Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Rauner’s $20 million “tip of the iceberg”

Posted in:

Illinois

Days before he takes office, Gov.-elect Bruce Rauner has created a special $20 million war chest to push his agenda against what is likely to be strong opposition in Springfield—and lots more money is on the way. […]

“There are a lot of legislators who he is going to be asking to make a lot of tough decisions,” said one Rauner insider who asked not to be named. “The intent is to build a large and effective political operation in order to pursue his agenda.”

Some of the money may be donated directly to legislators’ campaign committees and other funds spent on their behalf. TV ads, polling and other activity on behalf of Rauner policies also is expected, the insider said. And the war chest only is “the first in a series,” part of a “multipronged effort” in which other funding vehicles will be formed, the source said. “This is the tip of the iceberg.”

* Rauner kicked in $10 million and two of his buds contributed the rest…

Citadel CEO Ken Griffin, who previously had contributed $4.9 million, gave another $8 million on Dec. 30. Richard Uihlein, CEO of Uline Corporation and a major donor to Republican candidates, added $2 million on the same day.

* AP…

Transition team spokesman Chip Englander said Rauner wanted to change and improve Illinois.

“In order to do that, he recognizes that he has to amass the resources to support reformers and compete with the special interest protectors of the status quo in multiple forums over multiple years,” Englander said in a statement.

* The Tribune explains it as a way to “buttress lawmakers who follow the new chief executive’s as-yet unstated agenda after he takes office in mid-January”…

The willingness of Rauner and his allies to use their wealth to push an agenda could give the incoming governor added leverage with GOP lawmakers not used to taking difficult votes while Democrats have held one-party control of Springfield for the last dozen years.

“It’s got to help give Republicans some backbone for the tough votes they’ll have to take,” said David Yepsen, who runs the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale. […]

“I think it can also be a shot across the bow that he’s not someone to be trifled with. He’s got the formal powers of governor, the informal powers of persuasion and he can shove money into a primary if a legislator doesn’t behave,” he said.

Rauner will need Democrats, who retain strong majorities in the House and Senate, to advance any of his agenda items. But it’s unclear whether he would use his money to back Democrats if they vote his way.

* Back to Hinz…

In flexing his personal financial muscle after an election, Rauner appears to be following in the steps of former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The latter effectively self-financed his campaigns for mayor, but also opened his wallet to allies and would-be allies after taking office, and recently has funneled tens of millions into anti-gun and other causes.

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 8:50 am

Comments

One of many sources showings the pernicious effects of money from the .01% on governance in this country.

Comment by PublicServant Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 8:58 am
Didn’t Mayor Bloomberg also supplement the salaries of some of his top aides. That probably helped with recruiting. In fact, didn’t one of Blago’s top aides go back to work for Bloomberg before the Blago meltdown. Maybe he saw the writing, being rather close to it.

Ah, money. It helps. In America, it helps a lot.

Comment by Cassandra Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:05 am
Nothing like a little cash to support your reform agenda!

Comment by Stones Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:07 am
Kudos to Bruce Rauner. He’s eliminated the middle man and made himself a special interest.

Thank goodness we allow the wealthy to buy themselves out of those pesky contribution limits.

Comment by too obvious Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:08 am
“Um, Questions…”

Will this money be used to Primary sitting GOP legislators, given Uihlein’s recent history?

Will Rauner protect Democrats that vote Rauner’s “way” if THEY face a Dem Primary challenge?

Will Rauner protect sitting Dem “Tier 1″ targets that align themselves with the “Rauner” agenda?

Have the HGOP & SGOP become irrelevant in deciding what races they can choose?

Even if this find hoes to $100 million, $200 million, don’t the Senate President and House Speaker decide which bills get floor votes in the end?

Isn’t this exactly what Blago wanted to do, have his “own” Caucuses, bypassing the leadership in the legislature?

How many Dems, which are needed to get to 30 Senate votes, and 60 House votes to pass anything, will the HGOP & SGOP feel comfortable with that the Governor will be protecting?

Is this the beginning of the “Raunerite” Party? Is this where Rauner claims the GOP label, but owns his own party for himself?

Are rank and file Republicans going to be excited at what the definition of a Republican is acceptable to Rauner as his money shows favor or displeasure in GOP Primary races?

