1996 - Clinton vs. Dole
Bill Clinton boards his 1996 re-election campaign bus; Courtesy of the William J. Clinton Presidential Library
Though President Bill Clinton is unopposed in the Democratic primaries, he quickly raises the maximum $37 million allowed under the public-finance system and qualifies for an additional $13 million in federal funds. In addition, Clinton and Vice President Al Gore mount an equally intense parallel effort to raise soft money. Gore, for example, makes nearly 50 calls to donors from his office, asking them to give $25,000 to $100,000 to the Democratic National Committee. It’s not the amount of soft money Democrats raise, but how they use it, that blows a gaping hole in federal campaign-finance law. At the instigation of Clinton political adviser Dick Morris, the DNC spends tens of millions of dollars in 1995 and 1996 on television commercials that tout the Clinton administration’s policies and criticize the GOP for opposing them. While the ads dance around federal regulations by stopping short of explicitly advocating Clinton’s reelection, they have the intended effect of driving up his popularity in public-opinion polls. In essence, the effort pumps an additional $25 million into Clinton’s campaign.
Meanwhile, more than a dozen Republicans vie for the chance to take on Clinton. The candidates include publishing magnate Steve Forbes, who spends $30 million of his own funds in an unsuccessful run for the nomination, and Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, who raises more than $20 million but is out of the race by Valentine’s Day after finishing fifth in the Iowa caucuses.
Senator Bob Dole of Kansas eventually outdistances the field, but in the process burns through so much money that, by May, there’s just $177,000 left in his campaign treasury. Even though Dole comes up with another $1.1 million through the ingenious maneuver of selling computers, telephones, his mailing list, and video footage of himself to the general-election campaign, he’s still forced to lay off two-thirds of his campaign staff just to make it to the party’s convention in August. Clinton, in contrast, has $18 million left to buy the television spots that Dole can’t afford.
In the general-election campaign, Clinton and Dole each receive $62 million in public funding. Third-party candidate H. Ross Perot qualifies for $29.2 million, but in exchange the billionaire is limited to contributing no more than $50,000 of his own money to his campaign.
Dole, trailing in the polls, attacks Clinton’s fundraising, accusing him of being beholden to “trial lawyers, the Hollywood elite, and labor bosses.” He gains some traction with the issue, thanks to embarrassing revelations about millions in soft money illegally contributed to the Democrats by foreign donors, including $140,000 raised at an event at a Los Angeles Buddhist temple at which Gore made an appearance. Perot also attacks the Democrats for accepting $20,000 from a Miami man who was later arrested and convicted of drug smuggling (although the party had returned the contribution).
The accusations of fundraising improprieties make little difference in November. Clinton wins a decisive victory, taking 49.2 percent of the popular vote to 40.7 percent for Dole and 8.4 percent for Perot, and winning the Electoral College 379-159-0. But after the election, the DNC will return $1.6 million to donors because the money either came from foreigners or had murky origins, and Democratic fundraiser Maria Hsia, who was involved in the temple fundraiser, eventually will be convicted of raising illegal contributions and sentenced to 90 days of home detention. Gore will come under additional scrutiny because of the fundraising calls that he made from his office, but Attorney General Janet Reno will resist calls to appoint an independent counsel to investigate.
SOURCES: Ruth Marcus and Charles R. Babcock, “System Cracks Under Weight of Cash,” The Washington Post, February 9, 1997; John F. Harris and Charles R. Babcock, “Gore’s Calls for DNC From Office Detailed,” The Washington Post, August 27, 1997; Bob Woodward, “Clinton Called Shots for Party Ad Blitz,” The Washington Post, June 25, 1996; Dan Balz, “Forbes Ends His Run for President,” The Washington Post, March 15, 1996; Thomas B. Edsall, “Gramm Decides His Race is Run,” The Washington Post, February 14, 1996; Ruth Marcus, “Dole Spending Report Rekindles Charges,” The Washington Post, June 21, 1996; Ruth Marcus, “Rival Camps Disagree on How Much Money Dole Has Left,” The Washington Post, May 4, 1996; Donald P. Baker and David S. Broder, “Perot To Accept Federal Funds in White House Bid,” The Washington Post, August 19, 1996; Edward Walsh, “Dole Lashes Clinton on Trust Issue,” The Washington Post, October 12, 1996; Ruth Marcus and Ira Chinoy, “A Fundraising ‘Mistake;’ DNC Held Event in Buddhist Temple,” The Washington Post, October 17, 1996; Brian Knowlton, “Perot Attacks Clinton Ethics Over Donors,” International Herald Tribune, October 25, 1996; “1996 Presidential Election Results,” David Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections; “Electoral College Box Scores,” National Archives and Records Administration; Bill Miller, “Democratic Fundraiser Sentenced,” The Washington Post, February 7, 2001; Roberto Suro, “Reno Rejects Probe of Gore on Lying,” The Washington Post, November 25, 1998.
Previous year: 1975
Previous election year: 1992 - Clinton vs. Bush
Next election year: 2000 - Bush vs. Gore