Money Management At The Democratic National Committee
By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in Democrats — Comments (17) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
More and more, we are reading stories about how members of the Democratic party are displeased with Howard Dean's management of funds for races across the country. Behold the latest:
Democratic congressional leaders aren't happy with the way Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean is spending money. At a private meeting last month, they let him know.
Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (Nev.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) challenged the former Vermont governor during a session in Pelosi's office, according to Democratic sources. The leaders complained about Dean's priorities -- funding organizers for state parties in strongly Republican states such as Mississippi -- rather than targeting states with crucial races this fall.
Neither side was willing to give ground, according to several accounts of the meeting. Dean argued that his strategy is designed to rebuild the party across the country, and that he had pledged to do so when he ran for party chairman. Reid and Pelosi countered that if Democrats squander their opportunities this year, longer-term organizing efforts will not matter much.
Democratic congressional leaders are particularly worried because the Republican National Committee holds a huge financial advantage over the DNC. One congressional Democrat complained that Dean has -- at an alarming rate -- burned through the money the DNC raised, and that Republicans may be able to swamp Democrats in close races with an infusion of RNC money.
In its most recent filing with the Federal Election Commission, the DNC reported raising $50.1 million so far in the 2005-2006 cycle and had $5.8 million cash on hand at the end of last year. The RNC had raised $103 million and had $34 million cash on hand.
Dean has won friends among state party leaders for his efforts to underwrite the hiring of organizers in states where Republicans have been winning in presidential races. Dean campaigned for the DNC chairmanship by pledging to make Democrats competitive in all 50 states, not just in the 16 to 18 presidential battlegrounds. One congressional Democrat responded: "Nobody's suggesting they do 16 states, but not all states are equal."
Pelosi was particularly insistent in pressing Dean to keep focused on 2006, but Dean is reluctant to give congressional colleagues anything approaching a blank check, preferring to stay on the course he began a year ago.
I am now increasingly of the opinion that if the Democrats do not make serious Congressional gains this year, Dean will be asked to go. For all of his foibles when it came to dealing with the electoral process, Terry McAuliffe was doubted by no one in terms of his ability to manage money. But Dean's critics have grown more and more vociferous in terms of denouncing his money management techniques. Perhaps Dean's continued support from the netroots of the Democratic party will continue to buy him some time when it comes to keeping his hold on the chairmanship. But I have trouble believing that if Dean and the Democrats don't enjoy a pronounced success when it comes to the Congressional midterms, Washington-based Democrats won't finally tell him that enough is enough, and that they cannot stand the poor allocation of campaign funds in an election cycle many Democrats believe should be tremendously favorable to their party.
« Corrupt Democrat Watch, July 10 Edition, Part One — Comments (20) | To Put It Mildly . . . — Comments (46) »
Money Management At The Democratic National Committee 17 Comments (0 topical, 17 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
to the voter's ears.
Make it so ...
Capt. Jean Luc Picard
When in the voting booth and presuming you can read and manage the ballot, lever, push buttons, and sundry paraphernalia that so trouble people who know Bush is an idiot, you don't usually start voting for town alderman and work your way up, assuming Democratic voters know what up is. Even in the vaunted era of ticket splitting top down is prevelant, assuming Democratic voters know what down is. This is why we have the legendary "coat tails", unknown to Bill Clinton because he couldn"t even find his pants. The Washington Dems, on the advice of their psychciatrists, are concluding that whereas the party may have more water commisioners there might be less of them in the future. And in the Classic liberal mode of self sacrifice they are thinking of themselves, just as Dean is. Self sacrifice meaning throw the weak out of the lifeboat in the inverted world of the left.
Dean's behavior makes sense now. Thx.
this is good news for us...this is just what we need to break the democrat party's "unity" and lack of money, we need to work hard at every level and capitalize on dean's mistakes and the party's dissention to win some critical races...as i've been told and told others many times, howard dean is one of the best things to ever happen to the republican party
I thought Dean had it out for the Washington leaders first, gathering all sorts of evidence to use against Reid and Pelosi? Witness when Dean was in the news talking smack about Reid for connections to Abramoff, which I thought I read about here at RedState. This would beg the question, is this really about how Dean is spending the money? Because if not, then we should still be careful of Dean's strategies.
It's nice to know that whenever Karl Rove drops the political ball for some reason, Howard Dean is right there to pick up the slack for him.
"Just think, fellow Pubbies... a bath in 2006 followed by a McGovern-class loss in 2008. That's where our enemies are headed. Pass the popcorn."
Yes
Yes
Yes...
Make it so!
I think everyone knew this was a bad idea from the start. The RNC has held a fundraising advantage for years now, and while I see where Dean is coming from, it is certainly not a good idea for a minority party on a budget.
