10-4 on 11/4/08

I’m about post-election analyzed out for the week. You can listen and/or watch my interpretations and the perceptions of other political junkies from panels and interviews in which I participated this week:

• WILL-AM Focus 580
• The Illinois Government and Public Affairs luncheon with Gov. Jim Edgar and political scientist Kent Redfield, courtesy of the Illinois Channel
• WUIS 91.9’s State Week in Review (Scroll down to see the November 7 link.)

And here's a recap of the most common and obvious questions discussed:

What does President-Elect Barack Obama’s win mean for Illinois?

• Read Illinois Issues’ PRE-election analysis here. Stateline.org reporter Dan Vock reminds readers that while Illinois officials form their wish lists, this state won’t get its fair share of construction dollars or other earmarks unless the state General Assembly and the governor finally approve a capital plan. Also, Obama has "railed against earmarks," Vock writes.
• In the next year, we'll also watch for Obama’s presidency to affect Illinois tourism and Illinois scrutiny. And he could increase awareness about life in urban areas, as well as the effort to protect the Great Lakes and, maybe, just maybe, the effort to bring FutureGen to Mattoon. Whether that all translates into more money for Illinois, however, will be interesting to watch.
  
• If Obama continues to recruit Illinoisans to his cabinet in Washington, D.C., then the vacancies left by those state and Chicago officials will enhance the domino effect already in play.
• Obama ’08 completely changed the ground game and the technological savvy required of political campaigns.

What is the future of the Illinois GOP?
Former Illinois Gov. Jim Edgar says his party needs to move toward the center, particularly when recruiting gubernatorial and U.S. Senate candidates. That’s with the understanding that some politicians should continue representing their conservative Illinois districts.

Edgar also says the thing that concerns him the most is that to be a viable political party nationally, the GOP has to secure the Hispanic vote. “We’re going to have to show a little more sympathy and understanding and try to bring Hispanics in more party roles and run them for office and show that we appreciate them being part of the Republican Party.” Either way, the state GOP will have to overcome perceptions of the national Republican Party, which Edgar says took most of the blame in the court of public opinion for killing immigration reforms a couple of years ago.

Political scientist Paul Green of Roosevelt University says the Democratic wave rippling through the nation is sustainable, and it’s not exactly created by what the Democrats are doing. “It’s what the Republicans are not doing. You have a Republican Party that’s fighting against itself.”

He, like Edgar, says the middle is where the GOP needs to aim if it wants to attract and retain new individuals in Cook and Lake counties. He points to the reelection wins of two moderate Republicans in the Chicago suburbs: Rep. Rosemary Mulligan of Des Plaines and Rep. Beth Coulson of Glenview. Both survived targeted races. “And they’ve been able to withstand the Democratic Party because their issues and their positions are much more aligned with the people living out there,” Green says.

He adds that his philosophy on what the Republicans should do resembles what he wrote for Illinois Issues in 1978: Downstate holds the key to victory. Right now, he says, downstate is irrelevant. If Democrats carry Chicago, suburban Cook County and a few of Chicago’s surrounding counties, then there aren't enough people downstate to help Republicans win a statewide election.

“So the Republican Party has to decide does it want to remain divided, or does it want to find itself back to where it used to be — a party of small government, lower taxes and business growth? If they do that, they have a chance to rebound. If they keep talking about abortion and guns and gays and stem cell research, they are going to keep losing.”

Will Con-Con 2008 turn into Con-Con 2010?
Read Wednesday’s post to see what Con-Con supporters say. They are unlikely to pursue legal action to reverse or redo Tuesday’s 68 percent “no” vote. But they likely could pursue legal action to clarify the process of future referenda.

Read more...

The Democratic wave

Update: I was interviewed by WILL-am's Focus 580 this morning. Listen here.

There were two questions heading into Election Day in Illinois. The first was how far the Democratic wave would overcome traditionally Republican areas. The small tide in the Chicago suburbs swept away at least one and potentially two suburban Republican incumbents in the House. The Dems gained another open seat in Peoria. But Republicans also held on to a number of open seats and even gained one in southern Illinois. The Democratic majorities in both chambers, on the other hand, remain in tact. The second question was how the GOP would rebuild before 2010.

One change is that Senate Minority Leader Frank Watson, who suffered a minor stroke in October, told his members Tuesday that he would not seek the leadership position again. We’ll consider who could take his place in another blog. The Senate’s makeup remains the same, with 37 Democrats and 22 Republicans. The Democratic Caucus, however, hasn’t unified to make use of its so-called supermajority in the past two years. The retirement of Senate President Emil Jones Jr. in January will open the door for change there, too.

The House Democratic Caucus increased its majority from 67 to 69 members out of 118. And they could gain one more, pending official results in what turned out to be a barn burner. If the Democrats gain 70 members, they're one member away from the magic number needed to approve major spending, borrowing and other legislation without Republican votes.

Keep an eye out for these official results:

• House 66: GOP Rep. Carolyn Krause is retiring. The race is still too close to call this morning, but Democrat Mark Walker leads Republican Christine Proncho, as of this morning. If Walker is declared the winner, among the dynamics in play was the “Obama factor,” where a record number of Democratic voters cast ballots for President-Elect Barack Obama of Chicago.

Two Republican incumbents lost to Democrats:

• House 85: Rep. Brent Hassert, a Romeoville Republican in Will County and a member of the House Republican’s leadership team, lost to Democrat Emily Klunk-McAsey. The Democratic campaign machine was in the works, with the help of the Obama factor; Hassert was active in gaming and revenue issues.
• House 43: Rep. Ruth Munson, an Elgin Republican, initially appears to have lost to Democrat Keith Farnham. A Green Party candidate, Dane William, got 3 percent of the vote. [UPDATE 5 p.m.: Munson's campaign office confirmed that the representative conceeded to Farnham this afternoon. The office cited the vote: Farnham's 12,589 to Munson's 12,911, a 322 difference. The county clerk will have to count provisional ballots and absentee ballots within 14 days of the election.] Munson currently serves on committees related to business, technology, trade and pensions. The district is vulerable to the Democratic wave. A Democrat took the Senate district from Republicans when former Sen. Steve Rauschenberger retired. And the House district adjacent to Munson’s transferred from Republicans to the Democrats when Rep. Fred Crespo defeated veteran GOP Terry Parke in the last election. The Obama factor was at play.

Democrats also won this open seat, most recently held by a Republican:

• House 92: GOP Rep. Aaron Schock ran for Congress and won that seat last night. He will be replaced by Democrat Jehan Gordon, despite some alleged credibility problems released about the candidate during the campaign. Gordon beat out Republican Joan Krupa. Before Schock, the Peoria district historically was Democratic territory.

Two Senate Democratic incumbents hung on to win close races:

• Senate 59: Sen. Gary Forby, a Benton Democrat in the southern tip of Illinois. He barely won against Republican Ken Burzynski, the brother of state Sen. Brad Burzynski of Clare. It was the most expensive race for legislature in the state. The Campaign for Political Reform reported that a total of more than $2 million was spent by both sides. Forby fought hard during the electricity rate debate but was the sacrificial lamb in a political move by Senate President Emil Jones Jr. That opened the door for his Republican opponent to say Forby failed to get lower Ameren rates for his constituents.
• Senate 42: Sen. Linda Holmes, an Aurora Democrat, kept her seat. It was another expensive race exceeding $1.5 million, according to the Campaign for Political Reform. Holmes edged out Terri Ann Wintermute of Bolingbrook. Holmes took over the suburban seat when Republican former Sen. Ed Petka retired; Holmes got a lot of financial support from Sen. John Cullerton, one of the Democrats in the running to replace retiring Senate President Jones.

Two Republican incumbents held on in relatively close races, despite the Obama factor:

• House 17: Rep. Beth Coulson, a Glenview Republican in northern Cook County, and active voice for human services and environmental issues. She pulled out the win.
• House 46: Rep. Dennis Reboletti barely won in 2006. He took the seat after former Rep. Lee Daniels retired.

More Republicans filled three open seats vacated by the GOP:

• House 48: GOP Rep. Jim Meyer is retiring. Republican Michael Connelly won the race against Democrat Joe Heneghan.
• House 96: GOP Rep. Joe Dunn is retiring from the DuPage and Will County district that includes Naperville. Republican Darlene Senger barely beat out Democrat Diane McGuire in a race where about $1 million was spent.
• Senate 26: GOP Sen. Bill Peterson is retiring from the seat, which represents the northwest suburbs of Chicago in Lake and McHenry counties. Republican Dan Duffey comfortably won against Democrat Bill Gentes.

