable.
While Republicans presently have a huge cash on hand advantage in these seats they only raised $3 million more than Democrats in the 1st quarter of 2006. Most money in these election years is raised after July. We can expect Democratic candidates to pick up steam after primaries and we may see many PACs try to hedge their bets if they believe Democrats have a good chance of winning control of the House. I expect that all of the Democratic candidates in these districts will raise at least $500,000 this year and 20 already have, of those 20, 8 have raised more than $1 million. In another 35 of these districts Democrats have raised more than $200,000. Democrats are hungry for change and are ponying up the money to make that change happen. In addition, after a certain amount of money the impact of the next dollar spent becomes significantly diminished. That is particularly true of incumbents who can do very little to increase their name recognition. In essence, incumbents will spend money to protect their base of voters in order to win, while challengers will spend money to expand their base in order to win. Challengers have a much greater ability, initially, to expand their base than incumbents do.
Six months away from the general election in November, we face an uncertain political future. As I have previously reported, many pundits are saying that if the election were held today Democrats would win control of the House, but the election is not today. It is hard to imagine exactly how the Republicans could turn around the disaster that is their governance but even if they do the 50 State Strategy has already laid the groundwork for Republican losses in November, the only thing to be determined now is just how bad they will do.
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is call'd the feast of Crispian.
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when this day is nam'd,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian.'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispian's day.'
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words-
Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester-
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.
Excerpt from St. Crispen's Day Speech - Henry V
William Shakespeare, 1599