Many know 32nd Ward Committeeman John Curry as a collegial, even fawning man at cocktail parties.There is, however, another side to him that we at the Chicago GOP have had to put up with for years, particularly Chairman Eloise Gerson.
John is a curious case.While portraying himself as a staunch Republican Conservative, he has endorsed Machine Democrats, and had Machine Democrats circulate most of his nominating petitions for the 32nd Ward Republican Committeeman election in 2008.A former Democratic Alderman and Machine stalwart, Ted Matlak, even signed as Circulator on several of those Petitions.When I called John after the election, his explanation was that Matlak was now a “precinct captain” in John’s “ward organization”, so it was “fine.”This thin explanation is difficult to square with Ted Matlak’s vote in the 2008 Democratic Primary just days earlier, or his running for County Commissioner in the Democratic Primary in 2010.I have regrettably been forced to view John Curry as the Republican equivalent of what my African-American friends call an “Oreo Cookie.”
But Mr. Curry is also someone with a deep hatred of Eloise Gerson, and only a limited ability to control himself.He has repeatedly engaged in sneering, venomous outbursts against her, often in front of witnesses.On two occasions he put Eloise in fear of immediate physical assault, once with Tony Peraica’s wife looking on in shock.His last outburst at Eloise, which occurred a few weeks ago at the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, was witnessed by no less than 46th Ward Committeeman Diane Shapiro, Patty Battisti of the CBEC and Sherri Griffith of the 17th Ward.I myself have been threatened with lawsuits by Mr. Curry on more than one occasion, and it has to beat least three weeks since I last heard him threaten to sue a another fellow Republican.
Yesterday there was a court hearing in the Daley Center on a case brought by the City of Chicago for minor building code items in one of the commercial properties Eloise owns in Chicago.As with 99% of court hearings, no spectators ever bother to attend the court calls in the case (I'm always amused at legal shows on TV when the courtrooms contain lots of interested spectators - don't those people have jobs?) But who should be sitting in the far corner of the courtroom on this day but Mr. Curry, trying his best to look invisible, and not looking up or around.Mr. Curry was not there in court for a case of his own, for he had no tie on.He obviously was there to take notes on Eloise’s case, presumably to use against her in some campaign piece. He is listed as part of "The Team" by Eloise's opponent.
But it got much worse, as it often does with John.After the hearing, while I was briefly in the courtroom obtaining a copy of the court order setting the next court date, John went to work in the courthouse hallway.In front of a witness, he directed yet another verbal attack on Eloise (a woman half his size) in his usual sneering, venomous, vitriolic tone:
“You are the most despicable person I have ever met!”
“You have a miserable life and I have a wonderful life!”
“You need professional counseling!”(Under the circumstances in the hallway, Eloise would seem to have the better claim to such a statement.)
“See you on March 20th!”(Primary Election Day, when the Committeeman election will occur.)
Of course, the courageous Mr. Curry immediately ceased his attack on a woman as soon as I emerged through the courtroom doors down the hall.
As usual, Eloise did not lower herself to Curry’s level, but did not run from his schoolyard bullying tactics, either.She never does.But her companion and witness, like Nilo Peraica some months before him, was stunned at what he witnessed in the courtroom hallway.
John gets away with this stuff because people never call him out on it.Those days are over.People have to know what is really going on in this Party.
God forbid that John Curry and his scheming allies ever take control of the Chicago GOP.I tried my best to get him out, but I was obviously a marked man at the Democrat-controlled Chicago Board of Election Commissioners.
A knowledgable official of the Chicago Board of Elections yesterday described as "bogus" the allegation of 23-year-old "Tommy" Smithburg that Chicago GOP Chairman Eloise Gerson's 42nd Ward had no Republican election judges in 37 precincts in the last General Election.
The official, Patty Battista, should know, she is responsible for posting Republican Judges. In fact, the 42nd Ward has one of the best records in the City on Judges, and has a times exported judges to other wards due to a surplus.
"Consider the source", said Chairman Gerson. "It came from the Chicago Young Republicans. They have been lying about me for years."
In what the operators of this site consider to be no coincidence, just hours after posting an article critical of State Chairman Pat Brady and a Candidate backed by the Chicago Young Republicans, this website suffered the single largest cyber-attack in its history. Over 500 attempts were made to make a back door breach through the firewall and other protections of the site.
Being Republican, this site has been subject to numerous attacks over the years, with some inital ones even being successful, but nothing on this scale. Investigation is underway, and if evidence is found, authorities will be contacted for prosecution.
"It certainly looks like retribution," said one source. "Chairman Brady has a long history in law enforcement, so he is not a focus," it was added. "We have people pursuing it."
I read with some amusement the endorsement of State Chairman Pat Brady for the opponent to Eloise Gerson in her campaign for reelection as 42nd Ward Republican Committeeman. Since the GOP State Chairman has decided to inject himself into a local Ward race (completely unheard of before now), Mr. Brady’s endorsement, comments and track record are fair game, since the voters of the 42nd Ward have a right to assess the value of the endorsement in making a decision on a vote.
The 42nd Ward Republican Organization, started in 2000, has been and remains the best Republican ward organization in Chicago. Eloise Gerson has been a leader and builder of the organization from the outset. With its Boat Cruise, Breakfast Events and sheer hard political work, the 42nd has forged a proud record in Chicago politics. In 2003, when other GOP organizations (including the Chicago Young Republicans) did not even exist, the 42nd Ward GOP put Rich Gordon on the ballot for Alderman and he received 44% of the vote. The voter turnout in the 42nd has always been strong for Republican candidates. The Boat Cruise often draws national GOP figures.
There are wards in Chicago where the Committeeman refuses to do more than attend cocktail parties and Conservative events. There are more than a few wards in Chicago where the Committeemen are unabashed allies and agents of the Cook County Democratic Party. Yet the 42nd Ward, of all the wards in Chicago, is the organization that Pat Brady believes must be dismantled and destroyed. It’s not only unfathomable from a party building standpoint, it is flat out stupid when one considers the larger interests of the GOP.
Even better, the “opponent” to Chairman Gerson in the 42nd Ward is all of 23 years old, was at Northwestern this time last year, and his chief political experience appears to be that he worked a few hours as a volunteer for a George Bush campaign while in boarding school in New Hampshire. Political experience in Illinois? Zero! How about Chicago? Zip! Or the 42nd Ward? Nada! But now Mr. Brady wants him in charge of perhaps the most important ward in the city for Republicans, and has issued an endorsement against the elected Chicago Republican Chairman in the process. So much for “Party unity”!
I don’t know the opponent at all, since he has never attended local political events and has never worked for the GOP in the 42nd Ward or Chicago, but assume he is a quite decent young man (though a very young man.) He is being used by the Chicago Young Republicans and Pat Brady in a revenge campaign against Eloise Gerson because she knocked their collective political teeth in when they tried to oust her as City Chairman in a failed coup last year. Now both wish to wreak their revenge by destroying her. (Think of it as “Lord of the Flies” meets “Sho-gun,” only a lot more vicious.) As one wag put it to me a year ago over a beer, describing our State Chairman, “Pat’s a total team player in the GOP. Either you play on his team or he attacks you.”
In an astounding statement, Mr. Brady pointedly puts blame on Ms. Gerson and the Chicago GOP for Bill Brady’s loss in the gubernatorial campaign last year, because Bill Brady received only 17.5% of the Chicago vote. But the problem was not Eloise or the Chicago GOP, but the Brady Campaign and its strategic decisions, of which Pat Brady was a part.
