I just received an e-mail from the Obama campaign bragging about their fundraising for June.

Obama raised $52 million dollars and Obama/DNC have $72 million dollars cash-on-hand.

I think this beats the low expectations Obama had put out there. He raised more than twice as much as John McCain ($22 million).

McCain/RNC still have more than a $20 million dollar cash-on-hand advantage over Obama/DNC.

Patrick muses on the silence on the fundraising front from Team Obama:

Matt Stoller got a call from an Obama telemarketer. When he brought up the FISA issue, the caller was armed with talking points designed to smooth over Obama’s position.

This is significant on a few levels. First, I think this is first-hand evidence that Obama’s money crunch is real and is being impacted by his moving to the center on FISA and Iraq. In other words, it’s not just the netroots. The Obama campaign wouldn’t target a call like this to the netroots, because of the extreme likelihood that it would be blogged. It’s likely that this is their general telemarketing script, and FISA pops enough as an issue with Obama’s wide universe of donors to be included. That means, as Soren has written, that Obama may actually be killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

It’s also interesting that Obama is using telemarketing, usually the least efficient form of direct to market fundraising. Though he has to have used it at some other point in the campaign, I’m sure there was a great hope that the transition to online would obviate the need for more expensive fundraising techniques like mail and phones. This is also the first time I’ve heard of someone reporting an Obama telemarketing call. So, it looks like they’re trying to squeeze out cash any way they can.

Of course, this little video from Obama Campaign Manager David Plouffe only serves to throw more fuel on the fire:

P.S. Redstate’s Moe Lane and Mark Kilmer’s writing has been essential reading on this topic. If you have missed their posts, read them here, here, here, and here.

The Wall Street Journal reports (link via Talking Points Memo) that the Obama Campaign raised approx $30 million in June, a figure that an Obama spokesman calls “way off the mark”:

“The Wall Street Journal report of our fundraising numbers is way off the mark. It appears that after 18 months, some in the press still haven’t realized that anyone who is talking about numbers doesn’t know what our numbers are.”

So this can mean two things: either they blew away the $30 million figure (which I find highly unlikely), or this is the beginning of Team Obama’s dialing down of expectations regarding fundraising for the rest of the campaign.

Greg Sargent (for TPM) nails the significance of this all:

But here’s the cold, hard math: The Obama campaign wants to raise at least $300 million, and in order to do this he has to haul in an average of at least $50 million a month. If the Journal’s number is right, this obviously didn’t happen in June.

So it seems that Team Obama has built a massive national campaign (150 paid staffers in MO alone) under the expectation of raising $50 million a month. If the money is not coming in at this rate, they will have to tear down existing structure or scrap much of their planned national apparatus.

John McCain could live to fight another day when he had to gut his national campaign in the Summer of 2007. The consequences of a late summer 2008 tear down may be quite different for Sen. Obama.

H/T- Sampo

Mark Halperin is reporting that the McCain Campain and the RNC ended the month of June with a combined $95 million CoH, which is being touted as double the amount of the Obama Campaign and the DNC.

Team McCain also reported that the campaign raised more than the $22 million they totaled in May.

Where’s Obama’s figures? I eagerly await their release.

Read Halperin’s full report here.

H/T- Iowa

I cannot believe that I wrote that headline…

There is a good chance Barack Obama’s fundraising total from June will be less than the $22 million he raised in May. No word on whether McCain’s fundraising total was up from then, but if you recall, Sen. McCain only came in $1 million behind Obama for the month.

Nothing is certain, but there is at least the possibility (remember-I said possibility) that John McCain outraised Barack Obama in June.

The silence on this front, as they say, is deafening.

Update: One of the most insightful observers of the 2008 race emailed me with these two tidbits:

First off, traffic has decreased on Obama’s official site. Secondly, Obama is back on the rubber chicken circuit, which may suggest that he needs to find new methods of raising money.

Once again, this is purely speculation at this point. The numbers should be leaked to someone soon.

Update 2: As someone alluded to in the comments, there is a good possibility that the problems experienced by Sen. McCain last summer (building a gargantuan national campaign apparatus which needs to be torn down when the money is not there) will happen to Sen. Obama if this speculation bears fruit. How much money is needed to fund a campaign that has 150 paid staffers in Missouri anyhow?!

Remember how the silence regarding the Obama Camp’s May fundraising numbers caused many pundits to speculate that Sen. Obama may be headed towards a record shattering month? Perhaps even $100 million for the month of May alone?

As it turns out, Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain raised nearly identical figures for the month; Obama came in at $22 million compared to Sen. McCain’s $21 million. Obama’s May showing represents a 30% decrease from April. In fact, McCain and Obama have essentially reached financial parity in terms of cash-on-hand (all emphasis mine):

…[Obama] ending the month with $43 million cash on hand and $304,000 in debts. But $10 million of his available cash can only be spent in the fall after the party national conventions, leaving $33 million for the summer months. Obama’s decision to bypass the general election’s public finance system allows him to use left over primary money in the fall campaign.

