Third Party Watch (warning: annoying popups) and (moreso) Hammer of Truth are trying to make a big deal of Michael Badnarik's campaign spending $2400/month on an office and staff. Michael Badnarik is, if you remember, the 2004 Libertarian Party Presidential Candidate. He's now running for Congress in his local district. My question, and apparently others from the questions following the stories is "What's he supposed to be doing, working out of his living room with a staff of full-time unpaid volunteers?"
It doesn't work that way. $2400/month works out to about $80/day, which is really a fine burn rate for a candidate in any type of election.
This is one of the things that frustrates me with other libertarians. They don't seem to have a handle on what it takes to run a campaign, or better yet, to win a campaign. How is someone supposed to get elected if no one knows who they are and what they stand for? I'll often hear libertarians bemoan the lack of good candidates and say they're not voting. It's a classic Catch-22. You won't find any candidates willing to run until people are willing to vote, but the party faithful won't be willing to vote unless there's someone good to vote for.
I wish Hammer of Truth would stop sniping at candidates who stand a chance of winning and throw their support behind them.
Update: Two people, including Austin Cassidy from Third Party Watch contacted me regarding my figures above. Yes they are wrong. Yes I wrote them before I had coffee, and I appreciate them for setting me straight. I think it's good that people keep the politicians honest, and it's fine to ask questions in the public forum, but I do still believe that the money burn rate ($900/day) for Badnarik is not out of the norm for a candidate running a Congressional campaign.
We should be cheering for Badnarik. Thanks for writing guys, and sorry for the incorrect assertions on my part.
Comments (2)
Greetings, I noticed you made mention of my item on Badnarik's spending. I'm not looking to be overly critical of him, but I do want to offer this correction to your post. His spending on the office rent (not staff or anything else) is $2400 per month.
I am absolutely not opposed to a Libertarian (or any other) candidate running a serious and professional race.
His burn rate is not $80 per day. During the last reporting period the campaign spent almost $57,000, that comes to nearly *$900* per day. My questions were raised because although his campaign has certainly outraised any previous LP congressional campaign... and that is fantastic. However, more than $130,000 has been spent so far and we're still about 8 months away from the election.
It's certainly valid to wonder if the money (all $900 per day) is being spent on winning the race or spent on other things like traveling to state LP conventions and paying their paid consultants.
The campaign was actually in debt by about $1,000 at the start of this last reporting period.
Posted by Austin Cassidy | March 17, 2006 10:40 AM
Posted on March 17, 2006 10:40
Maurice,
It's not michael we are concerned with, it's Allen Hacker we have a problem with. If I donate money to a campaign I want to know if my money is going to be spent wisely: ie: a plan perhaps? It's because of Allen I haven't donated a dime to the Badnarik campaign yet
Posted by Chris Bennett | March 17, 2006 10:43 AM
Posted on March 17, 2006 10:43