37 Comments - Chicago Cynic - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 2:47 am: “The millions of dollars need to run in the Senate contest would have turned her into “a telemarketer five to six hours each day.” That’s not why she’s not running though it makes for nice cover. Had she run, her reputation would have been put through the ringer and likely wouldn’t have come out too well on the other end. The stuff involving Bob including her role in it has never really been explored publicly. Regardless of where things came out in the end, she would likely have taken a lot of serious hits. There also was little guarantee she would win. Illinois may be a blue state, but it’s more about the lack of a Republican party and decent candidates than about the state being as liberal as the Congresswoman. She’s simply too far left to win a statewide race. Smart move on her part. Now everyone can get back to wondering what Lisa will do. And Lisa can get back to waiting to make an announcement since she’s in the catbird’s seat. Ah, fun Illinois. - bored now - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 5:07 am: it’s really hard to imagine, in a state that has such a high tolerance for corruption, that *voters* would punish schakowsky for what her husband did (apparently kiting checks to make payroll — if i understand correctly). i don’t doubt that there are opponents who would have like to punish her for her marriage to a democratic strategist who’s frustrated republicans for years, but that’s a different story. i won’t venture a guess why schakowsky has decided not to run *before* she’s announced her decision, but i can note that she now sits at the center of an emergent debate as chair of a key house subcommittee which will dramatically raise her visibility. normally, one would have thought that this would benefit any politician. but the lesson of john fritchey may be key: he, too, had dramatically raised his visibility right before the recent congressional special election. while it did help him, it wasn’t enough to win. whatever the congresswoman has decided, i would think that her assessment of whether she could win this race would have been a factor. ten years is a long time in congress, and unless you have a committee chairmanship, ambitious pols always feel the pressure for moving up or moving out at this point. schakowsky clearly fits the definition of an ambitious member of congress. whatever she decides, she will still feel the burn of her own ambition. it is predictable that she will still be a player, and probably a more important player, regardless. i agree with the cynic that it’s probably a smart move on her part… - Under the radar - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 6:26 am: Run Julie run… Jan S not running pushed Julie Hamos to the forefront. Everyone know Julie is running for “something” and now that her Congresswoman is out of the way she can put this seat on her agenda too. It’s clear Julie is fedup with MJM and the House. She itching to go statewide or even to Washington. Run Julie run! - Lakefront Liberal - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 7:13 am: The problem with Julie running is that all the money she has been raising is for an Illinois race, she is starting at ground zero for federal money. Let’s assume that Julie doesn’t run for senate nor does Lisa. Who runs in the Dem primary besides Giannoulias, Burris (if he runs) and Cheryle Jackson? - fan - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 7:18 am: I was really hoping she would run. Then we could get her out of Congress. She would have been humiliated in her losing bid as the whole State would find out the details of her and her husband’s indiscretions that landed him in Federal prison. It would have been great for Illinois and America for her to run and lose! - John Doe - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 7:30 am: If you know that you have a guaranteed single or double, why would you swing the bat a little harder to try and get a triple and risk striking out? Plus, if she ran a campaign to get into the Big Leagues she knows that the spotlight becomes brighter and more intense. Not such a good idea when you have things that you would prefer to have remain in the shadows. Ethical lapses in judgement are the norm and accepted in Illinois state government. They are less likely to be given the usual “wink & nod” in Washington DC like they are in Illinois. - cassandra - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 7:55 am: Isn’t Kennedy still a possibility. I would think he would be a frightening opponent for someone like Schakowsky. The Kennedys still have a lot of clout, and a nasty campaign against Kennedy could have some repercussions, win or lose, but especially lose. Creamer’s husband’s history would be an irritant, but I think the Kennedy factor would be the most daunting. Isn’t she pals with Tina Tchen and Valerie Jarrett? Maybe Obama can find her something federal although perhaps not until his second term when he has more flexibility. She is viewed as being a rather strident feminist liberal by many…not postfeminist at all. - Tom Joad - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 7:56 am: There is no proof that Jan had anything to do with her husband’s crime. Even a politician is innocent til proven guilty. Why don’t you Repubs get a life outside of your hate mongering! By the way, I am not even a supporter of Jan’s. - Al Swearengen - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 8:04 am: Stephanie Neely was mentioned at the end of Sweet’s column as a potential U.S. Senate candidate. That was a joke, right? - DzNts - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 