A Few New House Polls

Published on

Courtesy of Politico this morning we have new polls of five House districts that are currently held by Republicans and could be potential Democratic targets in the fall. Each of these districts is listed in our tracker of potential target General Assembly races.

The polling was done by Public Policy Polling on behalf of SEIU Healthcare. The service union wanted to test some messages related to possible upcoming votes that would affect the union’s members. The polls also included numbers on the Governor’s approval rating in the district and the district’s preference on whether or not to re-elect the incumbent.

 

First, the Governor’s approval rating in each district:

Rauner Approval Good Bad Neutral Not Sure
20th House (McAuliffe) 34% 48% 16% 2%
61st House (Jesiel) 40% 37% 21% 2%
95th House (Bourne) 30% 46% 21% 2%
99th House (Wojicki-Jimenez) 32% 51% 16% 1%
115th House (Bryant) 27% 50% 21% 2%

The Governor’s approval rating is upside down in all but one district, the 61st.

 

Next, the generic re-elect numbers for each incumbent:

Incumbent Re-Elect Someone New Not Sure
Mike McAuliffe (20th) 45% 40% 15%
Sheri Jesiel (61st) 36% 43% 21%
Avery Bourne (95th) 42% 47% 11%
Sara Wojcicki-Jimenez (99th) 33% 49% 19%
Terri Bryant (115th) 45% 44% 11%

McAuliffe has his head above water despite the Governor’s numbers, Jesiel is behind in the generic re-elect by 7 points despite the Gov’s +3 approval rating, Bourne and Wojcicki-Jimenez (both of whom were appointed to their seats via the Governor) are well under water in their districts along with the Governor and Bryant is just holding about even despite the Governor’s dismal numbers.

These numbers are just a limited snapshot but interesting nonetheless. The Governor’s team has telegraphed that they intend to tie Democratic House candidates to the Speaker so it would have been interesting to see those numbers in each of these districts, also while generic re-elect numbers are interesting it would have been more interesting to see actual head to head matchups with the Democratic candidates that will appear on the ballot this fall.

Here are the links to the full poll results and crosstabs:

 

Republican State Party Transfers $2 Million to HRO – Some Context

Published on

You may remember that about two months ago Governor Rauner put $2 million more of his own money into his candidate committee and then a week ago he transferred $5 million from his candidate committee to the Illinois Republican Party. Well today the House Republican Organization reported receiving $2 million from the State Party. Any time that much money is transferred it is significant but this is significant for a number of reasons, here are a few:

  1. Fundraising by the House Democrats had been far outpacing the House Republicans. You may remember from our financial analysis back at the start of May the four committees controlled by the Speaker (personal, DPI, Democratic Majority & 13th Ward) had about $7.5 million available compared with just $1.2 million in the three committees controlled by House leadership (Durkin, HRO & House Republican Leadership Committee). Plus when you add up the balances in all the other House candidate committees aside from the leaders the Democrats have an additional $14 million compared to just $5.4 million for House Republican candidates.
     

    Further, if you look at all the likely targeted House races you’ll see that the cash available numbers are very lopsided for the Democrats. The Democrats fundraised heavily into their targeted candidate committees in the 4th quarter of last year, aside from the Speaker 14 House Democrats raised more than $100K (11 of them more than $247K and 3 of them more than $500K) while the only House Republican to break $100K that quarter was Leader Durkin. The numbers last quarter were a little skewed because of the primary but aside from Bob Romanik loaning himself $1 million the only other House Republicans who raised more than $100K last quarter all had primaries (Scobbie, Acklin, Phillips, Schofield and Bourne). So far this quarter Romanik has loaned himself another $1 million and after that the leading fundraiser (aside from Leader Durkin) is David McSweeney with $26,700.

    The House Republicans just haven’t been fundraising with any significant results, now the Governor (via the State Party) is sending in at least some of the cavalry.

  2.  
  3. It’s May. In a typical budget year this is when many or all of the year’s most complicated votes happen. It’s going to be easier to hold the party and the caucus together when they know the needed resources will be there.
  4.  
  5. The House Republican Organization will decide how this money is spent. With the Governor’s campaign committee so flush and the legislative committees less so it wasn’t clear who would decide how and where the money gets spent on legislative races. The Governor’s team could have spent this money directly on various campaigns on behalf of the campaigns they chose but by transferring this money to the HRO for at least this part of the spending those decisions will be made by the House Republican leadership team.
  6.  

I’m sure this won’t be the last of it either. Stay tuned.

 
 

General Election Preview – Likely Targeted Races

Published on

This cycle’s General Assembly races will very likely be the most expensive in Illinois history and many of the top targeted races will be contested like never before. On May 1st we estimated that the two parties had $69.1 million cash on hand for the fall general elections for General Assembly races between their various committees (that is on top of the $55.4 million that has already been spent this cycle by these committees). This year we’re likely to see $150 million or more spent on legislative elections alone.

Since taking office Governor Rauner has pursued an aggressive agenda, one that is more commonly found when the chief executive shares the same party as the majority in the legislature. However the Democrats currently have super majorities in both chambers and the Governor’s agenda has found little traction resulting in a prolonged multi-year stalemate. Thus far the Democrats’ veto-proof majority has had limited effect, despite several attempts the Democrats have only once successfully overriden a gubernatorial veto (other than those that were part of an agreed process with the Governor).

If the Republicans pick up a few seats in the fall it may be good for party morale but it will not fundamentally alter the current dynamic, the Democrats’ veto-proof majority is not a functional one but they still control the legislative branch and unless the legislative branch changes hands advancing the Governor’s agenda will likely be limited to whatever policy proposals are able to win bipartisan support.

Therefore the Governor has a very strong incentive to pursue significant gains for legislative Republicans if he wants to improve the chances of passing his agenda. Right from the start the Governor and his political team have made it clear they understand the stakes involved and are prepared to put in the necessary resources and effort to support and enhance their legislative allies.

On New Year’s Eve 2014, after winning election but prior to taking office, then Governor-elect Rauner replenished his nearly depleted candidate committee, Citizens for Rauner, with $20 million. The Governor put in $10 million of his own money and also received contributions of $8 million from Ken Griffin and $2 million from Richard Uihlein. Here is what one Rauner advisor told Greg Hinz of Crain’s at the time:

“There are a lot of legislators who he is going to be asking to make a lot of tough decisions,” said one Rauner insider who asked not to be named. “The intent is to build a large and effective political operation in order to pursue his agenda.”

Some of the money may be donated directly to legislators’ campaign committees and other funds spent on their behalf. TV ads, polling and other activity on behalf of Rauner policies also is expected, the insider said. And the war chest only is “the first in a series,” part of a “multipronged effort” in which other funding vehicles will be formed, the source said. “This is the tip of the iceberg.”

That was indeed the tip of the iceberg. The following spring the Governor’s allies created an independent expenditure committee, Turnaround Illinois, seeded with $4.25 million from the Governor and Sam Zell. Since that time the Governor has contributed $2 million more of his own money to each of his candidate committee (Citizens for Rauner) and his IE (Turnaround Illinois).

Prior to entering politics the Governor was a successful investor and with so much of the Governor’s personal money at stake it’s fair to expect that the Governor and his political team will make a concerted effort to get a return on his investment. The Governor and his allied donors have demonstrated that they can easily contribute unprecedented sums to advance their political interests.

However to fundamentally alter the current political dynamic the Republicans will need to take control of the legislature and that will not be easy, particularly in the Senate which has half as many districts as the House and where a third of the seats are not even on the ballot this cycle. The Republicans currently hold 20 seats in the Senate, they will need to win 10 more in order to take control of the chamber. As you can see from the list it’s hard to find ten winnable districts for Republicans without getting into districts generally considered to be favorable for the Democrats. Further complicating Republican efforts is that in some of these districts there is no Republican candidate currently on the ballot. The deadline for appointing candidates to the ballot in those races is fast approaching (May 31st).

In the House the Republicans currently hold 47 seats and would need to win 13 seats to gain a majority. The situation in the House isn’t as bleak for the Republicans simply because there are twice as many districts, every seat is on the ballot this fall and they have more options to find 13 winning pickup opportunities but it will still be a tall task, complicated further by the fact that in several of the more mathematically favorable districts the Republicans currently have no candidate on the ballot.

The pickup opportunities for the Democrats are far fewer, they already have super majorities in each chamber so there aren’t very many winnable seats left. However the Democrats are likely to have some favorable political conditions this fall. It’s a presidential election year where Democrats generally do better than in off-year elections. At the top of the ticket the likely nominee, Hillary Clinton, was born in Illinois and could provide a local boost for turnout. It will be interesting to see if and where the Democrats decide to play offense.

What follows in the four tabs above are the likely targeted pickup opportunities for each party for each chamber as ranked by the 2014 election results. You can find the candidates, their cash position as of 9pm last night, 2014 election results, the total number of presidential primary voters from the March primary and a note about each race.

Below are the districts ranked by most mathematically favorable based on the statewide results in each district from the 2014 general election. Not all of these districts are certain to be targets, that will also depend on candidate recruitment, messaging and local factors, these are just the ones with the most favorable math based on the previous election.

Fundraising and old vote totals will not determine the outcome of these elections, instead the candidates, their message and the campaigns they run will. If you want to follow the developments of these campaigns stay up to date with the local traditional media who can and will cover the candidates and the issues far better than I ever could. If you’re looking for outlets that cover all of these races I’d suggest subscribing here and here and/or here.

Here are 15 Senate districts currently held by Democrats that are the most mathematically favorable to the Republicans. There are currently 20 Republican Senators and they would need to pick up 10 seats to win a majority in the chamber.

 

47th Senate District – (D) [Vacant] vs. (R) Jil Tracy

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +19.53 Rauner +36.18 Schimpf +3.7 White +11.79 Topinka +36.71 Cross +20.53 N/A Sullivan +12.8
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 15,850
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 35,498

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: this is the seat that will be vacated by retiring Sen. John Sullivan. As of now there is no Democratic candidate and appears to be a likely Republican pickup.

 

 

59th Senate District – (D) Gary Forby vs. (R) Dale Fowler

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +11.56 Rauner +30.97 Schimpf +6.01 White +12.05 Topinka +7.35 Cross +24.91 N/A Forby +18.2
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 24,397
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 35,749

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: in 2014 Rauner won this deep Southern Illinois district by 31 points while Cross won it by 25. Four years ago perennial target Gary Forby cruised to an 18 point win. As is often the case in Southern Illinois this race will likely key on local issues and support for state facilities in the area.

 

 

56th Senate District – (D) William Haine vs. (R) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +2.02 Rauner +18.66 Madigan +0.03 White +14.98 Topinka +13.19 Cross +9.05 N/A Haine +17.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 31,390
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 29,118

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Haine won comfortably in 2012 but the Republicans did well in 2014, Rauner won by almost 19 points here. Despite the Republicans strong showing in 2014 no Republicans filed to run in the primary in this district and they currently have no candidate on the ballot.

 

 

23rd Senate District – (D) Tom Cullerton vs. (R) Seth Lewis

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +1.99 Rauner +19.19 Madigan +11.71 White +25.21 Topinka +15.4 Cross +15.06 N/A Cullerton +2.4
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 28,239
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 28,009

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: this was the surprise upset district four years ago and now Tom Cullerton will have to do what he can to win re-election in a district that Rauner won by 19 points and Cross by 15 points two years ago. The 2016 partisan primary participation numbers are surprisingly close here though.

