Latest news with #IllinoisStateBoardofElections
Chicago Tribune
08-07-2025
- Business
- Chicago Tribune
Illinois Senate President Don Harmon appeals potential $9.8 million fine for improperly accepting campaign cash
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.
Chicago Tribune
11-06-2025
- Politics
- Chicago Tribune
Editorial: Senate President Harmon's sly legislative maneuver exemplifies the need for campaign finance reform
Even lawmakers who've been around Springfield a long time were taken aback at the audacity of Senate President Don Harmon slipping a provision into a broader elections reform bill that would have gotten his campaign off the hook for a potential penalty well into the millions. The Senate president's problem stems from a March ruling by the Illinois State Board of Elections that his campaign had improperly accepted more than $4 million in donations in 2024 — a finding that stemmed from this newspaper's questions about the campaign's fundraising. If Harmon's appeal of that determination is unsuccessful, his campaign could be subject to a penalty as steep as $6.1 million. Harmon's language in the broader reform bill would have deemed the grounds for his campaign's appeal correct, both going forward . House Democrats concluded the provision would have ended the board's enforcement action, wiping the slate clean for the Harmon campaign. The Senate president's attempted slick move only confirmed what many voters already believe about Springfield — that those in power regularly speak in support of good government and clean campaigns but, when push comes to shove, do what they feel is necessary to preserve their authority. The maneuver deserved the condemnation it received — including from members of Harmon's own party. Thankfully, there was no vote on that elections reform package in the most recent session of the General Assembly. Beyond the unseemly legislative maneuvering, the Harmon story to our minds underscores how Springfield's past efforts at campaign finance have failed so miserably. The issue at the heart of Harmon's woes is a provision in the state's 2009 campaign finance reform law that was meant to neutralize the effect of big money on Illinois politics. Back then, worries about independently wealthy candidates effectively buying elections led state lawmakers to lift donation limits when 'self-funding' got to a certain level so that opponents could compete. Instead, that safeguard mainly has enabled party leaders like Harmon to collect sums well above the law's ordinary caps on individual contributions from politically connected, big-money donors like unions and other special interests. The law says that candidates who contribute their own money above a certain threshold — in the case of state lawmakers, it's $100,000 — no longer must abide by the donation limits (and neither must their opponents). The loophole is so flimsy that it permits those candidates to provide that cash as a loan and get repaid by the sizable sums that flow from the lifting of the caps. In this manner, Harmon uses the so-called millionaire's exemption in election cycle after election cycle, the Tribune reported. He's not alone. House Speaker Emanuel 'Chris' Welch has taken advantage of the same loophole, Alisa Kaplan, executive director of campaign watchdog Reform for Illinois, tells us. Republican leaders in the House and Senate have done so in the past as well. Before scandal forced him to retire in 2021, Michael Madigan routinely employed the same strategy as House speaker. Madigan awaits sentencing this coming Friday after being convicted in February of bribery and corruption charges. As broad as the exemption is, there are some limits. Harmon ran afoul of the law when his campaign collected amounts above the caps during a period of time it allegedly couldn't, according to the Board of Elections. Harmon says the board is misinterpreting the statute and has appealed. However the Harmon campaign affair is concluded, the bigger issue here is the loophole itself. It allows legislative leaders to evade campaign limits routinely and enables special interests to amass far too much influence over state policy through exorbitant donations. As Madigan so skillfully proved over his decades in power, caucus leaders exert immense influence over members by doling out funds in their campaign war chests, bankrolled by those special interests. This unholy alliance between the leaders and donors gives those deep-pocketed interests effective veto power over legislation they don't like. Why do so many problems facing the state seem so intractable? Look no further than this dynamic. Potential fixes don't come without tradeoffs. Eliminating the millionaire's exemption altogether would open the door again to uber-wealthy candidates (or super PACs controlled by rich individuals) gaining an unfair advantage. But there are some obvious steps Springfield should take. At the very least, an end should be put to making cap-busting donations in the form of loans. And the amount self-funders should have to front ought to be raised substantially from the $100,000 threshold currently applied to state legislative races. Reform for Illinois set forth other constructive suggestions — . They're no less relevant today. The Harmon campaign controversy will have done the urgent cause of campaign finance reform an unintended favor if it puts the millionaire's exemption on Springfield's agenda.
