A few weeks ago, I spotted a worried post or two about a late-January Roll Call article on some of the blogs. This article asserted that some of the Democratic party's leaders had called Dean on the carpet about the state of the DNC's finances:
"Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill are privately bristling over Howard Dean's management of the Democratic National Committee and have made those sentiments clear after new fundraising numbers showed he has spent nearly all the committee's cash and has little left to support their efforts to gain seats this cycle.Several well-informed Democratic sources said Congressional leaders were furious last week when they learned the DNC has just $5.5 million in the bank, compared to the Republican National Committee's $34 million..."
Some worried that Dean and the Democratic Party were in trouble. Others, like Kos, blasted the article as B.S.:
"The cowardly shots in the beltway press come from disaffected insider consultants who see their lucrative gigs in danger. Dean is out raising money directly for the state parties and finally investing in the sort of infrastructure that Republicans spent decades building.If it was up to these DC insiders, Dean would hoarde (sic) tens of millions to dump into television later this year, just as the DNC has done in the past. And just like in the past, the DNC would parsel out its advertising contracts to all the various consultancies to spread the money around, they would all take their nice fact commissions, and they'd laugh all the way to the bank.."
So which is it?
Following the time-honored advice of "Deep Throat", I decided to follow the money. So I turned to the FEC reports. Read on for the scoop.
I chose to compare the December, 2003 report and the December, 2005 report. These work well because
(a) they come from corresponding points in an off-off-year, and
(b) they demonstrate the change between the spending and fundraising habits of the DNC under Terry McAuliffe, and under Howard Dean.
My more detailed notes from the reports are posted online in the form of an Excel spreadsheet: http://www.crocuta.net/UtilityPics/DNC_f inances_notes.xls. Remember, this is a scratchpad, so don't expect a polished presentation in the thing. Do feel free to play with the numbers yourself.
The changes in the DNC's money flow are clear. It has transformed (and still is transforming) from a party which lived on fewer, somewhat larger donations, to one which takes in more and smaller donations. Instead of spending its money in Washington and on consultants, the party is spending more money out in the states, both in the form of salaried employees, and in direct donations to the states themselves. The party is reaping the benefits of its new headquarters, in that it no longer has to pay a half million in rent, and in many spending areas, Dean's skinflint tendencies appear to be manifesting themselves.
Details of what I found:
Donations, December 2003:
All Individuals: $2,952,792
"Itemized" (more than $200 total this year): $1,231,404
"Unitemized" (small): $1,631,388
There were 2186 pages of "itemized individuals" at 3 people/page --> giving us 6,556 donors averaging $188 each this month.
Overall Total Receipts, Including Individuals: $3,028,289
Donations, December 2005:
All Individuals: $4,270,313
"Itemized" (more than $200 total this year): $1,712,630
"Unitemized" (small): $2,557,683
There were 4,000 pages of "itemized individuals" at 3 people/page --> giving us 12,000 donors averaging $143 each this month.
Overall Total Receipts, Including Individuals: $5,730,340
The huge number of "itemized" individuals looked like the effect of "Democracy Bonds" to me! A person donating $25/month since June (when DB's began) could have easily racked up $200 in total donations and ended up on the "Itemized" list. So, for kicks, I compared these figures to the June 2005 donations:
Donations, June 2005:
All Individuals: $4,479,688
"Itemized" (more than $200 total this year): $1,307,563,
"Unitemized" (small): $3,047,453.
There were 1,393 pages of "itemized" individuals at 3 people/page --> 4,179 itemized donors averaging $312 each this month.
Overall Total Receipts, Including Individuals: $4,479,688
If the DNC is truly being powered by Democracy Bonds now, you will see this kind of shift in the reporting every year. At the beginning of the year, most of the donations will be "unitemized". As people fill in their $200 reporting minimum over the next several months, you would expect that while the total donations figures remain similar, the balance will gradually shift until by the 10th month or so, a much larger proportion of the donations are "itemized" and the number of "itemized individuals" will rocket. I look forward to watching the 2006 figures to see if this turns out to be the case.
