Thursday, October 11, 2007

Kander Returns Excess Contributions, Still Rolling

As reported here a while back, Jason Kander has returned the contributions made to him that exceeded the cap reinstated by the Missouri Supreme Court. (Some commenters had asked whether he would do so, and, when I provided the answer, they claimed I was trying to give him excessive credit for simply following the law - you just can't satisfy some people!) It should be noted that faux-Democrat Chris Koster and several of his Republican colleagues, including "Bad" Sam Graves, have refused to return the money.

The good news for Kander is that he's doing quite well in raising small donations. According to a press release I received early this morning (get some sleep, Jason!), he raised over $18,000 in the most recent quarter, and has over 250 donors. That's an impressive showing when the election is 10 months away.

Being a fair-minded, equal-time kind of person, I went to Amy Coffman's website to see if she had any similar success to report, but she continues to limit her site to a "coming soon" promise, now more than three weeks after we were told to expect an informative site. After my last post pointing out that her site was pushing an event that had already happened, though, she did finally update her site to remove the notice. (Yes, I do promise to post a link here when she finally does post her website - the suspense about what this long-overdue website will be when it is finally posted is building!)

Labels: ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gee Dan, your pathological obsession with the Coffman website is a little unnerving. By the way, it looks like Jason had to file an amended quarterly report because in his first one, he over-reported his contributions by $1,000. Should voters be wondering if they should support someone who has such a fundamental issue with math?

Makes about as much sense as your website rant.

10/11/2007 9:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks, Dan, for keeping us posted on the Amy Coffman website. I don't really care about the website itself, but it cracks me up that she promised it three weeks ago. The Republicans will eat her alive if she brings her "over-promise, under-deliver" attitude to Jeff City.

10/11/2007 9:46 AM  
Anonymous You smell that too? said...

He is playing games with a $5000 in kind donation he reported last spring, which he now claims was not really a donation.

Kander might just fit in pretty well with the CURRENT leadership in Jeff City.

10/11/2007 12:53 PM  
Anonymous smells fine.. said...

I read the amended report you're referring to. Did you even read the addendum explaining the amendment?

It says pretty clearly that the original in-kind amount was for services for the entire campaign. It says that after the July 19 ruling, they stopped using the assistance.

Looking at the October expenditures, it looks like he refunded money to someone who had volunteered their services. You know, he could have just not reported this in the first place and then not refunded it at all if he'd wanted to, but it looks to me like he is erring on the side of transparency. I wonder if Amy Coffman would have done the same thing if someone wanted to donate their time to her...

Nice attempt at spinning this though.

10/11/2007 1:21 PM  
Anonymous smells fine.. said...

I read the amended report you're referring to. Did you even read the addendum explaining the amendment?

It says pretty clearly that the original in-kind amount was for services for the entire campaign. It says that after the July 19 ruling, they stopped using the assistance.

Looking at the October expenditures, it looks like he refunded money to someone who had volunteered their services. You know, he could have just not reported this in the first place and then not refunded it at all if he'd wanted to, but it looks to me like he is erring on the side of transparency. I wonder if Amy Coffman would have done the same thing if someone wanted to donate their time to her...

Nice attempt at spinning this though.

10/11/2007 1:23 PM  
Anonymous smells fine.. said...

Ooops. Sorry about that.

Too bad I can't amend ;)

10/11/2007 1:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If an explanation takes more than one paragraph, then the explanation needs an explanation.

10/11/2007 5:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't understand why some chose to nit pick each of Kander's moves. Some of these arguments are pretty weak. But when their candidate of choice doesn't give them much to go on (i.e. website, position papers, history of volunteering, history of involvement in the community), I guess there's not a lot left for them to do while they wait for her to create her identity.

10/11/2007 6:01 PM  
Anonymous the nitwit said...

Dan, not to nitpick, cuz I know that's your speciality, but ...

As much as I loathe Sam Graves, it's unfair to slap at him for having "refused to return the money." Graves is a federal officeholder and he gets to follow the federal contribution limits, not the state limits. There's plenty of issues to whack at Graves over, but unfortunately, this isn't one of them.

10/11/2007 7:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nitwit -

You assume Dan is concerned with facts. Bad assumption.

10/12/2007 7:02 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

Nitwit -

Good catch, and thanks - I got distracted by Todd Graves, Sam's brother, writing the letter to the MEC.

10/12/2007 7:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What does the fact that your favored candidate's opponent does not have a website that is fully operational have to do with the issues that affect our area? Heck, the election is not even for another nine months.

10/14/2007 3:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree. What is the big deal with a website? Coffman is out there meeting voters and asking for support. She has already obtained the financial support of Sen. Jolie Justus and Rep. Beth Low.

