Josh Barnett has an interesting post over at Harman Watch in which he lays out his case that Sen. Tom Harman will be at a campaign financing disadvantage should he face a vigorous primary challenge next June:
During Harman’s tough 2006 Special Election, he was hard-pressed to keep up with his opponents’ spending. So, he turned to a creative source, his 2008 campaign account.
Being an incumbent, Harman was able to raise money from all sorts of special interests and spend it from an account theoretically set up for his 2008 Campaign.
Barnett continues:
But now that the prospects of a serious challenger are becoming real, having spent $288,000+ (see attached Summary of his 460 filing) out of the $790,000 allowable under the Spending Limits he chose to abide by, that move seems like it could be backfiring. If his burn rate continues just at an average rate through the election, he'll have just $450,000 to spend.
Instead of having to raise even just the limit of $790,000 to match Harman’s spending dollar for dollar, an opponent could easily outspend the incumbent, or even spend only $450,000 to match him dollar-for-dollar.
Obviously, this is only important in the context of a contentious, expensive primary battle -- which would be an interesting experiment in itself, since Sen. Harman has yet to walk the electoral coals of a closed primary.
Stay tuned...
If anyone is going to give Harman a run for his money, it is Chuck DeVore. Other than DeVore, I really don't see anyone else who can seriously challenge Harman.
A "little bird" told me that Assemblyman Chuck DeVore is the only state legislator in Orange County that did not endorse Harman for re-election.
Posted by: Insider | October 22, 2007 at 05:15 PM
Lets AT LEAST be accurate. From what I can see the limit is like almost 800k now. It changes. These guys are jokers.
Posted by: At Least Get Your Numbers Right | October 22, 2007 at 06:17 PM
Josh can't get his numbers right and even if he did Harman will get a ton more IE's then DeVore. It's not as simple as 25 year old Josh would like to make it.
Posted by: Josh doesn't know | October 22, 2007 at 09:12 PM
How do you think Nuke's policies will do in Huntington Beach? DeVore can't win in this Senate district. Thats why Tom has continued to defeat the Reep machine. And by the way, it amazes me that Tom would be a reep target, he held the party line in the Senate even though he took a lot of heat from his long time supporters.
Posted by: just..asking | October 22, 2007 at 09:17 PM
A recent PPIC poll says Reeps support nukes by about 80 percent. Even in HB, nukes are popular with Reeps. Remember just..asking, June 2008 is a closed primary.
Posted by: Seal Beach | October 23, 2007 at 12:01 AM
Josh doesn't know, IEs from whom? The unions? If just..asking is right that Harman "held the party line in the Senate even though he took a lot of heat from his long time supporters" then why would the unions help him if be betrayed him?
Posted by: Seal Beach | October 23, 2007 at 12:06 AM
There are a lot of groups that hate DeVore which will be willing to run IE's. If this race happens it will be a bloodbath.
Posted by: Josh doesn't know | October 23, 2007 at 08:10 AM
What is not being factored in is it is Senate Caucus policy to defend incumbants - which Harman is. That means Harman can spend his 500k + every dollar he needs from Senate Leadership.
The problem? Senate Leadership has limited money. So while they may have enough to defend Harman and Muldonano, Strickland would be left in the cold in a competative seat.
Posted by: Devore Runs... Strickland Pays | October 23, 2007 at 09:54 AM
(1) no penalties have ever been levied for blowing past the spending limit - and MANY campaigns have done it (2) the law allows a candidate to amend his reports right up until filing to change whether or not to accept spending limits - done by McClintock in fact.
Posted by: Are You Serious? | October 23, 2007 at 09:57 AM
anyone notice Josh changed all the numbers on his post to point out the much higher amounts Harman could spend, but didnt change his conclusions?
Posted by: Little Boy Blue | October 23, 2007 at 10:47 AM
So....
If Devore runs Ackerman and the Senate and GOP defend Harman. That is a given. They end up spending a ton of money and we lose our one vote margin in the senate when we lose strickland or muldonado. All this to replace a politician with another politician with essentially the SAME voting record.
Posted by: Hilarious | October 23, 2007 at 01:01 PM
Want to see something funny google josh barnet and politics and see his 'website'.
Look, this clown is hardly credible, and his blog reports are full of inaccuracies, assumptions, and half truths. One mistake, fine... dozens and its intended to smear not report or 'watch'.
You may not like Tom Harman for whatever reason, but to give this half wit any attention hardly adds to the real dialogue about Harman's voting record or a possible challenge from DeVore.
Posted by: Josh Who? | October 23, 2007 at 02:44 PM
The same voting record? That's a laugh.
Harman voted for a diaper tax, an SUV tax, global greenhouse gas restrictions, and a weakening of Prop. 13.
Devore has the worst enviro record in the O.C. delegation.
The conservative California Republican Assembly rated Harman a 47% last year. Devore got a 100%.
There is a difference, a big difference.
That said, I don't see Devore running. He has not declared that I have seen.
Posted by: Seal Beach | October 23, 2007 at 02:50 PM