Republican John McCain, who secured his party’s nomination in March, raised $21 million in May and had $31.6 million in the bank.The figures place him virtually on same financial footing as Obama — a level of parity that would have been unimaginable just a few months ago.

Even more good news is found in the CoH figures of the two respective parties:

The Republican National Committee, however, ended June with 13 times more money in the bank than the Democratic National Committee. The RNC had $53 million cash on hand to the DNC’s $4 million. Both parties are allowed to assist their presidential candidates with coordinated campaigns.

As Sean noted earlier, Obama outspent Clinton 3 to 1 in Pennsylvania only to lose by 10 points. Essentially, Obama had to outspend Clinton by 40% to draw her to a statistical tie in the overall vote.

And if these fundraising patterns hold up, it appears that Obama will not have that luxury in the general election.

Just arrived in my mailbox:

As I and many others have postulated before, Romney’s gracious bowing out of the GOP primaries this year was a huge move in uniting the party as well as the first step in preparing for a run in 2012 should McCain lose this November. Since that time, Romney is doing exactly what he needs to build support among conservatives and the GOP party faithful — making speeches at GOP conventions and Lincoln Day dinners, headlining fundraising events for groups such as the Susan B Anthony List, filling in for Paul Harvey on his radio news show, and yes, fundraising and campaigning for John McCain.

This morning, the Romney team launched their new PAC: Free and Strong America.

The name is lifted from a line in his “Faith in America” speech:

“You left us, your children, a free and strong America. It is why we call yours the greatest generation. It is now my generation’s turn. How we respond to today’s challenges will define our generation, and it will determine what kind of America we leave our children, and theirs.”

The PAC is more or less a reassembling of the Romney campaign team, including big names such as James Bopp, Peter Flaherty, Vin Weber, Carl Forti (CEO of Freedom’s Watch), and of course, Beth Myers and Kevin Madden.

The main purpose of the PAC is to harness and funnel Romney’s fundraising capabilities for conservative candidates in the upcoming election. They’ve selected 7 House candidates to back so far - and Marc Ambinder notes, “Make no mistake: the candidates Romney’s PAC is supporting are all solid conservatives.” And, Free and Strong America is supporting John McCain for President.

Of course, the PAC also acts as a vehicle to allow Mitt to stay in the political spotlight as well: he is featured on the homepage as the chairman of the PAC and there’s a “Learn About Mitt” tab for his biography of accomplishments.

My Friends,

I have long said that I am running for president not to be someone, but to do something - to do what is hard, but necessary to address the challenges we face as a nation. In the coming weeks, I intend to address many of the great challenges that America’s energy policies must meet.

One of these challenges is global climate change. Whether we call it “climate change” or “global warming,” in the end we’re all left with the same set of facts. Good stewardship, prudence and simple common sense demand that we act to meet the challenge and act quickly. And if we are wrong and climate change is not a threat, all we are doing is leaving a better planet for our children and lowering our dependence on foreign oil.

That is why I have proposed a cap-and-trade system that would set limits on greenhouse gas emissions while encouraging the development of low-cost compliance options. This is a market-based system to curb greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, mobilize innovative technologies and strengthen the economy.

With so much at stake in this election, it is more important than ever that we work together to secure our energy future, to create opportunities for American industry and to leave a better future for our children. I cannot succeed in my efforts without your immediate financial support.

Unfortunately, some have already begun to criticize my efforts to solve global climate change. My campaign must be financially prepared to respond to this criticism and that’s why I ask that you follow this link immediately to make a donation of $50, $100, $250, $500, $1,000 or up to the legal limit of $2,300.

We Americans like to say that there is no problem we can’t solve, however complicated, and no obstacle we can’t overcome if we meet it together. I believe this about our country. I know this about our country. And now it is time for us to act with this resolve.

Please join my campaign today by following this link. Thank you for your support.

Sincerely,

John McCain

P.S. Our next president will need to address the issue of the environmental challenges we face as a nation. This week, I have taken the lead to propose a market-based system to curb greenhouse gas emissions and to strengthen our economy. I ask for your financial assistance in helping my campaign spread my message by following this link to make a contribution of any amount up to the legal limit of $2,300. Thank you.

Senator McCain, since you concede that you may be wrong about “climate change/global warming”, and that it may not be a threat, please explain why you asserted in a speech three days ago that “the facts of global warming demand our urgent attention,” and then proceeded to antagonize many of your fellow Republicans in an ad, saying “One extreme thinks high taxes and crippling regulation is the solution; another denies the problem even exists.”

Two months ago, McCain and Obama got into a bit of a argument over whether Obama would stand by the pledge he made last year to take public funding for the general election campaign if he was the nominee. McCain accused him of being a hypocrite for attempting to renege of the agreement and Obama noted that with over 1,000,000 individual donors, his campaign is essentially the definition of being publicly funded.

Since that time the conventional wisdom was that McCain would ultimately take the guaranteed $85 million for the general election (September through November) as well as rely on the fundraising of the RNC and state GOPs while Obama would be able to raise a couple hundred million for the general election on his own.

