skip to main |
skip to sidebar
UPDATED BELOW
Sen. Tim Huelskamp topped the field in fundraising in the first district once again, new FEC reports show.
With almost $129,000 in contributions in the first quarter of 2010, Huelskamp ended with over half a million dollars in the bank. Of his nearly $130K raised, nearly $20K was from unitemized contributions.
Jim Barnett was second at $107,000 raised but with almost $100,000 spent, he was only able to bank $382,000 at the end of the quarter. The bigger surprise here is that I only saw one "Requested" in his contributors employment information. That's be good and bad for the Barnett campaign. Good in that they have apparently figured out that you have to ask folks giving to your campaign lawfully required information. Bad in that they've now demonstrated they can competently file a campaign finance report and so now the public is left wondering what happened during all of the previous quarters.
Barnett's large expenditures include one for over $16,000 to Axiom Strategies (a la Jeff Roe) and $23,000 to Wilson Research in Oklahoma for, "Campaign Research and Strategies." Well, I guess Barnett never promised to be the economic engine of the Big First.
Speaking of which, no report yet from the Wasinger campaign.
Tracey Mann tanked, and that's putting it lightly. With just over $65,000 raised and almost $45,000 spent, he ended the quarter with just over $261,000 in the bank. Shadwick came in a very distant fourth (so far) at $22,800 raised, $18,600 spent and $23,400 in the bank. Sue Boldra almost raised $15,000 and has $17,200 cash on hand.
All in all, looks like a great quarter for the Huelskamp campaign. I'll update later with more information about interesting contributors and expenditures, and I'll let you know how the Wasinger campaign made out when they get around to filing.
UPDATE:
Wasinger looks like he just filed, and not too many surprises here. $111K in contributions, $102K in expenditures means only $213K in the bank. Lots of Virginia, lots of Massachusetts, lots of out of state contributors. And despite assurances that his campaign would be the economic powerhouse the Big First, he seems to be quite enthralled with spending large sums on media in Virginia. So Wasinger squeaks into a second place in contributions raised, but fourth in cash on hand.
On the back of gaining donations from every county in the big First District, Tim Huelskamp announced today that he had outraised all other candidates and had more than $100K in cash on hand than his nearest challenger.
Huelskamp reported raising over $136,000 during the fourth quarter. That was followed by $123,000 by Jim Barnett and barely over $100,000 by Rob Wasinger. Tracey Mann raised nearly $72,000 with Monte Shadwick and Sue Boldra both raising less than $20,000.
So far no other candidate has had the ability to gain contributions from every county in the district. It's really easy to talk a talk. Send out some emails, roll into town and spend 15 minutes for a quick photo op.
It's an entirely different game to get a contribution when there. The fact is so far the people of the first district have been voting; voting with their hard earned money. And clearly the winner of those votes has been Tim Huelskamp.
And while Huelskamp continues to shine in funds raised, he's also leading the pack in cash on hand. Huelskamp is way out front with nearly half a million on hand, followed distantly by Barnett with $374,000 on hand. Of course that includes a $100,000 loan Barnett made to himself.
Barnett has once again turned in a year end report with spotty information. "Requested" and "undisclosed" appear less than in previous reports, but are still there. When will Jim Barnett hire competent staff that can track down basic, required FEC information? When will Jim Barnett finally show some respect for the people of Kansas and their right to know?
Recent filings suggest not anytime soon. Barnett choose to wait until two days before a filing deadline to fix employer and occupation information in his third quarter report. That's of course more than two months after filing an amendment to show they had more cash on hand than reported earlier. It looks like when it might make him look bad, they can act quickly. When it comes to the public's right to know... well... that can take a back seat to getting elected, right Jim???
Now, want to know the sad part? It took me only a few pages before I found "undisclosed" on his amended third quarter report. And who didn't disclose the name of their employer? Uh, an ophthalmologist in Emporia. You know, a doctor that Barnett has worked with for years. It's so ridiculous it's unbelievable.
And that's the amended report.
So, I'm sure you'll be hearing about another request for information from the FEC. I personally wonder when the FEC will stop asking the Barnett campaign to please obey the law and start slapping on some fines. They're clearly asking for it.
Then again, this thumbing his nose at the law doesn't seem to be helping. Huelskamp is still the front runner in funds raised, cash on hand, and clearly with the wallets of First District voters.
What is happening in the Barnett campaign? Is he using so much brain power to keep track of which position he's flipped to that he's forgotten how to file a campaign finance report?I know I said that the campaign might have problems providing the information requested by the Federal Elections Commission, but I honestly thought that even if they didn't have the information that they would get it by the October 15 deadline to avoid a possible FEC audit.
