2008 Campaign Spending Outpaces 2006 | Number of candidates continues to dwindle
Historically, to run a successful campaign as a Massachusetts politician, you needed money.
Lots of it.
A recent report from the Office of Campaign and Political Finance (OCPF) detailing last year’s election spending confirms that notion, but also reveals some surprising trends.
Overall, the 200 winners in 2008’s House and Senate elections outspent their unsuccessful counterparts 2-to-1, according to the OCPF analysis.
All told, more than $12.6 million was spent on those campaigns, but only 311 candidates ran, the lowest number since the OCPF began tracking election spending in 1990. (Click here to see statistics from the OCPF's report.)
“That might be the lowest total in the modern era of Massachusetts politics,” said Jason Tait, the OCPF’s director of communications and public education.
Dollar For Dollar
Interestingly, the campaign spending from 2006 to 2008 increased more than $673,000 while the number of candidates dropped from 339 to 311.
However, 2008’s total spending still pales in comparison to the total in 2004.
That year $17.6 million was spent by 390 candidates, according to the OCPF. On a per candidate basis, $45,232 was spent in 2004, while $40,354 was spent in 2008.
Sen. James Eldridge (D-Acton) said that the need to raise campaign funds is causing the decreased interest in running for public office in the Bay State.
“The challenge of raising money is a tough one for running for office in Massachusetts,” Eldridge said, adding that a Massachusetts legislator is an “all-consuming, full-time job” and potential candidates may not be interested in the time commitment that it requires.
Even for incumbents, the proposition of raising money is a frustration, but Eldridge acknowledges that the candidate with the most money tends to win, and so it exacerbates the problem.
“I’ve now been an elected official for seven years and I’ve had to spend a lot of my time fundraising,” he said. “It would be better to spend that time on my job.”
Of course, last year, plenty of candidates didn’t spend the time to run at all. The OCPF reports that 27 senators ran unopposed, the highest number ever recorded by the office.
Eldridge blames the low turnout partly on the understood “intensity” of serving as a state senator, but in the end, he says it comes down mostly to the amount of money a candidate has to raise.
“It’s impossible to just go door to door to get elected,” he said.
Public Support
When Eldridge first ran in 2002, he did so as one of 13 “clean election” candidates, which meant his campaign was entirely public-funded.
“Through the law, I received the same amount as the candidate who had the most money, so that leveled the playing field,” he said.
“I could spend my time going door to door talking about the issues.”
The clean election program was repealed by the legislature in 2003, but Eldridge hopes to bring it back.
Due to the current budget crisis, raising the issue of public campaign financing would likely be defeated.
However, Eldridge said he’ll revisit the issue during the 2010-2011 session. In the meantime, he’s continuing to find ways to change the campaign spending landscape.
“In the Senate ethics bill which passed yesterday [May 14], we banned donations from lobbyists,” he said. “We removed the donation from special interest politics. So we’re making progress.”
The OCPF study is still finalizing its report on 2008 campaign financing.
For more information visit www.mass.gov/ocpf.
WBJ Web Partners
Most Recent
0 Comments