Well, earlier today Obama sat down with Fox’s Chris Wallace and talked about his current thinking as it regards to the situation. He had some very interesting things to say:

WALLACE:  The Wall Street Journal says that you are prepared to run the first privately-financed campaign - presidential campaign since Watergate.  True?

OBAMA:  Look, we’ve done a wonderful job raising money from the grassroots.  I’m very proud of the fact that in March, in February for example, 90 percent of our donations came over the Internet.  Our average donation is $96.  And we’ve done an amazing job, I think, of mobilizing people, to finance our campaigns in small increments.

I have promised that I will sit down with John McCain and talk about, can we preserve a public system, as long as we are taking into account third party, independent expenditures, because what I don’t intend to -

WALLACE:  If you could get that agreement you would go for a publicly financed campaign?

OBAMA:  What I don’t intend to do is to allow huge amounts of money to be spent by the RNC, the Republican National Committee or by organizations like the Swift Boat organization and just stand there without -

WALLACE:  If you get that agreement?

OBAMA:  I would be very interested in pursuing public financing because I think not every candidate is going to be able to do what I’ve done in this campaign and I think it’s important to think about future campaigns.

Now, if I understand that correctly, Obama is essentially saying that if he and McCain could sit down and hash out an agreement regarding 527 groups that he would be “very interested” in taking the $85 million for himself. Quite frankly, that’s stunning. Here’s a guy who could very well outspend his opponent by 2 to 1, or even 3 to 1 in the general election (which would be a significant advantage for Obama - enabling him to run a 50-state campaign), but now he says that he might voluntarily level the playing field. If I were John McCain I would make a deal right away. If they can fight the general with the same amount of money, that will give McCain a much better chance to win, especially if Obama isn’t drowning him out with ads.

To be sure, I think it would be complete insanity for Obama to actually take public funding in the end. I’m sure his advisers would never let him go through with it, but he’s really not leaving himself much wiggle room. What if McCain accepts to take the money while coming down hard on the third party groups?

Last night, Hillary’s campaign announced that they had received $2.5 million within an hour of the cable networks calling the primary for her. According to MyDD, Terry McAuliffe went MSNBC and announced that so far the Clinton campaign has raised $10 million since last night, including an astonishing 50,000 new donors.

Not on the shortlist?

Although Sec/state Condoleezza Rice may be campaigning for vice president, I sense no — and I mean no — interest on the McCain side in putting her on a short list… at least not yet.

One wonders whether Marc’s “sense” is from his own intuition or from talking to people within the McCain campaign itself.

In other news, Ambinder also notes that McCain has raised $15 million in March.

Here’s more on Howard Dean’s, frankly, sad attempt to smear Sen. McCain regarding a violation of campaign finance laws:

Lawyers for the bank that provided a crucial $4 million line of credit to John McCain’s campaign late last year said Monday that the loan agreement was carefully drafted to give McCain the opportunity to withdraw from public financing during the primary elections.

In a letter obtained by The Associated Press, the outside counsel for Fidelity & Trust Bank said the loan terms specifically excluded from the collateral any potential share of public matching funds the Arizona senator was entitled to receive.

The letter, from lawyers Matthew S. Bergman and Scott E. Thomas to McCain lawyer Trevor Potter, supports McCain’s stance against claims that his withdrawal from public financing is in jeopardy.

The bank’s description of the loan came on the same day the Democratic Party filed a complaint against McCain, calling on campaign finance regulators to investigate whether the likely Republican presidential nominee can legally bypass public financing for the primary and the strict spending limits that come with it. The Federal Election Commission also has asked McCain to explain the loan terms.

Staying in the public financing system could be devastating for McCain because he would have to live within spending limits that he is already on the verge of surpassing.

The Federal Election Commission approved, or certified, McCain to receive up to $5.8 million in public matching funds. McCain did not collect any of the money. To withdraw once such funds have been certified, a candidate must not have received any of the money nor encumbered it as collateral for a loan.

”The bank does not now have, nor did it ever receive from (McCain’s campaign) committee, a security interest in any certification of matching funds,” Bergman and Thomas wrote. ”Any finding or determination to the contrary would be wholly inconsistent with the language of the loan documents, the intent and understanding of the parties and basic principles of banking, security and uniform commercial code law.”

The loan documents specifically state that the collateral did not include McCain’s right to such the public funds. But the agreement with Fidelity & Trust Bank of Bethesda, Md., required him to reapply for matching funds if he withdrew from public financing and lost early primary contests.

”It is our understanding that, to date, none of those events have occurred,” the bank lawyers wrote.

But FEC Chairman David Mason, in a letter to McCain last week, said the senator must show that he did not use the promise of future public funds to help secure the loan and asked McCain to explain three specific provisions in the loan agreement.

Mason also said McCain must receive approval from four members of the six-member commission before withdrawing from the system.

Such approval is doubtful in the short term because the commission has four vacancies and cannot convene a quorum.

The DNC’s complaint faces a similar obstacle.

Upon receiving a complaint, FEC staffers must notify the target and request a response. They then make a confidential recommendation to the commissioners whether to continue with a full investigation or whether to dismiss the complaint. Without a quorum, the FEC will be unable to make that determination.