10/16/2007 6:01 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

If you read this site, you'll see that the problem is not so much that failure to master the simple task of posting a website, though that is kind of embarrassing for her. Much more important is the fact that her campaign is already failing to live up to its promises.

And, really, don't you think it would be nicer if she had her own site to post news about her campaign on, rather than having her volunteers rely on the kindness of other sites like mine to allow comments to spread the word?

It's nice that she got two donations from two politicians I admire. Seriously. But Amy's a lobbyist - she's been paid to influence politicians for a while now.

By the way, how did the total come out? Did she beat Jason in total dollars raised? Did she beat him in number of contributions?

10/16/2007 6:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dan, Dan, Dan --

"But Amy's a lobbyist - she's been paid to influence politicians for a while now."

Are you seriously saying that you believe Rep. Beth Lowe and Sen. Jolie Justus are supporting Amy's campaign because they've been overcome by Amy's "influence" as a lobbyist (for seniors, by the way)?

It sounds like you don't know Rep. Lowe or Sen. Justus very well -- and that you're coming perilously close to popping your cork in this race. Maybe you'd better stop drinking so much of Jason's Kool-Aid and have a few of your home-brewed beers instead!

10/16/2007 8:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dan -

Just what are accusing Sen. Justus and Rep. Low of? Trading support for contributions? You can't be serious.

And as for the total dollars raised, money is nice, but it doesn't win elections. Having the support of the two influential politicians in the area goes a long way. I would take support over money in the bank.

It is interesting that you chose not to post a blog about the quarterly report.

10/16/2007 8:41 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

No, no, no, I'm not accusing Low or Justus (or Coffman) of anything improper. I'm just saying it's no big deal that she got two contributions.

Sorry I didn't post about the quarterly reports yet. Damn, you are a demanding audience. Can't I even get a day?

10/16/2007 8:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In looking at Amy's report, it looks like she raised over $10,000. Not a bad showing for someone who entered the race in the middle of the quarter, especially when you consider that Jason (who has been running for what -- 3 years? -- maybe it just seems that long) took in only a little over $18,000 during the entire quarter.

Looks like this race isn't a done deal for Kander after all.

10/16/2007 9:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

According to her campaign report, she's been raising money since July, so I'm not sure why you'd claim that she's only been in the race for half the quarter. Which half?

10/16/2007 10:07 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone know what NODAK PAC is? It's listed on Kander's report.

10/16/2007 10:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

According to what I just googled up, NODAK PAC is Earl Pomeroy's PAC - he's a dem congressman from North Dakota. No idea what the connection is, but doesn't look nefarious or anything.

Does anyone know what Coventry Health Care is? They're supporting Coffman's run.

10/16/2007 10:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 10:31. I don't see a check from Coventry on Coffman's report. I guess you must be trotting out the old "Cheryl Dillard works for evil Coventry and therefore, evil Coventry is supporting Amy Coffman who is -- therefore -- also evil" line again. Yawn.

You're right though that ND Congressman Earl Pomeroy is the money behind NODAK PAC. Taking money from a PAC funded by a Blue Dog Democrat isn't the best way to sell yourself as a progressive in the 44th. I guess the way to do that is to muster the support of true progressives like Rep. Beth Lowe and Sen. Justus.

10/16/2007 10:54 AM  
Blogger Dan said...

Peace out, everyone!

Quick workday comment here, recommending that the partisans take a breather. It's one report, and if we're already picking out individual donors and holding them up to our litmus tests, we're in for a long and unpleasant run here!

For the record, I'd be willing to bet that if Cheryl Dillard, or anyone else from Coventry, wanted to give Jason a contribution, he'd be happy to accept it. I would also bet that if a democratic congressman from North Dakota wanted to give Amy a contribution, she would accept it.

And, anonymous 10:54, if you're going to nitpick about the Coventry check, then Beth Low hasn't made a contribution yet, either. But I make that point not to argue that Beth Low is not supporting Amy, only to gently suggest that some people are getting awfully hyper-technical awfully early, don't you think?

Fact is, Amy had a decent quarter. Not bad, not brilliant. Jason had a better quarter, but not so much better that Amy ought to surrender.

I'm unaccustomed to the peacemaker role, but calm down, people! I'll do the same . . .

10/16/2007 11:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isn't Pomeroy the guy that referred to Bush as a "clown and a damn fool" a few months ago? Hardly sounds like a conservative to me.

10/16/2007 11:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Forget the numbers. Strategically speaking, how can Kander possibly overcome the grassroots support that Coffman will receive from Justus and Low. Expensive, glossy mailers just won't do it.

10/16/2007 12:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think you're wildly overstating the effect of a couple of small donations.

