Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

“Buying” votes?

Posted in:

Illinois

Lee Newspapers has a big to-do this weekend about contributions from state legislative leaders to targeted candidates.

[M]ore than $8 million was funneled from the campaign war chests of the leaders into 10 select races for the state House and Senate.

Observers say the amount of money dumped by the leadership into those battles raises concerns about the independence of locally elected representatives.

“When someone is elected after having a legislative leader drop 65 to 75 percent of the funds into that race, there is an indebtedness. It is much harder for a candidate in that position to buck the wishes of the leader,” said Cindi Canary, director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform. […]

“The big issue is that it put these races in the hands of the legislative leaders, as opposed to putting it in the hands of constituents. So, the (campaign) decisions aren’t even made by the candidates based on what the people in their districts want to hear,” Canary said.

“It’s a much more centralized approach to elections,” she said. “It’s a campaign that’s being produced off site.”

The Herald & Review has an accompanying editorial.

The fact is that the statewide elections and most contested legislative elections come down to who can buy the most votes. The system effectively leaves many voters out of the loop and virtually guarantees that the cost of government will continue to increase.

As a chart with today’s stories points out, in every case, the candidate who spent the most money per vote in the November election won. In Central Illinois, Rep. Bob Flider, D-Mount Zion, spent $37.60 for every vote in his favor. His opponent, Republican Dick Cain, spent $32.88.

That’s a bargain, compared to some other areas. In the Centralia area, Democrat Kurt Granberg spent $67.15 per vote in order to defeat his rival. In February, after year-end reports are filed, the Herald & Review will report specifically on where the money comes from and where it’s spent.

The chart can be viewed here.

posted by Rich Miller
Sunday, Jan 7, 07 @ 4:34 am

Comments

Money is by nature fungible.

Is it possible to create a system that doesn’t cause successful candidates to be indebted to a network of interest groups and political organizations?

And even if it’s possible, is it desirable?

These networks keep politicians playing games between the 40-yard lines. Do we want more radicalism in politics?

Comment by Carl Nyberg Sunday, Jan 7, 07 @ 11:01 am
That’s exactly what the Green Party is trying to do, Carl; and it’s yet another aspect that differentiates the Greens and the Democratic Party’s leadership. Compare the cost of each vote in the race for Governor. Who was able to do the most with the least amount of money?

Comment by Squideshi Sunday, Jan 7, 07 @ 12:21 pm
has anyone wondered what part of the distrcit was neglected, what local issue shortchanged by support from the leaders of either party?

That’s a tough one, but try

Comment by Capt. Obvious Sunday, Jan 7, 07 @ 12:51 pm
Seems to me that the Illinois system is little more than legal bribery. How can you recieve $250,000 or more and not call it any thing else?

Comment by Cash Sunday, Jan 7, 07 @ 3:51 pm
How’d the GOP ring up barely funded for the 2006 campaign?

Comment by Crimefighter Monday, Jan 8, 07 @ 4:37 pm