Quinn, Brady to lunch at Manny’s tomorrow
Monday, Nov 22, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From the Quinn campaign…
Quinn/Simon for Illinois Public Schedule for Nov. 23, 2010
At 12:30 p.m. Tuesday, Governor Pat Quinn will meet Senator Bill Brady for lunch at Manny’s Cafeteria and Delicatessen, 1141 S. Jefferson, Chicago. The Governor invited Senator Brady to Manny’s the week of the election.
Menu suggestions?
36 Comments
|
George Ryan’s lawyers make their case
Monday, Nov 22, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller
* George Ryan’s attorneys were in court today arguing that their client should be released. Much of the press coverage has focused on the humane aspect…
Former Gov. James Thompson, a longtime friend and lawyer of George Ryan, said Monday “as a matter of humanity” the imprisoned convicted governor’s suffering in prison should be put to an end.
“In my view, George Ryan has been punished enough. He has lost everything,” Thompson said. “The only thing that George and Lura Lynn have left is their lives . . . their love for each other, their family and their friends. Everything else has been taken from them.
* I’ve had the Ryan attorneys’ memo in support of their motion to release the former governor for weeks and haven’t published it because of the election. Now seems a proper time. Click here to read it.
* It’s usually helpful to read the conclusion first in these matters, so here it is…
Because the evidence was insufficient to support Ryan’s mail fraud and RICO convictions under the Skilling standard, these convictions must be set aside, and the government may not retry the defendant. See Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1, 10-11 (1978). If the Court were to find the evidence sufficient on any or all of the mail fraud or RICO counts, however, it should order a retrial of these counts. The Court’s instructions were erroneous, and the error was not harmless. Upon setting aside Ryan’s mail fraud and RICO convictions, the Court should recalculate his sentences for false statements and various tax offenses.
The “Skilling standard” is, of course, the US Supreme Court’s ruling that set aside part of the conviction against Enron honcho Jeff Skilling. “Honest Services” was the core of the case. Ryan was convicted mainly on this long-established and ever-expanded precedent that the Supremes tossed out the window.
* A big way the feds convicted Ryan was stating right up front that they didn’t have to prove any quid pro quo. The Skilling decision prohibited this line of attack…
A single theme pervaded the five-and-one-half-month trial of George Ryan. Witnesses declared that Ryan had never to their knowledge taken a benefit in exchange for official action, and Ryan’s lawyers argued that there was no quid pro quo. The government replied that it had never claimed that Ryan took a bribe and that whether he did or not did not matter. The Ryan trial was an anti-McCormick, anti-Evans, anti-Sun Diamond Growers trial, a paradigmatic pre-Skilling honest services trial, and a forum in which the government successfully and repeatedly contended that no quid pro quo was necessary. […]
With one exception, to be discussed in the next section of this memorandum, the Government did not claim to have proven a corrupt act or quid pro quo. It conceded in its closing argument that it had not […]
“R. 22973.
“How did George Ryan reciprocate this longtime friendship [with co-defendant Lawrence Warner]? Governmental business is how he did it. $3 million worth of government business. Was it a quid pro quo? No, it wasn’t. Have we proved a quid pro quo? No, [we] haven’t. Have we charged a quid pro quo? No, we haven’t. We have charged an undisclosed flow of benefits back and forth. And I am going to get to the instructions in a minute, folks, but that’s what we have charged. . . . We have charged an undisclosed flow of benefits, which, under the law, is sufficient . . . .”
* There is also a new definition of bribery and kickbacks that the Ryan team is attempting to take advantage of…
The Government charged Ryan with a wide-ranging scheme to defraud that extended over twelve years and with a RICO conspiracy predicated upon the alleged mail fraud scheme. Most of the conduct alleged to be part of the scheme cannot remotely be characterized as bribes or kickbacks. Evidence of this conduct would be inadmissible in a post-Skilling mail fraud trial and would be highly prejudicial in a trial of legitimate mail fraud charges.
More…
C. Other Leases. Counts 3, 8, and 9 consisted of mailings in furtherance of other leases. The jury convicted Ryan on all of these counts, but this Court set aside the conviction on Count 9 (concerning the rental of a property at 17 North State Street on which Lawrence Warner obtained a commission) partly because there was no evidence that Ryan had a part in arranging this lease. […]
This evidence is insufficient to support Ryan’s convictions on Counts 3 and 8 under the Skilling standard. The Government’s evidence may have indicated that Ryan favored Warner in awarding leases and other business, but it did not indicate that Warner ever gave Ryan a bribe or kickback. Warner provided only one significant financial benefit to George Ryan. He sponsored two political fundraisers—one raising $75,000 and the other $175,000. R. 22959. Sponsoring a fundraiser is a political contribution, appropriately treated as a bribe only when the beneficiary has explicitly promised a quid pro quo. McCormick, 500 U.S. at 273-74. Because the Government offered no evidence of an explicit quid pro quo, the fundraisers should be disregarded.
