Illinois Senate President Don Harmon faces potential $9.8 million fine for improperly accepting campaign cash
State election officials have informed Senate President Don Harmon that he will face more than $9.8 million in penalties pending an appeal of a case alleging he broke an Illinois election law designed to rein in big money in political campaigns.
The calculation of the potential penalty emerged only days after the Oak Park Democrat attempted to pass legislation designed to wipe away the election board case and the potential penalties, a maneuver stymied amid bipartisan backlash only hours before the spring session adjourned early June 1.
The developments take on an added political dimension because of the looming federal sentencing on Friday of former Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan in the bribery-related ComEd scandal.
In a letter dated June 5, the Illinois State Board of Elections told Harmon's campaign committee it must pay more than $9.8 million within 30 days unless an appeal is filed. The Harmon campaign has already filed a notification that it plans to appeal, and Harmon has said he 'fully complied with the law.'
On Tuesday, Harmon's political spokesman, Tom Bowen, said Harmon has supported every campaign finance reform that has passed the legislature and has 'always prioritized the highest ethical standards.'
'Our committee has filed a response to the Board of Elections that we do not agree with their assessment,' Bowen said in an emailed statement. 'We look forward to our opportunity to resolve this matter.'
Following a Tribune inquiry about Harmon's fundraising, election board officials notified Harmon in March that he had accepted more than $4 million in campaign contributions over the amount allowed under campaign finance restrictions he championed years ago that limit the size of political contributions.
The board arrived at the $9.8 million figure based on two provisions in the law.
The first would require Harmon's political fund to send to the state's operating fund an amount equal to the more than $4 million his campaign fund collected over the limit. The board also computed a nearly $5.8 million fine based on 150% of the amount the board determined Harmon overcollected. The board said it took into account a provision in the law that allowed for a couple of reductions for the first two violations among the dozens of excessive contributions in question.
It's still uncertain how precarious this situation is for Harmon and his campaign fund. Politicians frequently challenge the board, and negotiations can result in final fines that are a fraction of the potential fine. If Harmon wins the appeal, he could wind up paying nothing.
In a Tribune interview last week, Harmon also defended his eleventh-hour attempt to change state law with a clause that could have eliminated his elections board dispute and potential fine. He said the language he sought to insert in the statute was 'existing law' and his measure was an effort to clarify the issue.
But that is Harmon's interpretation of 'existing law,' not that of elections board officials.
At the heart of the disagreement between Harmon and election officials is a loophole in state campaign finance law. It allows politicians to collect contributions above state limits if any candidate in the race in which they are running — themselves or an opponent — reports reaching a 'self-funding threshold' in which they have given or loaned their campaign funds more than $250,000 for statewide races and more than $100,000 in races for the state legislature or local offices.
In 2023, Harmon gave his state Senate campaign committee more than $100,000 to open the loophole for the 2024 campaign season, even though he was not running for office last year.
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 March and the end of the year was not allowed.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Politico
29 minutes ago
- Politico
Trump revokes California's nation-leading electric vehicle mandate
President Donald Trump moved Thursday to eliminate California's nation-leading vehicle emissions standards, upending strict rules that had become a template for states across the nation to realize their greenhouse gas ambitions. Trump signed three Congressional Review Act resolutions rolling back a trio of California's rules at a White House signing ceremony, delivering on his Day 1 executive order to quickly roll back electric vehicle mandates around the country. 'We officially rescue the US auto industry from destruction by terminating California's electric vehicle mandate, once and for all,' Trump said at a Oval Office signing alongside House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, Energy Secretary Chris Wright and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin. The president, in a wide-ranging speech before the signing, used the moment to hit on a range of issues, including inflation, his disdain for windmills and his recent fallout with Tesla CEO Elon Musk. 