The vacancies have not been filled because of a partisan dispute in the Senate. Many Democrats oppose nominee Hans von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department official, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has proposed holding separate, simple majority votes on each nominee. Republicans want all FEC nominees voted on as a package.

McCain and his lawyer, Potter, a former FEC chairman, have argued that McCain is entitled to turn down the primary matching funds in the same manner that Democratic presidential candidates Richard Gephardt, John Kerry and Howard Dean did in the 2004 primaries. Dean is now chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

McCain, campaigning in Ohio on Monday, said he hadn’t considered the financial implications of staying in the public financing system.

”I haven’t even contemplated it because we’re doing exactly what Howard Dean did in a previous election and what the FEC ruled in the case of Congressman Gephardt,” he said. ”They said they were going to take matching funds and then they withdrew.”

You read that right folks… Howard Dean is accusing Sen. McCain of an FEC violation for exact same action that he, John Kerry and Dick Gephardt took in the 2004 cycle.

Pathetic…

Let’s do a little compare and contrast. Today, Dean and the Democratic National Committee have filed an FEC complaint against John McCain on the grounds that McCain was somehow out of line when he opted out of the primary public funding system on Febraruary 6th, after having qualified but not recieved any of the money:

The Democratic National Committee will file a complaint Monday with the Federal Election Commission, alleging that Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has illegally blown through spending limits imposed by the presidential public financing system.

“This is a classic example of someone who talks one way and does the other,” DNC Chairman Howard Dean said today. “Our purpose here is to get him to obey the law.”

The complaint is based on a dispute between McCain, who appears headed toward his party’s nomination for president, and the FEC, which notified him last week that it had not approved his request to withdraw from the public funding system.

And yet, if we go back to June of 2003, we see that Howard Dean himself actively sought FEC primary funds as well, when he was a Presidential contender:

In March 2003, Dean Committed To Public Financing, Promised To Attack Any Opponent Who Opted Out: “It Will Be A Huge Issue”

In March 2003, Dean Committed To Taking Matching Funds, Said He Would Attack Any Opponent Who Opted Out Of System: “It Will Be A Huge Issue … I Think Most Democrats Believe In Campaign Finance Reform.” “Howard Dean committed Friday to taking taxpayer dollars to finance his presidential campaign … He promised to make it an issue in the Democratic primaries if any of his rivals decide to skip public financing, as President Bush did en route to winning the Republican nomination in 2000. ‘It will be a huge issue,’ Dean said. ‘I think most Democrats believe in campaign finance reform.’” (Sharon Theimer, “At Least Five Democratic Presidential Hopefuls Lay Groundwork To Take Public Financing,” The Associated Press, 3/7/03)

And yet, surpris, surpise. Dean goes back on his pledge and opts out of the system a few months later:

In November 2003, Dean “Became The First Democrat To Opt Out Of The Presidential Public Financing System In 30 Years, Striking A Severe Blow To The Watergate-Era Program.” “Howard Dean on Saturday became the first Democrat to opt out of the presidential public financing system in 30 years, striking a severe blow to the Watergate-era program. Dr. Dean, who has raised $25 million to become the best-financed Democrat in the race, will rely on private contributors to fuel his campaign in the primaries, turning away almost $19 million in taxpayer financing and avoiding the spending limit of about $45 million that comes with it.” (Glen Justice, “Dean Rejects Public Financing In Primaries,” The New York Times, 11/9/03)

His fellow Democratic contenders didn’t seem particularly happy about it at the time:

· Lieberman Spokesman Craig Smith: “It’s a shame that Howard Dean has broken his word and abandoned his earlier pledge never to bypass the public financing system …” (Ronald Brownstein, “Dean Won’t Accept Public Financing,” Los Angeles Times, 11/9/03)

· John Edwards: “It sends exactly the wrong signal to voters in this country …” (Jim Drinkard and Jill Lawrence, “Dems Decry Dean Move,” USA Today, 11/10/03)

· Dick Gephardt: “You’ve got to … stay with what you believe in and think is right.” (Jim Drinkard and Jill Lawrence, “Dems Decry Dean Move,” USA Today, 11/10/03)

This is the official McCain campaign position on withdrawing from federal matching funds:

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has repeatedly held that candidates who enter the Presidential Primary Matching Funds System have a right to withdraw, provided they do so before the United States Treasury pays them the funds and provided they do not use the matching fund certificates they hold as collateral for a loan. The campaign has been paid no funds by the United States Treasury and never used the certificates issued by the FEC as collateral for its bank loan. Previous candidates in this situation include Democratic National Committee Chair Howard Dean, who entered and then withdrew from the primary funding system in the 2004 election, and Congressman Dick Gephardt, whose campaign obtained an advisory opinion from the FEC in 2003 stating they could withdraw from the system and then re-apply for re-entry. The right to withdraw from the system is a constitutional right, which prevents the FEC from blocking Senator McCain’s withdrawal without cause.

