* From the governor’s most recent quarterly campaign report, filed under “Other receipts”…

From the campaign’s January, 2015 D-2…

* The Tribune explains what’s going on…

In the critical days leading up to Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner’s election last fall, his campaign handed out thousands of $25, $50 and $75 gift cards to people helping get the vote out for him. […]

Asked about the gift cards by the Chicago Tribune, the Rauner campaign said in an email that it bought 5,145 of them in denominations of $25, $50 and $75. A source close to Rauner’s 2014 bid said the campaign office was “awash” in the debit cards, some of which were then passed along to township and county GOP operations. The cards were distributed to people who worked on phone banks as well as those who walked streets to canvass for votes, the campaign said. […]

But the Rauner campaign has not disclosed who got the prepaid gift cards, including anyone who may have received multiple cards worth $150 or more — the threshold in state campaign finance law for reporting compensation to workers. […]

“If they’re giving them a debit card with value on it, that’s payment to these people. You can’t get around it,” said Noble, now senior counsel at the Washington-based Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan, nonprofit group involved in campaign finance legal issues. […]

“The campaign reported the gift cards correctly,” Sarah Clamp, a spokeswoman for Rauner’s campaign, said in an email statement. “The campaign is only responsible for reporting when the campaign makes an expenditure and did this by reporting the purchase of gift cards.”

The Rauner folks say this wasn’t compensation, just “property.”

I don’t hugely care about the reporting issue.

* What does interest me is that they used those cards in their GOTV efforts. According to the story, they were handing them out willy nilly, including to township parties. And they had so many that they returned 20 percent of them for refunds.

Your thoughts?

       

