Illinois Republicans have long complained that House Speaker Michael Madigan’s campaign organization doesn’t just beat you; it destroys you. Madigan doesn’t set out to merely win; he wants to make sure he doesn’t ever have to deal with you again.
Madigan’s own Democratic primary race was a good example. He posted yard signs all over his district urging his constituents to vote against “convicted felon Jason Gonzales,” and his cable-TV and direct-mail ads ceaselessly pounded home that very same message. His captains also reportedly had volunteers holding those signs at the entrance to voting locations.
Gonzales was, indeed, a convicted felon. But that happened two decades ago, and he was pardoned by former Democratic Governor Pat Quinn. To hear the Madigan campaign tell it, however, you’d think the guy just walked out of prison.
Or take a look at what Madigan did to Katelyn Hotle. The House speaker’s operation dropped at least nine negative mailers on the little-known, lightly funded candidate in the Quad Cities-area Democratic primary to replace retiring state Representative Pat Verschoore (D-Milan). The gist of the attacks was that Hotle, a Rock Island city-council member, profited personally from her shoddy government service, but none of it was true.
They also smeared Hotle in the media for being a “plant” of Governor Bruce Rauner. Why? The only real explanation is that she was the lone female in a four-way primary, so she could do well on demographics alone and they had to take her out. For good.
The Madigan operation reached way back into the past of Representative Ken Dunkin (D-Chicago) to find an arrest, some formal allegations of domestic abuse, and troubles paying his child support and then used that against him in his Democratic primary campaign. Dunkin started the fight by so closely allying himself with our Republican governor and thumbing his nose at his fellow Democrats, but he seems to have personally rehabilitated himself. Madigan and the people around him didn’t care. It’s a matter of public record, and Dunkin got whacked with it.
But as we’ve also discovered this year, Rauner’s legislative-campaign operation is eerily similar to Madigan’s. And while that’s making some Republicans privately uncomfortable, Madigan’s way has proven to work far more often than not over the years.
A good case in point is conservative activist Dan Proft’s TV ads against Jim Acklin in the three-way 102nd House District GOP primary.
Proft’s Liberty Principles PAC ran a blistering TV ad that claimed Acklin, as a school superintendent, “blamed the victim” and “did nothing” about a sexual predator in his school system who also happened to be a “family friend.” The ad was based on a failed civil lawsuit – a very thin reed indeed – but it was brutal.
Rauner and his pals have pumped seven-figure contributions into Proft’s PAC over the past few months. They’ve clearly been involved in several races through Proft.
Rauner and his people do not want Acklin nominated because he is backed by former Republican Governor Jim Edgar, a frequent Rauner critic. So they’re supporting former state Representative Brad Halbrook (R-Shelbyville), despite the fact that they don’t really love the guy. Keeping Edgar’s fingers out of the House has been their priority.
So they launched a second killer TV ad to build on their theme. The new spot used Acklin’s own videotaped comments at a candidates’ forum where he claimed to have acted “quickly and decisively” to remove the predator teacher from his school.
But the second Proft ad claimed: “In his own words, it took him four years to act. Four years.” A news clip on the screen indicates that Acklin said “he was aware of an incident involving [the predator] in 2008.” That “incident” was an allegation that the teacher was texting a student, but the student denied at the time that anything inappropriate was going on. The teacher was warned, and that was the end of it until the predator’s arrest four years later. The ad concludes: “Acklin touts his judgment. On March 15, make your own.”
Acklin raised a decent amount of money compared to similar races in prior years, but times have changed. Both sides in Dunkin’s race (including Rauner’s allies) dumped well over $5 million into the contest. A Senate Republican primary race in the Springfield area where the governor opposed the incumbent saw spending top $3.5 million.
Acklin wasn’t able to air a response ad until a full week after the initial Proft ad aired, and after he’d already been buried with Rauner’s money.
- Norseman - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 8:24 am:
What they do to attain power. What they spend to attain power. What they say to attain power. Shame on them.
That this works, shame on us.
- cdog - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 8:26 am:
“Buried with money” seems to be the theme.
So if these deep-pocket-oligarch-billionaires get their way with term limits and remapping, who can stand a chance?
