One of the things that jumps out at me from Darryl’s post on the final Q2 fundraising numbers in the Burner/Reichert race is the disparity between the contribution total that Real Clear Politics reports ($192,000) and the number that Dave Reichert’s staff recently gave the Seattle Times’ David Postman ($245,000). Huh.
The difference is mostly explained by a $64,000 transfer from ROMP, the NRCC’s “Retain Our Majority Program”. (Note to NRCC: you’re in the minority.) Apparently, the folks who cover these sort of things for a living don’t consider committee transfers like these as “contributions” when comparing dollars raised. In fact, Real Clear Politics points out that of the 19 “vulnerable House incumbents” on the Republicans’ ROMP list, only one raised less money than Reichert during the second quarter: NY Congressman Randy Kuhl, who pulled in a paltry $68,000.
And when you delve a little deeper into Reichert’s numbers they look even worse, especially as an early measure of his relative organizational strength and grassroots support. Of the $257,000 he ultimately reported, only $70,800 came from 86 individual contributors in Washington state — the rest came from PACs, out-of-state residents and outside committees. Compare that to Burner, whose $199,000 haul included $156,675 from 120 individual Washington residents.
I’m just sayin’.
In the comment thread, RonK suggests that I might have missed Reichert’s small, unitemized donations. I’m about to go on air, so don’t have the time to go back to my spreadsheet, but if so, the point remains the same, even if the numbers above aren’t exact: the bulk of Reichert’s money comes from PACs, out-of-state contributors and ROMP, whereas the bulk of Darcy’s money comes from individual, Washington state contributors.
I’m certainly no FEC expert, but after further review of the FEC filings, my original post appears technically accurate as an apple-to-apple comparison of in-state individual contributions. In addition, Reichert raised $25,052 in unitemized, individual contributions, while Burner raised $21,286. But since these are “unitemized,” they do not provide the information necessary to evaluate in-state support. Even if one were to assume that most of these unitemized contributions came from in-state, that would not change the premise of this post.