Is it official now; Rauner owns the ILGOP State Party and both Political Caucuses?

What will be said by the HGOP & SGOP Caucuses when a House or Senate Dem is taken off the table to be a target, because Rauner and his money say it’s so?

Dangerous times…

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:09 am
Just buy what you want. Isn’t this what our ancestors ran from in Europe–domination and control by the aristocratic monarchy? Didn’t we somewhere in time want a representative democracy?
I guess we’re going back to government by those with the cash.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:10 am
“Even if this fund goes to $100 million, $200 million, don’t the Senate President and House Speaker decide which bills get floor votes in the end?”

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:12 am
So I take it that money will only go to legislators that make “tough decisions.” In other words, vote the way Rauner likes.

That’s shaking things up. A new goo-goo day is upon us.

What about that whole 100 years of corruption thingy, and union bosses buying the legislature with campaign contributions?

Rauner made it sound like a bad thing during the campaign. I guess I misinterpreted. He was outlining his business model.

Watch your quid pro quo, boys.

Comment by Wordslinger Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:16 am
This is smart. Yes funding is just anoeice of the puzzle; yes voters may toss out heavily financed incumbents if they are unhappy with them. But! This lets rauner dilute the lobbiests and specila interests.

Or put more directly, elected officials do not need union money to campaign. Now those officilas still need the public to vote for them, but this will be a big blow to union influence

Comment by Ghost Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:16 am
Seems to me that this was just a way to exploit the election code’s definition of “election cycle.” By my reading of the code, the 2014 election cycle didn’t end until 12/31/14 - so these donations are technically part of Rauner’s 2014 election effort (where the caps were blown). In effect, Rauner’s buddies made contributions on 12/30/14 and 12/31/14 that would not have been possible on 1/1/15, when the caps went back into effect. Additionally, as a side benefit, it appears that Rauner may have just self-funded for 2018 but done so without blowing the caps. I for one welcome our new corporate overlords.

Comment by Sam Weinberg Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:18 am
Is this so different than the juggernaut that’s been in place on the other side with MJM controlling the debits and credits? If it creates a “push” that renders the financial nukes on the other side neutralized, doesn’t that clear the field for actual legislative action where it’s supposed to happen?

The sides are by no means even, but there’s a smaller gap than there used to be. So far, the reaction is interesting. You might even call it an overreaction. That says something.

Comment by A guy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:20 am
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Bruce is more corrupt than Blago ever was. And he hasnt even started the new job. I guess impeachment isnt to far off.

Comment by Del Clinkton Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:21 am
All good questions by Willie.

The formation of a Rauner Caucus is an interesting way to look at it. Obviously, all that cash can protect Repub GA members who vote with Bruce from primary challenges and punish those who vote against him by funding challengers.

The impact on Dems is harder to figure. Some of the Dem targets who would be most vulnerable to a Rauner-funded challenge are probably the members most likely to vote with him.

Money changes everything.

Comment by T.H. Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:23 am
Instead of using this money to push his agenda, why not just pay off some of the debt?

Comment by Cheryl44 Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:27 am
This administration is going to put more people in jail than Blagojevich did. Congrats to some soon to be famous AUSA.

Comment by The Captain Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:27 am
So basically he’s going to buy votes. I suppose that qualifies as “Shaking Up Springfield.” He’s shaking it up with different money.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:29 am
Isn’t this exactly what Obama did with OFA? It’s not going away even after he leaves office according to that freaking looking guy who runs it.

How is what Rauner doing different? I don’t recall any shrieking about “dangerous times”, “money changes everything” “Obama is more corrupt than Blago” “King Obama”, etc. Most CapFAx commenters provide a one-sided view of reality to say the least.

The reality is that in ‘14 Dem groups raised a ton more $$$$ than Dems but still got beaten like rented mules.

But The Narrative that Money Is Everything Must BE Protected at all costs!

Comment by qcexaminer Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:30 am
Spin yourself silly, Guy.

If Blago and Rezko set up a fund to buy legislators’ specific votes, you’d spin the other way.

Some of us can see the inherent corruption no matter who the governor is. It’s called a principle.

Comment by Wordslinger Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:30 am
- qcexaminer -,

Rauner explained that he will support Dems and Republicans.

Did OFA “support” … any … Repunlicans?

