It’s about the money:
When I announced the suspension of my campaign on July 3rd, I did so as the first step in the withdrawal process because I have a modest campaign debt – a debt that is an obligation to those who worked for me and continue to work for me and those who provided services. My hope was to raise sufficient funds to pay these workers and suppliers.
If anybody thinks our current system of campaign financing is working, here’s just one more example that it is not. Having to stay in the race – and depriving the voters in the 1st CD a choice – just should not be. Our system is b0rked.
The entire email from Hummell is below the fold. If you want to help him retire his “modest” debt so that the folks in the 1st CD cand move forward with selecting another candidate, do so here.
As many of you know, my life over the past several months has been very busy – between the campaign and working in the Emergency Room. I just returned from a four day rotation at the hospital to learn that the state of my campaign has been the focus of some attention over the past week.
I can only say that it is unfortunate that members of our party are communicating with each other through the blogosphere and the press as opposed to picking up the phone and talking things through. I wish I had known of the Fredericksburg Democratic Committee’s concerns regarding my campaign and I would have made every effort to attend their meeting and address the assembly about my suspended campaign. Although I have yet to receive a copy of their resolution, its tenor and tone seems clear enough.
I have at all times stated that I was the imperfect candidate and that I had financial difficulties in the past. I have always said that while there were extenuating circumstances, I accept full responsibility for my personal finances and I hve never attempted to mislead or deceive members of this party about that background. I also stated that these were personal. When this became the center of attention rather than the important issues which first motivated me to run, I realized that I would not be an effective candidate and began the process of terminating my candidacy.
Reports stating that I continue to “blame others” and have “refused to step down” are simply erroneous. Because many people and much paperwork is involved, the process of winding down takes some time.
Let there be no doubt, I am happy to hand over the candidacy to another candidate who thinks they can do the job. I have personally spoken with potential candidates about this very thing. Although the conclusion to campaign has been tumultuous, I truly believe that this party has an enormous number of very kind, hardworking, and honest members. I know this because I’ve traveled every mile of this district and have been heartened by the well wishes of so many dedicated individuals.
As I stated in my convention speech, prinum non noceri, “first, do no harm,” is the creed of the doctor. This should be everyone’s creed. The Democratic party cannot win this fall unless we all accept that creed. As Democrats, we are trying to create a better, stronger, safer, more prosperous country for our children and grandchildren to live in.
Some of you have asked, “Why haven’t I withdrawn from the race?” When I announced the suspension of my campaign on July 3rd, I did so as the first step in the withdrawal process because I have a modest campaign debt – a debt that is an obligation to those who worked for me and continue to work for me and those who provided services. My hope was to raise sufficient funds to pay these workers and suppliers.
The tumult of the past few weeks has left others to ask, “Why I won’t grant an interview to tell my side of the story.” Although I have had financial difficulties in the past I have always tried to be a gentleman and one of the qualities of a gentleman is loyalty. I have no desire for vengeance or vindication and bear no ill will to my fellow democrats. I will not pour gasoline on a burning fire. The First Congressional District has suffered enough — I have suffered enough. For those who know and respect me, no detailed explanation is necessary. For those who dislike me and have their own agenda, no explanation goes far enough.
The mind reasons, the spirit yearns, and the heart does what the heart will do. My heart told me to enter this race and speak out for those who have no voice. Although my heart is still in this race, reason tells me it’s over. As I conclude this process, your assistance in helping to retire this modest debt means supporting the young men and women who worked on this campaign and who represent the spirit and future of our party. Although I will remain a loyal Democrat and will work to elect Democrats this November, I am eager to bring my direct involvement in politics to a close.
Thank you for your continued good wishes, hospitality, and support over the past several months.
Regards,
Keith
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
“If anybody thinks our current system of campaign financing is working, here’s just one more example that it is not.”
I’m afraid I don’t follow your logic. Could you elaborate?
“Damn that blogosphere! Those bastards!”
And who would trust this guy with any money after we found out that he has had five bankruptcies?
Maybe the top of the ticket sucked up all the money? Seems his opting out of public money may be a drag to many under ticket candidates.
…yeah, I’m going to have to call BS on this one. Doesn’t anyone else remember how quickly Ed Schrock dropped out and Thelma Drake stepped over here in the 2nd District back in 2004? The turn-around between the allegations first coming out, Schrock dropping out and Drake being nominated was something like two weeks, if that. But he didn’t file to close his Federal campaign committee until the middle of October, more than a month after Drake was nominated, and the FEC didn’t even grant him permission until well after the election was already over.
Keith Hummel may think he has to close his campaign committee to officially drop out and allow another candidate to run as the party’s nominee this year, but it just ain’t so.
You have got to be kidding me! I’ll admit that there are problems with the way elections are funded, but this has nothing to do with Hummel.
Hummel was less then forthcoming about his bankruptcies and Suzette Matthews was derilict in her duty to properly vet him. Why should we reward him? This amounts to extortion. Eiher we pay off his debt or he is going to bring the entire ticket down? Are you freakin kidding me! Not to mention that he wants a say in who replaces him.
Don’t let Hummel play the martyr card. The only victims here are Dems in the First District.
I will not be giving him a damn thing and will be urging everyone to do the same. Hey he can always claim bankruptcy!
