Skip to comments.Giuliani Reports Skyscraping Early Money Total for White House Bid
Posted on 04/19/2007 1:50:48 PM PDT by areafiftyone
Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani has led the long list of 2008 Republican presidential contenders in early preference polls and his perceived position as the front-runner, at least for now, was not contradicted by his recent campaign finance report, which shows he has already built a sizable treasury.
Giulianis campaign reported total first-quarter receipts of $16.6 million, which included a $1.85 million transfer from the presidential exploratory committee he established last November.
With total receipts of $18 million for his campaign to date, Giuliani leads all but three of the current crop of White House hopefuls Democratic Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, and Republican Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor in overall campaign receipts.
Giuliani ended the quarter with $11.9 million left to spend. All but about $1.1 million of Giulianis funds were raised for the nominating campaign, with the rest for possible use in the general election should he win the nomination.
Giulianis report includes numerous donations that highlight his ties to New York, the nations most populous city, which Giuliani headed as mayor from 1993 through 2001.
As an example, Giuliani received contributions from about 30 employees of Lehman Brothers, the large financial services firm that is headquartered in New York.
Giuliani is a longtime fan of baseballs New York Yankees, who happened to win four World Series titles during his eight years as mayor. Several team executives, including principal owner George Steinbrenner, gave to Giulianis presidential campaign.
This profile of Giulianis report is the latest in a CQPolitics.com series that is analyzing the first-quarter campaign finance filings of all 19 Democratic and Republican candidates.
Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani
Receipts, Jan. 1 to March 31: $16.6 million
Receipts to date: $18 million
Expenditures, Jan. 1 to March 31: $5.7 million
Expenditures to date: $6.1 million
Cash-on-hand, March 31: $11.9 million
Debts, March 31: $89,000
Notable individual donors (who are allowed to contribute $2,300 to a candidate for a primary campaign and $2,300 for a general election campaign)
John F. Antioco, chairman and chief executive officer of Blockbuster: $2,300
Richard D. Beckman, president of Conde Nast Media Group: $2,300
Brian Cashman, general manager of the New York Yankees baseball team: $2,300
Miguel Estrada, a partner at the firm Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher and an unsuccessful nominee for a federal judgeship in 2003: $2,300
Alan D. Feld, a senior executive partner at the firm Akin Gump: $2,300
John Grant, professional staff member for the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee: $250
Keith Hernandez, sports broadcaster and a former professional baseball player for the St. Louis Cardinals, New York Mets and Cleveland Indians: $1,000
Michael D. Hess, a founding partner and senior managing director of Giuliani Partners LLC and Giulianis former corporation counsel during his mayoral tenure: $4,600
John OHurley, actor: $4,600
Susan Molinari, chairman and chief executive officer of The Washington Group and a former House member from New York (1990-97): $1,900 (Molinari also gave Giulianis campaign $2,100 in late 2006, bringing her contributions to $4,000)
Theodore B. Olson, partner at Gibson, Dunn and Crutcher and a former U.S. solicitor general: $2,500 (Olson also gave Giulianis campaign $2,100 in late 2006, bringing his contributions to the maximum of $4,600)
Adam Sandler, actor: $2,100
Charles R. Schwab, chairman and chief executive officer of Charles Schwab Co.: $2,300
Ben Stein, an author and actor who served as an aide to presidents Richard M. Nixon and Gerald Ford: $750
George Steinbrenner, principal owner of the New York Yankees: $4,600
Chad Sweet, chief of staff at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security: $4,600
James S. Turley, chairman and chief executive officer of Ernst & Young: $2,100
Candidate committees and political action committees (PACs)
One of Giulianis strongest supporters in Congress is California Republican Rep. David Dreier, who donated $2,300 through his House campaign committee and another $5,000 through another political committee, American Success PAC.
Pennsylvania Republican Rep. Charlie Dent, who represents the 15th District in and around Allentown and Bethlehem, donated $2,300 through his political committee, Dedicated to Establishing National Teamwork PAC, which forms an acronym of the congressmans last name.
Among his political supporters at a more grassroots level is West Virginia state Sen. Vic Sprouse, whose campaign committee gave Giulianis campaign a $1,000 contribution.
Giulianis campaign reported spending $897,000 on payroll to 82 individuals. Other expenses included $225,000 on postage including a payment of $167,000 to the Austin, Texas-based firm Olsen & Shuvalov. Giulianis campaign also spent more than $116,000 on catering.
