According to the Denver Post Governor Bill Ritter has raised only $118,000 in the first quarter of ’09. This gives him a grand total of `$125,609 in his campaign fund. Contrast this with Betsy Markey raising $342,000, let alone Michael Bennet and his not unimpressive $1.35 million for his Senate race, and you have to wonder why donations are so scarce for the Guv.
It’s possible that certain Democratic money machines like Big Labor are disappointed that his performance in office has not been “progressive” enough, and are holding back in favor of a possible challenger. Former Colorado Speaker of the House Andrew Romanoff would be a likely choice, he’s popular with the base, has name recognition, and has experience with the legislature.
There could be other explanations for the Governors poor performance in fundraising, and I,m interested in hearing any other theories on it. But it really is odd that the preeminent Democrat in Colorado is having this kind of trouble.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Weekend Open Thread
BY: JohnNorthofDenver
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: Chickenheed
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: The realist
IN: Weekend Open Thread
BY: The realist
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: Duke Cox
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: ParkHill
IN: Monday Open Thread
BY: spaceman2021
IN: Weekend Open Thread
BY: kwtree
IN: Weekend Open Thread
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
There is one big fat obvious reason why Ritter has raised less money than Markey and Bennet as of now: they NEEDED to do so, and Ritter didn’t. Markey will certainly face a serious challenge in the general, so she must show strength. There was a ton of talk (all talk, it turns out) of Bennet facing a primary, plus he will have to run the general election without ever having won before, plus he is a relative unknown. Thus he needs to make a strong $$ showing.
None of this applies to Ritter.
I think Ritter has been concentrating on doing his job. Means his fundraising is lower, but the state is better served. And I think come election time people will reward that focus.
this would make sens. However, I don’t think major donors are holding out hope that Andrew Romanoff or anyone else is going to jump in the ring.
Bill Ritter is going to run for re-election.
There’s not going to be a primary opponent.
If, when Ritter starts campaigning in earnest, he’s still putting up paltry numbers, then maybe it’ll be a concern.
Actually, I think it’s fairly impressive that he raised over $100,000 without doing anything.
Campaign finance limit for Governor – $525
Campaign finance limit for Congress – $2,400
PAC limit for Governor – $0
PAC limit for Congress – $5,000
Not to mention Ritter’s dollars raised in the same quarter of the cycle in which he was elected – $0. He didn’t file until June of 2005.
The concept of the perpetual campaign is relatively new and it’s been hugely damaging to democracy. I am glad that Ritter has spent the past two years governing rather than fundraising.
That’s the big difference. It’s a hell of a lot easier to raise big money quickly in a federal campaign than a state campaign. Most of the money spent in state campaigns will come from 527s anyway.