Posted on 02/08/2006 4:46:36 PM PST by new yorker 77
Under Howard Dean's leadership last year, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) raised about $50 million less than the Republican National Committee (RNC). And the DNC spent every dime (and then some) that it did raise last year. Mr. Dean and the DNC entered the 2006 election year with less than $6 million in cash on hand. Indeed, the DNC had less money in the bank at the beginning of 2006 than it had on Jan. 1, 2005, just several weeks before Mr. Dean arrived. Meanwhile, with $34 million in cash on hand at the beginning of 2006, the RNC had nearly six times as much cash as the DNC.
Political parties entered a new fund-raising era immediately after the 2002 elections. At that moment, the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance legislation prohibited national party committees from accepting the unlimited, unregulated "soft-money" contributions from wealthy individuals, corporations and labor unions -- often donated in multimillion-dollar increments. Henceforth, national party committees, including the parties' national Senate and House campaign committees, would have to rely solely on "hard money" contributions, which are limited funds donated by individuals (a maximum of $26,700 per year per national committee, subject to a two-year aggregate total of $61,400) and by political action committees ($15,000 per year per national committee).
Over the four years from 1999 through 2002, the RNC collected nearly $50 million more in soft money ($280 million) than the DNC ($231 million) received. But the RNC advantage over the DNC in "hard money" was much bigger. In fact, the RNC's hard-money contributions for the 1999-2002 period ($383 million) were twice the level of the DNC's hard-money total ($191 million). Notwithstanding the RNC's gargantuan hard-money advantage through 2002, the DNC defied all conventional wisdom by raising more hard money ($394 million) than the RNC collected ($392 million)-during-the-2003-2004-cycle.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
The Idiots fired Mr(turn one million into 18 mil)McAuliffe to replace him with Dean L0L
Hopefully, the U.S. Supreme Court will obliterate this unconstitutional law.
Sorry, I responded to my other post.
Either way, Dean is a nitwit.
All of George Soro's money, and all of MoveOn's men, can't put the democRATS back in power again!!
Kimmers, "The existence of todays Democratic party, proves that God has a sense of humor."
But sometimes I wish the competition wasn't so incompetent. This would force the GOP to run a tighter ship.
Howard Dean is the best thing that ever happened to us. When he got elected to the DNC chair, all of the moonbats I go to school with were ecstatic. They stopped being ecstatic when they noticed that I was also ecstatic.
Yes, but he's the only candidate who has run a surplus.
But the GOP shouldn't be that excited or happy, alot of that money that would have gone to the DNC is going to the democratic senatorial committee (header by Chuck Schumer) and to canidates directly along with a whole host of liberal special interest groups.
Think of it this way, its like me not giving money to the RNC but instead donating it to the Club for growth and directly to Michael Steele along with the republican senatorial committee.
You idiot Dems...You had some key advantages but you totally blew it by selecting whacko nimrods like Dean and Kerry, now you lose, chumps, haha!
I would agree with you. I am rather disappointed at times with the GOP. Power and money creates and evil mistress.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.