Warner also made loans and gifts to members of Ryan’s family. Most notably, he wrote a check for $3,185 to pay for the band at the wedding of Ryan’s daughter, Jeanette. R. 22969. The evidence offers no basis for inferring an agreement at the time this check was written.
* And then they go after the jury instructions…
VI. THE JURY INSTRUCTIONS WERE ERRONEOUS
Even if the evidence were found sufficient to support Ryan’s RICO and mail fraud convictions, this Court’s instructions were flawed on five respects.
First, the instructions incorporated the honest services standard of United States v. Bloom, 149 F.3d 649 (7th Cir. 1998). The Supreme Court held in Black v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 2963 (2010),
Second, the instructions described the duty not to accept bribes and kickbacks merely as one of the duties of public officials whose violation could lead to an honest services conviction. Under Skilling, a scheme to obtain a bribe or kickback is not just one possible path to conviction; it is essential.
Third, the instructions concerning the duty not to accept bribes and kickbacks, taken as a whole, did not convey the quid pro quo requirement.
Fourth, the instructions invited the jury to convict Ryan for failing to disclose conflicts of interest. They thereby endorsed a theory of honest services fraud that the Government advanced in Skilling and that the Supreme Court emphatically rejected.
Fifth, the instructions invited the jury to convict Ryan for violating state laws, another position clearly rejected by Skilling.
* Here’s the argument for why Ryan should be released now, even though he has not served out all the years of his sentence…
Although Ryan does not challenge his convictions for false statements (Counts 11-13) and various tax offenses (Counts 18-22), setting aside his mail fraud and RICO convictions would require this Court to re-determine his sentences for these other offenses. Ryan received the statutory maximum sentences on both the false statements counts (five years) and the tax counts (three years) only because these counts were joined with the mail fraud and RICO counts. Section 2255 affords this Court broad remedial powers. Upon a finding that a judgment or sentence is subject to collateral attack, “the court shall vacate and set the judgment aside and shall discharge the prisoner or resentence him or grant a new trial or correct the sentence as may appear appropriate.” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(b). Moreover, “when part of a sentence is vacated the entire sentencing package becomes ‘unbundled’ and the judge is entitled to resentence a defendant on all counts.” United States v. Smith, 103 F.3d 531, 533 (7th Cir. 1996).
Thoughts?
29 Comments
|
Better late than never, or better never late?
Monday, Nov 22, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller
* This might’ve been nice to know before the election…
Go to the town in Cook County with the fewest people, the village of McCook, and it’s easy to run into a relative of Mayor Jeff Tobolski, who has just been elected to the Cook County Board. […]
Tobolski family members have a history of serving the village of McCook, a tiny west suburb near Lyons and Brookfield with large sections of industrial areas.
In fact, in 2009 alone, the greater Tobolski family had 17 government jobs and received about $350,000 in compensation from the village, as well as from the library and park districts, which are separate governmental entities the mayor doesn’t run. The jobs ranged from the mayor’s own job to full-time supervisory positions to part-time or seasonal work.
That doesn’t include the two family members at the Max whom Tobolski hired this year — his wife and Barofsky — who make about $60,000 a year each.
All Rahm, all the time kinda cut into the demand for stories like this one. Too bad. Tobolski defeated Tony Peraica for county board and nobody took notice until now.
Also, considering that the Tobolski clan has that little town of 200 souls pretty well sewn up, how truly stupid was it for Peraica to allegedly venture out at night to tear down Tobolski’s yard signs?
* I think the genesis of this story is one of the kabillion rumors floating around about why Tom Dart decided not to run for mayor. His brother, the reasoning goes, put the kibosh on it. The rumor is beyond silly, but here’s another better late than never story from the Sun-Times…
Dart’s younger brother, Tim Dart, is a partner in a Chicago law firm that has a lucrative lobbying practice at City Hall that would have been threatened if voters had elected a Mayor Dart.
Last year alone, Tim Dart, 43, was paid $541,500 to lobby Daley’s staff, the City Council and city agencies on behalf of 15 clients, records filed by the younger Dart with City Hall show.
Tom Dart, 48, says his brother’s business wasn’t a factor in his decision not to run for mayor. But he acknowledges his brother would have provided campaign fodder for Dart’s opponents in a mayoral race.
“I would have had to tell him he couldn’t do business with the city,” says the sheriff, who won re-election earlier this month. “How it would have affected him, I wouldn’t have known.
