Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Campaign TV ad buyers love crime shows
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 - “She did not ask him for a job” *** Did JBT ask Quinn to help her son get a job?
Posted in:
* Reboot took a look at the top ten contributors to Bruce Rauner and Gov. Pat Quinn…
While most of Rauner’s biggest contributions come from individuals, nine of Quinn’s 10 biggest donations come from organizations such as unions and political action committees.
According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Rauner raised more money during the second quarter period, but Quinn did spend as much, and so had more money available as of June 30.
To create an apples-to-apples comparison, these rankings are for donations made to both candidates after March 5, 2013, when Rauner first began collecting donations for his Republican primary race. Quinn has campaign donations on record dating back more than 20 years, but those are from earlier races.
The state’s campaign donation limits don’t apply in the governor’s race because Rauner in November crossed the $250,000 mark for self-funding. State law limits campaign donations to $5,300 from individuals; $10,500 from corporations, unions or associations, and $52,600 from a candidate political committee or political action committee. But those limits don’t apply if one of the candidates in a race provides $250,000 of his or her own money.
* The lists…
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:04 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Campaign TV ad buyers love crime shows
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 - “She did not ask him for a job” *** Did JBT ask Quinn to help her son get a job?
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Follow the money from Rahm’s friends to Rauner.
Comment by William j Kelly Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:09 am
billionaires on one side, unions on the other. the rest of us in the middle waiting to see the outcome.
Comment by PoolGuy Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:10 am
Pat Quinn has a lot money coming from people who are seeking special privileges from the state.
Comment by Steve Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:15 am
and Bruce Rauner has a lot of money coming from people who will make even more money if taxes are lowered and pensions are cut…
Comment by PoolGuy Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:18 am
Teamsters need to step it up!
Comment by anon Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:19 am
Or is it follow the money from Rauner’s friends to Rahm? Whatever…. Rahm and rauner are such well liked and trusted individuals I am sure whatever they are cooking up will be great for all of us, right?
Comment by William j Kelly Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:21 am
—While most of Rauner’s biggest contributions come from individuals, nine of Quinn’s 10 biggest donations come from organizations such as unions and political action committees.–
No, those unions and organizations are individuals, too, as is the RGA. The Supremes said so, remember?
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:21 am
Does anyone have to wonder why Rauner wants to limit the ability of labor unions to influence government? It is called neutering your opposition but Im sure he has some good public policy reason too - not. What is the agenda of all these millionaires who have by his definition bribed him by giving him money. Apparently hypocrisy is inconvenient when trying to score cheap political points at the expense of working families.
Comment by Obamas Puppy Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:37 am
But believe us when we claim to put the concerns of common Illinoisans first.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:38 am
We certainly know full well where Gov. Quinn and the Democratic Legislature sit on pension reform and elimination of benefits.
Thank God for the wisdom of the Illinois Supreme Court on one of these issues and the prospect of their decision on the other.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:44 am
Nobody at the local level that belongs to a union has any say as to were the monies that are collected as dues is spent. Unions boss’ always donate to the democrats and the membership has no say.
Comment by Rob Roy Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:45 am
You’re right, Steve. Guys like Griff and Uiehlein don’t have personal political agendas. Contributing to Rauner is philanthropy, like giving to the Red Cross or Save the Children.
Uiehlein does most of his corporate shakedown work up north, where Wisconsin government has proven to be an easier mark than Illinois, as hard as that is to believe.
But he continues to live in Lake Forest because Illinois’ flat personal income tax rate is much lower for him than Wisconsin’s graduated rate.
Think he and Griff have an interest in personal income tax rates? For guys like that, if you have a 7.65% max rate like Wisconsin, you’re talking some real money.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:49 am
At least Rauner is telling unions what he wants to do. Quinn and Madigan including Lisa are fighting to reduce pensions for union members and retirees and yet the union boss’ still give them all the campaign money. Rauner would not be a dictator and couldn’t just change pensions, no more than Quinn or Madigan can, even though they are trying. Those changes that the party in power want have been sent to the courts. And so far has been a good ruling if you are a retiree or future retiree. Party of the working man for sure.
Comment by Rob Roy Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:59 am
Lar Kelly, give it a rest. Uihlein and the RGA-friends of Rahm?
Comment by Arthur Andersen Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:08 pm
Organizations and unions aren’t people. Why are they allowed to contribute this kind of money to campaigns?
Comment by Confused Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:11 pm
Confused, please tell me that’s a rhetorical question.
Comment by Archiesmom Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:14 pm
You’ve discussed at length the 20 percent number that rauner needs to get in the city to be successful and with stories like this I’m wondering how many of the union members whose $ end up in quinn coffers still end up voting for rauner and then how many rahm donors bolt for rauner whether they’re the big guns in the city or the suburban smaller donors who also give to groups like naral/sierra club ect and might go for a moderate seeming Rauner where they were turned off by brady a few years ago.
