8
entries in each reporting period. In some cases, expenditures are not listed in alphabetical
order, so one must examine each record, trolling for a polling expense. In addition,
amendments to the report are often filed subsequently and must be examined to
determine whether they contain any polling expenses.
Perhaps the most vexing feature of the data reports is that while one can
determine the amount spent on polling, there is no information about the substance of the
poll. Nor can the date the check was issued tell us when the polling data were actually
collected. One professional pollster noted that there might be 30 to 60 day time-lags
between when the poll was fielded, when the pollster billed the national party, and when
the party issued payment. Consequently, if one is trying to examine the role that events
play in influencing polling, this approach is not entirely helpful. Nevertheless, the FEC
records offer the only cumulative look at party spending from 1977 through 2000. From
these reports, we can at least get a general sense of how frequently presidents (and their
staffs) commissioned polls.
4
Turning to Table 1, we examine whether presidents on the whole varied in the
resources they dedicated to polling during their administration. To facilitate comparisons,
we standardized dollar figures to 2002 values. On the surface, it appears that average
spending varied a great deal from administration to administration, with fluctuations
4
Our data collection method involved obtaining all expenditures for presidential pollsters (President Carter
– Pollster Pat Caddell and Cambridge Survey Research, President Reagan – Pollster Richard Wirthlin,
Decision Making Information, The Wirthlin Group, President Bush – Pollsters Robert Teeter and Fred
Steeper, Market Opinion Research, Coldwater Corporation and Market Strategies, President Clinton –
Pollsters Stanley Greenberg and Mark Penn and Douglas Schoen). We included all expenditures for
polling, surveys, research and focus groups and excluded non-polling expenses incurred by the pollsters
(e.g., travel, hotel). After initial figures were obtained by Tenpas and various research assistants, the
expenditure reports were checked two additional occasions (in the case of the Carter data, we checked four
occasions) for verification purposes. Nevertheless, these figures vary from those presented by Murray and
Howard for reasons that are unclear. The data collection is painstaking and punishing to the eyes,
suggesting that human error may be to blame. It is worth noting that the FEC website (fec.gov) has a
Convention