Q3 Fundraising Totals

Published on

At the end of the last three quarterly filing periods I ran the numbers and put together the fundraising totals for the General Assembly candidates, caucus committees, state parties and other relevant committees, for example here is last quarter’s.

For Q3 though I’m not going to do that for two reasons 1) money is moving so fast and so much of it has already moved since 10/1 that those figures are way out of date at this point so it would be trivia more than data and 2) so much money in those totals that looks like funds raised or funds spent was neither, it was just funds transferred from committee to committee which creates artificially large numbers. For example, the Governor transferred $20 million to the Illinois Republican Party who spent some of that and transferred the rest to the House Republican Organization and the Republican State Senate Campaign Committee who spent some of that and transferred the rest to their member committees. If you start adding all of that up it may look like $40 or $60 million raised and spent when it was the same $20 million moving around. The only way to correct for that is to pull up every expenditure for the quarter and go through them one by one to exclude the ones that were just transfers, a labor intensive and time consuming task that’s a poor use of time in mid-October of an election year.

I do plan to do that work after the Q4 filings are in so we can figure out a best estimate for what this whole process really cost, it just doesn’t make sense to do that now with so much financial activity still ongoing. It will take some effort but we’ll know in mid to late January next year.

 

Race Profiles Available

Published on

A few updates:

  • Race profiles are now available for every General Assembly district, not just the likely targeted races. Since it now loads 177 races give the page a minute to load.
  •  
  • I’ve also created something similar for the Comptroller’s race. Aside from the preview there is also a financial profile plus all of the historical vote totals for statewide general elections since 1990.
  •  
  • Using the new FEC API I was able to create profiles for all of the Illinois Congressional races as well.
  •  
  • Last, using the FEC API I have created a profile page for the US Senate race. Aside from the preview there is also a financial profile plus all of the historical vote totals for statewide general elections since 1990.

     

Embed Your Own Election Profiles

For each of the above you can embed the code for these election profiles on your own site. Use the tool here to get the embed code.

 

A-1 Contributions and In-Kinds Now Separate

For the General Assembly elections in a lot of key races the candidates are receiving in-kind contributions of staff and other costs from leadership and these are showing up on A-1’s. These numbers are not cash and were skewing the estimated cash available line so I’ve separated the A-1 totals into two lines.

 

Embed Your Own Election Profile

Published on

If you are familiar with our election profile pages (US Senate, Comptroller, Congress, General Assembly) you can now embed these profiles into your own page/site. For the statewide races you can embed the candidates’ financial position. For the congressional and general assembly races you can embed the whole profile or just the candidates’ financial position. Use the dropdowns below to select the race/type you want and get the embed code. If the size doesn’t look right on your site feel free to adjust the height/width values in the iframe.

 

The General Assembly and Comptroller financial data are downloaded each night from the State Board of Elections and are current as of 9pm last night. The US Senate and Congressional race financial data is taken from the FEC API. See the FAQ for further details about this financial data.

 

Statewide Races

Race:

 

 

Congressional Races

Race: Type:

 

 

General Assembly Races

Race: Type:

 

 

 

 

A Campaign Finance Oddity

Published on

A few weeks ago I was looking through A-1 filings and and noticed that State Senate candidate Seth Lewis was getting in-kinds from both HRO and the RSSCC, which I noted on Twitter.

Someone mentioned to me that the reason you rarely come across a situation where a candidate for the General Assembly is being financially supported by the caucus committee of both chambers is that it’s not allowed. I looked it up and this appears to be the case.

Here is the section on campaign contributions, the relevant section is highlighted:

5/9-8.5 Limitations on campaign contributions
(b) During an election cycle, a candidate political committee may not accept contributions with an aggregate value over the following: (i) $5,000 from any individual, (ii) $10,000 from any corporation, labor organization, or association, or (iii) $50,000 from a candidate political committee or political action committee. A candidate political committee may accept contributions in any amount from a political party committee except during an election cycle in which the candidate seeks nomination at a primary election. During an election cycle in which the candidate seeks nomination at a primary election, a candidate political committee may not accept contributions from political party committees with an aggregate value over the following: (i) $200,000 for a candidate political committee established to support a candidate seeking nomination to statewide office, (ii) $125,000 for a candidate political committee established to support a candidate seeking nomination to the Senate, the Supreme Court or Appellate Court in the First Judicial district, or an office elected by all voters in a county with 1,000,000 or more residents, (iii) $75,000 for a candidate political committee established to support a candidate seeking nomination to the House of Representatives, the Supreme Court or Appellate Court for a judicial district other than the First Judicial District, an office elected by all voters of a county of fewer than 1,000,000 residents, and municipal and county offices in Cook County other than those elected by all voters of Cook County, and (iv) $50,000 for a candidate political committee established to support the nomination of a candidate to any other office. A candidate political committee established to elect a candidate to the General Assembly may accept contributions from only one legislative caucus committee. A candidate political committee may not accept contributions from a ballot initiative committee or from an independent expenditure committee.

