In today's Times Leader Bill O'Boyle writes a column about Kanjorski's campaign money vs. Lou Barletta's campagin funds.
There seems to be on factual piece missing from this article. Boyle writes
According to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission in Washington, Kanjorski, of Nanticoke, has $952,233 cash on hand and no debt as the November general election looms.
In fact Paul Kanjorski owes a $250,000 payment from his campaign funds for dues assessed to him by the DCCC that has not been made. I call that debt.
If Kanjorski's campaign were to make that payment instead of $952,233 on hand the CFC would have $702,233. Since Ed Mitchell stated it costs approximately $100,000 per week to advertise on television Mitchell will only be able to buy seven weeks of air time.
“We’ll just have to wait and see what he comes up with,” said Ed Mitchell, spokesman for Kanjorski’s campaign. “Mr. Barletta claims to be a major fundraiser nationally, but it seems like he is lagging behind.”
It is a fact that Lou Barletta For Congress has raised more money at this point in time than in the 2008 race.
Kanjorski claims to be a powerful person in Congress.
Democratic leaders assess dues on members of their caucus, ranging from $800,000 each for top lawmakers to $150,000 annually for less powerful members.
Rep. Paul Kanjorski, a Pennsylvania Democrat who won re-election with 52 percent of the vote, has not paid his $250,000 DCCC dues despite almost $1.2 million in the bank.
So how powerful is he if his DCCC dues assessment is only $250,000 out of $800,000 potential?
As for Kanjorski's campaign money I point to a comment left on the O'Boyle article. (V)irtually all of Kanjorskis money comes from Wall Street banks, insurance companies, credit unions, and others that he is supposed to regulate. Aren't those types of conflict of interest what Kanjorski has been howling about with the fiancial institutions he claims need regulating?