Politico once again omits facts about Newt's fundraising

Once again, a Politico reporter writes a story in which they make it appear that Newt's entire fundraising success is due to millionaires writing checks to his groups. While he has received such contributions, those are the exception, not the norm.

This time, it is Ken Vogel who alleges that because Newt will not be able to accept contributions above $2500 that he will struggle to raise enough money. What Vogel -- and his colleagues Andy Barr and Zachary Abrahamson -- either does not know or is willfully omitting (and for alleged hard-news journalists, either is a damning statement) is that Newt's 527, American Solutions, received 300,000 contributions of $200 or less.

The source of that? The Washington Post, which talked of Newt's "fundraising prowess." CNN recently said that Newt would likely be the only possible GOP candidate who could match up with President Obama in fundraising.

The reason for those two mainstream outlets talking up Newt's ability to raise cash is obvious: the aforementioned 300,000 contributors, the roughly two million names and e-mail addresses of members of American Solutions, and the names and contact information from the numerous fundraising letters that different groups that have asked Newt to help them raise money over the years. (The groups, as part of the agreement with Gingrich, allow him to use the list of names that respond to his fundraising pitch.) A question for Politico: If Newt is such a terrible fundraiser, why do so many groups ask him to help them raise money? Is it because they wish to have as little money as possible?

Vogel also raises the question of why Newt's American Solutions PAC raised a comparatively little amount in the first quarter of 2011 -- then proceeds to give the answer: that the PAC started to wind down its fundraising push as Newt inches closer to becoming a Presidential candidate. So, by giving the reason that the PAC raised the amount it did, Vogel clearly shows that he understands the reason. However, the headline alleges that Newt is "struggl[ing]" raising money. If Vogel was being honest, he would have stopped writing the article once he realized that the PAC started to wind down. And he would never have started the article if he either did his homework or stopped misleading readers.

Barr did not reply to my question two months ago about his omission, and I asked Vogel tonight on Twitter. I have yet to hear from him. If I do, I will post his reply.

Quick Hits

-- Newt was a featured speaker at the Wild Irish Breakfast Thursday on St. Patrick's Day.

-- At a later event Thursday: "If we find enough volunteer support and enough financial support, we'll almost certainly run," he told reporters at a luncheon of the Boys & Girls Club in Salem. "We're in the process of assessing that now," he said, adding: "So far in New Hampshire, it's been a good day."

-- US News & World Report: "Moreover, Gingrich preserves an army of loyalists who worked for or with him during his time in office. One former Gingrich staffer recently informed me that "we’re around, we’re active, and we’re ready."

-- The State Column: "Mr. Gingrich will meet with the 87-strong GOP freshman class March 31 in the Longworth House Office Building. The meeting with take place just days before a continuing resolution is set to expire."

That meeting was scheduled by Austin Scott (R-GA), who was endorsed by Newt's PAC last year.

Newt's PAC raises second most among GOP, spends more in Iowa than anyone else.

According to FEC reports, American Solutions PAC raised $314,000 in the last quarter. Among Republicans, only Sarah Palin had more, with $469,000. Both her and Gingrich outpaced, as the Washington Post put it, "longtime fundraising leader" Mitt Romney. Of all the prospective Presidential candidates -- Palin, Romney, Mike Huckabee, Haley Barbour, Tim Pawlenty, etc. -- Newt was the last to start a PAC. Yet in less than a year, he is competitive with the two top fundraisers: Palin, whose committee has been up for a couple of years, and Romney, whose PAC is nearly three years old.

So where was Gingrich spending this money? He spent the third most -- behind Romney and Palin -- on contributions "to other candidates and state parties."

And interestingly, much of Gingrich's money went to the state that has held the nation's first Presidential contest since 1972: Iowa.

Danielle Kurtzleben writes:

American Solutions, a political action committee founded and chaired by Gingrich, contributed $107,500 to Iowa politicians and the state party. Pawlenty's Freedom First PAC donated $82,000 in the state, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney gave $50,100. Other possible presidential hopefuls spending on 2010 Iowa elections included Huckabee, who dropped $15,500; Palin, with $15,000....

Cary Covington, professor of political science at the University of Iowa, says that contributing to state officials' campaigns can go a long way toward mobilizing Republican voters. 'You need the support of the party at the local level,' says Covington. 'Getting people to come out on a cold winter night isn't easy, and (state-level politicians) are the people who have the connections and the organization to do that.'

On top of that, Newt's 527, American Solutions for Winning the Future, raised over 9.9 million dollars the first nine months of 2010. (527s can raise money in unlimited amounts, unlike PACs.)

Alexander Burns of Politico:

And even those figures won’t provide a full reckoning of Gingrich’s fundraising activities this cycle. According to data shared with Morning Score, Gingrich helped Republicans raise more than $7 million over the 2009-2010 cycle, through dozens of speeches and nearly $1.9 million raised for GOP campaign committees through direct mail. He also participated -- along with many others -- in a joint NRSC/NRCC fundraising dinner that brought in over $14 million for the two committees.

Gingrich spread his attention widely, but also put down deep financial markers in early primary states: In Iowa, Gingrich’s donations, speeches and other appeals guided some $256,000 to Republican candidates. In South Carolina, he generated $68,000 for the GOP. His New Hampshire presence was more limited, but he still brought in $5,000 at a speech to a state GOP breakfast and raised $18,000 for Sen.-elect Kelly Ayotte in combined small-dollar donations.

Given the earlier numbers, that means that through his "speeches and other appeals" in Iowa that Newt raised nearly $150,000.

Though it is not clear, it would appear that Newt's role in the larger campaign to remove three Iowa judges who called gay marriage a "constitutional right" does not count toward that above total as it was not a Republican Party effort.

Newt's new PAC

Since leaving office after the 1998 elections, Newt has only started groups that advocated certain policies and had no hand in elections. Shortly, however, he will be starting a political action committee, with the same name as his 527: American Solutions. The goal of the PAC will be to support candidates who stand and fight for the policies that the 527 advances.

American Solutions raked in the third-most dollars -- 22.7 million -- of all 527s in 2008. And since it's inception three-plus years ago, $38 million.

Starting a PAC is often a sign of gearing up for a presidential run. When combined with his usual barnstorming of the country for candidates this year -- "Gingrich said that wants to be active for GOP candidates in the '10 midterm elections" -- he will have a lot of goodwill built up among elected Republicans, as well as getting a chance to talk to voters. And the latter's importance cannot be understated.

Pollster Frank Luntz, who worked with Gingrich on the Contract with America, found that when people in his focus groups during 2006 heard Gingrich, they "ignored, or in some cases forgot, the controversial nature of Gingrich's speakership," as Matthew Continetti wrote. "The words he spoke were like nothing they had heard from anyone else," Luntz says. "While he didn't start either session with any measurable support, he ended both Iowa and New Hampshire sessions with the most new converts."

That is important because despite staying in the headlines pretty consistently in the eleven years since resigning as speaker, a Pew Research Center poll found that 26% of the public is undecided about him. His favorability split is 35/38, but if the remaining quarter of the electorate -- as well as "soft" opposition -- find his message as appealing as the focus groups that did not come in as Gingrichites, he could improve those numbers a lot. Having a full debate of the issues over the course of 2011 would likely benefit him more than any other candidate heading into Iowa and New Hampshire in the early part of 2012.