First on CNN: DNC makes big dent in debt
May 20th, 2014
06:00 AM ET
7 months ago

First on CNN: DNC makes big dent in debt

Washington (CNN) - The Democratic National Committee will announce Tuesday that it raised nearly $9 million last month, and that it's made major strides in reducing its debt.

According to a DNC official, the party committee has paid off all of its bank debt, while it continues to pay off around $7 million it still owes vendors. The DNC's total debt reached a high of $22.5 million following the 2012 elections, and remained around $15 million as recently as three months ago.

The official, who asked to remain anonymous to speak more freely, said in the past four months the party committee has paid off $7 million in bank debt. The official added that the DNC's April report, which will be filed on Tuesday, will show two debt payments totaling nearly $4 million. An additional payment of nearly $2 million will be reported in next month's filing – which the official says will make the DNC free of bank debt.

"With six months until Election Day we're on our best financial footing since before the 2012 Election," the official told CNN.

According to the official, the DNC raised $8.9 million last month, with $7.9 million in the bank, the party committee's best cash on hand figure so far in the 2014 election cycle.

The rival Republican National Committee has yet to release its April fundraising figures. The RNC brought in $10.2 million in March, with $12.3 million cash on hand as of April 1. The RNC has been debt free since June of last year.

The DNC's financial figures are being boosted by President Barack Obama, who this year has stepped up the number of party fundraisers he's headlined.

The DNC's also touting that over the past year, as they've reduced their debt, they've also brought on some top flight staff from the White House, progressive organizations, and the private sector.

CNN Political Research Director Robert Yoon contributed to this story.


Filed under: DNC
soundoff (61 Responses)
  1. Thomas Harold Richards

    With all of the fundraisers that Obama attends on a regular basis, they should be debt-free.

    Maybe the OFA needs to raise the price of their exclusive Obama meetings to $250,000 or at least raise the cost of the autographed picture.

    Maybe the IRS can issue Democrat-only tax refunds.

    To bad they are only concerned about lowering their debt than lowering the growing $17 Trillion US debt.

    May 20, 2014 06:16 am at 6:16 am |
  2. king

    i dont know how grassroots dem contributors, will stock up to multi national billionaire corporations that are backing the repubs. mega corporations have the world to invest in and make rich, look at china. grassroots dems looks at our country and its crumbling infrastructure, that is falling like a rock against megga modernizing infrastructure like china. the repubs doesn't give a dam about our people nor our country, they are just trying to find a way to suck money from our economy to give to big corporations, so they can keep building china into a megga super power, in both their economy and armed forces. the repubs obstructions and lack of ideas that is not hoarding more money to the rich, have stopped our country in its tracks and allow our country to start drifting back into the pass, while china is booming into the future.

    May 20, 2014 06:49 am at 6:49 am |
  3. george

    Sure they can when they have secret money doners like Soros giving them 40 million. Oops, he in not republican so should I have said anything?

    May 20, 2014 07:18 am at 7:18 am |
  4. smith

    The GOP and the Dems are pulling in the cash from the political fat cat donors. If anybody out there thinks that these two parties really represent you, think again. They care about the fat cat donors first then you might get some of the scraps.

    May 20, 2014 07:51 am at 7:51 am |
  5. Gurgyl

    --please count on me, I shall send you a check to support this nation's dire needed party that cares poor, middle-class Americans making strong mock-market strengthening dollar. Hillary16.

    May 20, 2014 07:53 am at 7:53 am |
  6. Gurgyl

    Stock-market, typo–computer auto pick.

    May 20, 2014 07:54 am at 7:54 am |
  7. Gunderson

    Well,
    It is good that the Democrats are finally learning what Fiscal Responsibility is. Don't stop now! We have a 17.7 Trillion Dollar Federal debt.

    May 20, 2014 08:32 am at 8:32 am |
  8. Malory Archer

    george
    Sure they can when they have secret money doners like Soros giving them 40 million. Oops, he in not republican so should I have said anything?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    A drop in the bucket compared to the coin the kochs and adelsons have dropped during the last few election cycles.

    May 20, 2014 08:40 am at 8:40 am |
  9. Rick McDaniel

    The DNC attacks Republicans constantly about the money they raise, for campaigns, yet the TRUTH is, that the DNC raises far MORE money from MORE billionaires, and the TRUTH is, that the DNC is in bed with the wealthy.........NOT the RNC.

    May 20, 2014 08:57 am at 8:57 am |
  10. The Republican Party Is Dead To Me

    This brings to mind an old saying. To find the guilty, follow the money.

    May 20, 2014 09:00 am at 9:00 am |
  11. Gurgyl

    --That debt is derived from Two wars–one Iraq, the other Afghanistan plus Tax Evaded Trickle-Down nonsense–what rubbish you talk.

    May 20, 2014 09:02 am at 9:02 am |
  12. land mine

    Too bad George isn't a little more curious, you could do a little research, and no Fox news doesn't count.

    May 20, 2014 09:14 am at 9:14 am |
  13. Malory Archer

    Rick McDaniel
    The DNC attacks Republicans constantly about the money they raise, for campaigns, yet the TRUTH is, that the DNC raises far MORE money from MORE billionaires, and the TRUTH is, that the DNC is in bed with the wealthy.........NOT the RNC.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Actually rick, you're projecting. The VAST majority of Dem donations are $100 or less. If individual/corporate donations were limited to $100 per person/corporation the reds would starve to death.

    May 20, 2014 09:19 am at 9:19 am |
  14. smith

    @Malory-I suppose Tom Steyer giving 100 million to the Dems is just a drop in the bucket. Both parties are bought and paid for. Might be a good time to come off you denial cloud.