- A Guy… -, Rauner stated he would shake up the system, not become an even larger player in monies dictating votes…

Just saying.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:35 am
Can sway a vote…..just buy it…Its the American PAC way to success.

Comment by one day at a time Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:36 am
Does this seem corrupt?

Government is supposed to be the meeting of diverse people and interests to craft a common good.

With Rauner/Griffin throwing around money, the number of voices that get considered get very small.

Comment by Carl Nyberg Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:36 am
I think Sam Weinberg might be on it. If so, i’d expect a lot of Rauner threats to spend money but few actual payments. $20 million with interest over 3-4 years is a heck of a warchest for anyone’s re-election.

Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:37 am
Think he’ll fund another Term Limits Petition drive?
/snark

Comment by walker Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:42 am
=== Wordslinger - Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:30 am:

Spin yourself silly, Guy.

If Blago and Rezko set up a fund to buy legislators’ specific votes, you’d spin the other way.

Some of us can see the inherent corruption no matter who the governor is. It’s called a principle.====

But you can’t see the inherent corruption if it’s the Speaker? OK, I got it. That Rezko guy did everything in daylight, I forgot.

Good to see the new year didn’t make you any less cynical Sling.

Comment by A guy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:49 am
Love it! Rauner kept his election promise to those of us in the GOP rank and file who are tired of each and every election of being outspent, out manned, gerrymandered and being told to shut up and be quiet and lose elections. You know, those of us “who aren’t Republican enough” according to so-called Republicans who refuse to support GOP candidates during elections.

Hope some of this is also used to protect social moderate Republicans who are fiscally conservative who have taken a pounding from our own party members who prefer ILGOP meetings be held in their little closets. You know, the gang that would prefer to lose elections and allow Democrats unfettered control of government.

Nice to see someone commit to having our backs and helping us with the resources necessary to elect more Republicans in this state.

Dangerous times? Or a new frontier of leveling the playing field? If that is “dangerous” give me a double dose please!

Gee, wonder how much of that $20 million will go towards a special election for Comptroller if the lame duckers, including our lame duck governor, do a lame end around of our current Illinois Constitution?

Go, Bruce, Go! I’m not afraid of shaking things up in this state. Again, if that is “dangerous” then I’m all in!

Comment by Louis G Atsaves Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:52 am
==do a lame end around of our current Illinois Constitution==

Still ignorant of the Constitution I see. You don’t have to like it. In fact, you can continue to whine about it like you have been. Maybe it will happen. Maybe it won’t. But it isn’t unconstitutional no matter what your brilliant legal brain says.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:55 am
Taxes on the rich are way too low in this country.

Comment by Roosevelt Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:59 am
“I can’t be bought, bribed, or intimidated,” said Rauner, adding “but let see if the legislature can.”

=“It’s got to help give Republicans some backbone for the tough votes they’ll have to take,” said David Yepsen…=

What a joke. It doesn’t take backbone to do what the leader of your party and corporate special interests want you to do.

Comment by Bull Moose Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 9:59 am
The battles may be epic if not interesting..

Comment by Mouthy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:01 am
Um, vote my way and I’ll give you money.

Didn’t that used to be called bribes?

Comment by Streator Curmudgeon Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:03 am
If he’s willing to support dems with this money that will change everything. We are about to find out how much of a loyal republican rauner really is. Unlike Blago, he has the money so there’s a way to a Rauner caucus, but it may just leave the HGOP and, to a lesser extent, the SGOP in its wake.

Comment by K3 Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:03 am
This is a smart move for the wealthy in Illinois who are heavily invested in the State and don’t want their investments negatively impacted by pension, healthcare and other severely underfunded obligations. $20 million (or even $100 million) is a paltry sum to pay to buy Republican and Democratic votes to lessen or eliminate state, county, municipal and school district debt.

Comment by Roosevelt Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:06 am
@Demoralized: Who is whining here? I’ve read it. I understand it. I came to an opinion about it. The whole thing will end up in court one way or another.

Remember the “special election” for U.S. Senate fiasco? A court ordered a special election held the same day as the general. I got to vote for Kirk TWICE that day! And it was legal! Although this language doesn’t apply to the Burris fiasco, the ends justifying means approach has problems.

Will Illinois learn its lesson and do it the right (constitutional) way, or be lame ducky about it?

Dangerous stuff!

