In a dramatic move just days before Election Day, Vice President Kamala Harris held a series of high-profile concerts across the country in an effort to boost voter turnout. However, reports now reveal that the events, which included performances by stars such as Bon Jovi, Christina Aguilera, and Lady Gaga, led to significant financial strain on the campaign’s budget. With $20 million spent on the concerts, sources say the Harris campaign is now facing a substantial debt, leaving staff and vendors fearing they will not be paid for their services.
The concerts, which took place in key cities like Detroit, Las Vegas, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia, were part of a push to energize voters in the final days of the campaign. The idea, reportedly conceived by Obama campaign veterans Stephanie Cutter and David Plouffe, was intended to energize potential voters, particularly those in swing states. However, some within the campaign now question the move, suggesting the funds could have been better allocated elsewhere.
Sources close to the campaign told “The Post” that the concert initiative, despite its star power, was ultimately a misstep in terms of budgeting. Concerns about the rising costs were raised internally, especially when some performances, including a planned show by Alanis Morissette, were scrapped to save money. The concerts, originally projected to cost between $15 million and $20 million, quickly ballooned beyond expectations, with some blaming the last-minute nature of the events for driving up production costs.
Campaign officials, including chairwoman Jen O’Malley Dillon, faced internal pushback for approving the concert plan too late. One insider described the decision as a “real misuse of funds,” pointing out that the money could have been better spent on targeted advertising focused on the economic concerns of voters, particularly given the rising inflation.
As the election approached, campaign leaders realized that most of the $1 billion in campaign funds had already been spent, forcing them to reduce concert expenses where possible. Despite efforts to scale back, sources indicated that the campaign still ended up in financial disarray, with unpaid staff and vendors now worried about reimbursement. “They had huge advance teams for these concerts, like 40-60 people in some cities,” one insider revealed.
Campaign finance teams are reportedly working to file a balance sheet, but concerns remain about how the debts will be addressed in the aftermath of the election. According to reports, despite raising substantial funds during the 107-day campaign, the Harris campaign ended up at least $20 million in debt.
In a bid to cover the deficit, donation pages remain active, urging supporters to help pay down the campaign’s post-election debt. However, critics argue that the money could have been better spent on messaging that resonated with voters, rather than on star-studded performances aimed at motivating a shrinking electorate.
With the final tally still in the air, it remains to be seen how the financial mismanagement will impact the legacy of Harris’s campaign and whether the debts incurred will be fully addressed.
