Shimkus, Davis lead Illinois politicians in NRA funding

Shimkus, Davis lead Illinois politicians in NRA funding

Questions for Kacich? Ask them here

Letter to the Editor? Submit it here

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Area congressmen John Shimkus and Rodney Davis are the top recipients in Illinois of money from the National Rifle Association, according to an analysis by the group OpenSecrets.org, which tracks federal campaign spending in politics.

Shimkus, whose 15th Congressional District includes parts of Champaign and Ford counties and all of Vermilion, Douglas, Edgar and Coles counties, ranks 69th out of all 535 House and Senate members in direct and independent campaign support from the NRA.

Overall, Shimkus' district includes 33 counties, nearly all of them rural and Republican. It was the most favorable to President Donald Trump in the 2016 election, giving him more than 70 percent of the presidential vote.

Shimkus has received $44,500 in direct support from the NRA in his 22-year tenure in Congress, plus $14,804 in independent support, which includes independent expenditures such as electioneering communications.

Davis ranks 89th overall of all senators and representatives in terms of NRA support, with $15,900 in direct campaign contributions and $29,369 in independent campaign support.

Davis' 13th Congressional District is more moderate than Shimkus'. It includes Champaign-Urbana and Decatur and parts of Springfield, Bloomington-Normal, Collinsville and Edwardsville. Trump won the 14-county district by 6 percentage points in 2016.

In the current election cycle, Davis received a $1,000 contribution from the NRA last October. The contribution is a tiny fraction of the more than $1 million in political-action-committee contributions the Davis campaign has received since Jan. 1, 2017.

After Shimkus and Davis, the top recipient of NRA funds in Illinois is U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Wheaton, with $32,216 in overall support.

Illinois' two Democratic senators, Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth, have received a total of $50 in financial support from the NRA, according to OpenSecrets.org.

In fact, the organization spent $3,470 in indirect support for opponents of Durbin and $6,422 in indirect support for opponents of Duckworth.

U.S. Rep. Cheri Bustos, D-Moline, is also a prime NRA opponent, with $28,489 in indirect campaign expenditures going to her opponents.

While Shimkus and Davis rank in the top 89 for NRA financial support, they're far below the top recipients.

No. 1 is U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., with a grand total of $7.7 million in NRA support, much of which was for independent expenditures against his opponents.

Tops among congressmen is Rep. French Hill, R-Ariz., who has received a total of about $1.1 million in support from the NRA.

Sections (2):News, Local

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
CallSaul wrote on February 20, 2018 at 10:02 am

Davis and Shimkus have blood on their hands for voting so loyally to enact the agenda of the death merchants at the NRA.

They could begin to wash some of that blood off their hands by returning the NRA's blood money...but we all know they'll never do that...

And they'd of course never ever in a million years cast a vote that would in any way displease their masters at the NRA...

It's time to vote out these bought and paid for NRA toadys.

Adam Bogan wrote on February 20, 2018 at 12:02 pm


       Why are most of these mass shooters/kidnappers/etc., on Prozac, Klonopin, and other mass-shooter, mind-altering chemical pills? Why doesn't the news cover this point more often?  Big Pharma is CNN's biggest sponsor.  That's why.

      Chicago has been a gun free zone with gun laws and "gun control" for ages.  It's amazing how a law hasn't stopped one murder there.  England has no guns but a huuuuge stabbing issue.  I'd rather be shot, personally. Outlaw guns and only outlaws will have them! Go ahead,  as long as they still sell welders and pipe people can make them themselves.  They are old technology.  I'm more afraid of all these zombie pills that rid people of their conscience. The Prozac insert says "may cause suicidal and homicidal tendencies".  Now whether they decide to kill and choose a knife, gun, gasoline, sharp glass, or a truck as their weapon of choice is up to them.  Let's talk pill control while we are politicising every tragedy involving a gun.  Let's talk about the 100 red flags that Nikolas De Jesus Cruz raised and how nothing was done.  I like how the news calls this guy a kid when he is as old as most of our Marines.  If he wanted to kill so bad he should have just joined the military where murder is encouraged.  Then he could have came home and assimilated back into the population peacefully, with medals for said murders. We need troops, don't get me wrong. I just hate where their lawyer-leaders (Bush,Obama,etc.) send them and the reasons they send them.  I personally do not own guns, but I see the great need for them as a last line of defense against rapists at farm houses, robbery-prevention in inner cities, dangerous animals, looters, car-jackers, and most importantly, tyranny.  I don't hunt, I love animals. But each to his own. :)