(I have always been pro term-limits. I have voted to turn-the -pond-over more times than not. But after this tsunami of uncoordinated cash (cough, cough), I think incumbents with name recognition are the only folks that stand a chance of being policy-makers independent from a Rauner-type. )
- lake county democrat - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 8:27 am:
–And while that’s making some Republicans privately uncomfortable, Madigan’s way has proven to work far more often than not over the years.–
It’s worked over the years because good Democrats haven’t stepped up. In the few years I’ve posted here, the most jarring thing is how Machiavellian the Democrats are on this board and the contempt-to-patronizing attitude towards political reform. Often it seems that all that matters to them is union money and power (unless you believe they truly think there is something holy about keeping budget negotiations pure from any non-budgetary item) and they “post accordingly.” I deigned them Madigan Genfulectors because whenever something bad about the speaker was posted, they’d say something that was a distraction, a Machiavelian defense, or a joke that indicated more admiration than criticism.
And now there’s Rauner doing the same. No wonder term limits are so overwhelmingly favored in this state (tellingly, most commenters here dislike them). It might not be the answer, but in a state so beaten down over the years (not to mention gerrymandered to keep the voters’ will from being reflected in legislation as much as possible), it’s not surprising.
- wordslinger - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 8:30 am:
Zero-sum contests. It’s been this way since Adams vs. Jefferson.
- Aldyth - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 8:43 am:
They haven’t gone as far as Game of Thrones, but politics and campaigning seems to have gone especially vicious this season.
- Anon - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 8:59 am:
In a contested primary — or a really close general — the only way to really work around being a convicted felon is to make it a part of your narrative that you use to talk to voters. If you tie being a reformed felon to wanting to serve your community and to help set other young men on the right track in life, you might be able to survive.
I know Gonzales didn’t exactly hide his past, but we’ll see what impact Madigan’s antics have had in a couple of days.
- Dilemma - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 10:03 am:
@LCD - There are good democrats who have stepped up, and what you find is that Madigan, despite his faults, supports the voters who got those democrats elected in the first place. How do you oppose a powerful figure who supports the groups you support? Working middle class families? Union members? Those who need state aid? Basically any group that risks losing funding under the turn around agenda. On the other hand, where are the people on the other side who are stepping up for their constituents? Who are their constituents? Who is the powerful figure they don’t want to oppose?
It is easy to demonize people you clearly don’t like, but it is much more complicated than Madigan (or Rauner) is bad.
- Annonin' - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 11:11 am:
“I know Gonzales didn’t exactly hide his past….”
No. He claimed to be a “troubled teen” Even though the arrests and guilty verdicts ran past the teen years. He also has not explained the real estate foreclosures and tax liens AFTER the transformation or how he is payin’ the rent. Guessin’ he is on a Rauner/Hull payroll.
All of this should tell the reformers that the
1%ers have co-opted the term limit/remap effort in IL.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 12:09 pm:
Great work, Rich, nicely done.
To the Post,
===But as we’ve also discovered this year, Rauner’s legislative-campaign operation is eerily similar to Madigan’s. And while that’s making some Republicans privately uncomfortable, Madigan’s way has proven to work far more often than not over the years.===
The only “two” things I hacs a beef with in Rauner going about this is…
1) An alleged GOP governor involved in a Democratic primary for that alleged GOP governor’s personal agenda.
2) Caucus discipline based on a single vote, when the whole package of that incumbent may have been enough of a reason for a split, but that’s not the framing.
Solution?
Rauner just blatantly admits he’s kidnaped the GOP and will work both Republicans and Democrats head on… which ironically I’d have 1,000% more respect for, and makes a clear break and crumbling of the GOP real…
Then Rauner can take on Madigan on his own, for Rauner’s own hair-brained schemes of destroying Illinois, and allow free thinking Republicans not to be forced to destroy the state by a $20 million hammer over theur head.
That will never happen, but… lol.
Rauner paid for a brand, and Rauner plans to destroy the state and party under that purchase.
Rich is Spot On in his writings.
Rauner’s end game is just far different than many ever would’ve agreed should be an end game.
- lake county democrat - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 12:31 pm:
@Dilemma Again, ends justify the means, even if it means defaming good people, etc. And Madigan’s tactics long predate Rauner. And no, he doesn’t just support “good democrats” - he’s actually used these tactics to support bad democrats. He’d be supporting Dunkin had Dunkin gone along on the mandatory arbitration bill.
How to oppose him? They could have opposed him by supporting Pat Quinn’s blue ribbon reform panel’s suggestions. THey could break with him far more often and solicit independent funding (see Scott Drury). Might it cost some seats? Maybe, but the same old same old also helped elect Rauner.
- Mama - Monday, Mar 14, 16 @ 5:29 pm:
I wished someone was running against both legislators in my district so I could kick the current ones out - - they vote with the gov instead of their people, and it needs to stop! We vote for them to represent us not the governor!