Comment by Louis G Atsaves Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:06 am
“Isn’t this exactly what Obama did with OFA?”

I don’t think so. OFA is now Organizing for Action, and it claims to not directly fund candidates but instead to fund outreach and education on issues. Plus, Obama didn’t throw millions of his own dollars to fund his agenda. He’s worth nowhere near what Rauner is worth.

Will Rauner use the money to twist GOP arms into voting for tax increases? I would expect him to use money for an anti-union agenda, and to combat public sector unions.

There was an article recently about ALEC and Heritage Foundation attacking unions in a new way, via municipal/county right to work ordinances. Rauner was already on board with this.

As far as Griffin, I’m honestly surprised that he’s able to function, after government workers have oppressed him all these years.

Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:07 am
==Will Illinois learn its lesson and do it the right (constitutional) way==

I believe a special election would be a constitutional way.

==The whole thing will end up in court one way or another.==

If they pass a special election bill and the Republicans challenge it they will be easily painted as being against democracy. I would be careful if I were them. But that’s their call if they want to have that argument.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:09 am
Sam Weinberg’s theory is an interesting one, but I can’t imagine a scenario where a Governor’s race doesn’t get the caps blown. The level of financial interest in those races is so high and the threshold is so low that it is inevitable, just look at the Chicago Mayor’s race where the caps were blown by a candidate that didn’t even qualify for the ballot.

Comment by The Captain Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:11 am
===Hope some of this is also used to protect social moderate Republicans who are fiscally conservative who have taken a pounding from our own party members who prefer ILGOP meetings be held in their little closets. You know, the gang that would prefer to lose elections and allow Democrats unfettered control of government.===

You do realize Uihlein contributed, right?

Ignorance to history and not following the money is willfully oblivious to recent history.

This is about a “Raunerite” Caucus.

If you can’t see that as dangerous to the GOP brand, and when Rauner gives to Dems, you are fine with a sitting “GOP” governor having the back of a Tier 1 Dem target, then why have a GOP?

It’s fun reading your observations on this…

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:12 am
Interesting that it’s so palatable to talk of the tens of millions here, 20 million there—-plenty of money around, it seems. But not for the people of the state! To those not in Bruce’s camp, the state needs police powers because there is NO money! Huh?

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:14 am
For those NOT afraid of the naturally corrupting influence of money, you should be asking yourselves about how exactly the top-down control that exists now was created. Same game with a different name will just yield more people who bring little to the process other than being able to identify where their checks (and staff, and campaign offices, etc.) come from. With low information voters participating in minimally covered races for offices most of them don’t understand, money almost always wins.

Comment by Jeeves the Cat Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:15 am
===Hope some of this can be used to support socially moderate Republicans===

With you there, Louis.

We all can use a stronger Republican Party in Illinois, with a fair representation of moderates. That has been under attack from within lately.

The risk might be if some of the donors to Rauner’s political fund push him the other way. These have previously included some very strident national PACs and interests. This won’t by any means be all Rauner’s money. We’ll see if it’s all his to distribute.

Comment by walker Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:17 am
“With low information voters participating in…”

Jeesh. I thought we agreed to ban this phrase.

Comment by A guy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:18 am
Guy, seems to me Madigan and the other legislative leaders support members of their caucuses who vote differently on different issues. Unless you think Dave Phelps and Greg Harris are in lockstep.

Rauner’’s talking about rewarding with money individual legislators from either party who vote his way on specific issues.

Resolve in the New Year to read first, comment second.

Comment by Wordslinger Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:30 am
This is no better or worse than anyone else trying to buy votes/loyalty. It is the exact same thing. Those who have been opposed to union money will likely be happy about it. For me it is about the integrity of a persons word. Rauner promised to right the ship and do business differently, honestly. It is that last part that is the lie. The actions are no worse, just the same. So is the lie.

Comment by JS Mill Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:32 am
@DelClinkton9:21=Bruce is more corrupt then Blago ever was. And he hasn’t even started the new job. I guess impeachment isn’t too far off.=

Who is going to impeach him? Rauner is paying them to play ball with him. If there was an impeachment vote, Rauner would easily buy the votes he would need. Integrity in Illinois government has sunk to zero point zero.