 

 

31st Senate District – (D) Melinda Bush vs. (R) Mike Amrozowicz

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +2.8 Rauner +18.68 Madigan +14.64 White +26.42 Topinka +13.26 Cross +13.34 N/A Bush +2.8
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 27,692
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 26,717

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: this north suburban district was a target four years ago and is expected to be again. The 2014 competitive elections (Gov, Comp, Treas) went to the Republicans by double digits but the 2016 partisan primary numbers gave a slight edge to the Democrats so as with most swing districts independent voters will be key.

 

 

49th Senate District – (D) Jennifer Bertino-Tarrant vs. (R) Michelle Smith

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Durbin +0.59 Rauner +13.73 Madigan +14.6 White +26.88 Topinka +11.12 Cross +22.19 N/A B-T +6.8
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 32,956
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 30,268

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: just like the preceding district this suburban district was a target four years ago and is expected to be again. The 2014 competitive elections (Gov, Comp, Treas) went to the Republicans by double digits but the 2016 partisan primary numbers gave a slight edge to the Democrats so as with most swing districts independent voters will be key.

 

 

34th Senate District – (D) Steve Stadelman vs. (R) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Durbin +1.71 Rauner +10.48 Madigan +19.24 White +26.41 Topinka +20.27 Cross +7.57 N/A Stadelman +25.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 27,769
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 27,410

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Stadelman won this Rockford-area district going away in 2012. It went comfortably for the Republicans in the contested elections of 2014 but no Republican candidates filed to run in the primary here in 2016 and so far no Republican candidate is on the ballot.

 

 

28th Senate District – (D) Laura Murphy vs. (R) Mel Thillens

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Durbin +6.49 Rauner +14.82 Madigan +21.65 White +38.13 Topinka +12.81 Cross +10.08 N/A Kotowski +14.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 32,712
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 24,531

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: appointed incumbent Laura Murphy (Kotowski’s former seat) will attempt to win this near northwest suburban district. Four years ago Kotowski won it going away but just two years ago the Republicans won the competitive races (Gov, Comp, Treas) by double digits.

 

 

52nd Senate District – (D) Scott Bennett vs. (R) Mike Madigan

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Durbin +8.7 Rauner +8.86 Madigan +15.65 White +23.55 Topinka +13.81 Frerichs +18.47 N/A Frerichs +29.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 36,895
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 27,305

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: in this Champaign-area Senate district four years ago Mike Frerichs cruised to re-election by almost 30 points and two years ago the district strongly supported him in his run for Treasurer while still going for Rauner and Topinka by almost 9 and 14 points respectively. Now Scott Bennett hopes to replicate Frerichs’ success against a former Repubican staffer with a not exactly unique ballot name: Mike Madigan. There are a number of factors about this race/district that should make this one interesting to watch.

 

 

29th Senate District – (D) Julie Morrison vs. (R) Benjamin Salzberg

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Durbin +17.3 Rauner +12.8 Madigan +23.28 White +38.23 Topinka +6.16 Cross +5.01 N/A Morrison +8.8
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 38,441
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 26,176

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: four years ago Julie Morrison won this targeted north suburban district by almost 9 points. Two years ago Rauner won it by almost 13 points while Topinka and Cross won by 6 and 5 points respectively. The presidential year election favors the Democrats but this is expected to be a targeted district.

 

 

46th Senate District – (D) David Koehler vs. (R) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Durbin +5.89 Rauner +1.41 Madigan +19.83 White +32.84 Simon +0.62 Frerichs +4.25 N/A Koehler +8.4
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 27,476
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 26,506

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: this is the 11th district listed here, the Republicans could re-take the chamber by winning all 10 of the races above but if they do not sweep them this is where it starts to get more difficult. Four years ago Koehler won this Peoria-area district by more than 8 points. Even in the very favorable Republican year of 2014 Rauner was only able to win this district by a point and a half while Topinka lost by a half point and Cross lost by more than four. On top of that no Republican candidates filed to run in the primary here and no Republican candidate is currently on the ballot.

 

 

40th Senate District – (D) Toi Hutchinson vs. (R) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Durbin +9.39 Rauner +3.77 Madigan +26.15 White +35.35 Topinka +0.64 Frerichs +4.2 N/A Hutchinson +19.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 35,388
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 27,195

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: four years ago Toi Hutchinson won this district by almost 20 points. Two years ago in a very strong Republican year the statewide contests were basically a coin flip in this district, Rauner won by 4, Frerich won by 4 and Topinka edged Simon by a half point. If 2016 isn’t as favorable for Republicans as 2014 was they’re going to have a hard time winning this district. On top of that no Republican candidates filed to run in the primary here and no Republican candidate is currently on the ballot.

 

 

22nd Senate District – (D) Cristina Castro vs. (R) Tracy Smodilla

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Durbin +14.3 Rauner +1.46 Madigan +29.54 White +40.54 Simon +1.02 Frerichs +3.33 N/A Noland +30.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 26,673
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 15,602

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Four years ago Mike Noland won this Elgin-area district by 30 points. He gave up the seat this year to make an unsuccessful run for Congress but it still looks like a solidly Democratic district. In 2014 Rauner won it by a point and a half but Topinka and Cross lost by 1 and 3 points respectively. The 2016 partisan primary performance favors the Democrats by a wide margin, a Republican would have to overwhelmingly win the independents to win this district.

 

 

10th Senate District – (D) John Mulroe vs. (R) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Durbin +16.74 Quinn +3.59 Madigan +31.73 White +46.04 Topinka +6.67 Frerichs +4.72 N/A Mulroe +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 43,091
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 20,861

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: four years ago John Mulroe ran unopposed in this northwest side/northwest suburban district. Two years ago Quinn and Frerichs both won in a strong Republican year while Topinka also won handily. This will be a difficult district for Republicans to win. On top of that no Republican candidates filed to run in the primary here and no Republican candidate is currently on the ballot.

 

 

19th Senate District – (D) Michael Hasting vs. (R) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Durbin +16.35 Quinn +4.58 Madigan +30.83 White +37.34 Simon +5.2 Frerichs +7.4 N/A Hastings +24.4
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 45,785
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 27,284

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: four years ago Michael Hastings won this southwest suburban district by 24 points. Two years ago none of the Republican statewide candidates won this district in a very strong Republican year. On top of that no Republican candidates filed to run in the primary here and no Republican candidate is currently on the ballot.

 

Below are the districts ranked by most mathematically favorable based on the statewide results in each district from the 2014 general election. Not all of these districts are certain to be targets, that will also depend on candidate recruitment, messaging and local factors, these are just the ones with the most favorable math based on the previous election.

Fundraising and old vote totals will not determine the outcome of these elections, instead the candidates, their message and the campaigns they run will. If you want to follow the developments of these campaigns stay up to date with the local traditional media who can and will cover the candidates and the issues far better than I ever could. If you’re looking for outlets that cover all of these races I’d suggest subscribing here and here and/or here.

Here are 7 Senate districts currently held by Republicans that are the most mathematically favorable for the Democrats. There are currently 39 Democratic Senators, holding 36 or more seats would allow the Senate Democrats to retain their super majority.

 

38th Senate District – (R) Sue Rezin vs. (D) Christine Benson

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +10.54 Rauner +19.17 Madigan +6.19 White +23.93 Topinka +12.89 Cross +17.36 N/A Rezin +7.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 24,530
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 32,261

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: there are not very many more seats the Democrats can win in this chamber but this district northern central Illinois district is the most mathematically favorable based on 2014 results, comparable to Haine’s district but without the Democratic vote history.

 

 

58th Senate District – (R) Paul Schimpf vs. (D) Sheila Simon

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +7.06 Rauner +29.35 Schimpf +7.06 White +12.19 Topinka +12.3 Cross +21.15 N/A Luechtefeld + 21.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 23,443
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 34,993

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: this is an interesting matchup of two candidates that ran and lost statewide in 2014 and are now facing each other to win the southern Illinois district held by retiring Sen. Dave Luechtefeld. In 2014 Paul Schimpf ran for Attorney General and lost to Lisa Madigan but bested her by 7 points in this district. That same year Sheila Simon ran for Comptroller and lost to Judy Baar Topinka, also losing this district by 12 points. This is not a favorable district for Democrats, Simon’s best hope is that her name ID and presidential year voting demographics can work to her advantage.

 

 

41st Senate District – (R) Christine Radogno vs. (D) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +10.31 Rauner +29.94 Madigan +3.59 White +19.11 Topinka +26.18 Cross +26.91 N/A Radogno +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 32,670
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 41,250

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: by custom it is unlikely that the Democrats will put a candidate on the ballot to challenge the Republican leader in her western suburban district.

 

 

32nd Senate District – (R) Pamela Althoff vs. (D) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +19.79 Rauner +33.93 Madigan +0.99 White +18.32 Topinka +21.83 Cross +26.98 N/A Althoff +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 25,906
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 41,012

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: no Democrats filed to run in the primary in this far north suburban district and no Democratic candidate is currently on the ballot.

 

 

25th Senate District – (R) Jim Oberweis vs. (D) Corinne Pierog

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +13.31 Rauner +30.98 Schimpf +1.93 White +14.76 Topinka +23.54 Cross +30.03 N/A Oberweis +15.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 27,645
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 36,936

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: four years ago Corinne Pierog came up 15 points short of defeating Jim Oberweis in this far western suburban district. This year she won an uncontested Democratic primary for the chance to try again.

 

 

35th Senate District – (R) Dave Syverson vs. (D) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +16.6 Rauner +28.8 Schimpf +0.61 White +12.31 Topinka +29.61 Cross +26.02 N/A Syverson +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 25,959
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 40,055

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: no Democrats filed to run in the primary in this district that runs east and south of Rockford and no Democratic candidate is currently on the ballot.

 

 

50th Senate District – (R) Sam McCann vs. (D) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST SEN 2012 ST SEN
Oberweis +14.89 Rauner +29.15 Schimpf +3.86 White +18.08 Topinka +38.2 Cross +27.85 N/A McCann +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 20,940
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 45,043

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: this district that includes the western half of Springfield and runs west all the way to the Mississippi River featured one of the state’s most interesting primaries in 2016 leading many to wonder if there could be effects that bleed into the general election. However the underlying numbers for this district are very favorable to the Republicans, it is unlikely that this district’s general election will be very interesting. Also, no Democrats filed to run in the primary in this district and no Democratic candidate is currently on the ballot.

 

Below are the districts ranked by most mathematically favorable based on the statewide results in each district from the 2014 general election. Not all of these districts are certain to be targets, that will also depend on candidate recruitment, messaging and local factors, these are just the ones with the most favorable math based on the previous election.

Fundraising and old vote totals will not determine the outcome of these elections, instead the candidates, their message and the campaigns they run will. If you want to follow the developments of these campaigns stay up to date with the local traditional media who can and will cover the candidates and the issues far better than I ever could. If you’re looking for outlets that cover all of these races I’d suggest subscribing here and here and/or here.

Here are 20 House districts currently held by Democrats that are the most mathematically favorable to the Republicans. There are currently 47 Republican House members and they would need to pick up 13 seats to win a majority in the chamber.

