I don’t know much about Kamal Jain‘s campaign for State Auditor, other than that he is running in the Republican primary against the odds-on favorite, former Turnpike Authority board member (and BMGer) Mary Z. Connaughton.
But I have to say that I found this dispatch from the MA Office of Campaign and Political finance extremely amusing (email, no link).
Three candidates for statewide office whose opponents have agreed to statutory spending limits for the upcoming primary campaign have filed the required statements declaring the maximum amounts their campaigns will spend…. Such statements are required from candidates who declined to abide by statutory spending limits by the June 1 deadline. Though they did not agree to the limits, these candidates are still required to declare a self-imposed spending cap if they are opposed by candidates who have agreed to limit spending….
· Glodis: $1,300,000. The limits of Glodis’ two primary opponents, Suzanne Bump and Michael Lake, now increase to $1.3 million from their previous statutory limit of $375,000.
· Grossman: $3,500,000. The limit of Grossman’s primary opponent, Stephen Murphy, now increases to $3.5 million from his previous statutory limit of $375,000.
· Jain: $26,930,143,000. The limit of his primary opponent, Mary Connaughton, now increases to $26,930,143,000 from her previous statutory limit of $375,000.
That’s right. In an exceptional show of self-restraint, Kamal Jain has declared that he will not spend any more than about $27 billion in his campaign for Auditor.
I don’t know whether the number Jain selected has any particular significance, nor do I know the motivation behind Jain’s selection of what does appear to be a rather optimistic fundraising goal. I have asked his campaign for comment and will report back if I hear anything.
Personally, I am not a huge fan of what seem to me artificial spending caps on political races, so I find Jain’s move, which appears to be an attempt to make spending limits look silly, to be quite funny. What is your reaction?