House Republicans gained one seat from the Democrats:

• House 107: Democratic Rep. Kurt Granberg retired. He'll be replaced by Republican John Cavaletto, who challenged Granberg in a tight race in the last election. Cavaletto defeated Democrat Patti Hahn Tuesday.
  

Illinois’ Obama
Personal story: I have a distinct memory of U.S. President-Elect Barack Obama. When I worked as a health reporter in Decatur, Obama visited a local community college during his first year as a U.S. senator. He met with military veterans and talked about their health care, among other things. After the event, Obama made himself available to a handful of reporters. He answered our questions, and then most of the reporters except me said thanks and walked away. I asked for one more question. He said I could ask as many as I wanted and suggested we walk into a neighboring room so he we could hear each other better. We walked into the next room, and he pulled two folding chairs over for us to sit. Except he turned his chair around so that he straddled the chair and rested his elbows on its back. He stayed until I asked all of my questions. Unfortunately, I don’t remember his exact answers. But what stuck out were his mannerisms and his willingness to answer as many questions as I had. No staffers tried to cut off the conversation and whisk him away to his next appointment.

Some of my fellow reporters haven’t had as good of luck when trying to break through the communications lines of Obama’s presidential campaign. I can only hope that a President Obama would remain as genuine, considerate and open as he was in the that instance.

Read more...

Money matters

The ongoing federal probe into alleged pay-to-play politics in Illinois demonstrates attempts to influence state business by donating to political campaigns. But the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform released another round of campaign contribution totals this week that seem to reinforce the fact that money drives politics behind the scenes, as well.

The Illinois Senate Democrats will pick a replacement for Senate President Emil Jones Jr., who retires in January. Since Jones announced his retirement, a lengthy list of candidates has started campaigning to replace him. The caucus will need 30 votes to select a new president. Watch for more about the candidates in the November edition of Illinois Issues magazine. UPDATE: Here's the story.

One way those candidates are trying to differentiate themselves is through cash. The more money they can raise for their political campaigns, the more they appear capable of strengthening an already extraordinarily big Democratic Caucus (of 59 total senators, 37 belong to the Senate Democratic Caucus).

According to two nonpartisan think tanks, the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform in Chicago and the Sunshine Project in Springfield, Senate presidential candidates have doled out more than $1 million to their party candidates and incumbents.

The top two givers are Sen. James Clayborne of Belleville and Sen. John Cullerton of Chicago, two who repeatedly have been mentioned as front-runners in the race to replace Jones.

Clayborne has given $418,000 to other Senate Democrats, while Cullerton has doled out $336,000. According to the Campaign for Political Reform, Clayborne has transferred money from his own political committee, Friends of Clayborne. Top donors to that fund include the Illinois Education Association, AT&T and Ameren Corp.

Cullerton has used money from his committee, Citizens for John Cullerton, but he also formed a new committee, the Senate Democratic Victory Fund. Top donors to both funds include Chicago Wolves chairman Don Levin; Sen. Heather Steans of Chicago, her husband Leo Smith and her parents; and the Illinois Hospital Association. We’ll talk more about the Democrats who are receiving these funds in another blog.

Political insiders are used to Jones raising that much money or more ($3.6 million in 2006), but when these new candidates aren’t even president yet and are raising those amounts, the totals are striking. But it’s also part of the legislative process in Illinois.

“The leader is supposed to help raise a lot of money, and that’s part of their job,” says David Morrison, assistant director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform. “Part of what Cullerton and Clayborne are doing here is showing that they can shoulder that kind of burden, [that] they help their colleagues in that regard.”

Yet, this is one time when Morrison — ironically for a campaign finance reformer — says it’s not all about money. This internal election is about context. So even though these numbers look big, there are many other factors that are in play for whom the next Senate president will be.

• Jones’ retirement: It means the person whom businesses donated to in the past is no longer the person who will funnel the funds to other Democratic members. Without knowing who will serve as the hub for accepting donations and funneling them to other Democrats, donors have to take their chances.
• The Obama factor: It translates into record numbers of Democrats who will come out to vote for U.S. Sen. Barack Obama for U.S. president and who likely will continue voting Democratic down most of the ticket. Democrats are expected to have a good year, so money in some ways is less important this year than it was in 2004 and 2006, when Jones was trying to build on a majority of seats in the chamber.
• Personality: Then there’s a question of which qualities that Senate Democrats want in their next leader. The most common characteristic cited is someone who can compromise and refresh the atmosphere in the Capitol, thereby breaking the stalemate of Gov. Rod Blagojevich and his ally Jones against House Speaker Michael Madigan.
  

But the money is still important. It’s not just who is giving, but why are they giving? Morrison says it’s hard to tell if the Senate presidential candidates are attracting new donors, getting increased donations from patron donors or if it’s a combination. It’ll be easier to tell when the next detailed campaign finance reports are due in January. One thing is for sure, he says: “There’s a lot of money flowing around.”

Read more...

Election Season Rhyme and Reason

{cross posted at GapersBlock.com}

Top of the ballot:

Should the citizens of Illinois hold a Constitutional Convention?

I wrote about this issue a few weeks back. And the answer is that yes, they should. The only compelling argument I've heard against the Con-Con was that it could endanger state and local employee pensions. That seems to be unlikely if not untrue — due to the federal Constitution's so-called "contracts clause," and also because pensioners are probably the most well-organized constituency group against the Con-Con, so I don't think they'll be left weeping on the sidelines when the Con-Con comes.

The reasons to support it are myriad.

First of all, the problem with Illinois politics is not the current "bums," and therefore the solution to the problem is not one that could be solved by throwing the current bums out. The problem with Illinois politics is a system that concentrates an enormous amount of power in very few hands; a districting system that allows politicians to choose their voters, rather than vice versa; and an education funding formula that makes equal opportunity nearly impossible.

Secondly, the fear of "special interests" dominating the Con-Con process is ridiculous on its face, particularly because it is being offered by a coalition of special interests. But the system is blind to which special interest is benefitting from the system. Sometimes, progressive or "good" interests are able to dominate the political climate in Springfield; sometimes, it has been the "bad" interests. I don't want to be in the position today of supporting a system because my "team" benefits, and then be left with no arrows in my quiver when the other team takes control.

Third, the left has an ideological duty to support measures that devolve power to the greatest possible number — as close to "the people" as possible. We cannot say we are for democracy sometimes, but then oppose it when we fear its outcome. Certain rights cannot be infringed, even by majority whim — the right to vote, the right to privacy, due process, etc. — but most of the rules that effect our civic lives get their legitimacy from majority rule, and every chance to bring the policy making process to the grassroots level should be supported, or we risk making hypocrites of ourselves either in the future or in the past.

Rich Miller has provided the most elegant argument about how the concentration of power compromises the political system. And it's a simple argument: Carefully constructed legislative districts make only a handful of seats competitive, and the majority party's leadership controls the legislative process from beginning to end. There is no chance for elected officials to meaningfully buck their parties, or forge a policy or legislative consensus outside of party leadership. If you want to get something done, you have to deal with Michael Madigan, and Madigan alone, in the House. Ditto (for the time being) for Emil Jones in the Senate. This kind of concentration of power constricts the "marketplace of ideas" that should reflect the diversity of opinion in the state, while also ironically making it easier for the largest organized interests to buy their way into favor.

And, at the end of the day, the voters still get a chance to vote the new constitution up or down. Personally, I believe in the people's ability to govern themselves — even if the process may seem chaotic to us.

Vote Yes for a Con-Con. If you're afraid of what the results could be, pay attention to the process. Organize. Be a delegate. But don't ever say no out of fear — because that's the message the anti forces are sending out: "If we call a Con-Con things could get better; but they could also get worse." Americans — left, right, center — have a voracious appetite for change right now. But change doesn't come to the timid.

As Thomas Jefferson said, "Timid men... prefer the calm of despotism to the boisterous sea of liberty." I'm not scared of a bit of boisterousness — are you?

Other Illinois Races, in Two Clever Sentences Each, With Some Cheating Via Judicious Use of the Semi-Colon:

Aaron Schock versus Colleen Callahan (US House - IL18)
Schock is a wunderkind, but may also be a careless notary. Colleen Callahan is probably Irish.
Prediction: Schock +12%

Marty Ozinga versus Debbie Halvorson (US House - IL11)
Ozinga looks like a cartoon character of a plutocrat, sans cigar. Debbie Halvorson is from Crete but, sadly, is not a Minoan-American.
Prediction: Halvorson +4%

For more predictions, and to comment, predict, and mock, visit the original at GapersBlock.com}

Read more...