The winners of Democrat primary elections for federal office are selected by nation's most powerful special interest groups explaining why the Party cannot have a national "agenda". Local and state Democrat politicians and voters cannot compete with big groups' millions of dollars and armies of campaign workers. Even Cook County's famous Democrat machine cannot beat the combined forces of the AARP, NAACP, NOW, Government workers' unions and the NEA. Howard Dean owes his job to these groups and not their D.C. tools. As earlier explained by another poster, the Democrat Party was demoted to a shell-like front for these groups by its McGovern Rule changes in 1979.
It's now or never. Except in the bluest of seas, the state-level party organizations are stuggling mightily just to keep what they have. Every year they lose a few more percent in the registations... a few more seats in the legislature... a few more donors pass on and are not replaced.
The Democratic Party is slowly going out of business. It is not as apparent yet at the national level because they have some big-name luminaries that they recycle on television. But the state party chairmen know perfectly well that today's dog catcher is tomorrow's state senator and 2014's candidate for the House. That's not happening. The 'farm teams' are not developing the talent, with catastrophic future consequences.
The party can wait too long to address this. In fact it may already be too late. At some point there isn't going to be enough money coming in the door to fix the problem, because they won't have enough people in office to deliver what people donate to get. Several big unions recently split from the AFL-CIO because the blind devotion to the Democratic Party was not getting them anything. The Democrats no longer swing a big enough bat to get things done.
Dean is doing the right thing. Short-term Finance Types can be strategically stupid in unbelievable ways. AOL once had a CFO who tried to reassure Wall Street about AOL's earnings by telling them that AOL would put aside that expensive "broadband" stuff and would instead concentrate on milking its dial-up base. The minute I read that I thought, "If that guy is still there in 90 days, AOL is hosed." (He didn't make it another 45 days.)
These "Washington Democrats" are doing the same thing. They want to make the next quarter, while the 'company' is crumbling right under them.
but what has changed since 2004 that makes you think Dean can win in Iowa in 2008?
If the Democratic Party is just a front for special interests, why is Howard Dean upsetting the special interest groups?
From the Washington Blade newspaper online http://www.washblade.com/2006/2-10/view/editorial/e2.cfm:
LIKE MANY GAY Democrats, I was shocked to learn from a report in the Blade last week that party chief Howard Dean had abolished the Democratic National Committee's office of GLBT outreach.
This was written by Ramon Gardehire the former deputy director of the DNC Office of GLBT (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered)Outreach.
Gardehire goes on to suggest that gay democrats should stop giving money to the party:
I am and always will be a Democrat despite Dean's actions. I truly believe that Democratic values align with America's promise of equality and opportunity for all. But until the Democratic Party can again find its moral compass and adhere to the principles that make me a Democrat, I will withhold financial support and encourage others to do the same.
Interesting.
No point in going for Mister Bland Electable, is there? They tried that, and Bland lost. Let's try Mister Firebrand.
Compared to the hetero AARP, unions, NAACP and femininist groups, how many $ millions and campaign workers can the Gay/Lesbian groups contribute ? Tell us when Dean also dumps one of those hetero Super Special Interest groups.
George McGovern.
Dean is running for President. He does not care what "Washington Democrats" think. What he cares about is that the state-level party machinery is going to belong to him when he starts maneuvering toward the 2008 primaries. He is spending the money the way he is because he is buying the loyalty of the people he needs to win the nomination.
The way the DNC works, "Washington Democrats" cannot make him go away. It doesn't matter how loudly they yell. What matters is how many votes Dean has in his pocket among those who get a vote. And there are more votes outside Washington than in.
Even if the Democrats take a bath in 2006, the state-level people will not take it out on Dean. They'd be taking out on themselves. They are the ones who will have lost the elections. You think they're going to blame themselves? No, they will blame the "Washington Democrats," those out-of-touch elitist snobs who never listen to the state-level people and who run off at the mouth about gun control, gay marriage, antiwar everything... and so cost Democrats out in the hinterlands every position from Governor to dog catcher.
The Democratic Party isn't down; it's in decline. It has been since The Clintons showed up. The Clintons personally have done well. The rest of the party has been taking gas. This is what Democrats out in flyover country talk about when Nancy Pelosi isn't around to listen.
Dean listens. Dean acts. Dean is going to be their guy come 2008. He is going to be the anti-Washington-Democrat Democrat. Between that and the Kossacks, Dean is going to be a Big Problem for anybody else who thinks they are going to get the 2008 Democratic nomination.
This road was paved in 1972. This is how George McGovern happened.
Just think, fellow Pubbies... a bath in 2006 followed by a McGovern-class loss in 2008. That's where our enemies are headed. Pass the popcorn.