Money tensions rise between Harris' team and DNC
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Aïda Amer/Axios
Democratic leaders are increasingly anxious about being left with a big bill from Kamala Harris' campaign, which is likely to end millions of dollars in debt, four people familiar with the matter tell Axios.
Why it matters: Debt beyond a few million bucks could hamper the Democratic National Committee's efforts to rebuild the party over the next four years.
- The intra-party tension has put scrutiny on how Harris' team — which raised well over $1 billion in less than five months, between the campaign and outside groups — spent its money.
Driving the news: Democratic Party chair Jaime Harrison privately has expressed concerns about the campaign's spending and has asked about the potential level of debt, two people familiar with the matter told Axios.
- The extent of the debt remains unclear because the campaign is still raising money — and still receiving invoices from vendors and others.
The intrigue: Tensions already had been building between Harris' team and Harrison.
- Some on the campaign roll their eyes at the fact Harrison has been followed around by a documentary crew since the Democrats' convention in August.
- A DNC official said the committee did not pay for the documentary.
Reality check: Campaigns are always second-guessed more when they lose — often unfairly.
- If Harris had money left over after losing, many Democrats would have been furious the campaign hadn't spent every dollar to beat Trump.
Many campaign committees have debt at the end, but the DNC is worried about being loaded down with tens of millions in debt, as it was after Barack Obama's successful re-election campaign in 2012.
- Even with Obama winning and able to still raise money for the DNC, the committee was still more than $2 million in debt in late 2015.
- That made it difficult for the committee in the run-up to the 2016 elections. Hillary Clinton's team believed the DNC's debt contributed to her defeat in 2016.
- A person familiar with budget plans and finances told Axios that "if there is any debt, it will be minimal, and addressed in the immediate weeks and months, not the long term."
- A DNC spokesperson said the committee is ready to meet all of its financial obligations.
Between the lines: Harris' campaign expected to be able to raise money in the days after the election, as some swing states can take days to count votes.
- But Trump's victory was clear early — making post-election fundraising more difficult.
What they're saying: Many on Harris' team remain shell-shocked by Trump's victory.
- They acknowledge disagreements on tactics and how some of the money was spent, but some aren't sure such changes would have made a difference.
- "How do you raise a historic amount of money and not win a single swing state?" one Harris aide asked. "The honest answer is: I don't know. It seems we lost the national narrative, and that's what we need to diagnose."
- Not including the huge amounts spent by outside groups such as super PACs, the Harris and Biden campaign spent about $530 million on TV ads compared to the $286 million Trump's campaign spent, according to the tracking firm AdImpact.
Zoom in: Most of Harris' campaign money went to digital and TV advertising. But her team also splurged on rallies and some high-profile ads such as the big one that appeared on The Sphere in Las Vegas that some aides have wondered were worth the price.
- Harris' campaign also paid $1 million to Oprah Winfrey's production company Harpo for a celebrity-filled town hall, according to FEC records first reported by the Washington Examiner.
Some allies of the Harris campaign were frustrated at the time by Harpo's takeover of the event.
- Winfrey told TMZ that she was "paid nothing — ever."
- A spokesperson for Harpo said Winfrey wasn't paid a "personal fee," but acknowledged the Harris campaign "paid for the production costs" of the town hall outside Detroit.
Zoom out: Some Harris campaign aides contend the massive spending was necessary given the unprecedented nature of her short campaign.
- The splashy rallies and advertising moves were attempts to grab attention and introduce Harris to voters in the brief time period.
- They also was were implicitly anti-Biden, who typically didn't cater to celebrities and didn't have as many energized crowds.
- Some Harris aides and advisers also say that Trump refusing to participate in a second debate was a shrewd move that deprived Harris' campaign of necessary oxygen.