TOP 10 DONORS TO LEGISLATIVE CONTESTS GAVE $4.3 MILLION

Cross posted from ICPR's blog, The Race is On:

Same Donors Gave Another $440,000 to Anti-Con-Con Group

With a week to go before Election Day, many candidates for General Assembly are raising campaign money at a furious pace and just 10 contributors account for nearly 20 percent of all funds raised by legislative candidates in recent months.

A dozen legislative races are approaching or have passed the $1 million mark; all told, legislative candidates have raised more than $20 million since July 1.

The Illinois Campaign for Political Reform (ICPR) and the Sunshine Project examined campaign disclosure reports filed by incumbent legislators and candidates for the General Assembly to compile this list of top donors.

Illinois has no limits on the source or size of campaign contributions. Many of these groups have made contributions to candidates that would be illegal if made to candidates in other states or for federal office. Much of this money is reported as receipts by caucus and party leaders, who in turn transfer funds to individual candidates.

Top Donors to Legislative Incumbents and Candidates, 7/1/08-10/26/08
(1) Illinois Education Association (IEA): $877,000
(2) Illinois State Medical Society (ISMS) $565,000
(3) Illinois Federation of Teachers (IFT) and affiliates: $558,000
(4) AFSCME: $410,000
(5) Illinois Health Care Council: $398,000
(6) Associated Beer Distributors of Illinois: $389,000
(7) Illinois Hospital Association: $305,000
(8) Personal PAC: $267,000
(9) Fred Eychaner, founder of Newsweb: $253,000
(10) Illinois Association of Realtors: $251,000
(11) Illinois Chamber of Commerce: $236,000
(12) Illinois Trial Lawyers Association (ITLA): $229,000
(13) Altria Group/Philip Morris Tobacco: $228,000
(14) Service Employees International Union (SEIU): $225,000
(15) Ameren: $258,000
(16) Associated Firefighters of Illinois: $194,000
(17) Illinois Dentist Association (Dent-IL PAC): $194,000
(18) AT&T: $180,000
(19) International Union of Operating Engineers Local 150: $161,000
(20) International Union of Operating Engineers Local 399: $153,000


Many of these Top 10 donors have also helped fund the opposition to a referendum to authorize a state constitutional convention. The Alliance to Protect the Illinois Constitution (APIC), a political organization formed earlier this year to oppose the "con-con" has raised at least $1.2 million since July 1, including $440,000 from these top legislative donors. By contrast, two organizations in support of the con-con, Con Con Yes and Metro Chicago United PAC, have together reported total receipts of just $5,000.

Top Donors to the Alliance to Protect the Constitution
(1) Illinois Federation of Teachers and affiliated: $300,000
(2) Illinois Education Association/National Education Association: $225,000
(3) Exelon: $100,000
(4) Illinois Coalition for Jobs, Growth, and Prosperity: $92,500
(5 - tie) American Insurance Association: $50,000
(5 - tie) Health Care Services Corp: $50,000

ICPR and the Sunshine Project do not endorse candidates and have not taken a stand on the constitutional referendum. ICPR and the Sunshine Project are monitoring reports on those targeted legislative races. For a chart of contribution totals on those races, visit www.ilcampaign.org.

Read more...

Big Ten Battleground

In honor of the second presidential debate tonight, take a look at this Big Ten Battle Ground Poll. It surveyed 600 residents of eight Midwestern states in the Big Ten Conference last month, and it’ll do another round in about two weeks. Other than Illinois, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s home turf, six states were statistically tied between Obama and his Republican opponent, Arizona Sen. John McCain. Indiana was the only state that leaned toward McCain.

But that was three weeks ago. Things have changed in Obama’s favor, says Brian Gaines, political science professor with the Institute of Government and Public Affairs at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Gaines is participating in the polling project with professors from seven other universities.

“In the last three weeks, there has been a pretty clear swing to Obama almost everywhere,” he says.

It comes down to economics. In tough times, voters tend to look to Democrats to get them out of it, he says. And the recent financial crisis that put Washington, D.C., on the hot seat put Obama in the driver’s seat.

Now, most Midwestern states are Obama’s to lose. But it’s not a shoo-in. The September results show that Obama had an advantage among Midwestern women, with double-digit leads over McCain in Iowa, Illinois, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. McCain led in five states among Catholic voters, with large margins in Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Economic pessimism and widespread angst that the country is going in the wrong direction resonates with white- and blue-collar voters. White-collar tended to lean to McCain, while more blue-collar participants said they supported Obama. The exception was Ohio, where analysts said Obama has to stem the deflection of Democrats who helped U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton win that state's Democratic primary.

While Ken Goldstein, co-director of the polling project and political science professor at the University of Wisconsin – Madison, said debates don’t normally get much credence in election results, Obama’s newness on the national scene gives voters the opportunity to see whether he lives up to the presidential image. Watch the video of the analysis here. The consensus was that these debates could be a huge factor in this election.

New Big Ten survey results will be available October 23.

Read more...

Chicago Documentary: Where Is Obama?

This video from the John McCain campaign looks at what has Sen. Barack Obama done for the Latino community.

Cross-posted at The Sixth Ward!

Read more...

The GOP change agent?

Illinois Republicans have come to expect the unexpected with U.S. Sen. John McCain, their presumptive nominee for president, but Friday’s announcement about his new running mate was flat out shocking to some members of the Illinois GOP.

Taking attention away from the Democratic National Convention in Denver, where U.S. Sen. Barack Obama accepted the presidential nomination in a stadium of 85,000 people the night before, McCain selected Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate. She’s a virtual unknown who has since been described as an “outsider” to Washington, D.C.

“My first reaction was, ‘Oh no, another Dan Quayle,’” said Illinois Senate Minority Leader Frank Watson, McCain’s chairman of legislators. He referred to the former Indiana senator who served as vice president under George H.W. Bush. “I thought, ‘Here’s another unknown, untested — from Alaska — that you question the electoral benefit it brings to the ticket.’”

But Watson said the more he learned about Palin and the more he listened to her speech, the more he believed that she would provide a fresh face with sincere character and an energy that the GOP ticket needs. (It’s easier to see her bio from the Illinois Republican Party’s Web site because her site has been down all day.)

Palin not only brings a whole new level of excitement to the ticket, said state Rep. Jim Durkin, but she also brings the gender issue back into the race.

“Barack Obama’s campaign had an opportunity to put a strong woman on as everybody’s president, and they decided not to do it. On a number of levels, I think it’s a great idea,” said Durkin, McCain’s national legislative co-chair. He added that Palin is a “strong woman” who has “good conservative credentials.”

Obama supporters immediately jumped on the fact that Palin has served about two years as governor and two years as a small-town mayor, saying it negates the argument that Obama lacks experience to run the country.

Illinois GOP delegates countered that by emphasizing her executive experience. “She’s made more decisions as an executive than Barack Obama has ever made in his days as a state senator and in the few moments that he’s been in the U.S. Senate,” Durkin said.

U.S. Rep. Ray LaHood, a Peoria Republican, said today during a Statehouse news conference that McCain’s pick of Palin, who broke the proverbial glass ceiling as the first female governor of Alaska, is classic McCain. “His pick today proves that he’s going to do what he wants to do and what he thinks is right and what he thinks is best, and not what some poll tells him and not what his consultants or his advisors tell him.”

On the other hand, Christopher Mooney, political studies professor with the Institute of Government and Public Affairs at the University of Illinois at Springfield, said Palin’s nomination seems to directly respond to the polls. “It appears, at this point, to be sort of cynical ploy to go after the Hillary Clinton supporters. That seems to be one of the main strategies. They saw a little thing in the polls that suggested that 20 percent of the Hillary supporters are not going to vote for Barack.”

But, Mooney said, she’s got more than youth and the token gender. She also offers expertise in dealing with energy issues and a set of ideals that could help compensate for McCain’s weakness in attracting conservative Republicans. Describing her as “aggressive in a positive way,” Mooney cited her lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for listing polar bears as a threatened species. “She got a public policy perspective. She’s got an ideology. And she’s going for it. She’s not a shrinking violet.”

And, he said, it’s hard to avoid the parallel between Palin and Geena Davis, who played the first female vice president who had to take over the U.S. presidency in the ABC show, Commander in Chief. “It just makes an interesting year that much more interesting. Hang on folks, it’s going to be a bumpy ride.”

