[EL] Time Spent Fundraising, pre- and post-1974

Tue Apr 8 11:38:46 PDT 2014

I think, Steve, it's pretty much all anecdotal. The only compilations of anecdotes I know are published by reform groups so I don't know how representative they are. They certainly have no interest in including the views that don't conform to the mission.

It's just my recollection that this doesn't seem to have been an issue in the past. The anecdote I've always heard, directly from old backers of Reagan, was that they went to Reagan and asked him to run for governor and said basically, "don't worry about the money, we'll take of that." And Reagan basically did no fundraising to start. Clearly presidential candidates once did fewer fundraisers.

I do think that the genie is out of the bottle, so to speak. That is, donors now expect to be called or contacted by the candidate. I don't think that was so in the past. I think that change reflected the need for the candidate to try to raise funds in a market where the supply was constricted.

Bradley A. Smith

Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault

   Professor of Law

Capital University Law School

303 E. Broad St.

Columbus, OH 43215

614.236.6317

http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx

________________________________
From: Steve Kolbert [steve.kolbert at gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 2:30 PM
To: Smith, Brad
Cc: Election Law; David A. Holtzman; Byron Tau
Subject: Time Spent Fundraising, pre- and post-1974

Brad,

I think your hypothesis --  that time spent fundraising increased dramatically after 1974 and was negligible before that -- is very interesting. As a theoretical matter, the hypothesis makes sense -- higher (or non-existent) limits means larger possible sums, which means fewer necessary asks, which means therefore less time spent raising money.

In my pre-law life as a campaign fundraiser in both (1) federal races and (2) non-federal races in states with no individual limits, the time my candidates spent fundraising was equal in all cases -- the candidates spent nearly every waking hour fundraising, irrespective of whether there were limits. (I'm a bit too young to have fundraised in 1974, though, so I have no anecdotal evidence to offer concerning what fundraising was like back then.)

I wonder, though, whether my experience is representative. So to that end, ate you aware of any empirical support for the proposition that higher limits result in less time spent fundraising? Or at least some publicly available collection of anecdotal evidence to that effect? And I ask the same questions with regard to the post-1974 spike in time spent fundraising  -- any empirical data or collection of anecdotal evidence?

Thanks Brad!

Steve Kolbert
(202) 422-2588
steve.kolbert at gmail.com<mailto:steve.kolbert at gmail.com>
@Pronounce_the_T

On Apr 8, 2014 10:57 AM, "Smith, Brad" <BSmith at law.capital.edu<mailto:BSmith at law.capital.edu>> wrote:
>
> Again, "dialing for dollars" (which is generally exaggerated anyway, but is present) is a phenomenon of the "reform" era.
>
>
>
> Bradley A. Smith
>
> Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
>
>    Professor of Law
>
> Capital University Law School
>
> 303 E. Broad St.
>
> Columbus, OH 43215
>
> 614.236.6317
>
> http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx
>
> ________________________________
> From: Byron Tau [btau at politico.com<mailto:btau at politico.com>]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 10:46 AM
> To: Smith, Brad; Marc Greidinger; David A. Holtzman
> Cc: Election law list
> Subject: RE: [EL] Rousseau and McCutcheon
>
> Actually, I think that's an interesting question that could go either way.
>
> Will being able to host a $50K per plate fundraiser — as Kay Hagan now can with her new JFC — mean less dialing for dollars because she can solicit a bigger check with a single in-person event.
>
> http://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/fecimg/?C00560748
>
> Or will her fundraisers also insist on MORE dialing for dollars to donors who were previous maxed out to other campaigns but can now be hit up for Hagan's effort as well?
>
> --
> Byron Tau
> Lobbying and campaign finance reporter || POLITICO
> c: 202-441-1171
> d: 703-341-4610
> Follow: @byrontau
> Subscribe to: http://www.politico.com/politicoinfluence/
> ________________________________
> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> [law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>] on behalf of Smith, Brad [BSmith at law.capital.edu<mailto:BSmith at law.capital.edu>]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 10:40 AM
> To: Marc Greidinger; David A. Holtzman
> Cc: Election law list
> Subject: Re: [EL] Rousseau and McCutcheon
>
> Fortunately, if the reform lobbyists are correct, fundraising will now be easier with joint fundraising committees, eliminating the need to spend so much time "dialing for dollars."
>
>
>
> "Dialing for dollars" is a phenomenon of the regulatory age that began in 1974. Prior to that time, there were no constraints on individual giving, and time spent fundraising was not an issue.
>
>
>
> Bradley A. Smith
>
> Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
>
>    Professor of Law
>
> Capital University Law School
>
> 303 E. Broad St.
>
> Columbus, OH 43215
>
> 614.236.6317
>
> http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx
>
> ________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140408/1d662c2f/attachment.html>