Randy's Views

During the last days of the 2006 election cycle, Republicans cautioned voters about four big issues. They raised the specter of a parade of horribles should Americans shift power in the Congress from the Republicans to the Democrats. The alarm bells they rang were drowned out by the steady drumbeat of scandals that plagued the Congress during the last session. In the end, the Foley scandal foreclosed any possibility that the concerns they raised might sway voters to consider the risks of a Speaker Pelosi / Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid majority in the United States Congress.

House Democrats capitalized on the historical significance of the first female Speaker in the history of the Congress to pass largely popular measures during the first 100 hours of the 110th Congress. The real life implications in the change of power were left to another day. Well, another day is rapidly approaching.

There were three big issues that lingered in the background of the 2006 election. First, there was the risk that Congressional Democrats would cut off funding for troops serving in Iraq. No one questioned that the war in Iraq had become unpopular as the Administration increasingly admitted to mistakes after the fall of Baghdad. Yet, there was genuine disagreement about the wisdom of either an immediate withdrawal or a specific date for withdrawal.

Although the debate could not penetrate the steady news of the Foley scandal, many warned that setting a date for the cut off of funds for the war would be a mistake. Most conservative Democrats insisted that such an option would never pass. Well, they were wrong. It was not just the House of Representatives, with its more liberal wing, that passed the measure. The Senate followed suit in refusing to strip the funding limitations imposed by House Democrats.

Second, there was the worry that a Congress lead by the Democrats would inevitably become a vehicle for endless investigations with a constant eye toward impeachment. So far, the talk of investigations and hearings have crowded out any hint of effort toward accomplishing the real work of the Congress. Although ruled out early by the new Speaker as an agenda item for the House, the focus of both the House and Senate has been on subpoenas, investigations and hearings with a steady eye on the possibility of impeachment should the Administration not simply roll over.

Third, there was the issue of tax increases. Soon, the House will consider a proposal for the largest tax increases in history. There will be plenty of finger pointing regarding why taxes must increase. But, in the end, there will undoubtedly be significant increases in taxes. The impact of these increases on the economy will be noticeable. Already, there is an uneasy edge about them.

In the early days of the 110th Congress, Congressional Republicans staggered to regain their balance. They were kept off balance as they tried to cope with the partisan rules adopted and enforced by Democrats thwarting debate. The rules that Democrats had decried during the 2006 election cycle became the model for governance in 2007.

Yet, as the prognostications regarding a Democrat controlled Congress have materialized, Republicans have increasingly regained their footing. While, they may not have yet figured out exactly who they are, they have figured out who they are not.

Show me the money. That was the message, and boy did 2008 Presidential campaigns respond?

Total dollars raised by the Democratic and Republican 2008 Presidential contenders - a whopping $127 million dollars.

With twelve (12) Presidential candidates reporting (six Democrats and six Republicans), there were three candidates that accounted for over $70 million - Senator Hillary Clinton, Senator Barack Obama and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. Democrats collectively raised approximately $77 million; Republicans collectively raised approximately
$50 million.

So, what does all of this mean? Running for President is expensive, or at least it appears that way. There are some other explanations as well.

The most obvious explanation is that real power is up for grabs. Unlike any other Presidential election since 1928, neither the President nor the sitting Vice President is a candidate. As a result, there is an opening in both major political parties.

In the last 80 years, there has typically been an "incumbent" (of sorts) on one ticket or the other. And typically, the money has almost always followed the power. As a result, Presidents running for reelection, and sitting Vice-Presidents trying to move up, have had the advantage in pulling in most of the money from their party's faithful. In addition, they have had the advantage in raising money from groups with special interests in maintaining power. This year is different.

Beyond the White House, many believe that the Congress is also up for grabs. What does this have to do with Presidential politics? There is a heightened interest in who the next President will be. Some part of this is due to a belief that the Presidential nominees may determine each parties' chances for winning control of Congress in the fall. Others are hedging their bets against the outcome of the Congressional elections. Either way, the power vacuum has pulled more money into the Presidential politics than ever.

There is one more factor that has led to this unprecedented giving. The winds of change are blowing. In 2006, Americans made their appetite for change clear. Now, many see the 2008 election as the last meaningful opportunity for real change for eight years. Increasingly, many more Americans are moving off the sidelines and into the political process in a direct way. They are contributing money. Although not the focus of much media attention, the fact is there are more contributors than ever. This does not diminish the significance of money in politics. Yet, it is clear that it is not just power brokers that are breaking out their checkbooks. Average citizens are contributing more than at any time in history.

Through cable news, the internet and emails, Americans now hear daily about specific issues that they care about. In addition, organizations communicate through emails to their members directly and frequently. The result has been a new vehicle for the mobilization of activists and the solicitation of campaign contributions. And it has worked.

Senator Obama's 50,000 contributors giving a combined total of almost $7 million dollars over the internet makes the point.

Of course, the internet has made it easier to give. Credit cards, debit cards and e-transactions are accepted. Significantly, individuals can now completely bypass political parties and organizations and show their support for the candidate of their choice.

And so the money totals climb - $127 million at the end of March in 2007 with only nineteen months to go until the General Election. It could be a billion by then.