Campaign Diaries

Regular readers of this blog have presumably noticed that I rarely talk about fundraising strength at the congressional level. While money has obviously a lot of influence on electoral results, I do believe that too much is read in candidates’ financing reports, especially given how early we are in the cycle: That Jerry Moran outraised Todd Tiahrt by $100,000 in the first quarter of 2009 will not be a big factor in the identity of the next Kansas Senator. To the extent that small fundraising differences do play a role in campaigns, they are largely due to the media’s choice to play them up: The more press coverage Moran gets for slightly outraising Tiahrt, the more Republican donors will view him as the establishment’s consensus choice.

That said, there are interesting stories buried in the fundraising reports - and here are those I think are important enough to be signaled.

Outraised House incumbents

While I am weary of dismissing a challenger because he had a lousy fundraising quarter, a challenger outraising an incumbent is undoubtedly a sign of strength - one that is so rare that it will get the attention of the national party. Based on Swing State Project’s very useful fundraising chart, this has only happened in 3 House races:

• TX-10: It remains to be seen whether the district has drifted leftward enough to be open to voting for a Democrat, but Jack McDonald - a wealthy high-tech executive who supported George W. Bush’s campaigns and who is expected to self-fund his campaign - will certainly have the financial resources to test Rep. McCaul: The Republican incumbent raised $98,000 compared to $311,000 for McDonald.

• OH-01 and CA-48: The differential in those districts is nowhere as big as in TX-10, but Democratic Rep. Steve Driehaus and Rep. John Campbell found themselves slightly outraised. That is less significant in OH-01, where Republican Steve Chabot is running for the seat he lost in 2008 and thus already has a strong fundraising network, than in CA-48, where former Irvine Beth Krom is more of an unknown.

All eyes were on Jim Bunning

For the past few months, the Kentucky Senator has been warning that his fundraising will be lousy and preemptively laying the blame on the NRSC’s mixed signals and on Mitch McConnell’s monopolizing Kentucky’s fundraising networks. Well, we now know the numbers: Bunning raised $263,000 in the first quarter and he has $375,000 of cash-on-hand. While most observers are describing the total as weak (sure, he was outraised by Dan Mongiardo), I do believe his report could have been far worse (there was talk of 5-figure sum). Bunning might not have the most daunting of war chests, but he certainly has sufficient funds to pursue re-election - and that is the relevant metric in this race.

If Republicans are hoping to force Bunning to retire by keeping his contributions down, they will need to send stronger messages to GOP donors. And it looks like they are trying: McConnell is scheduled to host a fundraiser in Kentucky for Senator John Thune, who is as safe as can be in South Dakota. That is quite a diss for Bunning, who was already complaining that it was difficult for him to raise funds because McConnell was already asking for donations for his 2014 campaign. Will Bunning throw another fit?

Less than $1,000 for Burris

Above, I wrote that I was weary to dismiss a candidate because he had a lousy fundraising quarter, but that candidate still needs to have enough funds to start a campaign! Illinois’s embattled Senator Roland Burris has only raised $845 in the first quarter of 2009. Sure, Burris has faced a disastrous start to his Senate tenure, but he certainly has enough supporters that he would have been able to raise more than that amount had he tried. More than Burris’s ability to win next year’s primary, his fundraising report should make us question whether the Senator has any intention of seeking a full term in 2010.

Young stays on the “retirement watch”

Rep. Bill Young, now the longest serving Republican in the House, has never faced a competitive re-election race. It is thus not surprising to see him put no effort in fundraising - only $1,000 raised in the first quarter. But do not take this as sign that Democrats will be able to swamp Young financially now that they finally recruited a credible opponent: Young has a healthy $412,000 of cash-on-hand and he could easily raise a lot of money in a short time span - a lot of people would love to donate to the ranking Republican member of the Appropriations Committee.

On the other hand, Young’s fundraising report certainly solidifies his place on the list of potential retirees. Now that Young has drawn a threatening opponent and the DCCC has set its sight on him, Young has to get in the mood of a serious campaign. While he can raise money, will he want to? Will he accept the fact that he now needs to solicit funds - after decades in which raising $1,000 was enough? We shall see in the upcoming months.

Frontline Democrats

Just as in the past cycle, the DCCC is clearly pushing its most endangered members to fundraise, fundraise, fundraise. Most members of the “Frontline program,” which regroups vulnerable Democratic incumbents, posted very strong fundraising numbers - many of them over $300,000 (especially John Adler, Gary Peters). While Carol Shea-Porter is attracting some criticism for posting the lowest number in the group, her six-figure haul is nothing to be ashamed of. Shea-Porter beat the odds twice in 2006 against high-profile and far better-funded opponents; in 2008, many once again saw her as a goner based on her weak fundraising. But Shea-Porter’s ability to mobilize grassroots support should no longer be doubted.

Pennsylvania’s Senate primary

Three Democratic representatives are mentioned as possible Senate candidates. While all raised significant sums in the first quarter - from $364 for Patrick Murphy to $535 for Joe Sestak - cash-on-hand totals are widely different. Sestak, who was first elected in 2006, has an eye-popping $3.3 million stocked up in the bank; Schwarz has $2.1 million; and Murphy “only” has $252,000. If these Democrats challenge Arlen Specter, they would be able to transfer these funds into their new Senate war chest. That would give Sestak and Schwarz a 15:1 and 10:1 head-start over Murphy; and it would also allow them to start at the same level as Specter.

Meanwhile, Joe Torsella (the only Democrat to have already declared his candidacy) reported raising nearly $600,000 since he jumped in the race in February. I have argued before that Torsella should not be underestimated - and his first fundraising report certainly confirms that he has what it takes to mount a very credible bid for the Democratic nomination.