logo
Illinois Senate President Don Harmon appeals potential $9.8 million fine for improperly accepting campaign cash

Illinois Senate President Don Harmon appeals potential $9.8 million fine for improperly accepting campaign cash

Chicago Tribune21 hours ago
An attorney for Illinois Senate President Don Harmon's political operation says state election authorities reached an 'absurd' conclusion earlier this year in issuing nearly $10 million in penalties against Harmon's campaign fund after determining he violated campaign fundraising limits.
In an 11-page appeal filed late last week with the Illinois State Board of Elections, attorney Michael Kasper also laid out what amounted to a legal justification for Harmon's unsuccessful attempt in the closing hours of this spring's legislative session to pass a measure that could have negated the case and the $9.8 million potential penalty.
At issue is whether Harmon, a Democrat from Oak Park, improperly accepted $4 million more in campaign contributions after the March 2024 primary than permitted under limits established in a state law he co-sponsored. The elections board leveled the charges this spring after a Chicago Tribune inquiry about the fundraising activities of his Friends of Don Harmon for State Senate campaign fund.
Using a frequently used loophole in a law purportedly designed to help candidates compete with wealthy opponents, Harmon contributed $100,001 to his own campaign in January 2023. It was precisely one dollar over the contribution limit threshold that allowed him or anyone else running for his Senate seat to accept unlimited funds for that race. In campaign paperwork, Harmon indicated he thought the move allowed him to collect unlimited cash through the November 2024 election cycle. But board officials informed him that the loophole would only be open through the March 2024 primary, meaning they viewed the campaign cash Harmon collected above campaign restrictions between the March primary and the end of the year was not allowed.
Responding to a June 5 letter in which elections board staff notified Harmon's campaign of the impending fine, his attorney argued that the January 2023 contribution should have lifted the contribution limits at least through the end of 2024, if not through the March 2026 primary, when Harmon's seat will next appear on the ballot.
'The staff's analysis would create an absurd system that unfairly benefits self-funding candidates and also turns campaign finance compliance into simple accounting gimmicks,' Kasper wrote.
The state elections board had no comment on Harmon's appeal, spokesperson Matt Dietrich said Monday.
Harmon campaign spokespersonTom Bowen said the appeal 'speaks for itself.'
The next step is for a hearing officer to hold a hearing with both sides and make a recommendation to be reviewed by the board's general counsel before the board issues a final ruling, possibly as soon as its August meeting.
In the filing, Harmon's campaign argued the elections board's interpretation would allow a candidate in his position to accept unlimited contributions during a period well before an election when no opponent has entered the race and then have limits put back in place closer to when voting begins. Conversely, a candidate in Harmon's position could also simply lift the limits again by refunding his own cap-busting contribution the day after a primary and depositing it back into the campaign fund 'on the same day — the same hour — the same minute,' the campaign said in its appeal.
'Does the money even have to move accounts, or can it just be an accounting entry?' Kasper wrote. 'According to the Board's staff, (due to) the fact that Mr. Harmon did not go through this, frankly, silly exercise, he now faces almost $10,000,000 in fines and penalties.
'The General Assembly did not enact the thorough and time-tested campaign finance regime that we have today by requiring candidates to jump through accounting hoops simply for the purpose of jumping through the hoop.'
In arguing that the contribution cap should have been off through at least the end of 2024, Harmon's filing also calls attention to how the board's determination treated his situation differently than it would a member of the Illinois House, where each seat is up for election every two years. Senate seats, by contrast, have two four-year terms and one two-year term each decade.
This issue was at the heart of Harmon's controversial attempt to add language into elections legislation on the final day of the spring session that would have declared it 'existing law' that senators halfway through a four-year term 'shall be deemed to have been nominated at the next general primary election, regardless of whether the candidate's name appeared on the general primary election ballot.'
Defending the move to the Tribune days after backlash to the provision tanked the broader elections bill, Harmon said: 'A fundamental notion of campaign finance law is that House candidates and Senate candidates be treated the same. The state board staff's interpretation treats House candidates and Senate candidates fundamentally differently.'
In the recent filing, Harmon's attorney points out that a section on contribution limits in the board's own campaign disclosure guide notes, 'Candidates seeking office in the General Assembly have their election cycle reset every general election regardless of participation.'
'It makes little sense that the Board would treat Senate and House candidates the same for purposes of applying contribution limitations, but differently for removing contribution limitations after a primary election,' Kasper wrote. 'Instead, the General Assembly structured election cycles so that all legislative candidates are treated the same.'
Calling the board's penalty — a payment to the state's general fund equal to the more than $4 million it says Harmon raised in excess of the limits, plus a nearly $5.8 million fine calculated based on 150% of that same amount — 'excessive' and 'unconstitutional,' Harmon's campaign asked for the matter to be dismissed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Judge orders mental evaluation in appeal for Laken Riley's convicted killer
Judge orders mental evaluation in appeal for Laken Riley's convicted killer