8:06 am: I’m thinking that, as a member of the House, she’s probably telemarketing about 2-3 hours a day now, so the extra fundraising time isn’t really the main issue here. I also don’t think her husband’s problems are a big political issue either. The reality is that she’s counted the cards on the table and realizes that, even if the “river” turns over another pair, she can’t beat the full house that Lisa already has. - Ghost - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 8:07 am: The Dem field for Senate is crowded, with some strong frunners. Why bash yourself to peices against all those rocks, not to mention the intense fundraising. I think it would be a good decision for her not to run this time, hold back and prepare for the next shot at the brass ring. Also it is fascinating how people are already counting Giannoulias out of the Senate race because of some minor bad press. He was hit hard last time with the mafia/bad loabn ads and managed to prevail. I would not count him out as the primary winner yet. The news leaks about courting Lisa could b a bit of a PR brush back to help clear the feild and chill fund raising on the repub side. - Anonymous - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 8:23 am: That Jan S. groundswell never materialized, did it? Very small chance of winning a Senate primary, a safe House seat, seniority, in the majority…. it’s a no=brainer. - Pot calling kettle - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 8:25 am: I suspect that it is the fear of the “Bill for Senate” juggernaut that will launch on this blog sometime over the summer. That will probably push a lot of potential candidates aside. Based on the comments above, it’s probably a combo of her husband’s legal issues, the uncertainty of a win, and (probably) slow fund-raising. One roadblock might not do it, but as they pile up, it gets harder to justify a run. - Diamond Dog - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 8:26 am: “A telemarketer.” That’s a lame excuse. Anyone who had been involved in any campaign on the federal level knows that every federal candidates, senate or house, spends 75 percent of their time on the phone. The numbers weren’t there and she knows it. - Steve - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 8:46 am: Why didn’t Jan run ? We may never know the real answer. Her convicted felon husband may have something to do with it. Questions may have come up about what Jan knew and when she knew it. Did Creamer plead guilty so she could avoid being investigated? Anyway, since Illinois is an ultra sleazy political place Jan’s husband probably wouldn’t have hurt her: look what her district will tolerate. My guess is Chris Kennedy’s ability to raise money and compete with her is what deterred her, plus Alexi is extremely close with Obama. - Amy - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 8:54 am: Mazel tov! for the people of Illinois, and especially for the Democratic Party. we don’t need the things that would come up with another look at Creamer. - Anonymous - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 8:56 am: It’s clear that either Lisa or Kennedy will have a clear shot. No brainer for Jan. My guess is that Alexi is the next to announce he’s not in either. - Oneman - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 8:59 am: Mr Joad if she was involved is not the issue, the fact it happened would have been the issue. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 9:05 am: Whatever her reasons, not running is the hardest thing to do, even when its the right thing to do. Too often, potential candidates allow their entourage of special interest groups, loyalists, and consultants to cajole them into entering a race that — for one reason or another — they never should have entered into. - fedup dem - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 9:08 am: Note to bored now & Tom Joad: The past actions of Schakowsky’s felonious hubby would have played a role in a Senate race for the following reasons: First, Schakowsky has been an active Board of Directors member of all of hubby Creamer’s groups for years. Claiming that she was merely a clueless bystander is laughable. Secondly, voters across the state would have perceived Creamer’s four-month stay at Club Feb for his crime as a “40 lashes with the wet noodle” sentence, given to him (in lieu of something more severe) because of her influence and position. Finally, just how well do you think voters would have catered to learning that after Creamer was sentenced, but before he went to prison, the federal judge allowed him and Schkowsky to take a Caribbean vacation? My only wish now is for the voters in the Ninth district to wake up and vote Schakowsky out of office next February 2! - Anon - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 9:22 am: Alexi is running — dont fool yourself. He has blazed trails in the fundraising and is independently wealthy as well. Chris Kennedy has never run for political office in Illinois. This isnt MA, people dont roll over for the Kennedys. Alexi is a proven campaigner and constitutional officer. He will be hard to smear with the political BS that can come out in a campaign. he’s been vetted already. He’s ready for the rumble with Kennedy. Then bring on whichever republican wants to run and lose. - Bill - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 9:30 am: ==I suspect that it is the fear of the “Bill for Senate” juggernaut that will launch on this blog sometime over the summer. That will probably push a lot of potential candidates aside.