10. Myths about Campaign Spending
10.1 MYTH: Campaign spending would skyrocket if candidates had to campaign throughout the country.
The amount of money that a presidential campaign can spend is determined by the amount of money that is available—not by the virtually unlimited number of places where money might be advantageously spent.
Currently, presidential campaigns try to raise as much money as possible from their sources of funding. They raise money nationally from closely divided battleground states as well as spectator states. After determining the amount of money that is available to be spent, the candidate engages in a resource-allocation process in order to decide how to spend the money most advantageously. The amount of money that is spent is not determined by the virtually unlimited number of spending opportunities, but on the amount of money that is available to be spent.
Under the current system, about two-thirds of the money raised in the 2004 presidential campaign was spent in five closely divided "battleground states." About 80% was spent in just nine states, and 99% was spent in just 16 states. As early as the spring of 2008, major political parties acknowledged that there would be only 14 battleground states in 2008.72 In 2008, candidates concentrated over two-thirds of their campaign events and ad money in just states, and 98% in just 15 states.73 Under the current system, candidates concentrate their spending in the handful of closely divided battleground states because they have no reason to pay any attention to the two-thirds of the states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind.
The National Popular Vote plan does not increase the total number of dollars that is available. It does make every vote in all 50 states and the District of Columbia equally valuable. Thus, candidates will spend whatever amount of money that they can raise far differently from the way they do under the current system. It can be safely predicted that money will be allocated more evenly throughout the United States because every vote in every state will matter. As always, the total amount that is spent will be constrained by the total amount of money that is available from the candidate's nationwide network of donors and other sources. An increased list of geographical places where a candidate might spend money does not, in itself, increase the amount of money that is available.
72 "Already, Obama and McCain Map Fall Strategies." New York Times. May 11, 2008.
73 http://fairvote.org/tracker/?page=27&pressmode=showspecific&showarticle=230.
