Pantagraph.com Weather forecast, local radar and more
NewsMonday, August 27, 2007 4:01 PM CDT
Comments Comments (13) | E-mail this page E-mail this page | Print this page Print this page | Enlarge type Enlarge type | Reduce type Reduce type | Search archives Search archives | RSS RSS feeds | Add to My Yahoo! Add to My Yahoo!
Illinois keeps Obama fundraising above water
By Kevin McDermott
kevin.mcdermott@lee.net
Advertisement

SPRINGFIELD — As political leaders were rewriting Illinois election law to help Sen. Barack Obama win the presidency, the state’s political donors were doing their part — contributing close to $7.7 million to the Illinois favorite.

That’s how much Obama has raised in his state, as of the end of June, in his bid for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, according to data from the Federal Election Commission.

He is far and away Illinois’ most successful presidential fundraiser in either party, outraising fellow Democrat (and Illinois native) Hillary Rodham Clinton more than 4-to-1 in the state. He is also beating the entire combined Republican field by more than 3-to-1, the data show.

In fact, of every $3 in campaign money raised in Illinois this year for any presidential candidate, $2 of it went to Obama.

Obama’s lopsided financial support in Illinois comes at a time when the state is gaining new relevance in the presidential nomination process. Illinois has pushed its 2008 primaries up to February, after a declaration by state leaders that they wanted to help Obama.

That means the state’s large cache of voters will go to the polls before any candidate has locked up the nomination.

“Illinois Democrats have moved heaven and earth to assist Sen. Obama, and he is a fundraising machine,” said state Sen. Kirk Dillard, a Chicago-area Republican.

He still counts his former Springfield colleague as a friend but said he is troubled by the way Obama’s political and financial supporters have steamrolled across the state’s electoral landscape.

Paul Green, political scientist at Roosevelt University in Chicago, said the financial windfall for Obama is in line with the state’s tradition of using campaign contributions not just to get someone elected nationally, but also to stay on the right side of people who hold power locally — no matter how a national election turns out.

In Illinois, that means pleasing Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, Sen. Dick Durbin, and a state-level Democratic Party that holds total control in Springfield. And all of those heavy hitters have lined up behind Obama.

“There’s more to it than just Obama and his ’vision.’ … It’s a strategic decision” to donate to him in Illinois, said Green. “Mayor Daley is going to be around awhile. Obama, win or lose, is going to be around awhile. So you protect your interests.”

That local political instinct is so strong in Illinois, one Clinton campaign official suggested last week that it can be considered a victory for Clinton to have raised as much as she did ($1.7 million) on Obama’s home turf.

“We’re pleasantly surprised at the support she’s received in Illinois,” said Clinton spokesman Blake Zeff.

With the Republican vote so weak in Illinois, the national GOP has virtually written off the state. So it’s not surprising that the GOP contenders have stayed under $1 million each in their Illinois fundraising. Arizona Sen. John McCain did best among the Republicans in Illinois (and was third overall), garnering about $746,000, followed by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, with about $617,000.

According to federal law, individual donors can give no more than $2,300 per candidate for an election. They are allowed to donate for a primary election, and then again for a general election.

Raking in money

The state’s Democratic-controlled political leadership has made no pretense of even-handedness in its view of the wide field of Democratic presidential candidates.

In a speech in January, Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan first proposed pushing the state’s 2008 primary elections forward, to Feb. 5.

It’s been a common move among states this year, including Missouri, but Madigan’s explanation for it was unusual in its bluntness: “Illinois will be able to mark up for Barack Obama,” said Madigan, a Chicago Democrat, drawing thunderous applause from a bipartisan audience of state lawmakers.

Obama’s popularity in Illinois has sometimes crossed party lines. For example, Dillard, the Republican state senator, created a stir earlier this year by appearing in an Obama television commercial lauding the candidate for his bipartisanship.

But Dillard now says he’s bothered by the central role that money is playing in Obama’s campaign, and in presidential politics in general.

“Money is an unhealthy thing in politics. It’s ironic that my friend Sen. Obama, who likes to campaign as a reformer, is raking in money like a craps dealer at a casino,” said Dillard. “He’s sort of stuck in the system.”

Obama supporters, though, maintain he is anathema to “the system,” and that one the biggest issues brought up by his detractors — inexperience — is actually a virtue.