Read more...

Gaines' perspective

Editor’s note: This week’s Democratic National Convention in Denver and next week’s Republican National Convention in Minneapolis-St. Paul are perfect reasons to stop and gain some perspective. Below is a conversation between Brian Gaines, a political science professor, and Craig Chamberlain, the University of Illinois news bureau social sciences editor. Gaines, a frequent contributor to our Illinois Issues magazine, has appointments in the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign’s political science department and the Institute of Government and Public Affairs. He also is a research fellow at the Cline Center for Democracy. Here is an edited version of that conversation:


Questions by Craig Chamberlain of the University of Illinois news bureau:

Many commentators in recent weeks have questioned why Barack Obama is not far ahead of John McCain in the polls, given that issues and circumstances are said to dramatically favor the Democrats this year. Do they have a point or are they missing something? Do you expect a close election in November?

I do. I’ve never bought the argument that this year should be an easy win for the Democrat. The country remains pretty evenly divided, and unpopular incumbents don’t always cast long shadows. John McCain is widely viewed as an independent-minded maverick, so he might be the ideal Republican candidate to withstand a slump in his party’s popularity. Also, retrospective unhappiness with the situation in Iraq doesn’t map neatly into an Obama vote. A lot of voters who wish the U.S. had never invaded still haven’t decided whether Obama or McCain is better qualified to make decisions about Iraq policy in the future.

After every convention, there’s talk about whether the candidate got the expected post-convention “bounce” in the polls. Does this have any significance?

The bounces are usually about the same size, so they’re irrelevant by mid-September. Political scientists are not even sure why they occur. It could be that the undecided get swept up in the enthusiasm of well-scripted love-fests. But it might also be the case that strong Republicans tune out the news (and refuse to talk to pollsters) while the headlines are full of Democratic convention news, and vice versa.

The news coverage of campaigns focuses constant and daily attention on polls, and most often national polls. How and in what ways is this misleading? What should we understand about polls and don’t?

I don’t think the margin of error is well understood. If a poll finds 47 percent saying they plan to vote for Obama, and it is described as accurate plus or minus 3 percent, that is suggesting a level of support anywhere in the range of 44 to 50 percent. And while it is probably true that the actual value (known only by God, not by any pollster) is in that interval, that calculation will fail, just by bad luck, about five out of every 100 times. Moreover, most pollsters do not calculate these intervals quite right. Polls usually need to be weighted to reflect demographic differences — such as in age, gender, or race —between the respondents and the target population.

Such weighting makes the margins of error larger, and so many polls report incorrect margins. There’s even more bad news: Response rates to polls have fallen over the years, and it seems likely that people who are willing to talk to pollsters, or even computers doing “robo-calls,” are different from those who won’t be polled, and in ways much harder to measure than age, gender, or race. The reported margin-of-error assumes that this is not true.

The extremely tight 2000 election, and resulting dispute over the Florida recount, raised some uncomfortable questions about the U.S. voting system. Have we adequately addressed those concerns? Are there other potential issues or controversies waiting in the wings in the event of another close contest?

Unfortunately, there’s no such thing as a foolproof electoral system. Blunders and fraud can creep into many different stages, from ballot design, to eligibility screening, to tabulation. Recounts often reveal serious problems. New Mexico’s handling of the 2000 presidential election was a shambles, but the state was spared scrutiny because all eyes were on Florida. Washington state had an orderly, uncontroversial recount in its U.S. Senate race that year. The secretary of state crowed that his state managed recounts properly, so watching them was “like watching grass grow.” Four years later, his successor oversaw a tumultuous triple recount in which new, previously overlooked ballots emerged late in the process, reversing the outcome. I’ll hope for a controversy-free election, but if it is as close as I expect, there will probably be serious problems somewhere. Personally, I worry about the huge growth of absentee voting. Hardly anyone ever points out that absentee ballots defy modern practice by not being secret. Secret ballots emerged in the 19th century as the main device to prevent vote buying and intimidation of voters. We’ve quietly rolled back that reform in the interest of boosting turnout, on the assumption that decentralized, non-secret ballots are secure. I’m not confident that’s right, and I expect a blowup over systematic abuse of absentee ballots by some campaign one of these days.

Read more...

By-my-side Biden

Illinois’ Old State Capitol got another cameo in the Hollywood-like narrative of U.S. Sen. Barack Obama as he tries to get to the White House as the first African American president. His first appearance with his new Democratic running mate, U.S. Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware, resembled the February 2007 event in downtown Springfield, when Obama announced his candidacy. A larger crowd gathered in the 88-degree heat, the polar opposite of the 10-degree weather last year.

Obama and Biden took the stage on the Old State Capitol grounds about 12 hours after the Obama campaign sent a massive text message to supporters announcing his selection for vice president. Both men emphasized focusing on family, overcoming adversity and repairing economic conditions to about 35,000 people, according to Obama’s campaign Web site.

They attempted to weave common threads through their backgrounds, both coming from meager beginnings and living “America’s story” on the national stage. Obama introduced Biden as a family man who grew from tragedy, when his first wife and a daughter were killed in a car accident several years ago.

Tragedy tests us – it tests our fortitude and it tests our faith. Here’s how Joe Biden responded. He never moved to Washington. Instead, night after night, week after week, year after year, he returned home to Wilmington on a lonely Amtrak train when his Senate business was done. He raised his boys — first as a single dad, then alongside his wonderful wife Jill, who works as a teacher. He had a beautiful daughter. Now his children are grown and Joe is blessed with five grandchildren. He instilled in them such a sense of public service that his son, Beau, who is now Delaware’s attorney general, is getting ready to deploy to Iraq. And he still takes that train back to Wilmington every night. Out of the heartbreak of that unspeakable accident, he did more than become a Senator — he raised a family. That is the measure of the man standing next to me. That is the character of Joe Biden.

Read the full speech here.

Biden framed Obama as the agent for change after eight years of President George W. Bush’s administration.

Barack Obama and I believe, we believe with every fiber in our being, that our families, our communities as Americans, there’s not a single solitary challenge we cannot face if we level with the American people. And I don’t say that to say it; history, history has shown it. When have Americans ever, ever, ever let their country down when they’ve had a leader to lead them?

See U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin's comments about the Biden selection here:

Biden is a safe choice for the Obama ticket, according to Christopher Mooney, professor of political studies with the Institute of Government and Public Affairs at the University of Illinois at Springfield. “He doesn’t have the big wow factor, but Obama’s got the wow factor. So, it’s not what he needs. He needs somebody safe, and Biden is safe.”

Biden also has foreign policy experience, which has been described as Obama’s weak spot. Biden is serving his sixth term in the Senate, where he started in 1972 at age 29. He chairs the Committee on the Judiciary and serves on the Committee on Foreign Relations. Combatting a potential contradiction in his campaign, Obama said that Biden “has brought change to Washington, but Washington hasn’t changed him.”

Biden twice ran for president, most recently against Obama in the Democratic primary. Biden dropped out of the ’08 race after the Iowa caucus and after making a comment that Obama was “the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy ...” He later clarified that his word choice misrepresented his point that Obama was a storybook candidate.

While Biden joked that he talks “too colloquially” and too much, the vice presidential selection generally doesn’t drastically help or hurt presidential candidates, said Mooney. Nor does it sway many voters. “This is the one time it matters. He’ll go to the convention, and they’ll take pictures. And then they’ll put him on a bus, and he’s going to drive through Nebraska, Kansas and Alabama or wherever they’re going to send him. Unless he says something off the cuff that’s embarrassing, it won’t be a problem.”

Springfield plays a role
Using the Old State Capitol in Springfield as a backdrop is “good politics,” said Tom Schwartz, Illinois State historian at the event. It inevitably draws a comparison between Obama and Abraham Lincoln. Schwartz said Obama is “very much like Lincoln, reminding people that politics is messy and there’s a gamesmanship to it but that at it’s core, it is meant to reflect the ideals of the people that it represents — and that it is participatory, that people need to be part of it. And so, in that sense, he and Lincoln are on the same page.”

And using Lincoln as a backdrop doesn’t hurt when the event attracts national and international media.

Springfield emergency responders also played a role. Individuals stood in lines that wrapped around the downtown area before gates opened, and once they got on the grounds, they waited another two hours for Obama to appear on stage.

The 88-degree heat mixed with sun, humidity and crowded proximities to overwhelm between 30 and 40 people, according to Lt. Bill Neale of the Springfield Police Department. He said heat exhaustion and related injuries led local responders to seek help from the Springfield Fire Department, Riverton emergency services and the American Red Cross.

