Edwards, Clark Carry Debt From 2004 Bids

[ProSense]

Edwards, Clark Carry Debt From 2004 Bids

By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writer
7:29 AM PST, December 2, 2006

NEW YORK -- Democrats John Edwards and Wesley Clark have debts of several hundred thousand dollars from their unsuccessful White House bids in 2004, a burden as they consider presidential runs in 2008.

Edwards, the 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee, had about $2,200 in his campaign account at the end of September and more than $300,000 in unpaid bills from his failed campaign for his party's nomination.

Clark, who has said he will decide in the next few months whether to run again, had about $390,000 left from the last campaign and debts totaling more than $260,000.

According to the Federal Election Commission, candidates are not obligated to pay off debts from a past presidential campaign before starting a new one.

In the case of Edwards and Clark, their 2004 committees will stay open until the debts are retired, but the men are free to begin fundraising for 2008.

Federal law does prohibit them from rolling whatever is left in their 2004 accounts into a 2008 campaign until outstanding bills are paid.

more...

[Schema Thing]

1. Ok, call me stupid, but does that math add up to actual "debt" for Clark?

[clarquistador]

2. $130,000 surplus = debt?

LOL...

[Pithy Cherub]

3. It's karl rove's THE Math...

OMG - basic addition is much too difficult for these troglodytes! Clark has a surplus! :rofl:

[ProSense]

4. There is a difference between carrying a debt and being in the red! n/t

[Schema Thing]

6. Yeah, a semantic difference.

It's a debt that is covered by existing money; money that can only be used to pay that debt, if I read this right.

Just seems silly to try and make this situation analogous to Edward's situation, to me.

No big deal, but I sure wouldn't feel "in debt" if my debts where so structured.

[BruceMcF]

7. Actually, the two campaigns seem to ...

... attract the analogy when they both give the same explanation of waiting for the FEC audit.

Fortunately I have never had to learn all the ins and outs of campaign finance rules, but it would seem that they to ensure that everything that the FEC audit says has to be paid out of the account is, so that they have the maximum amount they are legally allowed to transfer over. It is, IOW, like crossing the i's and dotting the t's kind of stuff.

The way that Congress has set the rules up, they favor people presently in Congress, and not sitting Governors and not potential candidates in the situation of Wesley Clark, John Edwards or Al Gore. It should be no surprise that they are waiting to dot every i and cross every t in getting the SEC audit so they can determine precisely which obligations must be paid out of the campaign account and which may be paid out of other sources. When you can raise in the $10m's as a Senator, its no surprise that sitting Senators do not fret about the "mere" odd $10,000 or $100,000 here or there.

[bahrbearian]

5. Was Carville helping in their campaigns?

[blm]

9. Carville was an Edwards fan, but I don't think he ever said much about Clark, iirc.

.

[Mass]

8. Another brilliant example of AP reporting - Clark has a positive balance

and Edwards has not a lot of debts. In any case, they can start to fundraise even as their 2004 is still open, so what is newsworthy there.

Same goes for the article concerning Hillary's electability. It seems that AP had a lack of news last weekend.