102nd & 110th State Representative (ECWd) –
Based on the unofficial numbers reported tonight in the 110th State Representatve race Reggie Phillips has beaten Jonathan Kaye by sweeping every county in the district to include Kaye’s home county. With over 17,000 votes cast it appears to be one of the largest voter turnouts the district has seen in years.
The unofficial numbers reported in the 102nd State Representative race reflect Brad Halbrook as the winner with 44% of the vote. Jim Acklin received 38% of the vote while Randy Peterson received 18% of the vote. Acklin and Peterson were in a virtual tie in their home county of Edgar with Acklin receiving 1336 votes and Peterson only 4 votes behind with 1332.
More election results can be viewed at this link provided by Channel 3 news.
Please consider a donation to the Edgar County Watchdogs.
[wp_eStore_donate id=1]
2 Comments
Cheryl Basso
Posted at 13:35h, 17 MarchI have been following your site for several weeks now, and it is fascinating and informative. But I have also been reading about superPACs becoming involved in local elections. The PAC I am most curious about is the one run by Dan Proft. It disturbs me when outsiders become involved in local elections and those outsiders have more money to spend than the opponent. I also noticed in one of my readings that Brad Halbrook, who won the election, has financial support from Proft’s group. Will that mean he will be beholden to that PAC when it’s time to vote while in session? How does that make those who accept support from an outside group any different from, say, the Democratic, or Republican, political organizations? Because according to many PACs, somehow receiving money from a recognized political organization is a bad thing, but accepting money from a shadowy PAC is acceptable. I am working my way through these questions, and wonder if you have any opinion on the power of outsider PACs getting involved in local elections.
Kirk Allen
Posted at 16:40h, 17 MarchThroughout history political figures have complained about funding provided to their opponent. The bigger the race, the more funding sources. In the recent state rep you mention a PAC got involved as did big labor unions from Chicago. Both are technically outside the district. I dont get to concerned over in district or out of district spending when it comes to a state level race. The concept of beholden to whoever funds you is an interesting topic of which I dont know if there is any hard evidence either way. I know with the right candidate that is not a problem. Rest assured the Liberty Principals PAC is not a “shadowy” PAC. I am of the opinion that I want to be able to donate to whoever I want, where ever I want! If I could afford to support a candidate in TX who I knew was a principled candidate then I should be able to. A PAC is nothing more than people like myself who used the law to POOL their money and basically support the same candidate but at a much higher level of funding. I do know that it is always the loser in a race that complains. Had they gotten the funding they would have accepted it. Most who brag about NOT taking outside money or PAC money simply were never offered that opportunity. Bragging they did not take any is disingenuous at best. Peterson claimed to have not taken any money from outside the district however the money he did take from Adam Brown, most definitely came from outside the district.