Jeanne Cummings joined the Wall Street Journal's Washington Bureau in 1997 as a political reporter. During her career, Ms. Cummings has reported on numerous statewide races, congressional contests, and three presidential campaigns. Read Jeanne Cummings' bio

Q: We've heard a lot about 527 groups during this campaign season. Did 527s exist in 2000? How has their role in this election cycle changed since then? Is there any expectation that regulation of these groups may change by 2004?

The 527 section of the tax code has been around for a long time and applies to many types of political committees, including the two national party committees and most candidate committees. What's new this year is the rise of partisan 527 committee that conduct some of the same activities as party committees -- advertising and voter turnout -- but are not officially aligned with either party. The Federal Election Commission already is considering some regulations that would force the groups to change the way they spend their money on voter turnout operations. Reformers are unhappy with that small step and have introduced legislation that would force the groups to follow the same rules as the parties and candidates. However, prospects for passage of another major campaign finance reform bill are slim and reformers will likely have to take their arguments to court.

Q: The public often hears about the power of money in politics, especially when it comes in the form of large donations from wealthy individuals. Are there any powerful grass-roots groups that depend largely on the support of small-money donors? Was the short-term success of the Howard Dean campaign an indication of what's possible for "the little guy" or did that campaign benefit from big donors, too?

The Dean campaign, coming on the heels of Republican John McCain successful Internet fundraising in 2000, has shown a new way for motivated small donors to impact the political process.

MoveOn.org, a liberal group, also has been on the cutting edge of mobilizing lots of small donors to work on projects with big impact. Its political advertising project this year was boosted by an early donation of about $5 million from wealthy backers, but MoveOn was first established during the Clinton Administration and made a name for itself by conducting online petition drives and mailings to Capitol Hill on issues important to its millions of small donor members. Most of its advertising today is being paid for with small online donations.

Q: How do the campaigns make their spending decisions as they eye campaign opportunities across the nation? Are long-shot states completely ignored in favor of greater investment in battleground states? What are some of the most expensive states in which to campaign? Do politicians consider any region a particular "best buy" or great bargain when it comes to comparing dollars to potential payoff?

The campaign's spending decisions are based on their strategy for winning enough Electoral College votes to take the White House. Some states that vote along predictable partisan lines are ignored completely, and that won't change. Among the most expensive battleground states are Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio. The bargain states are the likes of Iowa, Wisconsin and New Mexico, which also explains why so many of the smaller 527 groups buy ads in those states.

Q:The state of Colorado is considering a measure that would change their "winner-take-all" presidential electoral vote system to a proportional allocation method. What would be the impact on campaigning and campaign spending if more states made this switch?

If many states passed such initiatives, it would significantly expand the campaign boundaries because opportunities to pick up Electoral College votes would abound. Even states like California would suddenly be in play since Republicans could count on pocketing at least some of the heavily Democratic states Electoral College votes.

Q: How did the great recount of 2000 change campaign planning? What are campaign managers budgeting for and watching out for now that they may not have considered four years ago?

Both are raising millions of dollars to pay for possible recount fights. Also, they are much more deliberate in their battleground strategy. John Kerry, for instance, stopped advertising in some states to be sure he would have enough to finish strong in both Ohio and Florida. Four years ago, Al Gore had to shift resources from Ohio to Florida in the final weeks because he was running out of money.