Ncdatanet Jan2002 V3

Program on Southern Politics, Media and Public Life School of Journalism and Mass Communication The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill MARCH 2002 • NUMBER 30 WWW.SOUTHNOW.ORG Follow the Money: Campaign Thad Beyle Editor & Associate Director [email protected] Spending in Governor’s Race 2000 Joanne Scharer Managing Editor & Assistant Director THAD BEYLE, Pearsall Professor of Political Science [email protected] FERREL GUILLORY, Director, Program on Southern Politics, Media and Public Life Ferrel Guillory Director (EDITOR’S NOTE: This article draws on research in the an unpleasant chore, said Jay Reiff, his campaign [email protected] campaign finance reports of the major-party guber- manager, the Easley campaign used his persistent NC DataNet is a quarterly publica- natorial candidates by Evan Sauda, a 2001 UNC lead in the polls to its advantage in raising money. tion of the Program on Southern graduate, now a law student at Washington and Lee Politics, Media and Public Life in University, who spent last summer as an intern in Mass electorate, mass media: As North Carolina the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at The University the Program on Southern Politics, Media and Public grew from a spread-out, largely rural state of 5 million of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Life. In addition, the authors organized a seminar residents in 1970 to an urban-suburban, Piedmont- on the 2000 governor’s race for the American Politics clustered state of 8 million in 2000, its voting-age To receive an electronic version of future issues, send your name Research Group of the UNC political science depart- population increasingly resembled a mass audience, and e-mail address to ment at which Jay Reiff, manager of Gov. Mike Easley’s to be reached through the mass media. Accordingly, [email protected]. campaign, and Carter Wrenn, manager of Richard both gubernatorial candidates spent the lion’s To subscribe to a printed version, Vinroot’s campaign, led a discussion of spending, share of their budgets on television, radio and call (919) 843–8174 or e-mail organization and strategy. The authors thank members bulk mailings. [email protected]. of the staff of the State Board of Elections for their courteous assistance, and we acknowledge with The Easley campaign spent 74 percent of its budget appreciation funding from an appropriation by the — $8.3 million — on advertising, mostly radio and General Assembly and a grant from the Z. Smith TV spots. The Vinroot campaign spent 62 percent — Reynolds Foundation.) $5 million — on broadcast commercials. Over the course of the campaign year, therefore, North By applying Watergate’s famous lesson — follow the Carolina voters saw and heard $3.3 million more In This Issue money — you can gain a fuller understanding of of Easley’s message than Vinroot’s. statewide campaigns. Most political analysis follows the money going into campaigns — who, represent- The Easley advantage becomes even more pro- 3 Increased Competition Drives Up ing what interests, is giving how much to which nounced when you breakdown the candidates’ Cost of Races candidate. This analysis follows the money out of advertising budgets. Easley’s campaign actually 4 Hunt for Statewide Leadership the campaigns of Democrat Mike Easley and spent slightly more money on ad production than Draws Big Spenders Republican Richard Vinroot — how they spent their Vinroot’s, but the Easley campaign was able to money to win votes. devote a greater share of its budget on media buys. 5 Polling in the 2000 NC Fully 94 percent of the Easley media budget went Gubernatorial Race Overall spending: Total expenditures in the 2000 to purchasing air time or printed space, compared 7 Best Election Predictors North Carolina governor’s race came to $28.2 million, to 88 percent of the Vinroot budget. Are Counties that Look Like or $9.82 per vote cast in November. It was expensive, North Carolina but not super-expensive, for a race that attracted “TV is becoming a medium that is so fragmented,” more than 2.9 million voters to the polls. said Reiff, “it takes more and more and more.’’ 9 Labor Commissioner Goes Republican Over the course of both the party primaries and the Wrenn recalled a lesson he learned from his 10 North Carolina’s Majority Party general election, Easley out-spent Vinroot — $11 mil- involvement in Sen. Jesse Helms’ first re-election lion to $8.2 million. While Easley finds fund-raising SEE CAMPAIGN SPENDING ON PAGE 2 ➝ ➝ CAMPAIGN SPENDING FROM PAGE 1 as a strategic consideration of both campaigns. Vinroot tied himself closely to Republican campaign in 1978. The Helms campaign started presidential candidate George W. Bush, who off spending $2 million on grass-roots organiz- eventually carried North Carolina easily, and ing, including an “army of staff’’ and precinct the national GOP poured $1 million into the leaders. “We