'Now we know why Elon doesn't like me so much,' Trump quipped, before saying that Musk never asked him to save EV rules and that their break was over other 'smaller things.' While the Trump administration has also gone on the offensive against federal vehicle standards, California's regulations aimed at phasing out gas-powered passenger vehicles and heavy-duty diesel trucks — which are followed by a dozen other states — have drawn the stiffest opposition from the auto and fossil fuel industries. 'Worse than unachievable, these EV mandates were going to be harmful,' said John Bozzella, president and CEO of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation. 'Harmful to auto affordability, to consumer choice, to industry competitiveness and to economic activity.' The move takes place against the backdrop of worsening relations between Trump and Gov, Gavin Newsom, with the president ordering the military to quell unrest in Los Angeles over immigration raids. It also comes as Tesla CEO and former White House adviser Elon Musk clashed with Trump last week over electric vehicle policies. Trump's signature revokes the Golden State's unique permission to exceed federal vehicle pollution standards, which it's used for decades to set nation-leading rules. A dozen other Democrat-led states have opted to follow California's rules, representing one-third of the U.S. auto market. California's regulations aim to require automakers to sell increasing percentages of zero-emission vehicles, culminating in a 2035 target of all new-car sales being electric or otherwise carbon-free. Trump had targeted California's rules in his first term and on the campaign trail for his second term. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin asked Congress to revoke them using the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn rules passed in the waning days of the previous administration. The request triggered a debate among Republicans about whether to stretch congressional norms by using the CRA to roll back California's rules, which Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough and the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office have said aren't subject to the law. In addition to the rules for passenger vehicles, Thursday's signings roll back California's authority to enforce zero-emission sales targets for commercial trucks and higher standards for heavy-duty diesel engines. The fight over whether Congress acted lawfully will now head to the courts. California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta said last month they would sue immediately after Trump signs the resolutions. The outcome of that court case will have widespread implications, as Democratic leaders seek to wean drivers and industry off fossil fuels and hit lofty greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals. But the question is especially acute for California, which has struggled for decades to reduce the nation's worst smog in the Los Angeles area and Central Valley and comply with federal air quality standards under the Clean Air Act. Failure to reach those standards could result in sanctions and withholding of federal highway funds, which both Republican and Democratic administrations have floated in the past. Trump's EPA threatened sanctions against the state in 2019, just days after the agency revoked an earlier version of its electric vehicle rules. 'It is hard to imagine that they will not threaten sanctions,' said Ann Carlson, who was head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under former President Joe Biden. 'The president clearly has it out for California, and Los Angeles is obviously in his sights.' EPA said in a statement when asked about the possibility of sanctions that it will enforce the Clean Air Act. 'EPA will continue to implement the Clean Air Act as provided in law and will continue to hope that California can get into attainment after decades of nonattainment,' the agency said. EPA could develop its own plan for California to meet federal standards, though air quality experts say that's unlikely because the agency would have to take unpopular steps like restricting driving. California Air Resources Board spokesperson Lindsay Buckley said in a statement that without the waivers, the state will need to find an alternative to reach compliance. CARB chair Liane Randolph told state lawmakers during a hearing last month that she's 'confident California will prevail in litigation,' but that could take years, during which the rules are not enforceable. Randolph suggested that the state could consider approaches like district emissions rules for 'indirect sources' like warehouses that attract commercial trucks, incentives to encourage EV purchases and putting more funding towards public transit.