71 Comments - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:26 pm: ===According to the story, they were handing them out willy nilly…=== I can’t speak for “nilly”, but I didn’t get one. To the post. “Walking around money on plastic” I read it, now I’m done with it. - Ducky LaMoore - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:26 pm: Could be nothing, could be a disaster. It really all depends on who, if anyone, involved in the campaign wants to sink the ship. - Chicago Cynic - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:27 pm: Best election money could buy. Not sure the difference between this and walking around money. Just tried to make it easier for them to administer I suspect. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:28 pm: Wow. Now that’s walking around money! I wonder how much went to state employees. This gives new meaning to GOP concerns about potential vote buying fraud. - John A Logan - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:29 pm: It certainly is a pattern with this guy. Remember the Quinn ad? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZtW1S2nEAE4 - Norseman - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:30 pm: Rauner said he’s against pay to play, but nobody said anything about debit card to play. Great example of limitless money leading to questionable practices. Yep, shaking up Springfield just like Blago. - 100 Miles West - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:30 pm: Watch $17-, Carhartt Jacket $109, walkin’ around money on plastic, priceless. - Arsenal - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:30 pm: I don’t see how it’s any different than giving out cash for GOTV, and even though that seems unseemly, there’s a perfectly legit reason to do it. - John A Logan - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:30 pm: At least the campaign volunteers got at least $25 bucks instead of the $20 for the homebanc folks. Maybe that was to adjust for inflation…. - the Other Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:35 pm: I think the disclosure requirement is actually quite important. OK, maybe not public disclosure, but keeping records of who got the cards serves an important purpose. Illinois law prohibits giving something of value for a vote. A campaign really should — maybe is even required to — keep records of these sorts of gifts to make certain that they were not given to voters (illegal) rather than to people working on GOTV. - The Captain - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:36 pm: The vendor who sold them is merely a conduit under the disclosure law, you can’t do this. Imagine a scenario where you had a $10 million campaign budget and you paid a payment service a lump sum of $10 million and on your D-2 you had a single expenditure listed for $10 million and the payment service then went about paying your individual bills? The disclosure rules prevent campaigns from doing this. The same is true with your payroll, you can’t just send a lump sum to ADP you actually have to report the individual payroll elements, something the Rauner campaign already got caught doing before. The same rules apply to credit card payments, you can’t just report a lump sum payment to Visa, you actually have to itemize the credit card transactions. Strangely, the same conduit rules apply to media buys, you are supposed to list individual payments to the stations but many campaigns only list the lump sum payment to the TV consultant, sometimes they get away with it and sometimes either because of a complaint filed or oversight by the board the campaign is forced to file an amended return with the itemized detail. This action of the Rauner campaign to purchase cash equivalent gift cards and then to hand that compensation out in the form of a gift card falls under the same rules and is subject to the same disclosure requirements. If any of the recipients of the gift cards received in aggregate of $150 then those expenditures should have been disclosed in the itemized disclosure section. Also they are required to keep the name and address of recipients of funds of, I believe, anyone receiving $20 or more, even if they don’t have to be itemized on the disclosures. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:37 pm: In my experience they were largely being given to kids in college towns to get them to walk and work phone banks. Not a huge deal, imho - train111 - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:37 pm: Nothing that a new voter ID law wont take care of–oh wait! - Gooner - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:38 pm: “Walking around money” is the cash campaigns need day of. Covering a precinct your poll watcher needs coffee? Cab back HQ with numbers or just to warm up a while? Pizza for the judges? That’s walking around money. However unless you are paying people to make calls, I don’t get why people working the phones would each need a card. This seems to go beyond the ordinary. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:38 pm: ===“The campaign is only responsible for reporting when the campaign makes an expenditure and did this by reporting the purchase of gift cards.”=== First, using prepaid debit cards must be how it’s done in the private sector. In my day, we just used cash. And I agree it’s essentially the same thing. Except for the disclosure, which really is the issue here. If my report shows I withdrew $250,000 in cash, but nothing else, I’d have a problem. That’s all Rauner’s disclosure shows, the “purchase” of cash. How it spent that cash is a legitimate question and one I think the Board of Elections is entitled to ask. This may be uncharted legal territory, but my guess is it will end up as a problem for the Rauner campaign. - tikkunolam - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:40 pm: I’ve used gift cards for GOTV in the past and found them useful for two reasons. First is laid out in this story; campaigns can avoid reporting the names of paid canvassers. This can be obscuring for nefarious reasons, but I’ve also used it to protect workers from public attention that could seriously hurt their future job prospects. This is particularly true of workers with felony convictions who are trying to move on with their lives and won’t be treated with empathy by the press or opposing campaigns. Remember that Rauner actually used a low-level Quinn field worker’s felony conviction during the campaign. Additionally, many paid canvassers come to campaigns with very low incomes and don’t have bank accounts, so paying them by check means they have to go to a currency exchange and lose part of that check. Paying in cash is difficult to track and carrying lots of cash can be dangerous. Gift cards solve that puzzle. - Juice - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:41 pm: Heh, this guy and his gift cards…again. - DPGumby - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:42 pm: we knew he bought the election, just not in such small denominations. - Anon - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:49 pm: Rich and others may say it’s not a big deal, but it is the law. The law is clear. Public disclosure of recipients of all payments over $150 in the aggregate. I hope he is held accountable for this. - Linus - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:49 pm: I’m sure the Rauner folks wouldn’t have criticized Quinn and the Dems for doing likewise and reporting it likewise — right? