Candidate Finance Reports: Three views

The media, more often than not, merely reprint press releases from the campaigns or look at one number—total raised -- when reporting on the status of campaign fundraising.

Frankly, it is simply inaccurate to dutifully report the total amount raised. There are two things that campaign junkies should remember when looking at the financial health of a campaign; cash is king and the burn rate matters. There are other things, such as number of donors, the trend of the money coming in the door, but cash and burn rate are two reliable indicators. When you look at the democrats, clearly Pingree is dominating the democratic fundraising scene, with more than a 2-1 advantage over her nearest rival. While republican, Dean Scontras has an clear advantage over his opponent Charlie Summers

First, let’s talk about TOTAL RECEIPTS (Republicans are in Bold, Democrats in italics)

PINGREE $783549
STRIMLING $337026
LAWRENCE $326252
COTE $304894
SCONTRAS $197986
BRENNAN $152410
SUMMERS $117127
MEISTER $46300

Now, let’s look at CASH-ON-HAND. That number is what the candidate had stated is in the bank account at the end of the reporting period. (We will ignore debt for now). However, in a primary battle there is a subset of cash on hand—and that is PRIMARY cash on hand. Close to 25% of the money left in Senator Pingree’s bank account is ear marked for the General election, which means she can’t spend that money in the Primary. Pingree still has a significant advantage with cash-on hand, though the numbers are much less daunting than total receipts. Looking at the Primary money available, Cote moves up two notches, although Strimling, Cote and Lawrence are essentially tied. On the Republican side, you see a very significant change from total raised to available cash on hand. Scontras, who is dominating Summers in total raised, drops off a cliff when it comes to cash on hand.

PINGREE $326,451
COTE $187,597
STRIMLING* $176,719
LAWRENCE $172,489
BRENNAN $82,339
SUMMERS $70,973
MEISTER $39,639
SCONTRAS $24,755
*Strimling’s number were hand calculated.

Finally, let’s move to the BURN RATE. This isn't rocket science. It is simply the percentage difference between cash on hand and total raised. Here is why it's important – campaigns are marathons, not sprints. If you are in second or third place and you have a strategy to conserve cash until the final lap, it is more often than not -- a winning strategy. Ideally, reporters would track this number for each report to give folks a sense of the trend line. This early in the campaign cycle you can get a pretty good glimpse of which campaigns will be best positioned for the final two weeks of the campaign—you know, the only time anyone is actually paying attention.

Obviously Steve Meister, can change his name to Miser. Of course, this is just one of the three pieces of information we are reviewing. There are few other observations worth noting. First Adam Cote, on the democrat side, has a done a decent job in controlling the flow of cash out of the campaign. The fact that he is such a political novice and is still conserving cash says to me that he has good controls in place and is being well advised. The other democrats in the race, seem to have their finances under control, although at this point in the game under 40% is a good number to shoot for. The real story here is the Scontras and Summers race. When you burn through 87% of your cash in December—for a June primary---it is time to seek outside counsel. In short, it is a recipe for electoral failure. All of the hard work to post impressive numbers on the Republican side - when compared to your opponent – simply disappear with a burn rate that would make the Legislature look frugal.
MEISTER 14%
COTE 37%
SUMMERS 39%
STRIMLING 42%
LAWRENCE 42%
PINGREE 43%
BRENNAN 46%
SCONTRAS 87%

So, that’s the Campaign Finance lesson for today. I would welcome your suggestions for other measures on the financial health of campaigns. You can email me at politickerme@aol.com.