* Tribune…
Illinois politics saw a watershed year for cash on legislative campaigns in 2016, with newly released financial reports documenting Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner’s lead role in funding GOP candidates and Democrats under House Speaker Michael Madigan relying on union and labor allies to keep General Assembly majorities. […]
All told, the House Republican Organization raised and spent about $30 million on individual campaigns, eroding Madigan’s 71-member, veto-proof majority to a 67-51 edge. Madigan, who was attacked by Republicans as a symbol of what is wrong in Springfield, fought back with about $15.5 million in spending from four political funds he controls.
The Republican State Senate Campaign Committee, focused on fewer contests, spent nearly $8 million and picked up two GOP seats to reduce Senate President John Cullerton’s majority from 39 members to 37 against 22 Republicans — still a veto-proof margin.
On the Senate side, three political funds controlled by Cullerton cycled through $14.5 million in spending. The campaign arm of Senate Democrats spent $9.7 million, with about $5 million coming from two other Cullerton funds.
Those House numbers looked a bit off to me, so I asked Team Rauner if they had compiled anything.
* From Mike Schrimpf…
We took a look at the Tribune story and did our own analysis based on competitive races. Because of Illinois’ unique state campaign finance system and the different strategies used by both parties to fund campaigns, we believe you need to expand what you are looking at to get a complete picture of campaign spending.
As we’ve detailed previously, the Democrats use a number of incumbents as “piggy banks” to transfer significant funds between campaigns while Republicans largely do not. Therefore, we believe the most accurate way to analyze campaign spending is to isolate and exclude transfers out by party and candidate committees (since that money will also be counted in a candidates’ finance report) and then sum the remaining spending by candidate committees and other political committees and outside groups.
Doing that shows total spending by all sides on the general election campaigns were at parity. Please take a look at the attached for a more detailed breakdown.
Click here for his complete analysis.
* Schrimpf pegged total Democratic spending at $50,215,528.21 and total Republican spending at $50,985,565.04.
According to Schrimpf’s analysis, House Democratic candidates outspent House Republicans $19.5 million to $15.7 million. Again, click here because Schrimpfy has all the numbers down to the penny.
Schrimpf says Senate Democrats also outspent SGOP candidates $10.4 million to $5.9 million.
Party spending is where the Republicans had the big advantage, at $22.3 million (mainly Rauner money), versus $7 million by the Democrats. And that helped even the score on the local level.
But the Democrats had an advantage in outside spending (almost $10 million of that by Sen. Daniel Biss’ PAC) with $13 million, versus $7 million by the Republicans (much of that by Dan Proft’s PAC, but $2 million by a Rauner committee).
One big caveat on that last batch of numbers. Biss’ PAC did a statewide buy, so I don’t know if it should be included. But, whatevs. He spent it, let’s tally it.
* The other thing to ponder is that Madigan, Cullerton and others worked very hard to raise about $40 million last year, and Madigan’s and Cullerton’s allies helped boost Biss’ LIFT PAC. They’re gonna have to do that all over again for 2018, which is why some top Democrats want a self-funder candidate for governor.
They were stretched to the very limit last year, but still managed to keep up. If they also have to fund a gubernatorial candidate next year, they may not be able to keep up again.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Jan 19, 17 @ 2:06 pm:
The state rep numbers do not include in-kind expenditures.
See D63, of instance. where Reick spent over $1 million.
http://mchenrycountyblog.com/2017/01/17/steve-reick-raises-1108-661-spends-1108661-in-winning-state-rep-race-over-john-bartman/
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jan 19, 17 @ 2:12 pm:
===* The other thing to ponder is that Madigan, Cullerton and others worked very hard to raise about $40 million last year, and Madigan’s and Cullerton’s allies helped boost Biss’ LIFT PAC. They’re gonna have to do that all over again for 2018, which is why some top Democrats want a self-funder candidate for governor.
They were stretched to the very limit last year, but still managed to keep up. If they also have to fund a gubernatorial candidate next year, they may not be able to keep up again.===
This. All day.
Remember, this is a LONG game. If anything, what was far more important than 6 seats gained in both chambers is that Uihlein, Griffin, and Diana Rauner will fund Bruce Rauner’s $120 million needed to run 5 (Gov-LG, AG, SoS, Comp, Treas) statewide races, and both Caucuses.
This, for Diana, Griffin, and Uihlein, will be “no problem” and with $50 million in “seed monies”, 2018 is set up for a significant decimation of the Democrats, top to bottom.
I can argue $120 million overall is “light”
What the Rauners did, when Diana and Bruce kept up with the Democrats was drain resources that no need to start all over again, today to even get to $50 million that is parked.
This just in… 2020… If Rauner wins, will set up the new map situation and the, you guessed it, $70-80 million that will be used for that new “map”
… unless Rauner uses his signature for a new map to finish off Labor in Illinois.
Rauner winning in 2018 and funding all the other statewides and the Caucuses is “Step 2″ in fulfilling the Rod Blagojevich dream that Rauner now wants… Raunerites, removed from Republican or Democratic control, and allow a governor to control the legislative and hold the legislative hostage for an agenda, until such time Raunerites control it all.
This ain’t fantasy, this IS the plan.
Step 2 is 2018… and the $50 million, which seemingly replenishes the total figure spent in 2016… says, “We have you where we want you, and you can’t keep up”.
Mind blowing.
- thunderspirit - Thursday, Jan 19, 17 @ 2:24 pm:
=== This ain’t fantasy, this IS the plan. ===
Yep.
And it makes the Democrats’ coherent messaging — more specifically, its lack thereof — particularly important. All the self-funding candidates in the State won’t matter if they don’t form a coherent message and cultivate a way to communicate that message to voters.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 19, 17 @ 2:55 pm:
===The state rep numbers do not include in-kind expenditures===
They’re in there I think. Party spending.
- Precinct Captain - Thursday, Jan 19, 17 @ 3:34 pm:
Between candidate and outside spending, Open Secrets reports 4 U.S. Senate races topped $100m in spending for 2016. Easily the governor’s race here next year will top that. https://www.opensecrets.org/overview/topraces.php?cycle=2016&display=allcandsout
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Jan 19, 17 @ 4:00 pm:
The discrepancies in the Senate campaign spending is stark. Cullerton dumped a lot into Simon and Forby, and I think the Simon money may have been more about reminding people who controls the Senate than actually winning that race. If the Senate GOP had a few more million they may have pulled off a serious upset or two, although it also shows in some races that the Senate Dems thought they might be able to tap into the HRC-Trump spread and pull off an upset of their own.
- My New Handle - Thursday, Jan 19, 17 @ 4:06 pm:
So in the 99th House distrct for the General Election, DelGiorno spent $8.37 (rounded) per vote and Jiminez spent $11.05 per vote. (From above analysis and BoE election totals). Jimenez won by 13,175 votes. Math is enlightening.
- Annonin' - Thursday, Jan 19, 17 @ 6:50 pm:
This is a silly rack up cause it does not cover dark money for Rauner Proft IPI fordakeness movies and papers
- Chicago Barb - Thursday, Jan 19, 17 @ 7:25 pm:
I was under the impression Rauner & Repubs used Leslie Munger as a “piggy bank”