Senate Democrats are in their strongest financial position in years as they set out to win control of the chamber this fall, campaign finance reports filed this week show.
Republicans, who have controlled the Senate for more than 40 years, still have a huge financial advantage, with $6 million on hand in their central campaign accounts to the Democrats’ $1.5 million. But for the Democrats, who have steadily won Senate seats in recent years — often on shoestring budgets — the fund-raising picture is less lopsided than it has been in recent memory.
Just four years ago, the Democrats’ campaign committee was half a million dollars in debt, and Democratic senators had to co-sign a loan personally to get campaign money. Counting money held by the two state parties that year, Republicans had more than 30 times as much cash in the bank as the Democrats — and still lost three Senate seats. This year, the combined ratio is about three to one.
“We can’t beat them when they outspend us five or six to one,” said Senator Eric T. Schneiderman, a Manhattan Democrat and former head of the Senate Democrats’ campaign efforts. “But if they outspend us two to one, three to one, we win races. It’s an overwhelmingly Democratic state.” There are more than five registered Democrats to every three Republicans, he noted.
Still, the current figures reflect a large Republican advantage going into a very important election. As in years past, Senate Democrats have raised most of their money from so-called ideological donors — wealthy liberals — while Senate Republicans dominate among so-called transactional donors: special interests, like labor unions and business lobbyists with business before the Legislature.
“If there was any hint among donors, among New Yorkers, of a switch in the Senate, you would have seen those numbers a lot higher,” Matthew R. Mahoney, the Senate Republicans’ campaign strategist, said of money donated to the Democrats. “The money they’ve been able to raise in their general campaign account is a joke.”
Democrats see improvement on several fronts, though. The state Democratic Party, for example, has nearly $1.5 million on hand, compared with little more than $622,000 for the state Republican Party, offsetting the typically strong fund-raising by Senate Republicans.
That is largely a legacy of Eliot Spitzer, who broke a longstanding truce last year under which Democratic governors did not raise money or campaign for Democratic candidates in Senate races. Before resigning amid a prostitution scandal in March, Mr. Spitzer poured money from the state party into two special elections that whittled the Republican majority down to a single seat.
He also used his influence to bring new donors to the Senate Democrats. This month, for example, the real estate developer Eric D. Hadar, who in the past donated tens of thousands of dollars to Mr. Spitzer, gave $50,000 to the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, his first gift to the group. He gave nothing to Senate Republicans, to whom he donated $25,000 several years ago.
Unlike Mr. Spitzer, Gov. David A. Paterson has signaled that he will honor the old campaigning truce this fall and stay out of Senate races, despite raising $3.3 million on his own. But Democrats are counting on another patron: Tom Golisano, the billionaire Rochester businessman, who said last week that he would spend $5 million in state legislative races.
While Mr. Golisano has said he would give to both parties, he has already talked with at least three Democrats who are running for Republican-held seats in western New York. That suggests that Mr. Golisano could play a pivotal role as a financial equalizer for Democrats.
Democratic strategists also say they are pleased with the individual fund-raising efforts of their candidates in key races this fall. According to an analysis of records for 10 important races, Democratic incumbents and challengers raised an average of $147,886, while Republicans averaged $186,772.
While the central campaign committees typically raise and spend most of the money in individual races, Democrats say their candidates’ ability to raise money reflects enthusiasm for a Democratic takeover, long regarded as an impossible goal even by loyal party regulars.
“We are getting more money from more people,” said Doug Forand, the Senate Democrats’ top campaign strategist. “We’re also getting more money from our old donors.”
As yet, few special interest groups are willing to give directly to the Democratic campaign accounts, but some groups appear to be hedging their bets with small, symbolic donations to individual Democrats.
For example, the Senate minority leader, Malcolm A. Smith, raised more than half a million dollars during the last six months, including donations from Featherstonhaugh, Wiley & Clyne, a law firm with strong Republican ties, and Powers & Company, a lobbying firm headed by William D. Powers, the former state Republican chairman.
Empire Dental, the powerful dentists’ political action committee and a top ally of Senate Republicans, made small donations to more than a dozen Senate Democrats, including three top targets for Republicans: the first-term senators Darrel Aubertine, Craig M. Johnson and Andrea Stewart-Cousins.
Senate Democrats also tend to raise more money from special interest groups in the summer and fall of an election year than in the spring. That is because interest groups that are wary of offending Republican leaders during the legislative session — which runs from January through June — are more likely to give later in the year, when legislative business is concluded.
Of those Senate incumbents whose campaign reports were available Thursday, Republicans had $13.2 million on hand, compared with $5.9 million for Democrats, money that can be spread from safe seats to vulnerable seats as needed. Joseph L. Bruno, the retiring Senate majority leader, has more than $1.7 million on hand, should he choose to use it to help his colleagues.
The Senate Republican Campaign Committee has already made six-figure infusions of cash to three candidates, including Senator Serphin R. Maltese of Queens, considered the most vulnerable incumbent. Meanwhile, two Democratic candidates, the Queens lawyer Albert Baldeo and David Nachbar, a Rochester-area businessman, have relied on six-figure loans to themselves to improve their own numbers.
Mr. Mahoney voiced optimism about his party’s chances against Democrats, especially with John McCain poised to be at the head of the national ticket.
“I wouldn’t want to change places with them,” Mr. Mahoney said, “and I wouldn’t want to swap any of my candidates for theirs.”