And here is the section on committee definitions, the relevant section is highlighted:

5/9-1.8. Political committees
(c) “Political party committee” means the State central committee of a political party, a county central committee of a political party, a legislative caucus committee, or a committee formed by a ward or township committeeman of a political party. For purposes of this Article, a “legislative caucus committee” means a committee established for the purpose of electing candidates to the General Assembly by the person elected President of the Senate, Minority Leader of the Senate, Speaker of the House of Representatives, Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, or a committee established by 5 or more members of the same caucus of the Senate or 10 or more members of the same caucus of the House of Representatives.

So far Republican Senate candidates Seth Lewis, Paul Schimpf and Dale Fowler are getting paid staff from both the Republican State Senate Campaign Committee (RSSCC) and the House Republican Organization (HRO). Now the House Republican Organization is running an ad against Democratic incumbent Senator Gary Forby, which would presumably be an in-kind contribution to the Fowler campaign, it even lists HRO in the paid-for-by at the end of the ad.

This part of the campaign finance law seems rather odd to me. Then again it also seems kind of odd to be paying for Senate campaigns out of the House caucus funds, if for no other reason than you’ll have to explain to angry House caucus members why your’re spending caucus funds on the Senate instead of their races. Either way under the current letter of the law I’m not sure this is permitted.

General Assembly In-Kind Contributions

Published on

The various caucus committees have started spending money on staff and paid communications for various supported candidates via in-kind contributions. I thought you might be interested to see which candidates they are already favoring with this support. Below is a sum of in-kinds reported on A-1’s since May 1st by candidate, donor and purpose. This list shows all in-kinds but the most prevalent ones are the ones from the caucus committees. This list is generated dynamically from the State Board data so whatever day you’re looking at it it is current as of 9pm last night.

 

The Money Race for the State House (07/18/2016)

Published on

With the latest filing deadline just passed here is the latest update on the state of the money race for the Illinois General Assembly. If you read either of our previous State of the Money Race posts back in either April or January you’ll find that the narrative hasn’t changed much. With a few notable exceptions there wasn’t a lot of fundraising done in Q2 compared to previous quarters. The only General Assembly candidate committees to raise over $100,000 in the quarter were the four legislative leaders plus Bertino-Tarrant ($136K), Forby ($109K), Hoffman ($133K), Romanik ($1 million) and Phelps ($136K). Compare that to the 4th quarter of 2015 when aside from the legislative leaders one Republican and 19 other Democratic campaign committees raised more than $100K including 11 House committees over $247K and 3 over $500K.

The big new money in the quarter came from Bob Romanik, the Republican House candidate in the Metro East’s 114th district (currently held by Eddie Lee Jackson) who loaned himself another $1 million in Q2, on top of the previous million he loaned his campaign the quarter before.

Also on the Republican side money that was already in the system moved around a bit. Governor Rauner’s campaign committee transferred $5 million to the Illinois Republican Party and then the party transferred $2 million to the House Republican Organization (the state party also transferred another $1 million to HRO on July 1st). So far there haven’t been any similar transfers to the Republican State Senate Campaign Committee.

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

Candidate Q2 Cash on Hand Q2 Investments Q3 A-1s Est Funds Available
Democratic Party of Illinois $2,459,508.04 $0.00 $30,000.00 $2,489,508.04
Friends of Michael J. Madigan $1,299,318.51 $0.00 $18,309.75 $1,317,628.26
Democratic Majority $2,742,990.67 $0.00 $31,600.00 $2,774,590.67
13th Ward Democratic Org $1,239,445.41 $0.00 $1,000.00 $1,240,445.41
Citizens for John Cullerton for State Senate $1,637,026.79 $300,488.79 $0.00 $1,937,515.58
Senate Democratic Victory Fund $2,468,521.98 $412,074.69 $0.00 $2,880,596.67
Committee to Support John Cullerton for State Central Committeeman $887,778.93 $0.00 $0.00 $887,778.93
Dem Senators Not On Ballot This Cycle $3,391,413.48 $42.36 $41,300.00 $3,432,755.84
Dem Senate Candidates $5,233,462.77 $250,007.00 $112,373.53 $5,595,843.30
Dem House Candidates $13,253,508.33 $285,941.27 $304,332.64 $13,424,572.00
Total $34,612,974.91 $1,248,554.11 $538,915.92 $35,981,234.70
Candidate Q2 Cash on Hand Q2 Investments Q3 A-1s Est Funds Available
Citizens for Rauner, Inc $15,280,774.95 $0.00 $0.00 $15,280,774.95
Turnaround Illinois $2,208,676.44 $0.00 $0.00 $2,208,676.44
Illinois Republican Party $3,052,327.80 $0.00 $10,000.00 $3,062,327.80
Citizens for Durkin $859,562.13 $0.00 $13,000.00 $872,562.13
House Republican Organization $669,355.36 $0.00 $1,023,820.05 $1,693,175.41
House Republican Leadership Committee $63,527.40 $0.00 $0.00 $63,527.40
Citizens for Christine Radogno $716,955.96 $0.00 $32,000.00 $748,955.96
Republican State Senate Campaign Committee $448,015.28 $0.00 $6,421.00 $454,436.28
Rep Senators Not On Ballot This Cycle $956,674.76 $0.00 $3,000.00 $959,674.76
Rep Senate Candidates $1,578,309.02 $45,300.00 $44,361.18 $1,667,970.20
Rep House Candidates $5,462,830.51 $25.00 $165,776.92 $5,628,632.43
Total $31,297,009.61 $45,325.00 $1,298,379.15 $32,640,713.76