Senator McCain notified the FEC and the United States Treasury of his withdrawal from the system in a letter dated February 6th. The current dispute is simply over whether the FEC has to take any action in response to the withdrawal notice. It is clear to the campaign, as it is to a number of FEC experts, that no FEC action is necessary in response to Senator McCain’s notice of withdrawal given the constitutional nature of the right. In our view, the Senator’s letter is all that is legally required to exit from the system. FEC Chairman Mason, who does not represent the official view of the Commission due to the current lack of a quorum, has written a letter to the campaign in which he states his belief that the FEC must formally vote to accept the withdrawal. In either case the result is the same: the campaign will be out of the public funding system either because of the letter sent on February 6th, or because of a future vote by the Commission acknowledging the letter.

Nevertheless, the campaign is fully responding to Chairman Mason’s request for information and is confident that the new commissioners, when appointed and confirmed, will take whatever action they conclude is necessary to confirm Senator McCain’s withdrawal from the system as of February 6, 2008.

Looks like yesterday’s McCain campaign email on the Times story has paid off:

John McCain raised more money from yesterday’s Times-bashing e-mail pitch than he has from any other e-mail solicitation, according to a source familiar with the fundraising effort.

In a missive authored by campaign manager Rick Davis, the McCain camp used the Times story to portray themselves as a victim of the “liberal media.”

The source declined to say exactly how much they raised.

UPDATE: The McCain campaign tells CNN that they have raised “nearly $2 million” in the past 24 hours since the email was sent out.

In case you’re wondering what McCain is talking about here, this is Sen. Obama’s statement of commitment [pdf]:

QUESTION: “If you are nominated for President in 2008 and your major opponents agree to forgo private funding in the general election campaign, will you participate in the presidential public financing system?”

OBAMA: “Yes. I have been a long-time advocate for public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests. I introduced public financing legislation in the Illinois State Senate, and am the only 2008 candidate to have sponsored Senator Russ Feingold’s (D-WI) bill to reform the presidential public financing system. In February 2007, I proposed a novel way to preserve the strength of the public financing system in the 2008 election. My plan requires both major party candidates to agree on a fundraising truce, return excess money from donors, and stay within the public financing system for the general election. My proposal followed announcements by some presidential candidates that they would forgo public financing so they could raise unlimited funds in the general election. The Federal Election Commission ruled the proposal legal, and Senator John McCain (r-AZ) has already pledged to accept this fundraising pledge. If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”

Obama took to the pages of USA Today to write his thoughts on the matter earlier today:

In 2007, shortly after I became a candidate for president, I asked the Federal Election Commission to clear any regulatory obstacles to a publicly funded general election in 2008 with real spending limits. The commission did that. But this cannot happen without the agreement of the parties’ eventual nominees. As I have said, I will aggressively pursue such an agreement if I am my party’s nominee.

I do not expect that a workable, effective agreement will be reached overnight. The campaign-finance laws are complex, and filled with loopholes that can render meaningless any agreement that is not solidly constructed.

I propose a meaningful agreement in good faith that results in real spending limits. The candidates will have to commit to discouraging cheating by their supporters; to refusing fundraising help to outside groups; and to limiting their own parties to legal forms of involvement. And the agreement may have to address the amounts that Senator McCain, the presumptive nominee of his party, will spend for the general election while the Democratic primary contest continues.

We can have such an agreement this year, and it could hold up. I am committed to seeking such an agreement if that commitment is matched by Senator McCain. When the time comes, we will talk and our commitment will be tested.

I will pass that test, and I hope that the Republican nominee passes his.

It certainly seems that Obama is inching closer and closer to accepting a public funding agreement. Like I said the other day, if Obama doesn’t accept it, or tries to put a “poison pill” into the negotiations, McCain has a very effective weapon to hammer him over. He says in the press conference in Washington that Obama is engaging in “Washington doublespeak.” If this attack can be tied to the fact that Obama doesn’t have a single legislative accomplishment that he (or even his own national surrogates!) can point to, I think McCain would be in a much stronger position. If Obama and McCain do end up sitting down and working out a deal on public financing, this also works out to McCain’s advantage, because the FEC places caps on the amount that you can spend in a particular state.

According to the FEC’s website, they have the anticipated national general election spending cap for each party for a hypothetical 2007 matchup ($81.8 million for each nominee - most observers think that it will be $85 million for the 2008 general). Even more fascinating than that is that the FEC would also cap the amount that can be spent in each state (based of population size), regardless of whether it’s a battleground or not. Take a look at these numbers.

The always thought-provoking AllahPundit has replied to my two posts on the emerging spat behind Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama on publicly financing the general election. If you haven’t already, I’d suggest reading my first and second post, then reading Allah’s reply.

