66 Comments - Phineas J. Whoopee - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:23 am: He needs to keep his business interests. How else can he avoid paying taxes? - Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:24 am: Let’s try to avoid snark, please. Thanks. - anonymous - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:31 am: Wouldn’t it make the most sense to place them in a blind trust? I;m a novice but I thought that was common place for officials elected to Constitutional offices. - Levois - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:32 am: He shouldn’t attempt to run them while he’s elected governor. I don’t think he should dispose of them if he doesn’t want to. - George - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:32 am: If his business interests still exist by then… No snark intended. - How Ironic - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:32 am: No snark? Damn. I was going to suggest he ‘write them off’. He will have to divest himself from them though. Unlike the GA being Gov is a full time job. - VanillaMan - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:34 am: Considering the span of time within a term as a governor, his partner should be able to handle it or pick up assistance to continue. So, Brady should do what most politicians do regarding their businesses, put it into a blind trust. But it is a good question all around. - erin - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:43 am: Thanks for asking that, Rich. He’s been so weird about the tax issue, I wouldn’t be surprised if that was supposed to fly under the radar, too. - Really?? - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:50 am: Don’t most elected officials usually place their business interests in a blind trust? - Ghost - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 11:51 am: Dispose of them. The chance for the appearance of an impropriety, even in a blind trust, is way to great. Those seeking to curry favor in fact could you the blind trust as a vehicle to try and buy influence. There is no way to truly make it blind. - truthman - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:01 pm: Its only fair to ask Quinn the same question. However, since he has survived on largely government work in his career, the question should be modified to ask why he doesn’t have any business interests at all to place in a blind trust. - Carl Nyberg - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:01 pm: Aren’t “blind trusts” for stocks and similar investment mechanisms? The public official is supposed to be “blind” to the companies and sectors of the economy s/he is invested in. So, it doesn’t really make sense to put a small business in a “blind trust”. - Tom Joad - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:04 pm: A blind trust means that you don’t know what is in it or control the assets. That is why it is blind! If he already knows the assets aren’t stock, which could be sold and replaced by the trustee, unless the asset are sold it really isn’t a blind trust. He should seel his share of the corporation and be done with it. - Phineas J. Whoopee - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:06 pm: I believe Quinn was a successful lawyer when not holding public office. I’m not sure what lawyers do to divest from their firms. I know many don’t, but to Quinn’s credit, I believe he has. - another angle - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:07 pm: Also, I’m not so sure how blind any blind trust could be. Aren’t his main partners his brothers? And don’t they do all the real work anyway? Isn’t Bill just the frat boy they sent in to politics? - Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:07 pm: Again, people, avoid the snark. Thanks. - Oswego Willy - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:08 pm: He has brothers(?) … Brady should step away from the day to day, put his shares in a controlling interest with his spouse, however, put her in a position of zero controlling, day to day interest of the running of the operation, and zero voting rights to the direction of the business … Like a blind trust, but I am sure at some point he would like to have his business back again. - wordslinger - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:11 pm: Blind trust works for me. It’s been done before on the national level. - Louis G. Atsaves - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:19 pm: Do it the way Alexi tried to do it. Keep ownership of the stock you have, stop working there entirely and let someone else run them and hope for the best. Alexi tried to do it the right way, and from someone who is actively campaigning for his opponent, I’ll give him that one. - fedup dem - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:24 pm: He should sell the businesse, since well before his four-year term expired the “no-tax” mantra of his party would have caused Illinois to join Greece in the Junk Bond Rating Parade! Brady’s businesses, like those of most everyone else in this state, will be worth a lot less than they are now. - jonbtuba - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:26 pm: The blind trust seems like a serviceable idea. No governor should have active ties to a business while running the state. If Brady doesn’t comment on this, count it with the tax returns fiasco as another issue of no transparency from the man. - Pot calling kettle - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:33 