First recall that the Brady Campaign effectively abandoned Cook County in favor of a “Downstate” strategy in the General Election, bordering on an “Anti-Chicago” strategy. Bill Brady barely ever came to Cook County or Chicago. Now look at how Bill Brady fared in Chicago compared to the successful GOP Candidates, who actually mounted a campaign in the City and Cook County:
Judy Baar Topinka 27.19% (52.4% in Suburban Cook) (209,549 Dem. plurality in Cook)
Dan Rutherford 20.63% (46.1% in Suburban Cook) (387,353 Dem. plurality in Cook)
Mark Kirk 19.47% (42.5% in Suburban Cook) (446,133 Dem. plurality in Cook)
Bill Brady 17.41% (39.5% in Suburban Cook) (500,553 Dem. plurality in Cook)
These percentages and plurality numbers show that it was the campaign efforts in Chicago and Cook County that mattered. As a social conservative, Bill Brady was already about as popular in Chicago as ketchup on a hot dog – he required more effort in Cook, not less, but his advisors decided to take their chances. Notice too, that a Downstate Republican, Dan Rutherford, ran well enough in Cook to win, so it was not all about regional bias.
Now guess who was a close advisor to Bill Brady, and no doubt affirmed this sadly fatal strategy? Bill’s boyhood friend, State Chairman Pat Brady!
It isn’t like the Chicago GOP did not try. In the 42nd Ward alone, Committeeman Eloise Gerson directed the delivery of thousands of pieces of literature for Bill Brady, Mark Kirk, Dan Rutherford and Judy Baar Topinka. Hundreds of yard signs were put out, frequently by Eloise herself as she drove around in an SUV managing her real estate business, and she even replaced signs around the Ward when the Democrats stole them. She mailed a Sample Ballot to over 9,000 voters in the 42nd Ward, “Hard Rs”, “Soft Rs” and Independents in the asking them to come out and vote for Bill Brady, Mark Kirk, Dan Rutherford and Judy Baar Topinka. Then she visited every precinct polling place on Election Day to check in. Woe betide the Democratic Election Judge who tries to push around a Republican Judge with Eloise around.
In the city as a whole, the Chicago GOP put out over 200,000 pieces of Brady literature door to door in key Republican areas of the North, and Northwest Sides of the City. Where there were “Do-Nothing” or outright “Democrat” GOP Committeemen, we simply went around them, and used a large corps of volunteers. It was an unprecedented effort in the City.
Thanks to the strong effort of Eloise Gerson and the Chicago GOP, Bill Brady polled better in Chicago in 2010 than Judy Baar Topinka, a Moderate, did in her run for Governor in 2006, despite minimal campaigning in the City.
Eloise’s hard work also paid off in the 42nd Ward:
-In the 42nd Ward, Bill Brady received 38.96% of the vote, twice the City average, and posted the second highest number of votes and vote percentage of all 50 wards in the City of Chicago. Bill Brady received more votes out of the 42nd Ward than in 72 of 102 Downstate counties.
-In the 42nd Ward, running against Alexi Giannoulias, a resident of the 42nd Ward, Mark Kirk received 43% of the vote, again the second highest number of votes and vote percentage of all 50 wards in the City of Chicago, and more votes than in 78 of the 102 Downstate counties.
-In the 42nd Ward, Dan Rutherford received 45.94% of the vote in the Treasurer race, again the second highest total and percentage of the Chicago wards.
-Judy Baar Topinka won the 42nd Ward in the Comptroller race with 51.99% of the vote, one of the four wards she won in Chicago.
But Pat Brady says we need a “new era.” That may be true in some Chicago wards, but not the 42nd. Such spiteful politics cannot be allowed to succeed.
Regarding the CYRs, whose odious record needs no recounting here, a question: did the CYRs support Bill Brady?
Below is a quote from the President of the CYRs in the Fall of 2010, complaining that distributing literature for Bill Brady in Lincoln Park and Lakeview might hurt their much more Moderate CYR member candidate for the State House in the North Lakefront, Dave Lenkowski (who lost 70-30 anyway):
“On a more pragmatic note and one that probably should have been discussed earlier, is there really a point to doing a Brady drop in these neighborhoods? I've talked to a couple local candidates and they aren't thrilled about being associated with Brady, and in fact are convinced that this lit drop is a horrible idea and is working against their efforts in their respective districts. As I'm sure you know, for whatever reason, people hate Brady around here, giving the argument that this particular lit drop is counterproductive some legitimacy. Do you have any insight on this and on what the Brady campaign is actually hoping to accomplish here? They can't seriously think they'll take the Lakeview and Lincoln Park neighborhoods, sad as that reality is.”
Eloise’s response to the President of the CYRs was eloquent:
“Furthermore, not only must I question the validity of your concerns and opinions, but Senator Brady is the Republican nominee for Governor and the leader of our party's statewide ticket. To the extent such concerns even exist, it is hoped that you understand that the needs of the gubernatorial campaign must trump them. In response to your explanation that Senator Brady will not "win" in Lincoln Park or Lakeview, please recall that what matters is the total number of votes statewide, and not their geographic origin. Governor Quinn cannot realistically hope to ‘win’ downstate Illinois against Senator Brady, but I assure you that his supporters are campaigning hard there for every vote they can gain for him. So it is for us in Chicago for Senator Brady.”
Such is the leader Pat Brady wants to remove! I will leave it to you to decide if this action by our State Party Chairman is furthering the interests of Republicans in Illinois, or his own.
Steve Boulton of this blog was tossed off the ballot by the Board despite having around 150 signatures for a requirement of 75, and bringibng in 41 voter affidavits when he only needed to get 19 signatures back. All but two were rejected by the Board. Tongues are wagging!
We asked Boulton, and he would only say that the proceedings were "very peculiar."
The Challenger, Committeeman John Curry, saw his own attorney, John Fogarty, drop out of the case, leaving Curry to go on his own. Hmmmm!
Stay tuned on this one!
Larry Kudlow, a former official in the Reagan administration, a friend and former colleague of Newt Gingrich, was on Chicago’s conservative talk radio show, “Don Wade & Roma” WLS-890AM, explaining the reasons he is disappointed with Newt Gingrich. Not only did he criticize Gingrich’s attacks on Romney with regard to Bain Capital, he also found the language he used about Romney’s investments and wealth as “the language of the left.” (Begins around 5:00).
“I’ve been very critical of Newt’s comments trashing Bain capital. I think it’s antithetical to free market capitalism. I think he made a huge mistake… I go back a long ways with Newt, and I do think Newt has a good record as a supply-sider,
But my disappoinment over his Bain Capital stuff is huge and a gigantic mistake.
Apparently yesterday in Florida, according to the WSJ he took a snarky wack at Mitt Romney, he said Mitt lives in a world of Swiss Bank Accounts and Cayman Island Accounts and automatic$20-million income with no work. I just think that is below the belt. I’m so disappointed to read that. That was printed by Jason Reilly in the WSJ Political Diary. This is the language of the left. And it’s really engaging in ignorance. And I think it’s just all wrong. It’s unbecoming to a guy like Gingrich.Why he does this, I do not know…
I think all of this class warfare is the language of the left, It’s not the language of conservatism. And that’s why it’s been so disappointing now. I thought Newt was putting that stuff away. But I guess it’s reappearing again…
I’m not waging war against Newt, I am, however, disagreeing with some of these key points. And I think they are unbecoming and unnecessary, and very very disappointing."
Later that night, before the CNN-Wolf Blitzer debate in Florida, Kudlow interviewed Gingrich on his show, CNBC’s The Kudlow Report, and outlined his displeasure at the way Gingrich has been attacking capitalism and Romney’s investments.
“Ronald Reagan never singled out investments and funds and attacked them. That’s my disappointment with you—calling Bain Capital and other private equity funds, that they are looters, raiders, greedy corporations. You yourself worked for Ted Forstmann, “at the great private equity fund Forstmann Little.”
He then cited another private equity firm that hired Gingrich: “JLL Partners, a private equity firm, they gave you $40,000, you gave a speech, the guy said you were euphoric about private equity.”
Asked Kudlow: “Is it just political expediency and opportunism, where you are giving up your principles that I thought you and I shared?”
Kudlow and Gingrich acknowledged their history, going back 30 years together off and on, back to the Reagan revival of free market capitalism and supply side economics.
