Last night, Barack Obama doled out $1 million each to NBC, CBS, and Fox, and probably a hefty chunk of change to MSNBC, Univision, BET and TV One, for airing his 30-minute Obamamercial, where he rattled off the tales of four families — in swing states — who are suffering, and just how the Democrat would solve their woes. That's on top of the gobs of cash he's been spending locally, regionally, and nationally, delivering 30-second spots across the land as he outspends John McCain 4:1 in television advertising. Then, a penny for your thoughts: how come here we are, in 2008, with Obama having raised $600 million, and TV networks are seeing less political ad spending than every before?

For starters, you can blame John McCain. Ever since that man made good on his promise to accept public financing, while his competitor backtracked, the Republican nominee has only had $84 million to dole around to local networks.

Then there's the Senate races, where few big state competitions equals less ad spending. Back in 2006, television buys in Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania raked in more than $150 million. This year, the most competitive Senate race is in Minnesota, where Al Franken v. Norm Coleman has produced $21.2 million. And that's about it.

And the 527 groups, which lifted media companies' spirits with all that swift boating? This time around, both candidates urged such groups to leave 'em alone, and for the most part they've complied.

So where does this leave us? According to the guys with the abacuses at Borrell Associates, only $984.3 million will flow through 2008's local TV ad spending, compared to 2004's $1.05 billion. You could see the obvious negatives here, or you could look on the bright side: Media companies won't have to look so hard to find an excuse when they lay off staffers by the hundreds.