Yahoo
03-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
U.S. Supreme Court will hear Bost's appeal over Illinois' mail-in ballots
The U.S. Supreme Court announced in an order filed on Monday that it will hear a southern Illinois congressman's appeal over the state's counting of mail-in ballots received up to 14 days after Election Day. U.S. Rep. Mike Bost, R-Muphysboro, and two Illinois delegates to the Republican National Convention first filed the lawsuit against the Illinois State Board of Elections in May 2022 — alleging that counting ballots after the election violated federal election law. A President Trump-appointed judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Bost and the other plaintiffs lacked legal standing to challenge the state law. The high court agreed to hear Bost's appeal on standing during its next term, which is scheduled to start in October. 'With the American people's confidence in our elections at a discouraging low point, it's more important than ever we work to restore their trust,' Bost said in a statement. 'I believe a big part of that effort is ensuring all votes are tallied by Election Day, not days or weeks later.' The conservative activist group Judicial Watch will represent Bost and the other plaintiffs' appeal. 'The Supreme Court's decision to hear this case is a critical opportunity to uphold federal law, protect voter rights, and ensure election integrity,' said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. 'Illinois' 14-day extension of Election Day thwarts federal law, violates the civil rights of voters, and invites fraud.' A spokesman for the Illinois State Board of Elections declined to comment on the pending litigation. Bost has represented Illinois' 12th Congressional District since 2015, which includes portions of the Metro East. St. Louis Public Radio's Rachel Lippmann contributed to this report.
The Herald Scotland
10-05-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Pope Leo XIV's voting history sparks speculation
Many are already speculating on the new pontiff's political allegiances after taking the mantle as the spiritual leader of the world's 1.4 billion Roman Catholics on Thursday to global fanfare. Before being elected pope, for example, Leo XIV reposted a message on X, formerly known as Twitter, criticizing President Donald Trump and El Salvador President Nayib Bukele during their Oval Office meeting amid debate about a wrongfully deported man. In February, he posted two op-ed columns critical of Vice President JD Vance, a practicing Catholic, and the administration's stance on immigration. Many have latched onto the voting records as a sign of the new pontiff's politics, but Illinois officials are quick to point out that Prairie State voters are not required to register as members of a political party. "In Illinois, a declaration of party affiliation is not part of the voter registration process," Matt Dietrich, spokesman for the Illinois State Board of Elections said in a statement. The clerk's office for Cook County, Illinois, where the pontiff lived previously, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. This story will be updated.
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Here's what we know about Pope Leo XIV voting in US elections
The newly elected Pope Leo XIV, born in Chicago as Robert Prevost, is registered to vote in the United States and has previously voted in some Republican primaries, but he is not registered as a member of a political party, and his voter history does not indicate whom he voted for or why. According to the Illinois State Board of Elections, there is no party registration in the state. Voters can choose only one party's ballot during each primary, but that does not restrict which party's ballot a voter is allowed to choose in subsequent primaries. MORE: What we know about Leo XIV, the new American pope ABC News obtained Leo's voter history from the Will County Clerk's office, which is the current local election authority for him. (The office provided it in response to an inquiry referencing claims about Leo circulating online after he was announced as the new pope, and the records include a date of birth that matches Leo's.) Leo voted in the 2024 general election, the 2018 general election, the 2016 Republican primary, the 2014 general election and Republican primary and the 2012 general election and Republican primary, according to the voter history from the Will County Clerk's Office. The voting history does not say or indicate anything about how Leo voted in each election, why he voted in some elections and not in others or if he affiliates with any specific party, given that he would not have registered with any party in Illinois when registering to vote. ABC News has not obtained records showing which elections he voted in before 2012. Leo could still vote in future elections. A voter living abroad can continue voting by mail as long as the voter maintains his or her voting address in Illinois, according to a spokesperson for the Illinois State Board of Elections. If that voter relinquishes his or her Illinois address, that voter's right to vote for federal offices would still be protected under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. The new pope's personal politics are not known. Prior to being elected pontiff, Leo had a presence on Twitter, and later X, where he sometimes shared messages that appeared to be critical of some of President Donald Trump's policies. MORE: Pope Leo shared content critical of Trump, Vance's immigration policies in social media posts Trump and Vance have both congratulated Leo. Various cardinals have indicated, separately, that they believe Leo will be able to build a connection with Trump. Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York told reporters on Friday, "Will he want to build bridges to Donald Trump? I suppose that he would want to build bridges with the leader of every nation." Cardinal Charles Maung Bo, archbishop of Yangon in Myanmar, told ABC News' James Longman that he believes Leo can "build a bridge" and have a dialogue with Trump. ABC News' Hannah Demissie, Chris Boccia, Terry Moran, Ariane Nalty, and Kelsey Walsh contributed to this report. Here's what we know about Pope Leo XIV voting in US elections originally appeared on