But Kudlow was compelled to tell his friend and former colleague, “You sound like President Obama or the left wing of the Democratic party. That’s what has disappointed many of your conserative supporters.”
You can find the entire interview, including Gingrich's responses, here.
You can also find the interview, and Kudlow’s commentary, here.
Our preliminary review of President Obama's nomination petitons indicated a higher than expected number of signatures were not by registered Illinois voters, as is required. We used a database analysis by comparing the signature names to a list of all registered voters in Illinois through a database analysis service.
Right off the bat, we lost two days by the fact that our order for ballot petitions was “mishandled” by the ISBE. Near the close of business on Friday, January 6, 2012, we received 60 disks of ballot petitions of various candidates as requested, but upon return to the office we found that the disk for Barack Obama’s petitions was . . . BLANK!!! It cost us the weekend and a good part of Monday before new disks could be obtained and transmitted to the database service.
The difference was crucial to our efforts to review the Obama petitions with a sound and double-checked database analysis. This type of analysis requires extensive "cleansing of the data to reduce or elimiate errors by use of "Ave." instead of avenue. As it was, we filed the Objection to the Obama petitions with seven minutes to spare at 4:53 pm on January 13, 2012. We knew that the database results were not audited, and likely too high in finding voters not registered, but it was impossible to know how high in the short time frame. Ah, well, spilt milk and all.
While we identified several fatal defects in a small number of specific sheets out of the 701 Petition signatures sheets filed, and our spot checks identified a large number of questionable signatures, we knew going in that only the registered voter objections would attack enough signatures to potentially keep President Obama off the Primary ballot.
During the records review of the petition signatures, held at Illinois State Board of Election offices in downtown Chicago, ISBE clerks called “Checkers”, rule on each challenged voter signature on a line by line basis though comparison with ISBE records on computer screens. In this case, over 3,000 individual reviews had to occur. On respective sides of the Checker are single representatives of each side, who note each ruling, and assert their side's position to a limited degree as needed.
Our people had repeated complaints about the Checkers slanting to the candidate on signatures, addresses, and virtually all else. We accept that to a degree as part of the game, since the law strongly favors ballot access, but it seemed a bit overboard this time compared to other experiences. Additionally, we knew that the crux of the case was the existence of enough signatures by persons not registered.
Alas, after six hours of checking at eight computer terminals (a substantial ongoing effort by some 30 Board employees and volunteers), we determined in the final stages of the records check that Mr. Obama was going to obtain approval of sufficient signatures to cross the 3000 mark required for ballot placement, with no reasonable prospect of our being able to reverse enough rulings to get him back under 3000. Close monitoring and extensive use of pocket calculators caused us to see the trend and unfortunate mathematical reality that the President was certain to prevail on the challenge. We consequently halted the exam and filed to withdraw the challenge to avoid a waste of additional effort and time by the assembled workers.
But we thank profusely the people who agreed to come down to the Thompson Center to assist us as respresentatives at the terminals. I am very proud of them.
Dennis Coleman Kurt Fujio (GOP Committeeman Candidate in the 49th Ward) Tonia Lindsey Tony Lindsey Sheila Morgan Carl Segvich (GOP Committeeman for the 11th Ward) Diane Shapiro (GOP Committeeman for the 46th Ward) Leo Steinys
Mirlinda Vula Feirstein (on call) (GOP Committeeman Candidate in the 2nd Ward)
Catherina Wojtowicz (on call) (GOP Committeeman Candidate in the 19th Ward)
Eloise Gerson (on call) (Chicago Republican Party Chairman and Candidate for reelection as GOP Committeeman Candidate in the 42nd Ward)
As a person who has been at the front line for ten years in acting for reform through lawsuits, board proceedings and much more, and not just talking about it, I can say that for true reformers disappointment is a regular companion. We have High Hopes, however, and the ram will keep butting that dam!
Hi Folks!
The first hearing on the challenge to the Barack Obama Nomination Papers for the Illinois Primary will be a 11 am tomorrow, January 24, at the James R. Thompson Building in the Chicago Loop. It should be interesting, but administrative in nature.
Far more importantly, the Illinois State Board of Elections has already scheduled the "Registration Check" in this case, whereby the entries of the Obama petitions will be compared, line by line, with ISBE records on voter registration and voter signatures. it will start on Wednesday, january 25 at 9 am in the Thompson Center, and go on until completed. They hope to complete the task in one day, but it may run over to Thursday morning.
The Board will have personnel at eight separate computer terminals conducting review of different parts of the petitions at the same time. The Board employee is the Examiner. Our task is to have a representative of the Objectors at each terminal, monitoring the exam, advocating for the Objectors on a particular line or signature as needed, objecting to the ruling of the Examiner as needed, and recording the results on sheets we will provide, aling with a list of our objecitons, the sheets and line numbers, etc.
Anyone who has Wednesdayand would like to join in the effort, please feel free to contact me at
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
. Thanks!!!
On Friday January 13, 2012, an Objection was filed against the Nomination Papers of Barack Obama to appear in the ballot for the Illinois Primary on March 20, 2011. The three Objectors are Sharon Meroni, Chris Cleveland and myself. I wrote the Objection, and will be acting as legal counsel in the Objection proceeding. After considerable effort to analyze the 5,000 signatures submitted by the President, we concluded that he is well short of the 3,000 valid signatures required to be on the primary ballot.
If we are successful, Barack Obama's anme will not appear on the Democratic Primary Ballot in the March 20, 2012 Democratic Primary in Illinois. For those who will falsely brand this a "birther" challenge, it simply is not. This is based on the President's filed petitions, not his birthplace or geneology.
The Objection arose out of a series of ballot integrity and election fraud investigations and filings that Sharon Meroni and I have conducted for the past year and a half, both independently and through our new organization, Defend The Vote. www.defendthevote.com. Sharon had read the reports from Indiana which included claims that fraudulent nominating petitions were filed for President Obama in 2008. It brought up the question of whether other Petitions filed in Illinois were suspect.
(We are still quite busy at Defend The Vote, and plenty is in the pipeline on the Illinois ballot integrity front, but more on that later.)
We had other concerns. One major one is the byzantine aspects of the Illinois ballot access system. in which challenging nominating petitions is a legendary blood sport in Chicago and Cook County. I have been representing Republican candidates for free before the various boards since about 2004, fighting to keep them on the ballot against Democratic (and sometimes local Republican) challenges seeking to knock them off the general election ballot, to allow the Democrats to run unopposed. President Obama himself used this process to knock four opponents off the ballot to allow him to run unopposed for his first term as State Senator in Illinois. So he certainly has no right to complain about this Objection. We wanted to see what the Illinois State Board of Elections would do with this, since my previous efforts to get the Board to do its job in politically uncomfortable circumstances have starkly failed.
A third objective was to show the Democratic powers in Chicago (and therefore in Illinois) that after years of taking shots, Republican elements in Chicago had now achieved the hard-won ability to strike back hard on the challenge front, even on petitions involving thousands of signatures. We want to see if the Machine and its Republican minions want to keep playing this game, or will stop messing with the GOP, as the price has now gone up sharply.
The legal fees will be paid by Jack Roeser, to whom we offer our thanks.
The first hearing is on January 24, and I expect a frigid welcome from the Board and its Democratic Chairman. (That won’t, however, be anything new for me at the State Board of Elections, where I am considered a Republican “troublemaker, ” or with this Chairman, with whom I have had near shouting matches overpast cases at the Board on Republican cases, most notably the 2006 full Board hearing on the case by the Cook County GOP against Democratic Alderman using City rented Aldermanic offices as Democratic Party campaign centers. That hearing was a two hour rodeo, as witnesses can attest.)
We shall see what course this takes, and I will be both dressed warmly and unafraid. We will keep you updated on this site, so check in on the evening to the 24th for an update.
The following Letter to the Editor appeared on pages 10-11 of the Sept., 2011, edition of "Business & Commercial Aviation." It may have also appeared elsewhere, since it was submitted to several aviation publications, some of which expressed interest.
President Barack Obama demonizes those who fly on business jets, as though it was the ultimate in luxury. The fact of the matter is that these jets enable executives to conduct company business more expeditiously. If they use the jets for personal business (such as a trip to a resort for a weekend), or if a family member, not connected with the company, accompanies them on a business trip, the value of the trip must be reported as income for tax purposes. Some companies may even require some type of reimbursement for the cost of the flight.
When the president flies on Air Force One to conduct the business of the nation, he is using it for the purpose for which it was intended. Unfortunately, presidents have grown accustomed to treating the aircraft as a perk of the office. Obama flies to various cities for political fund-raisers, with the amount of money raised far surpassed by the cost of the flight (plus the cost of security, meals, accommodations, etc.), and the taxpayers pick up the tab. When he flew to Chicago to celebrate his 50th birthday, the taxpayers also paid for it.
When Obama uses Air Force One, the ultimate business jet, for non-government business, he should report it as income on his tax return, and he should reimburse our financially strapped government. This of course, would put him into bankruptcy.
Rick Santorum was the eventual winner of the anti-Romney sentiment. His timing was perfect and nicely assisted by Evangelicals in Iowa.
However, there are still certain realities he must face. The money should start pouring in, but that is easier said than done. If he doesn't reap a huge harvest of funds, he won't be competitive across the nation. The other fact is that he was actually the least liked of the anti-Romneys. The fickle music chairs of Perry, Cain, and Gingrich fervors took up all the limelight. Reporters were asking Santorum last week if he was going to drop out.
Gingrich lamented the barrage of negative advertising and spin when he was the flavor of the month. Santorum has yet to feel the heat, wrath, of the other spinmeisers on the edge of desperation.
If Romney truly has double the next nearest competitor in New Hampshire, I still stand with my prediction that Romeny is going to be the nominee.
A week is a lifetime in politics, so Santorum will need to play his hand masterfully. He has had difficulty campaigning. His loses will shortly turn into his inability to beat Obama.
Santorum was more lucky than good. This is his week in the spotlight. Let the vetting begin.
This was a very interesting Republican Primary. Mitt Romney was the early frontrunner, but there were some interesting challenges from several different flavor-of-the-month competitors. I believe the Republican Primary is now over and Romney will be the nominee.
The online trading market, Intrade, which has proven to be more accurate than polls now has Romney with a 75% chance of being the GOP nominee.
Intrade has Ron Paul at 7%, Newt Gingrich at 5.8% Santorum at 3.8%, and the rest at less than 1%. It also gives a 15% chance Hermain Cain will endorse Newt Gingrich.
I still think Ron Paul might win Iowa, but Romney immediate takes all the momentum by taking a 2-1 vote advantage over his next competitor in the Granite State.
Conservatives have had a tough time trusting Romney because of his "apparent" liberal compromises. Some of the better analysts have astutely pointed out Romney was a Republican governor in once of the most liberal east coast states in the nation.
Romney was widely criticized for nominating more Democrats for Judges than Republicans. This sounds like a good political hammer to pound Romney and all his opponents tried. But, when Romney explained every person on his states judicial nominating committee were Democrats, it is easy to see why he did it.
Many loudmouth conservatives protest because Romney fails their rigid litmus test, but he passes my good compromise test. I still might vote for Newt in the primary, but will eagerly support Romney in the general.
The Iowa Caucuses are coming fast. The early states will start the momentum of the Republicans next nominee. After listening to the debates, I sometimes find myself pulling for some candidates and pushing back against others. Howver, after reading rational analysis about the candidates, I realize I can pretty much support ALL the Republican nominees for President.
Like most Conservatives, I have been willing to leave open my decision and let the flavor of the month try to woo me with the latest anti-Romney rhetoric.
I didn't quite fully embrace the Perry movement. He lost me with his poor performance in the debates. I also must admit his Texas twang and swagger remind me too much of W.
Cain was a puzzle. I thought the triple 9s were extremely catchy, but I couldn't resolve that last 9. Adding another tax just couldn't be a good thing, but the man could talk to a crowd.
Ron Paul has always been a perennial favorite of mine. I believe he is the intellectual godfather of the tea party. But his complete unwillingness to modulate his foreign policy stance is his own undoing. Most Republicans believe this is a dangerous world with a bunch of crazies out there; we want a strong military.
It turns out Romney isn't as bad as I originally thought. He did a good job explaining himself in the debates. Living in Chicago, I can understand how he had to modulate his views in that extremely liberal state. This point hit home when he explained ALL the people voting on his judge nominations were Democrats. Of course he had to nominate mostly Democrats. I actually get this. Mitt's not so bad.
The Newtster is my latest favorite. His debate performance is unrivaled. He would twist Obama into fitful tongue-tied knots. I like that he actually passed some actual effective government reform. Newt though, isn't perfect. His personal life is despicable, but Bachmann's partial-birth abortion attacks are unfounded. Newt is my current favorite, but not by much at all. He may stick as he is a known entity, unlike the pizza-man.
I could live with Huntsman fine. Solid, but not terribly compelling.
Bachmann and Santorum I think are also fine, but I see them as dropping down to 3rd tier with Huntsman. They are just hoping to stay in long enough to peak as flavor of the month at the right time.
I must admit McCain did not thrill me. I dutifully displayed his yard sign, but he wasn't my choice. I just wasn't enthusiased by him, regardless of his great war hero narrative.
This time around, I think I can be enthusiasic about Romney, Gingrich, or Paul. And maybe the others.
An interesting observation and somewhat paradoxical is how Democrats and Republicans solve their differences.
Democrats are usually known for being more emotional and less competent at the technical processes of making things work. They always have problems with their balloon drops.
Republicans are more known for making decisions based on logic. They excel at technology and their efficiency scares the daylights out of many Democrats. Their balloon drops always work.
Yet, when it comes to a difference of opinion. The Democrats handle it far more politically advantageously than Republicans. In this case, the Republicans weakness is also their strength; values.
A voter chooses to be a Republican based on a personal set of values such as fiscal responsibility, immigration, guns, abortion, etc. Usually Democrats default to that party out of necessity. Sure, some true liberals are Democrats, but the trial lawyers, unions, and poor don't have a choice.
Since a majority of Democrats require Democrat rule for survival, they choose to handle their differences in private. This problem resolution is what you would expect from Republicans.
Democrat politicians squabble, rant, and yell in private. After all the debating and a vote is taken, the Democrats clam up and present a unified face to the public. In public, the floor leader asks for a unanimous vote and always gets it from all the participants.
The current objective for the Republican Party is to defeat Obama, but the vitriol and mudslinging amongst presidential candidates will make it more difficult in the general election. The Republicans should take a cue from the Dems on not airing dirty laundry. Or at least try to follow Reagan's commandment.
We at the Chicago Republican Party express our heartfelt sorrow that a very courageous lady, Maggie Daley, has now passed.
Mrs. Daley was not only a warm and loving mother and wife, while all the time serving us all for decades as the First Lady of Chicago. She was also a shining example to all afflicted with cancer, as she kept on with her life despite all the pain and travail her illness dealt her. She was a true leader in the best way, advocating for the programs she loved, most especially after-school activities for Chicago’s children to keep them from trouble.
On behalf of the Chicago Republican Party, we offer our sincere sympathy to the former Mayor and the Daley family.
Most of you know me personally since I have been involved in pushing the ball forward for the Republican Party for over twenty-five years. You have seen me in the trenches walking precincts, putting up signs, making phone calls, promoting candidates and causes and attending events sponsored by Republican organizations and conservative groups.
