The Washington Post

pa2012.com is proud to partner with The Washington Post in bringing our originally reported insider political news to a wide audience of decision makers and opinion leaders across the country.

Close it

send to a friend | print | comment

When pols get sneaky with campaign finance numbers (Updated)

Ah, the preemptive campaign finance leak. In a fragmented, hour-to-hour media landscape, with campaigns looking for any narrative leg-up in the perception game, it’s becoming a new mainstay of political news as candidates look to convince whoever happens to be watching that they’re politically viable.

I won’t pretend that pa2010.com takes the bait less than anyone else here. If anything, we’ve been jumping through hoops this cycle to get early numbers out to what’s becoming the most influential readership in Pennsylvania politics. Like we did here. And here. And I’m sure there are plenty more examples.

But before full campaign finance data is published, it gives campaigns an opportunity to—well, let’s say, be less than completely and thoroughly truthful.

So in the interest of keeping them honest, here’s a rundown of some of the recent tricks campaigns have used to “pad” their numbers, so to speak. It’s important to note that these folks haven’t lied, and they certainly haven’t done anything ethically improper. But they’ve certainly presented the information in lights favorable to themselves.

Exhibit A, we’ve got Republican Bob Huber in the 3rd District telling reporters that he raised $100,000 in the third quarter. Sort of. As new campaign finance data makes clear, half of that comes from a loan he made to the campaign.

Exhibit B, we’ve got Republican Steven Welch in the 6th District telling us that he has half-a-million in cash on hand. Nice to know. What he didn’t tell us is that almost all of it came from a massive loan he gave the campaign.

But our most creative spin has to come from Democrat Bryan Lentz in the 7th District. Surprised that his Republican opponent Pat Meehan had leaked third quarter numbers that showed him raising $200,000 in 16 days, the Lentz folks hurried together a press release showing that he had raised $250,000 (this led to a fun “Bigger than Yours” headline on one blog). Alas, as some helpful commenters pointed out, the fine print of his release made clear that the $50,000 difference came from money raised after the third-quarter deadline—meaning we can’t verify it until the end of the year when fourth quarter reports are filed.

Fun, fun.

UPDATE: The Lentz campaign showed me a copy of its recent bank statement, confirming that it does indeed have $250,000 on hand. Not that I didn’t believe them, but it’s nice to know.

share001btn When pols get sneaky with campaign finance numbers (Updated)

October 13, 2009 at 8:35 pm

--Dan Hirschhorn

Tags: , ,

comments

comments [5] | post a comment

  1. Jon Geeting

    Oct 13th, 2009

    Can’t wait to see what John Callahan’s numbers are tomorrow in PA-15.

  2. ChescoTom

    Oct 13th, 2009

    Numbers are numbers Dan. Right now its all about showing you can raise the money or put your own money where your mouth is. A dollar spent to run ads next year is not required to include any proviso qualifying the source of the funds as long as it is raised within the law. In this difficult economy, kudos to those who raise the money or feel so strongly that they’ll use their own money to make a difference.

  3. David Diano

    Oct 13th, 2009

    Anyone noticing a deafening silence from Sestak campaign?

    Expect them to get CRUSHED by Specter campaign this quarter.

    The expect the spin to be:
    1) “It’s not about how much you raise but (insert bu11sh*t cliche here).”
    2) We are on track with funding to get our message out, because Joe is such a great blah, blah, blah. We’ve got the people behind us. blah blah blah.

    Here is the BIG question: Did Joe raise more or less than last quarter?
    Think about what as happened since the last quarter ended on Jun 30th
    - Joe toured all 67 counties in 3 weeks (not sure how much value you get in 3 stops per day and giving a speech to 10 people)
    - Joe officially announced (after 10 tries)
    - State committee meeting in Harrisburg this past August
    - Joe appears on MSNBC so many times, people wonder if the S stands for Sestak
    - Joe keeps showing up at county events, fall dinners, Union events (where Specter speaks)
    - Joe missed more votes to campaign

    To show he’s viable, Joe REALLY needs an increase proportional to the relative amount of work he’s put in. Double? Triple? Otherwise, it’s diminishing returns.
    Should Sestak actually backslide and raise less this quarter than the previous (unlikely, but possible), such a trend line should be the headline.

    Also, has Joe gotten a professional campaign manager yet? Donors like getting value for their dollar, and Joe is tight with a buck, but running a cheap campaign is not going to impress anyone.

    BTW, what is it with the 6th Congressional district that the leading candidates for each party ponied up $500,000 from his own pocket??

  4. Lee Levan

    Oct 14th, 2009

    David

    Nice job pre-spinning the anticipated spin of the Sestak campaign. Makes me want to repeat the earlier statement of a commenter wondering when we are are going to start hearing about the issues.

  5. David Diano

    Oct 14th, 2009

    Lee-
    1) Fundraising is an issue when it comes to showing your level of support. SESTAK HIMSELF wrote in his May fundraising letters that he needs money so show his candidacy is viable and he can hang with the big dog.

    2) Sestak is as full of sh*t as any politician you will ever meet. Why not pre-deconstruct his spin? His choices: go with the spin or come up with new spin or be straight-up/realistic

    3) Sestak talks a great game about the issues, but I’m not seeing much daylight between them. Except that Specter is more open to single payer than Sestak, who voted against states doing their own single payer.

    4) Being able to mount a professional campaign and being “ready” for the Senate is part of the process. Sestak is not ready for Prime-Time, let alone Primary-Time.

    5) Joe’s got little real support. That is an issue. The supporters are making their choices. A viable candidate should be able to pick up a few good endorsements outside of his district.

    6) Joe’s been campaigning heavily and making TONS of appearances on cable news. If he can do all that, and not get any traction, that is an issue about his appeal and how people respond to his style. I saw Sestak trashing Obama on the deficit on Kudlow with Toomey. It would have been nice to see a Dem there, instead of 3 Republicans.

    7) Lee, if I didn’t pre-spin to un-spin, you would contact the government and have them check me for an alien pod.

Leave a Reply


- will not be published


pa2012.com blogs