Money Floods Into Massachusetts Race to Replace Ted Kennedy

The week began in the Massachusetts Senate race with news that Republican Scott Brown's one-day fundraising "money bomb" had hauled in an astonishing $1.3 million in 24 hours. The week ended with so much outside political money raining down on both Brown and his Democratic opponent, Martha Coakley, that it could only be called a campaign of shock and awe.

The estimated $3 million in last-minute spending by outside interest groups is being used to blanket radio and television with ads, to fill Massachusetts voters' mailboxes and e-mail in-boxes with messages about the candidates, to light up their phones with robo-calls and, next week, to fund sophisticated get-out-the-vote efforts designed to bring every last supporter to the polls, no matter what.

The multimillion-dollar blitz is a testament to both the unexpectedly closeness of the race and the importance of its outcome, both inside and outside of Massachusetts. For Bay State voters, the special election to fill the Senate seat held by Ted Kennedy for 47 years has morphed from a symbolic turning-of-the-page from the Camelot years to a nail-biting partisan toss-up that is now too close to call.

For political interests outside of the state, Tuesday's vote will be both a referendum on the Democratic national agenda and a linchpin for its success. If Coakley wins, Senate Democrats will hold their razor-thin filibuster-proof majority until January of 2011. If the Republican Brown prevails, Democrats will see their critical 60-vote advantage slip away -- along with any hope of passing the remainder of an ambitious agenda, possibly including a final vote on their signature issue of health care reform.

Since last weekend, when polls began to show the race suddenly and unexpectedly tightening, money from outside the state, as well as fundraising appeals from high-profile Democrats and Republicans, have exploded for both candidates.

Early in the week, the executive director of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee sent an urgent alert to liberal activists. "What you do in the next two minutes could mean the difference between keeping Ted Kennedy's seat blue, or ceding his seat to a tea-bag Republican," he warned in an e-mail asking for donations to Coakley.

More appeals followed, and the money came in. Ted Kennedy's widow, Victoria, sent an e-mail to Democratic supporters that brought in more than $600,000 for Coakley's campaign. MoveOn.org raised more than $600,000 for the race, while Sens. Harry Reid, Chris Dodd and Al Franken sent e-mails to those on their mailing lists on Coakley's behalf and brought more than $500,000 for their fellow Democrat. Nearly all of the messages stressed the importance of the race and the symbolism of the Kennedy seat.

In addition, the Democratic Party's individual committees plowed more than $1 million into the race. On Tuesday, the DSCC spent $567,000 on a media buy, while the Massachusetts Democratic Party spent another $288,000. Sources tell Politics Daily the Democratic National Committee sent "north of $500,000" to shore up Coakley's message.

Federal Election Commission records also show that special-interest groups sent in millions more to support Coakley. The Service Employees International Union spent $739,000 this week alone on television ads, while EMILY'S List spent nearly $250,000 on radio ads attacking Scott Brown for his 90 percent voting record with the state's Republican Party.

Jonathan Parker, the political director of EMILY'S List, explained why an organization outside of Massachusetts would spend so much money on a race in a single state.

"Our whole mission is to help elect pro-choice Democratic women to office," Parker said. "In terms of Massachusetts and Martha Coakley, we endorsed her immediately when she got into the race. We raised a lot of money for her race, both from our members in Massachusetts and across the country." Parker said that in addition to the radio buy this week, EMILY's List will also send direct mail targeted to women in Massachusetts and will operate an independent get-out-the-vote operation to encourage women to vote in the race, which could elect the state's first female senator.

On the Republican side, the National Rifle Association spent $20,000 mailing postcards to voters; the Tea Party Express spent nearly $150,000 on Internet newsletters and messages; and the Chamber of Commerce bought $50,000 in radio ads for Brown. On Monday, conservative columnist Dick Morris asked viewers on Fox News' "Hannity" to give money to the National Republican Trust for a planned $300,000 media buy. "If we win this fight, then there will never be another victory for Obama," Morris said.

Brown has had far fewer reports of outside funding, but one reason may be because he needs it less. The Daily Caller reported Thursday that Brown has raised at least $1 million dollars every day this week. Another reason outside money is not as apparent for Brown may be because Republicans are not required to report it until next month.

A Republican strategist familiar with Brown's campaign said that spotlighting a high volume of outside cash would not square with Brown's persona as an un-bought outsider. "Look at the race he's running, it's 'me versus the machine.' Why trumpet outside money?"

Will the money matter in the end? Even the top prognosticators in the business admit they have no idea who will win Tuesday. On Thursday afternoon, Washington's two best -- Charlie Cook and Stu Rothenberg -- both rated the race a toss-up and stressed that the very nature of an expected low-turnout, high-intensity special election makes the result almost impossible to predict.

Democrats privately say they think they have staunched the bleeding in the Coakley operation just in time to hold the seat. Internal Democratic polls track a recent Survey 2000 poll that showed Coakley eight points ahead of Brown.

Another significant advantage working for Coakley is the Democratic turn-out machine in Massachusetts, which will be fired up for her, if only to defend the Kennedy seat.

Republicans, meanwhile say Scott Brown's strength in Massachusetts can already be declared a victory, no matter who ends up winning next Tuesday.

"Who ever thought they'd have to pour well over a million dollars or more into a state like Massachusetts, particularly when they're looking ahead at competitive midterms?" said Brian Walsh, communications director for the National Republican Senatorial Committee. "That's money that they're not going to have this November. They really underestimated the intensity of the voters in this race, and they underestimated the potency of the health care issue."

A Suffolk University poll released Friday showed the Brown had taken a 50-46 lead, a margin that was still within the poll's 4.5 percent margin of error.

"It's a Brown-out," David Paleologos, director of Suffolk's Political Research Center, told the Boston Herald. Paleologos said that his modeling showed high numbers of independent voters turning out and many motivated by the health care debate. The poll showed 51 percent of next week's likely voters opposed the health care bill, and 61 percent worried that the country can't afford it.

"It's a massive change in the political landscape," Paleologos said.