The recent letter from my opponent does include some accurate statements, his name is Sean Morrison and he is running for the Board of Review. Beyond that, the letter is filled with inaccuracies, half -truths, unsubstantiated legal charges and a profound ignorance of the role of the Board of Review. No doubt this will continue into the primary election but I thought it important to respond so that Republican leaders and the public in general would not be taken in by the assortment of accusations Mr. Morrison has chosen to throw against the wall in the hope that something will stick. It is ironic that in Mr. Morrison’s letter published in Illinois Review a few weeks ago he whines that I am attacking his character by questioning his Party affiliation based on his life long record of voting in Democrat primaries and contributing to the 19th ward Democratic organization and yet attacking my character seems to be the entire basis upon which his campaign is built.
It is hard to know where to begin since Mr. Morrison’s letter provides so many opportunities to highlight his lack of knowledge of the Board of Review and the property tax system in general. His theme this year, as it was last election seems to be “lower taxes now!” A laudable goal but one that misleads the public. The Board of Review has little influence on the overall tax burden since every assessment reduction granted by the Board to one property owner results in a slightly higher tax bill for all other property owners. The Board should strive for fair assessments for all property owners. We do that by adjudicating appeals in a timely and non-biased manner. Contrary to Mr. Morrison’s contention that he would not be running if I had taken strides to improve the current property tax system, that is exactly what I have done by improving operations at the Board in big ways and small. To detail them now would take up too much space in what is already proving to be a lengthy response, but rest assured that our campaign will have much to discuss about our accomplishments between now and election-day.
The letter states that I have “focused on furthering the current state of malfeasance and inefficiency in Cook County government”. If Mr. Morrison believes I am guilty of malfeasance then it is his responsibility to take that charge and the evidence to back it up to the Cook County State’s Attorney and request an investigation. I am waiting Mr. Morrison.
Based on the most recent letter and two previous releases from the Morrison campaign, he seems to be fixated on my fundraising which has been conducted well within the law and within any commitments I made when I ran for the Board. He says I have “solicited contributions from special interests in amounts that far exceed those sought ever by previous commissioners”. Is he sure that that is true? Does he have any research to back up that claim? He goes on to complain that none of my contributions have gone to benefit the Republican Party. Another unsubstantiated claim. And if he really has a problem with the source of my contributions, then why would he be complaining that none of that money has gone to the Republican Party since he obviously believes it is tainted. The truth is that if Mr. Morrison were not challenging the first Republican to unseat an incumbent Cook County Democrat in the past fifteen years, it would be much easier for my campaign to contribute in larger amounts than I already have to Republican causes. As it stands now we will both be spending in the six figure range for a seat already held by a Republican. A colossal waste of money that cannot be justified by Mr. Morrison’s uninformed, unsubstantiated and unjustified contentions. The Republican Party would be much better served if Mr. Morrison focused his efforts and resources on defeating an incumbent from the Democrat Party or assisting other Republicans to do so.
One last thing, Mr. Morrison says that I have been “ignoring taxpayer interests” and that that will make me vulnerable to losing in the general election. Nothing could be further from the truth. In addition to improvements we have made at the Board to increase access for taxpayers and making it easier to permanently correct mistakes in property records, our office has conducted forty-nine assessment appeal seminars to date, educating thousands of taxpayers about their rights to appeal as well as providing information about exemptions and the property tax system in general. I have personally made presentations at forty-seven of those seminars. Since the November 2010 election I have been the first full time commissioner at the Board working every day with my staff to make sure taxpayers are afforded a fair review of their appeals. All of this on top of a long time record of activism in matters related to government spending and taxation. All of the above and more that I have not mentioned will make voters more, not less likely to vote for me in the general. What has Mr. Morrison done for taxpayers?
I have been through five elections and have been successful each time. As far as who will be the better candidate to defeat the Democrat in November, I leave it to you to compare our education, experience, achievements, knowledge and character in light of what would make a good commissioner and then determine which of us would have a better chance of success and who you believe would do a better job for the tax payers of Cook County.
Thank you for your kind consideration.
Dan Patlak
Commissioner, Cook County Board of Review 1st district
Americans know tough times are ahead, and they want leaders that will level with them in order to do the hard work to “master the challenges of a new century,” Sen. Mark Kirk told a full auditorium Sunday night at Elmhurst College.
Kirk was the guest speaker in the college’s series, The Democracy Forum.
In broad strokes, Kirk outlined an economic recovery plan he said would “save the economic future of the country.” Kirk, a Highland Park Republican, said the plan includes closing lobbying loopholes in the federal tax code that would allow the government to lower income tax levels for the top tiers from 39 percent to 29 percent. Additionally, the plan calls for ending agricultural subsidies and reforming Social Security and Medicare.
Kirk said the plan has the support of about 45 senators from both sides of the political aisle, including Illinois’ senior Sen. Dick Durbin. Additionally the plan calls for the D.C. Super Committee, comprised of members of the Senate and House, to “go big” by seeking $4 trillion in debt reduction, rather than its mandate of $1.2 trillion over 10 years.
The Super Committee has until Nov. 23 to come up with its recommendations or face automatic cuts in military and entitlement spending. Kirk said he was fairly confident the committee would meet its deadlines for a plan to reduce the nations’ $15 trillion deficit, so it can take advantage of a special dispensation that would allow the Senate to pass recommendations with only 51 votes.
Kirk warned that if federal lawmakers don’t get control of the national “spending problem,” the nation could face financial unrest of the likes currently seen in Greece and other European countries.
During his 30 minute address, Kirk hinted at the need to end military aide to Pakistan in light of accusations of that country’s intelligence organization’s involvement with terrorism. He also pointed out the threat of Iran and highlighted the political corruption in Illinois.
Kirk took the time to respond to questions from the audience, which ranged from immigration reform to taxes to jobs.
Kirk said improving the national infrastructure, which he said could be paid for through public and private partnerships like the type used by Abraham Lincoln to fund the transcontinental railroad, could put about $100 billion into the economy.
“We could give new life to Lincoln's economic legacy by building roads, airports and railroads using public-private partnerships," Kirk said.
Kirk also touted the need for a 401(kids) program, which would allow parents to set up a tax-deferred account to begin saving for their children’s future. He said parents could use it as a teaching tool to “teach savings and investments to young Americans.” Such a savings plan would have resources under the control of average Americans and not the government, he said.
Rachel Nelson, a student at Elmhurst College, asked Kirk about supporting the DREAM Act, which would help those brought to this country illegally as children by providing a path to citizenship if they go to college or join the military.
Kirk, who has not supported the DREAM Act, said the southern U.S. border needs to be secured to protect national security interests before any real discussion of illegal immigration can take place.
Former Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives Lee Daniels, also an Elmhurst College staff member, called Illinois’ junior senator one of the top leaders in the United States “representing all that is good and just in our complex society.”
“We need, more than ever, a leader that will guide us through these challenging and tumultuous times. Sen. Kirk is just such a man,” Daniels said.
I attended a neighborhood meeting for my Congressman, Mike Quigley, last night. I walked away with a disturbing sense of non-reality. Italy is now entering the “red zone” in the European Debt Crisis, and the Dow Jones dropped by almost 400 points today. The Italian crisis is not completely unexpected, but it is still very dangerous territory. Italy got here by doing exactly what the United States Government and the Illinois state government have done for decades: pushing debt to preserve high social spending levels - the Italians just have a head start on us. You would think our elected leaders, as well as the American Public, would take notice. After this meeting, I am not so sure they have.
The Italian problem makes Greece look puny, in several ways. First, the Italian economy is about eight times the size of the Greek economy. Second, the Italian economy is between 15 and 20% of the entire European Union economy. The Italian public debt is about five times that of Greece, so a "bailout" means gigantic money. Further, American banks either own or are owned, or owe and are owed plenty by major Italian banks. We are not talking about a tiny player like Greece or Portugal, so if Italy defaults the resulting financial upheaval will put the entire West in serious financial distress, with the resulting economic damage.
