Hillary’s picked up over $18 million in New York. Mitt palmed $4.6 million in Utah. Barack is big in California, but not as big as Hillary.

Campaign contributions serve as the fuel that powers the campaign. Resource Shelf pointed out the new FEC maps that show campaign finance information for the Presidential runners, and for House and Senate races.

Data for the Presidential campaigns through September 30th, 2007, presented on maps of the US, appears as circles of various sizes. The bigger the circle, the more that state contributed.

People may look at contributions per state by candidate, party, or overall donations. The individual profiles of candidates provides the most interesting picture. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, and Rudy Giuliani had the highest totals in millions through the September 30th date.

California and New York have been home to the most generous donors. Campaign contributions totaling $51.2 million from California, and $48.8 million from New York, flowed to the coffers of various candidates.

Some basic search functionality makes the FEC Presidential map interesting for followers of the search industry. By checking employer data, we found Google’s Marissa Mayer gave $2300 to Obama; ex-Yahoo CEO Terry Semel gave Clinton and Obama $2300 each; and a certain William Gates contributed $2300 to Obama’s campaign (Gates listed his Foundation as his employer, instead of Microsoft).

Oh, if only Marketing Pilgrim had a category called, “Duh.” Do these decisions change anything? As I see it, all they is codify the status of blogs as “media.” Or should I say, the status of a blog as a medium. A blog has always been a medium—a way that political candidates and interested parties can communicate with the public at large.

Realistically speaking, the Federal Electoral Commission’s decisions really only affect (1) bloggers who offer free advertising to candidates and (2) people blogging about campaigns (including blogs devoted to deposing incumbents). And if you fall into one of those limited groups, you’ll be happy to note that you’re now part of the media in the eyes of the FEC. And what does that mean? It means you don’t have to register as a “political committee” for doing the aforementioned.

On the other hand, it’s also a good sign that people so glaringly out of touch with modern culture to think that these rulings are necessary decided in favor of including blogs in the category. After all, they didn’t officially consider the Internet a medium until March 2006.

In the United States, the Federal Election Commission is a regulatory agency in charge of monitoring electoral practices, campaign finance and media activity. While these specific rulings do hold the force of law, it’s unlikely that all blogs will be considered “media” quite yet.

Comments

In the case of the heavily trafficked Kos, the FEC said, “Activity on the DailyKos website does not constitute a contribution or expenditure that would trigger political committee status.”

Exemptions for media have been in existence since 1974. Said the FEC:

In March 2006, the Commission made clear that this exemption extends to online media publications and that “costs incurred in covering or carrying a news story, commentary, or editorial by any broadcasting station. . . , Web site, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, including any Internet or electronic publication,” are not a contribution or expenditure unless the facility is owned by a political party, committee, or candidate.

DailyKos had been challenged by Part Time Pundit blogger John C.A. Bambenek, while Grace faced a complaint from House member Mary Bono (R-CA).

Bambenek accused DailyKos of failure to register as a political committee, while Bono’s lawyer said Grace’s work for her opponent generated unreported expenditures; coordination; and fraudulent misrepresentation of campaign authority.

Free speech in politics pretty much won out in the recent Federal Election Commission’s decision on what should or should not be part of campaign finance law. AP reported how the FEC decided to allow the free-wheeling world of online discussion remain free of the bonds of McCain/Feingold legislation.

That does not apply to paid advertising however. Those ads must be accounted for as part of a campaign’s federal spending and contribution limits. The Wall Street Journal noted how ads can be financed under the ruling:

“Individual online political activity will be protected from FEC restriction regardless of whether the individual acts alone or as part of a group, and regardless of whether the individual acts in coordination with a candidate or acts independently,” said Commission Chairman Michael E. Toner in the WSJ report.

That could be an issue for the Drum Major Institute, which purchased Google ads that display when users of the search engine query for New York state legislators. Those ads display the Institute’s grade for the legislator’s performance in Albany.

Members of unions or corporations can use their work computers to post political blog entries and other online content, provided they are not coerced to do so and work on their own time.

The decision by the FEC provided some legitimization of blogging. Bloggers received the same type of exemption from McCain/Feingold as other mainstream media types enjoyed. “There will be no second class citizens among members of the media,” Toner said.

How does the FEC decision affect your political blogging? Tell us about it at our new forums at SyndicationPro.

—

Add to | DiggThis | Yahoo! My Web

Drag this to your Bookmarks.

David Utter is a staff writer for WebProNews covering technology and business.