“(Donald) Rumsfeld and (Dick) Cheney had all the experience in the world, and look what they did,” said Gerald Montroy, a retired Metro East attorney who has contributed $2,000 to Obama this year. “He’s smart, he’s willing to listen … I think he is a person who can bring our country back together.”

Obama and Clinton have been locked in an unprecedented national fundraising battle in which they had raised $58.6 million and $62.5 million, respectively, as of June 30, according to the FEC figures.

In all, the data show, Illinois was second only to California ($8.6 million) in its support for Obama’s campaign. And, while Clinton is the big fundraising winner in her own adopted home state of New York, the Illinois junior senator did far better in her state than she did in his. He has raised $6 million in New York, to Clinton’s $13.8 million there.

Video
Most commented stories
Browse online archives
Recent issues:
Reader comments on this story - 13 total

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

Jason Smith wrote on Aug 28, 2007 3:50 PM:

" we are a theocracy bordering on a dictatorship right now, with no checks and balances, to reverse this trend is not socialist, right now the federal government is usurping state and individual rights, whoever posts blogs needs to check their facts before just rewriting spin they hear on conservative media!!! Hillary hasn't done anything for New York, except support rich downstaters....which is why I support Obama...I think for myself, and for the future of this country!!! "

Timmy wrote on Aug 27, 2007 8:26 PM:

" If Obama were recognized as being white, he would be "just another candidate". "

Weirdness! wrote on Aug 27, 2007 7:43 PM:

" How weird is it that people will give money to someone, just because they live in the same state. I challenge any Obama supporter to document ONE thing he has done for this state. "

Obamaniac wrote on Aug 27, 2007 4:40 PM:

" Do the Pantagraph headline writers actually read the articles? A headline like "Illinois keeps Obama fundraising above water" suggests that the money he's raising here is the only thing keeping his campaign afloat. The article suggests exactly the opposite, even ending by noting that Barack has raised far more in Hillary's "home" state than she has raised in his. Read first, THEN write the headline, please. "

Chapped wrote on Aug 27, 2007 2:02 PM:

" Does he get paid by this State to look out for our interests in DC (and i use that term loosely) ? And if so, why is he not in D.C has he given up his seat ? Do we still pay him when he is not at work ? I'm sure he qualified for a pension once elected ? All these questions ? Yes , I have more but I have to go to work and earn my money . I would kick all politicians in the %$^ ....butt there coffers are full of payraises...... it would hurt them there anyhow "

Awesome wrote on Aug 27, 2007 10:39 AM:

" Obama has my vote! "

reality check wrote on Aug 27, 2007 7:59 AM:

" If Obama or Mrs. Bill Clinton get elected, we are 1 step closer to a socialist state. Listen carefully to their campaign speeches and see if it is not reminiscent of the old Soviet propaganda. Sorry to disappoint, but the government runs nothing efficiently or cost effectively. "

He's trying to appeal to the African Americans wrote on Aug 27, 2007 6:48 AM:

" Look, a black man with a lot of money. He must be great!!! "

Ron Paul wrote on Aug 27, 2007 6:32 AM:

" is a libertarian " dog eat dog " politician who doesn't believe in the phrase " the common good ". He will get about 2% of the primary vote . End of story ! "

uncle guido wrote on Aug 27, 2007 5:36 AM:

" obama, what good is he anyway? has he done anything for below i-80? "

hmmh wrote on Aug 27, 2007 5:05 AM:

" Isn't he our senator or something? Sounds more like a popularity contest to me. I suppose anybody that would reelect Blagojevich might want to elect Obambi too. Illinois is becoming more relevant? Not hardly until Chicago either secedes from our union or voters get a little more informed and sophisticated. "

Never heard of Ron Paul wrote on Aug 27, 2007 12:47 AM:

" Guess it will be Obama for me. "

Help save America! wrote on Aug 26, 2007 11:41 PM:

" Vote Ron Paul in '08. "
Add your own comments

Please read the rules before posting comments.

You must be logged in to leave comments.
If you don't have a member ID, please register.

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?
 
Lee Enterprises Customer Service | 301 W. Washington St., PO Box 2907, Bloomington, IL 61701-2907 | Ph. 309-829-9000 | 800-747-7323
Copyright © 2008, Pantagraph Publishing Co. and Lee Enterprises. All rights reserved. | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy