Parsing the Purses

Tweet

Vermont's candidates for governor filed their official campaign finance reports today in Montpelier, and to no surprise Secretary of State Deb Markowitz had a very strong showing — easily besting her Democratic challengers, as well as incumbent Republican Gov. Jim Douglas.

Markowitz raised $190,736 dollars from 1,046 contributors, for an average of $168, from all corners of the state. After expenses, she has a total of $128,635 on hand. That's nearly as much as both Douglas and her chief Democratic rival Sen. Doug Racine (Chittenden).

"Although we are pleased with the financial support for our campaign, we are even more thrilled by the number of volunteers, email-signups, and contributors," said Markowitz in a statement. "We are going to take this campaign to every corner of Vermont, because we know that ultimately, the campaign is not about money, but about change and new leadership to revitalize our great state, build a strong economy, with great public education, strong towns and rural areas, and a pristine environment.”

Markowitz said she's only been officially a candidate for a few months and the early, strong showing is a signal that Vermonters hungry for change are receptive to her campaign.

Racine reported contributions of $102,000, with more than three-quarters of that cash coming in since the close of the legislative session in May. The average contribution was $198. After expenses, Racine reported having roughly $82,000 in the bank.

"I am very pleased and gratified by the response I have received from Vermonters from all over the state," Racine said, in releasing his totals. "The fundraising totals show that Vermonters are not just responding to this campaign and its message, they are investing in it."

"Vermonters are hungry for real leadership," Racine said. "This fundraising success proves that they want change and are ready to invest in a brighter future."

Like Markowitz, Racine said fundraising is just one aspect of a winning campaign. Quite true.

"This report is about money, but my campaign is about the future of our great state, its economy and its people," Racine said. "The financial support we have received is energizing. But I am even more excited about creating new jobs, reforming our health care system, and investing in the future of our children and communities."

Then there's GOP incumbent Gov. Douglas.

Douglas raised less than each of his Democratic challengers, and had less cash in the bank than either, too.

In all, Douglas reported raising $104,000 so far this year — $13,000 of that was carried over from the end of the 2008 campaign. That means he raised $91,000 since January 1. After expenses, Douglas has $48,000 in the bank.

Compare that to 2007, the last off-election year campaign finance filing on record. At that time, no Democratic challenger had raised money. And, Douglas had raised about $209,000 — $55,000 of that was carried over from the 2006 election. After expenses of about $56,000, the guv had about $150,000 in the bank.

If you look closer, these numbers aren't as dramatic a difference as they first appear. In 2009, Douglas spent about $55,000 to raise $91,000, and padded his nest with about $13,000 left over from the previous campaign.

In 2007, Douglas spent about $56,000 to raise $96,000, and he had $55,000 leftover from the previous campaign.

The big difference is that Douglas carried over more money from 2006 than in 2008, and raised about $5,000 more in the first half of 2007.

In 2005, his totals were even lower—Douglas spent $46,000 to raise a total of $80,000, rolling over about $8500 from the 2004 election.

In other words, don't read too much into these early numbers.

The broader message is clear — Democrats want Douglas out of office and are willing to put their money where their mouths are. But, that's not a surprise. That's been a Democratic aim during the past several election cycles. What's different this time is they have candidates to back — thought this early strength may simply be a case of finding the low-hanging donor fruit.

I'll be reviewing the campaign documents more closely today, and will post any findings. Any cracks this early in the campaign for 2010 may be easily patched by the governor, but I'll be interested to see how well he's holding those "Democrats for Douglas" donors.

Or, more importantly if those Democrats are showing up as donors to Markowitz and/or Racine.

Developing ...

Comments

[TJW]

While it's fun to look at these numbers as if they are tea leaves, in the end they reveal only one thing: People have had it with Jim Douglas. There is going to be a new Governor.

[Jimmy]

Douglas supporters know they don't need to pony up unless it gets close. Racine and Markowitz will still be mud wrestling come election day, and Douglas will float right past both of them. This is starting to feel like groundhog day.

[Wishful Thinking?]

From yesterday's "Fair Game" column:

"Clearly, the fact that two Dems have banked six-figure sums more than a year before the election spells trouble for Douglas. Word is both Markowitz and Racine have recruited plenty of “Democrats for Douglas,” those independent-minded citizens who voted overwhelmingly for “change” with Pres. Obama and “more of the same” with Gov. Douglas."

Hmm. This appears to be a good dose of wishful thinking, with rumor and/or speculation thrown in for good measure.

"Clearly, . . ." Really? How is it "clear" that the fact that two long-time Democrats who've been running for Governor for years managed to raise money by starting their campaigns light years ahead of the general election, means that Douglas is in "trouble." Hint: it may not.

What's more, this assertion of "clear . . . trouble" seems to be at odds with the multiple disclaimers you've (rightly) thrown into your blog entry above. You say yourself, "don't read too much into these early numbers." Yet you made a rather bold prediction yesterday?

"Word is . . ." What word? Whose word? What does this mean? What is the actual evidence that Markowitz and Racine have recruited "plenty" of Democrats for Douglas? And how many is "plenty"? Just exactly who are all these former "Dems for Douglas" who have signed up for Deb and Doug?

[Wishful Thinking?]

Ok. Credit where credit is due. It seems you've done some homework. Your Redux Report is a pretty good response to my comment above.

I'm still not convinced this means we can infer that Douglas is "in trouble" though.