Tim’s subscription price just doubled.
* Now, onto more timely matters…
Mayoral candidate Rahm Emanuel on Sunday proposed tapping special taxing districts to pay for 250 police officers in blighted areas. […]
Emanuel proposed using $25 million in TIF funds to hire officers. He declined to discuss specifics, such as which neighborhoods would get the officers. To use the funds, Emanuel would need approval from aldermen.
It probably goes without saying that 250 cops is a drop in the bucket.
* Carol Moseley Braun announced her candidacy for mayor over the weekend. My favorite line from the coverage..
Braun is counting on her business experience running a small company that specializes in coffee, tea and spices to be a plus with voters.
* Sen. Sandoval was also there for Braun…
Braun appeared on stage with U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush and state Sen. Martin Sandoval (D-Chicago). Also on stage was former Chicago Ald. Robert Shaw.
Sandoval criticized Braun’s rival, former White House chief of staff Emanuel, as someone who had grown up in the suburbs and “abandoned” President Obama before the midterm election.
Sandoval backed Hillary Clinton in the primary and openly flirted with supporting John McCain in the general. He doesn’t have much of a leg to stand on when it comes to Obama.
* Mayor Daley made a good point about Rahm Emanuel’s residency…
“President Obama and Michelle live in Washington D.C., as you know, but really, they’re residents of Chicago,” Daley said. “People have left cities all over America to work in federal government for two years or four years, by the president. And they’re asked to do that. Many of them make sacrifices. So it is something that has been going on legally forever.”
Daley said it’s “accepted fact” that people leave their homes to work in the federal government in Washington without giving up their residency.
If that weren’t the case, Daley said, “then all those people who had worked before, then had violated federal law by voting, I guess. Talking about thousands and thousands of people, under this administration, the Bush administration, the Clinton administration, the Bush administration, the Reagan administration, the Carter administration, going back to the beginning of time, you know.
“Many people who work, even for congressmen, on their staff, leave Chicago and go down there, but they still always keep their residency.”
It’s apples to oranges, but how long did Mark Kirk really live in Illinois before he filed to run for Congress the first time?
* Hilarity…
Ald. Bernie Stone’s son Jay filed his nominating petitions for mayor.
• He needed 12,500 signatures.
• He logged 280 signatures.
• He will not be running for mayor.
* And, finally, today is the last day to file for mayor and other city offices. You can keep track of the progress by clicking here.
It would really be nice if the elections board could put all this stuff on an actual web page rather than just update a pdf file, but whatever.
32 Comments
|
Question of the day
Monday, Nov 22, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The Daily Herald asked former Sen. Peter Fitzgerald what advice he has for his fellow Republican, Senator-elect Mark Kirk…
“My advice to Senator Kirk would be first to exercise his power wisely and judiciously,” said former Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, who lived in Inverness while in office. “And second, to just do what you think is right for the state of Illinois and the nation. Do not worry about the politics of individual votes.”
Fitzgerald said he believes the structure of the Senate, with 100 members as opposed to the House’s 438, will allow Kirk to hold true to the moderate stances the congressman became known for while serving the 10th District, including supporting abortion rights, civil unions and stem cell research.
“The House speaker is extremely powerful under the rules,” Fitzgerald said. “The Senate has a much stronger tradition of independence, with much more power in the hands of individual senators.”
Fitzgerald says he doesn’t foresee Kirk and Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin clashing much, either.
“Senator Durbin is a very effective spokesman for the Democratic side of the aisle,” Fitzgerald said. “But I didn’t have any trouble working for him on a day-to-day basis.”
* The Question: What advice do you have for Kirk?
And, please, let’s try not to get too snarky in comments, OK? Thanks.
47 Comments
|
The Tribune comes clean
Monday, Nov 22, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The Tribune editorialized Sunday against the gaming expansion bill that’s currently sitting in the Senate…
We hope legislators will reduce expenditures rather than hitch the state’s already desperate finances even tighter to an industry that has been contracting.
Yeah, that’s great. Unemployed single mothers relying on a human service provider? Tough luck. School kids? Fuhgettaboutit. Sick people without insurance? Heal thyselves. We can’t help you with a bit of gaming revenue because the Tribune wants cuts, and only cuts.
I’m not taking a position on this bill, but I’m no big opponent of gaming expansion. It just doesn’t bother me. The Tribune says much the same thing…
Think what you will about the morality of gambling. We’ve long supported casino wagering, and strong regulation to keep the industry here clean.
They’re OK with gaming, particularly when their company had their own casino on the table. What they most clearly don’t want is more revenue for the state.