I apparently was wrong.
Jim Barnett filed an amended campaign finance report for July but still failed to supply specific information requested by the FEC. Some occupation information is listed but employer data is still largely absent from the report. But instead of "requested" appearing where an employer should be, "undisclosed" appears instead.
Does this mean the FEC will audit the Barnett campaign to ensure they have made a good faith effort to obtain the missing information? Remember, the FEC notified the campaign that, "if the information is not provided, you must make one follow-up, stand alone effort to obtain this information, regardless of whether the contribution(s) was solicited or not. This effort must occur no later than 30 days after receipt of the contribution."
Of course, the story wouldn't be complete without noting that Barnett filed an October report with the exact same errors. Multiple donors have either "undisclosed" for employers information or "requested" for both occupation and employer info. And if an occupation is identified, the Barnett campaign has apparently decided that's good enough to list as an employer as well. Don't you know you can be a "physician" and be employed by "physician?"
Again, so many of these just don't make sense. David Wysong is listed as a $500 donor but has "requested" in both fields. Really, the Barnett campaign can't figure out what state Senator David Wysong does and who he works for? Is the public supposed to buy that?
The Barnett campaign's blatant disregard for public disclosure laws is mind-boggling. The FEC should launch an immediate investigation.
Huelskamp was the run away winner in the total contributions race with over $181,000 raised in the third quarter. Barnett reported $105,000, although exactly where that cash came from nobody has a clue. Rob Wasinger raised $106,000 mostly from, surprise surprise, the east coast. Tracey Mann and Monte Shadwick brought up the rear with $60,000 and $26,000 respectively.
Huelskamp was also the winner in cash on hand at the end of the third quarter with $379,000 left. Next was Barnett at $300,000, even though he once again messed up his summary report. Tracey Mann, still holding on to a lot of family cash was at $198,000. Rob Wasinger was at $194,000 and finally Shadwick clocked in at $18,000.
One final observation; my favorite contributor.
That would be former Kansas Republican Party National Committeeman, and liberal Republican's favorite son, Steve Cloud. He was a $1,000 donor to the conservative Barnett campaign.
Oh yea, he's an "Executive" and is employed by "Requested." That's the large firm that seems to employ many of Barnett's donors in Kansas.
Looks like the pay isn't too shabby at "Requested." I think I'll apply.
Mr. Conservative Rob Wasinger was missing in action in tonight's article in Kansas Liberty about the first district endorsement race. Kansas Liberty summarized the endorsement race in light of former Congressman Jim Ryun's endorsement of Sen. Tim Huelskamp today.
Liberty also interviewed Tracey Mann and the newest candidate, Monte Shadwick. Say what you will about the Salina guys, but at least they have the decency to speak to the press. Barnett, Bolrda and Wasinger apparently don't believe the public has a right to know what they think.
I expect this kind of stuff from Barnett and Boldra. After all, they are the farthest left of the six candidates. Barnett in particular now needs to focus on hiding his record from the public to have a better chance at election. But Wasinger's decision to avoid a reporter, especially one that is actually fair and factual, is down right inexcusable.
Even though Tim Huelskamp is the only well rounded conservative in the race with a stellar record to back it up, at least all of the other candidates recognize that they have to appear like a well rounded conservative to get elected. Everyone but Rob Wasinger it would appear.
While everyone else has been trying to convince the public they're the best candidate by treading to the right of where they naturally are, Rob Wasinger storms into town (sorry, storms into the state) and goes distinctly left, hiring Washington D.C. lawyers who do work for stem cell research initiatives in California and raise money for candidates like Rudy Giuliani.
And in light of not getting a single dime out of the first district in campaign contributions, he heads west to find someone, anyone to endorse him. And who does he decide would make a good endorsement? An independent who's only endorsements in the past have been for two Democrats and a liberal Republican.
And now Rob isn't even willing to speak to the press to pretend he's a conservative. It's downright shameful.
Tim Barker left the first district race yesterday with little more fanfare than a Google News Alert from the Pratt newspaper. Barker said that family obligations had become too much for him to effectively campaign. According to the Pratt Tribune article, Barker isn't endorsing anyone else in the race just yet.
As Barker says goodbye, another guy says hello. Monte Shadwick of Salina entered the race with even less fanfare than Barker left. Shadwick is a former mayor of Salina and city commissioner. He is a self described former field representative for Rep. Jerry Moran and says he want to see as little government as possible. Although the salina.com article doesn't come right out and say so, it appears he is describing himself as a conservative. Gee, not enough of those in the race, right?
More on Monte as I come across it.
UPDATED BELOW