Ok, now that that’s done I want to take his reply point by point:

Did the Messiah promise not to do any fundraising for the general election by accepting public funds? Given the difference between the cap on public money - around $85 million - and the kind of bank he can expect to make if he opts out, that’s a huge win for Maverick in eliminating the Democrats’ fundraising advantage. McCain’s been hammering him on it all week. Which leaves Obama with five options:

1. Abide by the pledge and give up that moneybomb advantage. Not a chance.

I would agree that’s an unlikely outcome for Obama to take. After all, he has already raised more money in the primaries than any other candidate (in either party) ever. Chances are that if he made it to the general election, he would raise even more amounts of money. Yet, if he accepts public funding, he not only would be alloted a total of $85 million, but most significantly, he would be constrained to ridiculous spending caps that are determined based on the population of the state, regardless of whether its a significant electoral battleground or not. Why would he purposely kneecap himself like that? Unless, he is such a true believer in campaign finance reform that he doesn’t care that it would neutralize his biggest advantage. I’m not sold on it just yet, but I think that that’s a possibility.

2. Deny that he ever “pledged” to take public funds and weasel out of the deal. Possible.

Sure. But then McCain would run a ad hammering Obama over this statement up to the day of the general election: “Senator John McCain has already pledged to accept this fundraising pledge. If I am the Democratic nominee, I will aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election.”

This seems like a minor issue that no one could possibly care about, except for us political junkies, but I think that if it’s played right by McCain, it would cut at the heart of Obama’s appeal. The great post-partisan reformer who rails against the cynical politics of Washington turns out to be a…cynical Washington politician.

3. Offer McCain an alternative deal which he’ll never accept because it plays too much to Obama’s advantages. See the “$150 contribution” proposal in LJ’s second post.

Well, I’m not exactly sure what that would entail because if Obama and McCain accept FEC funds, they will not be able to raise any additional private “hard money” funds, no matter how small the contribution is. Second, if Obama purposely tried to put a “poison pill” in the negotiations, that would also be used to great effect by the McCain campaign in ads aimed at tearing down Obama’s “good government” reputation.

4. Accept the deal and shunt the moneybombs off onto 527s

That would actually be illegal. The reason 527s are such a problem now is because they operate completely independently of a campaign. They can run issue ads on behalf of the candidate, but the money they get has to come from separate sources. If any coordination between a campaign and 527 is discovered, they immediately cease being considered 527s, and instead become part of the campaign itself. Not only that, but McCain has long said that he would denounce any ad that is aired on his behalf by a 527.

Back in December, a pro-war 527 sprung up and began running pro-McCain ads in South Carolina, which prompted a lengthy rebuke from the Senator including “…I ask all of my donors and supporters, including Mr. Reed, to cease and desist immediately from supporting any independent expenditures that might be construed as benefiting my campaign indirectly.” Obama also has taken tough stands against 527s over the past few months. I have a hard time seeing that both Obama and McCain would attack them during the primaries, yet embrace them during the general election.

5. Admit that he “pledged” but has to break his pledge now because he’s got a movement thing going that people want to be part of and, goshdarnit, it wouldn’t be fair to them to deny them the fun of donating. Weak, but still preferable to number one.

Yeah, and Obama would open up a big hole in his armor for which McCain would attack relentlessly. Obama has really boxed himself it here. Either he backtracks and takes the inevitable hits from McCain over it or he actually does take the funding which makes the general election a completely different ballgame - won that McCain would be much more likely to win.

Also: The Washington Post (that bastion of conservatism) just put up their morning editorial where they go after Obama for “waffling,” “backtracking,” and “parsing” on public financing.  Like I said, this thing has the potential to be huge.

It must be tempting for a campaign that has reached dizzying new financial heights to give up the guarantee of $85 million in federal funds for the prospect of being able to rake in even more — and to get a financial edge over an opponent whose fundraising has been lackluster and whose party seems dispirited. It must be chastening to think about the financial advantage that Mr. McCain will have in the months leading up to the convention, when Mr. Obama and Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), his remaining Democratic opponent, may still be battling for the nomination while Mr. McCain is spending “primary” money to build the necessary architecture for the general election.

But this kind of backtracking and parsing isn’t what the millions of voters who have been inspired by Mr. Obama are looking for. It’s not befitting Mr. Obama’s well-earned image as a champion of reform. Instead of waffling, Mr. Obama should be pushing Ms. Clinton to go beyond her spokesman’s statements that she would “definitely consider” forgoing public financing.

Why not let the candidates raise as much cash as they can and save the taxpayers’ money? Because it’s better for voters if candidates spend more time talking to them and less time cozying up to donors. It’s better for democracy if candidates are less indebted to big bundlers who have raked in six- or seven-figure amounts for their campaigns. Mr. McCain seems to understand this. What about the Democrats?

Yesterday, I asked whether or not Barack Obama would stand by his promise to take federal matching funds for the general election, if he and John McCain are their respective nominees. At his press conference an hour ago, it seemed as if Obama said that he would indeed honor it. This is potentially huge news.

Asked about public financing, he tells reporters in Milwaukee, “If I am the nominee, then I will make sure our people talk to John McCain’s people to make sure we abide by the same rules.”

That’s not exactly a promise to reach agreement, and Obama could propose rules intolerable to McCain - no contributions over $150, for instance.

But it certainly sounds like he’s moving back toward what had seemed, a year ago, like a firm commitment.

“My folks will sit down and see whether we can arrive at common sense ground rules” if he’s the nominee, he said.

