Today, Betsy Dirksen Londrigan’s campaign released its first television ad, “Personal,” which introduces Dirksen Londrigan’s personal health care story. In 2009, her 12-year-old son, Jack, spent nearly a month in the pediatric intensive care unit in critical condition from a rare, life threatening illness during which he was in a medically-induced coma and read his last rites twice before starting his long road to recovery.
Jack’s story drives Dirksen Londrigan to fight to keep the health protections we have in place while working to fix the parts that need fixing, like lowering the costs of prescription drugs and premiums.
The 60-second ad will air in the Champaign-Springfield-Decatur media market as part of a districtwide buy that includes broadcast, cable and digital platforms. It highlights Dirksen Londrigan’s commitment to ensuring access to quality, affordable health care for Central Illinois families.
“I know health care is personal to you, especially now,” said Betsy Dirksen Londrigan. “I’ll fight for every family to have quality, affordable care that won’t bankrupt them if they get sick.”
What I see families going through today reminds me a lot of what our family faced eleven years ago…
A rare infection put my son Jack in intensive care for 21 days, he was on a ventilator and read last rites twice before finally going home.
Without good health care we could have never afforded all the bills.
I’m Betsy Dirksen Londrigan and I know health care is personal to you, especially now.
I’ll fight for every family to have quality, affordable care that won’t bankrupt them if they get sick…
With lower premiums and prescription prices that guarantee your choice of doctors and health plans.
But the drug and insurance industries are standing in the way.
They’ve given millions to Washington politicians to vote their way on health care…
To gut protections for people with pre-existing conditions…
And overcharge patients for prescription drugs.
Corporate special interests can’t buy me. I don’t take their money.
I approved this message, because when your family’s health is at stake, your Congressman shouldn’t be working against you.
* Rodney Davis campaign…
CQ Roll Call has moved the race for Congress in IL-13 towards Rodney Davis and away from Betsy Londrigan. Last week, Roll Call moved the race to “Tilt R” from its previous “Toss-up” rating. And today, in her first TV ad, Londrigan continues to push the false claim that she doesn’t take campaign contributions from corporate interests, even though news reports say otherwise.
“Betsy Londrigan is taking her ‘no corporate money’ lie to the airwaves because she knows this race is moving away from her. Her hypocrisy is stunning. Londrigan’s campaign is funded in part by corporate lobbyists from Madigan’s ‘inner circle,’ ‘Big Pharma,’ and others. Londrigan knows the only way she can win is if she lies her way into Congress.” – Aaron DeGroot, Davis campaign spokesperson
Londrigan pushes “no corporate money” lie in first TV ad
In her first TV ad of the General Election season, Londrigan says “I don’t take” campaign contributions from “corporate special interests,” but news reports reveal that’s not true. Londrigan’s campaign is funded in part by corporate lobbyists and executives to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Londrigan’s campaign is funded in part by corporate lobbyists and executives
From WCIA’s 7/24/20 story titled, Despite corporate PAC pledge, Dirksen Londrigan takes campaign cash from corporate lobbyists:
“…Since launching her bid for Congress, Dirksen Londrigan has accepted at least $82,930 in campaign contributions from corporate lobbyists, including some who have represented pharmaceutical companies, the Chicago Board Options Exchange, gambling companies, red light camera companies, suburban municipal governments, telecommunications giant AT&T and utility company ComEd.
“She’s taken far more from corporate executives, many of whom are also regular donors to Democratic causes.
“The donations from ComEd and AT&T lobbyists in particular came under scrutiny after ComEd agreed to pay a $200 million fine to avoid federal bribery charges last Friday, and federal agents delivered a subpoena to Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan’s office searching for documents related to AT&T and its lobbying practices.”
“…Dirksen Londrigan reported $284,278 in household income so far this year, all of it coming from her husband’s salary at his corporate lobbying firm. It represents pharmaceutical clients like Horizon Pharma, which raised the price on an arthritis drug 11 times in seven years, reaching a price point of $2,979 for a 60-pill bottle.
“Another one of his pharmaceutical clients, Kaleo, was flagged in a recent Senate subcommittee report on the increasing prices of opioid overdose reversal drugs. The report found Kaleo contracted with pharmacy benefit managers to hike its prices from $575 per unit up to $4,100 — a spike of more than 600%.
“Londrigan’s campaign declined to comment on how she would handle any real or perceived conflicts of interest that could arise in Congress if she is ever in a position to vote on matters that pertain to her husband’s lobbying portfolio.”
Corporate lobbyists in Madigan’s “inner circle” are funding Londrigan’s campaign
A group of corporate lobbyists associated with Madigan, some of whom have lobbied for ComEd at varying times, have contributed a combined $9,350 to Londrigan’s campaign this election cycle. The Chicago Tribune referred to those lobbyists as members of Madigan’s “inner circle.”
Betsy is still holding onto corporate lobbyist cash from Mike Madigan’s cronies, and 16 days after she was called out for being a corporate money hypocrite, she remains SILENT as to whether or not she will return the money.
NRCC Comment: “No amount of television advertising can change the fact that Betsy Dirksen Londrigan is a corporate money hypocrite whose campaign is funded by Mike Madigan’s corrupt cronies.” -NRCC Spokeswoman Carly Atchison
Maybe I am wrong, but why do I think the only ones reading the reply press statements issued on the heels of a release of campaign ads are people from the opposing campaigns? Do people in the district really care what the NRCC has to say?
They are both no for you, unless hypocrisy is a thing.
To the post,
Dear Davis Campaign.
Get an editor. So much wasted on noise and words. If your pleading a case that should seem obvious, your pleading a case your words can’t make. It drones on and on, for the love of Pete, get to it already.
I’d be more concerned about ensuring the next package Rodney votes *against* for Covid relief isn’t monies the district’s people and towns need.
And Downstate swoops in with the ‘Whataboutism.’ In case you can’t read, the post is about Davis criticizing Londrigan for claiming she isn’t taking corporate money. The response to that was pointing out the Davis has also taken corporate money so perhaps people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. Try to keep up.
The ad is a weak C. Only a C because the production is quality but the substance is weak and doesn’t make me “feel” like she can do the job. Hypocrisy knows no bounds. Love that she is married to a lobbyist. Is she really gonna stiff arm special interests when she is married to a walking special interest. LOL. Additionally, DeGroot needs to tighten the response up and be brief. You can have a target rich environment but make the point succinctly. He has had a tough time doing that even going back to the losing campaign for Bryce Benton vs McCann.
I’m very interested in Ms. Londrigan’s response to the apparent fact that she is taking PAC money. I have no comment about that. She may parse PAC more vs. corporate money vs. individuals who work for corporations. I don’t know.
However, the Davis campaign brought up Exelon/ComEd 3 times in one press release. I went to OpenSecrets.org and RIGHT THERE without any searching is Exelon being Mr. Davis’ top donor this cycle. Is this dirty money that Mr. Davis should return? Or did he get clean ComEd money?
It’s a good ad. It’s pretty typical of the issue and I don’t find fault with giving it a B.
I agree with OW that the issues chosen could be more timely. This has the feeling of an ad that’s been in the can for the last few months.
I think this ad suffers from all of the things that I think it could have been, but that’s not a fair standard to apply to someone’s work. This is a great ad pulled right out of the 2012 playbook with a twist of the 2018 ’story of self’ motif.