An article I read in last Friday’s BusinessWeek essentially confirms that I had suspected with regards to the financial health of the Democractic Party. With the new campaign finance laws banning soft money contributions, I expected that the Dems would lose handidly when it came to raising funs.
In the first test of the new world of campaign-finance reform, Republicans collected far more money than Democrats. The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) pulled down $22 million in the first three months of the year — more than triple House Democrats’ $7 million take. The Democratic National Committee, outraised by Republicans by more than 4 to 1 in the first two months of 2003, refused to release an estimate for March, citing an Apr. 20 statutory deadline.
Isn’t it funny how campaign finance reform, an issue that Democrats had campaigned on for years, would end up hastening their own downfall? A friend of mine, who has worked as a campaign staffer on a Democratic Congressional Campaign last election hasn’t been unable to find a position for this year (granted, there aren’t a whole lot of races, it being an off-year). But if the Dems can’t get their fund-raising in gear, how well will they fair next time around?
Personally, I would send them a check, but I can’t seem to figure out what the party stands for anymore. In 2000, the campaign revolved around a strategy of “What you like about Clinton, without the scandals of Clinton”. In 2002, I don’t think I could find ANY coherent message from the party. Obviously, neither of these have produced any significant gains. So someone call me when you have a message besides “We’re not Bush”, because I don’t quite think that alone is going to do it.
If you want me to show you the money, you gotta show me the leadership.