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.
|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|
|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|
|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|
|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|
|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):
|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|
|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|
|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|
|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|
|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|
|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.
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.
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.
Here is what I'm working on and what will be available soon:
I'll post an update when each is available.
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
|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
|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).
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.
|R||Sen-58||Ballot Access Illinois||Sharee Langenstein|
|R||Sen-50||Basic Crafts Council of Mid-Central IL PEF||Sam McCann|
|D||Sen-02||Chicagoans United for Economic Security PAC||Omar Aquino|
|D||Rep-26||Chicagoans United for Economic Security PAC||Jay Travis|
|R||Rep-63||Government For The People||Jeffery Lichte|
|D||Rep-05||Illinois Chamber IE Committee||Ken Dunkin|
|D||Rep-26||Illinois Federation of Public Employees PAC||Jay Travis|
|R||Sen-50||Illinois Federation of Public Employees PAC||Sam McCann|
|R||Rep-63||Illinois PAC for Education (IPACE)||Jeffery Lichte|
|D||Cook-SA||Illinois Safety & Justice||Kim Foxx|
|D||Rep-22||Illinois United for Change||Jason Gonzales|
|D||Sen-02||IllinoisGO IE||Angelica Alfaro|
|D||Rep-06||IllinoisGO IE||Genita Robinson|
|D||Rep-26||IllinoisGO IE||Christian Mitchell|
|D||Rep-05||IllinoisGO IE||Ken Dunkin|
|D||Sen-05||IllinoisGO IE||Patricia Van Pelt|
|D||Sen-02||INCS Action Independent Committee||Angelica Alfaro|
|R||Rep-95||INCS Action Independent Committee||Avery Bourne|
|D||Sen-05||INCS Action Independent Committee||Patricia Van Pelt|
|D||Rep-06||INCS Action Independent Committee||Genita Robinson|
|D||Rep-26||INCS Action Independent Committee||Christian Mitchell|
|D||Rep-29||INCS Action Independent Committee||Thaddeus Jones|
|R||Sen-26||Lake County Life PAC||Dan McConchie|
|R||Rep-66||Liberty Principles PAC||Allen Skillicorn|
|R||Rep-102||Liberty Principles PAC||Brad Halbrook|
|R||Rep-72||Liberty Principles PAC||Brandi McGuire|
|R||Sen-50||Liberty Principles PAC||Bryce Benton|
|D||Rep-07||Liberty Principles PAC||Chris Harris|
|R||Sen-26||Liberty Principles PAC||Dan McConchie|
|R||Rep-74||Liberty Principles PAC||Mike DeSutter|
|R||Sen-58||Liberty Principles PAC||Paul Schimpf|
|R||Rep-110||Liberty Principles PAC||Reggie Phillips|
|D||Rep-02||National Association of REALTORS Fund||Alex Acevedo|
|R||Rep-66||National Association of REALTORS Fund||Carolyn Schofield|
|D||Rep-07||National Association of REALTORS Fund||Chris Welch|
|D||Rep-26||National Association of REALTORS Fund||Christian Mitchell|
|D||Rep-04||National Association of REALTORS Fund||Cynthia Soto|
|D||Rep-40||National Association of REALTORS Fund||Jaime Andrade|
|R||Sen-26||National Association of REALTORS Fund||Martin McLaughlin|
|D||Sen-19||National Association of REALTORS Fund||Michael Hastings|
|D||Cook-SA||Personal PAC Independent Committee||Kim Foxx|
|D||Sen-02||Stand for Children IL IEC||Angelica Alfaro|
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.
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.
I've been tweeting a lot of interesting updates from recent disclosures and I thought I'd do a weekly roundup to try to summarize the week's interesting news and organize these developments into a format you can follow. Here is last week's roundup.
What follows is not every development in each of these races, only the big and/or notable ones. For comprehensive coverage of all the campaign finance data subscribe to either or both of our Racing Forms, updated daily. The Illinois Racing Form covers all the General Assembly races, the Cook County Racing Form covers all the county candidates, MWRD, judges and committeemen races.
The big news this week was that the independent expenditure committee, Illinois United for Change, spent enough money in the 22nd House supporting Jason Gonzales/opposing Mike Madigan that it exceeded the threshold needed to lift the contribution limits for this race. Until election day on March 15th both candidate committees will be able to raise unlimited funds. Full coverage of that potentially significant issue can be found here.
You can find the complete list of all the funds available, every A-1 filed, every B-1 filed and a complete listing of all the candidates and districts in our Racing Forms. The Illinois Racing Form covers every General Assembly race while the Cook County Racing Form covers all the countywide, judicial, MWRD and Chicago committeemen races, full details below.