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:51 pm: Ok, some “Math”… $313,000 at $50 a clip equals 6,200+ cards 6,200 cards, returns, “18%” to be “fair” leaves 5,100+ out there at the low rate of $50. This is a statewide race, not a Chicago Aldermanic race, and it was for phone banks too, so factor in that. So… I read it, I’m done with it. - LooseyBrucy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:54 pm: Sounds like candidate Rauner wanted to spend money in a way that was untraceable. A modern day slush fund of $128,625 - $385,875. Good luck finding out who got what or what he bought with all of that money. - walker - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:58 pm: This distribution of debit cards is wider and of longer duration, than any analogous cash distributions I have seen the other party do. Like the Rauner campaign funding for GA members, similar to Madigan only taken further. Sure haven’t heard BGA complain about anything for a long while. - The Captain - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 1:59 pm: Also, while the Rauner campaign is pretty clearly in the wrong here the remedy/penalty is not all that severe. If the state board does anything, even if/after a formal complaint is filed, if the Rauner campaign most likely will be asked to file an amended report(s) for the affected periods, that usually is enough to put the issue to bed. They would not have to disclose every recipient of the gift cards, just the ones who received enough to trigger the itemized expenditures disclosure, the rest could be added as a lump sum in the unitemized section. The article does open the door to a weird tangent though. If they were handing them out to local Republican organizations (county/township/ward orgs) in lumps great enough to trigger itemized disclosures and those recipients are political committees registered in the State of Illinois with filing obligations to the ILSBE they could report those lump sums to the local party committees (i.e. $5,000 on 10/15 to XXX Township Republican Committee) and then those local party committees would have to show those contributions in their receipts section and those local party committees would have to itemize as expenditures the list of people that they handed them out to if they met the itemized expenditure disclosure threshold. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:04 pm: I got a few. You spend all day — ALL day — volunteering to walk precincts and stay in a hotel. I got 1 $50 card for each day, and it was explained that it would cover my breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Perfectly appropriate and much cleaner than the bogus “walking around” money Dems have been doling out for decades. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:06 pm: ===Perfectly appropriate and much cleaner than the bogus “walking around” money Dems have been doling out for decades.=== Can ya stop? Geez Louise, because it’s plastic and not paper doesn’t make it “holy” - Archiesmom - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:11 pm: And these anonymous gift cards represent income to the recipient, as well. Of course, the threshold for reporting to the IRS is $600 per person, so walking-around money has always been cash, now gift cards, which has the benefit of no paper trail. Most people get no more than $25-100, so no big deal anyway, but just sayin’. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:11 pm: And it wasn’t used to pay me to vote or buy me a bottle in a brown paper bag on election day. - @MisterJayEm - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:11 pm: What’s the phrase for this sort of thing? Money something… Something laundering… Something something… – MrJM - Austin Blvd - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:19 pm: Still waiting to hear when Rauner is going to pony up for the Uline contribution. - 1.5. x clever - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:19 pm: Cash is generally untraceable. Gift cards, not so much. There will be an electronic trail. Hopefully nobody used 3 or 4 cards for the same transaction. - Elo Kiddies - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:21 pm: If they gave anything of value to another PAC, that’s a transfer and should be reported, either itemized or non-itemized. Even under their “property” claim, it’d be in-kind. Did they report it that way? - Dave Victor - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:23 pm: It worked. - Frank Underwood - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:24 pm: In the immortal words of the Talking Heads- “same as it ever was - Same as it ever was!” - A guy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:27 pm: Lunch money and gas money for mostly college kids canvassing. Some volunteers even gave theirs to the kid they were walking with if they didn’t need it. Transportation (train, bus, uber, gas) can be the biggest obstacle to kids getting to a neighborhood they were working. It’s not holy or unholy. Gas and fast food. - Justin Observer - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:28 pm: Anonymous: “I got a few. You spend all day — ALL day — volunteering to walk precincts and stay in a hotel. I got 1 $50 card for each day, and it was explained that it would cover my breakfast, lunch, and dinner.” I am not saying you were not deserving, anonymous. Despite your poor choice in candidates, if you got a “few” at a mere $50 per day, I believe you are worth every penny. The question I do have: the typical definition of the word “few” is three or more. So, you got three? Four? of the $50 dollar ones? If we check da’ Gov’s disclosures, will we actually see you listed (under “Anonymous,” I am sure /snark) as the recipient of more than $150? Off to look. I shall search by: Recipient: Anonymous. Source: Citizens for Empty Carrhart for Gov’nor Amount: $150 (a few pieces of plastic). - Sigh... - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:31 pm: Wait, I thought Rich was telling everyone the campaign is over. - Pete - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:42 pm: As an Illinois resident would you rather have the gift cards handed out or a state job? Politics ain’t free. Better a fixed cost than a fixed benefit. IMHO - Chairman McBroom - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:46 pm: “Pieces of plastic” might sound pretty innovative, but it’s not as innovative as Rep. Kate Cloonen’s “$2 and a cigarette” in exchange for ‘I voted’ stickers. Not sure what the description on those line-items would be… Is that GOTV labor or sticker purchases? You decide. - Jordan - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 2:59 pm: Is that even legal? - Anon221 - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:07 pm: One can read it and “fuggit about it”, but I would hope the question would still be pondered, how steep should the slippery slope be? - Anonin' - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:08 pm: Just like street money, but much more germ free than those dirty dollars handed out by the ward boses, political class , blah blah - Precinct Captain - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:18 pm: Remember when Rauner tried to hide his staff by only reporting payments to his payroll company? This is from the same veil of Rauner secrecy as that and hiding his gubernatorial schedule. What’s he hiding? - Guzzlepot - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:27 pm: @Anonymous at 2:04 If they gave you a gift card plus covered a hotel room and meals you are probably over the $150 threshold. I am sure it is innocent, but the rest of us have to sweat and worry over our D2’s in order to make sure they are accurate and correct, why shouldn’t Rauner have to as we’ll? - burbanite - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:29 pm: Wow, what an opportunity for violating the disclosure laws, among other potential legal violations. - Guzzlepot - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:37 pm: I am amazed anyone could think this was an okay thing to do. Political campaign + a decent pile of cash + no or few controls to make sure it was spent properly = headaches down the line. It is so obvious that this could go wrong that I am really surprised they did it. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:42 pm: It’s not impossible to find out where these were redeemed. Hint: You’re lovin’ it. Hint #2 Where most of the corn crop goes every summer. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:45 pm: ==== Guzzlepot - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:27 pm: @Anonymous at 2:04 If they gave you a gift card plus covered a hotel room..=== And if 4 folks stayed in that hotel room where they always leave the light on for ya’? - Guzzlepot - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:50 pm: @A Guy Anonymous at 2:04 said he got a few $50 gift cards. I take that to mean more than 2. If he got that plus meals then he is over the $150 threshold and The expenditures to him should have been itemized. - Quid pro Quo - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 3:56 pm: I’ll be sure to get mine before working on election day 2018. Thanks for the *tip* - Wordslinger - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:04 pm: – much cleaner than the bogus “walking around money” Dems used for decades.– And Republicans. And what’s the difference? You make no sense. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:15 pm: Guzz, you want to itemize GOTV statewide…be my guest. $50 gets you enough gas to get to the Quad Cities from the Chicago area. $50 more will get you back. Another $50 will ensure you eat badly and not meet the RDA of vitamins and iron. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:19 pm: - A Guy -, You are a disaster here. Let it go. The hypocrisy of “walking around money” versus plastic gift cards are a wash. That’s a “win”. Stop. - Guzzlepot - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:23 pm: It ain’t what I want, it is what the law requires. And it has been this way for a long time. - Guzzlepot - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:26 pm: I don’t see the wisdom in training your ‘volunteers’ to expect money or gift cards for doing election day canvassing. Rauner won’t be around forever, if the next guy can’t keep up with Rauner’s spending there might be trouble. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:30 pm: === Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:19 pm: - A Guy -, You are a disaster here. Let it go. The hypocrisy of “walking around money” versus plastic gift cards are a wash. That’s a “win”. Stop.==== We agree Willy. Guzzy was looking for a response. Courteously gave him one. Politely offered a second. Now, it’s hopeless. lol. - The Captain - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:31 pm: - A guy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:15 pm: Guzz, you want to itemize GOTV statewide…be my guest. $50 gets you enough gas to get to the Quad Cities from the Chicago area. $50 more will get you back. Another $50 will ensure you eat badly and not meet the RDA of vitamins and iron. 1. You have to disclose these transactions, this is what the campaign disclosure law and applicable rules say you have to do, even for statewides. There is no exemption for statewides that absolves them of this record keeping and reporting responsibility. 2. The scenario you just described would qualify for an itemized expenditure on a quarterly D-2 based on the aggregate total. Not only should a record be kept of each of those $50 transactions but now all three need to appear in the itemized section of the expenditures on the quarterly D-2 report. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:33 pm: Ya shoulda took a pass here - A Guy -, now it sound like you’re making excuses. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:38 pm: Nah Willy. Street money has been around from the time of Caesar. No excuses necessary. It’s darn near the most transparent and practical money in the whole crazy system. Just ask the judges! (not the poll judges, the dudes who dress like they’re from Amana) lol - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:40 pm: - A Guy -, Stop. - A guy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:53 pm: -OW-, OK. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 4:59 pm: lol. - Illinoisvoter - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 5:33 pm: Isn’t this why we ask the kids please not to feed the dog from the table? There will be a time after Rauner even if he doesn’t understand that fact. - RNUG - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 10:10 pm: == What’s he hiding? == Everything he can … - RNUG - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 10:12 pm: And I thought it was the R’s who paid in cash and the D’s in promises. Guess plastic now trumps cash … has anybody told Donald? - Yellow Dog Democrat - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 10:14 pm: If Todd Stroger had handed out $200,000 in cash as part of his GOTV effort, without disclosing whom the cash went to, the same folks defending Rauner would be calling for a federal investigation. - Property of IDOC - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 10:30 pm: An unreported $150.00 for “walkin’ ’round money” or $400K for the GOPGA before a vote, during session… He doesn’t have to worry about following the law or abiding by any code of ethics - until we require him to do so. He certainly won’t do it on his own. Hopefully there will be a Federal investigation @some point in the near future. It’d be perfect if he and Rod could be cellmates; play some spades, share their commissary, watch reruns of the Golden Girls, talk about who’s gonna have a “¥*^%#!! problem” when they get out. - RNUG - Friday, Jul 24, 15 @ 12:16 am: If the Rauner campaign doesn’t get this straightened out, it could be the canary in the mineshaft. Or maybe the landfill permit that wasn’t issued? - Wordslinger - Friday, Jul 24, 15 @ 12:52 am: – Or maybe the landfill permit that wasn’t issued?– Woof. What a long, strange trip that started. Some in-law dust ups over the holidays can sting. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Jul 24, 15 @ 1:06 am: ===If the Rauner campaign doesn’t get this straightened out, it could be the canary in the mineshaft. Or maybe the landfill permit that wasn’t issued?=== Ald. Mell really sank the whole operation… To Rauner and the cards, To be clear, the purpose, of the walking around money, I get it, and stand by my comments. It’s purpose, if given to individuals, (not $10K to ONE person, for example) I understand. It may come down to a complaint filed and ruled on… Until then, it’s plastic walking around money, at $50, $100, $150 a clip. - Lynn S, - Friday, Jul 24, 15 @ 1:08 am: RNUG - Thursday, Jul 23, 15 @ 10:12 pm: And I thought it was the R’s who paid in cash and the D’s in promises. Guess plastic now trumps cash … has anybody told Donald? RNUG–which Donald do you mean? Are we talking Trump? (I thought Tomczak had retired from politics.) And @ wordslinger @ 12:52 a.m. Yet another reason to try to avoid the family and the in-laws? /snark Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.