Expensive Re-election Campaigns

April 17, 2011 by staff 

Expensive Re-election Campaigns, If you are an American and make 30,000 a year, it would take about 33,333 years for the and 1 million dollars that Barack Obama is apparently going to happen in 2012, his reelection campaign.

But is it realistic, even for a campaign to increase between now and the 2012 elections?

“I do not know if it will come,” said Meredith McGehee, policy director of the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit organization thatanlyzes campaign finance. “But I think the number 1000000000 and is probably in the ballpark. It is a testament to where we are.”

Other experts agreed that, compared to Obama and 750 million-campaign budgets in 2008, and 1000 million is not much of a stretch.

“It’s an impressive amount of money,” said Cindi Canary, director of the Campaign for Political Reform, Illinois. “But what we’ve seen over the last two election cycles is that the path only goes up.”

Obama set the bar for expensive campaigns in 2008, when he became the first major presidential candidate to refuse public campaign financing in general. This removes the cap on the amount of money I could.

After opting out, Obama was able to bring together large and small donors alike to effectively use social media.

“When I ran in ’08, we saw a true master of technology,” said Canary. “They mobilized the people through social networks. That was the beginning of a change in how candidates raise money, with a real emphasis on smaller donors.”

Katie Hogan, a press aide to the Obama campaign, said Obama has already begun to reap the benefits of this type of grassroots organization in his reelection campaign.

“Within 24 hours of his website [for reelection] is up, the supporters to do more than 23,000 contributions and 96.9 percent of them were for and 200 or less,” Hogan said Wednesday.

With the fundraising strategies that have not yet been matched, Canary and others said, Obama may be using the figure to 1000 million-competition psychology.

“It’s a coded statement to all potential rivals saying:” My team knows how to raise funds, “Canary said.” It says, ‘Do not get into this race unless you want to assume and 1 billion. ”

But Kerry Haynie, a professor at Duke University and an expert on American politics and race, said one and a billion campaign might do just the opposite.

“You could set the president and his campaign as an easy target for criticism,” said Haynie. “To say that it can increase and 1 billion for something like a campaign – is important, but is not as important as all these other problems facing the country. Instead of intimidating the opponent, this could backfire and give opponents in order to shoot. ”

Kent Redfield, a professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield, said Republican opponents could not use budget inflated Obama’s campaign against him. Instead, it is probably comparable fundraising.

“I hope that whoever is on the Republican side will be well funded,” said Redfield. “I do not think it will be a David and Goliath kind of thing. They shall be consistent with the trend.”

Part of the blame for the anticipated increase in campaign spending by all candidates is the decision of the Supreme Court last year on U.S. citizens against the Federal Election Commission, according to experts.

The decision is illegal to restrict the financing of independent firms political television ads during elections.

“From that allows corporate expenses, we have seen a big jump in spending on congressional campaigns in 2010,” said Redfield. “So we will definitely see that in the year 2012. I think people can shake your head in the amount of money spent, but will be on both sides.”

What exactly will the public think about this fundraising battle potentially catastrophic?

“With so many problems in the budget deficit,” Haynie said, “could have the effect of public opinion by saying: ‘Look, if you can spend and 1 million in a political campaign, why there is no money for education or jobs, or Medicare or Social Security? “Therefore, thus creating a sort of backlash against the incumbent.”

Haynie said, however, that raising money for a political campaign and raise funds for policy programs are different.

“This money does not come from the same place,” said Haynie. “It’s public and private funds, but the symbolic implications are significant. I’m not sure we’re ready for one and one billion men in the White House in particular economic context.”

Report to Team

Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.


Comments are closed.