It’s somewhat remarkable that even with the Governor’s personal wealth and his allied wealthy donors the Democrats have been able to keep pace in the money race. They currently have about $3.4 million more than the Republicans but that advantage can be quickly wiped out if or when the Governor and his allies start writing big checks again. Also the Independent Expenditure committee Liberty Principles PAC has just over $4 million and they have been closely allied with the Governor this cycle so it’s basically a wash.

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

Candidate Already Spent Q2 Cash on Hand Q2 Investments Q3 A-1s Cycle Spending Ability
Democratic Party of Illinois $605,891.63 $2,459,508.04 $0.00 $30,000.00 $3,095,399.67
Friends of Michael J. Madigan $1,929,553.60 $1,299,318.51 $0.00 $18,309.75 $3,247,181.86
Democratic Majority $934,771.61 $2,742,990.67 $0.00 $31,600.00 $3,709,362.28
13th Ward Democratic Org $329,614.62 $1,239,445.41 $0.00 $1,000.00 $1,570,060.03
Citizens for John Cullerton for State Senate $794,210.49 $1,637,026.79 $300,488.79 $0.00 $2,731,726.07
Senate Democratic Victory Fund $1,927,734.85 $2,468,521.98 $412,074.69 $0.00 $4,808,331.52
Committee to Support John Cullerton for State Central Committeeman $96,100.57 $887,778.93 $0.00 $0.00 $983,879.50
Dem Senators Not On Ballot This Cycle $2,067,590.58 $3,391,413.48 $42.36 $41,300.00 $5,500,346.42
Dem Senate Candidates $5,092,818.51 $5,233,462.77 $250,007.00 $112,373.53 $10,688,661.81
Dem House Candidates $12,553,717.80 $13,253,508.33 $285,941.27 $304,332.64 $26,397,500.04
Total $26,332,004.26 $34,612,974.91 $1,248,554.11 $538,915.92 $62,732,449.20
Candidate Already Spent Q2 Cash on Hand Q2 Investments Q3 A-1s Cycle Spending Ability
Citizens for Rauner, Inc $7,861,569.64 $15,280,774.95 $0.00 $0.00 $23,142,344.59
Turnaround Illinois $4,048,696.21 $2,208,676.44 $0.00 $0.00 $6,257,372.65
Illinois Republican Party $4,421,430.97 $3,052,327.80 $0.00 $10,000.00 $7,483,758.77
Citizens for Durkin $646,240.22 $859,562.13 $0.00 $13,000.00 $1,518,802.35
House Republican Organization $2,444,183.13 $669,355.36 $0.00 $1,023,820.05 $4,137,358.54
House Republican Leadership Committee $5,036.25 $63,527.40 $0.00 $0.00 $68,563.65
Citizens for Christine Radogno $217,658.58 $716,955.96 $0.00 $32,000.00 $966,614.54
Republican State Senate Campaign Committee $901,413.56 $448,015.28 $0.00 $6,421.00 $1,355,849.84
Rep Senators Not On Ballot This Cycle $626,464.56 $956,674.76 $0.00 $3,000.00 $1,586,139.32
Rep Senate Candidates $2,781,646.46 $1,578,309.02 $45,300.00 $44,361.18 $4,449,616.66
Rep House Candidates $4,527,111.13 $5,462,830.51 $25.00 $165,776.92 $10,155,743.56
Total $28,481,450.71 $31,297,009.61 $45,325.00 $1,298,379.15 $61,122,164.47
Committee Already Spent
Primary Independent Expenditure Spending (B-1’s) $11,168,207.97
Candidate Already Spent Q1 Cash on Hand Q1 Investments Q2 A-1s Cycle Spending Ability
Democratic Primary Losing Candidates $3,495,619.55 $200,191.71 $0.00 $0.00 $3,695,811.26
Republican Primary Losing Candidates $1,689,475.32 $21,288.66 $0.00 $0.00 $1,710,763.98