10/16/2007 1:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looking at Kander's reports, I see a ton of Justus's most ardent supporters from 4 freedoms, HRC, WPC, her own law firm, etc. We have no indication that Justus is supporting anyone. All that we know is that she gave $100 to one of the two candidates on what looks like the day Amy had her campaign kick-off. Was she at the event? If so, it's understandable that she would write a small check.

And as was pointed out on an earlier blog ccp post (i think it was blog ccp), Justus is listed as a member of the myspace group "Kander for State Rep." Some idiots tried to say that was an endorsement too, when it obviously is not.

So saying that she's in one camp or the other because of a tiny check or a "friend request" is pretty stupid.

10/16/2007 2:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm sorry, did I miss some big announcement that Beth Lowe and Jolie Justus are quitting their legislative seats to run Amy Coffman's campaign? I don't know why Kander is even trying any more. Clearly every voter in the district doing their research and reading the comments section of blogs should know by now that there is only one real democratic candidate in the 44th. Give up your stupid dream Kander. Go do something more productive with your time, like volunteer to defend your country in a war...oh wait.

10/16/2007 3:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 3:17, aka, Kander campaign staff, don't be stupid. Without his jew and lawyer support, Kander's got nothing. Rep. Lowe and Sen. Justus know how to run and win elections and if they have chosen their candidate, which it look like they have, there is little that "soldier boy" Jason will be able to do to compete.

10/16/2007 3:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

what, exactly, is jew support? Is that a bad thing? And lawyer support, oh my, that does sound bad. All for the little soldier boy? What was it that, once upon a time, democrats stood for?

10/16/2007 4:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't believe that Anon 3:33pm is a real post. It is either a straw man post by the Kander campaign (clever, clever) or a post by someone who should be ignored. Either way, no additional responses to the post are necessary.

10/16/2007 6:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Maybe I used some terms that I shouldn't have. I didn't mean to offend anyone. All I was trying to say is that the support of Rep. Low and Sen. Justus could very well be dispositive in this campaign. They can try to ignore this point all they want, but on election day it will come to bite Kander in the ass.

10/16/2007 6:54 PM  
Anonymous Porchpundit said...

A word of advice for both sides of this monumental struggle in American democracy for a STATE REP SEAT where you will share an administrative assistant and have an office you cannot turn around in with out inhaling, this kind of food fight only invites candidates into race.

You may think that you are unleashing smart bombs, but you are really tripping the Doomsday Machine from Dr. Strangelove, Or why I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb. That is what Rumsfeld thought, it did not work out well for him.

Let me enlighten all of you -- except for the idiot who used the term "Jew support" who lost his or her war in 1945. If that post was only supposed to appear to have been made by an independent or partisan for Amy, then you are going to get caught, especially if you have deceptively used the name "The Voice in Amy's Head."

Personally, if I think BOTH candidates are nuts and presumptuous for putting up Web sites and the lot this early.

I applaud your interest in public service, but one might want to check with the public before committing to policy positions that you are going to have to defend for the rest of your natural lives. The Internet is forever!

You might want to actually go out and meet "your" district before you tell people you WANNA BE "from the government and there to help them."
How about trying, "Hi neighbor" first? It works. I hate to spoil the party but it is THEIR district until they elect you -- unless Dick Cheney becomes interested in this race -- then all bets are off.

If I am supposed to vote for Kander based on his Web site, you lose. We are not electing "student council president." If you really believe that Web sites make the candidate, then you ARE too young to run for office.

Now if Dan is just working with Diana Kander (the Gloria of this race) trying to get Amy to put something up on the Web so that you can rip into her, then you are both sneaky Sh-ts and like Halderman and Ehrlichman. It did not work out well for Halderman and Ehrlichman.

If Amy Coffman puts up a Web site because an operative of her (present)opponent tells her do so so -- shame on Amy.

My guess is that you are being gamed here Amy, and your campaign treasurer seems to have fallen for the bait and posted a comment that promised a Web site when it was not in your interest to do so.

Not that you could NOT put up a site Amy, but that it is not in your campaign's interest. When it IS in your interest, you should have a way to launch it yourself, and not rely on a blog aligned with your (current) opponent to announce its existence. Not a good thing.

Amy, if you are being pushed around like this, you need to hire someone to be your SOB. Someone who can smack down ideas like letting your opponent run your campaign. Someone who can remind you and your treasurer (with extreme prejudice) that your job is to raise some more money to do that.

Now back to the original post. As far as Young Mr. Kander's returning the money: Congratulations Jason, for obeying the law. (I always thought officers of the court were SUPPOSED to obey the law and orders of the Supreme Court without expecting a pat on the back.)

God Save the Missouri House of Representatives!


10/16/2007 7:35 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home