The numbers on our federal budget and deficit are plain, but hard for the human mind to grasp. We spend about $3.7 trillion a year and only bring in $2.2 trillion, leaving a $1.5 trillion deficit. So when people discuss a “$1.5 trillion deficit” realize they are talking about our government operating at over a 40% deficit per year. That is staggering in its own right.
But then let’s look at sheer size, best expressed in the famous “$1,000 bill stack” example. A stack of U.S. $1,000 bills equal to $1 million dollars is only about 4 inches high. For $1 billion dollars, however, the same stack of $1,000 bills grows to 363 feet high, the height of a mid-sized office building. For $1 trillion dollars (which is a million millions) the same stack of $1,000 bills would be 63 miles high, just at the border between our atmosphere and Outer Space. But the deficit for just this year alone is $1.5 trillion, which equates to a stack 94 miles high, well into Outer Space and nearly halfway to the Space Station!
What do we spend all that money on? It is actually simpler than you might think:
Social Security - 20%
Medicare / Medicaid / health insurance grants – 21%
Other “safety net” entitlement spending - 14%
Defense – 20%
Interest Payments on National Debt – 6%
Everything Else – 19%
As these numbers show, a full 55% of the federal budget is spent on entitlements already, and that number is growing out of control, particularly on the medical side. Put another way, if you eliminated the entire defense budget for next year, it would only cut the current deficit in half. The problem is not defense spending, and the problem is not revenue. The problem is entitlement spending.
So what did we hear from the Congressman? Why, it’s all the fault of George Bush, of course! He got us in to these awful wars that cost billions that we now don’t have to fix the budget. (Notice the logic: we are spending the money in any event, so the deficit is the fault of whoever did not get us the money!) When challenged on the need for attacking Al-Qaeda, he asserted that the many plots uncovered and stopped in the U.S. all came from good police work, not wars. (Apparently, to the Congressman the fact that Al-Qaeda is on the run and seeing its leaders falling like dominoes had nothing to do with the lack of a sucessful attack on the U.S. in ten years.) He also stated that Republicans are at the root of all problems in the Congress as they will not “compromise.” Now, he says, the Super Committee is unlikely to reach agreement and the draconian cuts called for in the last debt limit deal will take effect, harming all. It all lies with the evil GOP, you now see.
Now, I give the Congressman credit, in that he did put out some tough facts. He admitted that the Stimulus did very little on job creation as only 4-5 percent of the money went into "shovel ready" construction projects. But he justified the Stimulus on ground that it saved a slew of state and municipal governments from bankruptcy. (The counter is that we only replaced state debt to bond holders with federal debt to the People's Republic of China, a government that does not have the future prosperity of the American people very high on its agenda.)
The Congressman's final shenannigan was the most chilling: he began to tick off “savings” that can be had, that will measure in the millions of dollars, and (wait for it . . . ) perhaps a few billion!! The largely liberal North Side crowd, not comprehending the difference between millions, billions and trillions, was appropriately impressed and cooing at this "aggressive cost-cutting," not realizing that he was talking chicken feed compared to the actual deficit. I was appalled both that he was saying it, and that they were swallowing it.
With ostrich-head leadership like this, I’m heading for Europe where things are saner ( no wait, they are going broke on social spending faster than we are.) Gosh, I know, I'm going to Canada, where I have shirt-tail relatives thanks to a Canadian grandmother (no, that's right, just as bad, and freezing to boot.) Mexico! (No, I'd get kidnapped in a flash, sure as heck, and no one would pay to get me back. )
Three years ago today, Americans elected Barack Obama as 44th President of the United States. Since his inauguration, over 2 million Americans have lost their jobs. His big government policies have racked up more debt than that of the first 43 Presidential Administrations combined.
One year from tomorrow, Election Day, 2012, we can send President Obama and his inner-circle of college professors home to write their memoirs. In Illinois, we have already started working towards our shared goal of making Barack Obama a one-term President. Building on the successes of our nationally recognized Victory Program, we are holding the first ever state-wide Presidential Preference Straw Poll. You can vote online by going to IllinoisStrawPoll.com right now or tomorrow at one of the polling locations listed here. Senator Kirk and I will be visiting several of the polling sites and announcing the results soon after the voting ends at 7:00pm tomorrow night from Party Headquarters.
This week, I had the honor and pleasure of visiting with and listening to a speech delivered by Governor Scott Walker of Wisconsin. He told a tale of two states. Governor Walker spoke on how by implementing common sense fiscal measures and reforming public sector-labor agreements he turned a $3.5 billion budget deficit into a $300 million surplus. His conservative fiscal reforms are working. Wisconsin is now recognized as one of the best states in the country to work and live.
Compare Governor Walker’s approach with the Illinois Democrats who control the levers of state government. Governor Quinn, who is fully owned by organized labor and his boss, Speaker Mike Madigan, have failed to enact a single comprehensive reform. The result, even after their 67% income tax increase (around one weeks pay for most of us): Illinois can’t pay its bills and businesses are packing up and leaving.
As Republicans and like-minded Conservatives, we need to fight back. Get involved, stay involved and bring a friend. Our children and grandchildren can’t afford the liberal agenda from Washington, DC or the Chicago machine politics from Springfield.
Chicago, November 5, 2011 - Ron Paul has won the Illinois GOP straw poll with 52% of the vote. The Texas congressman's undeterred grassroots support again stunned traditional GOP organizers with 66.5% support in online voting and 8% onsite voting. Herman Cain came in second with 15% online and 29% in person.
Under fire from allegations of sexual harassment, Cain, the Tea Party favorite, has been fighting to stay on message. Whether he will be able to whether the political storm is uncertain; but Cain has remained defiant in the face of relentless media scrutiny.
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney came in third with 7% online support and 35% in person support.
Romney will not be losing many sleepless nights over losing the Illinois GOP straw poll today. After all, Illinois is President Obama's backyard. Though Obama's support has dipped below 50% even in Illinois, he remains ahead of any potential GOP contender and retains strong support in his adopted city of Chicago with 78% support.
Even if he were not, the state's blue state pedigree put its 20 electoral college votes firmly in the Democrat's column.
But the Illinois straw poll again indicates a dissatisfaction with the GOP presidential candidates and consistent support of non-traditional, anti-politician candidates from GOP primary voters. Paul has surprised at straw polls over and over again and Cain continues to lead in overall polling, though not on a state-by-state basis, which still weighs in Romney's favor.
The strength of this trend has to be of concern to the Romney campaign. As the other GOP contenders fade away in popularity or implode as seems to be the case with Rick Perry, Romney may end up a last man standing.
But whether that will be enough for him to clinch the GOP nomination and gather enough steam to unseat Barack Obama remains to be seen.
On behalf of Defend the Vote, Inc. (“DTV”), Executive Director Sharon Meroni and I met with senior administration officials of the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners to discuss the contents and findings of DTV’s 43-page report on Chicago election procedures and the April 5, 2011 audit of Chicago Polling Places in the Chicago Municipal Runoff Election.
The hour-long meeting was quite civil, and the discussion was substantive and constructive to the extent possible, since the Board has only recently received the Report.
It would be inappropriate to identify specific comments by Board personnel, but a variety of topics raised by DTV were actively discussed, from the seal procedures on voting equipment, to voter rolls, to use of Election Judges at Chicago Early Voting sites. No quick resolution of issues will occur, but Board personnel are considering the Report and can already indicate at least one area where review of ballot integrity procedures may occur.
We feel the meeting was a good start, but far to go.We will keep all posted.
www.defendthevote.com
(SPRINGFIELD)— Pension reform designed to attack double-dipping and other abuses of retirement systems won overwhelming House approval today.
Inspired by disclosures in Tribune/WGN-TV investigations, a key provision aims to end the practice of labor officials collecting city and union pensions simultaneously. In addition, the legislation seeks to tamp down the ability of labor leaders to base their public pensions on union salaries.
House Minority Leader Tom Cross, R-Oswego, called the abuses uncovered in the investigations “egregious” before the House sent the bill to the Senate on a 111-3 vote.