UPI

time18 minutes ago

  • UPI

Judge orders mental evaluation in appeal for Laken Riley's convicted killer

The 2024 murder of 22-year-old Georgia university student Laken Riley received a lot of attention from President Donald Trump, who in January signed into law the Laken Riley Act (pictured). File Photo by Samuel Corum/UPI | License Photo July 8 (UPI) -- A Georgia judge ordered a mental evaluation for Jose Ibarra, the man convicted in the 2024 murder of 22-year-old university student Laken Riley. It will determine if Ibarra, a native of Venezuela, was mentally competent at the time of the crime and later at trial, including whether he understood the legal consequences of waiving a trial by jury and if he is mentally equipped to assist in his own appeal. In November, Ibarra was convicted of malice murder and other related charges in the February 2024 attack that left Riley, a nursing student, dead near a wooded trail on the campus of the University of Georgia. It was the impetus behind the Laken Riley Act, decried as a political move by opponents and which passed the Senate and was signed by U.S. President Donald Trump on January 29. The decision to call for the mental evaluation was issued last week by Athens-Clarke County Superior Court Judge H. Patrick Haggard, who sentenced Ibarra to life in prison with no chance of parole. Haggard's order filed on Thursday instructs officials to figure out if the undocumented migrant was "capable of understanding the nature and object of pretrial proceedings, including waiver of jury trial rights." Ibarra, 27, is hoping to vacate his guilty sentence or secure a new court trial after his attorneys filed a new-trial motion only weeks after his conviction late last year. His legal team argued that the guilty verdict was "contrary to law" and evidence. Ibarra, who speaks Spanish as a first language and possibly faced a language barrier, was characterized as "a slow learner" last month during a virtual hearing by defense attorney David Dodds. The state, for its part, did not oppose the evaluation request but filed a separate motion to seek public money to retain expert witnesses for a possible court appeal.

Mass. Senate eyes bill to ban students from having cell phones during school day
Mass. Senate eyes bill to ban students from having cell phones during school day

Boston Globe

time19 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Mass. Senate eyes bill to ban students from having cell phones during school day

