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

Michael Livingston's Blog

Michael Livingston's Blog

Purple in Pennsylvania

Meehan, Hoeffel show advantages of name recognition

Reports that Pat Meehan  raised $580,000 for his congressional race in the last quarter of 2009, while Joe Hoeffel raised $400,000 for his gubernatorial campaign in the same quarter, demonstrate the large advantage the current system provides toward candidates with high name recognition.

That Meehan is well known from his days as U.S. Attorney, and Hoeffel from his occupancy or candidacy for almost every conceivable office (he’s currently a Montgomery County  Commissioner), clearly helped them out—however much or little it has to do with the jobs they are running for. This is true, even though Hoeffel’s numbers are considered disappointing when compared to his original goals.

The campaign finance reports are a reminder that, while the media emphasizes the balance between Democrats and Republicans, the nature of the system remains essentially unchanged. So long as campaigns remain expensive—and so long as the U.S. maintains a political system that puts a premium on name recognition—the donors, rather than the voters, will have the first and sometimes the only say on who gets elected.

Those who want to see something other than professional politicians need to think about changing this system, rather than hoping that another partisan shift will somehow fix it.

share001btn Meehan, Hoeffel show advantages of name recognition

January 7, 2010 at 11:30 am

--Michael Livingston

Tags: ,

comments

comments [6] | post a comment

  1. David Diano

    Jan 7th, 2010

    Michael-
    You are comparing a Federal race by an unopposed candidate to win back a congressional seat, to a non-Federal statewide race with a crowded field with a lot of regional politics.

    It’s like comparing apples and bowling balls.

    Why not compare Hoeffel’s fundraising to Luksik?

    I think you are giving Meehan more name-recognition credit than he deserves.

    I do agree that the money factor does create a bar to entry for many worthy candidate that can’t raise enormous sums.

  2. Peter Asher

    Jan 7th, 2010

    Considering that federal elections have contribution limits whereas state elections in PA do not, Meehan’s fundraising totals are even more impressive, and Hoeffel’s are even weaker. Hoeffel could have raised the bulk of his money from a handful of wealthy donors. Meehan’s donors are limited to $4600 in total for the primary and general.

  3. Stosh

    Jan 7th, 2010

    David,

    You keep talking in circles trying to defend your two favored Dems poor showing in fundraising. On the one hand, Pat Meehan raising $580,000 for the quarter in a race for Congress isn’t that impressive (even though it will likely be one of the highest in the country). Yet Lentz and Hoeffel raising $300,000 and $400,000 respectively makes them rockstars. Plus, as Peter noted, Meehan is bound by contribution limits. Hoeffel — who’s running for Governor — isn’t.

    Your inability to be consistent shows you’re simply engaging in spin.

  4. Stosh

    Jan 7th, 2010

    And poor spin at that!

  5. suburban dem

    Jan 7th, 2010

    why is meehan pumping his fundraising numbers before the deadline? does he need to reassure himself? do we know if meehans are all individula contribs?
    where are you getting the numbers from? how do you know the Lentz numbers or are you just making them up to suit your purpose? heard lentz outraised meehan in the last “filed reports.” did meehan or lentz file their reports early?
    As for heoffel, who cares!

  6. David Diano

    Jan 7th, 2010

    suburban dem-
    In the previous quarter, Lentz did edge out Meehan by a few thousand dollars, but they both had about $200,000. Effectively a tie.
    The Lentz numbers come from his campaign manager, and there is no reason to doubt them. Similarly, Meehan would look pretty stupid/embarrassed to announce a number, then have it differ from what he files. Usually candidates wait for a while.
    In this case, my guess is that Meehan was sure he’d out raised Lentz, so he announced. Lentz has two reasons to announce: Meehan already had, so he could leave it hanging. The second reason would be to intimidate the other Dem primary candidates.

    Stosh-
    Onorato is not getting anywhere in the SE, because of his conservative views and lack of name recognition. This makes Hoeffel VIABLE to win SE PA, and to overcome Onorato if Wagner splits the western PA vote. The primary is in May, not April, which gives Hoeffel almost 5 more months of fundraising and campaigning to get his name out there.
    He can meet with the Ward leaders in Philly, who should endorse him from a “Dem platform” and regional basis. He should do well in Montco and Delco. Hoeffel can raise enough money to get his message out and he should do well in the televised debates.

    Lentz will easily raise enough to get his message out. Meehan can counter-argue that message, but he won’t be able to prevent it being heard.

    Hoeffel is an appealing candidate to progressives on the issues, which is key to capturing a primary.

    Lentz is an appealing candidate with a great personal story and a great reputation. In a general election, Lentz can attract moderate Republicans, just like he did for his St. Leg district.

    Stosh, both have a “path” to victory, which the fundraising differences make steeper. They can’t afford missteps and a few lucky breaks their way wouldn’t hurt. However, they can both raise enough money to win (assuming they hit the right notes with campaign message, etc.)

    Money is certainly a good indicator, but once a campaign reaches a certain threshold, it becomes secondary.

Leave a Reply


- will not be published