By KARL ROVE
On the money front, how do Sens. Obama and McCain stack up? No
contest, it seems. Since the campaign began, Mr. Obama has raised a
staggering $295-plus million, versus Mr. McCain's almost $122 million.
But that's misleading.
Mr. Obama spent a lot to win the nomination. So how much cash did he
and his rival have when the general election effectively began in
June? As of May 31, Mr. Obama had $43.1 million on hand while Mr.
McCain had $31.6 million =96 a significant but not overwhelming
advantage.
AP
Barack Obama
There is also the cash raised by the Republican and Democratic
National Committees. Each candidate depends on the party committees
for certain expenditures =96 registration, voter identification and get-
out-the-vote drives, materials distributed by volunteers, even some
advertising. Here, the Republicans had $53.5 million in hand on May
31, versus the Democrats' paltry $4 million. Thus Mr. McCain and the
RNC have $38 million more than Mr. Obama and the DNC.
If Mr. Obama maintains his prodigious fund-raising pace, he could
overtake Mr. McCain and the RNC. But that's not guaranteed. In May,
Mr. Obama raised $23.3 million and the DNC $4.8 million; but Mr.
McCain raised $21.5 million and the RNC $24.4 million. Mr. Obama's
Internet-driven fund raising may require a renewed sense of urgency,
crisis and energy that may be hard to gin up until the race heats up
with the conventions in late August.
The savvy Obama team believes they can raise considerably more than
the $84 million Mr. McCain will receive by taking public financing in
September for the general election. They realize this is likely to be
a close, hard-fought contest and they want every advantage =96 their
candidate's previous pledges to take public funds and criticism of
money in politics notwithstanding.
Then, too, unions will give Mr. Obama an edge. The AFL-CIO has
committed $53.4 million for the Democratic nominee, up $6 million from
2004. Other unions will chip in. The American Federation of State,
County and Municipal Employee has pledged $50 million.
There are other third-party groups. While the GOP may be seen as the
party of Big Money, recent presidential contests have shown that =96
taking unions, George Soros's wealth, and organizations like
MoveOn.Org into consideration =96 Democrats have a large financial
advantage. In 2004, when each side's spending by candidates, national
committees and third-party groups was totaled up, Democrats outspent
Republicans in the presidential race by $119.4 million.
Mr. Obama has used his money advantage to launch the air war. Starting
June 20, Mr. Obama spent $4.3 million for 10 days of a televised,
biographical ad covering 18 states. Mr. McCain countered on Monday
with roughly $2.1 million for a week of ads in 11 states. Mr. Obama
has now volleyed back, expanding his buy to 21 states for two
additional weeks at a cost of $15 million =96 half for his original bio
ad and half for a new ad on welfare reform.
But early television may not be as smart as it appears. Is it wise for
Mr. Obama to spend almost as much on ads in three weeks in July as he
raised in May? His fund raising peaked in February. June's fund-
raising numbers, due in mid-July, will show whether his current pace
of spending can be sustained. And TV becomes less effective in a
general election, since so much free media attention is focused on the
presidential candidates, whose actions have a larger impact than ads.
Mr. Obama's ads show he's aware of his vulnerability on two fronts:
his liberal values and his meager achievements. Yet he should be more
cautious with these weaknesses. His bio ad says he was raised with
"values straight from the Kansas heartland," though he grew up in
Hawaii. He claims to have passed three bills, but fails to mention
that two were in the Illinois state Senate and that he didn't vote on
the third in the U.S. Senate. His new ad praises welfare reform, yet
he opposed the legislation when a Republican Congress passed and
President Clinton signed it.
Mr. Obama may be overreaching by running ads in North Carolina,
Georgia, South Carolina, Indiana, Nebraska, Montana, Alaska and North
Dakota =96 states Republicans won by comfortable margins in recent
years. It would require a ****ft of between one-sixth and over one-
quarter of the vote to win any of them. ****fts that large rarely
happen.
Big ****fts do occur =96 witness West Virginia in 2000, which swung more
than 20 points between 1996 (when Bill Clinton carried the state) and
2000 (when George W. Bush did) =96 but these require sharp contrasts on
big issues, not just money. Money may be the mother's milk of
politics, in Jesse Unruh's famous phrase, but when running for
president, money alone can't buy a candidate love. Cash matters, but
being a good candidate and right on the issues matters even more.
Mr. Rove is the former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to
President George W. Bush.
|