 

116th House District – (D) Jerry Costello, Jr. vs. (R) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +11.29 Rauner +32.13 Schimpf +13.07 White +7.94 Topinka +19.53 Cross +22.48 Costello +100.0 Costello +24.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 10,506
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 17,351

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: based on 2014 statewide election results this is the most mathematically favorable district for the Republicans that is currently held by a Democrat. Four years ago Costello Jr. won it by almost 25 points. Two years ago he ran unopposed and yet Rauner won the district by 32 points, Topinka by 20 and Cross by 22. This past primary almost 7,000 more voters took a Republican primary ballot than a Democrat one in this district. Yet no Republicans filed to run in the primary here and there is currently no Republican candidate on the ballot.

 

 

63rd House District – (D) Jack Franks? vs. (R) Steven Reick

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +20.2 Rauner +34.02 Madigan +2.49 White +20.31 Topinka +19.82 Cross +25.77 Franks +17.0 Franks +98.4
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 11,651
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 18,597

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: cycle after cycle Jack Franks keeps winning in an overly Republican district. Even in 2014 when Rauner won his district by 34 points, Topinka by 20 and Cross by 26 Franks still won re-election going away by 17 points. This is a very Republican district but Franks is a proven winner here despite that. Franks has announced his intention to run for Chairman of the McHenry County Board. It is believed that he could probably run for both seats but it is expected that a replacement candidate will be announced for his ballot position in the 63rd House race, giving the Republicans a much greater chance of a pickup in this district.

 

 

117th House District – (D) John Bradley vs. (R) David Severin

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +14.48 Rauner +32.09 Schimpf +6.69 White +11.93 Topinka +5.32 Cross +25.51 Bradley +98.8 Bradley +33.3
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 12,565
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 17,349

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: the Governor’s staff has had a notably hostile posture toward John Bradley and it seems likely they will target this district. Four years ago Bradley won it in a walk. Two years ago he faced no Republican opposition (just a few write-in votes) even though Rauner won the district by 32 points and Cross won it by almost 26. Even Lisa Madigan lost the district by almost 7 points. About 5,000 more voters took Republican primary ballots than Democratic ones back in March so Bradley will have to do well with independents to win re-election. As is often the case in Southern Illinois this race will likely key on local issues and support for state facilities in the area. Campaign spending in this race could be very high.

 

 

118th House District – (D) Brandon Phelps vs. (R) Jason Kasiar

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +8.58 Rauner +30.01 Schimpf +5.31 White +12.33 Topinka +9.27 Cross +24.34 Phelps +99.4 Phelps +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 11,832
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 18,400

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: this is the 4th of the districts currently held by a Democrat that Rauner won by more than 30 points. The underlying numbers are favorable for the Republicans in this district but longtime incumbent Brandon Phelps (the nephew of the former congressman) is locally popular and much like the previous district this race will likely depend on local issues and support for state facilities in this deep southern Illinois district that borders Kentucky.

 

 

79th House District – (D) Katherine Cloonen vs. (R) Lindsay Parkhurst

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +6.72 Rauner +22.2 Madigan +13.3 White +26.36 Topinka +14.1 Cross +8.82 Cloonen +0.4 Cloonen +0.2
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 11,152
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 15,306

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: this razor thin district is exepcted to be hotly contested once again this fall. Four years ago Kate Cloonen won it by 91 votes. Two years ago she won it by 122 votes. Rauner won this Kankakee area district by 22 points, Topinka and Cross by 14 and 9 points respectively. Even Oberweis beat Durbin here by 7 points. There were about 4,000 more Republican primary votes for President than Democratic ones back in the March primary so if Cloonen is going to hold her seat she’ll need to run strong with independents.

 

 

71st House District – (D) Mike Smiddy vs. (R) Tony McCombie

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +1.68 Rauner +14.05 Madigan +3.71 White +22.4 Topinka +15.72 Cross +8 Smiddy +1.0 Smiddy +4.2
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 12,676
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 13,972

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: four years ago Mike Smiddy won this district by more than four points. Two years ago in a more favorable Republican year where Rauner won the district by 14 points and Topinka and Cross won it by 16 and 8 points respectively Smiddy was able to hang on and win by a point. If the Republicans hope to take this district this fall in what is expected to be a more favorable political environment for the Democrats they’re going to have to find the winning formula that eluded them last cycle.

 

 

111th House District – (D) Daniel Beiser vs. (R) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +1.14 Rauner +16.52 Madigan +2.85 White +19.11 Topinka +9.83 Cross +5.06 Beiser +100.0 Beiser +17.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 14,561
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 13,590

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: four years ago Beiser won this district by 17 points and two years ago he ran unopposed despite the fact that Rauner won the district by almost 17 points and Topinka and Cross won by 10 and 5 points respectively. About 1,000 more people took Democratic ballots than Republican ballots in this past primary but if the Republicans want any chance to win this district they’ll have to put a candidate on the ballot. No Republicans ran in the primary for this district and there is no Republican candidate currently on the ballot.

 

 

62nd House District – (D) Sam Yingling vs. (R) Rod Drobinski

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +0.79 Rauner +15.94 Madigan +16.75 White +29.9 Topinka +11.98 Cross +11.23 Yingling +4.2 Yingling +10.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 13,678
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 12,241

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: four years ago Yingling won this district by almost 11 points, two years ago that was trimmed to just 4 points in a strong Republican year where all of Rauner, Topinka and Cross won the district by double digits. This cycle Rod Drobinski returns for a second try.

 

 

76th House District – (D) Andy Skoog vs. (R) Jerry Long

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +3.89 Rauner +9.5 Madigan +10.71 White +30.66 Topinka +5.25 Cross +6.46 Mautino +1.0 Mautino +26.2
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 12,519
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 13,636

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: four years ago Frank Mautino won this district by 26 points, two years ago Jerry Long came within 337 votes of winning. Mautino has since retired to become Illinois Auditor General, Andy Skoog was appointed to take his place and now will have to defend the seat from Long who is making a second try.

 

 

56th House District – (D) Michelle Mussman vs. (R) Jillian Bernas

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +5.48 Rauner +16.5 Madigan +20.26 White +36.82 Topinka +12.18 Cross +9.57 Mussman +3.0 Mussman 19.8
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 15,920
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 12,640

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: four years ago Mussman cruised to a 20 point win but in the more favorable Republican 2014 cycle her winning margin was trimmed to just 3 points. The district had about 3,000 more Democratic primary votes than Republican ones this past March so if Bernas is going to prevail she’ll have to do well with independents.

 

 

55th House District – (D) Martin Moylan vs. (R) Dan Gott

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +7.47 Rauner +13.2 Madigan +23.01 White +39.38 Topinka +13.42 Cross +10.56 Moylan +5.4 Moylan +6.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 16,792
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 11,891

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: in 2014 even though Rauner, Topinka and Cross all won the district by double digits Moylan still won by 5 points, which was only slightly down from his 2012 margin. Dan Gott, who does not appear to have filed the papers necessary to create a candidate committee, will have to work the district hard if he hopes to flip the seat.

 

 

96th House District – (D) Sue Scherer vs. (R) Cindy Deadrick Wolfer

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +3.03 Rauner +5.95 Madigan +18.12 White +36.25 Topinka +12.17 Cross +1.18 Scherer +10.4 Scherer +24.1
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 13,205
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 13,388

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: this central Illinois district that runs from eastern Springfield over to Decatur was a bit of a mixed bag in 2014, Topinka won by 12, Rauner by 6 and Cross by 1 point while Scherer won by 10 points, down from 24 points four years ago. Scherer has won by big margins even in tough Democratic years like 2014 so if the Republicans hope to flip this seat they’ll need to find a new formula.

 

 

84th House District – (D) Stephanie Kifowit vs. (R) Mike Strick

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +10.25 Rauner +6.24 Madigan +19.08 White +31.58 Topinka +4.49 Cross +8.96 Kifowit +16.2 Kifowit +23.8
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 14,185
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 9,702

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: even in 2014 when Rauner won this district by 6 points, Topinka by 4 and Cross by 9 Kifowit cruised to a 16 point win. If the Republicans hope to flip this seat they’ll need to cut heavily into that margin.

 

 

46th House District – (D) Deborah Conroy vs. (R) Heidi Holan

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +7.99 Rauner +7.66 Madigan +21.56 White +33.59 Topinka +6.79 Cross +4.42 Conroy +5.0 Conroy +15.4
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 14,183
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 10,744

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Heidi Holan is back for a second try after losing this race in 2014 to Deb Conroy by 5 points, narrower than Conroy’s 15 point winning margin in 2012.

 

 

58th House District – (D) Scott Drury vs. (R) Marty Blumenthal

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +18.93 Rauner +13.97 Madigan +21.53 White +37.09 Topinka +4.67 Cross +4.96 Drury +9.0 Drury +11.8
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 22,504
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 14,836

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: even though Rauner won this district by 14 points last cycle no Republicans filed to run in the primary in this district and their only candidate was a write-in candidate.

 

 

113th House District – (D) Jay Hoffman vs. (R) Katherine Ruocco

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +11.13 Rauner +2.88 Madigan +15.27 White +24.03 Simon +1.75 Frerichs +4.82 Hoffman +19.0 Hoffman +31.2
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 19,474
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 11,292

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Jay Hoffman has cruised in each of the last two elections. Rauner narrowly won this district in 2014 but both Topinka and Cross lost. Two years ago Katherine Ruocco gave Senator James Clayborne a much closer than expected race and now she switches chambers to try to win this Metro East seat.

 

 

59th House District – (D) Carol Sente vs. (R) Dawn Abernathy

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +14.42 Rauner +10.04 Madigan +23.05 White +37.82 Topinka +6.01 Cross +4.5 Sente +4.8 Sente +12.4
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 15,845
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 10,783

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: last cycle Carol Sente defeated now Comptroller Leslie Munger by 5 points in a year where Rauner won this district by 10 points.

 

 

57th House District – (D) Elaine Nekritz vs. (R) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +15.06 Rauner +11.12 Madigan +25.74 White +39.78 Topinka +8.25 Cross +5.09 Nekritz +13.0 Nekritz +11.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 15,937
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 11,341

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Nekritz has won this district by double digits each of the last two cycles but even though Rauner won here by 11 points no candidates filed for the Republican primary and there is currently no Republican candidate on the ballot.

 

 

114th House District – (D) Latoya Greenwood vs. (R) Bob Romanik

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +11.82 Quinn +0.76 Madigan +14.56 White +23.98 Simon +3.23 Frerichs +5.31 Jackson +100.0 Jackson +19.8
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 22,212
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 13,070

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: in 2014 the statewide Democratic candidates all won this district but what makes this race interesting is that outspoken Republican candidate Bob Romanik has loaned his campaign $2 million to try to win this Metro East district.

 

 

72nd House District – (D) Michael Halpin vs. (R) Brandi McGuire

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +14.98 Rauner +0.53 Madigan +15.24 White +31.73 Topinka +0.57 Frerichs +5.46 Verschoore +100.0 Verschoore +28.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 15,673
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 10,028

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: in a strong Republican year both Rauner and Topinka both managed narrow wins in this district in 2014. Both Michael Halpin and Brandi McGuire won contested primaries for the chance to replace retiring Pat Verschoore.

 

Below are the districts ranked by most mathematically favorable based on the statewide results in each district from the 2014 general election. Not all of these districts are certain to be targets, that will also depend on candidate recruitment, messaging and local factors, these are just the ones with the most favorable math based on the previous election.

Fundraising and old vote totals will not determine the outcome of these elections, instead the candidates, their message and the campaigns they run will. If you want to follow the developments of these campaigns stay up to date with the local traditional media who can and will cover the candidates and the issues far better than I ever could. If you’re looking for outlets that cover all of these races I’d suggest subscribing here and here and/or here.

