One hundred and four million dollars — that’s how much money the Chicago Sun-Times reports sat in the 3,507 campaign funds controlled by state and local politicians and political-action committees at the end of 2010, according to Illinois State Board of Elections records. To see the 50 richest state campaign funds and PACs in Illinois (the list doesn’t include federal campaigns or PACs, which are overseen by the Federal Election Commission), click here.
Category: Campaign Finance
On bankrupt states, Wall Street paychecks and GOP hopefuls
Posted by – January 22, 2011
Policymakers are working behind the scenes to come up with a way to let states declare bankruptcy and get out from under crushing debts, including the pensions they have promised to retired public workers.
Two years since emerging from the financial crisis, Wall Street profits — and big paychecks — appear to be back.
President Obama’s potential challengers are busy cultivating donors, recruiting staff and testing campaign messages — conducting proxy campaigns that illuminate the approach they would take as White House hopefuls. Mitt Romney won the New Hampshire straw poll and sources say Newt Gingrich is going to run for president.
Presidential re-election campaign cash projection: $1 billion
Posted by – December 13, 2010
Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post offers this question: Will President Obama be the first billion-dollar man?
He raised and spent $750 million in the 2008 campaign, and there is already speculation that the cash-collection operation for his 2012 reelection bid will crest the once-unimaginable sum of $1 billion raised. (That’s a one and nine zeros. Nine!)
Does anyone else think the amount of money being spent for elective office has gotten way out of hand? An estimated $3.98 billion was spent during the most recent two-year federal election cycle. U.S. News and World Report put that into perspective:
• 10,000 times President Obama’s annual salary of $400,000, and over 100 times the annual salary of his entire White House staff combined.
• Nearly 80 percent more than the amount the United States has pledged and spent on reconstruction efforts after the January 2010 Haiti earthquake (includes $1.1 billion spent immediately post-quake, plus an additional $1.15 billion pledged).
• Slightly more than the $3.7 billion that the Department of Defense plans to spend in FY 2011 on the Ballistic Missile Defense System.
• Roughly equal to the amount that the Department of State has requested for assistance to Afghanistan in FY 2011.
On divided government, campaign cash and Lisa Madigan
Posted by – October 31, 2010
Steve Chapman of the Chicago Tribune writes that there are advantages to having Democrats and Republicans share power, which will likely be the outcome of Tuesday’s elections, rather than having one party in charge.
It seems neither party can help itself from going on benders. It needs the other party to lock up the liquor supply.
The New York Times editorializes about the impact of the staggering amount of campaign cash raised and spent during this election cycle, a large chunk of it by secretive groups.
Shrill political attacks have saturated the airwaves for months, but behind them is the real problem of this demoralizing election: the dark flow of dollars, often secretly provided by donors with very special interests.
The amount is staggering: Nearly $4 billion is likely to be spent once the final figures are in, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, far more than in the 2006 midterms, which cost $2.85 billion. It could even eclipse the $4.14 billion spent in the 2004 presidential campaign.
It is a foregone conclusion that Lisa Madigan will easily win a third term as Illinois attorney general on Tuesday. But Carol Marin of the Chicago Sun-Times wonders where Madigan’s eyes will be on Wednesday: Governor or mayor of Chicago?
Illinois earns the distinction of having the slimiest Senate race in the country.
Thankfully, 2010 campaign about to enter the homestretch
Posted by – October 28, 2010
As the final weekend of the 2010 campaign approaches:
The race between Gov. Pat Quinn and state Sen. Bill Brady is still considered too close to call, with most polls still within the margin of error. Paul Green, the director of the Institute for Politics at Roosevelt University in Chicago, provides these keys for victory for either Quinn or Brady.
Meanwhile, WGN-TV said it and other Chicago television stations have pulled Brady ads because of lack of payment by the GOP candidate.
The Political Fix calls the U.S House race in Illinois between incumbent Phil Hare and challenger Bobby Schilling a battle between labor money and the secretive American Future Fund. (Note: Schilling’s first name is misspelled and the endorsement by the Illinois Corn Growers Association didn’t happen.) A link to the Des Moines Register outlines the influence of the American Future Fund in neighboring Iowa.
The Springfield State Journal-Register believes voters should know who is behind the ads.
Thirteen mailed campaign pieces have arrived so far this week, nearly all blasting the opponent rather than touting the credentials of the favored candidate. In one, every accusation was factually incorrect. Unfortunately, too many voters don’t take the time to pay attention.
In case you’re interested in a refreshing non-attack ad, here is one from Carl Thompson, a Ralls County farmer running for the 6th District Missouri House seat. (You gotta love the weathered picture of the kids and the family dog. If you grew up in a rural area, you know what I mean.)
Some don’t see Illinois campaign finance proposal as true ‘reform’
Posted by – October 19, 2009
House Speaker Michael Madigan is proposing campaign finance reform that would limit donations to candidates to $5,000 each for the primary and general elections from individuals, $10,000 from corporations and unions and $50,000 from political action committees. The proposal was approved on a party-line vote of Democrats in a House Executive Committee last week.
But the Chicago Tribune reports there is “a special quirk built into the plan for senators, who serve two four-year terms every decade in contrast to the two-year terms of House members. Senators and challengers would effectively be allowed to double the limits by getting to raise money during election seasons in which their office is not on the ballot, critics said. They contend the provision only helps incumbents because opponents usually don’t surface far in advance.”
The Tribune goes on to report: “The proposal also would allow Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton, both Chicago Democrats, as well as Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno of Lemont and House GOP Leader Tom Cross of Oswego, to transfer unlimited sums of money from their special leadership campaign bank accounts to individual legislators or candidates in highly competitive races. Since Madigan also serves as state Democratic chairman, he also could devote unlimited party campaign resources to hard-fought contests.”
The Illinois Campaign for Political Reform reports that the four top leaders had $25 million to spend in each of the last three elections. In an editorial, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch says “allowing them to collect unlimited cash — and dole it out to cash-strapped legislators in return for future favors — would only strengthen their hold.”
Illinois currently has no campaign finance limits, but the Post-Dispatch opines that passing this “reform” measure would only make Madigan more powerful than he already is.