One person who did not play a role was Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who was in Chicago at a deployment event of the Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Battalion, 178th Infantry.

Read more...

Where's the Party?

The Illinois State Fair kicked off the political campaign season, with Democrats and Republicans rallying on the fairgrounds for the past two consecutive days. They’re rearing up for national conventions at the end of this month and beginning of next. Illinois Democrats hope to ride the coattails of the presumptive presidential nominee, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, a Chicago Democrat, but that doesn’t mask the divisions of state party leaders. The Illinois GOP has an opportunity to win over disgruntled voters frustrated by the Democrats in power. On the other hand, the party recognizes the challenge of gaining momentum while the “Obama factor” is anticipated to draw a record number of Democrats to the polls November 4.

The strengths and weaknesses of each party were on full display during their State Fair rallies.

On a packed lawn, Democrats had a huge draw to hear New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, former presidential candidate with a national and international resume. He’s now a hard-core Obama supporter, visiting Illinois to support Obama and U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin.

Richardson substituted the words “dynamic” and “diverse” to replace the word “dysfunctional” when describing the Illinois Democratic Party. He downplayed internal tensions by saying: “I’m a governor. I have, with my legislature, differences. There’s that control tension that I think is healthy in a democracy.”

But state Comptroller Dan Hynes, a Democrat, indicated he thinks the tension is suffocating rather than healthy. He cast a harsh light on the party leaders while speaking at the Democratic County Chairmen’s Association Wednesday morning, saying the existing state of affairs in Illinois represent “the worst of times.” He cited this year’s $1.4 billion in budget cuts that cripple state services and said it’s not a policy problem, it’s a personality problem personified by power clashes between the governor, Senate President Emil Jones Jr. and House Speaker Michael Madigan.

The division carried over that afternoon to the State Fair during Governor’s Day (a.k.a. Democrat Day). The only other statewide officeholder to attend was Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias. Hynes didn’t attend. Neither did Madigan, Attorney General Lisa Madigan, Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn or Secretary of State Jesse White.

The front of the audience was filled with busloads of supporters holding blue signs that said, “Pass the jobs bill today.” But when the governor rose to speak, members of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union booed and waved green picket signs that read, “Governor, don’t cut our health care.” They chanted as they passed through the audience, interrupting the governor’s speech.

The boos faded as AFSCME employees exited the lawn, and they were replaced with cheers as the governor yelled over the commotion: “I would ask our friends in AFSCME to join us in our crusade. They’re going to keep their jobs. They’re going to keep their health care, but now start helping us create jobs for other people and provide health care to other people across our state.”

He later said AFSCME was just using a political ploy to draw attention during contract negotiations with the administration. Union members argue that the cost of their health insurance continues to increase while their wages and their manpower is stagnant, at best.

Republicans aren’t much better off. While they have ripe opportunity to take advantage of the unpopular Democratic governor and the Democratically controlled legislature, GOP candidates have an obvious uphill battle to grab attention and prove their relevancy as an option for disgruntled voters.

The GOP leaders were quick to point out, however, that the Democrats didn’t even have their state party chair, Michael Madigan, present. The GOP also had a few other things the Democrats lacked: American flags, people dressed in red, white and blue, the national anthem and an opening prayer. But the Republicans had an emptier director’s lawn.

Given that Republicans are in the minority in both the Illinois House and Senate and don’t hold a single statewide office, they have the advantage of declaring innocence in the state’s problems. “They’ve completely dropped the ball and have had an awful six years,” said House Minority Leader Tom Cross. But he acknowledged that the GOP needs to revive itself and be stronger advocates for lower taxes and reforms.

He and Senate Minority Leader Frank Watson repeatedly blamed Blagojevich, as well as Senate President Emil Jones Jr. and Michael Madigan, for a lack of progress on a balanced budget, a capital construction program, an ethics reform package and a host of pension and Medicaid reforms.

“They enable him to do the things that he’s done over the past six years to put the state in the fiscal crisis that we’re in today,” Watson said of his legislative counterparts. “They enable him. There has to be a political price to pay. The voters have got to understand, the public has to understand the difference between what we believe in and what they believe in.”

The one thing all parties agree on is that the state needs a capital plan to repair schools, roads and bridges.

Madigan announced a potential agreement to lease the Illinois Lottery as a way to finance an infrastructure program, seeming to inch closer to a compromise with Blagojevich. But Senate President Emil Jones Jr. said his caucus already negotiated a deal and approved two capital plans, a $36 billion version and a $25 billion version. He added that he hadn’t seen any proposal in writing from Madigan.

The House later approved a roughly $1.1 billion capital bill that would draw federal funds that are waiting in Washington, D.C., for a state match. Republicans, however, called it a false hope and said the plan fails to give approval for the state to spend enough money. “Even if you thought last night was real, it doesn’t work,” Cross said. “It is a very small component of a bigger picture that has to be developed and be painted. But at the end of the day, it doesn’t work.”

Watch Illinois Issues magazine and this blog for more about a capital plan.

Read more...

Campaign finance law ruled unconstitutional

By Patrick O’Brien
Candidates for federal office who are running against deep-pocketed opponents could face tougher odds after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a key piece of campaign finance law today.

In north central Illinois, the race for Congress in the 14th District could be affected.

Jim Oberweis, the Republican candidate, already donated more than $1.7 million to his own campaign through the end of March. Oberweis previously self-funded his campaigns for elected office. The Sugar Grove resident runs a family-founded dairy company and an investment firm.

His opponent, Democrat Bill Foster of Geneva, donated more than $122,000 to his own campaign. Foster is a scientist who worked at Fermilab, as well as a businessman who helps run a company that makes theater lighting equipment.

The federal law previously allowed opponents who faced self-funded candidates to exceed federal limits for the amount individuals could donate to their political campaigns.

The 5-4 majority, represented by Justice Antonin Scalia, said the law “impermissibly burdens the 1st Amendment rights” of candidates to use their own money as political speech. Previous campaign finance laws also have been ruled invalid based on 1st Amendment arguments.

Not everyone agrees that the ruling automatically gives self-funding candidates a big edge, however.

“Regardless of how substantially a candidate self-funds, the voters still have to like what they’re hearing,” said professor Ron Michaelson, former director of the Illinois State Board of Elections. He currently lectures on campaign finance at the University of Illinois at Springfield.

He said he believes the “millionaires amendment” — part of the 2002 reform package sponsored by U.S. Sen. John McCain, this year’s Republican presidential nominee — was designed to limit the amount of money spent on federal political campaigns. He said it was a step in the right direction.

“I think it’s unfortunate. The amendment was an attempt to try to level the playing field,” he said.

The ruling likely will affect races for Congress only, as the amount of money needed to self-finance presidential campaigns is now in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

Michaelson cautions that voter resentment of candidates who may appear to be trying to purchase higher office may backfire.

The ruling, coupled with U.S. Sen. Barack Obama’s decision not to take $85 million in federal funds to limit his campaign’s spending in the presidential election, will bring campaign finance reform to the forefront this year, Michaelson said.

Obama defended his decision by saying the finance system was broken. He has said little during his campaign about reforming the system.

“If Obama’s elected, we’ll see how serious he is about the issue,” Michaelson said.

In another race for Congress ...
By Bethany Jaeger
Comptroller Dan Hynes endorsed Colleen Callahan, a Democrat, for the 18th Congressional District today in Springfield. At a press conference in the AFL-CIO building, Hynes said he supports Callahan, who is a longtime farm reporter for radio and television, in her race against state Republican Rep. Aaron Schock of Peoria. The district has long been held by Republicans.

Both Schock and Callahan say they grew up on farms and formed a hard work ethic. Schock has served on his local school board and represented the 92nd House District for two years, proving to be a strong political fundraiser. Three months ago, his campaign finance report shows he raised more than $1 million and had about $188,000 cash on hand. (See the report by selecting his name in this pull-down menu.) See more about Schock and his race against Callahan in the April Illinois Issues magazine.

Callahan has less money and says she has never worked as a public official, but she recently was named as one of 20 “emerging races” by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. That doesn’t guarantee, however, that the national party will flood her campaign with financial support. She expects her June 30 campaign finance report to show about $250,000 in contributions and about $130,000 and $140,000 cash on hand, although numbers could change between now and June 30. See her March report by selecting her as a candidate.