pm: It would seem that he isn’t running the business now. (Running for Gov. & being a State Senator must take up all of his time.) If he’ll need a job when he leaves office, the business is his job. I agree with the above posters that a trust could hardly be considered blind in this situation. It would make the most sense to keep on as is. For appearances, he could divest, but his family likely would not, so any appearance of a conflict of interest would remain. Brady and his businesses will just have to be very, very careful. BTW, The most obvious answer was the first one given. It’s snarky, but it is also a common practice. - Conservative Republican - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:38 pm: Avoid snark? What he does with his business interests is really nobodies interest until he is Governor-elect. Raise the question then. ( Thus I would suggest the Brady respond to you by saying, if elected Governor, I will take serious measures so that the people of Illinois know that I will not be subject to conflict of interest while serving as Governor.) Why haven’t you thrown down the same gauntlet vis a vis Alexi, who ducks and weaves on every issue regarding his financial relationship with his family and Broadway Bank? I think I know why. - truthman - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:40 pm: @Phineas: Funny, Quinn’s own campaign webpage says nothing about his “successful” law practice. Worked for Walker, and IDOT. 3+ years Worked as Budget Director for H. Washington 1+ years State Treasurer 4 Years Lt. Gov & Gov. 7 + years not sure if he drew a salary when on the Tax Appeals Board or CUB. - Aldyth - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:40 pm: Can you really do a blind trust when you are a partner in the business? Especially if you have any expectation of taking up the business again when you are out of office? Or your family members benefit from it in the here and now? - Truth Seeker - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:41 pm: Blind Trust for Mr. Brady’s businesses. Relatedly, a bigger question for me is what will Gov. Quinn receive in pension and health care benefits if he loses in November? - Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:48 pm: CR, unlike Alexi, Brady is actively involved in numerous businesses. On his 2009 return, he declared nonpassive income and losses on 20 separate businesses. That means he does more than just own stock. He’s an active participant in those 20 businesses. But, I’m sure you’re such a genius that you’ll quickly find something else to justify your tinfoil hat. - the Patriot - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:49 pm: Would anyone here, really put significant assets in a bling trust in this economic environment? If you would, I would think you probably aren’t smart enough to be Governor. I beieve his brothers do help with the business. He can have a CEO type, family member or confidant, take over the day to day operations of the family business and maintain control over “big” decisions. Rich, did you send the same email to Cohen? - Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:51 pm: ===really put significant assets in a bling trust in this economic environment? === The mayor of New York, who has a few bucks, has his assets in a blind trust. Really, some of you folks are just completely daft today. You ever hear of the Google? - Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:56 pm: ===did you send the same email to Cohen? === If he manages to get onto the ballot, I will. Otherwise, try to stick to the question at hand, please. - grand old partisan - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:56 pm: Blind trust is fine with me. It’s an issue he’s going to have to address, and it’s worth keeping in mind that there is little precedent to follow here in Illinois, as our last ??? how many Governors (and candidates, for that matter) were all career politicians/bureaucrats. With that in mind, I submit for considering the possibility that it might be a good thing that Brady actually has extensive, recent business experience. The mess we’re currently in was caused by politicians (of both parties) who have had little to none…that were legitimate and documented ahead of time, at least. Based on our recent history, the concern shouldn’t be with the business interests we know a candidate has, it should be with career politicians “supplementing” their incomes under the table. - PalosParkBob - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 12:59 pm: Of course he should keep the company and participate in its management as he sees fit,as long as his participation doesn’t create a conflict of interest with his office as Senator or Governor. I think it indicates a bias that this question is even being asked of Brady while no one asks the same question regarding Madigan’s law firm which uses his “clout” to get tax reductions for his clients. Add Cullerton’s exploiting his office against the public interest to fatten his law firm’s profits and this “issue” with Brady shrinks to insignifcance. I’m not aware of anything comparable to this or the Madigan clout being attributed to Brady. It’s like someone going 5 miles over the limit being put in jail, while somebody who commited vehicular homicide getting off with a warning! Why single Brady out? - 47th Ward - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:00 pm: He should consider selling