Comment by DuPage Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:40 am
Lol! While the anti-Rauner folks of the Democratic party ilk (or of the uneven O.W perspective) give lip service to the “corrupting power of money,” they conveniently ignore how Rauner will now be able to compete financially, and yes politically, with Madigan and Cullerton. These people evidently are okay with Blue money only. It’d be cleaner and easier if these people just said they like things as they are and with (mostly) Madigan and (sort of) Cullerton in charge.

Comment by Georg Sande Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:44 am
==Rauner promised to do business differently, honestly=

So the people who voted for him, who consider themselves informed, as opposed to low information voters………how do they rectify the secret plan our soon to be governor has? Trust me was good enough? Is that how these folks buy houses, cars, etc? Rauner is more of the same but with a sell that (high information?) voters bought.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:53 am
- Georg Sande -

Are you willfully ignorant or just a lemming?

Rauner stated he will support Republicans and Democrats.

Both.

Remember Rauner’s PAC?

https://capitolfax.com/2013/12/06/rauner-will-form-new-pac-to-protect-legislators-who-stand-with-him/

Looks like they are going to run it out of Citizens for Rauner too.

This is about Raunerites, not Republicans or Democrats;

From the link…

“We need a pro-business, pro-growth, pro-limited government, pro-tax reduction PAC down there in Springfield working with the Legislature for those who take tough votes.”

Dangerous times…

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:54 am
I agree with you JSMill.

Comment by Del Clinkton Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:55 am
==Rauner’’s talking about rewarding with money individual legislators from either party who vote his way on specific issues.==

He may fund Primary opposition as well to those who ignore his requests.

Comment by Roosevelt Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 10:55 am
Also, keep in mind that sometimes you just have to cock your gun rather than unload it. And he doesn’t need a shotgun either. He just needs to take out 1 or 2 “unbeatable” Legislators (from both parties) in 2016 to get everyone’s attention.

Comment by Roosevelt Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:00 am
O.W., You are wildly inconsistent, if not consistently entertaining, with your nonsense. But do tell. Provide a citation for your following exclaim: “Rauner stated he will support Republicans and Democrats.”

Comment by Georg Sande Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:02 am
…And we haven’t even gotten to the part of the story where Rauner and his guys start giving to Independent Expenditure groups.

Comment by Sam Weinberg Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:03 am
It really should come as no surprise that Rauner is going to use his cash to push his political agenda. He used it to get nominated and then to get elected.

Rauner may use some of that $20 million in 2016 to go after the supermajorities, but I have a feeling that he may find the road a bit more difficult in a presidential election year. For that matter, his campaign didn’t even move the balance of power in the House or Senate at all in 2014.

Rauner is going to learn that all the money in all his bank accounts will not substitute for the hard work of governing. I just hope he figures that out sooner rather than later.

Comment by Snucka Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:04 am
@Georg Sande: Afraid you are glossing over and missing a key point.

Please read Wordslinger’s at 1:30 am above to better discern the issue here.

Supporting your political party candidates regardless of individual votes, is one thing. Supporting those who vote your way regardless of political party, is another. Got the difference now?

Madigan, Schneider, Radogno, Durkin, and Cullerton all do the first.

Rauner is apparently proposing the second, as did Blago once. It never flew for Blago. We’ll see with Rauner.

Comment by walker Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:06 am
- Georg Sande -

Hitting a link is hard…lol

“We’re gonna raise a PAC, we’re gonna raise a fund dedicated to the state Legislature, members of both parties who take the tough votes. We’ve gotta protect the members who take tough votes.”

I’m consistent, thanks.

Ask around.

Dope.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:07 am
There’s precedent for what Rauner appears to be doing here. Here’s a good analysis of how a multimillionaire named Art Pope spent his own money in targeted legislative races — including Republican primaries — to move North Carolina significantly to the right over several election cycles:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/10/10/state-for-sale

Read it carefully and ask yourself if there might be some parallels.

Comment by olddog Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:09 am
Could Rauner fund a leadership challenge in 16?

Comment by Dozer Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:13 am
You guys are missing the important stuff:

First off, Rauner is playing for 2016 and the future. Structure first, then money. Think strategic first, then tactical.

IMO, this is Rauner’s way of putting in place a type of ‘vetting’ process for future candidates.

We’ll see….

———————-

Off topic, but there’s a really interesting turn that is happening (going to happen) in the world of government finance.