== At this point I have not made a decision on the race. My polling numbers are favorable and my supporters are urging me to run. I, like most of the other potential candidates for all statewide offices, am waiting to see what Lisa will do. Should I decide to run I am certain that I will pick up the liberal female vote that would have gone to Shakowsky. My vast experience as a commenter on the Capiotl Fax Blog far outweighs any accomplishments by Chris Kennedy or Alexi.I am in a great position to win the primary if I decide to take the plunge. - Anonymous - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 9:34 am: Another Bright Start story for Alexi in today’s Sun-Times. His potential opponents couldn’t buy that kind of negative publicity. - Niles Township - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 9:43 am: She told people last week she wasn’t running. - Objective Dem - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 9:46 am: Jan may be using the fundraising/telemarketing issue as an excuse, but it raises an important issue. Why is it that we have allowed our system to become so distorted that elected officials and candidates spend such a large percentage of their time fundraising? My understanding is the public owns the airwaves and can make tv and radio stations provide free time to political candidates. It won’t completely solve the problem but could make a big impact. - Oneman - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 9:47 am: the Alexi thing is about a settlement that will mitigate the damage - Rob_N - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 10:11 am: Anonymous - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 9:34 am: “Another Bright Start story for Alexi in today’s Sun-Times. His potential opponents couldn’t buy that kind of negative publicity.” You must not know how opposition PR works. Either a would-be Dem opponent or someone on the Republican side was feeding those stories. IL-GOP was all over the original batch, fanning whatever flames there were. Giannoulias needs to step up his own PR efforts and stay better connected if he wants to get anywhere. - Anonymous - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 10:12 am: Anon 9:22 - People may not roll over for Kennedy’s (although I’d disagree with you), but they do for Obama. With Daley and Kennedy united, I’d bet Obama gets Alexi out of the race. - Anonymous - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 10:19 am: –You must not know how opposition PR works.– I said you couldn’t buy it. No one paid for it. Get it? - Chicago Cynic - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 10:52 am: Rob_N, You’re off base on this one. The Bright Start stories were being fed by the ugly facts of losing $85 million in supposedly safe middle class money. It’s not in the interests of political opponents for those stories to come out now. It’s just too early. From a purely political standpoint, those stories need to come out in October/November, not now. - anon - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 10:54 am: Jan made a good decision. I have only respect for her and wish her well. As for Julie, she is a shining star. We need more independant and serious lawmakers. If there were more people, like her, there would have been votes for a tax increase and the House dems would not have been waiting around for Madigan to tell them what to do. Re: Madigan: For a guy who is supposed to care about matters of the state, I want to understand why he is, again, the central problem. (We cannot blame the repubs for wanting a seat at the table.) - Six Degrees of Separation - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 12:37 pm: Must have been the odds of defeating the formidable Burris dynasty:-) (ducks) - shore - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 12:56 pm: to anon. You must be smoking something. Hamos’s performance on chicago tonight was a total disaster in which she basically blamed republicans for own party’s failure to do anything other than campaign for obama and not govern. She was also pretty inarticulate and her comment that Illinois needs more blue collar workers to the chicago council on global affairs blew my mind. She’ll be easy fodder for defeat when the gop rebounds. The alexi love is a sign of weakness. 3 years in the most corrupt, worst job creating state and he thinks he’s qualified to vote policy in helmand province? He’s a dud. - siriusly - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 1:38 pm: No surprise really, her prospects in that race were not good. She should stay where she is. Same advice might apply to Julie Hamos. I don’t think she has a good chance as a statewide candidate, her only real chance to move up was Jan’s congressional seat. Now that’s off the table Julie is going to run for AG against Hynes and 3-4 others? I wish her luck. But I really wished she would have stayed in the House. - siriusly - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 1:39 pm: YDD - once again - great comments - not running is the harder thing to do for most of the pols. - Capttain America - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 4:13 pm: Julie Hamos is one of the best public policy thinkers in the State legislature. Unfortunately, sound public policy, based upon facts, is not the primary objective of most Illinois politicians. I really hate to see Julie Hamos and Dan Hynes run agaisnt each other - two dedicated, and principled public servants. As far as I am concerned, everyone else is an “also ran” in the AG race. - hohum - Monday, Jun 8, 09 @ 6:38 pm: Best wishes to Jan — too liberal for my blood, but a woman of sincere dedication. I am just watching things play out — some dem names I would work against, just like I did Poshard. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.