Here are 12 House districts currently held by Republicans that are the most mathematically favorable to the Democrats. There are currently 71 Democratic House members which is the exact number needed for a super majority.

 

20th House District – (R) Michael McAuliffe vs. (D) Merry Marwig

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +7.85 Rauner +5.89 Madigan +22.95 White +40.45 Topinka +15.71 Cross +6.21 McAuliffe +24.8 McAuliffe +21.2
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 20,320
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 12,692

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Mike McAuliffe has won this district by more than 20 points each of the last two cycles plus Rauner won it by 6, Topinka by 16 and Cross by 6 in the three competitive statewide elections of 2014. Encouraging for the Democrats there were almost 8,000 more Democrat primary votes than Republican ones back in March. This is the most mathematically favorable district for the Dems that is currently held by a Republican so it will be interesting to see if the House Dems try to play offense here.

 

 

91st House District – (R) Michael Unes vs. (D) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +1.97 Rauner +10.13 Madigan +13.47 White +27.41 Topinka +6.06 Cross +2.67 Unes +33.4 Unes +11.8
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 13,042
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 16,167

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: two years ago Unes won by 33 points in a district where Rauner won by 10, Topinka by 6 and Cross by less than 3. No Democrats filed to run in the primary in this district and there is currently no Democratic candidate on the ballot.

 

 

53rd House District – (R) David Harris vs. (D) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Durbin +0.14 Rauner +25.75 Madigan +15.46 White +35.33 Topinka +22.28 Cross +22.48 Harris +100.0 Harris +18.4
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 17,816
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 17,741

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Rauner, Topinka and Cross all won this district by more than 20 points in 2014 and even in the presidential election year of 2012 Harris won by 18. No Democrats filed to run in the primary in this district and there is currently no Democratic candidate on the ballot.

 

 

61st House District – (R) Sheri Jesiel vs. (D) Nick Ciko

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +6.21 Rauner +21.16 Madigan +12.59 White +23.16 Topinka +14.5 Cross +15.39 Jesiel +16.0 Osmond +12.8
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 14,014
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 14,476

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: in 2014 Jesiel won this Lake County district by 16 points at the same time that Rauner won it by 21, Topinka and Cross both by 15. The Democrats will have to signficantly improve those margins if they hope to play offense here.

 

 

104th House District – (R) Chad Hays vs. (D) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +5.15 Rauner +25.09 Madigan +3.46 White +12.74 Topinka +27.24 Frerichs +8.43 Hays +100.0 Hays +27.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 13,887
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 17,787

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Frerichs defeated Cross in this eastern central Illinois district that was part of Frerichs old Senate district but Rauner and Topinka both won by more than 25 points. Even in the presidential election of 2012 Hays won by 27 points. No Democrats filed to run in the primary in this district and there is currently no Democratic candidate on the ballot.

 

 

81st House District – (R) Ron Sandack vs. (D) Greg Hose

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +2.92 Rauner +22.9 Madigan +8.68 White +24.18 Topinka +19.88 Cross +20.1 Sandack +20.0 Sandack +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 17,470
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 19,830

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: in 2014 Sandack, Rauner, Topinka and Cross all won this district by 20 points. If the Democrats hope to play offense here they will have to significantly improve their 2014 effort.

 

 

48th House District – (R) Peter Breen vs. (D) N/A

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +2.87 Rauner +22.66 Madigan +7.82 White +23.41 Topinka +20.56 Cross +20.44 Breen +87.2 Pihos +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 17,800
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 20,962

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: the Democrats haven’t had a candidate on the ballot in this district in either of the last two cycles and they do not currently have a candidate on the ballot this cycle. In 2014 Rauner, Topinka and Cross all won this district by more than 20 points.

 

 

93rd House District – (R) Norine Hammond vs. (D) John Curtis

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +5.68 Rauner +21.32 Madigan +5.28 White +21.6 Topinka +25.18 Cross +12.72 Hammond +100.0 Hammond +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 9,344
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 14,127

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Norine Hammond has been unopposed for the last two cycles but this time draws Democrat John Curtis in this western central Illinois district where higher education funding may play a role. Two years ago Rauner and Topinka both carried the district by more than 20 points while Cross won by a bakers dozen and even Oberweis won by almost a half dozen. About 5,000 more Republicans drew primary ballots than Democrats here back in March so if the Democrats hope to do well in this district they’ll need to run strong with independents.

 

 

115th House District – (R) Terri Bryant vs. (D) Marsha Griffin

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +2.92 Rauner +26.87 Schimpf +1.21 White +16.46 Topinka +5.08 Cross +20.2 Bryant +21.9 Bost +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 12,938
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 17,642

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: Two years ago Rauner and Cross won this district by more than 20 points while Topinka was held to just a five point margin against the locally popular Sheila Simon. Oberweis won it by three, even Lisa Madigan lost this district by a point. This cycle Democratic challenger Marsha Griffin will attempt to win this southern Illinois district from Terri Bryant who defeated her last challenger by 22 points.

 

 

112th House District – (R) Dwight Kay vs. (D) Katie Stuart

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +4.48 Rauner +20.63 Schimpf +2.02 White +11.68 Topinka +15.98 Cross +12.2 Kay +17.4 Kay +0.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 16,829
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 15,528

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: in the presidential election year of four years ago Dwight Kay narrowly won re-election in this district by 329 votes giving the Democrats some hope for 2014. However in the off-year 2014 elections Kay cruised to re-election by 17 points, Rauner won this district by 21, Topinka by 6, Cross by 12, Oberweis by 4, even Lisa Madigan lost it by 2 points. Madison County has been trending away from the Democrats in recent years, Blagojevich took 55% in the county in 2006 while Quinn only took 36% in 2014 (down from 40% in 2010). This Metro-East district doesn’t include many of the more favorable Madison County Democratic precincts along the river but it is a more competitive district in presidential years.

 

 

95th House District – (R) Avery Bourne vs. (D) Mike Mathis

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +12.11 Rauner +29.27 Schimpf +1.36 White +19.05 Topinka +26.26 Cross +15.28 Rosenthal +100.0 Rosenthal +17.6
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 12,214
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 17,658

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: I’m adding this district by request, mathematically speaking there are six other districts currently held by Republicans that are more favorable to the Democratcs than this district but I’m not listing them for now as most don’t have a Democratic opponent. When Wayne Rosenthal was appointed to head the Illinois Department of Natural Resources former Rauner campaign staffer Avery Bourne was appointed to fill this seat. Since Governor Rauner will not be on the ballot this cycle some partisans have circled this seat as an opportunity to send a message to the Governor. Bourne defeated two Republican primary challengers with the help of a half million dollars spent by the Illinois Republican Party, now she will have to fend off Democratic challenger Mike Mathis in a district Rauner won by almost 30 points, Topinka by 26, Cross by 16, Oberweis by a dozen and even Lisa Madigan lost this district. The underlying numbers here are not favorable for the Democrats, if they hope to prevail the campaign will likely be less about the issues and more about the personalities of those directly or indirectly involved.

 

 

99th House District – (R) Sara Wojcicki-Jimenez vs. (D) Anthony DelGiorno

2014 General Election Results

US SEN GOV AG SOS COMP TREAS ST REP 2012 ST REP
Oberweis +12.98 Rauner +20.81 Madigan +1.88 White +23.47 Topinka +39.46 Cross +27.76 Poe +100.0 Poe +100.0
 

2016 Presidential Primary Total Votes

DEMOCRAT
Total Presidential Primary Votes 11,985
REPUBLICAN
Total Presidential Primary Votes 24,586

Candidates’ Financial Position

Note: I’m adding this district by request, mathematically speaking there are three other districts currently held by Republicans that are more favorable to the Democratcs than this district after the 95th House shown above but I’m skipping down to this one because of some of its unique features. Sara Wojcicki-Jimenez was chief of staff to First Lady Diana Rauner when she was appointed to this seat to replace Raymond Poe last fall who became director of the Department of Agriculture. Governor Rauner is not on the ballot this cycle so (as with the 95th House district above) some partisans see this race as an opportunity to send the Governor a message by proxy. This district covers most of the western half of Sangamon County and includes the western half of Springfield. The underlying numbers in this district are not favorable for the Democrats but it’s a Republican district where some of the Governor’s less than supportive statements about Springfield, state workers and unions can be a little tricky and that dynamic could create some tough votes for the incumbent. The Illinois Republican Party spent more than $300,000 to help carry Wojicki-Jimenez through the primary against Trump state director Kent Gray and if the Democrats or organized labor put resources into this race it seems almost certain that the Governor and/or his financial allies will respond in kind.

 

The Money Race for the State House (05/1/2016)

Published on

With the filing deadline passed for the 1st quarter 2016 campaign finance reports (D-2’s) I thought it would be interesting to update our post from last quarter on the state of the money race for the State House. Since we last looked at this data we had a primary election and now this look gives a much better idea of the state of the money race going into the general election. This data is as of 9pm on April 30th.

Here are the key figures: as of right now Democratic committees have an estimated cash available advantage of about $2.1 million ($35.6 million for the Dems, $33.5 million for the Republicans). Looking at spending the Dems have already spent $26 million so far this cycle, Republicans have already spent $18.2 million this cycle and Independent Expenditure committees (B-1’s) spent $11.2 million on legislative races during the primary. That’s a total of $55.4 million already spent. When you factor in the amounts of cash currently estimated available and add it to what’s already been spent it means that even if no additional money is raised and no new independent expenditures appear we’re likely to see $124.5 million spent on legislative races this cycle. Wow!

Let’s take a look at the data starting with the current estimated cash available, here is the current cash position of all the committees involved combining the 3/30 cash on hand, plus the 3/30 investment total plus any reported A-1 amounts so far this quarter.

Current Cash Position

Committee Q1 Cash on Hand Q1 Investments Q2 A-1s Est Funds Available
Democratic Party of Illinois $2,429,001.87 $0.00 $26,500.00 $2,455,501.87
Friends of Michael J. Madigan $1,372,783.15 $0.00 $30,275.00 $1,403,058.15
Democratic Majority $2,333,149.51 $0.00 $91,000.00 $2,424,149.51
13th Ward Democratic Org $1,245,449.07 $0.00 $0.00 $1,245,449.07
Citizens for John Cullerton for State Senate $1,482,635.98 $301,506.32 $0.00 $1,784,142.30
Senate Democratic Victory Fund $2,229,955.11 $405,301.22 $0.00 $2,635,256.33
Committee to Support John Cullerton for State Central Committeeman $769,358.93 $0.00 $0.00 $769,358.93
Dem Senators Not On Ballot This Cycle $3,502,698.50 $42.36 $3,500.00 $3,506,240.86
Dem Senate Candidates $4,994,097.14 $220,007.00 $70,868.24 $5,284,972.38
Dem House Candidates $12,769,369.04 $809,320.66 $482,918.70 $14,061,608.40
Total $33,128,498.30 $1,736,177.56 $705,061.94 $35,569,737.80
Committee Q1 Cash on Hand Q1 Investments Q2 A-1s Est Funds Available
Citizens for Rauner, Inc $20,311,643.80 $0.00 $0.00 $20,311,643.80
Turnaround Illinois $2,254,635.33 $0.00 $0.00 $2,254,635.33
Illinois Republican Party $651,799.75 $0.00 $16,100.00 $667,899.75
Citizens for Durkin $780,472.40 $0.00 $37,200.00 $817,672.40
House Republican Organization $303,042.08 $0.00 $39,500.00 $342,542.08
House Republican Leadership Committee $65,277.40 $0.00 $0.00 $65,277.40
Citizens for Christine Radogno $561,536.37 $0.00 $26,000.00 $587,536.37
Republican State Senate Campaign Committee $517,892.38 $0.00 $13,500.00 $531,392.38
Rep Senators Not On Ballot This Cycle $912,951.84 $0.00 $8,500.00 $921,451.84
Rep Senate Candidates $1,508,708.01 $45,300.00 $48,707.53 $1,602,715.54
Rep House Candidates $4,281,283.44 $0.00 $1,135,461.66 $5,416,745.10
Total $32,149,242.80 $45,300.00 $1,324,969.19 $33,519,511.99
Committee Q1 Cash on Hand Q1 Investments Q2 A-1s Est Funds Available
Democratic Primary Losing Candidates $340,235.14 $0.00 $1,000.00 $341,235.14
Republican Primary Losing Candidates $93,896.41 $0.00 $7,765.00 $101,661.41

Going into the fall general election the Democrats actually have a little more than a $2 million estimated cash available advantage, but as we have seen the Governor and his allies are able to commit additional funds in amounts that are virtually unprecedented in Illinois politics.