Seeing you supporting George Bush is like watching Geraldo Rivero complaining about mental patients not being locked up.
And you seem damn excited about it.
Just remember, you might be in the next go round.
Well, I do not for Democrats ever.
My voting status in my State is "unenrolled." I voted for Perot in 1992, and that was the sorriest vote that I ever cast. The 19 percent of us who protested the Bush tax increases by wasting our votes are likely all now properly in line.
Still, because I screwed up and got Clinton in back then, does not give the republicans a license to backslide.
I think that Guliani is a die hard lefty. McCain is a nut job. Romney is a very pragmatic person who got himself a few chips in the game at a great price.
Romney is the right guy to vote for so far in next years election. Perhaps someone better will come along, but we shall see.
Romney's worst flaw right now, is that he said enough crap to get himself elected here, and put off the problem of defending himself and his political posturing later, which is now.
Romney has got the inside track on this thing, and anybody who can not see it, is simply fooling themselves.
I still do not think that he is perfect, but who among us is?
Not to interupt your orgasmic glee that people are being banned, but what exactly do you think has been gained here? Do you honestly think that a single vote has been gained for the candidate of your choice here?
If I have to give anyone credit here, it's to Tommy Dale, who early on said that Rudy was too divisive and that he might cause a rift in the party that could cost us the election. I quite simply did not believe him, but now I'm given pause and I'm starting to think that Tommy just might have been right.
I've been a loyal republican since I cast my very first presidential vote for Ronald Reagan's second term. The idea of voting for a Democrat or helping a Democrat achieve office has never even entered my mind.
However, over this Rudy thing, I'm coming to hate some of you here on FR so much, that voting for a candidate you support, each day becomes increasingly more difficult to contemplate. What was once a given, is now up in the air. I can't believe my eyes half the time anymore. A freeper now even gets away with calling a woman a piece of ---- (that was Spiff btw)open in the forum without repurcussion. To be honest, I've had some misgivings about Rudy of late, but if you guys are the alternative, I'd just as soon fall on the sword.
Poor Melas..When all else fails, throw a temper tantrum..LOL.
If Rudy wins the nomination, the factions won't be unified.
Hillary will then beat Rudy when just enough conservatives vote for some lame a$$, Johnny-come-lately third party candidate. Young liberal judges will picked and pre-born babies will continue to be exterminated for years to come.
Hopefully instead, Fred will get the nod.
No my friend, not a tantrum, but an honest assessment of the state of things. I ask again, what's been gained by this increasingly bitter feud? I've actually tried to rise above it, and I think my posting record stands testment to that. See, I did my best to be a gentleman and NOT trash anyone or get personal. I'm sorry you see that as worthy of derision.
Important principles may and must be inflexible.
— Abraham Lincoln
Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits, who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in that grey twilight which knows not victory nor defeat!
— Teddy Roosevelt
God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it.
— Daniel Webster
I haven’t decided whom to support, but if this forum doesn’t quit jumping around from candidate to candidate in search of the anti-Rudy, it’s going to face some problems.
And if the nominee is Rudy, then what?
This forum becomes a third party site and drives all the Republicans off?
The previous hero of this forum, Duncan Hunter, has less than $300,000 in his campaign account. Thompson has $0.
We need a John Stossel Reality Check.
I will vote for whoever the GOP nominates. But I fully understand Melas’s frustration. The incivility here is sickening.
Because now it's power over principle!
A glance at the actual people elected should show you there are few conservatives who pass muster with a majority of FR as such. Those who do are from isolated districts in a few states. Every conservative Senator lost his re-election. There are no real conservative governors. Bush initially won only because of the Electoral college and the Traitor running against him obtained the second highest vote total in US history.
Only 35% claim to be conservative and, of those, at best a third would be considered conservative at FR.
And Reagan wasn’t electable either.
With Liberal Giuliani as the GOP pick, I hope we get our arses kicked 'till our GOP noses bleed. As goes the Presidency, so goes the party - and I won't remain loyal to the party of abortionist gungrabbing queerbots. I didn't give in to those before Rudy - I ain't going to with him. Those who change their "position" to embrace liberalism just because Giuliani has an "R" behind his name prove to possess very shallow principles. Period.
Far more is at stake than an '08 presidency, indicating to both houses of Congress as to what is acceptable is by far more important to me than one office - even the executive office.
But the shortsighted only see the '08 presidential race as the most important thing. If losing over steadfastly held principle were weighed against sacrificing virtue for a perception of winning, give me the loss - I'll deal with it.