34 minutes ago
Standoff with troops in Los Angeles reignites old feud as Newsom resists Trump's immigration raids
WASHINGTON -- It was earlier this year that California Gov. Gavin Newsom was making nice with President Donald Trump as he sought help for his wildfire-battered state and moderating his approach ahead of a potential bid for the White House. But now the gloves are off after Trump took the extraordinary step of federalizing the National Guard in Los Angeles over Newsom's objections and the governor responded by suing the administration, alleging abuse of power that marked an 'unmistakable step toward authoritarianism.' The escalating clash pits the leader of the Republican Party against a Democrat with ambitions of leading his own party, with a striking backdrop of a domestic troop deployment meant to control a city in unrest and now to assist in arresting migrants — the centerpiece of the president's agenda. For Trump, it's another chance to battle with Newsom, a frequent foil who leads a heavily Democratic state the president has long criticized. And for Newsom, the feud has handed him a national platform as a beleaguered Democratic Party seeks a leader able to resist Trump. 'He has shown he's not going to be intimidated, and we're all for that,' Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said of Newsom on Wednesday. Conservative commentator Ben Shapiro, a former California resident, said Newsom's motivations for taking on Trump are clear. 'This is all about Gavin Newsom running for president in 2028, and what he is hoping is that becoming the face of a resistance to Trump is going to jog him to victory in Democratic primaries,' he said in his podcast 'The Ben Shapiro Show.' Trump has long been a foe of California, which overwhelmingly rejected him in all three of his presidential campaigns. Over the years, Trump has threatened to intercede in the state's long-running homeless crisis, vowed to withhold federal wildfire aid as political leverage in a dispute over water rights, called on police to shoot people robbing stores and warned residents 'your children are in danger' because of illegal immigration. As a candidate in 2023, Trump said California was once a symbol of American prosperity but is 'becoming a symbol of our nation's decline.' 'This is not a great state anymore. This is a dumping ground,' Trump said at the time. 'The world is being dumped into California. Prisoners. Terrorists. Mental patients.' Newsom would learn to balance the dueling imperatives of a governor who needs to work with the federal government with being one of the Democratic Party's most prominent figures. As governor-elect, Newsom joined Trump in November 2018 as the then-president viewed wildfire damage in Paradise, California, and they pledged to put aside political differences to help the community recover. He was also overly complimentary of the Trump administration's assistance to California during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, praising Trump's 'focus on treatments' for the virus and thanking him for sending masks and gloves to his state. But Newsom was also a top surrogate for Democrats in the 2024 campaign and frequently warned of the consequences of Trump's return to the White House. There was a handshake and a warm pat on the back. Newsom was there on the tarmac in Los Angeles in January, welcoming Trump and first lady Melania Trump, who had traveled west to survey the damage from the deadly wildfires in Southern California. Then they spoke to reporters together, pledging cooperation to rebuild the area and appreciating each other's presence. 'You were there for us during COVID. I don't forget that,' Newsom said. 'And I have all the expectations that we'll be able to work together to get this speedy recovery.' Trump added: 'We will. We're going to get it done.' Newsom also traveled to Washington in February to press Trump and lawmakers for more federal wildfire relief. The governor called his meeting with Trump 'productive' and one that was marked with a 'spirit of collaboration and cooperation.' The cordial attitude was part of Newsom's unmistakable appeal to the center, painting himself as a pragmatist to reach out to those who had fled from a party that had just lost all battleground states in the 2024 presidential election. Newsom spoke to conservative allies of Trump on a new podcast the governor billed as a way for Democrats to learn from the political successes of Trump's 'Make America Great Again' movement. He voiced opposition to transgender athletes participating in female sports while shifting focus away from efforts in Sacramento to 'Trump-proof' California — which Newsom embarked on after Trump's victory in November — as the wildfires raged. In an April interview with YouTube commentator Brian Tyler Cohen, Newsom acknowledged Trump's ability to appeal to the public. 'His success is his ability to win every damn news cycle and get us distracted and moving in 25 different directions,' he said. The Democratic governor and Trump have been feuding publicly about the response to protests, with Newsom claiming Trump didn't warn him he'd deploy troops in a Friday phone call and Trump claiming the conversation was about that. Newsom has taunted Trump administration officials with arresting him, and Trump first appeared receptive to the idea and then walked back earlier remarks. After Newsom filed an emergency request in federal court Tuesday to block the Trump administration from using the National Guard and Marines to assist with immigration raids in Los Angeles, he gave a public address accusing Trump of going beyond arresting criminals. 'California may be first, but it clearly will not end here,' he warned. 'Other states are next. Democracy is next. Democracy is under assault before our eyes.' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed Newsom's speech as performative. 'I know Gavin Newsom had a big address to the nation last night — I guess he thought that's what it was for maybe his future political ambitions,' Leavitt said Wednesday. 