“The GASB’s proposal applies to transactions involving an agreement between at least one government and a taxpayer. The government reduces—or, abates—the taxes the taxpayer otherwise would owe. The taxpayer, in turn, takes a specific action that contributes to economic development or otherwise benefits the government or its citizens.”

Lin is: http://www.gasb.org/jsp/GASB/GASBContent_C/ProjectPage&cid=1176160019928

Short Take: All units of state/local government would have to start reporting as part of their annual reports the fiscal impacts of tax abatements made to individual parts (not applicable to mass property tax abatements to a class of properties).

We’re talking TIF abatements, Enterprise Zone Abatements, Special Assessment deals, Industrial abatements, etc.

Scheduled to be issued 08.2015

That could be some real fun.

Comment by Judgment Day (on the road) Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:13 am
Rauner has made sure that legislators who make the tough votes will have his support. Not a bad thing.

Comment by SonofSuperAbe2014 Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:14 am
==Rauner may use some of that $20 million in 2016 to go after the supermajorities, but I have a feeling that he may find the road a bit more difficult in a presidential election year.==

I think this is more about Primary opposition rather than General Election races. Why does everyone think that this is the only fund Rauner will create? This is the public fund to give notice to Legislators that he’s willing to spend big time cash to get the votes he needs to push HIS agenda. The public fund can be used when it’s in Rauner’s interest to show his fingerprints or, more likely, boot prints. The skulduggery funds will be much more anonymous but no less well funded.

Comment by Roosevelt Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:20 am
I also wonder what his appointments will look like? Perhaps that is a new thread soon? I think that will be interesting if he is non partisan….Because this does smell a bit.

Comment by Walter Mitty Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:29 am
Hey, I thought it was a good thing to get Republicans and Democrats to work together and vote on issues for the greater good.

Comment by Apocalypse Now Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:40 am
==Democratic party ilk==

When somebody speaks like that you should probably just dismiss them as capable of offering any sort of intelligent contributions to the discussion.

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:45 am
“as BEING capable”

Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:45 am
Rauner only needs to buy two votes,Madigan and Cullerton.Give each 10 million,problem solved.

Comment by Joe Blow Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:48 am
If history is a guide, I’d keep my eyes peeled for any new secretly funded “education” PACs coming out of that Cincinatti lawyer’s office.

In the past, they’ve tuned up Rauner’’s opponents pretty good while he did his Sgt. Schultz thing.

Comment by Wordslinger Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:48 am
== Sam Weinberg’s theory is an interesting one, but I can’t imagine a scenario where a Governor’s race doesn’t get the caps blown. ==

Fair points, but they ignore the much more pressing one: Griffin and Uihlein just gave $10 million to Rauner on New Year’s Eve, which was legal only because it was (technically) for an election he won two months ago.

Comment by Sam Weinberg Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 11:51 am
Willy:

I don’t see this money ending up in the coffers of a Democrat being challenged by Radogno or Durkin in the General Election.

Nor would a Democrat facing a primary challenge be wise to accept help from a Republican governor, especially when it has been totally tainted by the Tea Party.

I think you are most likely correct, this money is meant to supplant the authority of Durkin and Radogno. They will no longer be calling the shots.

We will see if it works out any differently for Rauner than it did for Rod, but if I were Radogno and Durkin I know what I would do.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 12:29 pm
- YDD -,

Agreed on the Dem aspect of the cash, but the “cover” Rauner can/woukd give to a Dem member over the howling of Durkin or Radogno…yikes.

Maybe if I check email, I could elaborate more….

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 12:32 pm
== Nor would a Democrat facing a primary challenge be wise to accept help from a Republican governor, especially when it has been totally tainted by the Tea Party.==

If Rauner has high poll numbers (and is moderate on social issues), the tea party label is not likely to stick.

Comment by Roosevelt Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 12:39 pm
R?ichard Uihlein contributed $2 million. Isn’t he the source of Proft’s fund for rightwing candidates? If Rauner requires GOP votes to raise taxes, might Uihlein end up funding both sides in a GOP primary

Comment by anon Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 12:51 pm
“You do realize Uihlein contributed, right? Ignorance to history and not following the money is willfully oblivious to recent history.”

Uihlein was a huge Rauner contributor during the election. He isn’t as one dimensional as you would believe in his politics and in his donations, and is very intelligent and focused, both in business and in politics.