        Keep in mind that Hitler, Stalin, and Mao Se Tung all took their peoples guns and their right to defend thereselves before they, the dictators, killed millions of their people.  No coincidence.  Unarmed victims are easy, just look at where all these mass shooters go, to UNARMED VENUES!!! These shooters in Chicago and elsewhere are not NRA members. It's sad we even need the NRA to keep a CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHT.  Earth is a dangerous place.  Schools shouldn't be that way, that's why someone should have taken Cruz's 37 red flags seriously.  They allowed it to happen, and now the gun debate is back on. Blaming a piece of metal. Meanwhile, Jimmy Kimmel, Diane Feinstein, Oprah, Obama, and all these anti-gun advocates all have security whom carry guns. No hipocrisy there. And that's all you get for free from me.  Authors get paid, why shouldn't I?  Have a good day. I'm out.
p.s.  I don't have the time to really get into it, but school shooter drills encourage shooters in my opinion. As well as letting the future-shooters know where the unarmed victims will be hiding.

Putting every shooters face on the headlines doesn't help, it's called a copy cat.

Video games and movies these days are murder, death, kill. Like murderer simulation training. No wonder we have a problem in this country.
Expecting this honest opinion of mine to be deleted from NG, I have copied and saved it elsewhere. I will spread it everywhere and my first ammendment won't be stiffled by a going-out-of-business newspaper.  Or is NG a scrap business now?  I heard about the press.  Sorry for the hostility, my comments have been deleted before on here. (wipes tears)
 

CallSaul wrote on February 20, 2018 at 12:02 pm

And now the disgusting rightwing media are attacking the children who survived the Florida killing spree and dare to express their opinions of our insane refusal to regulate these weapons of mass slaughter...

How do Davis and Shimkus respond to these attacks on children survivors of our latest school massacre by their fellow RWNJs in the media...?

Adam Bogan wrote on February 20, 2018 at 1:02 pm

"weapons of mass slaughter..."

How do you feel about fluoride in the water?? It comes from Chinese aluminum factories by-product waste ponds.  After it's wet-scrubbed from the smoke stacks that is. Good for teeth?  What do ya say Saul?? 

George2 wrote on February 21, 2018 at 4:02 pm

The previous Valentine Day Massacre was in Chicago during prohibition.  Four gunmen dressed as police gunned down seven gangsters.  The public outcry to against "gangster weapons" led to the banning of sawed-off shotguns, Thompson submachine guns and silencers.  One can still obtain these weapons today, illegally in the case of the guns; but, most people do not have access to them.  Do citizens really need to own a fully automatic submachine gun?  Is it a good idea to saw off a shotgun to make it more easy to conceal?  The banning of these guns did change the public preception of these weapons and did result in a great decrease in their numbers in the hands of the public.  It was not a "slippery slope" of gun confiscation but the elimination of a danger to the public.  Assault rifles are designed with one purpose in mind, to kill people.  Even the geese or deer I hunt have a better chance than school students.  There is a limit to the number of shells that can be loaded in my shotguns to hunt, three!  Let's face it, fishing would be easier if we were allowed to fish with dynamite; one stick and all the fish are on the surface ready to be picked up.  It is also illegal to fish with dynamite (not sporting you know). We need to give school children a sporting chance.  Having to reload after every 5 shots might give more a chance to run away.  Assault rifles and large magazines have no real need except for military.  Are we at war with our school kids or concert goers in Las Vegas?  Some common sense limitations rather than knee-jerk reactions could make life safer for a lot of Americans. In central Illinois I am more afraid of a nut with an AR-15 shooting me than being attacked by a terrorist.  When will enough dead children be enough?