[Bumped up for visibility.]
* So, this just happened…
Munger just got $5 million, so why is she giving $3 million away? And why would they blow the contribution caps in Leader Durkin’s race when he doesn’t even have an opponent?
* Scott Kennedy’s explanation could apply to both developments, although I’m told by one top Munger person that it doesn’t apply to her. We’ll see.
Kennedy’s theory is that the Republicans could be using Munger’s and Durkin’s no longer contribution capped committees as entryways to move huge amounts of fresh, non-Rauner cash into legislative races. Campaign committees can contribute unlimited amounts to state parties, and state parties can contribute unlimited amounts to candidates in general elections, so I suppose it’s possible that Rauner doesn’t want his personal campaign committee’s name on every single dollar going into the system…
Another very likely possibility is that [Munger’s] campaign committee is being used as an entryway to get unlimited contributions into the system where that money can then move freely around to be spent on other races. I discussed the need for entryways in my previous post. The House Dems have had a number of large donors, particularly in labor and legal, who are willing to contribute more than the maximum amount so they’ve had to break up those contributions into the amounts permitted by contribution limits and then contribute those amounts to as many Democratic affiliated committees as necessary to get all the money in the system. In a general election candidate committees can make unlimited transfers to party committees and party committees can make unlimited transfers to candidate committees so once that money is in the system the candidate committees with surplus funds can either transfer those funds to their fellow candidates up to the limited amount or they can make unlimited transfers to their party committee where the funds can then be redistributed in unlimited amounts to other candidates in need.
However in this case the contribution limits are off for the Comptroller’s race because of the $260,000 loan Munger received from her husband. Munger (and Mendoza) can accept contributions in unlimited amounts and if they so choose they can then make unlimited transfers to the party committee who can then spend or transfer unlimited amounts on other candidates, such as targeted general assembly races.
Prior to last week the Governor had been almost single-handedly funding the Republican legislative effort. The only other significant pool of money was in the Independent Expenditure committee Liberty Principles PAC which had raised $5 million since June, $2.5 million from Governor Rauner personally, $1.5 million from Richard Uihlein and $1 million from Ken Griffin. However the funds in the IE committee are somewhat walled off, independent expenditure committees are not allowed to transfer funds to candidate or party committees so if these donors wanted to use their money to help legislative candidates they could only do so by making expenditures independently. But now that the contribution limits have been lifted in the Comptroller’s race they can make direct unlimited contributions to Munger who can then transfer that money to the party as needed and it can be put to use elsewhere.
Just because Munger transferred $3 million to the State Party today doesn’t mean she won’t get additional financial support later to supplement her campaign budget, she may still very well spend $5.5 million on her fall effort if additional contributions are received. Also, it’s unlikely that this is our last unexpected development before the election. Stay tuned.
*** UPDATE *** Munger is in Quincy today…
The Republican comptroller also defended recent moves within her campaign finance fund, which have brought allegations from challenger Mendoza that she is gaming the system.
Late last month, Munger got a $260,000 loan from her attorney husband, which lifted contribution limits in the race. That cleared the way for $5 million in donations from hedge fund billionaire Ken Griffin and frequent conservative GOP donor Richard Uihlein, key Rauner allies. Since then, Munger’s campaign transferred $3 million to the Illinois Republican Party, which can now distribute that money to various candidates as the GOP tries to cut into the Democratic supermajorities held by House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton.
Mendoza called it “blatant money laundering” in a Twitter post. Munger said she was just taking advantage of campaign financial rules Democrats put in place in 2009 that Mendoza voted for while in the House.
“We are really just taking advantage of the law that she passed,” Munger said. “Everything I’ve done is completely transparent, and it’s certainly legal.”
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 6:57 pm:
… then in the end, it’s a PO Box in the Cayman Islands… Donating to Munger, passing it through to Durkin, then distributing this next $10-20 million as “clean”…
… Not from Rauner… or Griffin… or Uihlein…
Say, wasn’t it Griffin and Uihlein that broke the caps on Munger?
… so Rauner, and Griffin, and Uihlein used Munger, the seated check writer for Illinois, as the “designated check writer” to Durkin, to wash the money from Rauner, Griffin, and Uihlein, and that pass through then is washed to… anyone.
