I don't know what the numbers are for the money, but all of the money arguments of how Kerry and Edwards don't have enough are based on a history that isn't as relevant as one might hope (IMO).
The first problem is results come in more quickly. You don't have to spend a lot of money to keep up any bounce you have gotten from the previous results. The short period of time makes it difficult for someone with money to really out spend someone with less, before the next vote. It doesn't matter if Kerry doesn't have enough money to win it all now. He has enough to use his momentum to get to Feb. 3 states. He will do well there, which he can parley into more money to get him to Super Tuesday. Along the way he will probably win ME (based purely on how things are now, he will get more for being the front runner). Because he is the front runner he can count on winning one or two more before Super Tuesday. The same is true of Edwards, he wins SC, does well in OK and MO and he will pick up enough money to get him to VA and TN. These two may never catch up to Dean and Clark (but I suspect they will), but they don't need to because they can keep reaffirming their MO and justify more donations or self loads - they are both rich.
The second problem is the previous candidates people cite as not being able to turn early MO into enough money to hold on for the rest of the primary were insurgent candidates. Kerry is not an insurgent candidate; he is as close to a mainstream candidate as there is at this point. It won't be as difficult for Kerry to get money as it was for Hart, Tsongas and McCain. Edwards is the closest thing to a mainstream southern candidate and because of that he will continue to get some money.