Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Thursday, Apr 18, 2019 - Posted by Rich Miller

* There are a few different angles to this WCIA TV story, but let’s start with this one…

A political media firm that charged Illinois Republicans more than $2.1 million in the 2018 election cycle also made payments to House Republican Leader Jim Durkin’s right hand political operative David Walsh. […]

Durkin’s spokesperson confirmed the payments were made, and that Durkin knew about them, but declined to comment on the story. The secretive transaction caught many top House Republicans off guard and aggravated existing concerns about the potential for vendors making “kickbacks,” “spiffs,” or offering other incentives to consultants.

Walsh is far and away Durkin’s highest paid political consultant. Public records show Walsh earned more than half a million dollars from the Republican House leader’s campaign committee for work dating back to 2013.

Redfield, a campaign finance expert and professor emeritus at the University of Illinois Springfield, said the payment illustrated a process that could easily be exploited as a sort of dark money loophole.

“When you get in a posture where someone can essentially engage in self-dealing, it’s not only the public trust in understanding transparency, but the people that are trying to operate and win campaigns want to make sure things are above board,” Redfield said. […]

“David Walsh is an advisor to me and helps me develop business ideas that have nothing to do with the Illinois House,” CEO Brett Buerk explained in a phone call. “To suggest that we somehow had to pay him in order to get work is offensive. We had the Illinois House as a client going back to 2011. Our business relationship with Walsh has only been for the last 18 months.” […]

According to several sources in the House Republican caucus, Representative Mike Unes of Peoria questioned why so many high priced consultants who failed to deliver results remained on the party payroll. Durkin responded by booting Unes from his leadership team. Reached by phone, Unes declined to comment on the falling out.

Rep. Unes voted for the 2017 tax hike and, despite being in leadership, contributed just $15K to the HRO campaign committee last year and ended 2018 with $642K in the bank. That may explain some things.

Walsh says he consults on non-campaign issues and adamantly denies any connections between the spending and his consulting. And Buerk was so upset about the story that he reportedly threatened to sue.

As the article also notes, Walsh didn’t include his client’s name on his economic interest disclosure form when he was a member of the MWRD board, but state ethics laws don’t require consultants (and attorneys) to disclose the names of their clients and I’m not aware of anyone who does (although some could, I suppose).

The House Republican Organization spent just $190K on Majority Strategies during the 2018 cycle. By contrast, HRO spent $389K on Majority Strategies in 2016. You’d think that number would go up after Walsh started, not down. And despite House GOP Leader Jim Durkin’s hugely expensive 2018 GOP primary against a Dan Proft/Local 150-backed candidate, Majority Strategies didn’t get a dime during the effort.

* However, the Illinois Republican Party spent $1.9 million of that $2.1 million during the same period. And the vast majority of that was spent on House Republican candidates. Legislative leaders wash money through both state parties to save on postage costs, and they control how that money is spent. The state party spent $414K with Majority Strategies in the 2016 cycle and nothing before that.

In a world like this when everybody is an automatic suspect, consulting for a campaign vendor - even if it is totally unrelated work - is gonna bring some heat. And that’s especially so considering the HRO’s losses last year. People will always look for someone to toss under the bus. Walsh, despite whatever his intentions may have been, gave his enemies a too-easy opportunity.

21 Comments

- Annonin' - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 12:23 pm:
“Too easy opportunity” We are confused.
Is some unnamed person blaming Walsh rather than GovJunk for Durkie’s debacle?
But, hey on the bright side Durkie got Caulkins and the other migration magoos on his team. Doesn’t get much better.
Speaking of confusing we still do not understand why Kent is named a campaign finance expert. He is a pro for hanging onto a state check for so long.

- Practical Politics - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 12:33 pm:
Another question is “How good a consultant is David Walsh?” Or did he get the job based upon the fact that Jim Durkin and Tom Walsh used to share legislative district offices when Tom was a State Senator?

- {Sigh} - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 12:33 pm:
=The House Republican Organization spent just $190K on Majority Strategies during the 2018 cycle. By contrast, HRO spent $389K on Majority Strategies in 2016. You’d think that number would go up after Walsh started, not down. And despite House GOP Leader Jim Durkin’s hugely expensive 2018 GOP primary against a Dan Proft/Local 150-backed candidate, Majority Strategies didn’t get a dime during the effort.=

Didn’t Mike Z run Durkin’s 2018 campaign?

- Boone's is Back - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 12:41 pm:
===Chumming the sharks===

Lol, I love this post’s tagline.

- Anonymous - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 12:42 pm:
Another unverified article by Maxwell. If he continues his reporting style this way, he will be out at WCIA

- JS Mill - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 12:45 pm:
=“To suggest that we somehow had to pay him in order to get work is offensive.=

So delicate these ILGOP daisies are.

Funny, they were not so sensitive with their 2018 campaign adds and accusing MJM of corruption and now, the shoe is on the other foot.

Good on Unes to call them out, shocking that they would be so sensitive to a question.

- JS Mill - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 12:46 pm:
=Another unverified article by Maxwell. If he continues his reporting style this way, he will be out at WCIA=

Unverified? He provided his evidence, where is yours Leader Durkin?

- wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 12:46 pm:
–In a world like this when everybody is an automatic suspect, consulting for a campaign vendor - even if it is totally unrelated work - is gonna bring some heat. And that’s especially so considering the HRO’s losses last year.–

Absolutely. You take the big money for those results, no crying.

This bit of journalism concerns me:

–According to several sources in the House Republican caucus, Representative Mike Unes of Peoria questioned why so many high priced consultants who failed to deliver results remained on the party payroll….Reached by phone, Unes declined to comment on the falling out.–

To me, Maxwell is providing cover to unnamed sources who are putting words in Unes’ mouth — while Unes himself is declining to say anything.

That’s not kosher. Those unnamed sources obviously have beef with Durkin; they need to cowboy up and put their own names to them.

- BoSox - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 12:54 pm:
Gone are the days of “The Hog”? HRCC oldies will remember that show.

- Been There - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 1:14 pm:
===but state ethics laws don’t require consultants (and attorneys) to disclose the names of their clients and I’m not aware of anyone who does (although some could, I suppose).===

My spouse works for the state and I lobby. I’m pretty sure we had to list my clients on the statement. Didn’t bother to keep a copy but I remember listing them.

- Rich Miller - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 1:15 pm:
===My spouse works for the state and I lobby.===

Lobbying is different and is especially so since you’re married to a state employee.

- Anon - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 1:52 pm:
1.) $83,000 a year isn’t a fortune.

2.) Lordy, do they ever over pay folks that lose. Still entertained by the number of mailers I received for races in districts other than the ones I lived in.

3.) If they want to keep hiring the same folks over and over again and get the same results over and over again, good on them — but maybe their donors should be concerned?

4.) Crikey, I don’t see how these folks expect to be taken seriously as a party again. Folks form the most rural and economically depressed part of the state are advocating against a tax proposal that would by and large benefit their communities and very few of their constituents would pay a higher rate relative to districts in Cook and the Collar Counties. Not only do they lie because they presume their base are unwitting idiots so they call it a “jobs tax,” but they go on to pretend their districts are supporting Chicagoland by means of tax revenues (which is super false) and refuse to support a tax proposal which would have the net result of taxing Chicagoland more to continue to support downstate services and jobs.

Like, seriously, what is wrong with these elected officials? Do they really not care about the outcomes and impacts of their district?

- Roman - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 3:06 pm:
This ain’t exactly the Watergate break-in from an investigative reporting standpoint. But it is an interesting look inside the HRO.

- A guy - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 3:25 pm:
Majority Strategies is a big outfit working all over the place, not simply Illinois. Part of the economy of scale of getting out so many mailers. I might question the quality based on their “less than local” expertise, but they are very economical when it comes to quantity, which has been the ’strategy’ the last few cycles on both sides. Majority Strategies employs regional consultants in many of the media markets they operate in. It’s not bad coin, but you don’t get rich on it (in relation to the previous citing of the Hog).

The political consultancy biz has a lot of freelance people moving in and out of it, and makes for interesting conjecture as every cycle re-forms teams and rosters. As unpleasant as these things look sometimes, I could see why the CEO is so peeved. Kickbacks is a serious charge. I’d doubt they’d exist here.

- Rich Miller - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 3:28 pm:
===but they are very economical when it comes to quantity, which has been the ’strategy’ the last few cycles on both sides===

Maybe in the House, but I think Giangreco might be able to retire after the JB campaign. lol

- A guy - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 3:30 pm:
==Maybe in the House, but I think Giangreco might be able to retire after the JB campaign. lol==

Eek dude. What possesses you to use the word “might” ?

- Pete - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 3:42 pm:
Using unnamed sources to insinuate is what is called journalism today. Maxwell can be considered biased - just look at his work twitter. Will wait for him to seek out corruption on both sides of the aisle.

- A guy - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 4:49 pm:
==Will wait for him to seek out corruption on both sides of the aisle.==

Better bring more than one suitcase if you’re waiting for that.

- Sonny - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 5:50 pm:
Mark has broken tons of stories. Deserves a medal not anonymous lame comments section cheap shots.

- Just Me 2 - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 6:41 pm:
The Republicans failed at the ballot box because they failed when the had the Governors Mansion.

- wordslinger - Thursday, Apr 18, 19 @ 10:28 pm:
Yeah, I thought for a while this has been coming. And away we go…

–@WCIA3Mark
House Republican David McSweeney reacts to our story, “I think Jim Durkin should resign as a leader. He is a corrupt insider.”
McSweeney voted for Durkin for leader but now calls him a “fake Republican,” “ineffective leader” and adds “I certainly would never vote for him again.”–

“React” or “Plant?” If McSweeney was one of those unnamed sources who planted the story, could he really “react” to it?

McSweeney has been doing the GOP rubber chicken thing all over central and southern Illinois. Wonder who he thinks should replace Durkin?

I imagine McSweeney is telling the folks down south that he’s just a regular guy, a non-elitist investment banker from Barrington, just like them.

Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.