I’m confused. His debt only exceeds his cash on hand by about $8,000. Why doesn’t he just pay it off himself? Make a loan to your own committee, pay off the third-party debt and then just eat your losses if necessary? This seems to be a problem of his own making and I’m somewhat shocked that a person in his position would ask for donations to fix his problem. T’here is also no reason why his outstanding debt would preclude him stepping aside for another candidate. And I thought the D candidate in my neck of the woods (Rasoul) was a joke, this guy takes the cake.
Timothy – your comment got hung up in my spam filter (because of the language 😉 )
Silence – you make a good point. I didn’t realize that Schrock hadn’t closed his account. Did he continue to raise money?
My understanding was that in order to pay off the debt, he had to “suspend” his campaign. But if that doesn’t preclude the 1st CD Dems from going ahead and nominating a replacement candidate, then why aren’t they doing so? Even if Hummel thinks that is the case, shouldn’t someone else on that committee know the rules?
Vivian–no, he didn’t raise more money. He had the opposite problem that Hummel has: whereas Hummel doesn’t have enough money, Schrock had too much. After he finished paying off his legal bills and his vendors, Schrock spent the first several weeks of September refunding or disposing of excess campaign contributions, as required by FEC rules. He was further slowed in closing his campaign committee down by some discrepencies in previous reports; the FEC wouldn’t grant him permisssion to close until these were resolved. So while he wasn’t raising money, he was still spending a whole heck of a lot.
Not that it matters; you’re allowed to keep your account open and continue raising money to pay off outstanding debt or dispose of contributions for years after the election has come and gone. Owen Pickett didn’t close down his until last year.
Vivian,
Talk to the State Board of Elections regarding suspension versus withdrawal. They say a suspension is not a wtihdrawal. It stops the 1st from moving on because according to the state his name is still on the ballot. If he wants the money maybe he should release the name of his debtors to the 1st CD and public to make a fair evaluation of who he actually owes. Maybe we can send them a check. Also the 1st CD cannot give him back the $5000.00 filing fee because in a federal year you can only give up to $1000.00.
Enjoy Denver by the way!!!
Yeah I may not have made that clear, but Gene’s right. The 1st CD dems can start recruiting but they can’t actually *do* anything about replacing his name on the ballot until Hummel officially withdraws from the election through the State Board of Elections. I don’t expect they’re going to find a way to recruit any sort of serious candidate until Hummel officially withdraws anyway; while I’m sure Hummel is simply a misinformed first-time candidate, it would be pretty easy for people to get the impression that he’s holding the nomination hostage until someone pays him off, and the last thing any potential candidate wants to do is insert himself into the middle of a political hostage situation.
By the way, looking over his most recent FEC report right now, I noted that all of the debts and obligations he’s listed (apart from a personal loan from the candidate) amount to $9750 owed to three people: Vic Fingerhut, Melissa Mattingly, and Jordan Higgins. Both Fingerhut and Mattingly are listed for previous consultations; Higgins is listed for website development. Where is asks for Higgins address on the FEC report, the Hummel campaign listed his gmail adress.
There’s no point to that, I just think it’s hilarious that they thought it was okay to list someone by their email address. Clearly a misinformed first-time candidate…I hope someone educates him fast so the 1st CD Dems can move on with their lives, though.
I find this interesting.
Seems that the Fred2Blue website has an interesting history of Dr. Hummel’s candidacy. A diary appeared on that site on March 2nd, “Keith Hummel May Run in the First”, (http://fred2blue.wordpress.com/2008/03/02/keith-hummel-may-run-in-the-1st/). On April 4th a commenter, Montross, added this comment to that diary:
Montross, on April 6th, 2008 at 10:35 pm Said:
Even his own counties democratic party doesn’t want him to run. If he does receive the nomination, he will only embarass himself and the Democratic party.
Move forward to April 21, 2008 at Fred2Blue where the same diarist wrote this diary “An Exclusive Interview with Dr. Keith Hummel” (http://fred2blue.wordpress.com/2008/04/21/an-f2b-exclusive-interview-with-dr-keith-hummel/#comments). In the interview, Dr. Hummel said this —
“During the past ten years, my family and I became Roman Catholics, and successfully overcame a decade-long financial struggle. As a result of these and other events, I feel compelled to do what I can to place the interests of the individual and nation above those who would subvert those interests for profit.”
And then finally a Fred2Blue diary on July 2nd (http://fred2blue.wordpress.com/2008/07/02/hummel-withdrawing/) had this comment —
Moderate By Nature, on July 3rd, 2008 at 12:37 pm Said:
This was unfortunately long overdue; his track record would have made for a much easier win than the Republicans need.
So Hummel openly acknowledged that he had a financial struggle then. And Montross had left a comment at Fred2Blue that should have caused the Fred2Blue diarist (and others) to pursue just what that “financial struggle” was during the interview. And as late as July 3rd, less than a month after Nominating Convention, someone was saying that his exit was long overdue!-
Bottomline, as early as APRIL there was significant information that Dr. Hummel may pose a problem as a Democratic candidate.
Prinum non noceri, “first, do no harm.” From a distance it appears that he has in fact done harm, so he has pretty much violated this first principal. Stalling because of one lame excuse or another only contiues the harm. Kinda like sewing up the patient but leaving the forceps inside, it hurts. It also appears that he is stalling in order to coerce others to pay off these new debts just as others had to bear the debts of his previous financial struggles. IMHO, this is pretty sorry behavior.