Petrelis Files

Trying to Follow Hillary Clinton's Iowa & NH Money

I'm the kind of activist who thinks there are many batches of political tea leaves to read when looking at the 2008 presidential race, such as FEC filings, funds raised, pundit chatter about setting up exploratory committees, opinion polls, blog accounts of which advisors have signed on with a given candidate and stories in the mainstream press, from the "it's a horse-race" perspective.

One batch of tea leaves not yet thoroughly gone over, at least online, are the Iowa and New Hampshire secretary of state's campaign financial disclosure records for their state's respective political parties, statewide advocacy groups and candidates for state offices.

This is because both of these crucial states on the 2008 primary calendar have lousy web sites, compared to other states' sites with voluminous and easy-to-search data, according to an analysis and rankings by the helpful folks at the Campaign Disclosure Project site.

Check out this incredible portal to follow the political money at the state level, and learn if your state is in modern web age with records online and searchable, or if your state ranks at caveman level. All is clearly explained by the disclosure project leaders.

I wanted to see if Hillary Rodham Clinton or any of her campaign and political associates and close advisors gave money this year to any candidates, or otherwise spread some dough, say, at a county dinner, in Iowa, home of the nation's first presidential caucuses, so I visited the Iowa page on the disclosure project's site as my first step.

Excerpts from their analysis:

Grade: D

Iowa has shown significant improvement this year, raising its overall grade from an F to a D, and its overall rank from 38th to 31st, with most of the gains coming in the Online Contextual and Technical Usability category.

Iowa’s disclosure law can be described as average, and requires candidates to report detailed information about almost all contributions received and expenditures made. [...]

Though the state’s grade and rank for Disclosure Content Accessibility has not changed since 2004, there has been one small measurable improvement in this area, which is that the agency reduced the price of paper copies of campaign finance reports. Otherwise, there have been few changes in data accessibility and the main deficiency is still a lack of any searchable—or even sortable—data, even though approximately one-third of the candidates are filing electronically. [...]

What a disappointment it was to read this, then link over to Iowa's lame campaign disclosure site, with an incredible dearth of public records. Never mind looking for a Hillary donation, or by any other individual for that matter, because no such basic campaign finance transparency is provided by Iowa. To compound the problem of not having easy access to the Hawkeye State's donations records, New Hampshire campaign finance transparency is even worse.

Take a look at the New Hampshire analysis and ranking from the disclosure project:

Grade: F

New Hampshire’s rank in the study dropped for the second year in a row and its disclosure program is still among the bottom ten in the nation, with poor performance in the areas of electronic filing, data accessibility, and web site usability.

New Hampshire performs best in the area of the law, and it received a B- in the Campaign Disclosure Law category. Candidates are required to report details about contributors giving $25 or more, including occupation and employer for those contributing more than $100. [...] The Secretary of State’s office previously stated it offered candidates the option of filing electronically, but clarified in 2005 that what it actually offers is downloadable forms that candidates must print, complete and return via traditional filing methods (i.e. mail or in-person delivery).

Access to campaign filings in New Hampshire is poor, as reflected in the state’s F for Disclosure Content Accessibility. [...]

Speaking of the Granite State, that nickname is totally appropriate and related to my earlier contention that states not making simple campaign finance records available on the net live in a prehistoric stone age time.

Should be a no-brainer, as 2007 approaches, that America can follow the Iowa and New Hampshire political money, and how it influences the 2008 race for the White House, in my opinion. But that just won't happen for this presidential election.