Fourth Quarter Flurry, or How To Assess the Presidential Filings

Print More

Carol Robidoux Photo/Manchester Ink Link

New Jersey governor and presidential primary candidate Gov. Chris Christie is pictured in Manchester at a recent event

 

As the election year begins and we await the presidential and super PAC filings due Jan. 31, it’s a good time to look…backward.

Major hauls for the fourth quarter of 2015 are being reported by some candidates to conclude a year that started slowly for them and saw much funding going to super PACs backing the many White House hopefuls.

But how do the totals compare to those of previous cycles?

Presidential candidates have brought in $10 million or more in contributions during the final three months of the cycle’s off year 12 times in the past.

The two biggest totals came from incumbents running for re-election who didn’t have significant primary challengers to siphon off donations: George W. Bush reported $46.7 million in contributions in the last quarter of 2003 and Barack Obama raised $31.9 million at the end of 2011.

Bush’s record may stand, though early reports from the current candidates indicate that both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders could beat the Obama total. Clinton’s campaign claims $37 million in receipts, while Sanders’ claims $33 million; what we don’t know yet are their more important “contributions” totals.

The first campaign to hit the $10 million mark for the corresponding quarter was George H.W. Bush’s re-election effort in the final three months of 1991.

Three other previous campaigns exceeded $20 million in contributions for the quarter: Clinton’s with $26.5 million at the end of 2007; Barack Obama’s, which received $22.8 million that same quarter; and Mitt Romney’s, which reported $24 million in the last three months of 2011.

Several of the 2016 Republican candidates have also announced totals in this range, including Ted Cruz at almost $20 million and Ben Carson at $23 million. Again, it’s unclear what share of those sums came in the form of contributions as opposed to other receipts, including the candidate’s own cash.

In 2007, Romney’s total receipts were $27.2 million, but only about $9 million of that came in the form of contributions from others while most of the rest was provided by Romney himself.

Totals from earlier races also show that early fundraising success doesn’t necessarily guarantee future popularity with primary voters. For instance, the two Democrats who cracked the $10 million mark in late 2003 were Howard Dean and Wesley Clark. In 2007, Clinton, Romney, Ron Paul and Rudy Giuliani made the list, and in 2011 Herman Cain and Ron Paul did as well. None of them found their way to the general election ballot.

Other things to watch for in year-end campaign filings:

  • How much of each candidate’s total is designated for the primaries as opposed to the general election? Candidates can choose to accept contributions for both at the same time; that’s often more efficient for the donor and also helps the appearance of the campaign’s bottom line. But contributions designated for the general election may not be spent before the party’s convention. The Clinton campaign in 2008 repaid tens of millions of dollars in general election contributions when she failed to win the Democratic nomination.
  • How much have the candidates spent on fundraising? The cost of bringing in money can be an important factor, since that means there’s less cash available for other activities – like voter communication and mobilization – that might be more effective politically. The Carson campaign in particular spent large sums on fundraising in the early stages of the 2016 race; those costs should have shrunk considerably if the campaign truly was gaining support in the last few months of the year.
  • What reports are we not seeing? Any super PACs that are born this month can begin spending immediately but delay disclosure of their donors until Feb. 20 if they choose to file monthly reports. That means some primary and caucus voters would register their preferences without knowing what big-money backers are behind ads supporting or attacking candidates on the air, online or in their mailboxes. Of course, the same kind of spending might come from politically active nonprofits that will never have to disclose their donors.