“I know this has been somewhat of a shock to us even by Illinois standards,” Cross said.
The measure also would put in place stricter fraud provisions to require workers employed at public pension systems to report potential wrongdoing to top officials or prosecutors.
First focused on a handful of Chicago-area pension systems, the latest version has been expanded to include pension systems covering Chicago and downstate teachers, laborers and public universities. The proposal likely will be tweaked to address some concerns raised by police and firefighters. A similar bill sponsored by Rep. Karen May, D-Highland Park, also moved to the Senate today. She said she is still negotiating on some of the finer points.
So there I was, talking to Jake over supper in a Golden Something-or-Other on the North Side. Jake is a “Reformed Chicago Democratic Operative” and no fan of the Speaker. Of course, his favorite topic came up.
“He’s gonna do it again,” said Jake casually, picking at his Tex-Mex Skillet Eggs with a fork, reviewing something on his gigantic Superphone.
“Do what?” I said, sipping coffee and reading about Theo in the paper. I looked up. “And while we’re at it, who?“
“Madigan.” he says. “He’s going to beat you GOP guys again by not running against you, just like last time. ”
“Oh yeah? Who’s he going to run against?” I asked.
“Quinn, you dope, just like he did against Blago in ‘08,” he responded.
Jake noted Madigan’s new resolution calling for legislative participation in the upcoming AFSCME negotiations, and the not-so subtle implication that Quinn and his people were about to give the State away.
“You mean people will think that Quinn could somehow give away our future more than Madigan has over the last 20 years?” I asked. “I have trouble with that one.”
“The public doesn’t remember squat,” he said. “The voters only worry about the next ten minutes at election time. So Madigan portrays himself as the Man Heroically Protecting the People from the Crazy Governor, just like with Blago in 2008, so the voters will overlook all he has done to screw up the State. He makes them think that without him all is lost, so they keep voting for his Machine hacks for the Legislature. He's already starting. You GOP guys then lose because you are irrelevant. ”
“Ok, so how do we get relevant?”
He thought about that one for a while, using the fork to explore further the gastronomic mystery on the plate before him.
“You guys need a ‘Contract with Illinois,’” he finally said. “You need to spell out exactly what you will do to begin to fix things, on paper. Have your guys run on it, saying they will pass it all with a majority. And it better be good, believe me. Nobody believes political talk in this state any more. You have to show them.“
“So that’s it, huh? Anything else?”
More silence ensued, with more exploration of the miracle of Tex-Mex Skillet Eggs.
“Yeah, one other thing. You have to rip Madigan’s throat out on TV for causing all this mess. You guys are pussies.”
“Our people down there don’t like messing with the Speaker,” says me. “It gets painful.”
“Either learn to or get new leaders,” he advised. "This is your year if you don't blow it."
It’s a prairie puzzler in Illinois: What happened to all the money?
Ten months after the largest tax increase in its history, Illinois is unable to give scheduled raises to its workers. The backlog of unpaid bills is $4 billion and years from resolution. The current budget, despite $7 billion in new revenue, isn’t balanced. Businesses, even as they argue that government pension costs are unsustainable, will clamor for tax cuts during a legislative session that starts today in Springfield.
The Land of Lincoln now resembles that president’s “House Divided,” a cauldron of factions fighting over how to escape a financial crater years in the making. Unions fight Democrats, businesses threaten flight, and a poll shows that majorities of voters oppose cuts in education, public safety, the environment, aid to the poor and those with disabilities -- everything in the spending plan except pensions.
“It’s time for a rendezvous with reality,” Democratic Governor Pat Quinn promised in September, as he announced plans to dismiss more than 1,900 government employees because the state “clearly does not have enough money.”
The lack of money isn’t the only problem, according to the poll released Oct. 20 by the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute. Only 15 percent of those polled said the state is heading in the right direction, and 35 percent approved of Quinn’s performance.
Gazing Up
“Political leaders are held in such poor regard by the people of Illinois that they have no credibility when they say things” voters don’t want to hear, said David Yepsen, who directs the institute at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale. “Pat Quinn, like the state’s budget, is in a very deep hole.”
As receivership hangs over Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island wrestles with the costs of public employee pensions, reality is pressing in on Illinois from several directions.
Three prominent businesses -- CME Group Inc., which operates the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and Board of Trade; Chicago Board Options Exchange; and Sears Holdings Corporation - - are threatening to leave the state unless their tax load is lightened.
Lawmakers return to the capital today and are scheduled to consider a 50 percent tax cut for CME Group and CBOE Holdings Inc. (CBOE) before concluding the session Nov. 10, according to John Patterson, a spokesman for Illinois Senate Democrats. A trim for Sears will be considered in a separate bill.
We’ve Had It
At the same time, a coalition of businessmen from the Commercial Club of Chicago’s Civic Committee called Illinois is Broke is pushing lawmakers to cut pension benefits for state employees. Members of the Civic Committee’s board include executives of companies seeking tax cuts.
“The state is on the brink of insolvency,” the group says on its website. “Enough is enough!”
The state’s unfunded pension liability is $85 billion, and the retirement system has assets to pay 45 percent of promised benefits, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. It is the lowest so-called funded ratio of any U.S. state.
While the Illinois Constitution says pension benefits “shall not be diminished or impaired,” some legal scholars argue there are grounds to reduce them. The poll from the Simon Institute said 45 percent of respondents support cuts while 48 percent oppose them. Union leaders say they’re on the defensive.
What About 9/11?
“Politicians have found us to be convenient targets,” said Henry Bayer, executive director of AFSCME Council 31, the largest public-employee union in Illinois. “They were very happy when all those public employees went into the World Trade Center 10 years ago to rescue people in the private sector who were running away from the building to save themselves.”
Illinois’s general-obligation debt is tied with that of California as the lowest rated in the estimation of Moody’s Investors Service, at A1. Standard & Poor’s has it at A+, two levels above California.
The state is selling $300 million of sales-tax bonds this week under the Build Illinois program, created in 1985 to fund infrastructure. Those bonds are to be paid by a specific revenue stream that S&P has said is adequate and so rates AAA, the highest level.
The January tax increases -- a 67 percent hike in the personal income tax and a 46 percent boost in the corporate rate -- helped the state make its scheduled pension payment, rather than borrow money to do so. The taxes, however, didn’t produce enough to cover a budget hole of about $8 billion.
Coddling Corporations
“To give tax cuts to huge groups like that is only hurting more people,” said Sara Schroeder, 22, of Des Plaines, a freelance photographer at the Occupy Wall Street protest in Chicago on Oct. 21. “I feel like the people who are defending acts like that know it doesn’t make any sense.”
While tax revenue is up, federal revenue payments to the state declined by 62 percent, or $905 million, in the first quarter of the fiscal year, according to a report from Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka. Unemployment rose in September for the fifth consecutive month, to 10 percent, compared with 9.1 percent nationally.
Pensions “are the albatross” around the state’s neck, said Richard Ciccarone, managing director and chief research officer at McDonnell Investment Management in Oak Brook.
One thing Illinois has going for it is greater public appreciation of the crisis.
“The good news is there is an awareness that the state has a problem and they are trying to figure out ways to fix it,” Yepsen said. “It’s just very difficult, given the political realities.”
SPRINGFIELD -- House lawmakers attacked union pension abuses on two fronts today in response to Chicago Tribune/WGN-TV investigations, including weekend stories exposing how two lobbyists can get public teacher pensions for a single day of substitute teaching.
The Tribune/WGN-TV reports detailed how Steven Preckwinkle, political director for the Illinois Federation of Teachers, and fellow union lobbyist David Piccioli jumped through a small window that allowed them to count their years in the teacher union toward a state teacher pension.
The two lobbyists had no prior teaching experience before they substituted a day.
Rep. Jack Franks, D-Marengo, said he will introduce legislation to block them from the pension system, saying the 2007 law the two lobbyists used is an "obscene loophole." Franks called on Preckwinkle and Piccioli to resign their lobbying jobs.