I expected that he would find some way to wiggle out of his pledge, in light of the fact that he’s been pulling in $30 million a month. Were he to accept federal funds,his fundraising would not only be restricted, but the amount he’d be able to spend in each state would be capped. That would effective erase his entire fundraising advantage and completely level the playing field. If it goes through, this might be the best thing to happen to McCain’s chances in November.

UPDATE: The Senator raises the issue at a rally in Northern Wisconsin today:

“I made the commitment to the American people that if I were the nominee of my party, I would accept public financing,” McCain said Friday in Oshkosh, Wis. “I expect Senator Obama to keep his word to the American people as well. This is all about a commitment that we made to the American people.

“I am going to keep my commitment,” he said. “The American people have every reason to expect him to keep his commitment.”

I have always given Barack props when it comes to campaigning and to his ability to get his base out to the polls. I never thought that we would have to face him in the general even with his incredible political skills. I always assumed that Hillary’s machine would turn out for her and propel her to the nomination. I was wrong.

Obama had a record January with $32M in donations from 170,000 different sources. It looks like he is set to repeat this feat this month.

Clinton had a stellar year last year with her fund raising, but it seems that those wells have already dried up.

Is this the writing on the wall? Can she self-fund against Obama until Pennsylvania (April)?

The big question is this: Can we complete with Obama after he kills Hillary in the primaries? I have a bad feeling that we ought to be getting ready for 2012 at this time. At least we can pick up some huge wins in the House and Senate in 2010 with a Democratic president..

And ties Fred Thompson for 3rd place this quarter in contributions?
From readers RayinNH and Jeffrey:

- Amount Reported In Primary Contributions In The Fourth Quarter: $9 Million
- In The Fourth Quarter, Governor Romney Loaned $18 Million To Romney For President
- Total Amount Raised In Primary Contributions For The Year: Approximately $53.5 Million
- Total Amount Of Revenue For The Year: $90 Million
- Total Number Of Donors In 2007: More Than 119,000
- Contributions Received From All 50 States And Washington, D.C.
- NO General Election Money Collected In 2007

I’ll update this below in a few minutes…

I’ll update this as I go along with posting. Here are the fundraising numbers for this quarter alone. I’ll continually update this as I type in the information. Still waiting on numbers from the Romney and Paul campaigns. From the AP:

4th Quarter Contributions:

• Rudy Giuliani 14 million dollars
• Fred Thompson 8.9 million dollars
• John McCain 6.8 million dollars
• Mike Huckabee 6.6 million dollars

Official Candidate Numbers:

RUDY GIULIANI (dropped out)

• Total receipts to date: $61.6 million, including $5.7 million for the general election
• Total contributions to date: $59.2 million
• Total spending: $48.9 million
• Fourth quarter contributions: $14.2 million
• Fourth quarter spending: $18.3 million
• Fourth quarter transfers or loans: $78,195.
• Cash on hand: $12.8 million
• Debt: $1.2 million
• Top donor states this quarter: New York, $2.3 million; Texas, $1.7 million; California, $1.5 million
• Employees of U.S.A.A. gave $61,600; employees of Merrill Lynch contributed $45,050.00; and employees of Ernst & Young, L.L.P., gave $39,350

FRED THOMPSON (dropped out)

• Total receipts to date: $21.8 million, including $158,163.00 for the general election
• Total contributions to date: $21.7 million
• Total spending: $19.7 million
• Fourth quarter contributions: $8.9 million
• Fourth quarter spending: $14 million
• Fourth excursion transfers or loans: None
• Cash on hand: $2.1 million
• Debt: $404,221.35
• Top donor states this quarter: Tennessee, $780,085; Texas, $492,608; California, $400,316
• Employees of J.P. Morgan gave $19,500; employees of Sullivan and Cromwell, L.L.P., contributed $10,400

JOHN MCCAIN

• Total receipts to date: $42.1 million, including $2.2 million for the general election
• Total contributions to date: $37.5 million
• Total spending: $39.1 million
• Fourth quarter contributions: $6.8 million
• Fourth quarter spending: $10.5 million
• Fourth quarter transfers or loans: $3 million
• Cash on hand: $2.9 million
• Debt: $4.5 million
• Top donor states this quarter: California, $600,715; Florida, $523,583; New York, $458,091
• Employees of Merrill Lynch gave $39,125; employees of Bridgewater Associates contributed $13,800

MIKE HUCKABEE

• Total receipts to date: $9 million, including for the general election
• Total contributions to date: $9 million
• Total spending: $7.1 million
• Fourth quarter contributions: $6.6 million
• Fourth quarter spending: $5.4 million
• Fourth quarter transfers or loans: None
• Cash on hand: $1.9 million
• Debt: $97,676.18
• Top donor states this quarter: Texas, $1 million; Florida, $623,805; California, $267,015
• Employees of Kenneth Copeland Ministries gave $16,020; employees of the Panduit Corporation contributed $13,700; and employees of Emmet, Marvin & Martin, L.L.P., gave $9,720

Sorry about my absence over the past day and a half, I’ve had to tend to some unexpected family issues. Looks like I missed a lot of the fun.