Comment by Louis G Atsaves Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 12:59 pm
===Uihlein was a huge Rauner contributor during the election. He isn’t as one dimensional as you would believe in his politics and in his donations, and is very intelligent and focused, both in business and in politics.===

So…

Durkin and Radogno should expect their members to be Primaried if Rauner isn’t…”pleased”

Caucus loyalty or Raunerite Agenda?

Hmm.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 1:02 pm
Louis:

When Crain’s calls you the sugar daddy of the Illinois Tea Party, you become the sugar daddy of the Illinois Tea Party.

http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20130928/ISSUE01/309289966/the-koch-of-conservative-politics-in-illinois-uihlein

Just because the top conservative bankroller in Illinois is giving to the top Republican officeholder in Illinois doesn’t make him a regular party guy.

Uihlein, BTW, has quite a few contracts with state government.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 1:10 pm
“I’m a conservative Republican, and I’m trying to help people who believe as I do in limited government….” (Uihlein)

As long as your definition of “limited government” means gays are icky not be “married”.

And if your a woman…then the man can tell you what to do with your body.

But if you want to own a gun, then do whatever you’d like.

That kind of “limited government”.

Ok, got it.

Comment by Del Clinkton Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 1:39 pm
=== Caucus loyalty or Raunerite Agenda? ===

What makes you think they won’t be identical? The minority leaders have already signaled they are ready to serve the new guv.

Comment by anon Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 2:09 pm
===What makes you think they won’t be identical? The minority leaders have already signaled they are ready to serve the new guv.===

Welp, signaling that Rauner plans to protect Dems that vote how Rauner wants, and Uihline’s recent history of Primaring sitting GOP Caucus members, that doesn’t sound like Rauner has much respect for Caucus loyalty…

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 2:15 pm
=== Are rank and file Republicans going to be excited at what the definition of a Republican is acceptable to Rauner ===

Republican positions are “evolving” even as we write. When Dems were in control, the GOP unanimously opposed tax hikes, which they denounced as job killers. When AZ Bob says he’s for a temporary tax hike,(which he did on another thread), we can be confident that Republican votes are already lined up to do Rauner’s bidding in that regard. Suddenly, tax hikes won’t be so bad for the economy after all — so long as they are regressive.

Comment by anon Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 2:17 pm
–sam weinberg– why would the donation be illegal if it was after the new year started? are donations only allowed during election years?

Comment by kizzoboy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 2:18 pm
== –sam weinberg– why would the donation be illegal if it was after the new year started? are donations only allowed during election years? ==

It’s not the donation, but it’s the amount. Per 10 ILCS 5/9-8.5(b), “During an election cycle, a candidate political committee may not accept contributions with an aggregate value over the following: (i) $5,000 from any individual…” By giving on 12/30/14 and 12/31/14, his buddies’ contributions were considered to be part of the 2014 general “election cycle” and (since Rauner had self-funded) therefore not constrained by any campaign funding limits.

Comment by Sam Weinberg Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 2:32 pm
You guys are missing the main point. Rauner is going to use this cash to reassure Democrats it’s ok to vote against Madigan…. Mike may have met his match.

Comment by Achilles Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 2:41 pm
===You guys are missing the main point. Rauner is going to use this cash to reassure Democrats it’s ok to vote against Madigan…. Mike may have met his match.===

By what, protecting Dem House and Senate seats from the GOP?

Boy, that’s showing MJM & Cullerton, lol

If Rauner protects Dems voting Raunerite, what’s in it for the HGOP & SGOP?

The Raunerite Caucus ain’t helping the GOP.

Nope.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 2:45 pm
===Rauner is going to use this cash to reassure Democrats it’s ok to vote against Madigan===

Madigan only cares about two votes: Rules and Speaker. Otherwise, he’d have primaried Jack Franks years ago.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 2:46 pm
And a few others…

Comment by A guy Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 3:36 pm
LOL

There is nothing, nothing to prevent Democrats from voting “against Madigan” now.

This cash is to protect Republicans from each other.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 7:42 pm
Votes are only “tough” if they are unpopular with your constituents. So Rauner is telling legislators if you vote for my interests rather than those of your constituents, I will defend you against their wrath. And this money doesn’t pervert democracy?

Comment by Truthteller Monday, Jan 5, 15 @ 8:26 pm