ECIElection Campaign-Finance Index
How well is money in politics regulated and disclosed?
Dimensions
Contributions
83.3% · 3/3| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| CONT.1Contribution limit framework codifiedIf contribution limits exist, are they set by statute (not administrative discretion)? If no limits, is that absence explicit in statute? | 1/1100.0% | 10 ILCS 5/9-8.5 codifies a tiered contribution-limit framework: $5,000/individual, $10,000/corporation-or-union, $50,000/candidate-committee-or-PAC per election cycle; uncapped from party committees; additional restrictions for judicial elections (no out-of-state, no anonymous-source contributions). “$5,000 from any individual” | § view source 2026-05-13 |
| CONT.2Independent expenditure rulesAre independent-expenditure rules (third-party spending separate from candidate committees) codified in statute? | 1/1100.0% | 10 ILCS 5/9-8.6 codifies IE definition (separation from coordinated spending), $3,000 trigger for disclosure within 2 business days, continuing $1,000-increment reporting obligation, and the natural-person/political-committee distinction. “An independent expenditure is not considered a contribution” | § view source 2026-05-13 |
| CONT.3Anonymous-contribution treatmentAre anonymous contributions (cash below the threshold, etc.) addressed in statute with a defined disposition (returned, forfeited, etc.)? | 0.5/150.0% | 10 ILCS 5/9-8.5(b-5)(1)(A) prohibits judicial candidate committees from accepting contributions from undisclosed-source entities, but the general anti-anonymous prohibition for non-judicial races was not surfaced as a separate provision. “any entity that does not disclose the identity of those who make contributions to the entity” | § view source 2026-05-13 |
Disclosure
40.0% · 2/5| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| DISC.1Disclosure threshold in statuteIs the disclosure threshold (amount above which contributions must be reported) defined in statute, not regulation? | 1/1100.0% | 10 ILCS 5/9-11(a) codifies a $150 aggregate disclosure threshold for contributors (per reporting period) and a $500 threshold above which the contributor's occupation and employer must also be reported. “in an aggregate amount or value in excess of $150” | § view source 2026-05-13 |
| DISC.2Enumerated filing scheduleIs the filing schedule (pre-election, post-election, quarterly, etc.) enumerated in statute with specific deadlines? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-13 |
| DISC.3Disclosure of contributor identityDoes statute require contributor name, address, occupation, and employer be disclosed for contributions above the threshold? | 1/250.0% | 10 ILCS 5/9-11(a)(4) requires reports to include full name + mailing address of every contributor >$150 aggregate, plus occupation and employer above $500. “the full name and mailing address of each person who has made one or more contributions to or for the committee within the reporting period in an aggregate amount or value in excess of $150” | § view source 2026-05-13 |
| DISC.4Public access to filingsAre campaign-finance filings legally required to be publicly accessible online within a defined time of filing? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-13 |
Enforcement
37.5% · 2/4| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| ENF.1Penalty schedule codifiedAre penalties for campaign-finance violations defined in statute with specified amounts (civil) and/or criminal grades? | 1/250.0% | 10 ILCS 5/9-3 codifies a $50/business-day civil penalty for late/missing statement-of-organization filings, capped at $5,000 (or $10,000 for statewide committees), plus injunctive remedies. § 9-25.1 imposes Class B/A misdemeanor liability for election-interference public-fund misuse. “$50 per business day” | § view source 2026-05-13 |
| ENF.2Enforcement body independenceIs the enforcement body (election commission, attorney general, campaign-finance regulator) appointed by multi-branch process and protected from in-cycle political control? | 0.5/150.0% | 10 ILCS 5/1A-9 establishes the State Board's executive-director structure (Board appoints + can remove by 5-vote supermajority of 8 members). Indirect independence via the Board's bipartisan composition (4-4 political balance per § 1A-2) but no separate, structurally-walled-off enforcement body. “The executive director and assistant executive director may be removed from office at any time by a vote of at least 5 members of the Board” | § view source 2026-05-13 |
| ENF.3Private right of actionDoes statute provide a private right of action (citizen or party suit) for campaign-finance violations? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: 10 ILCS 5/4-13 governs voter-registration appeals (cancellation of registration), not a private right of action in campaign-finance enforcement. | § view source 2026-05-13 |
Foreign Source
25.0% · 1/4| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| FOR.1Foreign-source prohibitionIs direct foreign contribution to a candidate or campaign committee prohibited by statute? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-13 |
| FOR.2Indirect / pass-through foreign rulesAre indirect foreign-source channels (foreign nationals via domestic entities, foreign-controlled LLCs, etc.) addressed in statute? | 1/250.0% | 10 ILCS 5/7-10.1 requires candidates to swear they are not affiliated with any 'communist organization or any communist front organization, or any foreign political agency, party, organization or government' — touches foreign affiliation on the candidate side, not directly indirect-source contributions. “foreign political agency, party, organization or government” | § view source 2026-05-13 |
| FOR.3Foreign-source verificationAre campaign committees required by statute to verify contributors are not foreign-source (vs. relying on contributor self-attestation alone)? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: 10 ILCS 5/9-50 codifies vendor-contribution restrictions (automated traffic/speed/grade-crossing vendors); not foreign-source verification. | § view source 2026-05-13 |
Traceability
0.0% · 0/2| Datapoint | Score | Rationale & evidence | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| TRACE.1Records-retention requirementAre campaign committees required by statute to retain records (contributor lists, expenditure documentation, bank statements) for a defined period? | 0/10.0% | No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: 10 ILCS 5/9-50 is the automated-traffic-vendor restriction. | § view source 2026-05-13 |
| TRACE.2Audit accessAre campaign-committee records subject to mandatory audit (post-election random sample, threshold-triggered audit, or routine cycle) under statute? | 0/10.0% | No candidate sections returned by FTS. | no FTS match 2026-05-13 |