Tom Reed spends early and often

tricksIn an article which appeared in The Ithaca Voice on July 17, Emma Jesch asks:

Ever wonder what Congressional candidates raise and spend during their campaigns? According to campaign finance reports released Tuesday, Representative Tom Reed, R-Corning, has already spent over half of the $2.4 million he’s raised for his reelection campaign. What can $1,381,115 buy during a campaign?

Here is a breakdown of Reed’s major operating expenditures, which date from January 2013 to June 2014, according to Emma Jesch:

  • Catering                          $85,883
  • Consultants                    $70, 182
  • Political Contributions  $31,985
  • Travel and Lodging       $32,071
  • Advertising                    $11,993

According to an article by Brian Tumulty which appeared in the Elmira Star Gazette on July 15,

Reed spent $44,000 on polling in October and April by the Tarrance Group of Alexandria, Va., headed by well-known GOP pollster Edward Goeas. He spent $122,000 on political strategic consulting by Roland-Kelly Inc. of Marco Island, Fla.

Reed recently began running his first TV ad, a 30-second spot with his sister, Mary (youtube/X87P3wvqBSo), in the Elmira and Buffalo television markets.

120416_tom_reed_ap_328In a conference call with reporters Monday, Reed indicated no decision has been made on when he will begin airing another TV ad. Most congressional campaigns don’t begin airing TV ads until after Labor Day.

The Reed-Robertson race, however, is among the most competitive House contests in the nation.

According to a third article by Jerry Zremski which appeared in The Buffalo News on July 15:

“This quarter’s record breaking fundraising numbers are a testament to his willingness to hear from his constituents and continue traveling a district the size of New Jersey to remain as accessible as possible,” (Katherine) Pudwill (Reed’s spokesperson) said.

Then again, Reed’s most recent campaign finance disclosures show that he continues to rely heavily on political action committees for his campaign funding. And a Center for Responsive Politics study at the end of the first quarter showed that he raised 55 percent of his money at that point from political action committees, with PACs representing the insurance industry, the Republican leadership, the oil and gas sector and health professionals leading the way.

Reed’s consultants may have advised him to smile more and talk less–it sure looks that way. Is Reed worried? He ought to be, and the evidence suggests he knows it.

© William Hungerford – July 2014

http://ithacavoice.com/2014/07/tom-reed-spend-campaign-cash/

http://www.stargazette.com/article/20140715/NEWS01/307150047/Tom-Reed-spends-early-race-Martha-Robertson

http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/chautauqua-county/reed-robertson-race-remains-financially-competitive-20140715

Advertisements

About whungerford

* Contributor at NewNY23rd.com where we discuss the politics, economics, and events of the New New York 23rd Congressional District (Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung, (Eastern) Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben,Tioga, Tompkins, and Yates Counties) Please visit and comment on whatever strikes your fancy.
This entry was posted in 2014, Campaign Finance, Congress, Constituents, Political, Reed's Views and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Tom Reed spends early and often

  1. Jimmy Henry says:

    But David Wasserman, House editor of the Cook Political Report, said Robertson’s strong fundraising doesn’t compensate for her “weak messaging” and strongly liberal leanings.

    “In a district that favors a middle-of-the-road candidate, she’s run as anything but that,” said Wasserman, adding that the Cook Political Report may soon reclassify the race, moving it from “lean Republican” to “likely Republican.”

    • whungerford says:

      More than a million simoleons says Tom Reed isn’t as blasé about his prospects as Mr. Wasserman. Before he was elected Tom favored term limits, but he hasn’t said much about that since then. Voters should note that if Tom is reelected, he will be vested in his government pension. Republicans would do well to vote Tom out this time and nominate someone they like better next time.

  2. pystew says:

    Well, the Reed campaign can breathe easier now with that report. He can stop campaigning and keep the money from the Insurance and Gas/Oil industry. Tom can stop being so nicey-nice and he doesn’t have to laugh at pigs. Too bad he can’t take his campaign team to the Holy Land for a vacation. 🙂

  3. Anne says:

    Tom’s TP affiliations make him anything but middle-of-the-road. I think it’s also a shame that he isn’t spending all that campaign loot in-state. Surely there are consultants available closer to home? You’d think he’d want to help out here in NYS, since he’s all about the jobs.

    • Jimmy Henry says:

      If you think Tom Reed is an extremist you’ve never met Martha Robertson. Her record, her views on socialized medicine and her opposition to fracking put her to the left of President Obama and even Nancy Pelosi — the definition of liberal extremists.

      • Anne says:

        Mostly, I think Tom is a jackass, albeit an opportunistic one: he rode to his position on Tea Party money, and his subsequent disavowal of those folks is further proof (as if we needed any) of the fact that Tom’s out for Tom, period. (His abysmal record of failure to do much of anything for the district he represents is the public face of that motivation.) If you think opposition to fracking is somehow an extreme (libtard!) view, you haven’t been paying attention. Tom’s all for that, I’m sure, on account of those mineral rights he owns on land over in Tuscarora. Good for the environment? Of course not. Good for the economy? (Wait until you see what happens to your property values if fracking comes in.) It matters not–if it’s good for Tom, that’s the way he’ll lean. Health care for the rest of us isn’t important, as long as he had his when he was in with his blood clot, and then later, in for his fat surgery.

      • whungerford says:

        Martha Robertson’s support for affordable health care for all and her commitment to protecting the environment are greatly preferred to Tom Reed’s hostility to both. The EPA was proposed by President Richard Nixon. It began operation in1970, after Nixon signed an executive order. Tom Reed’s opposition to the EPA certainly marks him as an extremist at least on this issue.

      • josephurban says:

        Jim…I guess “extremism” is in the eye of the beholder. I think it is good public policy to try to insure a healthy population. Good for business, good for workers. And ethically defensible. And I think it is good public policy to carefully consider the long term environmental effects of natural gas development. I remember a time when conservatives were…well…conservative. Jumping on the fracking bandwagon without a thorough analysis of the short and long term environmental impact seems to me to be “extremism”. We know that regions like Ohio and Oklahoma, as two examples , are experiencing regular earth tremors or quakes in areas where fracking is occurring. (Areas without tremors or quakes before).We also know that the tremors stop when fracking stops. Don’t you think that bears further study ? Also, we know that in PA (one example) there have been very real gas leaks and water contamination. I am not opposed to fracking if it is done in a way that is environmentally safe, but the jury is out on that. Why support continuing this extreme practice until more data is in ?
        http://josephurban.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/frack-you/
        http://josephurban.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/neocon-papers-5toxic-deregulation/

  4. josephurban says:

    It is a sad state of affairs. A BI-PARTISAN bill by Congress (McCain/Feingold) TRIED to limit campaign spending so that each seat was not a bidding war among special interests.The activist SCOTUS overrode Congress and said that the government is for sale. Corporations could buy it. I don’t blame Reed or Robertson for raising as much money as they can. The rules of the game dictate that no candidate, good or lousy, can win without a massive influx of money. Don’t blame Reed or Robertson, blame the activist judges on the SCOTUS.

  5. Anne says:

    Interesting, too, that in 2012 Reed had to outspend Shinagawa by more than 3 to 1, and won by the pretty slim margin of just over 9500 votes, give or take. The district was considered R-leaning then, too, and I believe Tom’s seat was considered safe. The outcome was a whole lot closer than I am sure Reed was comfortable with.

  6. whungerford says:

    Tom should expect to spend at least twice as much as Martha Robertson.
    https://newny23rd.com/2014/04/22/tom-reed-and-his-rivals/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s