Now let’s look at the same info while adding in the amounts that have already been spent so far this cycle (including in-kinds as spending):

Cycle Spending Ability

Committee Already Spent Q1 Cash on Hand Q1 Investments Q2 A-1s Cycle Spending Ability
Democratic Party of Illinois $538,072.80 $2,429,001.87 $0.00 $26,500.00 $2,993,574.67
Friends of Michael J. Madigan $1,640,020.17 $1,372,783.15 $0.00 $30,275.00 $3,043,078.32
Democratic Majority $871,977.99 $2,333,149.51 $0.00 $91,000.00 $3,296,127.50
13th Ward Democratic Org $272,060.96 $1,245,449.07 $0.00 $0.00 $1,517,510.03
Citizens for John Cullerton for State Senate $688,272.67 $1,482,635.98 $301,506.32 $0.00 $2,472,414.97
Senate Democratic Victory Fund $1,536,150.63 $2,229,955.11 $405,301.22 $0.00 $4,171,406.96
Committee to Support John Cullerton for State Central Committeeman $85,590.57 $769,358.93 $0.00 $0.00 $854,949.50
Dem Senators Not On Ballot This Cycle $1,698,911.71 $3,502,698.50 $42.36 $3,500.00 $5,205,152.57
Dem Senate Candidates $4,208,546.60 $4,994,097.14 $220,007.00 $70,868.24 $9,493,518.98
Dem House Candidates $11,203,399.75 $12,769,369.04 $809,320.66 $482,918.70 $25,265,008.15
Total $22,743,003.85 $33,128,498.30 $1,736,177.56 $705,061.94 $58,312,741.65
Committee Already Spent Q1 Cash on Hand Q1 Investments Q2 A-1s Cycle Spending Ability
Citizens for Rauner, Inc $2,624,772.17 $20,311,643.80 $0.00 $0.00 $22,936,415.97
Turnaround Illinois $4,001,086.86 $2,254,635.33 $0.00 $0.00 $6,255,722.19
Illinois Republican Party $1,663,295.77 $651,799.75 $0.00 $16,100.00 $2,331,195.52
Citizens for Durkin $550,350.74 $780,472.40 $0.00 $37,200.00 $1,368,023.14
House Republican Organization $656,686.28 $303,042.08 $0.00 $39,500.00 $999,228.36
House Republican Leadership Committee $3,286.25 $65,277.40 $0.00 $0.00 $68,563.65
Citizens for Christine Radogno $168,490.63 $561,536.37 $0.00 $26,000.00 $756,027.00
Republican State Senate Campaign Committee $693,245.16 $517,892.38 $0.00 $13,500.00 $1,224,637.54
Rep Senators Not On Ballot This Cycle $565,648.77 $912,951.84 $0.00 $8,500.00 $1,487,100.61
Rep Senate Candidates $2,282,987.18 $1,508,708.01 $45,300.00 $48,707.53 $3,885,702.72
Rep House Candidates $3,357,574.75 $4,281,283.44 $0.00 $1,135,461.66 $8,774,319.85
Total $16,567,424.56 $32,149,242.80 $45,300.00 $1,324,969.19 $50,086,936.55
Committee Already Spent
Primary Independent Expenditure Spending (B-1’s) $11,168,207.97
Committee Already Spent Q1 Cash on Hand Q1 Investments Q2 A-1s Cycle Spending Ability
Democratic Primary Losing Candidates $3,337,775.14 $340,235.14 $0.00 $1,000.00 $3,679,010.28
Republican Primary Losing Candidates $1,606,159.06 $93,896.41 $0.00 $7,765.00 $1,707,820.47

Looking at the already spent figures (and including the losing primary candidates) the Democrats have already spent $26 million and the Republicans have already spent $18.2 million, plus another $11.2 million was spent by independent expenditure committees (B-1 filings) on legislative races for an already spent total of $55.4 million. When you factor in the amounts of cash currently estimated available and add it to what’s already been spent it means that even if no additional money is raised an no new independent expenditures appear we’re likely to see $124.5 million spent on legislative races this cycle. That’s unbelievable!

Finally, here are the other top 25 committees that have notable funds and could impact the fall elections if they so choose.

Name COH INV A-1 Est Funds Avail
Friends of Edward M Burke $2,160,076.64 $6,273,896.00 $5,500.00 $8,439,472.64
IllinoisGO IE $6,149,225.57 $0.00 $0.00 $6,149,225.57
Laborers’ Political League – Great Lakes Region $3,023,155.22 $0.00 $0.00 $3,023,155.22
Citizens for Lisa Madigan $2,173,498.62 $0.00 $0.00 $2,173,498.62
Illinois State Medical Society PAC $415,826.75 $1,251,596.00 $14,400.00 $1,681,822.75
Carpenters Helping in the Political Process (CHIPP) $1,612,141.33 $0.00 $0.00 $1,612,141.33
Laborers’ Political Action and Education League $1,443,781.99 $0.00 $0.00 $1,443,781.99
Chicagoland Operators Joint Labor-Management PAC $1,128,549.69 $0.00 $263,144.71 $1,391,694.40
Biss for Illinois $1,360,488.45 $0.00 $0.00 $1,360,488.45
The Burnham Committee $1,307,346.28 $0.00 $0.00 $1,307,346.28
Support Independent Maps $478,768.86 $0.00 $686,500.00 $1,165,268.86
Friends for Susana Mendoza $1,102,541.75 $0.00 $0.00 $1,102,541.75
Stand for Children IL PAC $1,070,877.79 $0.00 $22,600.00 $1,093,477.79
Citizens for Alderman Reilly $1,012,213.26 $0.00 $0.00 $1,012,213.26
REALTORS Political Action Committee $941,494.05 $0.00 $16,700.00 $958,194.05
Roofers’ Political Educational and Legislative Fund $185,753.65 $749,380.67 $0.00 $935,134.32
Dan Rutherford Campaign Committee $13,432.35 $844,463.00 $0.00 $857,895.35
Citizens for Judy Baar Topinka $840,769.03 $0.00 $0.00 $840,769.03
Committee to Elect Joseph Berrios Assessor $831,314.73 $0.00 $0.00 $831,314.73
Citizens for Giannoulias $779,479.42 $0.00 $0.00 $779,479.42
Friends of Suarez $14,708.65 $750,000.00 $0.00 $764,708.65
Cook County Democratic Party $741,225.55 $0.00 $5,000.00 $746,225.55
Illinois PAC for Education (IPACE) $741,903.61 $0.00 $0.00 $741,903.61
Finishing Trades of Chicago Corp PAC $688,727.48 $0.00 $0.00 $688,727.48
14th Ward Regular Democratic Org $669,790.30 $0.00 $0.00 $669,790.30
James Pate Philip Campaign Fund $736.10 $650,000.00 $0.00 $650,736.10

If you’d like to check my math or investigate and calculate further the data I used to create the tables above can be found here.

 

Note: these figures are our best estimates and include some double counting of funds, which cannot be avoided. For example not all funds listed in “Transfers In” come from political committees that are already registered with the State Board but for those that do these transfers aren’t new money coming into the system, they’re simply transfers from one fund to another. If those transfers are from funds that are involved in legislative elections to funds involved in legislative elections (such as when Governor Rauner transferred funds to the state party who then spent money to assist incumbents Bourne and Wojcicki-Jimenez) then we are double counting those funds. The same goes for in-kinds, not all in-kinds are double counted but when a committee that is involved in legislative elections provides and in-kind to another committee involved in legislative elections (such as when the Speaker’s leadership committee, Democratic Majority, spent money on mailings on behalf of incumbent House Dems who then reported those transactions as in-kind donations received) we’re just seeing the same numbers twice. The only way to control for this double counting would involve manually going through and coding tens of thousands of transactions to determine if each transaction a) involved two committees that were both registered with the State Board and b) both funds were involved with this cycle’s legislative elections. That’s just not a realistic option so we’re left with our best estimates above.

 

 

General Election Candidate Filing

Published on

For offices where no candidate was nominated by an established political party that party can appoint someone to the ballot for the General Election so long as they submit petitions and their candidate filing papers by May 31st. For example in the 1st State House District the Democrats nominated incumbent Dan Burke, he won his primary with no opposition but no Republican candidate filed so the party could appoint someone to appear on the fall ballot so long as they submit the required paperwork. That is true for every such situation.

Here are the relevant sections of the election code which explain this process. I had to look it up so I figured others might find it useful as well.

10 ILCS 5/7-61
If the name of no established political party candidate was printed on the consolidated primary ballot for a particular office and if no person was nominated as a write-in candidate for such office, a vacancy in nomination shall be created which may be filled in accordance with the requirements of this Section. If the name of no established political party candidate was printed on the general primary ballot for a particular office and if no person was nominated as a write-in candidate for such office, a vacancy in nomination shall be filled only by a person designated by the appropriate committee of the political party and only if that designated person files nominating petitions with the number of signatures required for an established party candidate for that office within 75 days after the day of the general primary. The circulation period for those petitions begins on the day the appropriate committee designates that person. The person shall file his or her nominating petitions, statements of candidacy, notice of appointment by the appropriate committee, and receipt of filing his or her statement of economic interests together. These documents shall be filed at the same location as provided in Section 7-12. The electoral boards having jurisdiction under Section 10-9 to hear and pass upon objections to nominating petitions also shall hear and pass upon objections to nomination petitions filed by candidates under this paragraph.

In the proceedings to nominate a candidate to fill a vacancy or to fill a vacancy in the nomination, each precinct, township, ward, county or congressional district, as the case may be, shall through its representative on such central or managing committee, be entitled to one vote for each ballot voted in such precinct, township, ward, county or congressional district, as the case may be, by the primary electors of its party at the primary election immediately preceding the meeting at which such vacancy is to be filled.

