 |
 |
|
|
|
| |||
|
Posted on Tue, Jun. 01, 2004 | | |
| |||
|
GOP Senate race costliest ever New technology, television ads mean candidates need millions to campaign Staff Writer And the money is flowing back out just as quickly: The six candidates have spent $6.78 million. Where does the money go? Former Gov. David Beasley spent $425 on liability insurance during the first three months of this year. U.S. Rep. Jim DeMint dropped $8,000 at the post office during the same time. And former Attorney General Charlie Condon spent $9,000 on a computer system and then another $1,600 on computer repairs. Welcome to the world of high-stakes, high-finance political campaigns. While television advertising remains the single largest expense of most of the campaigns, rising costs in other areas are contributing to the growing price of doing business. And the campaigns are multimillion-dollar businesses. “It’s pretty much a small business with a sales goal, and the sales goal is to win,” said DeMint, the Greenville congressman who had raised $2.61 million and spent more than $2.08 million through May 19. DeMint’s money has gone to small expenses, such as $203.24 for conference calls, as well as big price-tag items. More accurately, much of the money has gone to big price-tag people. DeMint paid political consultant Warren Tompkins $20,000 from Jan. 1 to March 31; $21,000 to Carla Eudy of Washington, an experienced solicitor of contributions from political action committees; and more than $85,000 to Scott Howell of Dallas, his advertising producer. DeMint is not alone in spreading campaign cash to consultants. Former Gov. Beasley, who did not join the race officially until February, paid Columbia political consultant Richard Quinn & Associates $25,000 and fund-raising consultant Smoak and Co. more than $6,000 through March 31. The company that has made the most money in 2004 from a South Carolina candidate is Red Sea LLC, the Virginia company developing Condon’s TV campaign. (Red Sea also does advertising for Gov. Mark Sanford.) Condon’s campaign spent more than $200,000 from Jan. 1 to March 31 with Red Sea for research, strategy and advertising. The amount of money in the campaigns is “frightening,” Condon said, adding he is at a loss as to what to do about it. “I have no solutions, hear me.” Condon, who had raised $1.32 million in his Senate bid, blames the cost of television ads. A recent 30-second ad on WIS during the 7 p.m. news cost $1,750, for example. “It used to be that the idea of raising $1 million in a statewide race was considered a very enormous campaign,” he said. “That’s bothersome.” costly technology But it is unlikely to get better, said Don Fowler of Columbia, a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, political scientist and historian. Fowler said costs are being driven up, in part, by the proliferation of consultants and the emergence of new technology. “The technology of campaigning expands with almost every generation of new innovations in telecommunications and the Internet,” Fowler said. “There are so many more things you can do now.” Consultants learn and master the technology and “urge it on the candidates,” he said. An example is the use of hand-held devices called Blackberries. These palm-size machines can transmit data from the field to a central computer. Campaigns send college-age workers out into targeted neighborhoods to survey residents to identify issues and political leanings. That information immediately is dispatched to a central database, and, depending on the results, targeted mailings are sent to each household. This method was successfully used by Republicans in the Mississippi and Georgia gubernatorial elections in recent years, Fowler said. “It increases the favorable turnout,” he said, “I won’t say exponentially, but certainly by large percentages.” Fowler predicts the November general election campaign will be the most expensive in state history. The eventual Republican senatorial nominee alone will spend between $10 million and $15 million, he said. Inez Tenenbaum, the presumptive Democratic nominee, will need to raise and spend $7 million or $8 million to compete. Tenenbaum’s money goal is lower, in part because the Democratic primary is not as competitive. She faces perennial candidate Ben Frasier of Wadmalaw Island on June 8. the new wrinkle University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato said the rising costs are another sign S.C. campaigns are joining a national trend. “The same phenomenon is occurring everywhere,” he said. “We used to think there was a green-glass-colored ceiling for campaign spending, but we’re starting to learn the sky is the limit.” In the 1980s, Sabato said, rising campaign costs were purely television-driven as TV ad costs increased at four times the consumer price index. “It still continues to go up, but there has to be another reason.” A new wrinkle this year contributing to the increased costs is candidate Thomas Ravenel. The Charleston businessman, who has reported assets of up to $164 million, has put $2.25 million of his own money into the campaign. Under new federal campaign rules, that triggers what’s known as the “millionaire’s amendment.” In normal situations, candidates can accept up to $2,000 from each donor. But once a candidate like Ravenel starts pouring his own money into his campaign, the “amendment” allows his opponents to increase contribution limits from individuals. Now, because of Ravenel, the other five Republicans in the race can accept up to $12,000 from an individual. “The more he spends, the wider the limits go,” Sabato said. Reach Gould Sheinin at (803) 771-8658 or asheinin@thestate.com. BRINGING IN THE GREEN David Beasley | |||