Some Candidates Are Broke in the 50th
I was tipped off to check out FEC filings by the candidates for the 50th congressional district, and sure enough the latest filings are now coming online. The shocking thing is to see some of the leading Republicans are now broke!
Here’s where the candidates stand in these last critical days before the April 11th election:
Francine Busby (Democrat): She’s raised over $1.3 million. Owes debts of just $9,000 and has about $363,000 cash on hand.
Brian Bilbray (Republican): Raised $328,349 so far in the campaign. Has $107,704 left. (Bilbray had also transfered over about $195,000 from his previous congressional account which has helped his campaign financing).
Eric Roach (Republican): He’s spent over $1.8 million. He had cash on hand of $96,748 but debts of $1,917,388. Of course he can always write another check to his campaign.
Alan Uke (Republican): He reports just $58,056 with debts of $234,667. (This explains the reports that Uke was considering withdrawing from the race. He can write himself a check at any point but he has already spent over $1 million in the race and still has debts of over $200,000).
Bill Morrow (Republican): He has raised $391,000 but now has just $55,768 with debts of $54,500. Basically he’s broke. It looks like this is the end of the line for Morrow and his campaign.
Howard Kaloogian (Republican): Kaloogian has raised $419,000 and has just under $143,000 cash on hand. He reports debts owed of $79,340.
Bill Hauf (Republican): He’s funded his campaign with mostly his own money and has cash on hand of $347,000 but debts of $978,000.
You forgot me…I’ve spent $3,176.93
Had to throw this one in.
Make it a great day!
BB
Comment by Bill — March 31, 2006 @ 10:02 pm
Bilbray is hosting a big fundraiser next week with Newt Gingrich as the headliner. I would expect this to bring in some pretty serious bucks.
Comment by Cross Tabs — March 31, 2006 @ 10:16 pm
Maybe he should ask Bajagua for more money?
Comment by BajaguaWatcher — March 31, 2006 @ 10:40 pm
Wow. . .its to be expected though. With so many reps in the race the money pool is diffused. Still, I expected a least one Rep to be over $200k. And how dumb is Bilbray for not bringing in Gingrich before the reporting period?
Comment by Jim Treglio — March 31, 2006 @ 11:31 pm
Not dumb at all if you’re trying to hide who your donors are. Remember, Bilbray’s biggest burden is his lobbyist connections. Chances are there will be some embarrassing names on the Gingrich list.
Comment by KnightErrant — April 1, 2006 @ 12:31 am
Well it looks like the leading Republicans’ campaigns are all acting exactly like the Republican-controlled congress–spending like drunken sailors and racking up enormous debts. (How did the “drunken sailor” expression come to be anyway? Seems kind of offensive to sailors.) Too bad the American people pay the interest on Republicans in congress’ debt, and our grandchildren will eventually have to pay off the principal. The candidates will just get some special interest or millionaire donor to cover it (themselves or otherwise).
Comment by yeah right — April 1, 2006 @ 12:54 am
Speaking of drunken sailors, how about Busby? She’s spent a million dollars. Sheesh! Too bad all shes gonna have to show for it is a runoff that she has no money to finance! I think I would have saved a little if I were her.
Comment by Cross Tabs — April 1, 2006 @ 12:59 am
Are we looking at the same numbers? She’s got more cash on hand than anybody.
Comment by yeah right — April 1, 2006 @ 1:06 am
a drunken sailor at 45% - not bad.
Comment by ross — April 1, 2006 @ 1:14 am
How does Bilbray have almost $200K left over from the ‘00 campaign and how did his consultant at the time let him end a close, losing campaign in a swing district with that much cash in the bank? Shouldn’t that money have been spent to get out the vote in a race he lost by fewer than 8,000 votes out of over 200,000 cast?
Or did he raise that after Election Day to retire debts that were later forgiven? Or is there another explanation?
Comment by North County — April 1, 2006 @ 1:41 am
Cross Tabs: Funny that you’re criticizing busby for spending so much when she still has by far the most cash on hand and by far the smallest debt of any candidate.
I don’t think you’d be happy unless Busby spent nothing on her campaign and lost with $1.3 million cash on hand.
Comment by Nik — April 1, 2006 @ 1:50 am
Nik: my point exactly. Busby’s accounting looks beautiful, virtually no debt and lots left over. She’s spending enough to do the job, which is what she is supposed to do. Just the kind of person we want in congress.
Comment by yeah right — April 1, 2006 @ 2:17 am
Um….shes still spending because she’s still on TV so by April 11 she most likely WILL have next to nothing left. And furthermore, yes I believe saving her money and having 1.3 mil left for the general would have been her smartest play since she had the democratic nomination locked up in the first place. Why spend 1 million + on something that was yours from the beginning. She COULD have had 1.3 or more starting on April 12, but instead she will have very little, and she will be the democratic nominee either way. That, frankly, is a silly tactical error.
Comment by DC Guy — April 1, 2006 @ 4:52 am
Busby has a good chance of winning it outright in the primary - with the memory of Cunningham still hot and the Republicans attacking each other. In my opinion, it is a chance worth investing in.
Comment by KnightErrant — April 1, 2006 @ 5:12 am
Sorry. You can dream all you want, but with 18 candidates she has no chance, and never did. She was better off saving that money for a head to head fight. In 11 days I will be proven correct.
