Financially, the contenders for Hawaii's open Senate seat are standing on equal ground (Total Raised and Spent). With Hirono having raised $5.1 million and Lingle having raised $5.4 million, the margin remains small and neither candidate is being offered a serious financial advantage (Mazie K. Hirono)(Total Raised and Spent). As there is no significant gap in the funds both candidates were able to amass, it is interesting to cross-examen how each candidate thought it best to spend their available resources.
Linda Lingle's campaign opted to purchase a cable channel to broadcast endorsements and advertisement 24-hours a day (Nagourney). This rather ambitious tactic exemplifies the idea of name recognition, which plays on undecided voter's memory to bring to mind the candidate that they most remember. A 24-house news advertisement channel is an example of how the idea of name-recognition is being taken to the next level, providing a constant stream of stimulating propaganda. This channel, situation only one station above Fox News, provides biased perspectives as seen through the eyes of the republican party, and would mislead any viewer to stumble upon it expected an objective perspective (Nagourney)(Berry et. al 142).
Because of this over-zealous attempt to seize public attention, more timid voters might shy from its sheer audacity, thinking the channel to be a blatant waste of money or simply too forward in promoting Lingle's campaign. Is the channel even effective enough to justify 2.5 thousand dollars in expenditures every week (Nagourney)? Political scientist Neal Milner answers that "most people people who are likely to watch [Lingle's channel] are people who have already decided to vote for her (qtd. in Nagourney). If so, perhaps Lingle is just preaching to the choir and this channel is nothing more than a narcissistic release for the Republicans of Hawaii.
In contrast, Hirono not strayed far from the beaten track in terms of advertising technique. Any eccentricity in her campaign pales in comparison to the Lingle channel. As such, it is sufficient to say that Hirono has been more orthodox in her advertising campaign. This makes Hirono's campaign less likely to alienate voters than if the bombarded them with an excess of advertisements.
The Hirono and Lingle campaigns have both been diligent and reported to the best of their abilities their respective financial records to the Federal Election Commission (House and Senate Campaign Finance). The money raised by both parties is in accordance with the Federal Elections Campaign Act, and no major discrepencies have yet been identified (House and Senate Campaign Finance)(Total Raised and Spent)(Berry et. al 221). However, it is noteworthy to mention that, as of october 17th, Hirono was only able to fully disclose 73.9% of her funds raised, while the origins of 26.1% of her funds remains incomplete. (Total Raised and Spent). Lingle's records were are much more transparent and accurate, as she was able to fully disclose the origins of 95.7% of her funds.
Although it may amount to little more than slow accounting, the lack of transparency in Hirono's fiscal sector may be enough to cause Republicans, and even undecided voters, some grief. There is still time for the Hirono campaign to get its finances in order before the mandatory submission of records to the FEC in November (Berry et. al 221). It will be worthwhile to follow-up on these events and discover if the Hawaiian Democrats have indeed been fiscally responsible.
Hirono received more donations, 21% of her campaign funds, from smaller individual donations (Mazie K. Hirono). Lingle only received 7% of her overall campaign funds from small individual donations, and instead relied more heavily on larger and fewer donations (Total Raised and Spent). Observing this trend, and operating under the assumption that contributions are correlated to average household income, it becomes clear that Hirono is more popular among the majority of lower income households while Lingle is popular among the more wealthy households. These indicators based on campaign contributions are congruent with the national norms of partisanship and the role that income and socioeconomic status play in deciding elections (Berry et. al 173). Such partisan alignment determined by donation is a tool that can be used to gain insight into the candidates popularity, and to measure their success across different socioeconomic classes.
Berry, Jeffrey, Kenneth M. Janda, Jerry Goldman, and Kevin W. Hula. The Challenge of Democracy.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2004. Print.
"House and Senate Campaign Finance." Federal Election Commission. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.fec.gov/disclosurehs/HSCandDetail.do>.
"Mazie K. Hirono."
Campaign Finance/Money. N.p., 17 Oct. 2012. Web. 19 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00028139>.
Nagourney, Adam. "A Candidate Whose Ads Are Never Off the Air." The New York Times. The
New York Times, 09 Aug. 2012. Web. 19 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/us/politics/linda-lingle-turns-hawaii-tv-channel-into-
24-hour-campaign-ad.html?ref=lindalingle>.
"Total Raised and Spent." Total Raised and Spent. N.p., 16 Oct. 2012. Web. 19 Oct. 2012.
<http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?id=his2>.