'But he spoke a lot of words. We haven't seen action.' The filing this week wasn't the first time this year that California had sued the Trump administration. In April, Newsom filed a lawsuit that challenged Trump's authority to impose sweeping tariffs that the governor asserted would inflate prices and inflict billions of dollars in damage to California, which has the nation's largest economy. And California — not just Newsom — continues to be a foil. Just this month, the Trump administration signaled that it intends to cut off federal funding for a long-delayed California high-speed rail project plagued by multibillion-dollar cost overruns. He's threatened to pull federal funding in California if the state did not bar transgender students from participating in girls sports. The Justice Department warned districts they could face legal trouble if they don't bar trans athletes from competition.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'I call it a rebellion': Maxine Waters' history of enflaming crowds, from Rodney King to today
Eighteen-term Democrat Rep. Maxine Waters resurfaced in the news after several run-ins with federal authorities during the ongoing illegal immigration riots in California, just as her House tenure began amid prior Angeleno unrest. In 1992, as she was finishing her first term in Congress, the not-guilty verdict against White LAPD officers seen beating a Black motorist named Rodney King sparked a similar conflagration in Los Angeles, and Waters was in the midst of it then as well. The riots greatly affected her South Los Angeles district, and Waters was quoted at the time as appearing to downplay the violence not as a "riot" but as "just a bunch of crazy people who went out and did bad things for no reason." "I maintain it was somewhat understandable, if not acceptable. So I call it a rebellion," she said, according to the Los Angeles Times. Maxine Waters Torched By Feds For 'Taunting' Guardsmen And 'Spewing Lies' About Riots, Trying To Enter Jail Waters had joined the Rev. Jesse Jackson in trying to convince the Justice Department to file civil rights charges against the acquitted officers, blaming the rioting on Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) Chief Daryl Gates and President George H.W. Bush, according to famed journalist Robert Novak. Read On The Fox News App When Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., attempted to have Waters expelled from Congress in 2021 for "inciting violence and terrorism," the Democrat claimed some of her past remarks were taken out of context. "I am not worried that they're going to continue to distort what I say," she told The Grio after Greene led her resolution with Waters' Rodney King-era statements. Greene said Waters violated House Rule 23's clause regarding conduct by members "at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House." At a 2007 anti-war protest, Waters declared she was "not afraid of George Bush" and also pledged to "get rid of" then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. She later drew the ire of Greene and other Republicans when she told an LGBTQ gala, "I will go and take out Trump tonight." Defenders said she was speaking rhetorically and politically and not threatening the mogul. Later in Trump's first administration, Waters was filmed on a California street corner shouting at supportive demonstrators and instructing them to be disruptive toward Trump allies. Maxine Waters Taunts Armed Agents After Feds Slam Door On Her During La Riots: 'You Better Shoot Straight' "If you see anybody … in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out, and you create a crowd, and you push back on them. And you tell them that they are not welcome." She later said she did not physically threaten Trump supporters, though then-White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders had earlier been run out of a Lexington, Va., restaurant and then-Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen was accosted at a Washington, D.C., eatery. In April 2021, Waters rallied in Brooklyn Center, Minn., while ex-Minneapolis Officer Derek Chauvin was on trial for the murder of George Floyd. Waters was recorded telling protesters to "stay" in the street and warned that if the jury delivered a not-guilty verdict, "We cannot go away … we've got to get more confrontational." The comments caught the attention of trial Judge Peter Cahill, suggesting the comments could lead to a defense appeal and also disrespected the judicial branch. Waters later pushed back on some characterizations, saying, "I am nonviolent. I talk about confronting the justice system. … I'm talking about speaking up." In February, Waters appeared in front of the Department of Education building in Washington along with other House Democrats. A security guard was confronted as lawmakers tried to gain entry to voice concerns about Secretary Linda McMahon's downsizing plans. This week, while riots again raged in Los Angeles, Waters hurried toward a group of National Guardsmen entering the plywood-covered door of the Metropolitan Detention Center. "I just came to use my congressional authority to check on David Huerta," she said, referring to the SEIU union leader arrested during an immigration raid. A Guardsman told Waters to contact "public affairs" and slammed the door in her face. She was later seen asking armed Guardsmen if they planned to shoot her, why they were there and that the conflict was President Donald Trump's fault. Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin told Fox News Digital after that incident that instead of "taunting" Guardsmen, Waters should have been trying to assuage the unrest. While some of her recent Republican challengers, like Joe Collins and Omar Navarro, have received hefty donations from around the country due to her polarizing comments, the 86-year-old has been re-elected with typically 70% of the vote. Fox News Digital reached out to Waters for comment but did not immediately hear back. Fox News' Leonard Balducci contributed to this article source: 'I call it a rebellion': Maxine Waters' history of enflaming crowds, from Rodney King to today