Cash on Hand, December 2003: $8,942,616
Cash on Hand, December 2005: $7,330,642
Salaries, December 2003:
Total paid out: $362,791
Number of Employees in DC, MD, VA: 104
Paid to Employees in DC, MD, VA: $328,907
Number of Other States with DNC Employees: 5
Paid to Employees in Other States: $33,884
10 Highest Salaries, Range: $5,470 - $9,042
7 of the top 10 between $5,470 - $7,981
Salaries, December 2005:
Total paid out: $326,792
Number of Employees in DC, MD, VA: 114
Paid to Employees in DC, MD, VA: $203,838
Number of Other States with DNC Employees: 45
Paid to Employees in Other States: $122,954
10 Highest Salaries, Range: $2,593 - $10,533
8 of the top 10 between $2,593 - $4,821
Some comments on the salaries:
In December 2003, Terry McAuliffe paid himself $346. I guess being independently wealthy from his investments, he figured he didn't need the money.
In December 2005, Howard Dean paid himself $4,821. The highest salary, $10,533, went to Thomas Burke, who was paid $6,992 in December 2003. Two other longtime DNC employees who were in the top 10, took pay cuts on the order of $3,000 a month.
Non-People, Non-Party "Stuff"
This was day-to-day expenses of running the DNC, such as rent, online services, consulting, and so on.
Total December 2003: $2,084,688
Total December 2005: $781,367
Breakouts:
Travel Expenses, December 2003: $81,311
Travel Expenses, December 2005: $28,772
$10,906 in Dec 2005 to Matthew Nugen alone. Not sure what that's about.
$2,915 to WMATA in Dec 2005-- guess Dean's making them ride the Metro!
Online Services, December 2003: $115,111
Online Services, December 2005: 69,054
An odd little two-step in December 2003: On Dec 17th, "Walter Karl, Inc" paid the DNC $140,436.
On December 18, the DNC paid them back $140,437. Huh?
Media Production, December 2003: $75,298
Media Production, December 2005: $81,092
Renting Office Space, December 2003: $542,376
Renting Office Space, December 2005: $0.00
In December 2003, the new high-tech DNC HQ building came on-line. This was paid for by big-dollar donations raised by Terry McAuliffe in 2002 just before finance reform kicked in.
Design & Printing, December 2003: $178,388
Design & Printing, December 2005: $120,783
Consulting (all), December 2003: $719,670
Consulting (all), December 2005: $210,765
Aha.
Dean apparently got a health club membership. "NY Sports Club"-- $557. Or maybe he was sending his whole staff-- seems like a lot for one person.
Everything else, such as Bank Charges, Catering, Photography, etc was essentially similar between the two years.
Party-Building, Donations to State Parties:
December, 2003, Total: $407,943
December, 2005, Total: $945,120
Number of States Donated to in Dec 2003: 50
Biggest Receiving State in 2003: $230,200 (Louisiana)
2nd Biggest Recipient in 2003: $27,387 (DC party organizations)
Average per State in Dec 2003, minus top 2: $2,932
Average for top 38 States minus top 2: $3,406
Number of States Donated to in Dec 2005: 40
Biggest Receiving State in 2005: $500,000 (New Jersey)
2nd Biggest Recipient in 2005: $250,000 (Virginia)
Average per State in Dec 2005, minus top 2: $5,003
(Compare to "top 38" above)
---------------------------------------- ----------------------------------
These changes have not gone unremarked in the past.
As far back as last November, MyDD commented on the shift in DNC earning patterns:
"...growing Democratic independence from traditional sources of power in Washington: lobbyists and big donors. As was reported back in June, Dean has already freed the DNC from any reliance on big donors whatsoever...
The Democratic Party is now being funded almost entirely by small donors. Now, through Pelosi, we are starting to close the door on lobbyists as well...These two events go hand in hand. Traditionally, the main reason Democrats and Republicans meet with lobbyists is so that they are able to fill up their campaign coffers with PAC money. However, now that Democrats are able to rely on small donors much more than in the past, they do not need this money as much as they once did. Of course, it also helps that Democrats were forced to find another source of campaign funding because of the Republican K Street project (offical website can be found here). The point of the K-Street project was an attempt by Republicans to shut Democrats out of the lobbying world as much as possible, mainly in order to receive as high a percentage of PAC money as possible."
ScottForAmerica on DailyKos had a bead on the fundraising situation by December 21:
"The media and right wing contest the Democrats are losing the money race to the GOP 2-1. However, in the last off year, the Democrats trailed Republicans 3 to 1. However, even these numbers don't accurately describe the new situation among the Democrats. When Chairman Dean goes out to raise money, he often raises the money directly for the state party instead of the DNC, so while that money goes to funding the organization and ground effort of Democrats across America, it does not get included in the figures used by the mainstream media." (emphasis mine)
Looks healthy to me.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 42 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
