Money Dominant, Not Sufficient In IL Politics

Surface results from the March 15 primary election are in: Gov. Bruce Rauner can apparently neither protect those who support him nor punish those who oppose him, while House Speaker Mike Madigan and his union allies can do both.

            But billionaires playing in Illinois politics have more money than Madigan and his allies can ever scrape together, and the latter burned through much of their stockpile to defend important yet small parts of their turf March 15.

            As savvy political pundit Rich Miller pointed out recently, Rauner makes about a million dollars a week and his buddy hedge fund director Ken Griffin just dropped $500 million to buy a couple of paintings. So scores of millions for politics are but trifling matters to the governor, Griffin and their sympathizers.

            The last time I looked, Rauner groups had about $30 million in their war chests to about one-third that for the Democrats.

            A few specifics: This past year, Chicago Democratic state representative Ken Dunkin went off the Madigan reservation, a rare occurrence, and supported Rauner on a key vote in the legislature

To return the favor, Rauner affiliates spent more than $4 million, or almost $500 per vote, in support of Dunkin, but Dunkin was crushed 2-1 by a Madigan-backed candidate who spent “just” $125 per vote.

            From a district near Springfield, GOP state senator Sam McCann bucked Rauner months ago on a public union issue.

To enforce discipline in his ranks, Rauner, through sympathetic parties, mounted a $3 million campaign to defeat this apostate. McCann survived, however, largely on the work of public employee unions, which induced their members to cross party lines to vote for McCann March 15.

            Rauner could take some solace in the success of a number of GOP legislative candidates whom he supported in their nomination races. On the other hand, a multi-million dollar campaign committee the governor spawned had no success in behalf of friendly Democratic challengers to “regular” Democratic candidates.

            But what will the Dems do when they run out of money?

            First, money is critical yet not sufficient. A good candidate with a strong message still needs money to win. But as Jeb Bush showed in the presidential sweepstakes, even $100 million can’t propel to the nomination a lack-luster candidate with a message that is out of tune with the electorate.

            And money can’t help a good downstate candidate with laughable advertising crafted in the big city; indeed, the money can work against him.

            In a rural House district near me, a strong candidate named Mike DeSutter fell afoul of messaging in his behalf (over which he had no control). I am told that the Liberty Principles PAC of Chicago ran ads that called one of Mike’s opponents “a career politician.” The sins of the candidate’s political career: service on a school board, the county board, and in the Army!

            The over-the-top message hurt its intended beneficiary badly, people from the district tell me, and Mike lost.

            Yet money is still critical in communicating with voters.

            Exhausted of money at some point, maybe this fall, maybe the next election cycle, Illinois Democrats will have to rely instead largely on union foot soldiers and a legislative districting map, crafted by Madigan in 2011 to favor Dems, to fend off the Rauner challenge.

            As I have said in this space before, the rapidly escalating campaign finance arms race is disturbing, as it makes politics the playground primarily of the super-rich.

As a result, the minimum financial thresholds in electoral contests are raised beyond the reach of civic-minded citizens who simply want to do some public service—unless of course they are willing to become wholly-owned subsidiaries of the Daddy Warbucks crowd or of union leaders.

The multi-million dollar legislative campaigns of today make the $26,000 (in today’s dollars) I spent half a century ago seem quaint.        

            The recent primary elections represented the first salvos in what will be continual battles between Rauner and Madigan through the coming 30 months of the governor’s term.

            In the meantime, I look forward to enactment by the voters this fall of an independent redistricting process, which should diminish Madigan’s control in the legislature

And more timely disclosure of campaign contributions and increased transparency as to who is pumping in the money would also be helpful to voters. Ads paid for by “The Liberty Principles PAC” or “The Good Government Coalition” tell us nothing.