WASHINGTON, April 16, 2007
Hillary Banks Big Bucks For Primary
Clinton Leads All Other Presidential Contenders With $24M In The Bank
-
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., was able to boost her cash on hand with a $10 million transfer from her Senate campaign account, money left over from her easy Senate victory last year. (GETTY)
-
Who's Who 2008 Democratic Hopefuls Clinton, Obama and Edwards lead the chase for the Democratic nomination.
-
Who's Who 2008 Republican Hopefuls McCain and Giuliani head up the Republican pack chasing the presidency.
Clinton, the senator from New York, raised $19 million for the primary election, trailing Obama, who collected $24.8 million in donations for the primary.
Obama reported $18.2 million cash on hand for the primary, keeping him at Clinton's heels as the presidential campaign enters a more intense second quarter.
The first quarter financial reports established Clinton and Obama as the undisputed money leaders of the Democratic field, a significant but not determining factor in politics. The reports also show that as a group, Democratic presidential candidates outraised Republicans by a margin of eight to five.
John Edwards, the Democrat's vice presidential nominee in 2004, established himself as a likely alternative to Clinton and Obama by raising $13 million for the primary and reporting $9.8 million in the bank at the end of the quarter.
Clinton was able to boost her cash on hand with a $10 million transfer from her Senate campaign account, money left over from her easy Senate victory last year.
Both she and Obama spent similar amounts during the quarter and were thriftier than Republicans Mitt Romney and John McCain, the two biggest spenders in the presidential contest so far.
Clinton reported operating expenses of $5 million and a debt of $1.6 million. Obama spent $6.6 million and had $190,000 in debts. The low spending rate for both is all the more remarkable given the large amounts of money they raised.
The figures are early barometers of a candidate's fundraising base and organizational strength. So far candidates are on a record setting pace that is shattering past thresholds for fundraising and spending.
Most leading candidates from both parties plan to bypass the primary public financing system, placing a greater premium on early fundraising. For the first time since changes in campaign finance law in the 1970s, many candidates are considering bypassing public money in the general election and are raising money for that cycle as well.
On that front, Clinton leads the way, raising $6.9 million, a sum that must be kept separate and can't be touched unless she wins her party's nomination. Obama and Edwards both raised $1 million for the general election.
Clinton's money in the bank for the primary tops all candidates who have already reported to the FEC. The amount is more than twice the bank balances reported by Romney and Rudy Giuliani, who led the Republican field in cash on hand.
But Clinton's mighty campaign chest shared the spotlight with Obama's fundraising. He culled donors from the traditional centers of wealth — California, New York and Florida, and his home state of Illinois — but also through the Internet. Altogether he had 104,000 individual donors, the largest number of contributors for any candidate. Clinton had more than 60,000 contributors.
Edwards, a former trial lawyer and senator from North Carolina, led all other candidates in contributions from lawyers, with $4.9 million. One of the firms whose employees contributed significantly to his campaign was Lerach Coughlin, one of the most feared class action law firms on Wall Street. The firm, led by William S. Lerach, has filed hundreds of high-profile lawsuits on behalf of investors.
Among other Democrats, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., reported $6.4 million in cash on hand for the primary election. That money includes a transfer from his Senate campaign account of nearly $5 million.
Meanwhile, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson showed surprising fundraising considering a late start and a state legislative session that occupied much of his time. He reported raising $6.25 million and $5 million cash on hand.
Sen. Joe Biden ended the quarter with a balance of $2.8 million.
As often happens in a primary, many donors did not commit their money to single candidates. For instance, David Geffen, who caused a stir when he sharply criticized Hillary and Bill Clinton, held a fundraiser for Obama and donated to Edwards and Dodd. And actress Kate Capshaw Spielberg, wife of Steven Spielberg, contributed to both Clinton and Edwards.
Among Republicans who filed earlier, Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, was the fundraising leader, with $20.7 million in donations. But Giuliani, the former New York mayor, stayed even with him with cash on hand. Both have more than $10 million in the bank.
Meanwhile, McCain, the Arizona senator perceived as an early leader in the race, had half as much money in the bank as each of his two main rivals and had a $1.8 million debt.
That said, Romney is still fighting to gain name recognition. Though he spent more than $1.8 million in ads to publicize his face in key states, polls still place him in third or fourth place, sometimes trailing Republicans who aren't even in the race.
Giuliani is leading in the polls, buttressed by his image for unflappability after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the World Trade Center. But his donor base is the smallest among the leaders.
After spending more on staff than Romney or Giuliani did, McCain is now cutting his payroll and is revamping his fundraising operation.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The secrets of tennis legend 
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 40 CommentsPut a million dollar spending limit on elections, let them ride around the country on trains, buses, and cars. Make our want-to-be officials come out and meet the people.
Vote for the person who raised the least money, he won't have to pay so much back to corporations, and we will probably have more confidence in that person.
Posted by long_rider at 03:30 PM : Apr 18, 2007
--long_rider
In some ways this is not a valid argument. While Hillary Clinton is her own person and decision maker the Clintons are a team and don't hide the fact that America gets 2 for the price of 1. The Clintons also have a track record both good and bad, but the good is President Bill Clinton left office with a large U.S. budget surplus and even if he did reward corporations like you claim, the budget surplus is a fact unlike the record U.S. budget deficit the U.S. has now which is still growing by the way with no end in sight!
Put a million dollar spending limit on elections, let them ride around the country on trains, buses, and cars. Make our want-to-be officials come out and meet the people.
Vote for the person who raised the least money, he won't have to pay so much back to corporations, and we will probably have more confidence in that person.
Some good points for sure but what the U.S. and the world needs now are proven winners with experience. Hillary Clinton is a former White House First Lady and current U.S. Senator and she has White House experience and the 2 of the 1-2 punch is former President Bill Clinton who left office with a U.S. budget surplus which has now reversed into the biggest budget deficit in U.S. History! All the Democratic Candidates are good, but in my view experience wins out and the U.S. and World needs that experience in a big way. These are difficult times and there is no time for "On The Job Training" or "Rookie" mistakes! Once the Clinton Campaign Engine gets in full swing it will be like a steamroller ...
Hatred and war is not her thing,
Bring back our boy's and we all can sing.
The first woman president will be an historic event,which hard nosed republicans will never prevent.
It's time to lay down the tools of war and never pick them up anymore. So where ever we are,whereever we go, we can always allow the peaceful river to flow.
Lets bring back the land of the free,and restore individuality, where women are women and men are glad of it,never again war to covet.
Dzyon
...none of your assumptions are correct. I work full time, have a college degree and give charitably what I can...I do however, find it repulsive, that SO MUCH money can be raised by politicians without the will or imagination to make this nation better for ALL of us. That doesn't make me a "pot head" it makes me human and one with some empathy for those less fortunate than me. It's obvious the same thing cannot be said of you.
Please name names...
If our politicians were truthful and campaigned on the promise to make the most money for themselves while in office a priority, they wouldn't be elected. But then asking them to be truthful is ridiculous.
Unfortunately, Hillary and all the rest of the usual suspects (both Democratic and Republican) have come to believe money makes someone a good leader. It only makes them more decadent, able to sacrifice less, pay off anyone who disagrees with them, and all the while them distanting themselves from the real, everyday Americans- who they consider riff raff.
She's da wo-Man!
Posted by jh6379
---------------------------
Hillary is an arogant supremist. I fyou really think she is good, then you deserve her.
Posted by forthepeopl1
Posted by davidchery
------------------------------------
I agree 100%
Your parents smoked a lot of pot in the 70's...didn't they? Is your real name 'Star' or 'Celeste'? The only real pathetic fact about this country is that it allows simpletons to pull voting levers.
I like the Thomas Jefferson method.....if you don't own land, you don't get to vote. There are people who contribute to the furtherence of American ideals (that's capitalism to you libs), and those who suck off the backs of those who work.
HOW CAN YOU???
Posted by forthepeopl1 at 11:59 AM : Apr 16, 2007
My apologies for the delayed response, but I was only passing through earlier and did not intend to get into a discussion. Real life trumps killing time on the Internet every time.
I support the US Constitution. The US Constitution is the rock that supports the US. If the US Constitution was suspended or thrown out, the US would no longer exist.
The US Constitution provides a valid, credible means for overthrowing the government without violence.
And, if we resort to violence, we are attempting to destroy the US Constitution. An effort that I cannot support.
Trust has nothing to do with it. I don't trust myself on some occasions, but I do not intend to wage war on myself.
The primary problem with the electoral system in the US is ignorance and apathy. And, that is your primary problem attempting to foment a revolution. If you cannot persuade Americans to participate in political campaigns, it is highly unlikely you will persuade them to join your revolutionary army.
Unless you have a few trillion dollars to pay them, that is.
War is the option of last resort. And we are a long way from needing to contemplate waging war on the US Constitution, i.e., the "government."
Posted by tuckerndfw at 11:46 AM : Apr 16, 2007
The problem is, to the average bedwetting, left wing looneytune, you will NEVER run out of options......even while you're being slaughtered.
Wow....I used to think you were just a leftwing, bedwetting liberal, but I can see now that you are quite insane. Do you actually do anything for a living or do you still live at home with mom & dad......plotting your fascist nonsense while they're out earning a living for your sorry a**?
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 40 Comments