his interest to others in his family and remove himself from any and all potential conflicts. Except he should keep his interest in the Bloomington indoor football team, especially if that includes season tickets. I can’t wait to see him photographed in a Bloomington Extreme jersey. - Rich Miller - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:02 pm: ===Why single Brady out? === Because we have a citizens legislature - meaning the GA is not a fulltime job and it’s expected that people have other jobs. Notice I didn’t ask what he intends to do with that business while he’s a Senator. It’s a different thing entirely. But, keep trying to justify the tinfoil hat. I’m sure you’ll come up with something. - Conservative Republican - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:23 pm: Tinfoil hat? I suggest that you are trying to fabricate an issue when there isn’t one. Brady does not have to divest himself of ANY business interest while he is a candidate. This reeks of double standard. Until you come up with a legitimate reason to question his business dealings (and his income as well, vis a vis the drum you’re beating about the tax return- non issue) I suggest you go back to concentrating on policy. I think a comment about Goldman Sachs execs applies to Rich Miller in Illinois politics as well: “There comes a time when you are in the water for so long, you don’t realize you’re in the water.” Applies to Rich with his liberal bias. No Conservative GOPer can do right, and a suggestion otherwise is “tinfoil” material. We’ll see in November. - Wumpus - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:24 pm: Increase his revenues, utilize his position to the fullest. DO it the Stroger way, the madigan way! Let others run it as he will be running the state. - wordslinger - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:29 pm: CR, you crack me up. Brady rails against taxes, but doesn’t pay any. He was against the stimulus package, but used it to his advantage. Does there really have to be a “liberal” conspiracy to discuss the irony? Or, to be intrigued to how he’s handled the issue so poorly, even though he had to see it coming from miles away? Another victim heard from. - Carl Nyberg - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:34 pm: “Liberal bias” = what movement conservatives say about all opinions that are not sufficiently supportive of movement conservatism. - Vote Quimby! - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:38 pm: Asking him to sell them in this economy is unfair. A blind trust would suit me fine…that’s why they have them. He’s got bigger issues for the campaign, but if he wins he should step away from all of them. - Vote Quimby! - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:39 pm: to clarify: step away from his business interests, not his issues… - wordslinger - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:43 pm: –to clarify: step away from his business interests, not his issues…– LOL, he’s been running away from his issues for some time. - PalosParkBob - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:47 pm: Ummmm….Rich, are you saying that a sitting Governor has any legal, moral, or ethical standard for fiancial isolation that need not be met by the Speaker or Senate President? As a matter of risk and ethics, I’m sure you’d agree that doing legal work that requires political unfluence for success, or using political contacts and influence to enrich oneself by having a spouse appointed to highly paid “Boards of Directors” with few qualifications ranks much higher than building houses. Orders of magnitude differences! Seems we both may be wearing tin foil hats, but it seems you have a much bigger hat size than me! - OneMan - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:50 pm: I suggest that you are trying to fabricate an issue when there isn’t one. Brady does not have to divest himself of ANY business interest while he is a candidate Ummm dude the question is if he’s elected governor? don’t think Rich or anyone else is suggesting that Brady divest now. I am a Brady supporter and I think it is a legitimate question. One it’s better to answer now than in October. - Logical Thinker - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:56 pm: Should attorney’s stop practicing law if they get elected to state-wide office? Should their law firms be closed if they receive partnership income? The concern is whether his company profits from his position as governor. That’s the real issue. However, there are plenty of people in state/county/city government that don’t seem to care. If Brady wins, he can resign from his leadership post with the business and put someone else in charge of his interests. When he is no longer governor, he can go back into the businesses. Don’t see why this is such an issue. - Really?? - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 1:58 pm: CR - you are right, he doesn’t have to divest himself of any business interests while he is a candidate, but wouldn’t it just be common sense to have a plan in place if he wins? Shouldn’t he at least be thinking about it? I guess it is too much to ask Governors or candidates for the office of Governor to actually think of things ahead of time and come up with a plan for dealing with them. - really? - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 2:14 pm: @Really with two ??? I agree. It is a good idea to ask him if he has a plan for dealing with his businesses if he is elected. I am sure he has given this some thought. - PalosParkBob - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 2:14 pm: Actually, there are only three main reasons for the the public or press to “need” to see tax returns: 1) To establish if there’s any illegal, or undeclared, income received by a candidate or official, 2) To establish if any source of income for a candidate presents a conflict of interest with his government position, and 3)To use the information as a political tool to create “class envy” with the candidate, or to create a red herring and new paradigm that politicians should pay taxes they are under no obligation to pay. It’s pretty clear that the press couldn’t dig up anything on items 1 and 2, so they moved on to number 3. By the way, how much did Senator Brady and his family donate to charity? Maybe he donated to charity for the public good instead of “the state” because they spend their resources more fairly, effectively, and efficiently than Springfield! - OneMan - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 2:17 pm: Should attorney’s stop practicing law if they get elected to state-wide office? Should their law firms be closed if they receive partnership income? Ummm, Yes to the first one and no to what was in the pipeline when they were still active in the firm - siriusly - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 2:27 pm: Rich’s questions are entirely valid. He’s not accusing Brady of anything. He’s simply saying - what is your plan? Brady surely must have one and the voters have a right to know what it is. Even if his plan is “do nothing, I plan to retain control of my business” - then he should say so and let the voters make our own judgments about that. - Keeptrying - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 2:29 pm: He doesn’t have to do anything with his businesses. Like others have said Quinn still has his Law Office did you ask him what fun things his Law office has been doing for the state? I know this is just another attempt to find something on Brady. - Little Egypt - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 2:56 pm: I don’t see this as an issue unless he wins in November. But this does beg the question, is the Governor the only elected official who should make a decision about his/her private business ventures (whether to hold onto them, sell them, or let someone else take over for X amount of time)? - Liandro - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 4:12 pm: Well, a couple of points from someone with a little experience owning a business (not nearly on the order of Brady, I think?): 1. Does he have personal guarantees with any of these business’ debt load? If so, putting them in a blind trust is not wise at all. 2. Selling off some or all would be “best” practice, but in this economy it is probably not practical or probable, and he would get neither a good price nor a good rate of return on the proceeds. 3. Are there any that have an obvious and immediate conflict of interest, such that continued ownership would give the appearance of impropriety? After those questions are answered, I would put into blind trust whatever ones are most stable/least personally liable, and I would attempt to sell/transfer ownership any that were convenient to do so. Any potential conflicts would get priority, and some businesses might have to remain somewhat under his control for the time being. The more diverse his holdings and ownership structures, the more complicated the “best” response to this question gets. - Anonymous - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 4:14 pm: I’m sorry, but I’m probably being a little “dense” this afternoon. I know someone who long ago was considering a run for office who was “worth” quite a bit (and it wasn’t Jack Ryan). He had millions invested overseas, and was a true patriot–so, comparatively speaking, you can imagine what his holdings were here in the US. By asking these questions, are we assuming that all people in similar circumstances are actually involved in the day-to-day operations of their businesses? I can say that in this particular case, the gentleman was not, because he not only had executives at those companies running day-to-day operations, but he also had “personal staff” who provided oversight of said operations to ensure things were running smoothly. And/or, are we saying that folks in similar circumstances will not be “perceived” well if running for office in today’s world? Either way, sounds like a “replay” of the considerations he made in deciding not to run for office–which was a shame, really, because he could have helped both our State and Country quite a bit. As a matter of fact, IMHO, that was a critical time in our Nation’s history, and if he would have run and won, things today might be quite better today from an economic view. - Steve - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 4:45 pm: He should either sell them or put them in blind trust. That way, we don’t have a Madigan/Burke style conflict of interest. - just sayin' - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 4:58 pm: This is one big reason why we need the tax returns for more than 3 hours. And yes, you have to say goodbye to what might be best for your businesses if you want the top office in the state. - Keeptrying - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 5:44 pm: ===This is one big reason why we need the tax returns for more than 3 hours.==== Yeah when do we get see Quinn’s Tax returns from last year for more then 3 hours? Oh yeah I forgot this is just a witch hunt against Brady I forgot were carry the democrats water for them. - Gregor - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 6:34 pm: How “blind” can the trust be? If Brady wins, he’s in a position to affect laws that could help or hurt his construction and real estate businesses. You couldn’t be sure unless he liquidated all his businesses and then put the cash in the blind trust. Even I don’t think that’s fair to him. OTOH, could he take an oath to recuse himself from participating in any legislation that might benefit himself later? Judges can recuse themselves when they have a personal interest in a case, but this is different; there is no deep bench of replacements. How would you even begin to enforce or even monitor that? Would the Kid Lite gov have to step in for any of those issues? Whatever his business losses if he wins the governorship, I’m confident the folks in Benton will make it all better, later. That’s not so much snark as a prediction based on his behavior to date. - Still Gettin Twisted - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 7:11 pm: Are Legislative Leaders considered “full time” state employees?? - cool hand - Monday, May 3, 10 @ 9:00 pm: Rephrase question… when he elected governor. - downstater II - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 6:08 am: No matter what Brady does & I mean no matter what…..they’ll immediately find fault in it you can bet ! The strong dis-like of Brady is amazing. What an endless ongoing obsession. Blind trusts ?? Tax returns reviews ?? Where he goes on vacation ?? On & on it goes . He’s the GOP nominee like it or not. The stange thing here is he’s made a living outside of gov’t. Been a while since our top spot guy has done that. Don’t like him ??….don’t vote for him. If Quinn wins….think he’ll start paying our bills on time ?? Get straight with the people of Illinois ?? How about his tax returns ?? What about his law practice ?? Hmmmm? - Old Milwaukee - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 8:08 am: This obsession about Brady’s taxes is getting very old. The argument that it’s ironic that he doesn’t want to raise taxes, yet he didn’t pay any last year is ridiculous. What if his business made money last year and he paid $100,000 in taxes. You would all be saying, of course he’s against raising taxes because he would personally benefit. He can’t win with people who just want to criticize him. Bill Brady’s business activities in the private sector and the people he employs are a net win for the taxpayers of Illinois. He is a contributor overall. Quinn is an eater, and always has been. - OBSERVING - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 8:55 am: If he put his business in a blind trust, the trust be blind to the public as well. We know it is very possible that a family business like Brady’s would never be truly blind to Brady, so it’s better to keep the business public so he has to file information with his annual Statement of Economic Interest. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 9:12 am: He’d have to sell his business…most likely any partners he has would have to buy him out. But, anything that he did as governor that benefited his old business…and thus the asking price he got from his partners, would still be subject to fair scrutiny. There’s no way to put a small business in a “blind” trust. - ShadyBillBrady - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 9:26 am: Actually Old Milwaukee, based on what we’ve seen from the last two years, Billy has been an “eater” and not a “contributor”. And the discussion about this issue is only getting old to his supporters who just want it to go away. I’d say that until there are more answers than questions, this won’t go away. I also find it humurous that so many here are attacking Rich for taking some position, or being a shill for the Democrats or whatever … last time I read the post it looked like Rich *asked a question*, and a legitimate one. And then he asked all of us what we think Brady should do, not what we think of his question. Just sayin. - Good Government Guy - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 10:04 am: Brady should say that he will give up all control of the day to day business. However, he does not have to give up any partnership interest or stocks that he holds in businesses. If he collects passive income, that really isn’t a problem. All of this assumes that none of Brady’s business interests invest in the market. In such a case, the interests would be placed in a blind trust. - downstater II - Tuesday, May 4, 10 @ 5:49 pm: Good God ! Peoples interpretations of the “law”. Everyone’s a lawyer. This is all assuming he’s {Brady} is somehow guilty of something or underhanded which has not been brought forth. The man made a living for his family for God’s sake, built a business & seems to keep it legal & in balance. All these “assumptions” & all without knowing the facts….but that’s never stopped anyone in this quest to squash. I’m sure as Governor he’ll turn over direct control to his partners ala family will continue & make livings for their families & provide livings for their employees. I’d assume Mr. Brady will be busy figuring out the states issues & trust his family will handle the business. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.