They say money is the mother’s milk of politics. While occasionally the underdog with less money comes out on top, it certainly doesn’t happen very often. Just like any successful business venture, you need capital to run a successful political campaign.
In past elections, putting together a substantial war chest of contributions was no problem for incumbents and “anointed” candidates. There were plenty of donors and not a lot of competitive races. So far, however, the 2006 election cycle is shaping up to be a very different type of year.
Incumbents and top candidates are finding it increasingly difficult to fill their campaign coffers. One reason for this is that there are fewer major contributors. The two major corporate gaming mergers have taken what used to be five large companies and consolidated them into two.
As an example, candidates used to be able to count on getting money from Mandalay Bay Resorts, MGM Grand, Mirage Resorts, Harrah’s Entertainment and Caesars Entertainment. If you were a strongly supported candidate, you might even be able to get $5,000 or $10,000 per property, which could account for $100,000 or more.
Now, you can count on getting perhaps one major donation from MGM-Mirage-Mandalay and one from Harrah’s Entertainment. Incumbent Clark County commissioners used to be able to count on getting $40,000 from MGM-Mirage and $40,000 from Mandalay Bay Resorts. Now it’s likely they will only get $40,000 from the newly formed conglomerate. The same is true with Harrah’s in its buy-out of Caesars Entertainment.
Different gaming companies didn’t always agree on donations, which meant that a challenger could still hope to get support if he or she had a particular relationship with one property or another. Not anymore, however.
Another factor that will make fundraising difficult in 2006 is the amount of truly competitive races on the ballot. In the governor’s race, many top contributors will be hedging their bets – giving money to candidates from both parties. In addition, a couple of candidates are running at mid-term – Senators Dina Titus and Bob Beers. They will be back in the Senate making votes in 2007 if they do not win, so companies feel an obligation to give to their campaigns so as not to risk incurring their anger at the Legislature.
Nearly every statewide office has a competitive field, and some have competitive primaries. All these candidates are seeking money to fund their campaigns. There won’t be enough to go around.
But while the fundraising pool is shrinking, costs are skyrocketing. Prices for media (television and radio ads), printing and other campaign functions are at least double what they were four years ago, mostly because of the increasing size of the electorate.
Elections where funds are tight at the beginning usually favor incumbents and, in open seats, candidates who have the widest support of the state’s largest industries. While there may not be as much early money, what is available will go to them and they will be able to put together a strong campaign team and effective messages.
However, in races such as this year’s governor’s contest, donors will probably equally split donations. Some casino companies have already committed to support one candidate in the Democratic primary and one in the Republican. From there, they will probably rely on polling to decide who gets the bulk of the money in the general election.
For political pundits, this year promises to be one of the best ever, with numerous contested races that should yield some very interesting (and perhaps entertaining) campaigns.