Close Close Comment Creative Commons Donate Email Add Email Facebook Instagram Facebook Messenger Mobile Nav Menu Podcast Print RSS Search Secure Twitter WhatsApp YouTube

We’ve Updated Our Campaign Widget to Better Help You Follow the Money

In the pricey Illinois governor’s race, it’s more important than ever.

This story was first published in ProPublica Illinois’ weekly newsletter. Sign up for that here.

Look closely at these two versions of “The Money Game,” our widget to chart contributions to candidates in the Illinois governor’s race. The two versions — one the original, the second updated to include data from two years earlier — tell different stories:



In the first, which looks at fundraising dating to Jan. 1, 2017, Gov. Bruce Rauner shows no self-funding. That’s correct: The Republican incumbent didn’t donate any money to his campaign in 2017 or the first two months of 2018.

In the second, which dates to Jan. 1, 2015, we get a more comprehensive view of Rauner’s contributions across the board. It shows he gave his campaign fund, Citizens for Rauner, $50 million on Dec. 20, 2016.

If you just look at the first version, Rauner isn’t self-funded.

If you look at the second, he is.

Our decision to update the widget to include data from earlier years points to another bit of tricky business: the definition of a campaign. In many cases, candidates and their supporters create political action committees, or PACs, that span election cycles and engage in activities that don't fit the traditional functions of a campaign. PACs frequently transfer money to other PACs to support other candidates or causes.

Citizens for Rauner is focused on the governor’s re-election, but it also pours money into the campaigns of candidates for other offices. For a time, some of his campaign aides ran a separate PAC that supported or opposed other state legislative candidates.

In the end, we decided to track everything coming into and going out of the candidates’ own campaign funds, but not PACs run by supporters or allies. The best we can do is be transparent about how we’re choosing to present numbers. There will always be tradeoffs.

Filed under:

Protect Independent Journalism

This story you’ve just finished was funded by our readers. We hope it inspires you to make a gift to ProPublica so that we can publish more investigations like this one that hold people in power to account and produce real change.

ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that produces nonpartisan, evidence-based journalism to expose injustice, corruption and wrongdoing. We were founded over 10 years ago to fill a growing hole in journalism: Newsrooms were (and still are) shrinking, and legacy funding models are failing. Deep-dive reporting like ours is slow and expensive, and investigative journalism is a luxury in many newsrooms today — but it remains as critical as ever to democracy and our civic life. More than a decade (and six Pulitzer Prizes) later, ProPublica has built one of the largest investigative newsrooms in the country. Our work has spurred reform through legislation, at the voting booth and inside our nation’s most important institutions.

Your donation today will help us ensure that we can continue this critical work. From the climate crisis, to racial justice, to wealth inequality and much more, we are busier than ever covering stories you won’t see anywhere else. Make your gift of any amount today and join the tens of thousands of ProPublicans across the country, standing up for the power of independent journalism to produce real, lasting change. Thank you.

Donate Now

David Eads

David Eads is a former news applications developer at ProPublica Illinois, where he combined journalism with software development.

More from ProPublica

Current site Current page