 
 

10 ILCS 5/8-17
In the event that a candidate of a party who has been nominated under the provisions of this Article shall die before election (whether death occurs prior to, or on, or after, the date of the primary) or decline the nomination or should the nomination for any other reason become vacant, the legislative or representative committee of such party for such district shall nominate a candidate of such party to fill such vacancy. However, if there was no candidate for the nomination of the party in the primary, no candidate of that party for that office may be listed on the ballot at the general election, unless the legislative or representative committee of the party nominates a candidate to fill the vacancy in nomination within 75 days after the date of the general primary election. Vacancies in nomination occurring under this Article shall be filled by the appropriate legislative or representative committee in accordance with the provisions of Section 7-61 of this Code. In proceedings to fill the vacancy in nomination, the voting strength of the members of the legislative or representative committee shall be as provided in Section 8-6.

Auditing Campaign Committees

Published on

Reaction to the news that Ken Dunkin finished the quarter with $1.2 million remaining in his campaign committee account has been varied, including some speculation that perhaps this reported figure is due to inaccurate accounting and his committee’s actual cash balance is significantly less.

In various situations the State Board of Elections can order an audit of a political committee, in some instances based on certain parameters that would warrant an audit and also they have the ability to randomly audit a limited number of committees. A few years ago I was involved in the record keeping of a committee that was randomly audited, it was a minor headache to assemble all the records for the auditor and of course we then had to pay a fee to an auditor but our records were in order so it wasn’t an overly burdensome process. It will be interesting to see if an audit is ordered in this situation.

Here is the relevant section of the election code:

5/9-13. Audits of political committees.

(a) The Board shall have the authority to order a political committee to conduct an audit of the financial records required to be maintained by the committee to ensure compliance with Sections 9-8.5 and 9-10. Audits ordered by the Board shall be conducted as provided in this Section and as provided by Board rule.

(b) The Board may order a political committee to conduct an audit of its financial records for any of the following reasons: (i) a discrepancy between the ending balance of a reporting period and the beginning balance of the next reporting period, (ii) failure to account for previously reported investments or loans, or (iii) a discrepancy between reporting contributions received by or expenditures made for a political committee that are reported by another political committee, except the Board shall not order an audit pursuant to this item (iii) unless there is a willful pattern of inaccurate reporting or there is a pattern of similar inaccurate reporting involving similar contributions by the same contributor. Prior to ordering an audit, the Board shall afford the political committee due notice and an opportunity for a closed preliminary hearing. A political committee shall hire an entity qualified to perform an audit; except, a political committee shall not hire a person that has contributed to the political committee during the previous 4 years.

(c) In each calendar year, the Board shall randomly order no more than 3% of registered political committees to conduct an audit. The Board shall establish a standard, scientific method of selecting the political committees that are to be audited so that every political committee has an equal mathematical chance of being selected.

(d) Upon receipt of notification from the Board ordering an audit, a political committee shall conduct an audit of the financial records required to be maintained by the committee to ensure compliance with the contribution limitations established in Section 9-8.5 and the reporting requirements established in Section 9-3 and Section 9-10 for a period of 2 years or the period since the committee was previously ordered to conduct an audit, whichever is shorter. The entity performing the audit shall review the amount of funds and investments maintained by the political committee and ensure the financial records accurately account for any contributions and expenditures made by the political committee. A certified copy of the audit shall be delivered to the Board within 60 calendar days after receipt of notice from the Board, unless the Board grants an extension to complete the audit. A political committee ordered to conduct an audit through the random selection process shall not be required to conduct another audit for a minimum of 5 years unless the Board has reason to believe the political committee is in violation of Section 9-3, 9-8.5, or 9-10.
26

(e) The Board shall not disclose the name of any political committee ordered to conduct an audit or any documents in possession of the Board related to an audit unless, after review of the audit findings, the Board has reason to believe the political committee is in violation of Section 9-3, 9-8.5, or 9-10 and the Board imposed a fine.

(f) Failure to deliver a certified audit in a timely manner is a business offense punishable by a fine of $250 per day that the audit is late, up to a maximum of $5,000.

Upcoming Data

Published on

Here is what I’m working on and what will be available soon:

  1. Updated Fundraising Totals – quarterly campaign finance reports for Q1 were due on Friday and a few late filers are still trickling in (looking at you Sen. Lightford and Rep. Ford). Once they’are all in I’ll put together a full analysis similar to what I did after 2015 Q4.
  2. Precinct Level Vote Totals – also on Friday the State Board made available the certified election results for the 2016 primary including the statewide precinct by precinct results. As I did with the 2014 general election results I’ll download each election authority’s results, combine them, fix the formatting and build some search capabilities that you’ll soon find in the Analysis section.
  3. Senate/House Profiles – once I have the fundraising and vote total information that I want to include I’m going to do a profile of the most likely targeted races for each of the House and Senate this fall based on the 2014 election results. Some of that may be eye-opening, particularly in the Senate.
  4. Updated Maps – I’ll update the Maps for the statewide primaries including President, US Senate and Comptroller.

I’ll post an update when each is available.

Millionaire’s Tax Amendment

Published on

With the possible resurfacing of the Millionaire’s Tax Amendment it’s worth remembering that this issue was on the ballot for the 2014 General Election and we have district by district vote totals.

Below are the results for each district for the House and Senate. This process uses the simple method, which has to do with instances where more than one district are represented in a precinct. Using the simple method the entire precinct data is used for any precinct that is in part or in whole in each district.

As you can see this issue won a majority in all but two Senate districts, the 26th (Duffy 48.67%) and 33rd (McConnaughay 49.93%), and it won a majority in all but five House districts, the 47th (Bellock 49.67%), 50th (Wheeler 49.43%), 51st (Sullivan 47.60%), 52nd (McSweeney 49.51%) and the 65th (Andersson 48.10%).

State Senate Districts

District Senator Party YES % NO % Total
State Senator – 1 Antonio Muñoz D 24,872 80.63% 5,976 19.37% 30,848
State Senator – 2 William Delgado D 30,433 81.71% 6,813 18.29% 37,246
State Senator – 3 Mattie Hunter D 47,445 81.35% 10,876 18.65% 58,321
State Senator – 4 Kimberly A. Lightford D 50,895 78.68% 13,794 21.32% 64,689
State Senator – 5 Patricia Van Pelt D 43,750 81.45% 9,961 18.55% 53,711
State Senator – 6 John J. Cullerton D 43,006 69.62% 18,763 30.38% 61,769
State Senator – 7 Heather A. Steans D 44,826 82.92% 9,232 17.08% 54,058
State Senator – 8 Ira I. Silverstein D 34,638 69.73% 15,038 30.27% 49,676
State Senator – 9 Daniel Biss D 48,318 63.38% 27,921 36.62% 76,239
State Senator – 10 John G. Mulroe D 35,202 65.89% 18,227 34.11% 53,429
State Senator – 11 Martin A. Sandoval D 28,010 75.13% 9,272 24.87% 37,282
State Senator – 12 Steven M. Landek D 24,932 73.11% 9,170 26.89% 34,102
State Senator – 13 Kwame Raoul D 50,857 83.65% 9,938 16.35% 60,795
State Senator – 14 Emil Jones, III D 58,842 79.74% 14,946 20.26% 73,788
State Senator – 15 Napoleon Harris, III D 48,292 80.53% 11,674 19.47% 59,966
State Senator – 16 Jacqueline Y. Collins D 49,035 81.11% 11,417 18.89% 60,452
State Senator – 17 Donne E. Trotter D 56,819 80.78% 13,516 19.22% 70,335
State Senator – 18 Bill Cunningham D 48,629 65.66% 25,433 34.34% 74,062
State Senator – 19 Michael E. Hastings D 49,151 65.74% 25,613 34.26% 74,764
State Senator – 20 Iris Y. Martinez D 30,270 81.68% 6,790 18.32% 37,060
State Senator – 21 Michael Connelly R 40,150 52.07% 36,956 47.93% 77,106
State Senator – 22 Michael Noland D 23,517 63.99% 13,232 36.01% 36,749
State Senator – 23 Thomas Cullerton D 32,572 57.50% 24,078 42.50% 56,650
State Senator – 24 Chris Nybo R 41,295 52.25% 37,733 47.75% 79,028
State Senator – 25 Jim Oberweis R 34,783 50.37% 34,275 49.63% 69,058
State Senator – 26 Dan Duffy R 37,046 48.67% 39,065 51.33% 76,111
State Senator – 27 Matt Murphy R 38,505 54.57% 32,057 45.43% 70,562
State Senator – 28 Laura M. Murphy D 34,627 61.30% 21,859 38.70% 56,486
State Senator – 29 Julie A. Morrison D 36,435 57.30% 27,146 42.70% 63,581
State Senator – 30 Terry Link D 28,058 63.84% 15,895 36.16% 43,953
State Senator – 31 Melinda Bush D 32,752 58.14% 23,585 41.86% 56,337
State Senator – 32 Pamela J. Althoff R 34,535 51.71% 32,248 48.29% 66,783
State Senator – 33 Karen McConnaughay R 35,432 49.93% 35,527 50.07% 70,959
State Senator – 34 Steve Stadelman D 33,415 62.82% 19,776 37.18% 53,191
State Senator – 35 Dave Syverson R 39,802 56.08% 31,170 43.92% 70,972
State Senator – 36 Neil Anderson R 41,070 62.80% 24,332 37.20% 65,402
State Senator – 37 Chuck Weaver R 44,180 57.13% 33,147 42.87% 77,327
State Senator – 38 Sue Rezin R 42,152 60.66% 27,340 39.34% 69,492
State Senator – 39 Don Harmon D 36,321 74.13% 12,675 25.87% 48,996
State Senator – 40 Toi W. Hutchinson D 42,247 61.65% 26,276 38.35% 68,523
State Senator – 41 Christine Radogno R 42,119 53.38% 36,786 46.62% 78,905
State Senator – 42 Linda Holmes D 24,534 64.60% 13,445 35.40% 37,979
State Senator – 43 Pat McGuire D 33,693 67.03% 16,569 32.97% 50,262
State Senator – 44 William E. Brady R 43,599 58.66% 30,723 41.34% 74,322
State Senator – 45 Tim Bivins R 42,219 58.36% 30,126 41.64% 72,345
State Senator – 46 David Koehler D 37,093 64.46% 20,452 35.54% 57,545
State Senator – 47 John M. Sullivan D 39,024 60.86% 25,097 39.14% 64,121
State Senator – 48 Andy Manar D 40,339 63.58% 23,108 36.42% 63,447
State Senator – 49 Jennifer Bertino-Tarrant D 38,292 61.33% 24,141 38.67% 62,433
State Senator – 50 Wm. Sam McCann R 48,790 59.22% 33,596 40.78% 82,386
State Senator – 51 Chapin Rose R 46,083 55.69% 36,661 44.31% 82,744
State Senator – 52 Scott M. Bennett D 35,065 64.04% 19,686 35.96% 54,751
State Senator – 53 Jason A. Barickman R 39,105 56.89% 29,630 43.11% 68,735
State Senator – 54 Kyle McCarter R 41,311 56.37% 31,975 43.63% 73,286
State Senator – 55 Dale A. Righter R 38,138 56.53% 29,322 43.47% 67,460
State Senator – 56 William R. Haine D 38,131 61.48% 23,890 38.52% 62,021
State Senator – 57 James F. Clayborne, Jr. D 41,154 64.85% 22,305 35.15% 63,459
State Senator – 58 David S. Luechtefeld R 42,015 60.34% 27,616 39.66% 69,631
State Senator – 59 Gary Forby D 39,457 60.40% 25,868 39.60% 65,325

 

