Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign, which ultimately ended in defeat, reportedly wrapped up with over $20 million in debt. The news was first shared on X (formerly Twitter) by Politico California bureau chief Christopher Cadelago, who cited two sources familiar with the campaign’s finances.
“Kamala Harris’s campaign ended with at least $20 million in debt, per two sources familiar. Harris raised over $1 billion and had $118 million in the bank as of Oct. 16,” Cadelago posted.
Following this report, Breitbart’s Matthew Boyle confirmed the debt, sharing further details on the controversy. According to Boyle, a Harris campaign staffer suggested there was a “massive scandal” surrounding the campaign’s financial management, calling for an audit. The staffer pointed to campaign manager Jen O’Malley Dillon, blaming her for what they described as excessive spending on high-profile concerts featuring artists like Katy Perry, Lizzo, Eminem, and Bruce Springsteen, instead of prioritizing core campaign efforts like social media outreach.
Harris’s campaign, which ran for only 107 days after she replaced President Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee, made substantial expenditures within a short period. This spending is especially notable given the positive media coverage Harris received compared to her opponent, President-elect Donald Trump.
According to a study by the Media Research Center (MRC), Harris enjoyed 78% positive media coverage, a stark contrast to the 15% positive press received by Trump. The National Pulse reported that this favorable coverage could be valued at around $3 billion in earned media, underscoring Harris’s media advantage. However, even with this billion-dollar campaign fund and strong media backing, the campaign struggled to convert this attention into voter support.
The 2024 election has gone down as the most expensive in U.S. history, surpassing even the record-breaking 2020 and 2012 campaigns. This financial milestone has intensified scrutiny on Harris’s campaign spending, especially as more details surface regarding the allocation of resources in her bid for the presidency.
As the dust settles, Harris’s campaign debt and spending priorities are likely to come under further examination, with calls for a deeper audit. For many, this campaign’s financial trajectory raises questions about whether strategic spending decisions were sacrificed for show-stopping events. The coming months may bring further insight into the inner workings of the campaign and whether a different financial approach could have yielded different results.