The Illinois Racing Form
The Cook County Racing Form
With this latest independent expenditure disclosure Illinois United for Change has now spent more than $100,000 in the 22nd House race supporting Jason Gonzales/opposing Mike Madigan thereby exceeding the threshold needed to lift the campaign contribution limits for all candidates in this race for the remainder of the primary election cycle. This means that the Speaker's candidate committee, Friends of Michael J. Madigan, can now raise unlimited funds, an advantage not shared by the candidate committees of any of the other three legislative leaders.
The affected timeframe may be brief, the primary election cycle ends in two weeks, but the impact of this may be significant. Candidate committees can make unlimited transfers to party committees and during the general election party committees can make unlimited transfers to candidate committees. For the next two weeks the Speaker can raise unlimited funds into his candidate committee, he can then transfer as much of that as he'd like to the State Party (which he also controls) and come fall he can then use those State Party funds to either make expenditures on behalf of his candidates in targeted races or make unlimited transfers to those candidate committees.
The Governor took advantage of a similar opportunity at the end of 2014. In the 2014 Governor's race the contribution limits were lifted due to the large amount of self funding from Bruce Rauner, however the Governor's campaign committee was scheduled to be subject to contribution limits once again at the start of January 2015. After Bruce Rauner was elected Governor but before he took office he turned his attention to the General Assembly. One day prior to the contribution limits going back into effect his main campaign committee, Citizens for Rauner, added $20 million from three contributors: 1) Bruce Rauner, $10 million, 2) Ken Griffin, $8 million, 3) Richard Uhilein, $2 million. Here's what that money is intended to be used for according to Greg Hinz in Crain's, who was given the scoop:
The money won't be spent on his re-election campaign in 2018 but to help him pass legislation this spring through a General Assembly in which Democrats hold veto-proof majorities in both the House and Senate.
"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."
Since that time the Democrats, particularly in the House, have been aggressively fundraising to try to catch up. In 2015 the four funds controlled by the Speaker raised $7.7 million, Cullerton's three funds raised $5.1 million while the Senate and House Republicans each raised about $1.6 million and the Illinois Republican Party raised about $500K. In addition to leadership fundraising the House Democrats have been very aggressively raising large sums into the various candidate committees of the candidates they expect to face targeted general election races, particularly in the 4th quarter of 2015. Aside from the legislative leaders only one other Republican campaign committee raised over $100K last quarter (Jil Tracy) whereas 19 other Democratic campaign committees raised more than $100K including 11 House committees over $247K and 3 over $500K. The Democrats were busy raising money into every door available, now though the Speaker can focus on his own interests and raise unlimited sums during this very brief window for the next two weeks until election day.
If the Republicans want to try to maximize the same advantage they have opportunities as well. The contribution limits are off in the 72nd and 114th House as well as the 26th and 50th Senate races where they have candidates. If they want to go the coordinated route and they had an agreeable candidate they could raise unlimited sums into a candidate committee and then transfer those funds into the State Party. If they aren't concerned about coordination they could simply raise unlimited sums into the Governor's independent expenditure committee, Turnaround Illinois, and then spend that money independent of the candidates involved. Turnaround Illinois finished 2015 with $2.6 million on hand and just the other night the Governor personally contributed another $2 million. Plus the Governor still has $20 million in his main campaign committee that he has pledged to use to support his allied candidates in the General Assembly.
The contribution limits that went into effect for Illinois elections in 2011 have done little to stem the tide of money flowing into our electoral system. Instead we have a much more convoluted process where the money is coming in through a much larger number of vehicles making it harder to track and some competitors find themselves raising money by an unequal set of rules. For a short time the Speaker will be able to raise unlimited funds, an advantage not shared by President Cullerton or Leaders Radogno and Durkin. The Republican leaders' disadvantage is somewhat offset by the Governor's deep pocketed supporters and his flush campaign funds. Meanwhile President Cullerton will have to try to keep up while only being able to raise money in limited amounts, unless he cuts a deal with the Speaker to work together to financially support all of the legislative Democratic candidates. Given the amount of money the Governor has pledged to support Republican General Assembly candidates can he afford not to?
If you are a wealthy Democratic donor your phone is about to ring, the Speaker will be calling. In fact he's likely to be on the phone non-stop for the next two weeks focused on big (very big) checks. The window for the Speaker is now wide open in a way that isn't for his peers and history suggests that he's likely to press his advantage, we'll keep track of the results and update you on the progress.
Note: there are two scenarios where the contribution limits can be lifted 1) when a candidate's self funding exceeds the threshold and 2) when an independent expenditure committee's independent expenditures exceed the threshold, and they appear to be treated differently. If the contribution limits are lifted during a primary because of self funding (#1) the contribution limits are lifted for both the primary and the general election, however the section of the law on lifting contribution limits in a primary due to independent expenditures (#2) is silent on the general election so it only appears to apply to that current election cycle. In this scenario for the 22nd House the contribution limits are being lifted because of scenario 2 so the lifting of the contribution limits appears to only apply to the primary. Had they been lifted for both the primary and general the advantage to the Speaker would have been even greater.