CQ TODAY ONLINE NEWS
June 21, 2008 – 12:18 p.m.
McCain Fundraising Up in May, Obama’s Drops But Still Ahead
By Emily Cadei, CQ Staff
For one month, Barack Obama did not have the big fundraising edge over John McCain that he has enjoyed through most of the election season. But the Illinois Democrat continued to outraise his GOP foe.
New financial reports, coming on the heels of Obama’s decision to opt out of public funding for the general election, revealed that as McCain’s fundraising continued to climb, Obama’s dropped precipitously in May.
The presumed Democratic nominee outraised McCain by less than $2 million last month. It was McCain’s best fundraising month of the campaign, with $21.8 million in receipts. Obama, in contrast, had his worst month of 2008, raising $23.3 million.
Even better for McCain, who sewed up the Republican nomination in March, he limited his spending to $11.7 million. The Obama campaign, meanwhile, doled out more than twice that — $26.8 million — as it fought off a last-gasp challenge from Hillary Rodham Clinton in the waning days of the Democratic primary season.
Obama’s once immense cash-on-hand advantage also shrank in May, though he still maintains the upper hand. The Democrat ended the month with $43.1 million in the bank, down $3 million from April, while McCain added $10 million to his war chest to close the month with $31.6 million in cash.
McCain profited from his status as the Republican’s presumed nominee, joining forces with the national party and President Bush to hold dozens of large-dollar fundraisers last month.
That is a benefit Obama’s campaign is only now beginning to enjoy, and Democrats hope his work to consolidate support, especially among Clinton’s finance team, will pay off in the coming months.
The presidential candidates reported their latest finances in a week that saw Obama announce he would not take public funding for the general election and instead rely on private funds. In doing so, he will become the first candidate to reject the public grant since the system went into effect in 1976.
Obama had promised to participate in the public financing system and tried to put a positive face on opting out. The system “as it exists today is broken, and we face opponents who have become masters at gaming this broken system,” he said.
But his decision was more likely grounded in a huge fundraising edge over McCain and the recognition it would be tactically foolish to neutralize that advantage by forgoing private fundraising after the party convention, as mandated by the public funding program.
Obama also benefits from a massive fundraising network, with hundreds of thousands of small donors who can give again and again and from whom he can request general election funds. McCain is far more reliant on large donors, many of whom have already given the maximum they are allowed under law. McCain has been returning contributions from maxed-out donors that were tagged for the general election, to ensure he is eligible to take public funding.
The Obama campaign also recognized that while the public funding program, which grants each candidate $84.1 million, would put it and the McCain campaign on even footing, it would do nothing to even out party spending on the campaign. The Republican National Committee enjoys a huge cash advantage over the Democratic National Committee, $53.5 million to $4 million as of May 31.




Comments
Again another LIE in the headline. Let me ask the person who proofreads the Headlines a question. If OBAMA OUTRAISES McCain by 1.5 Million, And the Headline reads "May Fundraising Good for McCain." How in anyway shape or form can it be "Not so good" for OBAMA? The premise alone is outrageous. Here is an example "Points in Super Bowl: Good for Patriots, Not so good for Giants". I could make a living just critiquing your crappy headlines, because they are that, lies and if not that Misleading. Contact me and I'll help you out next time.
It's gonna be okay Ron. Just ask if you can take that anger mangmnt class over. Obviously it was a very good month for McSame, because it was his best month and one in which he almost tied Obama. For Obama, on the other hand, it was his worst month of the year so I think "not so good" is actually an understatement. Maybe they could add "relatively speaking" to the end of the headline to make you happy. BTW let me know how you can make a living critiquing the headlines, and then I can make a living critiquing your postings
I can make a living because there is so much to critique in their headlines, enuff said about that. And as your comment proved you dont dispute that the headline was wrong. Again if someone who finishes BEHIND has a good month, the person finishing AHEAD cannot be NOT SO GOOD. And yes "relatively" would be a good thing. And by the way I do get angry about a headline that is wrong, because I respect this site and its a shame to see something so blatantly wrong. And to prove my point you didnt defend that that headline was wrong (in fact by saying they could add "relatively speaking" to the end) shows that even you admit it was misleading. Normally I wouldnt critique a comment at all, but you chose to critique me instead of the comment, which is out of line. Again "SUPER BOWL POINTS: Good for Patriots, Not so Good for Giants" there is absolutely no differance. A story about cash raised for a month, where one person finished ahead. Heres a good one if I wanted to slant it toward McCain. "Great Fundraising Month for McCain: Finishes behind Obama, but just barely" was that so hard? The truth is still Important to you, and by the way if you noticed, although the Headline is still the same for the link, on their HOME page it has been changed, to their creidit.
The article is interesting on the funding. Campaigns use way to much money and resources, such big media events. I'd hope there was a better way. The candidates positions are more interesting to me. They are quite similar in some ways, but still have their differences. Obama seems to be for spending more, and raising at taxes. McCain seems to be against raising taxes in general, but creating change still. McCains policies do not seem like Bush to me, he has a totally different view then Bush in some areas. The media and pundits often misrepresent both.
POST A COMMENT
Oops! The following errors must be addressed: