Changes in state campaign finance law pushed through by legislative Republicans in recent years have allowed Michael Screnock, a conservative judge running for state Supreme Court, to remain competitive with his liberal opponent, Rebecca Dallet, in campaign fundraising to date.
A campaign finance report released late Monday shows that Screnock, a circuit court judge in Sauk County, has raked in a total of $694,508 since Jan. 1 of this year. Along with contributions in 2017 and late reported contributions through Monday, Screnock has raised just over $900,000.
Dallet, a circuit court judge in Milwaukee County, has raised $509,147 since the start of this year, according to her latest report, and a bit more than $1 million overall, according to Wisconsin Ethics Commission numbers analyzed by Isthmus.
Screnock’s total includes $356,031 from committees, including $337,841 in in-kind contributions from the Republican Party of Wisconsin.
Prior to a 2015 revamping of state campaign finance law, the total amount a candidate for state Supreme Court could receive from committees was $140,156. Screnock has thus far received more than $200,000 in excess of this former maximum, with a week to go before the April 3 election.
The election, for a 10-year term, will determine whether the court will continue to be dominated 5-2 by conservatives or whether the divide will be 4-3.
Screnock has also received contributions of more than $10,000, the former individual donor maximum, from four individuals: Beloit business magnate Diane Hendricks, her daughter Kim, retired Racine businessman Fred Young, and Baraboo resident and presumed relative Joseph Screnock III. The first three gave $20,000, the new maximum. The records show that Joseph Screnock III has given a total of $24,250 in four contributions, in apparent excess of the statutory limit.
In all, Screnock has taken in $548,306 in 3,061 contributions from individuals, an average of $179.13 per contribution. Of these individual receipts, $30,245 came from 52 donors in other states, or 5.5 percent.
These totals do not include the outside expenditures being made on Screnock’s behalf, which has already exceeded his own fundraising totals. According to numbers tracked by the liberal advocacy group One Wisconsin Now, the big business lobby Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce has spent at least $1.35 million on ads that bash Dallet, rated as one of the state’s harshest sentencers, as being soft on crime.
Dallet, in contrast, has received $69,800 from committees, none from the Democratic Party. This total well within the old limits. This includes $18,000 each from the labor unions WEAC (Wisconsin Education Association Council) PAC and MTI (Madison Teachers Inc.) Voters.
Dallet has received contributions in excess of the old $10,000 limit from three individuals: John Miller of Cedarburg, John C. Miller of Kohler, and Madison businessman Mark Bakken of Madison, all of whom gave $20,000. Bakken’s contributions have come under scrutiny because, as Isthmus first reported, he was accused of failing to act appropriately regarding allegations of sexual harassment against another executive at his former company.
In all, Dallet has received $776,256 in 3,924 individual contributions, an average of $197.82 per contribution. Of her individual receipts, $89,784 came from 420 out-of-state donors, or 11.6 percent.
Dallet has also been her own largest contributor, having loaned her campaign $200,000 last June, for a total loan balance of $281,000. Screnock has not given any money to his own campaign.
Dallet has also received outside support, although to date it has not come close to what outsiders have spent on Screnock. A group affiliated with former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder has spent $140,000 on digital ads on her behalf.
Had Screnock been subject to the rules that were in place before the 2015 changes, he could have raised a maximum of $644,212, instead of the $904,337 reported through yesterday. Had Dallet been subject to these rules, she could have raised $1,001,972, instead of the $1,031,972 reported through yesterday. In other words, the impact of these new rules on Dallet’s campaign is negligible, whereas for Screnock it is substantial.
In every state Supreme Court race since 2007, the candidate who benefitted from the most spending, by both their own campaigns and outside groups, has won.
