Kerry should do the same--ask the people who are doing the donating whether or not they think it is a good idea. I have a feeling this time around the vote would be a little closer.

Hold the vote both online and through the mail on the Monday and Tuesday of the convention. Announce the results Thursday morning. Not only is it the right thing to do, it would make the convention quite a bit more exciting.

People have made plans based on the assumption that Kerry will take the public financing.  

I'm one of those new activists you talk about at the end--one of those people the Democratic party has returned to after lo these many years looking for money--and while I like giving, I'm limited in my ability, so I have to pick and choose my spots. I've given to Kerry and now I'm focused on Congressional races, and I'm giving all I can afford right now. Don't make me choose between Kerry and the Congressional races. Kerry's got a legitimate source of funds for the post-convention period, a source I've been paying into as long as it's been on the tax sheet. Let him take that and I'll send my $20 donations to smaller races for the rest of the year.

On top of that, we can't forget that Bush just has richer supporters than Kerry. If Bush is given the opportunity to opt out without taking the political heat (which a Kerry opt-out would do), then watch out. He could have another $200 million without blinking. Yes, Kerry has been outraising him, but remember that he essentially stopped fundraising for BC04 some time ago. Don't wake a sleeping dog.

I don't think there's any way Kerry does it. The August "problem" is not so bad, given that few people are home that month anyway (remember Wolfowitz's famous line about August being a bad time to "introduce produce," in reference to the Iraq invasion?). And the few who are home will be watching the Olympics, which even Bush can't afford to advertise on with any regularity.

I see Kerry at a big disadvantage whether he opts in or out.  The Repubs have exploited the system, and have gained a big advantage on this score.

What I'd really like to see is a definitive answer to what it is Kerry can and can't do with his money once he accepts the nomination.  Can he prepay staff in July?  Can he buy ad time now that would run in October?  Can he prepay for car rentals and other things?  I've seen this question posed many times but nobody seems to know the answer.

When people invest, they take ownership.  When people feel ownership they contribute more time, $$, effort, etc. toward an effort.  Instead of this being about Bush NOT saving the taxpayers $75 million, this should be about the people in this country who want change stepping up to the plate and taking a more active role in the completion of the campaign.  Instead of being spoken to by advertisements, they're continually asked to step up and do more to effectuate change. Turn it into a movement...If we're all so concerned about Bush, then why should we have a fundraising limit or baseline? If we want our candidate to win, then why should a far-right wing member of the Republican party have a fraction (albeit) microcsopic fraction of their donated tax dollars go to someone who they would never vote for?  Make it about ownership...about duty to country...about dedication to a cause and I think you turn this issue into something people will accept...and if you're an Independent...respect.

So that argument doesn't really fly.  The alternative argument:  parity.  Kerry can say Bush has 5 extra weeks to raise $$ (although he appears to be pretty much done, and even if he raises it, he can't spend it after the convention).

So I'm conflicted.  I don't know.

How much time would Kerry/Edwards/their staff have to spend fundraising to get the money? I'd rather they were out in swing states and not asking for cash from certain democrats.

I also think there is a diminishing return: the 10th ad buy has less impact than the 5th, but you can always run one additional campaign trip to meet and greet and generate local press coverage somewhere new.

Add to that the drain on other democratic fundraising, and opting out looks bad to me.

Some will surely sit in the pockets of the potential donors.  Kerry (and especially Edwards) will be able to ask donors to give more to his campaign than they would have given otherwise.  I.e., if Jane Donor will give $1000 to the DNC if Kerry stays public, she might be convinved to give $1500 to Kerry if he opts-out.  So there may be an increase in gross private contributions to Dem politics.

But, equally certain, is that much of that money will come at the expense of other candidates, DNC/DCCC/DSCC, and - don't forget! - 527s or traditional special interest groups like NOW, NARAL, Sierra Club, etc.  While gross private contributions will rise, it will not be by enough to offset the loss of $75m.

If there are lots of small donors out there who still want to contribute, there are lots of candidates who need help.  If those donors only want to help Kerry, they can give to the DNC and the 527s.  The same goes for anyone who's already given the candidate or DNC-max: 527s can use the money too!  If Kerry is smart, he'll sell his list of Veep-Announce email addresses and contributor lists to the DNC and the 527s - let them shake the trees while he takes the $75m.

A strong education campaign for new donors will be essential after the Convention: many potential donors may see the convention, get excited, and want to contribute.  But when they go to the website, they'll find out that they can't.  They may feel unwilling or uncertain about contributing to the DNC or some 527 that they don't know anything about, so there needs to a big effort to educate them and redirect them so they understand that their donations are still needed, and how to make them.

Lastly: Although Dems may not be able to raise an extra $75m, Bush certainly can.  Please don't throw him into that briar patch.

Would you rather pay a little first, or a lot later with pawns for reps?

I'm surprised the great Jerome Armstrong misses this.