State House Districts

District Representative Party YES % NO % Total
State Representative – 1st Daniel J. Burke D 13,150 80.47% 3,191 19.53% 16,341
State Representative – 2nd Edward J. Acevedo D 12,045 80.80% 2,862 19.20% 14,907
State Representative – 3rd Luis Arroyo D 14,244 80.55% 3,439 19.45% 17,683
State Representative – 4th Cynthia Soto D 17,876 83.19% 3,611 16.81% 21,487
State Representative – 5th Kenneth Dunkin D 27,717 80.90% 6,543 19.10% 34,260
State Representative – 6th Sonya M. Harper D 23,138 81.37% 5,297 18.63% 28,435
State Representative – 7th Emanuel Chris Welch D 26,595 77.53% 7,706 22.47% 34,301
State Representative – 8th La Shawn K. Ford D 25,298 79.70% 6,444 20.30% 31,742
State Representative – 9th Arthur Turner D 21,887 79.85% 5,523 20.15% 27,410
State Representative – 10th Pamela Reaves-Harris D 24,724 82.51% 5,241 17.49% 29,965
State Representative – 11th Ann M. Williams D 21,905 69.38% 9,666 30.62% 31,571
State Representative – 12th Sara Feigenholtz D 21,588 69.85% 9,319 30.15% 30,907
State Representative – 13th Gregory Harris D 23,598 81.68% 5,294 18.32% 28,892
State Representative – 14th Kelly M. Cassidy D 22,211 84.33% 4,128 15.67% 26,339
State Representative – 15th John C. D’Amico D 19,489 67.05% 9,578 32.95% 29,067
State Representative – 16th Lou Lang D 15,988 72.44% 6,084 27.56% 22,072
State Representative – 17th Laura Fine D 24,139 64.00% 13,581 36.00% 37,720
State Representative – 18th Robyn Gabel D 25,239 62.90% 14,889 37.10% 40,128
State Representative – 19th Robert Martwick D 17,284 70.11% 7,369 29.89% 24,653
State Representative – 20th Michael P. McAuliffe R 18,764 62.41% 11,302 37.59% 30,066
State Representative – 21st Silvana Tabares D 11,934 74.11% 4,169 25.89% 16,103
State Representative – 22nd Michael J. Madigan D 16,269 75.72% 5,216 24.28% 21,485
State Representative – 23rd Michael J. Zalewski D 13,298 71.03% 5,424 28.97% 18,722
State Representative – 24th Elizabeth Hernandez D 12,261 75.41% 3,999 24.59% 16,260
State Representative – 25th Barbara Flynn Currie D 24,634 88.37% 3,243 11.63% 27,877
State Representative – 26th Christian L. Mitchell D 30,809 81.12% 7,170 18.88% 37,979
State Representative – 27th Monique D. Davis D 33,763 80.06% 8,410 19.94% 42,173
State Representative – 28th Robert Rita D 27,903 80.10% 6,931 19.90% 34,834
State Representative – 29th Thaddeus Jones D 27,561 80.30% 6,761 19.70% 34,322
State Representative – 30th William Davis D 20,879 80.84% 4,947 19.16% 25,826
State Representative – 31st Mary E. Flowers D 29,804 79.85% 7,523 20.15% 37,327
State Representative – 32nd André Thapedi D 22,655 83.51% 4,473 16.49% 27,128
State Representative – 33rd Marcus C. Evans, Jr. D 28,604 84.18% 5,374 15.82% 33,978
State Representative – 34th Elgie R. Sims, Jr. D 30,886 77.95% 8,739 22.05% 39,625
State Representative – 35th Frances Ann Hurley D 26,535 64.52% 14,591 35.48% 41,126
State Representative – 36th Kelly M. Burke D 24,867 66.29% 12,643 33.71% 37,510
State Representative – 37th Margo McDermed R 21,574 54.34% 18,131 45.66% 39,705
State Representative – 38th Al Riley D 28,363 77.95% 8,025 22.05% 36,388
State Representative – 39th Will Guzzardi D 16,026 81.95% 3,529 18.05% 19,555
State Representative – 40th Jaime M. Andrade, Jr. D 16,725 81.41% 3,820 18.59% 20,545
State Representative – 41st Grant Wehrli R 20,397 53.64% 17,626 46.36% 38,023
State Representative – 42nd Jeanne M Ives R 19,753 50.54% 19,330 49.46% 39,083
State Representative – 43rd Anna Moeller D 10,980 62.10% 6,700 37.90% 17,680
State Representative – 44th Fred Crespo D 13,376 65.10% 7,170 34.90% 20,546
State Representative – 45th Christine Winger R 17,676 54.58% 14,709 45.42% 32,385
State Representative – 46th Deb Conroy D 15,186 61.29% 9,590 38.71% 24,776
State Representative – 47th Patricia R. Bellock R 20,104 49.67% 20,375 50.33% 40,479
State Representative – 48th Peter Breen R 21,350 54.97% 17,491 45.03% 38,841
State Representative – 49th Mike Fortner R 17,383 51.05% 16,669 48.95% 34,052
State Representative – 50th Keith R. Wheeler R 17,653 49.43% 18,059 50.57% 35,712
State Representative – 51st Ed Sullivan R 19,310 47.60% 21,257 52.40% 40,567
State Representative – 52nd David McSweeney R 18,682 49.51% 19,050 50.49% 37,732
State Representative – 53rd David Harris R 20,538 55.68% 16,351 44.32% 36,889
State Representative – 54th Thomas Morrison R 18,165 53.40% 15,849 46.60% 34,014
State Representative – 55th Martin J. Moylan D 17,628 61.76% 10,914 38.24% 28,542
State Representative – 56th Michelle Mussman D 16,999 60.83% 10,945 39.17% 27,944
State Representative – 57th Elaine Nekritz D 16,793 61.79% 10,384 38.21% 27,177
State Representative – 58th Scott Drury D 19,642 53.96% 16,762 46.04% 36,404
State Representative – 59th Carol Sente D 16,749 59.74% 11,288 40.26% 28,037
State Representative – 60th Rita Mayfield D 12,028 70.69% 4,987 29.31% 17,015
State Representative – 61st Sheri Jesiel R 16,852 57.02% 12,701 42.98% 29,553
State Representative – 62nd Sam Yingling D 16,197 59.28% 11,125 40.72% 27,322
State Representative – 63rd Jack D. Franks D 16,422 52.01% 15,153 47.99% 31,575
State Representative – 64th Barbara Wheeler R 19,831 51.29% 18,834 48.71% 38,665
State Representative – 65th Steven A. Andersson R 19,840 48.10% 21,409 51.90% 41,249
State Representative – 66th Michael W. Tryon R 16,333 52.65% 14,690 47.35% 31,023
State Representative – 67th Litesa E. Wallace D 14,348 67.16% 7,015 32.84% 21,363
State Representative – 68th John M. Cabello R 22,663 60.53% 14,775 39.47% 37,438
State Representative – 69th Joe Sosnowski R 22,127 57.24% 16,530 42.76% 38,657
State Representative – 70th Robert W. Pritchard R 18,112 54.73% 14,983 45.27% 33,095
State Representative – 71st Mike Smiddy D 22,205 61.18% 14,092 38.82% 36,297
State Representative – 72nd Patrick J. Verschoore D 20,687 64.52% 11,378 35.48% 32,065
State Representative – 73rd David R. Leitch R 21,066 53.54% 18,283 46.46% 39,349
State Representative – 74th Donald L. Moffitt R 24,339 60.75% 15,723 39.25% 40,062
State Representative – 75th John D. Anthony R 20,367 57.23% 15,220 42.77% 35,587
State Representative – 76th Andrew F Skoog D 21,880 64.21% 12,198 35.79% 34,078
State Representative – 77th Kathleen Willis D 11,065 67.70% 5,278 32.30% 16,343
State Representative – 78th Camille Y. Lilly D 25,256 77.35% 7,397 22.65% 32,653
State Representative – 79th Katherine Cloonen D 18,104 54.02% 15,408 45.98% 33,512
State Representative – 80th Anthony DeLuca D 24,790 68.50% 11,400 31.50% 36,190
State Representative – 81st Ron Sandack R 22,081 55.85% 17,456 44.15% 39,537
State Representative – 82nd Jim Durkin R 20,038 50.90% 19,330 49.10% 39,368
State Representative – 83rd Linda Chapa LaVia D 10,548 66.96% 5,204 33.04% 15,752
State Representative – 84th Stephanie A. Kifowit D 14,692 63.50% 8,444 36.50% 23,136
State Representative – 85th Emily McAsey D 17,099 66.89% 8,464 33.11% 25,563
State Representative – 86th Lawrence Walsh, Jr. D 17,253 66.94% 8,519 33.06% 25,772
State Representative – 87th Tim Butler R 23,104 60.38% 15,159 39.62% 38,263
State Representative – 88th Keith P. Sommer R 21,053 56.70% 16,076 43.30% 37,129
State Representative – 89th Brian W. Stewart R 20,301 56.59% 15,575 43.41% 35,876
State Representative – 90th Tom Demmer R 22,326 60.03% 14,864 39.97% 37,190
State Representative – 91st Michael D. Unes R 20,542 63.15% 11,988 36.85% 32,530
State Representative – 92nd Jehan Gordon-Booth D 17,140 66.16% 8,765 33.84% 25,905
State Representative – 93rd Norine K. Hammond R 19,558 65.16% 10,459 34.84% 30,017
State Representative – 94th Randy E. Frese R 19,494 57.06% 14,671 42.94% 34,165
State Representative – 95th Avery Bourne R 20,760 61.29% 13,112 38.71% 33,872
State Representative – 96th Sue Scherer D 21,742 66.13% 11,137 33.87% 32,879
State Representative – 97th Mark Batinick R 20,708 58.14% 14,908 41.86% 35,616
State Representative – 98th Natalie A. Manley D 20,577 65.23% 10,966 34.77% 31,543
State Representative – 99th Sara Wojcicki Jimenez R 27,319 60.24% 18,032 39.76% 45,351
State Representative – 100th C.D. Davidsmeyer R 21,516 57.94% 15,616 42.06% 37,132
State Representative – 101st Bill Mitchell R 24,538 55.67% 19,541 44.33% 44,079
State Representative – 102nd Adam Brown R 22,673 55.59% 18,110 44.41% 40,783
State Representative – 103rd Carol Ammons D 16,639 68.28% 7,729 31.72% 24,368
State Representative – 104th Chad Hays R 21,543 60.91% 13,823 39.09% 35,366
State Representative – 105th Dan Brady R 19,620 57.13% 14,725 42.87% 34,345
State Representative – 106th Thomas M. Bennett R 19,756 56.63% 15,133 43.37% 34,889
State Representative – 107th John Cavaletto R 19,483 58.05% 14,078 41.95% 33,561
State Representative – 108th Charles Meier R 22,268 55.00% 18,222 45.00% 40,490
State Representative – 109th David B. Reis R 19,647 53.90% 16,803 46.10% 36,450
State Representative – 110th Reginald Phillips R 19,334 59.76% 13,020 40.24% 32,354
State Representative – 111th Daniel V. Beiser D 18,501 62.34% 11,176 37.66% 29,677
State Representative – 112th Dwight Kay R 20,702 60.79% 13,352 39.21% 34,054
State Representative – 113th Jay Hoffman D 21,578 64.87% 11,683 35.13% 33,261
State Representative – 114th Eddie Lee Jackson, Sr. D 23,343 64.79% 12,685 35.21% 36,028
State Representative – 115th Terri Bryant R 22,501 62.61% 13,435 37.39% 35,936
State Representative – 116th Jerry Costello, II D 20,701 58.07% 14,947 41.93% 35,648
State Representative – 117th John Bradley D 19,888 60.91% 12,765 39.09% 32,653
State Representative – 118th Brandon W. Phelps D 19,760 59.87% 13,245 40.13% 33,005

You can find all of this data here.
Or you can search by going Analysis -> Precinct Level Election Results -> View Statewide Race by Districts (Simple Method).