Lots of washing… to fool… the Unwashed?
Right? Exactly Right? Hmm.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 7:00 pm:
I know it was Munger’s own loan, I was being mello-dramatic, lol
Apologies. That was wrong.
- G'Kar - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 7:08 pm:
I realize it is how the system works, but I am soooo sick of all of this money flowing into political campaigns.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 7:39 pm:
Good thing Munger is not beholden to the governor, or this might look a little hinky.
I mean, this is her call, right, all this money moving around? She’s not being directed to do it by the governor’s political operation? She’s doing it independently?
I don’t think it will be a good thing for her to have to explain and rationalize this sort of money-laundering. Detracts from whatever other message she might have.
Couldn’t they just have washed through Durkin and other incumbents without opponents? They can’t get stung.
- northsider (the original) - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 7:53 pm:
Wow, from wingman to laundress. Not sure if that’s a promotion.
- Johnny Pavarotti - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 7:54 pm:
Money- it’s a hit. Don’t give me that do-goody-good (stuff)….
- Whatever - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 7:59 pm:
Not an area in which I know anything, so this may be a stupid question, but doesn’t this mean that you can bust the caps for one candidate and then funnel the money through a party committee to another candidate without busting the caps on that other candidate’s race? If so, the caps will be worthless in the future when everyone starts funneling their contributions through unopposed candidates.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 8:00 pm:
Just remember: This is the system the “reformers” gave us.
- Tron - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 8:08 pm:
I’m just glad we defeated the British and gained our independence so that us regular folk could have representation.
- Just Me - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 8:09 pm:
Isn’t there a savings on postage if mail is run through a state party? Could that have anything to do with anything?
(I’m just an amateur on these matters, so feel free to make fun of me if I’m way off.)
- walker - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 8:19 pm:
Like tracking Trump’s income.
- Gus - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 8:24 pm:
Typically a candidate has the state party send a mail piece as IL GOP gets a better postage rate than campaigns.
- Angry Chicagoan - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 8:27 pm:
At what point does this cross the line from being money laundering by the spirit of the law, to money laundering by the letter of the law?
- The Captain - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 8:45 pm:
Imagine Mike Madigan got someone to blow the caps for him while he was unopposed. Now imagine reading the Tribune the next day.
- Hill Willy - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 9:26 pm:
What’s good for the goose…
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 10:20 pm:
So Munger came up with all these laundering schemes on her own? Or is she being directed by the governor’s political operatives?
Not s good idea, if it was her own choice. She’ll get a lot of distracting questions on the machinations.
If she’s just doing what she’s told — well, that’s not great, either, when you’re trying to portray yourself as beholden to no one.
Why use her to wash money? There are other’s like Durkin running without an opponent. Let them take the heat.
- Thoughts Matter - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 10:29 pm:
My head hurts trying to follow it all. I have long since past the points of outrage and disgust at the way mney is flowing for this, while non-profits close their doors and our universities crumble. Not voting for a single solitary GOP politician.
- HRC2016 - Wednesday, Oct 5, 16 @ 11:32 pm:
While legal inder Illinois state election lsws, very disturbing and disgusting. Petfect case to overturn Citizens United.
- Red tower - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 12:03 am:
So Rauner and his people are sticking to the letter of the law but not the spirit. How surprising /sarcasm
- Rabid - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 1:15 am:
I hope Mr Munger got paid back for his effort
- Aldyth - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 6:49 am:
Gosh, this strategy will certainly fool us all.
- Henry Francis - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 7:19 am:
So Munger the candidate, at the direction of the Guv, will play games with large amounts of money to circumvent the spirit of the law to make sure people the Guv wants to get paid, get paid? And she wants to be our Comptroller?
- siriusly - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 8:00 am:
There are two parts of “transparency” which make the laws effective and useful:
1) Required disclosure of contributions and transfers
2) Candidates answering and explaining receipts and expenditures
Disclosure and “sunshine” is meaningless if candidates don’t have to talk about their funding maneuvers and explain what this is about. Leader Durkin should be prepared to answer questions. The State’s check writer should have a response.
There is nothing wrong with these transfers, but all (D and R) candidates involved in the transfer game should explain their meaning and why they are relevant to their campaigns.
