The Washington Post is proud to partner with The Washington Post in bringing our originally reported insider political news to a wide audience of decision makers and opinion leaders across the country.

Close it

Aide: Lentz raised about $300K last quarter

Aide: Lentz raised about $300K last quarter

State Representative Bryan Lentz (D-Delaware) brought in about $300,000 in campaign contributions during the last three months of 2009, giving his 7th District congressional campaign more than $450,000 in cash on hand, according to campaign manager Vincent Rongione.

The fundraising haul, to be detailed in campaign finance reports published at the end of the month, was short of the $580,000 that likely Republican opponent Pat Meehan says he raised last quarter. But the high cash on hand number signaled that the Lentz campaign is spending lightly thus far, saving its resources for what’s expected to be one of the most competitive House races in the country.

The campaign has raised more than half-a-million dollars during the cycle so far. Regardless of individual fundraising numbers, both the Republican and Democratic House campaign committees are expected to spend heavily in the district.

January 6, 2010 at 4:00 pm

--Dan Hirschhorn

Tags: , ,


comments [5] | post a comment

  1. David Diano

    Jan 6th, 2010

    In the past, the Dems got beat by Weldon because he could (and did) out-spend us literally 10 to 1.

    Sestak was the first candidate that actually matched him 1 to 1.

    However it was my long held contention that we needed to get to only 2-1 or 3-1 to get our message out so we could compete on the issues. Lentz will have no trouble clearing that hurdle.

  2. Stosh

    Jan 6th, 2010

    David, how much was Weldon outspending the Dems back then – $200,000 to $20,000? I live in the Philly media market and don’t recall Weldon ever running an ad up until the Sestak race.

    Times are a lot different now and if Meehan is able to be on TV 2 to 3 times as much as Lentz, you can bet that Lentz is toast.

  3. David Diano

    Jan 6th, 2010

    In 2004, Weldon spent 600,000 in his 2004 campaign.

    The money was on stuff like mass mailings. At the end of October 2004, he spend $42,000 on postage. He could afford to mail to every registered household (not to mention all the franking privilege abuses).

    For July 2004, he had a $43,640 “Meeting Expense”.

    He even spend almost $1,000 on toy firehats for kids as as advertising expense. The campaign was essentially a slush fund for cronies he could hire as “campaign staff” and handing out goodies. (He has thousands of dollars in expenses labeled “constituent gifts”).

    His Dem opponents simply couldn’t afford to mail every likely Dem once, let alone multiple color glossy mailings.

    For the 2004 race, the ratio was actually more than 20 to 1.

  4. Stosh

    Jan 7th, 2010


    You still don’t address the main point of my arguement. You claim Lentz will be fine if he raises half to a third of what Meehan raises.

    In a competitive race, if for every one piece of mail Lentz sends out, voters get 2 or 3 Meehan pieces, he loses.

    In the current anti-Democrat environment, Lentz will not win if he is out spent 2 or 3 to 1.

    Claiming otherwise, as you do, is wishful thinking at best.

  5. David Diano

    Jan 7th, 2010

    Nope. If Lentz raises enough to send out the proper amount, and Meehan sends three times as much, Meehan will turn off voters and they will start ignoring his literature without reading it (like the junk mail it is).

    If you do two much the voters will get sick of you and you’ll turn them off to you. Weldon was able to send out 2 or 3 mailing to everyone, against almost no mailings by the Dems. Our candidates were lucky to afford literature to hand out at the polls.

    Lentz can easily raise enough to get his message out.

    If Weldon had more money back in 2006, he still would have lost. The air time was so filled with commercials that seeing Weldon 60 times vs 30 times per day was not going to get him any more votes.

    At the size of a Congressional race, anything above $2-$3 million is just wasted in diminishing returns. The 7th has enormous waste because the network TV ads air in the entire Philly market, most of which is outside the district.

    Anyway, my point is that a huge financial advantage only matters when your opponent can’t afford to get his message out, and you can. Once Lentz crosses that threshold, it comes down to the issues and the personal appeal the candidates have to the voters.

    Lentz against Meehan in a “Dem year” like 2006, would have been a big win for Lentz. In 2010, it’s more difficult for Lentz, but it’s winnable.

    I actually consider this race too close to call. Meehan has a lot of built-in advantages, but I think Lentz cancels them out to make it a competitive race.

    If you think Meehan’s that “good”, what is your prediction on the outcome? How close?

Leave a Reply

- will not be published