Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Today’s must-watch video (Updated x2)
Next Post: Did You Know? 80% Of Illinoisans Use Natural Gas To Heat Their Homes
Posted in:
* Hmm…
* But even if you don’t agree with this proposal (and there are some valid reasons for that), I would at least require proof that the cap-busting money is actually deposited because there is currently no such mechanism to show that the cash is real. Also, the self-funding triggers should be tied to inflation. The triggers have not risen since 2009. It cost Eileen Burke the same amount to bust the caps (minimum $100,001) as it did 15 years ago. Inflation would’ve increased that trigger to about $143K.
Burke reported raising $836,200 the very same day she declared that she’d busted the caps.
Both Democratic legislative leaders have busted their personal committee contribution caps. Speaker Chris Welch loaned his campaign $101,000. But Senate President Don Harmon busted the caps with a straight contribution.
* Interestingly enough, while the self-financing triggers don’t rise with inflation, the law mandates that all contribution limits must be adjusted to the cost of living. The contribution limit on political action committees is now $68,500. That limit was $50,000 when the bill was initially passed.
Discuss.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Mar 1, 24 @ 12:15 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Today’s must-watch video (Updated x2)
Next Post: Did You Know? 80% Of Illinoisans Use Natural Gas To Heat Their Homes
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
cheat code sounds bad in the context of politics. it’s not in the context of gaming. but, we get what Fabric is inferring, at least on Eileen O’Neill Burke if not on the current Speaker with links to Vallas and Madigan. which or whatever, raise the amount or the way to do it if it bothers you. doesn’t bother me. in fact, might be interesting to lower it so folks who don’t have the ability to put in or loan $100k could allow greater contributions. why limit people who don’t have money at that 100k level?
Comment by Amalia Friday, Mar 1, 24 @ 12:33 pm
I’m not sure forbidding loans would eliminate the “cheat code”. Nothing would stop a candidate from “contributing” the amount needed to bust the caps and then just refund it back at the end of the campaign
Comment by Sad Friday, Mar 1, 24 @ 12:35 pm
Fritz Kaegi has loaned his own campaign over $4 million.
Comment by City Zen Friday, Mar 1, 24 @ 12:47 pm
“Burke reported raising $836,200 the very same day
she declared that she’d busted the caps”
Gerald Beeson, COO of Citadel LLC made a whopping 100,000 donation, and another Citadel employee dropped 75K that same Day. Those Ken Griffin Bonus must be generous.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Friday, Mar 1, 24 @ 12:48 pm
===Fritz Kaegi has===
OK, now how about contributing to the actual post?
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 1, 24 @ 12:48 pm
Related.
I’ve always wondered if these self-loans were able to be paid back *with interest*. As in, can you loan your campaign money, but then pay yourself back the principal + interest. Additionally, can you set the interest rate yourself? It is capped at 1.5%/mo like tax sale interest is? Can you compound the interest monthly, or only yearly?
Basically, unless this is prohibited you’d become your own bank and the interest you pay yourself would come from the donations of others to your campaign.
I’ve tried looking this up in the election code, but never could find anything definitive on it.
–there is currently no such mechanism to show that the cash is real.–
This sort of nonsense is what makes me think the above situation might also be possible.
If done right(or wrong), it could be the political equivalent of the Broadway show “The Producers”.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Friday, Mar 1, 24 @ 1:39 pm
Good point about proving money exists. Were I an unscrupulous candidate, I’d get a ghost opponent to file for self funding and then be able to spend whatever I want. Or is there a way to prevent that?
Comment by Save Ferris Friday, Mar 1, 24 @ 1:50 pm
===I would at least require proof that the cap-busting money is actually deposited because there is currently no such mechanism to show that the cash is real. ===
The thing I always have found fascinating about this is that for pretty much all people they don’t have that kind of liquidity even if they had that kind of wealth. I would definitely support actual proof of the funds being transferred from the individual into the campaign fund.
Coming up with that kind of cash for most people would create a taxable event as they liquidated whatever their wealth was held in and would traditionally take several days to clear.
Comment by Candy Dogood Friday, Mar 1, 24 @ 1:57 pm