Comment by DC Guy — April 1, 2006 @ 7:35 am
DC Guy: why do you seem to think it is a zero-sum game between spending it now and spending it later? Should she have done absolutely nothing and let moderate R’s and D’s be wooed by some of the Republican candidates? If she did, those voters could very well get comfortable and not come back to her in the general. So it seems like any dollar spent on the special election is a dollar invested in the general. Maybe some depreciation, but certainly it isn’t worthless in the general as you seem to think.
Comment by yeah right — April 1, 2006 @ 7:54 am
DCguy and yeah right both make good points.
First of all, in spite of the Survey USA poll (which I think was tilted a little too Democratic), I don’t think Busby is anywhere close to getting the magical 50% +1 vote needed to avoid a run-off.
I actually got into an argument with the Busby campaign manager about that point a couple months ago. He seemed convinced that it was, indeed, possible to win outright. With a GOP field that spans the ideological spectrum, I see little reason for GOP rank-and-file voters to defect in the primary when there are so many choices.
That said, I think Busby has a chance in the general, although she’s still an underdog. I’m just hoping that Eric “Moneybags” Roach doesn’t end up winning the primary. Ideally she’d face Howard “Istanbul” Kaloogian, but Brian “lobbyist” Bilbray would also be beatable.
I also understand why she’s spending money now. It builds her name recognition for the general before she’s been defined by her opponents. Moreover, the better she does, the worse off for the more reasonable GOPers who will be tougher general foes.
Most importantly, she absolutely needs a good showing so that she can build momentum for the general and can be taken seriously by the national party and its donors. She absolutely needs at least 40% to be taken seriously by the national party. If she gets 44-46% she’ll be in good shape against a Kaloogian and, perhaps, Bilbray. The DCCC, meanwhile, will come in to reinforce her campaign, but only if she gets in the mid-40s.
That said, if it becomes clear that they’re headed to a run-off, the Busby people really need to work on managing expectations…
Comment by seank — April 1, 2006 @ 10:36 am
With all of the internal polls showing Francine well below that magic 40% mark, I fear it is going to appear VERY foolish for her to have spent all that money this early.
She may have a real problem getting the national interests to refill the old campaign tank in time to compete in June: This will only be a sixty day run-off!
Comment by John — April 1, 2006 @ 3:27 pm
The Big debts that the wealthy candidates owe are the loans they made from their personal checking accounts to their campaigns (as opposed to making a normal contribution) hoping to pay themselves back with future fundraising if they win.
Comment by Look Closer — April 1, 2006 @ 4:38 pm
John: those polls don’t “push” undecideds like the Datamar poll did. Notice that almost ALL candidates show an improvement in that poll. You might think, how is that possible, don’t they take votes from each other? The reaonson is that the previous polls (with Busby below 40) have huge numbers of undecideds. Almost certainly Busby will be over 40 in the actual election when undecideds become votes (as they were in Datamar). That being said, I do think Datamar slightly oversampled Dems.
Comment by yeah right — April 1, 2006 @ 4:46 pm
slightly? a 38% Dem sample in a 29.7% dem district is a gross oversample. Not slight.
Comment by DC Guy — April 1, 2006 @ 4:57 pm
I would expect the Democratic turnout to approach 40% in this special so Datamar is not far off. Just think Busby has trouble getting over 40% and if she fails to do that it will be a VERY long two months for her campaign!
Comment by John — April 1, 2006 @ 5:52 pm
The Democrats better hope that conservative Roach doesn’t win; according to Logan Jenkins in the North County Times today, he’s got no dirt on him and further, he is the only one with guaranteed money to finish the job agasint Busby in June. According to thier leftwing blogs, they are hoping for a Bilbray or Kaloogian to beat up on in the run-off.
Comment by Dr. K — April 1, 2006 @ 6:09 pm
Well, if Dem turnout is close to 40% then Rep turnout would have to much higher than the 46% turnout alloted to them. To believe a poll that says Dem turnout is going to spike by 10 points vis-a-vis registration, and Rep turnout is only going to spike by 2 is, frankly, some pretty wishful thinking. So take your pick. The sample either oversamples dems or undersamples reps…but it is not a correct picture of what the turnout will end up looking like.
Comment by DC Guy — April 1, 2006 @ 6:17 pm
DC, don’t forget you have, as is the case in most of San Diego, a large number of independent voters.
Comment by John — April 1, 2006 @ 9:17 pm
I agree… so why do you still say that there will be 40% dem turnout when they are registered at 29.7???? WHat about Indies was my point exactly.
Comment by DC Guy — April 1, 2006 @ 11:52 pm
A 40% Dem turnout is relative to the total number of people who actually vote, not relative to the number of registered voters in the district.
It’s entirely possible to have 40% Dem turnout on Tuesday Next because Democrats, civil libertarians, and left-leaning independents are much more energized and motivated to go to the polls — much more so than Republicans, many of whom are so disgusted with their party that they might sit this one out.
Comment by Nik — April 2, 2006 @ 1:43 am
Busby will be able to raise more if/when it’s needed - she’s got the support of the big boys and girls.
The Republican party here is quite strong though, and whoever gets the runoff nod will get strong support.
Comment by donna — April 2, 2006 @ 1:53 am
Well, Nik, you basically confirm my thesis in the first place. Your claim that:
“It’s entirely possible to have 40% Dem turnout on Tuesday Next because Democrats, civil libertarians, and left-leaning independents are much more energized and motivated to go to the polls — much more so than Republicans, many of whom are so disgusted with their party that they might sit this one out.”
Is purely anecdotal, and therefore, as I referred to it before, wishful thinking.
Comment by DC Guy — April 2, 2006 @ 8:58 am