Comment by Shore Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:15 pm
Let’s not pretend it’s just one candidate or another whose major donors are seeking special privileges or access.
That applies whether you are a multi-millionaire or a multi-million dollar organization.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:16 pm
The contrast couldn’t be any more stark
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:17 pm
–Organizations and unions aren’t people. Why are they allowed to contribute this kind of money to campaigns?–
Might want to check in with the Supreme Court on that.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:18 pm
**confused
oranizations and unions are collectives of people. Restricting their donations, which will go to buy campaign ads, would prohibit them from speaking about candidates for office. This is at the core of the First Amendment.
Comment by Kizzoboy Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:29 pm
I wonder if the United Education Political Education Committee has a Department of Redundancy Department.
6/10 of the top donors to Rauner are execs in the private sector and 7/10 of the top donors to Quinn are from unions. Way to break stereotypes guys.
Sorry, I’m full of snark today.
Comment by Jay Dee Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:38 pm
Quinn bought and paid for by unions .. where did the $26 BILLIONS Dollars of the 67 % income increase go to ???? union pensions ..
In 2013 , the interest paid on Illinois unpaid bills totaled 318 MILLION DOLLars ???
Comment by better days Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:44 pm
Influence, everyone wants the ability to put forth their ideas for a better. Individual or group, PAC or person. At the end of the day it’s all about the idea that “my” sacred cow is the best for us all; and “my” attempts to put my cow In play and influence it’s growth. Welcome to the battle of the sacred cows.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 12:53 pm
special privileges or a voice at the table….in the eye of the beholder.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 1:14 pm
Rob Roy -
If you don’t think Rauner plans on trying to dictate, you are sadly mistaken.
If Rauner wins, he will use his checkbook and the power of the governor’s office to try to dictate to both sides of the aisle.
Let’s be clear. Rauner doesn’t just disagree with unions on the issues. He disputes their right to exist. You don’t try to find middle ground with a guy pursuing your extinction.
And let’s be clear, Rauner isn’t just extreme when it comes to the fundamental rights of working families. He wants to bring back the death penalty. His campaign singled out the state’s most prominent gay rights advocate for attack.
Now, it is true that Madigan will not allow a rollback of gay rights, reinstatement of the death penalty, or a repeal of fundamental collective bargaining rights. But Madigan only narrowly prevailed in his battle against Blago’s megalomania, and Rod didn’t have unlimited wealth. How long do you think Madigan would last standing alone against Rauner? Two years? Four? Eight? When are we gonna let the guy retire in peace and just be a grandpa?
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 1:19 pm
Better days….. Technically tax increase went to pay for roads and a number of projects dating back to the 1970s and earlier, not the pensions. The state has been borrowing money from the pensions for highways, bridges and other projects. The state borrowed, and borrowed and borrowed. Not union pensions btw, just employee pensions.
No one complained for decades about borrowing the money. Repub, dems and voters kept voting for borrowers and supporting borrowers. Edgar, Thompson, Ryan, blago etc. the money the public has been borrowing for decades is now due. Time to pay for all the borrowing from pension money.
And it’s all pensions, not union pensions. The state attempt to borrow is over. Time to pay what is owed. Which is easy if we don’t have to pay what we owe. Let’s take what we need and refuse to pay.. No more debt.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 1:24 pm
YDD - easy on the hyperbole - Rauner has never said that unions don’t have the right to exist. That is pure fiction.
He appropriately points out that its unseemly for the Governor and his budget director to attend a union endorsement session and receive a $500,000 check and then turn around the next day with the same Gov/budget director agreeing to a new contract with that union that included significant raises.
Comment by 4 percent Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 1:28 pm
Better Days, what the what? Bought and paid for, why because he signed the pension theft law? Yeah. And all of the money that went to pensions, not just union pensions, state pensions, was owed. You may as well complain about those greedy bondholders expecting to get paid for their bonds. Money owed is money owed. It doesn’t matter if it is for pensions or schools it is debt, not special interest spending.
Comment by Jimbo Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 1:37 pm
That should have been “building” schools
Comment by Jimbo Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 1:39 pm
@4 percent. And which contract was that? The once signed in the fall of 2008 or the one in 2013 that included 2% COLAs?
Comment by Juice Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 1:39 pm
My side good, other side bad. Interesting to see, but neither side donates that amount for the good of the state. They all have interests and motives
Comment by Wumpus Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 1:42 pm
I think there is something unsettling that the contributions on one side PQ come from Unions. Many that stand to gain from such influence. If you are private and build a fortune and want to write a check, that’s bad? Look at the private money that goes to D’s nationally… Sounds like some folks on this board want their party to give it back….