“I am a candidate who didn’t just dip my toe in the water here. I went right to the high dive in my efforts to serve our district and our country,” she said this morning. “This being a new process for me, I was told at the beginning and am learning that typically, the national party money from either party doesn’t typically come until later in the campaign.”

“Money begets money,” she added.

What-ifs
By Bethany Jaeger
While in Springfield, Hynes also addressed the state budget or lack thereof and sent a letter to legislative leaders and constitutional officers outlining what would happen if they failed to enact a state budget by July 10, more than a week after the new fiscal year begins.

The General Assembly approved a budget that Gov. Rod Blagojevich says is unbalanced by about $2 billion. He threatened to cut $1.5 billion if the House didn’t approve two revenue ideas that already passed the Senate. Expect to find out in the next couple of weeks whether the governor will go through with the cuts or call legislators back in a special session in an attempt to force them to vote on new revenue ideas to plug the hole.

If revenue ideas failed and the budget remains unbalanced and unsigned by July 10, Hynes says, first, about 4,900 state employees would be in jeopardy of not getting paid on time. Tens of thousands more would be at risk the longer the budget remains unresolved.

Second, the state couldn’t pay its other bills that reimburse health care providers and other social service providers. Most people focus on the payroll because they have a deadline and a more tangible effect, Hynes said, “but every day we don’t have a budget, tens of millions of dollars don’t go out the door and don’t go into businesses all over Illinois, which has a real impact.”

He called on the governor to lead and the legislative leaders, particularly House Speaker Michael Madigan, to do what they should have done months ago and sit down together to negotiate an agreed budget. (The leaders did meet, and Madigan did send his majority leader, Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie, in his place.)

“We are now in a game of chicken,” Hynes said. “We are now basically in a staring contest to see who blinks first. And the ones who are going to get hurt in this contest are tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of vulnerable, innocent people.”

Read more...

Ex-alderman, ex-con, ex-Dem, Jones seeks political comeback

I saw this somewhere, perhaps some Republican communique decrying this as another Republican problem. I don't know what say you out there. From Crain's today...

ormer Alderman Virgil Jones’ latest attempt to reclaim public office after serving time in prison lasted about two weeks.

Mr. Jones, a former police officer who served as alderman for the city’s 15th Ward from 1991 until he was convicted of extortion and tax charges in 1999, had attempted to fill the vacancy on the ballot for state representative in the 32nd District.

He had even switched parties, from Democrat to Republican.

State law does not prohibit convicted felons from seeking office — unlike municipal law, which prevented Mr. Jones from reclaiming his aldermanic seat, a move he attempted last year. He was rebuffed by the city Board of Elections, and when he took his case to the Illinois Supreme Court, the judges sided with the board.

Mr. Jones said Thursday he will withdraw his nomination to run on the 32nd District Republican ballot after conferring with the leaders of the Cook County and city Republican parties. His nomination application was filed 10 days ago with the Illinois State Board of Elections.

“It’s what is best for the party,” Mr. Jones said. “There will be another time (to run for office).”

Though he was a member of the Democratic Party for years, Mr. Jones said his switch to the Republican Party represents his true political ideology.

“When I was a younger man, I was a member of the Young Republicans,” he said. “In the city of Chicago, you can only get elected (if you’re a Democrat).”

that last statement sounds like a cop out. Even worse I don't know if I'd touch the guy for his criminal history. Hmmm, here's what Crain's had to say about that...

Mr. Jones spent three years in prison after being convicted of extortion in the 1990s’ FBI investigation dubbed Operation Silver Shovel, which exposed political corruption. The probe ended with 18 convictions, six of them sitting or former aldermen.

Mr. Jones maintains his innocence. “I didn’t take any money. That was a lie,” he said.

He’s also preparing to file an appeal to have his conviction overturned. “I want to serve the people. I know what the people need.”

Read more...

Peraica tactic includes HDO 'demonization'

Is this going to be the tactic of those people who want to take down a Latino politico – dredge up the letters “HDO” and try to scare white ethnic Chicago into believing that those crazy Hispanics are somehow more corrupt than their Irish and Polish and Croatian counterparts at City Hall ever were?

It is the means being used by Tony Peraica, the Republican nominee for state’s attorney of Cook County, to try to trash his opponent. He has to resort to this in large part because Democratic opponent Anita Alvarez is so far better qualified for the top prosecutor’s post that he can’t argue on the merits of his record.

Specifically, Peraica is waving around copies of El Dia, a Spanish-language newspaper based out of Cicero (and not exactly a heavy-hitter in the world of Chicago’s Spanish media), which ran on its front page a photograph taken at a political fundraiser.

It is the standard shot of an aspiring politico (Alvarez) standing next to someone else and trying to smile. It is meant to give the person in the picture with the politico some sort of personal souvenir, and perhaps a bit of physical evidence that an actual relationship exists between the two.

Peraica is trying to use the photograph for the same reason – it is a picture of Alvarez posing with the son of the newspaper’s owner. It turns out that Jorge Montes de Oca, Jr. actually had a warrant issued for his arrest at the time of the March 6 fundraiser at a neighborhood restaurant.

In theory, as a high-ranking deputy in the state’s attorney’s office who aspires the top job in the Nov. 4 election, Alvarez is a law enforcement official who should have arrested Oca.

She didn’t.

I’m not going to get all bent out of shape about this. I don’t view it as a moment of corruption (as Peraica would like us to think of it). It is more a sense of reality that makes me realize I don’t expect anybody to know at all times the names of every single person who happens to have an arrest warrant issued in their name.

I particularly am willing to overlook this lapse (I believe that had it been brought to her attention, Alvarez would have acted like the life-long employee of the state’s attorney’s office that she is), especially since the warrant was not even issued in Cook County.

It was issued by a judge in neighboring Lake County, Ill., after Oca allegedly wrote bad checks to a car dealership in the far northern suburbs of Chicago. Since his photographic appearance with Alvarez, he has been picked up by police, hit with the relevant criminal charges, and is only free now because he posted the mandatory 10 percent of bond set at $30,000.

Now if someone could come up with evidence that Alvarez in some way is trying to cover up for him, or get his charges reduced, or in some way is interfering with the ability of Lake County officials to prosecute the case, that would be a sign of inappropriate behavior by a potential state’s attorney.

That would be an example of potential corrupt behavior. Heck, it would be just a good story.

Peraica doesn’t have any of that.

He just has that Alvarez was in the same room with someone whom the police were interested in, and didn’t do anything because she didn’t know anything.

I would be willing to overlook this ridiculous charge, if that were the extent to which Peraica took it. But he went further, dragging the acronym “HDO” into the mix by noting that the fundraiser was largely attended by HDO members.

For those of you who are clueless about City Hall and Chicago politics, HDO is the Hispanic Democratic Organization. It is the political action committee used by some Latinos who want to be involved in Chicago politics, which theoretically makes it no different than the organizations used by women, labor unions or any other special interest group that wants to get ahead politically.

It also is a group whose founder faces criminal charges for his alleged involvement in the city’s now-defunct “Hired Truck Program,” where private companies were hired to provide trucks and drivers to do municipal work.

Federal prosecutors say some of the companies had ties to organized crime, while others paid bribes to city officials to get contracts. In many cases, the companies hired by the city were grossly overpaid for their work, or the companies did no work whatsoever.

Peraica wants to create the impression of the Hispanic politicos dragging a city program into corrupt behavior, and then trying to show that Alvarez is merely one of their followers. “The HDO has been at the epicenter of all the corruption that has done on at the city of Chicago,” Peraica told WBBM-TV, which played the story up big during their Tuesday evening newscast.

That is just a ridiculous statement. There’s too much improper behavior that takes place at Chicago City Hall for “epicenter of all the corruption” to be true.

HDO didn’t give Chicago corruption. It merely is trying to use the means of the past by which other ethnic groups used politics to get ahead – not realizing that the ways of Michael “Hinky Dink” Kenna are long dead and buried, although their zombie corpse occasionally tries to come crawling out of the grave.

The other thing to realize about HDO is that it does not speak for all Latino political people in Chicago. It is a group whose leaders are firmly behind the policies of Mayor Richard M. Daley. It’s members routinely focus their political work on bashing the candidacies of would-be Latino politicos who appeared as though they might oppose Daley if they won elective office.

HDO’s real “sin” is that it is willing to put politics ahead of the concept of increased Latino political empowerment – it has been known to back the candidacies of white politicos in Latino neighborhoods in order to help Daley maintain his political control in Chicago.

Of course, none of this nuance came through in Peraica’s charges. He just wanted to create the image of a batch of corrupt Hispanic people, one of whom was literally a “wanted man” by the police – with Alvarez smiling for pretty pictures.

This tactic does not shock me in the least. This is, after all, the man who engaged in the ultimate “sore loser” behavior after losing his 2006 bid to be Cook County Board president to Todd Stroger. Peraica is not somebody who’s going to take the political high road.

I fully expect Peraica to keep hitting us with subtle (like a sledgehammer) reminders that Alvarez is Mexican-American, hoping that he can stir up enough people who have a problem with the concept of the first Latina to win a county-wide office to get their votes.

That is why Alvarez herself was totally justified when she responded as she did to Peraica’s charge by refusing to discuss whether or not she had her picture taken with Oca (She did, so what!) and instead denounced the whole attack as “racist.”

“To insinuate that any public official of Hispanic heritage has connections to the HDO is racist,” she said, in a prepared statement. “These allegations are completely absurd and if they were not coming from (Cook County Board) Commissioner Tony Peraica, our campaign would consider this an April Fool’s Day joke.”

-30-

Originally posted at www.ChicagoArgus.blogspot.com.

Read more...

Peraica: CBS 2 Chicago Report Shows Alvarez Connections to Fugitives and Insiders

Well I got an email from his campaign a few minutes ago. Hmmm, I think I should go find Alvarez and get on her emailing list. Anyway here's what you're likely to find in that vid...

First, CBS 2 Chicago reports that Cook County State's Attorney candidate Anita Alvarez - who ran as an "independent outsider" - relied on support from key members of the scandal-plagued Hispanic Democratic Organization (HDO) for her recent fundraiser. At that same fundraiser, Ms. Alvarez posed for a photo with fugitive from justice Jorge Montes de Oca - and that same photo appeared on the cover of last week's edition of El Dia newspaper.

In a move of shameless desperation, Ms. Alvarez labeled State's Attorney candidate Tony Peraica a "racist" for "insinuating" her ties to the HDO.

But, interestingly enough, Ms. Alvarez confirms those same ties to the HDO in a Daily Herald story this morning. Further, she confirms that not only did HDO leaders Eddie Acevedo and Tony Munoz attend her recent fundraising event - but that Acevedo helped emcee the event!

I wonder if this could help or hurt Peraica. Right now I don't know, but I wonder if someone out there is more determined to vote in Alvarez.

Read more...

Wright not wrong on question of race

Listening to audio of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, he sounds almost like Adolf Hitler – in that I mean both men have a commanding presence that forces you to listen and a gravelly voice that can reach such high decibel levels that makes everything they say sound so harsh.

But when one actually reads the words spoken on video tapes that are causing some people to say that Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama has a “racist” minister, anyone of sense would have to conclude the Rev. Wright is justified in much of what he says.

We have a race problem in this country. It is a blot on what otherwise is the great existence of the United States of America. While it might not be as blatantly violent as it was decades ago, we’re not going to be able to move beyond racial issues until we honestly address how bad the problem was.

Too many of the people who are trying to turn the retired Rev. Wright into a political issue seem to be of the type who would prefer to ignore race out of some hope that the issue will go away and things can go back to the way they used to be – before all the loud-mouth civil rights types forced us to pay attention to the problem.

That’s basically what Wright is making us do when he says things like, “Hillary was not a black boy raised in a single-parent home. Barack was.”

And when he talks about the United States’ involvement in activities that are construed by some people of the world as just as harsh and violent as any of the terrorist activity we condemn, he is touching on a vein of thought with some validity.

Let’s not forget the reason former Iraq leader Saddam Hussein ever rose from the ranks of third-rate dictators to become a serious threat to world peace is because the U.S. military backed him against Iran when it served our country’s interests during the decade-long Iran-Iraq War. Then, that fully armed pit bull turned around and bit us on the tushy.

“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we’re indignant,” Wright said. “Because the stuff we have done overseas has now brought right back into our own front yards.”

And giving us a touch of Malcolm X beyond the version that filmmaker Spike Lee tried giving us several years ago, Wright adds, “America’s chickens are coming home to roost.”

Now some people are going to be upset that Wright has compared the 1945 U.S. bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with atomic weapons to the 2001 terrorist hits on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. How dare he make such an “un-American” statement!

But it is not a new thought. It’s not even terribly original. I recall a professor two decades ago at Illinois Wesleyan University (then and now, a very Midwestern place) tell us during a U.S. history course that when it came to deadly use of nuclear weapons, the scorecard for mankind read, “Harry S Truman – 2, Rest of World – 0.”

Admittedly, this professor wasn’t a Truman fan, and I know the arguments that use of the bomb saved lives by ending World War II more quickly. But the statement was a valid attempt to force us to consider the consequences of actions and judge for ourselves whether a positive outcome ever justifies the use of horrific means.

Now I understand that Obama on Friday made something of a public statement intended to put some distance between himself and Wright.

He said the private conversations the two men had were for personal guidance and never delved into the type of fiery rhetoric being criticized now. He said he would have publicly criticized such talk had he ever heard it personally.

But I really don’t think Obama has anything to be apologetic about. I was glad to hear that he is not totally denouncing Wright.

In listening to the so-called controversial recordings that some people would like to think of as more offensive than the Nixon tapes, the closest I can come to a statement to criticize Wright on is his comments about race and gender.

“Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people,” Wright said, adding later, “Hillary has never had her people defined as a non-person.

“Who cares what a poor black man has to face every day in a country and in a culture controlled by rich white people?”

While he’s right about the situation of African-American people in this country, there have been eras in our country’s story when people of Hillary’s gender were considered little more than non-persons.

One could just as easily make the statement that Barack has never had his gender defined as a non-person, and it would be just as accurate. Of course, that’s what we count on Michelle to be there for – to give him that bit of an intelligent female perspective whenever the testosterone levels of Team Obama get to be a little too high.

In fact, it is this balance between the inequities suffered by women and black people that I see as being behind the whole flap earlier this week that resulted in Geraldine Ferraro having to step down from her un-paid post as a Clinton campaign adviser.

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position (as front-runner in the Democratic presidential primary),” Ferraro said. “If he was a woman, he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is, and the country is caught up in the concept.”

On a certain level, Ferraro (who herself was the first woman to be chosen by a major political party to run for vice president – remember 1984?) is absolutely correct.

The “country” is caught up in the “concept” of Obama-mania, which could result in the first non-white president of the United States. (I don’t want to hear about how he’s bi-racial, which makes him part white. Only half-wits who have a problem with it seriously bring that issue up).

Obama-mania is so intense that a segment of the liberal population that normally would be very receptive to the first serious campaign of a woman to be U.S. president doesn’t want to hear about her.

Clinton, who had hoped to campaign as the Democratic darling who would advance the country’s gender preferences into the 21st Century, instead is reduced to having to be the candidate of the political establishment. The progressives have turned elsewhere to the point that if she does manage to win election in November – the bulk of liberal talk is going to be about how we lost the chance to have an African-American president, not how we finally have a woman.

That fact has to be frustrating to Clinton’s hard-core fans, and all I hear in Ferraro’s comments to a California newspaper is that frustration being articulated. I don’t hear a racist, the way some people try to portray it.

I also don’t hear a racist when I read the words of Wright. When I listen to the words of Wright, I might think that someone has gone off their medication, but then second thoughts make me realize his reasoning, and that he might actually have a legitimate point.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: I realize Wright used the word “n----r” during one of his sermons. The UPI Stylebook (which I use as a guide in editing this site) says, “Do not use racially derogatory terms unless they are part of a quotation that is essential to the story.” I honestly believe that particular quote was NOT essential to understanding what Wright is about, and that the only reason you have heard it on television newscasts is because some half-wit TV producer is infatuated with so-called “dirty” words.

Originally posted at www.ChicagoArgus.blogspot.com.

Read more...

Chicago is Barack Obama's kind of town

A pretty good article from this past January about the political environment that allows black politicians to move ahead in the system. This article from Salon.com says that if Sen. Obama had stayed in New York no one would have heard from him. He might have won an office but we may not have gone beyond for example, the New York State Assembly. I suppose a question to ask here is what would account for this? Why would Obama have never been heard from had he stayed in New York or also California or Hawaii?

Here's an excerpt. There is a lot about black history in Chicago. From Republican Oscar DePriest who was during the early 20th Century the only black man in Congress to William Dawson who operated a mostly black political machine until he was co-opted by the first Mayor Daley, or even some of the other black politicians of today including Harold Washington, Carol Moseley Braun or Sen. Obama himself...

For the hundreds of thousands of poor Southern blacks who made the trek north in the early 20th century, Chicago was literally known as the promised land. It promised prosperity, relative freedom -- and also, incredibly, political power. When the sharecroppers of Alabama and Mississippi passed around copies of the nation's biggest black newspaper, the Chicago Defender, in the 1920s and '30s, they read about a city with something unheard of in the rest of America: a black representative in the U.S. House. Oscar S. De Priest was a Republican, loyal to the party of Lincoln, and as the lone black man in Congress, he ended discrimination in the Civilian Conservation Corps, filed anti-lynching bills, and integrated the Senate Dining Room, over the physical objections of an Alabama senator.

De Priest was defeated in 1934, after the New Deal converted blacks to the Democratic faith, but his seat has remained in African-American hands ever since. It's currently held by Bobby Rush, a former minister of defense for the Black Panther Party.

When Barack Obama was 22 years old, just out of Columbia University, he took a $10,000-a-year job as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago. It was a shrewd move for a young black man with an interest in politics. Had he stayed in New York, "you would never have heard of him," says Lou Ransom, the Defender's current executive editor. "He may have been a very good lawyer and maybe got elected to some office, but if he hadn't come to Chicago, he would not have had the kind of support to push him where he is now."

His home state of Hawaii is more diverse, the California of his early college days is more tolerant, New York is more sophisticated. But only in Illinois could Obama have become a senator and a presidential candidate. Going all the way back to Oscar De Priest (and in some ways to Abraham Lincoln), Illinois has led the nation in black political empowerment. It has elected two of the three black senators since Reconstruction -- Obama and Carol Moseley Braun. It's had a black attorney general, and its black secretary of state is setting a new standard for that office by not taking bribes (or at least not getting caught). The only other black candidate to win a presidential primary was Jesse Jackson, who came to Chicago from the South as a seminary student and stuck around to build his own political machine.

Ironically, Chicago became the political capital of black America because it was so racist. For most of the 20th century, it was the most segregated city in America. Blacks used to have a saying: "In the South, the white man doesn't care how close you get, as long as you don't get too high; in the North, he doesn't care how high you get, as long as you don't get too close." During the Great Migration, the refugees who rode up from Mississippi on the Illinois Central Railroad were crowded into the Black Belt, the South Side ghetto portrayed in Richard Wright's "Native Son." Because the black population was so concentrated, white politicians couldn't gerrymander it out of a congressional seat. One of De Priest's successors, William Dawson, was the most powerful black politician in America. He helped boot out the predecessor to Mayor Richard J. Daley, the current mayor's father, who bossed Chicago from 1955 to 1976. In return, Daley's machine rewarded Dawson with control of the entire South Side.

Consider this Illinoize's only black history month entry for this year!

Oh BTW, the book An Autobiography of Black Politics written by Chicago real estate developer Dempsey J. Travis is a good book to look at the history black politics in Chicago. It starts with the founder of Chicago Jean Baptist Pointe du Sable some black politicians during the 19th century then the developments over the 20th Century and ultimately concludes with the election as mayor of Harold Washington in 1983. You should check it if it's of your interest especially if it's available at your local bookstore or at Amazon.com.

Read more...

Wrap-up Wednesday

By Bethany Jaeger and Patrick O'Brien
The surprise on Super Duper Tuesday in Illinois was at the state level, not the national level. Illinois still played a significant role February 5 by doling out more than 200 presidential delegates to the Democratic and Republican candidates, but the state got lost in the mix of 22 states that held primaries that day. I’ll repeat this point made by Kent Redfield, political scientist at the University of Illinois at Springfield, for a previous blog. “There’s a certain irony in the fact that we moved our primary up so we could be a major player, and now states that didn’t move actually may be more important than Illinois. If we’d have stuck to mid-March, we might have been this huge battleground all by ourselves instead of one of all of these other states.”

National view
Illinois Democrats were predictable in electing Barack Obama, former state senator and current U.S. senator of Chicago. But Obama is still in a tight race against U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York to win enough delegates nationwide to secure the Party nomination. (See more at the Associated Press’s “Delegate Tracker” here.) By Wednesday morning, Clinton had fewer than 100 delegates more than Obama, heightening the importance of the next round of primary elections throughout this month and next (other states have primaries scheduled through June for Democrats and July for Republicans).

Republicans in a dozen states nominated U.S. Sen. John McCain of Arizona. He already has half of the GOP delegates needed to win the nomination over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

State view
The state-level surprise was that Senate Democrats fared better than expected, and Gov. Rod Blagojevich could still have some allies to replace those who vacated their seats to work for him.

Senate Democratic incumbents — particularly assistant majority leaders Iris Martinez and Ricky Hendon, both of Chicago — withstood challenges that had potential to significantly alter the chamber.

Martinez’s leadership position sparked controversy within the Latino Caucus because Senate President Emil Jones Jr. selected her over fellow Latino Sen. Tony Munoz to serve in Jones’ cabinet. The disagreement affected the entire chamber, sometimes preventing such major legislation as the governor’s health care plan from advancing.

Martinez received a lot of money from Senate Democrats, including four separate $40,000 donations and a $100,000 check from the Illinois Senate Democratic Fund. (We're having a hard time with the State Board of Elections Web site linking to the wrong page. I hope it works for you.) She ended up winning more than half the vote over state Rep. Rich Bradley, who vacated his House seat so Chicago Ald. Dick Mell’s daughter, Deborah Mell, who also is the governor’s sister-in-law, could run. Mell is uncontested in that race.

Martinez’s likelihood of staying put won’t change the Senate dynamic much, but it will deepen tensions that likely will affect this spring’s negotiations or lack thereof.

Hendon, a former West Side Chicago alderman and Party committeeman, is a rather outspoken senator called “Hollywood Hendon” because of his flashy suits and quick quips. He’s also a licensed producer and writer. He’s become a point person on gaming negotiations and gained a last-minute sponsorship of the Chicago-area mass transit legislation because he was in an intense race against Chicago Democrat AmySue Mertens, an experienced community advocate who had the backing of AFSCME Council 31. A third candidate, Jonathan Singh Bedi, had potential to be a spoiler if it turned out to be a close race. That wasn’t the case. Hendon won more than 60 percent of the vote, according to the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners. The $17,000 donation January 31 from the Senate president probably didn’t hurt.

In the Illinois House, two successful candidates backed by Blagojevich could place more emphasis on the dynamics of the governor’s relationship with House Speaker Michael Madigan, as the governor held onto the seat of a former ally and gained another probable supporter.

Blagojevich ally Patti Hahn of Centralia won the democratic primary for Rep. Kurt Granberg’s seat in the 107th District. Granberg, a Carlyle Democrat, vacated his seat and could pop up in the Blagojevich Administration. Hahn defeated Travis Loyd by twenty points in the historically Democratic district. Democratic Rep. Jay Hoffman, a key Blagojevich ally in the House, contributed to Hahn’s campaign.

Will Burns, a former aide to the Senate president, won the primary in the 26th District on Chicago’s South Side with 33 percent of the vote in a five-way race. Incumbent Rep. Elga Jeffries, who was appointed to the seat in 2007, finished a distant fourth with 12 percent. Burns also was an Obama staffer at one point, and Obama won more than 90 percent of the vote in that district in 2004. The victory means another potential supporter to the Blagojevich-Jones alliance next year. Burns received significant financial support from Senate Democrats allied with Jones and from contributors with strong ties to Jones, including utility giant Commonwealth Edison.

Preview
(And follow-up from January)
House District 44 Democratic incumbent Rep. Fred Crespo will face Republican Margaret “Peggy” Brothman in November to serve the northwest suburbs of Chicago.

House District 56 Schaumburg Rep. Paul Froehlich, who switched from a Republican to a Democrat last year, won the Democratic nomination despite fierce opposition from John Moynihan. He’ll now face Schaumburg Republican Anita Forte-Scott, who was unopposed in the primary.

House District 92 Because Republican state Rep. Aaron Schock vacated his seat to run — and ultimately win — a GOP nomination for Congress, the west-central Illinois seat was vacant. Now Peoria Democrat Jehan Gordon will face Peoria Republican Cindy Ardis Jenkins. Gordon won the primary with financial help from Senate Democrats and Hoffman despite a controversy regarding whether she actually graduated from the University of Illinois as stated in campaign literature. The district leaned Republican by fewer than 300 votes in 2004 and was competitive in 2006.

Read more...