After winning Florida, McCain has rapidly consolidated his position as the likely 2008 Republican nominee. Today, he picked up support of Gov. Rick Perry, Gov Arnold Schwarzenegger and former Senator and United Nations Ambassador John Danforth.

On Danforth:

U.S. Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign today announced that John C. Danforth, former U.S. Senator from Missouri and United States Ambassador to the United Nations, has endorsed John McCain for president. Senator Danforth will serve as the honorary Chair of John McCain’s Missouri campaign.

“I have known John McCain for many years, and I am proud to endorse him for president,” said Senator Danforth. “John McCain’s lifetime of service, unparalleled knowledge of world affairs and ability to work across party lines make him the best candidate in this election. In these uncertain times, John McCain is uniquely equipped to meet our challenges and lead our nation in the struggle against radical Islamic extremism. I am proud to help spread John McCain’s message across the country and to the good people of the state of Missouri.”

John McCain expressed his appreciation for Senator Danforth’s support, stating, “I am honored to have John’s support. His knowledge of the issues facing our nation will prove valuable to my campaign, and I grateful to have him on our team.”

In addition, K Street has also begun to coalesce behind McCain. He has raised well over $10 million since his New Hampshire victory and has several fundraisers scheduled over the next few days. McCain and Giuliani are also making a joint appearance on Leno tonight.

According to senior adviser, Mark Salter. $3 million has been raised online since McCain’s win in New Hampshire on January 8th. The campaign also plans to hold two big fundraisers the day before and the day after the primary in Washington DC and California, respectively. It’s very possible for the campaign to have raised $10-$12 million by the end of the month.

Update: The AP talks to McCain’s great spokeswoman, Jill Hazelbaker, about the campaign’s impressive haul this month:

McCain spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said McCain has expanded his total base of contributors to more than 110,000 donors and raised $3 million online. McCain raised $5.7 million between July 1 and Sept. 30.

She said the campaign has stopped raising general election money.

“People are excited about McCain’s momentum, and that’s translated into a significant bump in our fundraising,” Hazelbaker said. “They’re rallying to John McCain because they recognize that he’s the candidate who will lead the Republican Party to victory in November.”

It’s been quite a while since Senator McCain has pulled in this much money in a single day fundraiser. He has at least 3 more high profile fundraisers planned between now and Tuesday in Florida. He is currently on pace to outspend Rudy Giuliani on ads in the Sunshine State.

Armed with a contingent of high profile veterans and former prisoners of war, Sen. John McCain hammered home his core message of keeping the nation safe from terrorism as he wooed voters in this heavily military region of the state before flying to New York to pick up cash and a key endorsement.

“As president, I’d like to serve this nation a little while longer and I’m asking for your support,” McCain said at one of his largest events of the campaign at the Fort Walton Beach Convention Center. “And here, all across North Florida, is where I will be depending upon our veterans. I will be depending upon our servicemen and women.”

Congressional medal of honor recipient Bud Day, McCain’s roommate in prison, accompanied McCain, offering a quiet but powerful endorsement. He and a group of prominent veterans are also campaigning separately for McCain this week in Panama City, Tallahassee, and Jacksonville, among other areas where the military is predominant.

McCain raced up to New York in the afternoon for a fund-raiser that brought in more than $1 million, said Charles Black, his senior adviser.

And, in what could be construed as a slight to former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, former Sen. Alfonse M. D’Amato, a powerhouse in New York politics, gave McCain a ringing endorsement.

“This is a man whose time is here, who will restore confidence and people will have confidence in what he says not only here in America, but in the world,” D’Amato said. “He will be in my opinion, the strongest Republican candidate _ and for those of you who say, well, I disagree with him on one issue or another – if you want to win in November, John McCain – he’s the man.”

Several days ago Governor Romney hinted there was a limit to how much of his personal fortune would be spent on his increasingly quixotic quest for the nomination.  Has Ann said ‘enough’?

Maybe.

Mitt Romney hasn’t extended his television presence into next week in South Carolina and Florida, an aide confirms.

Romney has been on TV for months in both states, owning the airwaves long before his GOP rivals purchased their first spots.

But his multimillion-dollar investment in the two key states that may ultimately decide the GOP nominee has not paid off as he continues to lag behind rivals there.

Spokesman Kevin Madden declined to say whether their decision was based upon strategy or money.

“The strategic decisions on ad spending are made on a day-by-day basis,” Madden said. “We are on the air in both South Carolina and Florida and are ready to extend those ad buys should we decide to.”

Romney has repeatedly refused to divulge how much of his personal fortune he has spent this quarter, but his total investment was already at $17 million at the end of the third quarter, and he’s certainly chipped in millions more since to underwrite an ad campaign that, at year’s end, spanned the first five primary states. 

I just recieved confirmation from the campaign that Erik’s post over at redstate is pretty close to the mark. The campaign did raise around 2 million dollars in the last 3 weeks of December, and:

“For the week before, week of and week after Christmas, I think that’s pretty good.”

Team Thompson is not broke, and likely not going anywhere until after the race reaches the south.