Comment by Walter Mitty Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 2:19 pm
@4 Percent: Rauner’s own words on unions: they are “immoral” and “shouldn’t exist.” He backtracked it during one of the GOP debates.
http://www.sj-r.com/x871009113/Rauner-Union-control-makes-taxes-high-hurts-schools
Comment by Precinct Captain Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 2:22 pm
I have two questions. 1. in Light of the beating public sector unions are taking from Quinn, do you really think Rauner will be worse?
2. What exactly is the argument that public sector unions are good? It is not about fair wages, safety, fairness in job placement like trade unions. With tenure, teachers basically can’t be fired so the union is not for job security. healthcare and pensions are not union programs like the trades. Why do the taxpayers need them?
Comment by the Patriot Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 2:30 pm
Patriot, taxpayers don’t need public sector unions, just like business owners don’t need unions. Employees on the other hand do. Why? Rauner could be governor some day. Collective bargaining is the only thing that would prevent him from destroying the livlihoods of every civil servant. Okay that was hyperbole, but unions exist to better working conditions and compensations when managements goal is typically to do the opposite in the name of cost savings. Collectively workers have power, they have a right to excercise said power. It’s one of those freedom things most people like.
Comment by Jimbo Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 2:49 pm
I meant “most patriots like”
Comment by Jimbo Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 2:50 pm
- PoolGuy - Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 11:10 am:
“billionaires on one side, unions on the other. the rest of us in the middle waiting to see the outcome.”
This about says it, other than perhaps adding that the rest of us are “caught” in the middle instead.
Comment by liandro Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 2:51 pm
When a private sector union tries to bargain for significant salary/benefit increases, in some cases the management of the company may be able to replace those workers with non-union workers. If management decides to do so and is successful in hiring good lower-cost replacements, the owners/shareholders of the company will likely increase their gains, management will likely be rewarded, and consumers may see prices which are lower then they might be if the union employees were kept on and their salaries increased.
When a public union tries to bargain for significant salary/benefit increases, in some cases the mayor/politicians may be able to replace those workers with non-union workers. If the mayor/politicians decide to do so and are successful, the taxpayers may see taxes/fees which are lower then they might be if the union salaries were increased. However, the union may decide to fund the mayor’s/politicians’ competitors at the next election so that they can (perhaps unduly) influence the public to vote the mayor/politicians out of office.
Are the scenarios above possible, and do you see the difference between the two? Based upon the amount of money the unions provide for political candidates, is the latter scenario more or less likely?
Comment by Rharaz Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 3:36 pm
What happened with Elizabeth Christie and the scandal at Young Republicans of Cook County? I forget.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 3:44 pm
More questions. How much do the political campaign contributions from the private sector influence lawmakers to create tax loopholes for monied interests, or to change laws to allow private companies to behave in monopolistic ways? Based upon the contribution amounts shown above, is this more or less likely to occur?
Comment by Rharaz Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 3:49 pm
Rharaz, that’s a great academic exercise for the classroom. Takes me back to high school.
What’s the point though? There is real-life experience between Quinn and unions, as in, they’re suing him over the pension bill he signed, and they sued him to get contractually mandated pay increases.
They just think Rauner would be worse for them, and there’s no reason to believe he wouldn’t be. Class dismissed.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 4:09 pm
Except it isn’t as simple as that Rharaz. Busting a union is never actually good for the bottom line. You face boycotts by any union workers, you face Rat mascots and full page ads in newspapers, and you have a less skilled and less experienced workforce. You act like union busting is a good thing. First, it hurts many middle class families to benefit a few moneyed interests, and second, it seriously hurts a companies reputation. It really isn’t that different from funding a pols opponent.
The problem with your analogies, is you limited them to full on union busting though. Public sector unions can withhold support or give it to a challenger for small things, like crappy raises in the latest contract. Hey, that sucks a bit, but gee whiz, how is using campaign dollars to do that any different than creating tax loopholes and reduce regulations on businesses. Both cost the government money in terms of tax dollars, fees and externalized costs. Reducing regulations on polluters for instance costs society big in terms of site cleanups, health problems, and climate change.
None of the rich guys on Rauners list are doing their civic duty. They want something. So do the unions. I’d rather stand alongside the working man than some rich guys who want it their way, but that’s just me.
Comment by Jimbo Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 7:00 pm
the rat pack knows something bruce is not saying (a plan to loot illinois)
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 8:11 pm
Four Percent:
Bruce Rauner absolutely, positively believes that public employee unions, as we know them, should be abolished.
How many times does he have to praise Governor Walker before you understand that?
Rauner does not believe in the right of public employees to strike, collectively bargain, lobby or engage in politics.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Jul 16, 14 @ 8:30 pm