If President Joe Biden does not run for re-election, Vice President Kamala Harris would have a major practical advantage over other potential Democratic presidential nominees.
That’s because only Harris could seamlessly take full control of the president’s war chest, making the vice president, at least financially, the easiest option to replace Biden at the top of the ticket.
“It’s uncharted territory and it’s going to be a huge challenge for any candidate other than the vice president to raise a lot of money very quickly,” Larry Noble, the former general counsel of the Federal Election Commission, told HuffPost.
Handing everything over to a candidate other than Harris will be much harder, if not impossible, according to experts who underscore the unprecedented nature of the situation Democrats currently face. In that case, the Biden-Harris bill could shuffle everything off to a political action committee, hand it over to the Democratic National Committee, or reimburse donors and ask them to contribute to a new committee. None of these options are ideal.
“Because President Biden and Vice President Harris share a qualified campaign committee … if President Biden were to no longer be a candidate and Harris were to succeed him as the nominee, she would retain access to all funds on the committee and could use them to further her candidacy,” Trevor Potter, the president of the Campaign Legal Center, a campaign finance watchdog, explained on social media this week.
A new campaign would also need to fund campaign infrastructure, such as staff, field offices, and existing ad buys, at a fair market rate, as all of these are subject to limits on in-kind contributions.
“The Biden-Harris campaign could make a political contribution to another candidate, but that is subject to political contribution limits,” Noble said, referring to the federal candidate-to-candidate contribution limit of $2,000 per election. “They simply cannot transfer [everything] to another candidate.”
It’s just one example of how challenging mounting a new campaign would be for anyone but Harris with four months to go, as Democrats publicly question whether Biden has the energy to win the election and complete another term. Fundraising is just one piece of a puzzle that would involve marshaling another candidate and getting that candidate on the ballot in 50 states with varying qualification rules.
Harris, who ran against Biden in 2020 before becoming his running mate, is getting renewed scrutiny as a presidential candidate, with a CNN poll this week showing her narrowly beating Biden in a head-to-head matchup with Trump.
But Biden and his closest advisers have become steadfast after last Thursday’s debate, in which Biden (81) appeared unable to effectively stand up to the 78-year-old former president.
In a move that could help ease growing concerns, Biden’s campaign released its second-quarter fundraising numbers on Tuesday, showing that Biden raised $264 million in Q2, including $127 million in June and $33 million on debate day alone, the campaign said. Biden ended the quarter with $240 million in cash on hand, compared to Trump’s $285 million in cash from his $331 million Q2 haul. They were strong numbers for both campaigns as they head into the final stretch of the election.
But if Democrats were to nominate Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer or California Gov. Gavin Newsom — both of whom have been touted as potential Biden successors now and in 2028 — neither would directly benefit from the Biden-Harris campaign’s mountain of cash unless Harris also runs.
According to campaign finance experts, the only way to ensure that a completely new candidate ticket gets the same amount of money is to refund donors and ask them to contribute to a new candidate committee. A logistical nightmare would not guarantee the same result for a new campaign.
One Democratic strategist called that option “phenomenally stupid,” but stressed that there is no modern precedent for what Democrats are currently experiencing. “People are not going to give it back … I don’t think you should ever give money back in politics,” the person said.
The Biden-Harris campaign could also shift money to a PAC, which can accept unlimited contributions but cannot spend them in direct coordination with a candidate. Another disadvantage of PACs: They often pay more than candidates for TV time, a major campaign expense.
The campaign could also give it all to the Democratic National Committee, but even with the DNC there are rules governing coordination with candidates that limit how freely the committee can spend. “That’s not necessarily as effective as a campaign spending money itself,” Noble said.
Noble pointed out that no sitting president has chosen not to run for re-election since Lyndon B. Johnson in 1968, “and that was before all of these laws.”
He added: “For a candidate other than the vice president, it’s going to be a really tough task to raise a lot of money.”