had kids whose mileage reimburse- Vinroot campaign. ments were more than their salary,’’ said Wrenn. And all of that effort resulted in a four-point Meanwhile, against the advice of his political gain for Helms in the polls. Then the Helms advisers — according to Reiff — Easley decided campaign spent $250,000 on television ads just to appear with Vice President Al Gore when before the May primary, resulting in a 15-point the Democratic candidate arrived on Air Force boost in the polls. Two for the presidential debate in Winston- Salem. That decision softened Easley’s support Speaking of the Vinroot campaign, Wrenn said, among some North Carolina voters. But, “Our basic strategy was to raise all the money Wrenn said that the $1 million from the we could and put it in the message. I think national Republican Governors’ Association this is a priority for most candidates.’’ came too late for Vinroot to gain much from the infusion of cash. Ground game wanes: The campaign spending reports make dramatically clear what the state’s People and polling: Vinroot paid more in press reported as a new facet of campaigning salaries than Easley — 12 percent of the in the Tar Heel state: That the candidates Republican’s budget, 5 percent of the eschewed the hustings. Democrat’s budget. Meanwhile, Easley spent nearly four times more than Vinroot did on The Easley campaign spent a mere $85,000 — polling and research. barely more than one percent of his budget — on travel. And the Vinroot campaign spent One plausible explanation for the disparity in even less, slightly more than $25,000. salaries is that the Easley campaign relied more heavily on Democratic Party staff than It is telling that the Vinroot campaign actually the Vinroot campaign relied on Republican out-spent the Easley campaign in one facet of Party staff. From the records, it appears that reaching out to voters. Unable to match Easley neither party contributed significantly to their on the air, the Vinroot campaign spent more candidates’ polling information — thus Easley than the Easley campaign, both in total dollars apparently had a strong advantage in gathering and as a percentage of ad spending, on such intelligence on the electorate. ground-game techniques as bumper stickers, yard signs, bulk mailings and automated tele- “What I strongly believe is that the building phone calls to potential voters. block of a good campaign is research,’’ said Reiff. He mentioned not only polling to look Toward the end of the race, the extent to which at issues and the voters, but also research to the campaign would become “nationalized’’ — understand the opponent’s and the campaign’s linked to the presidential campaign — emerged own candidate’s record. I Easley Spending Breakdown Vinroot Spending Breakdown NC DATANET 2 NEWSLETTER OF THE PROGRAM ON SOUTHERN POLITICS, MEDIA AND PUBLIC LIFE Increased Competition Drives Up Costs of Races THAD BEYLE, Pearsall Professor of Political Science There have been some significant changes in the 2000 election — an increase of more than while the smaller table provides some inter- the state’s gubernatorial elections over the 980 percent. The average cost per election is esting comparisons. Here are a few of them: past four decades. The constitutional change $16.1 million, with the single winning candi- allowing a governor to serve a second term is date spending an average of about 35 percent N The average margin of victory in the elections one of the major changes. Jim Hunt served of the money each campaign. The winner’s has narrowed considerably from just over four terms and Jim Martin served two terms spending ranges from the nearly $850,000 17 points to 10 points, reflecting the grow- since that amendment was adopted in Bob Scott spent in 1968 to the more than ing strength of the Republican candidates. November 1977. Instead of seeing nine different $11.2 million Mike Easley spent in 2000. The people serving as governor over the period, cost per general-election voter over the period N The average cost of the elections escalated there have only been five. has been $7.62. This cost per vote ranges from about $9 million in the earlier period from the $1.87 per vote spent in the 1968 to nearly $22 million in the most recent There have also been significant changes in Scott election to the $10.80 per vote spent in period, an increase of more than 140 per- the expense of gubernatorial elections. All the 1984 election of Jim Martin. cent. This jump is also reflected in the cost dollar figures reported here are converted to per voter, which increased nearly 60 percent their 2001 equivalent value. There are two distinct periods of campaign from $5.50 to $8.73. spending — the elections held between 1968 The costs of these campaigns have escalated and 1980 and the elections held between N Interestingly, the winning candidate’s per- greatly from the $2.9 million spent in the 1968 1984 and 2000.

Load more