Money is the oxygen that sustains politics. How does money operate in Greenburgh elections? We can get a sense of the scope of the role of money in our politics by examining the campaign finance disclosure reports available at the NY State Board of Elections website. The July financials for Feiner and Bernstein have just been released. But to make sense of this information it is beneficial to gain some context from previous primary campaigns. The NY BOE website only has filings available back to 2006, so the money numbers for the contested Feiner-Greenawalt election are not readily accessible. The 2007 financials from the Feiner-Berger are posted on-line and are revealing.
Feiner came into the spring/summer 2007 campaign season with $138,590 in his campaign chest. Astutely, he had actively fundraised during 2006, raising $32,000 and spending $14,000 in that year. Getting his fundraising operation in order paid off well: right out of the gates, he had a great early 2007, raising $30,000 by early July. Overall, during the 2007 political season, running through the election, the Feiner campaign raised almost $70,000. He also spent $110,013 during this same period.
Berger collected $38,000 from various contributors, but she also loaned or donated to her campaign $43,300 of her own money. In total, the Berger campaign spent $81,390 on the 2007 campaign.
Where did the money come from?
Nearly all of Berger’s contributions came from individuals, with a surprising number – nearly half of listed donors - living outside Greenburgh. A few local law firms contributed as well as several political “friends of” groups, including Richard Brodsky, and $1,300 from Andy Spano’s campaign. Interestingly, town board member Diana Juettner contributed to the Berger campaign. Ironically, while the Feiner campaign made a donation to the Lois Bronz Center, Lois Bronz contributed to Berger.
Feiner also relied on contributions from individuals, but Feiner accumulated well more than double the number of individual donors as did his opponent. [The exact number of donors is impossible to ascertain since the reports NY Board of Elections filings only identify donors individually who give $100 or more.] Significantly, the vast majority of Feiner’s donors were Greenburgh residents. And the rate of Feiner donations stayed strong throughout the campaign, unlike Berger’s numbers which dropped off after a strong start. In addition, Feiner got larger contributions from a bigger roster of local companies, including several Westchester Co. law firms, plus support from local unions, particularly the Teamsters. One interesting 527 contribution was $2500 from the Stars and Stripes PAC of the Building and Reality Institute – a builder and developer lobbying group.
Where did the money go?
Most campaign spending went toward preparing mailings, postage and other campaign material. Feiner spent more on the operations of his campaign office. But Feiner got a discount with his campaign consultant: he paid Allyson Felix only $6,500 compared to Berger’s paying Kimberly Ditomasso $12,000 for the campaign. Feiner also spread his money around locally much more than his challenger. While handing thousands of dollars to New York printing and publicity material businesses, Feiner’s campaign was also sending contributions to numerous political groups, including all the local Democratic Party committees and the Working Families Party, and to a myriad of charities, such as the NAACP, UJA, Chabad, the Kiwanis, churches, etc. Berger’s campaign, on the other hand, was spending a lot of money on one consultant in particular, with their biggest expenditure – more than 43% of her expenses - going to 360 JMG LLP – a DC based branding/p.r. company. When you add in Ditomasso’s payment, you’ll see that 58% of Berger's spending went to those two sources. With a lot more money raised, Feiner could easily afford to pay one vendor $11,000 for “creative services” or try out stunts like renting a 4 person bicycle for $780.
BOTTOM LINE:
Altogether, the two candidates spent $191,403 on the 2007 campaign. That translates to $29.41 per Democratic Party primary voter. Feiner not only outraised and outspent his opponent, but he also got a much bigger bang for his buck, spending only $25.50 per vote compared to Berger’s per vote cost of $37.12. By coincidence, each campaign outspent its fundraising by $40,000. I imagine that this was a strain on the Berger campaign, but Feiner, with his campaign war chest, could painlessly absorb this deficit financing. Furthermore, while Feiner had the advantage of starting off with $130,000, his fundraising operation did not rely on this cushion. His political team continued to raise money relentlessly, even after the primary. Furthermore, Feiner demonstrated his characteristic political acumen by gathering money from a wide variety of sources and distributing this money among a large number of vendors, political committees and charitable groups. In fact, Feiner’s fundraising methods can be compared to his managerial emphasis on constituent service, which builds electoral loyalty by focusing on direct and repeated contact with a large number of potential voters. The two approaches reinforce each other by creating and maintaining a dependable and loyal voter base in Greenburgh.
[SOURCE: All this information can be found in the campaign financial disclosure filings at http://www.elections.ny.gov/CFViewReports.html ].
No comments:
Post a Comment