Hillary has a cash flow problem; Bernie has cash on hand

[LongTomH]

Two stories from Poltico, first: Hillary's cash flow issue:

Hillary Clinton narrowly edged out Bernie Sanders in third quarter fundraising, but she was in a class all by herself when it came to blowing through campaign cash, according to a POLITICO analysis of reports filed Thursday with the Federal Election Commission.

The analysis raises red flags about whether Clinton’s increasingly tapped-out big donor base can maintain her massive campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, which spent $26 million ― more than twice that of any other presidential candidate ― between the beginning of July and the end of September. During that stretch, she dramatically expanded her campaign infrastructure, spending more than most of her rivals on payroll-related costs ($8.6 million), polling ($1.6 million in payments and unpaid bills) and office space ($641,000 in rent).

................snip

Her 2016 campaign did, in fact, finish last month with $33 million in the bank ― nearly $5 million more than Sanders, her closest rival ― and with less than $650,000 in debt. In detailing her $29-million haul third quarter haul on Thursday evening, her campaign manager Robbie Mook proclaimed it “a testament to (the) broad support for Hillary Clinton’s vision for America.” But POLITICO’s analysis found that to maintain her spending pace, Clinton likely will need to significantly expand her fundraising base to include more small donors, who can ― and usually do ― continue giving throughout the race.

................snip

In the third quarter, only 17 percent of Clinton’s cash came from donors who gave $200 or less. By contrast, donors who gave the maximum donation of $2,700 for the primary election ― and who, as such, won’t be able to donate again in the primary ― provided more than 50 percent of the former secretary of state’s haul.

Meanwhile, Sanders has $27 million in cash on hand:

Bernie Sanders had $27.1 million in cash on hand at the end of the third quarter, a considerable sum that comes after a $26.2 million quarter for the Vermont senator.

He has also raised more than $3.2 million since Tuesday's debate, his campaign said, with an average donation of $32.28.

His reliance on small donors is a marked difference from any other serious contender: only 270 of his contributors gave the maximum of $2,700, and more than 77 percent of his contributions since he launched his campaign were from individuals giving less than $200.

I almost posted this over in the Thunderdome, er......GDP. But, I thought I could get more reasoned responses here!

[n8dogg83]

1. Interesting arcticles. Thanks for posting! I was wondering something....

maybe someone in the group can answer: is the Sander's campaign getting matching funds from the government? Or does that not apply in this case? I ask because I seem to recall Obama being criticized by McCain for not doing the public funding and instead doing the super PAC thing. I didn't know if Bernie, who is not playing the SuperPAC game, will qualify to receive matching funds in order to at least keep him in the game. Of course, it doesn't look like Bernie will need the matching funds because he is raking in the money from we-the-people!

[mak3cats]

2. You piqued my interest so I went and looked for the rules...

Source: http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/pubfund.shtml#Primary

Primary Matching Funds

Partial public funding is available to Presidential primary candidates in the form of matching payments. The federal government will match up to $250 of an individual's total contributions to an eligible candidate.

Only candidates seeking nomination by a political party to the office of President are eligible to receive primary matching funds. In addition, a candidate must establish eligibility by showing broad-based public support. He or she must raise in excess of $5,000 in each of at least 20 states (i.e., over $100,000). Although an individual may contribute up to $2,700 to a primary candidate, only a maximum of $250 per individual applies toward the $5,000 threshold in each state.

Candidates also must agree to:
•Limit campaign spending for all primary elections to $10 million plus a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA).6 This is called the national spending limit.
•Limit campaign spending in each state to $200,000 plus COLA, or to a specified amount based on the number of voting age individuals in the state (plus COLA), whichever is greater.
•Limit spending from personal funds to $50,000.

The campaign finance law exempts the payment of some expenses from the spending limits. Certain fundraising expenses (up to 20 percent of the expenditure limit) and legal and accounting expenses incurred solely to ensure the campaign's compliance with the law do not count against the expenditure limits.

Once they have established eligibility for matching payments, Presidential candidates may receive public funds to match contributions from individual contributors, up to $250 per individual. The contributions must be in the form of a check or money order. (Purchases of tickets to fundraisers and contributions collected through joint fundraising are matchable contributions, but loans, cash contributions, goods or services, contributions from political committees and contributions which are illegal under the campaign finance law are not matchable.)

Even if they no longer campaign actively in primary elections, candidates may continue to request public funds to pay off campaign debts until late February or early March of the year following an election. (However, to qualify for matching funds, contributions must be deposited in the campaign account by December 31 of the election year.) Eligible candidates may receive public funds equaling up to half of the national spending limit for the primary campaign. Because candidates receive many nonmatchable contributions, such as those from political committees, they generally raise more money than they receive in matching funds.

Bernie could qualify, but I have no idea if his campaign is doing so. Perhaps at this point he wants to keep his options option - the spending limit for primaries under this rule was $45.6 million in 2012 (the stated $10 million increased by the annual COLA's). It could well be that he has no problem raising more than that from we-the-people!

[n8dogg83]

3. Thanks for looking that up! Very helpful. Yes it seems Bernie will do much better raising money....

on his own than limiting his campaign spending by accepting public funds.

[spinbaby]

4. I've told this tale before

In early 2008, Hillary set up a shiny new campaign office in a fancy office building in our small western Pennsylvania city. Every time I went by, it was deserted. Down the street, the Obama campaign had set up in a dilapidated storefront. It was always busy with volunteers coming and going.

[Bernin4U]

5. They act as if it's all about how much you raise

But I'm betting Bernie know how to make a dollar go 4x further than Hillary.

On sites where H advertises, there's probably 3x more presence on there than what really would matter. It's like they're trying to spend as hard and fast as they can.

It means that if she's not taking in 3-4x more than him, he's already ahead.

[SoapBox]

6. Yes...to money management.

Tad Devine was on with Chris Hayes today.

The campaign has been saving their money and spending very wisely...they have spent ZERO on advertising vs. Ms. Inevitable spending millions already.

Bernie's campaign is pure brilliance.

[NervousGuy]

7. I just love hearing that Clinton blew $15,000 at a nighclub owned by Jay-Z in NYC

like it was nothing. I earn that much in a year, sadly.