When you look at what’s already been spent on legislative races so far plus what is still available to spend the amount is already over $140 million which is an eye popping number, but there is a catch. Some of those spending amounts are really just transfers of money already inside the system. So for example when the Gov’s campaign committee transferred $5 million to the Illinois Republican Party back in May, who then transferred $2 million to the House Republican Organization that looks like $7 million in spending when no new money entered or left the system, it just got moved around a bit. Unfortunately there’s no easy way to filter these amounts out, I’ll see what I can do in the future.

Edited to add:
I pulled up all of the expenditures of $30,000 or more and tried to figure out which ones to subtract to address this double counting issue. I came up with $12,477,100.00, you can download my list to review my work here. That means that we believe that roughly $128 million either already has been spent or is in the bank available to be spent for the 2016 General Assembly elections.

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 $2,090,259.42 $6,257,127.37 $0.00 $8,347,386.79
Liberty Principles PAC $4,047,466.15 $0.00 $0.00 $4,047,466.15
Laborers’ Political Action and Education League $2,229,666.33 $0.00 $0.00 $2,229,666.33
Citizens for Lisa Madigan $2,194,850.80 $0.00 $0.00 $2,194,850.80
Laborers’ Political League – Great Lakes Region $1,759,912.79 $0.00 $0.00 $1,759,912.79
Illinois PAC for Education (IPACE) $1,753,013.79 $0.00 $0.00 $1,753,013.79
Illinois State Medical Society PAC $374,778.67 $1,261,198.00 $0.00 $1,635,976.67
Chicagoland Operators Joint Labor-Management PAC $1,565,230.36 $0.00 $0.00 $1,565,230.36
Carpenters Helping in the Political Process (CHIPP) $1,533,859.02 $0.00 $0.00 $1,533,859.02
The Burnham Committee $1,400,263.49 $0.00 $0.00 $1,400,263.49
Biss for Illinois $1,374,174.71 $0.00 $24,300.00 $1,398,474.71
Friends for Susana Mendoza $1,332,604.13 $0.00 $30,500.00 $1,363,104.13
Stand for Children IL PAC $1,092,582.40 $0.00 $0.00 $1,092,582.40
Support Independent Maps $1,017,355.40 $0.00 $32,000.00 $1,049,355.40
Citizens for Alderman Reilly $1,039,888.10 $0.00 $0.00 $1,039,888.10
REALTORS Political Action Committee $988,921.20 $0.00 $9,000.00 $997,921.20
Roofers’ Political Educational and Legislative Fund $196,615.49 $749,380.67 $0.00 $945,996.16
Dan Rutherford Campaign Committee $11,216.37 $899,648.00 $0.00 $910,864.37
Committee to Elect Joseph Berrios Assessor $832,194.22 $0.00 $0.00 $832,194.22
Citizens for Judy Baar Topinka $830,415.98 $0.00 $0.00 $830,415.98
Citizens for Giannoulias $780,209.84 $0.00 $0.00 $780,209.84
Friends of Suarez $15,732.32 $750,000.00 $0.00 $765,732.32
Illinois Federation of Teachers COPE $741,932.05 $0.00 $0.00 $741,932.05
Cook County Democratic Party $728,276.43 $0.00 $0.00 $728,276.43
Citizens for Claar $148,489.37 $507,574.31 $0.00 $656,063.68

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) 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.

 

 

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).

Downloading Chicago Mayor by Precinct

Published on

If you’re like me you want to download all of the Chicago Mayor election results in this April runoff by precinct and you don’t want to have to load each ward’s page and then copy and paste that into a spreadsheet. Paul Smith was kind enough to share a Python script to download the results but I was unfortunately unable to get his Python script to work so I wrote one in php and got that to work.

Download the 2015 Mayor Runoff by Precinct

Click on the link above to download the April Runoff Election Results by precinct. This will probably take 60 – 120 seconds to run before it lets you save the file. This script will check the CBOE website and then it will write the data to a CSV file that you should be able to download and open in Excel and it will have the Mayor’s race election results by precinct. If the CBOE updates their vote totals with either 1) updated precinct totals or 2) updated VBM totals (or both) just click on the link above again and it will pull the latest data.

If something isn’t working right let me know. Thanks.