The gap between rich and poor is growing -- not just in American society, but also in the race for president.
Sens. Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York are rolling in cash, having raised more than $100 million between them, while the other Democratic candidates are foraging for scraps.
On the Republican side, former New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani has $18 million in the bank and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney wields a seemingly inexhaustible checkbook, allowing him to supplement contributions. Sen. John McCain of Arizona, meantime, is firing staffers and shrinking his campaign to three states after another weak fundraising quarter left him with just $2 million cash on hand. The rest of the declared GOP candidates are living on the equivalent of pocket change.
Money is not necessarily determinative. History is filled with presidential hopefuls who brandished a great deal of cash -- sometimes much more than others -- only to fail spectacularly once the voting started. Publishing magnate Steve Forbes and former Republican Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas are two recent examples.
It is undeniably better, however, to be rich than poor. "Most campaigns don't lose," said Bill Carrick, a veteran Democratic strategist. "They just run out of money."
And the rich are likely to keep getting richer, making it all the more difficult for other candidates to catch up financially -- especially now that fundraisers are hitting the slow summer months.
"There is a bandwagon effect," said Marty Wilson, a Sacramento Republican consultant who oversaw Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's fundraising during last year's reelection campaign. "If people see a candidate is being successful raising money, they will tend to give more."
Money can't buy votes (at least not legally). But it does provide huge advantages both practical and tactical. It costs a lot of money to run a serious White House campaign, even one reliant on grass-roots support.
"Volunteers don't organize themselves," said Noah Mamet, a longtime Democratic fundraiser who is supporting Clinton. "Campaigns need money to spend on staff, office space, computers, office phones, cellphones, lists of registered voters, even food for volunteers."
Iowa, the first state to vote, illustrates the point.
