The short answer is "very carefully." Last week, when Sen. Barack Obama decided to opt out of public financing (and bizarrely attempted to link his decision to our nation's Declaration of Independence), he offered an odd statistic:
"The Obama campaign highlighted Thursday the fact that 93 percent of the more than three million contributions it had received were for $200 or less." (New York Times)
People quickly reading that statement (or hearing it repeated verbatim on TV while setting the dinner table) might get the impression that 93% of Obama's funds came from small donors.
That impression would be false -- though many people likely doubt that Obama's campaign spokesperson had actually intended to create such a false impression.
Incidentally, donations of $200 or less are considered "small," likely because the FEC doesn't require itemization of donations that are $200 or less. Such is the currently accepted lingo.
That said, here's some info from the Campaign Finance Institute:
"Although small donations have become relatively more important to Obama since February, providing 63% of his contributions in May (they have supplied 49% of his funds overall since January 2007), they have not been sufficient to maintain his previous level of receipts."
If 49% of Obama's total campaign funds came from small donors ($200 or less), then 51% of his funds came from big donors ($201 or more). Thus, an actual majority of Obama's campaign cash was generated from big donors.
That's a vastly different picture than the 93% that some skim readers might misinterpret as Obama's small-donor percentage.
The same NY Times article quoted above says that Obama (as of June 20) has received money from about 1.5 million donors.
In short, Obama has received "more than 3 million" separate donations from 1.5 million donors. Thus, some donors gave more than once -- and could actually qualify as big donors, depending on the total amount of their multiple donations.
For example, if I'd gone to Sen. Obama's campaign website once a month from February 2007 through May 2008 and donated $100 each time, Obama's campaign would have counted my donations 16 times in the "small donations" category ($200 or less) -- despite the fact that I would qualify as one big donor (for having given $1600).
Here's a slightly helpful breakdown of Obama's big-donors category from January 2007 - May 2008 (from a Campaign Finance Institute pdf) based on 1.5 million donors:
*18% of Obama's donors gave $201 - $999 (270,000 donors)
*33% of Obama's donors gave $1000 or more (495,000 donors)
That's a lot of big donors (more than three-quarters of a million), though Obama's small-donor percentage is higher than that of many other candidates during the primaries. McCain's is 24%, Hillary's was 36%, and Edwards' was 32%.
The only major-party candidates with higher small-donor percentages were: Brownback, Gravel, Hunter, Kucinich, Paul, and Tancredo.
But I've strayed from my point, which is this: when you hear stunning campaign statistics or claims, read them carefully, ask questions, and check other data.
If you instead prefer to wait for diligent journalists or pundits to do the fact checking, please refrain from holding your breath.
Other BN-Politics Posts:
* Jon Stewart Has Fun with Obama's Seal & Campaign Funding
* Open Letter to Sen. Salazar re: FISA
Comments