Inside Politics

Cash competition

The Republican National Committee raised a record $32.3 million from January through March, more than double the Democrats’ total.

The RNC finished March with $26.2 million on hand, Chairman Ken Mehlman said yesterday. The money it collected in the first quarter tops its fundraising during the same period in 2001 and 2002, before the national party committees were banned from collecting corporate and unlimited donations. It also exceeds its fundraising in early 2003, the first year the parties were limited to contributions from individuals and political action committees.

The Democratic National Committee raised $13.8 million in the first quarter. That includes at least $1 million a week since former Vermont governor and presidential hopeful Howard Dean took over as chairman in mid-February.

The DNC views it as a strong start for the year, said spokeswoman Laura Gross.

“We know we’re headed in the right direction,” she said. “We’re going to keep working hard.”

Rather than stockpiling the money to spend when the fall 2006 elections near, the RNC is starting to tap it now for campaign efforts.

“One of my lessons from the 2004 election is that voter registration and grass-roots building needs to be year-round, permanent,” Mr. Mehlman said in a phone interview with the Associated Press from Atlanta, where he was raising money. That means, he said, that where the GOP is likely to have competitive races in ‘06, the RNC is working with state parties to build grass-roots support and register voters “to make sure we have the grass roots we need to be successful next year.”

Evaluating Hillary

“Pollster Scott Rasmussen has begun publishing a regular ‘Hillary Meter,’ Jay Cost writes at www.OpinionJournal.com.

“The purpose of this is to track Sen. Hillary Clinton’s movement to the political center by determining how much of the American public considers her to be middle-of-the-road. I find this to be a fascinating story, because it says quite a bit about Hillary and her political skills — or lack thereof,” said Mr. Cost, a graduate student at the University of Chicago who writes for RedState.org, where his article first appeared.

“It is, of course, gospel that Hillary Clinton is a political genius, or something to that effect. She is so brilliant that potential Democratic opponents are warned by pundits everywhere that she will work her secret devil arts on the poor fool who dares cross her. She is that good. Ostensibly, the only hope that humble conservatives have to keep her from being the first female president is some tawdry book by Ed Klein.

“I have never understood this. Where do her political credentials come from? It seems to me that she was a great supporting player to a good (though highly overrated) politician. She played the part of the forgiving, intelligent, driven wife with great effectiveness. When she takes center stage, however, the results are quite mixed.

“She botched health-care reform so badly that President Clinton got absolutely nothing from a Democratic Congress. She coined the term ‘vast right-wing conspiracy’ — guaranteeing that conservatives everywhere would curse her existence until the end of time. She did win that New York Senate seat, but that, to my mind, was pretty unimpressive. She beat latecomer Rick Lazio, who was not a formidable candidate, to say the least (the word ‘sophomoric’ comes to mind).

Story Continues →