Related : Advertisement The prohibition would include devices like cell phones, tablets, smartwatches, and Bluetooth headphones, according to the draft bill. The Massachusetts legislation would require schools to prohibit physical access to devices like phones and smartwatches, and have those policies in place before the start of the 2026-27 school year. It also directs the state's K-12 education department to provide guidance to the schools and districts guidance on the creation of such policies. The proposal includes several exemptions for students who need access to personal electronic devices, including as part of a student's special education plan, accommodations to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, English language learners, during emergencies, and issues related to 'school and student health and safety,' according to language of the bill. It also requires schools to have a method for parents and guardians to contact students during the school day, or for a student to reach their parent or guardian. Advertisement The measure approved by the legislature's Joint Committee on Education has the support of Senate President Karen Spilka. In a joint statement with Senator Jason M. Lewis, the senate chair of the committee, Spilka and Lewis hailed the vote. 'The cell phone is one of the most distracting devices ever created. Overwhelming evidence shows us that cell phones are major barriers to student growth and achievement in the classroom, and they make it harder for our talented educators to teach,' they said in the joint statement. The bill now moves to the Senate's Ways and Means Committee, though lawmakers did not say when the legislation may come up for a full Senate vote. House Speaker Ron Mariano, himself a former teacher, did not respond to a question Tuesday on whether he'd support a school cell phone ban. Nearly three quarters of US high school teachers said cell phones distract students and cause a major problem for classrooms, The Massachusetts Teachers Association, state Education Secretary Patrick Tutwiler, and state Attorney General Andrea Campbell have all supported banning students from having cell phones in classrooms. Part of the concern over in-classroom use of cell phones is the access social media platforms. Health officials like former US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy have warned heavy social media use by young people is associated with 'significant mental health harms.' As of May, a majority of states have imposed measures that ban or restrict students from using cellphones in schools, or recommend schools create their own policies, Advertisement Ten states — Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, New York, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Virginia — have imposed a full ban on cell phones during the school day, while seven more prohibit phones during class time. And last month, In Massachusetts, school districts in places like Newton, Brockton, Fall River, Methuen, and Ipswich have rules in place restricting students from cell phones. In a previous interview, Jonathan Mitchell, the principal of Ipswich High School, said a cell phone ban launched last fall changed the school for the better. At Ipswich, students who bring their phones to the high school have to turn their phones over to teachers at the start of the day and retrieve them when classes end. Students talk to each other more often, the cafeteria is louder, and fewer teens have their faces looking at cell phone screens, he said. 'It's hard to quantify with data, but it appears to have had a positive impact on school culture,' Mitchell said. Follow him on Bluesky at He can also be reached on Signal at john_hilliard.70 or email him at

Arrington sees another chance to notch conservative wins, spending cuts in second megabill
Arrington sees another chance to notch conservative wins, spending cuts in second megabill

Politico

time23 minutes ago

  • Politico

Arrington sees another chance to notch conservative wins, spending cuts in second megabill

House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington says Republicans shouldn't give up on advancing certain priorities that were cut out of their 'big, beautiful bill' for not complying with Senate rules, telling reporters Tuesday that lawmakers will try again in follow-up budget reconciliation packages. 'There may be a longer list of things that were kicked out by the Senate parliamentarian as non-compliant with the Byrd rule — I think we should make another run at that and look for ways to structure the provisions so that it's more fundamentally budgetary in impact and policy,' the Texas Republican said during the press call Tuesday afternoon. 'I suspect that's why they were kicked out.' The so-called Byrd rule limits what provisions can be included in a bill moving through Congress through the reconciliation process, which allows lawmakers to skirt the 60-vote filibuster threshold in the Senate. Arrington specifically pointed to one provision stripped in the Senate from the House-passed megabill that would have prohibited Medicaid coverage for gender affirming surgeries, and another that would have banned noncitizens from tapping into Medicaid resources. 'I think those — we need to spend more time' crafting the provisions to pass muster with the parliamentarian, Arrington said. 'I don't think we spent enough time to look for a pathway to success on them, and that's sort of the landscape, as I see it, of the opportunities in another reconciliation bill.' Echoing Speaker Mike Johnson 's recent comments, Arrington said he suspects GOP leaders will attempt to do two more party-line packages in the 119th Congress, with the next one slated for the fall. Arrington added members would likely demand that those additional measures be drafted under circumstances where both chambers adhere to the same budget framework, avoiding a repeat of the most recent scenario where House and Senate Republicans each gave their committees different deficit reduction targets. He lamented the fact that the Senate did not comply with the House's aggressive instructions for writing iits version of the megabill, but credited fiscal hawks for helping secure $1.5 trillion in savings in a final product, and noted that it was not 'feasible' to expect the full magnitude of cost savings would be acheived in a single reconciliation bill — 'politically, at least.' As it currently stands, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which President Donald Trump signed into law over the weekend, is 'front loaded with costs and back-end loaded with savings,' which Arrington said should compel Republicans to make sure the administration follows through in 'mak[ing] sure the savings actually happen.' 'That was a concern among conservative budget hawks,' Arrington said. 'When I think about the Budget Committee's role going forward, one of the things that we need to do … is keep the pressure on the Senate, on the House and the administration to be diligent in implementation and enforcement.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store