The union has stood behind the lobbyists, saying what they did was legal, though the union's president has said it should never be allowed again.
In other action, House Minority Leader Tom Cross, R-Oswego, advanced broader legislation aimed at other abuses uncovered by Tribune/WGN-TV investigations.
Citing the "outrageous stories," Cross slammed Chicago city employees who boosted their pensions in ways unavailable to the average citizen.
"We are attempting to make our state laws strong to prevent government employees from dipping into taxpayers' pockets to take more than they have earned," Cross said.
The House Personnel and Pensions Committee voted 9-0 to eliminate a 1991 state law that allowed Chicago city employees to retire with a city pension based on bigger union paychecks.
The action is aimed at the Chicago Municpal Employees Pension Fund, the Chicago Laborers' Pension Fund and the Chicago Teachers Pension Fund. Future employees would have to base their pensions on city salaries instead of union salaries.
The Cross package advanced to the full House for consideration.
It also would prevent a union official from getting pensions from both a union and the city of Chicago for the same period of work. That proposal is aimed at the Chicago Municipal Employees' Pension Fund and Chicago Laborers' Pension Fund.
The package would also require board members or employees of union pension funds to report fraudulent activity to a board's officials or local prosecutors.
Ed. Note. - Illinois Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady had this to say amid the mounting outrage:
“The intersection of clout, money and political backscratching that allowed this to happen reeks of fraud. The Attorney General is our state’s chief law enforcement officer and she has repeatedly assured voters in every political campaign that being the daughter of the Illinois House Speaker and State Democratic Party Chairman would not stop her from doing her job. Now is the time for Lisa Madigan to do her job.”
These guys are union connected and at least one is an ex-Madigan staffer. So don't hold your breath waiting for the AG! - SFB
And now some shameless horn-tooting for Defend the Vote, the non-partisan ballot integrity organization I helped found this year. I act as Chairman of the Board of Directors. www.defendthevote.com.
In the April 5, 2011 Chicago Municipal Runoff Election Defend The Vote conducted a controversial surprise audit of the polling places in multiple wards, visiting 239 precinct polling places as pollwatchers to check compliance with ballot security protocols. The results? Not good.
-In 90% of the precincts there was a failure to observe at least one major portion of the complicated ballot security protocols set down by the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners, sometimes multiple ones.
-58% of precincts had unsealed ballot boxes.
-100% of the precincts were forced to use procedures and equipment that were deemed "vulnerable" to elcction fraud.
Any experienced politician will tell you that the Election Judges are the key to ballot security at the polling place. The many, many honest Election Judges who serve long days at low compensation as a vital public service for all of us are facing an uphill battle in protecting our elections. We intend to help them in their crucial role! The extensive results of the April 2011 audit were complied in a detailed 34-page report, which not only details the results, but also the ballot security procedures that are suspect. I am very proud to state that the Audit Report has been peer-reviewed, approved, and now published by the scholastic Journal of Physical Security of the Argonne National Laboratory!
Congratulations and many thanks are hugely due to Defend The Vote Executive Director Sharon Maroni, who has been indefatigable in her efforts to secure better elections in Illinois over the past year! This all would never, ever have happened without her.
Rather than run around trying to catch individual instances of fraud in polling places, which sounds heroic but is usually a wild goose chase, Defend the Vote has concentrated on the ballot security procedures, equipment storage, equipment function and counting processes used in our elections. In effect, rather than run around dark neighborhoods with flashlights trying to catch burglars in the act, at Defend the Vote we concentrate on better locks and alarm systems, to give the Election Judges a fighting chance to stop fraud. Unfortunately there remain many holes in the election system itself that are open doors to nefarious activity. Those holes need to be closed up.
We also are investigating Early Voting procedures in Illinois. Unlike the votes cast on Election Day, Early Voting votes are never audited at all for irregularities after the election. That has to be changed.
Further, there are substantial unanswered questions on the vulnerability of the electronic (“touch screen”) voting machines to manipulation through electronic or computer virus means. For example, at a recent legally required “public” demonstration of the electronic machines prior to the Chicago Municipal Election of February 2011 ("public " in the sense that you could be there if you could find it!), the Defend The Vote investigator was told not film anything and not to use her cell phone in the room while the machine operated, because it might affect the performance of the machine! (A long silence followed that statement.) More on this topic will be coming in the future.
Defend The Vote is planning more audits by voters like you in our Voter Auditor Pollwatcher Program, under which regular voters are given training, pollwatching credentials and a survey form to check ballot security procedures at the polling place after they vote. The results are sent in to us, and tabulated to create snapshots of ballot security that can be tendered to election officials, or made the basis of lawsuits to compel remedies before for the next election . We are asking individual citizens across Illinois to give just 20 extra minutes of their time while voting to create better elections in Illinois, by presenting their credentials as pollwatchers and asking the questions on the form, which will all be quite legitimate under the Election Code.
Please come with us on this good cause that serves all of Illinois. If you would like to volunteer, or can donate a few bucks to keep us going, please go to the website. Thanks!
An excellent Illinois GOP fundraising breakfast was held in Chicago this week to begin the fight for power in Springfield in 2012.
Hosted by W. Gregory Doolin at the University Cub in Chicago (with some minor assistance from yours truly as Executive Director of the Chicago Republican Party), approximately 40 potential major donors heard presentations from Senator Mark Kirk, Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno, House Minority Leader Tom Cross, and Illinois Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady. Chicago Republican Party Chairman Eloise Gerson, and State GOP Executive Director Rodney Davis also attended.
The presentation was exciting! Senator Mark Kirk gave an excellent presentation on recent polling numbers and issue breakdowns to show exactly where and how Democrat support is dropping like a like a falling safe across Illinois, showing potential for a seismic shift in the state electorate to the GOP. After a decade of spendthrift, irresponsible Democrat rule, the electorate may finally be turning to the GOP to bring sanity back to Illinois’ fiscal policies and business environment.
Senator Kirk also reviewed the key Congressional races that will be won to maintain the Republican majority in the Illinois Congressional delegation, including discussion of the surprise announcement this week by long-time Democratic Congressman Jerry Costello that he will retire. That resignation leaves Rep. Costello’s downstate Congressional seat heavily vulnerable to a GOP pick-up.
Senator Radogno gave a detailed explanation on how the GOP will attack in the Illinois Senate races, and Representative Cross followed suit with the key house races. Finally, Chairman Brady discussed the emerging unity within the Illinois GOP going into 2012, with a real prospect of victory in sight. Thereafter some lengthy discussion, as well as question and answer, occurred on the important details on the means, ends and operational focus of the effort in 2012 - which will have to stay out of publication on this website (we know that Democrats read this blog!)
While I can recall previous years in which GOP fundraising meetings resembled a wake, given the electorate and expected election results, this meeting was upbeat, positive, and financial commitments are already coming in. The Illinois GOP is coming back, and coming back strong.
From the Illinois Republican Party - www.weareillinois.org
Illinois Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady called on Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan to immediately launch a full-scale investigation into allegations of abuse of the public pension system by leaders of various well-connected labor unions.
“Taxpayers have lost millions of dollars because of the abuse of power that has taken place by Lisa Madigan’s political allies,” said Brady. “Where has Attorney General Madigan been on this issue?”
“She has been quick to investigate many other issues that have gotten her good press,” said Brady. “Is Lisa Madigan’s silence and inaction on this issue caused by her past – and perhaps future - political support from labor union bosses?”
At least eight Chicago labor union leaders who are eligible for inflated city pensions also stand to receive union pensions covering the same work period, thanks to a questionable interpretation of state law by officials representing two city pension funds as well as potentially false information being reported by the union leaders on public applications regarding their private union pension contributions.
“Laws may have been broken yet our state’s chief law enforcement officer has been silent - perhaps because of politics,” said Brady.
