TORONTO – The 2012 U.S. presidential campaign is in full swing and the battle between U.S. President Barack Obama and Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney will be the most expensive ever – by a wide margin.
For the second month in a row, Romney raised more money than the Obama campaign by $35 million. Obama and the National Democratic Committee raked in $71 million, while Romney and the Republican National Committee drew in $106 million. Currently, Obama still has substantially more money and donors than Romney.
The rules for campaign fundraising have changed significantly since the arrival of Super PACs, political action committees that can receive unlimited contributions from corporations and unions once prohibited from spending on attack ads.
The bulk of the Romney campaign fund is bankrolled by financial heavyweights from Wall Street and right-wing donors, along with the RNC’s election funds and Super PACs. Small donors, on the other hand, tend to fuel Obama’s fundraising campaign.
Federal disclosures released on Monday reveal that Romney has raised about $389 million, while Obama has hauled in $512 so far. In the last election, Obama broke previous records. According to the U.S. Federal Election Commission, Obama raised about $778 million, while McCain trailed behind at about $383 million.
The money race is on track to hit a record but it won’t be the deciding factor, said Bob Biersack, a senior fellow at the Center for Responsive Politics and former staffer on the FEC.
Get breaking National news
Global News spoke to Biersack about the role that money will play in this election cycle.
Global News: Why exactly is the 2012 election shaping to be the most expensive election to date? Can we put this trend into perspective and compare it to elections as far back as the 1976 election of Jimmy Carter?
Bob Biersack: It’s happening because it almost always happens. It’s also perhaps happening because the system has been opened up to allow new participants – corporations and unions to be directly involved in ways they were not permitted before.
Global News: Reports say this is the second consecutive month that Romney has out-raised Obama. Is this a worrying trend for the Obama campaign? Does the fundraising gap matter given that Romney’s benefactors have deeper pockets as opposed to Obama’s?
Global News: Who has benefited the most from the proliferation of Super PACs and why?
Bob Biersack: More of the money is being spent by conservative organizations. A lot of the spending happened in the primary campaign. Benefits went to candidates who are no longer running. We’ll have to see if that pattern continues.
Global News: What effect has it had on the tone of the election?
Bob Biersack: What is different now are the organizations doing the spending, with outside groups. In the past it might have been national committees with the same kind of advertising to allow candidates to stay above the fray but the attacks still get made and may resonate with voters.
Global News: What are the ethical concerns associated with Super PACs?
Bob Biersack: From our perspective, the biggest problem is voters don’t have the ability to understand who’s behind those efforts. How the messages are received depends on the voters.
Comments
Want to discuss? Please read our Commenting Policy first.