I've been reading more about how Candidates Pay Superdelegates in Campaign Contributions. It all seems a bit fishy to me, but then again it is politics.
Usually, when journalists look at campaign financing, we look at who gave the candidates money. But here is a twist. Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have Political Action Committees that have doled out thousands of dollars to the very people who will be voting to nominate them.
These recipients are so called "superdelegates," mostly party insiders who may back whomever they wish. Many are elected officials, such as congressmen, governors and the like. If you look at how candidates spend their campaign funds, you will often see that they help finance their political pals. Just go here and type in a congressperson, then click "expenditures" on the left side of the page. You can see how the elected official spends every dime of his or her campaign contributions.
The Center for Responsive Politics finds:
While it would be unseemly for the candidates to hand out thousands of dollars to primary voters, or to the delegates pledged to represent the will of those voters, elected officials who are superdelegates have received at least $890,000 from Obama and Clinton in the form of campaign contributions over the last three years, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, who narrowly leads in the count of pledged, "non-super" delegates, has doled out more than $694,000 to superdelegates from his political action committee, Hope Fund, or campaign committee since 2005. Of the 81 elected officials who had announced as of Feb. 12 that their superdelegate votes would go to the Illinois senator, 34, or 40 percent of this group, have received campaign contributions from him in the 2006 or 2008 election cycles, totaling $228,000. In addition, Obama has been endorsed by 52 superdelegates who haven't held elected office recently and, therefore, didn't receive campaign contributions from him.
Clinton does not appear to have been as openhanded. Her PAC, HILLPAC, and campaign committee appear to have distributed $195,500 to superdelegates. Only 12 percent of her elected superdelegates, or 13 of 109 who have said they will back her, have received campaign contributions, totaling about $95,000 since 2005. An additional 128 unelected superdelegates support Clinton, according to a blog tracking superdelegates and their endorsements, 2008 Democratic Convention Watch.
Because superdelegates will make up around 20 percent of 4,000 delegates to the Democratic convention in August--Republicans don't have superdelegates-Clinton and Obama are aggressively wooing the more than 400 superdelegates who haven't yet made up their minds. Since 2005 Obama has given 52 of the undecided superdelegates a total of at least $363,900, while Clinton has given a total of $88,000 to 15 of them.
Many superdelegates to the 2008 Democratic Convention have officially announced whom they plan to nominate. Others have not yet endorsed a candidate.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think that system is inherently flawed but can you really blame Obama for investing a lot more?
He's on the fence so to speak when it comes to insider votes. His ability to distribute money is telling of his fund raising skills...and important quality come general.
That is if McCain and him back off of the federal financing agreement they have. Tell me a federal campaign wouldn't be fun! All the commercials would come from PACs and there would be no money for on-air rebuttal by the candidates.
Then again, I wouldn't mind holding onto the money I'll inevitably float the dem candidate. Muhahaha, maybe i'll give moveon.org my green.
Post a Comment