2016 Illinois Primary – IE Scorecard

Published on

Spending by independent expenditure committees has been massive this primary and may continue in the general. In some races the spending by IE committees dwarfed the amounts raised by the candidates themselves. Below is a table of each of the IE committees (I did not include IE spending by party committees) and how much they spent on their favored candidates as of 9pm last night (3/14/16).

As the results go final we’ll try to keep this table up to date.

Party District Committee Name Supporting Amount Result
R Sen-58 Ballot Access Illinois Sharee Langenstein
$12,221.82
LOST
R Sen-50 Basic Crafts Council of Mid-Central IL PEF Sam McCann
$1,818.00
WON
D Sen-02 Chicagoans United for Economic Security PAC Omar Aquino
$27,651.72
WON
D Rep-26 Chicagoans United for Economic Security PAC Jay Travis
$254,938.92
LOST
R Rep-63 Government For The People Jeffery Lichte
$15,500.00
LOST
D Rep-05 Illinois Chamber IE Committee Ken Dunkin
$970,982.00
LOST
D Rep-26 Illinois Federation of Public Employees PAC Jay Travis
$1,500.00
LOST
R Sen-50 Illinois Federation of Public Employees PAC Sam McCann
$5,000.00
WON
R Rep-63 Illinois PAC for Education (IPACE) Jeffery Lichte
$12,500.00
LOST
D Cook-SA Illinois Safety & Justice Kim Foxx
$437,515.87
WON
D Rep-22 Illinois United for Change Jason Gonzales
$767,903.50
LOST
D Sen-02 IllinoisGO IE Angelica Alfaro
$96,736.64
LOST
D Rep-06 IllinoisGO IE Genita Robinson
$72,865.44
LOST
D Rep-26 IllinoisGO IE Christian Mitchell
$66,658.80
WON
D Rep-05 IllinoisGO IE Ken Dunkin
$1,581,924.70
LOST
D Sen-05 IllinoisGO IE Patricia Van Pelt
$92,989.60
WON
D Sen-02 INCS Action Independent Committee Angelica Alfaro
$33,705.00
LOST
R Rep-95 INCS Action Independent Committee Avery Bourne
$24,094.95
WON
D Sen-05 INCS Action Independent Committee Patricia Van Pelt
$25,121.34
WON
D Rep-06 INCS Action Independent Committee Genita Robinson
$25,125.12
LOST
D Rep-26 INCS Action Independent Committee Christian Mitchell
$33,573.00
WON
D Rep-29 INCS Action Independent Committee Thaddeus Jones
$19,945.88
WON
R Sen-26 Lake County Life PAC Dan McConchie
$1,000.00
WON
R Rep-66 Liberty Principles PAC Allen Skillicorn
$456,962.80
WON
R Rep-102 Liberty Principles PAC Brad Halbrook
$300,062.44
WON
R Rep-72 Liberty Principles PAC Brandi McGuire
$238,882.22
WON
R Sen-50 Liberty Principles PAC Bryce Benton
$3,075,404.33
LOST
D Rep-07 Liberty Principles PAC Chris Harris
$22,925.67
LOST
R Sen-26 Liberty Principles PAC Dan McConchie
$493,567.24
WON
R Rep-74 Liberty Principles PAC Mike DeSutter
$51,716.51
LOST
R Sen-58 Liberty Principles PAC Paul Schimpf
$87,036.15
WON
R Rep-110 Liberty Principles PAC Reggie Phillips
$108,777.33
WON
D Rep-02 National Association of REALTORS Fund Alex Acevedo
$42,411.70
LOST
R Rep-66 National Association of REALTORS Fund Carolyn Schofield
$34,725.00
LOST
D Rep-07 National Association of REALTORS Fund Chris Welch
$11,708.48
WON
D Rep-26 National Association of REALTORS Fund Christian Mitchell
$27,000.00
WON
D Rep-04 National Association of REALTORS Fund Cynthia Soto
$5,416.32
WON
D Rep-40 National Association of REALTORS Fund Jaime Andrade
$9,999.99
WON
R Sen-26 National Association of REALTORS Fund Martin McLaughlin
$42,922.72
LOST
D Sen-19 National Association of REALTORS Fund Michael Hastings
$25,298.62
WON
D Cook-SA Personal PAC Independent Committee Kim Foxx
$93,731.04
WON
D Sen-02 Stand for Children IL IEC Angelica Alfaro
$70,340.00
LOST

Tuesday’s Primary – What to Watch For

Published on

Here’s a rundown of some of the notable state and local races for Tuesday including their financial profile. These numbers are as of 9pm last night and will update each night so if you’re reading this in a day or two they should be current.

Note: if you’re reading this now this is an old post. It used to contain live campaign spending data but that has been removed since we are now into a new quarter and the data calculation is obsolete.

Cook County State’s Attorney (D)
First, the Cook County State’s Attorney’s race. Donna More just never caught fire and most of her recent funding has come from her or her husband, if there is an enthusiasm for her campaign it hasn’t translated into recent financial filings. Alvarez the incumbent is still seeing some support, particularly with labor and some of the city’s more prominent law firms. But the candidate that has benefited most financially has been Kim Foxx. The caps are off in this race because of Donna More’s self funding and Foxx has been able to take in $600K from Fred Eychaner plus another $250K from Toni Preckwinkle. Additionally an IE with significant funding from George Soros has independently spent over half a million dollars to support her candidacy.

5th House (D)
Next is the mother of all state rep races, the 5th House. This one has already seen a record single donation for the incumbent plus an almost unprecedented endorsement of a sitting US President, for the challenger no less. Ken Dunkin has taken in $800,000 from an organization run by Dan Proft, former Republican candidate for Governor and been the beneficiary of about $2.5 million in IE spending by IllinoisGO, funded by Governor Rauner’s allies. On the other side Stratton is up to almost $2 million from mostly labor money, but also recently many of the campaign committees of the House Democratic caucus, in particular many of the members who are expected to be fall targets and had big influxes of cash late last year. Regardless what happens on Tuesday we’ll probably still be talking about this race 10 or 20 years from now.

50th Senate (R)
Ever since breaking with the Governor’s wishes and siding with organized labor Sam McCann has had a target on his back. His opponent, Bryce Benton, has been endorsed by the Governor and largely financed by him as well. Benton has managed to raise a little more than $100K, $50K of it came from the Governor’s campaign committee, $25K came from Illinois Liberty PAC which is almost the same amount that Illinois Liberty PAC received from the Dan Proft run Illinois Opportunity Project. But Benton’s real muscle in this race has come from the spending of Liberty Principles the IE that is also run by Proft. They have spent over $3 million in this race (and coincidentally received about $2.3 million from the Governor’s IE, Turnaround Illinois). McCann has managed to raise almost $600K this quarter, largely from labor money. This race will test Republican party loyalty enforcement and the outcome will likely have repercussions for the spring budget negotiations.

22nd House (D)
The financial profile for this race is a little misleading, it only shows the Speaker’s candidate committee but he also controls the caucus fund Democratic Majority, the Democratic Party of Illinois fund and the 13th Ward Democratic Org fund, all of which are flush. The challenger, Jason Gonzales, has managed to raise about a quarter million dollars largely from CEO’s and other wealthy retirees and/or investors. But the more interesting development in this race has come from Illinois United for Change, the IE largely funded by former Democratic US Senate candidate Blair Hull and Steven Miller. The wealthy investor and his allies have independently spent over $750K to try to defeat the longtime incumbent Speaker, we’ll find out on Tuesday if it was a good investment.

26th House (D)
A rematch of a hard-fought election last cycle, oddly enough this race has featured various factions of teachers unions on opposite sides. The Chicago Teachers Union has made it a priority to defeat Christian Mitchell and they have been supporting Jay Travis, along with the Illinois Federation of Teachers. On the other side Mitchell has been supported by the Illinois Education Association along with various groups that support charter schools. A number of IE’s have been involved in this race including a labor IE supporting Travis and IllinoisGO and the Illinois Network of Charter Schools supporting Mitchell.

95th House (D)
Incumbent Avery Bourne has been largely supported by the Illinois Republican Party via independent expenditures. Challenger Dennis Scobbie has largely been funded by the IEA, first through a direct max out contribution and later via various affiliated locally named committees. Despite all of these independent expenditures and single source funding this race technically still has contribution limits, although it’s probably the best exhibit for how meaningless our current contribution limit regulations are.

26th Senate (D)
The biggest player in this race has been Liberty Principles, the IE run by former Republican Gubernatorial candidate Dan Proft. They have spent a half million dollars supporting pro-life activist Dan McConchie and in doing so lifted the contribution limits for this race. One of the more surprising developments came when McConchie received a donation from Chicago Bears owner Virginia McCaskey despite the fact that one of his opponents is the brother of Chicago Bears great Brian Urlacher. This lead to some speculation that the former Bears linebacker may step up with some large donations but so far that hasn’t happened, most of Casey Urlacher’s money has come from himself. The third candidate in the race Martin McLaughlin has had the smallest financial impact but has been endorsed by both the Chicago Tribune and Chicago Sun-Times.

66th House (R)
This is another race where Liberty Principles spending has been the dominant financial force. They have spent almost a half million dollars supporting Skillicorn and opposing Serwatka and Wilbrandt (note: the spending against Serwatka doesn’t show up due to a spelling error on the filing). Carolyn Schofield has been able to break into six figures largely via a max out donation from the IEA, $40K from Pam Althoff and $5K from incumbent Mike Tryon. Paul Serwatka has also broken six figures but oddly enough it was all in 2015 fundraising, he hasn’t filed a single A-1 so far this quarter.

2nd Senate (D)
Angelica Alfaro, a charter school executive, has been the beneficiary of significant independent expenditures by allied groups including IllinoisGO, Stand for Children and the Illinois Network of Charter Schools. Omar Aquino has been backed with significant organized labor money. This near northwest side Chicago district is too expensive for Chicago TV so this has mostly resulted in lots of mail from each of these candidates and allied IE’s. Lots and lots of mail. Endless mail. I live here, please make it stop, please no more mail.

5th Senate (D)
Incumbent Patricia Van Pelt has been strongly supported by the Illinois Democratic Senate Victory Fund, the caucus committee of President Cullerton. She has also received significant outside help from IE’s IllinoisGO and the Illinois Charter Schools Network. Former Chicago mayoral candidate Bob Fioretti has been hoping to capitalize on his local popularity as the former alderman of what was the 2nd ward prior to the last remap.

102nd House (D)
This race is considered a proxy war between two Republican Governors. Brad Halbrook is supported by Governor Rauner and Dan Proft’s IE Liberty Principles has spent $300K supporting him. On the other side is Jim Acklin who has been endorsed by former Governor Jim Edgar. The TV ads in this race have been brutally negative.

The Rest
As we get farther down the list fewer of these races have enough interesting features to provide a narrative so here’s just a listing of the rest of the general assembly races.