    May 20, 2014 09:20 am at 9:20 am |
  15. Rudy NYC

    smith

    @Malory-I suppose Tom Steyer giving 100 million to the Dems is just a drop in the bucket. Both parties are bought and paid for. Might be a good time to come off you denial cloud.
    ------------------------------
    It is a drop in the bucket compared to the estimated half a billion that the Koch's have spent since Obama was sworn in. The number could be even higher. The half a billion is all that we are pretty sure about. They prefer to keep their donations hidden from public view.

    May 20, 2014 09:35 am at 9:35 am |
  16. Malory Archer

    smith
    @Malory-I suppose Tom Steyer giving 100 million to the Dems is just a drop in the bucket. Both parties are bought and paid for. Might be a good time to come off you denial cloud.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    $100k IS a drop in the bucket compared to the kochs and adelsons, and there ain't no denying that! Glad you brought up Tom Styer. Ironically, in addition to trying to stop the wholesale pollution of America's croplands, Styer is donating $$$ in order to get Dems elected in the hopes of OVERTURNING that dog of legislation known as Citizens United which the activist judges on the USSC crammed down our throats without so much as a discussion.

    May 20, 2014 09:37 am at 9:37 am |
  17. tom l

    Rudy NYC

    smith

    @Malory-I suppose Tom Steyer giving 100 million to the Dems is just a drop in the bucket. Both parties are bought and paid for. Might be a good time to come off you denial cloud.
    ----------
    It is a drop in the bucket compared to the estimated half a billion that the Koch's have spent since Obama was sworn in. The number could be even higher. The half a billion is all that we are pretty sure about. They prefer to keep their donations hidden from public view.
    ====

    What's so funny is that the constant complaint is the the 1%er's buy their candidates. The point that is always driven home by the gang is that the average American doesn't have a voice. So how is it any different when Steyer – a man who made his money in coal and now has major investments in alternative energy – any different? Such a complete double standard. If your gripe is that the rich have unfair access, then how about being consistent instead of showing incredible hypocrisy?

    May 20, 2014 09:44 am at 9:44 am |
  18. tom l

    Styer is donating $$$ in order to get Dems elected in the hopes of OVERTURNING that dog of legislation known as Citizens United which the activist judges on the USSC crammed down our throats without so much as a discussion
    =======

    Completely false. Nothing true about that statement whatsoever. He is "donating" money to stop the Keystone pipeline from being built because it hurts his investments in alternative energy. As the great pontificator, Rudy, likes to say....nice try, but we gotcha.

    May 20, 2014 09:46 am at 9:46 am |
  19. tom l

    It is a drop in the bucket compared to the estimated half a billion that the Koch's blah blah blah blah

    =======

    100 million compared to 500 million and you call that a drop in the bucket? Lol. That's a pretty large drop. Oh, do we get to count Soros and Bloomberg? Because if you count them we are now at 200+ million. That drop in the bucket is enormous now...

    May 20, 2014 09:47 am at 9:47 am |
  20. smith

    @Malory-100 million not 100k. Your hypocrisy is beyond absurd. There is no amount of spin that can change the facts that both parties are bought and paid for.

    May 20, 2014 09:49 am at 9:49 am |
  21. smith

    @Rudy-Your point is moot and doesn`t change the facts that Dems are in the pocket of fat cat donors. Like Malory, your in denial.

    May 20, 2014 09:51 am at 9:51 am |
  22. tom l

    Watch out smith, you're about to get the "ilk" comment from Mallory.

    Anyone ever notice how whenever there is a fluff piece story about some democrat that the gang always makes comments like "cue the hate" and those comments seem to outnumber the amount of actual negative comments. And then you go to a Palin/Christie/Paul/Rubio story and you can almost feel the venom from the anger of the gang. It's palpable.

    May 20, 2014 09:57 am at 9:57 am |
  23. Lynda/Minnesota

    "There is no amount of spin that can change the facts that both parties are bought and paid for."

    Oh, absolutely. And no amount of spin will change the fact that voters will vote for either the one party or the other regardless of which party is bought for by whom. The only question is, who are the donors and what is it they represent (want for their dollars) nationally and how willing they are to lie, cheat and deceive to get what they want.

    It's a lobbyists world. I don't see an uprising against lobbyists anytime soon. Indeed. They have all the power, all the talking points, all the greed.

    May the best pander win.

    May 20, 2014 09:58 am at 9:58 am |
  24. land mine

    Look, we don't like big money in politics, period, but alternative energy has to be embraced at one point, 97% of scientists agree man is causing climate change, yet the gop fights it tooth and nail, he's only protecting our natural resources we need, not oil, water. Are you suggesting that he didn't have the choice of going strictly oil, the time is now, get off the Arab tit already. The only reason the gop wants keystone badly is the 100,000,000,000 the Koch's will make once it goes through, which I'm sure with that at stake it will.

    May 20, 2014 10:00 am at 10:00 am |
  25. Malory Archer

    smith
    @Malory-100 million not 100k. Your hypocrisy is beyond absurd. There is no amount of spin that can change the facts that both parties are bought and paid for.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Typo. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Nobody SAID both parties AREN'T "bought and paid for". Meanwhile, it seems that only Mr. Styer is the only one attempting to do anything about it. Granted, it involves $$$, but it costs $$$ to get the message out. The fact ALSO remains (the one from my post above that you seem reluctant to address – why is that?) that the VAST majority of Democratic donations are $100 or less. Which do YOU think is better for America: five million people each donating $100 or one individual donating $500 million?

    May 20, 2014 10:01 am at 10:01 am |
1 2 3