Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Renters now protected from foreclosures
Next Post: Today’s quote
Posted in:
* An expenditure made by a ballot initiative committee “in concert with” a candidate’s committee is considered a contribution by state law, and candidate committees are barred from accepting contributions from ballot initiative committees, so that’s a real legal problem for Bruce Rauner’s new term limits PAC…
How does Bruce Rauner the candidate for governor manage not to coordinate with Bruce Rauner the SuperPac chair?
“If he can find a way to not coordinate with himself, that’s a neat trick,” says David Morrison, Deputy Director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform. Morrison said unlike campaign committees supporting individual candidates, there are no contribution limits on ballot initiative committees because they are typically isolated from candidates.
Except in this case, Bruce Rauner is a candidate in a heated, four-way gubernatorial election. Yet he also filed organization papers as chair of the Committee for Legislative Reform and Term Limits, a SuperPAC. The committee’s aim, according to Rauner’s campaign spokesman Mike Schrimpf, is to put a question on the November 2014 ballot that would place term limits on Illinois politicians. The details will be announced in upcoming weeks but in an interview on Thursday, Schrimpf described it as a good government initiative. […]
There is plenty of potential for problems with this set up, says Morrison, who added that he was still studying the issue. Rauner, who is in a four-way primary battle for the GOP gubernatorial nod, has had no problem raising money and tapping friends to donate to him. But there’s a limit on how much Rauner — as well as those friends — can pony up. Rauner has poured $249,000 of his own fortune into his race. That’s just shy of the $250,000 threshold that would take off the limit cap — for both Rauner and his opponents.
So working through a separate committee would potentially reap financial benefits for Rauner.
Morrison noted that Rauner could tap the SuperPAC funds for TV commercials in which he could appear (within a certain time period before the primary and general election). Rauner could not ask for a vote for governor if the SuperPAC were footing the bill. But that wouldn’t stop him from winning name recognition. The SuperPAC money could be used for polling data, voting data and other resources needed for a ballot initiative that a candidate’s campaign committee would also take interest.
Contributions aren’t capped to ballot initiative committees, which is quite convenient for Rauner, who is just about at the cap for candidate committees.
* I talked with ICPR’s Morrison this afternoon and he pointed to a similar thing that occurred in California during the Gray Davis recall push. The elections board out there ruled that the recall was a ballot initiative, so contributions to it weren’t capped. So, Arnold Schwarzenegger set up a ballot initiative committee, raised gobs of money and appeared in tons of TV ads announcing that he was voting “Yes” on the recall.
Discuss.
…Adding… The Sun-Times story identifies this Rauner fund as a “Super PAC.” It ain’t. Different sort of PAC, different rules.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 2:19 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Renters now protected from foreclosures
Next Post: Today’s quote
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
A rich guy finding an end-run to the rules… wow, I’ll bet this kind of creativity will lead to uplifting regular people in Illinois. Or making bank shareholders richer. One or the other.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 2:27 pm
I guess we’ll see Farmer Bruce doing loads of TV spots pushing term limits. What a scam.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 2:28 pm
Sounds like a litigious nightmare for the other candidates.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 2:32 pm
Just shows how stupid all the campaign contribution limits are. It leads to this kind of maneuvering, just as it has at the federal level, where Super Pacs can receive unlimited (and anonymous) contributions for bashing the actual candidates who in turn have to respond with dollars raised in increments of thousands! It’s like using a pea shooter to fire back at a Howitzer.
We should keep it simple and transparent. No limits but immediate disclosure. Let the voters decide if they don’t like the source of funds. Fewer rules, but the same for everybody.
Comment by Chicago taxpayer Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 2:44 pm
Weren’t Schrimpf’s comments as campaign spokesman about the ballot initiative/PAC the essence of “coordination” itself?
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 2:46 pm
Citizens United was the worst decision the court made since Dred Scott, (or at least Santa Clara County V. Southern Pacific…) and that’s not hyperbole. The resulting corporatist-driven PAC nightmare has done more, in shorter time, to warp our system of government, than any other factor in our short history. I believe generations to come will look at this time as the second-closest we came to falling apart as a country.
Comment by Newsclown Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 2:53 pm
Chicago taxpayer, you stated it perfectly. Campaign finance restrictions amount to incumbency protection and a barrier to new entrants.
Comment by Conservative Republican Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 2:53 pm
If you turn out to be un-likeable, being seen MORE, only makes you more… un-likeable.
I am going to sit back & watch this. How long can Rauner keep pretending to not be a hypocrite, versus how long can Rauner fool voters that he cares.
It will be a race for perception.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 3:04 pm
Rauner’s ethics speak for themselves, but, is the Davis fact pertinent? I don’t think Arnold was a candidate until after the re-call.
Comment by Publius Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 3:32 pm
Publius, the election was held at the same time.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 3:34 pm
Seriously, this may or may not be legal but at the end of the day “Term Limits” is one of the rich guys campaign messages. Uhm - it’s collusion period!
Furthermore, here’s a guy that says he’s not corrupt, above the frey, etc. For heavens sake, his money and actions like this show clearly that he is a corrupter!
The fact that none of his opponents will have the money to point out how he has manipulated the system and groups like “For the Good of Illinois, the Illinois Policy Institute” and Jack Roser’s organizations with pay outs is unfortunate and Rauner knows it.
This is truly pay to play and Rauner has the $$$$ to pay.
Question: can his money and the Griffin’s money pay the media to look the other way?
Answer: I’m afraid so…Griffin is already dipping into the Daily Herald - who’s next?
Comment by Only the rich can afford to pay to play Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 3:57 pm
Why wouldn’t anyone just accept Rauner’s word that he isn’t coordinating with himself between the referendum drive and his gubernatorial campaign? I’m sure there’s a lockbox around the super PAC that he wouldn’t breach.
Comment by reformer Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 4:46 pm
Taken on its own - it is problematical, but when viewed in conjunction with his “pay to play” contributions to Ed Rendell; his donation of $200,000 to the PAC that attacked Schock for - get this - not being Republican enough!!; his infamous deal with SBC: Daley going to the White House from SBC - Rahm going from the White House to becoma an investment banker @ Rauner’s suggestion and presto Rahm makes $16 million on one deal with Rauner’s help; Rauner’s support for Richie Daley, Rahm, Jan Schakowsky et al Democrats; and now this!! If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck ….. This isn’t about term limits, it’s about the Benjamins!! and circumventing the campaign finance laws. How arrogant to think we are all so gullible!!
Comment by Voice of Reason Friday, Aug 23, 13 @ 4:55 pm