Appreciating the Dems' financial edge

In politics, money isn't everything, and it's not the only thing. But give the best candidate in the world an under-funded operation and a wealthy sub-par candidate will win an election. This year, breaking tradition, it is Democrats who enjoy a mammoth lead in the money chase,
and the party has already started flexing their financial muscle.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has already shelled out a sizeable chunk of change in eleven key House races across the country, previewing the tremendous hurdle Republicans have to overcome. But with $56.4 million in the bank through the end of July, compared with $14.2
million on hand for the National Republican Congressional Committee, the initial investments are little more than the tip of the Democratic iceberg.

In total, the DCCC spent $1,478,965 on those eleven races. The money has gone to defend three of the party's most vulnerable incumbents, including U.S. Rep. Nick Lampson of Texas, U.S. Rep. Jerry McNerney of California and
U.S. Rep. Paul Kanjorski, of Pennsylvania and -- perhaps more importantly -- to target a Republican challenger and seven GOP-held open seats.

In stark contrast, the NRCC has spent a grand total of $21,675 on a series of national television advertisements slamming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for refusing to schedule votes on new energy drilling legislation.

Neither figure includes the amount spent on three special elections held earlier this year. And that total does not include coordinated expenditures both parties are allowed to make, including spending on polling.

Still, the gap between the parties is indicative of just what Democrats will be able to do this year. The party has already reserved $53 million in television time in fifty-one districts, and spending on mail, phones and other voter contact methods will add up to millions more. That's
money Republicans simply don't have.

Both parties will benefit from assistance from some outside
organizations. Democrats have unions and environmental groups helping out with some expenditures in key races, while Republicans have been assisted this year by groups like Freedom's Watch, which recently launched an ad campaign against Democratic incumbents (Though GOP
insiders voice disappointment that Freedom's Watch and others haven't done more for the party).

Republicans have begun to fight back, reserving air time in 14 districts with the promise of more to come. But even then, the districts the party chose to defend are notably on their side of the playing field. The NRCC will defend eleven incumbents or GOP-held open seats, including U.S. Rep. Phil English in Pennsylvania and U.S. Rep. Sam Graves in Missouri, neither of whom has had particular difficulty keeping his seat. Just three Democrats -- U.S. Rep. Don Cazayoux in Louisiana, U.S. Rep. Nancy Boyda in Kansas
and U.S. Rep. Tim Mahoney of Florida -- are on the GOP's list so far.

Reserving the time serves as a signal to some of those third-party groups, which can spend their own money on races the NRCC feels are winnable. And more advertising reservations are coming soon. "Resources will have to be used selectively and strategically in a manner that will
maximize impact," one NRCC source told me. "The road ahead is a rocky one, but there is a path to victory in a number of seats where Republican turnout will be high thanks to the competitive nature of the presidential race."

In the grand scheme of multi-million dollar races with myriad plot twists and turns, a few thousand -- even a few hundred thousand -- dollars might not make or break a candidate. And so far, early Democratic spending has been, for the most part, modest. The party has spent less than $100,000 in six of the eleven targeted seats and more than a quarter of a million dollars in just three, one in Illinois and two in Ohio.

But the DCCC simply has more money available, and that gives Democrats the ability to expand the map in their favor. Many of the eleven seats favor Democrats, including those of retiring U.S. Reps. Tom Davis of Virginia, Jim Saxton of New Jersey and Jerry Weller of Illinois. The list of seats in which the party is competing is more ambitious; they
include seats held by U.S. Reps. Bill Sali in Idaho, Joe Knollenberg in Michigan and in Florida, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Tom Feeney.

That larger playing field gives a party more chances to take advantage of favorable atmospherics like those in 2006. Good candidates who might not otherwise have won without the help of a strong anti-Republican wave, like U.S. Reps. Chris Carney and Jason Altmire in Pennsylvania, Kirsten Gillibrand in New York and Harry Mitchell in Arizona were in the right place at the right time. The difference this year between a Democratic pickup of five seats and a pickup of twenty seats will come from both the quality of the candidates and the breadth of the districts in which they are running.

Money does not mean everything in a campaign. But two years after Democratic successes, quality candidates have come out of the woodwork, even in districts that once seemed unwinnable. Put those two together and Republicans face another difficult election night in November.

Reid Wilson, national columnist for Politicker.com, is also an associate editor of RealClearPolitics.com and covers Senate, House and governors' races at PoliticsNation.com. Contact him at reid@realclearpolitics.com.