- Whatever - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 8:31 am:
HRC 2016 == Perfect case to overturn Citizens United.==
Other than the facts that Citizens United said that states cannot bar corporations donations, the $5 million contributions to Munger came from two individuals, and this whole thing appears to be legal under the letter of Illinois law, you’re probably right.
- Publius - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 8:33 am:
The movie “The Campaign” was for entertainment not an instructional film on how to conduct political campaigns, Right?
- Cubs in '16 - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 8:45 am:
Legislators and other elected and appointed officials beholden to everyone except ‘we the people’. It’s becoming harder not to be cynical.
- Try-4-Truth - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 8:48 am:
I’d love for the “Go-Go’s” to weigh in on this.
I’ll hang up and wait for the answer.
- facts are stubbor things - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 8:49 am:
The best government that money can buy.
- Bleugrass Boy - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 8:54 am:
Bruce,
It’s hard for me to believe you have good intentions when you are laundering money.
–BB
- Rabid - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 8:57 am:
It’s her business model, lather rinse repeat
- Flynn's mom - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 9:08 am:
Campaignin’ BVR style!
- Chucktownian - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 9:12 am:
Munger is a fully-owned subsidiary of Rauner, Incorporated.
The best part of it all is they’re still going to lose and these millions will just be wasted. I love it.
- Winnin' - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 9:20 am:
Kudos to Capitol Fax.
Which major news organization will do a story on this money-launderin’ strategy?
Tronc?
The Illinois Policy News Network?
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 9:23 am:
I just read today’s subscriber’s edition. So the Dems put into law a way to “game the system” and now they’re mad that someone else gaming the system?! And a statewide candidate who voted IN FAVOR of the said law that allows a party and/or candidate to game the system is now upset that her opponent is taking advantage of the loopholes in the law?! Oh, the irony…
Maybe this is a good example of why laws should be easier to understand or more plainly written. Things like school reform and campaign finance rules are needlessly complex.
- Nitemayor - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 9:25 am:
I am waiting with baited breath for the Chicago Civic Federation to rise up in righteous indignation in regards to this chicanery. Here is your chance Ty.
- siriusly - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 9:26 am:
Rabid - you win. Outstanding.
- Anon221 - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 9:36 am:
Why expect anything else from Rauner and Co.? Runnin’ Illinois like a (venture/vulture) Capitol business.
- hisgirlfriday - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 9:39 am:
Where’s the photoshop of Leslie and Rauner riding a skateboard together holding bags of cash?
- Anonymous - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 9:39 am:
Snakes WILL slither…..
- just sayin' - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 10:51 am:
When mobsters wash cash like that they call it RICO.
- X-prof - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 10:59 am:
Real caps don’t blow.
- Union Man - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 1:58 pm:
Money Laundering, by any another name, still smells foul.
- Huh? - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 3:52 pm:
“We are really just taking advantage of the law because we represent the ultra rich and can buy what ever we want. We want to buy enough members of the General Assembly to make sure that we get our legislation passed that protects our social class at the expense of everyone else,” Munger said. “What did you expect me to do? I’m the governor’s wingman. I do what I’m told.”
Fixed it for you.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 4:01 pm:
–“We are really just taking advantage of the law that she passed,” Munger said. “Everything I’ve done is completely transparent, and it’s certainly legal.”–
I don’t know what “advantage” there is for Munger to take money and then give it to someone else, but in the interests of transparency:
– Whose idea was this? Munger’s?
– Who game-planned the whole break the cap, wash the Griff and Uiehlein money, then start dishing out the cash? Munger?
- Rabid - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 4:51 pm:
Does the star struck superstar realize she’s a tool to be disposed off in January
- HRC2016 - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 4:58 pm:
I know it was mentioned earlier but where is the Civic Federation why aren’t they screaming about this? How about the news media come on local news how come you’re not screaming about this?
- Red tower - Thursday, Oct 6, 16 @ 11:24 pm:
Again politicians violating the spirt of a law if not the law itself.
- Rabid - Friday, Oct 7, 16 @ 7:14 am:
Chameleons think their transparent, when you couldn’t put 5 million in a 2 million sack you should of had a press release praising your actions