…Adding… Some of you are woefully ignorant of fiscal history, so here’s a little chart from the Sunshine Review…
…Adding More… These are not inflation-adjusted dollars.
46 Comments
|
* Adam Andrzejewski has no idea what he’s talking about…
“Bill Holland is more interested in keeping a friendly relationship rather than rooting out corruption,” Andrzejewski said.
Bill Holland is the best auditor general this state has ever had. I didn’t care for him much back when he was Phil Rock’s chief of staff, and he despised me. But I’ve grown to respect the man over the years. He is honest, above board and a tireless worker.
* The root of Andrzejewski’s whining stems from a proposal he pushed that the House Republicans took up…
The measures lawmakers - mainly Republicans - are pushing now call for an analysis of “all state spending, hiring, procurement, and contracts awarded and the appointment of board and commission officials and decisions made by boards and commissions or those with procurement or hiring authority” from 2001 through 2010.
Here’s the reality check: For state spending alone, there are more than 130 million transactions over that period, from checks issued for mere pennies to lump-sum payments in the tens of millions. A thorough review can be expected to take years, not weeks or months. Any politician who implies the results would be in by their January inauguration - or by the start of the next fiscal year on July 1, 2011 - is … well, dreaming. Auditor General Bill Holland - who has repeatedly proven to be one of the straightest shooters in Illinois government - previously told the Chicago Tribune that the price tag on such an in-depth analysis would be “astronomical,” reaching “hundreds of millions of dollars.”
But Andrzejewski now says that’s not what he wanted, even though that’s exactly what he originally pushed…
Andrzejewski said later that he believes the kind of audit he wants would cost $60 million, although it wouldn’t necessarily involve a piece-by-piece look at every transaction — he claimed that “data mining technology” could help identify trouble areas.
Andrzejewski obviously had no clue what his “forensic audit” actually was when he originally came up with the idea. And his knowledge of recent Illinois history is astoundingly horrific…
Holland said later that when he met with Andrzejewski, Holland learned that Andrzejewski didn’t realize that the 2001-10 time frame includes the last two years of the George Ryan administration.
The House Republicans also had no clue what it entailed when they tried to get a vote on the proposal. It sounded so enticing that even I was briefly on board until I talked with Holland. There’s just no way that this could be done for the price Andrzejewski claimed back then.
* But, hey, Andrzejewski can take comfort in knowing that the last guy who went up against Bill Holland was none other than Rod Blagojevich…
Gov. Rod Blagojevich, meanwhile, stood behind CMS in the wake of an audit that accused the agency of waste and mismanagement. Blagojevich called the dispute between CMS and Auditor General William Holland “a prizefight between accountants - not a lot of muscle there, but a lot of argument and quarrel.”
Yeah, he’s in great company there.
Back off, Adam. This is a fight you will lose, and for good reason.
…Adding… I put this on the Tribune post because some of you are so woefully ignorant of fiscal history. Just to make absolutely sure you see it, here’s a little chart from the Sunshine Review…
…Adding More… These are not inflation-adjusted dollars.
* Related…
* VIDEO: Bill Holland on the forensic audit proposal
67 Comments
|
A look at the tea leaves
Monday, Nov 22, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column takes a look at some legislative tea leaves…
What started out as a slow state legislative veto session suddenly accelerated Thursday. Senate President John Cullerton formed two new bipartisan committees and charged them with reforming workers compensation and Medicaid. The catch is that the committees must finish their work by Jan. 3.
That means votes could be taken on workers comp and Medicaid reform before the new General Assembly is sworn in about a week later.
Republicans have been clamoring for those very reforms for years. So that means, if all goes well, the Republicans will have two fewer excuses to refuse to put votes on the big bills the Democrats really want, like borrowing to make the state’s pension payment, gaming expansion or, perhaps, even a tax hike.
Cullerton also introduced major legislation last week that would force the termination of Rod Blagojevich’s appointees whose terms have expired but who have not yet had another Senate confirmation vote.
More than a dozen state agency directors and hundreds of others would be kicked out of government by the legislation, unless Gov. Pat Quinn renominates them. House Speaker Michael Madigan added his name as chief House sponsor of the measure, which is a good indication that this thing is moving fast.
Quinn acted quickly, however, and asked for the resignations of all his cabinet members the following day. Change is in the air.
This new movement wasn’t confined to the Senate or to the governor’s office. Both legislative chambers advanced several state finance and government reform measures Thursday, and more may be on the way. For instance, a reform of the police and firefighters pension system likely will be unveiled in the House after the Thanksgiving break.
Madigan took over sponsorship of a bill Thursday that would create a $300 million short-term, no-interest loan program for the state’s health care and human service providers, most of whom have been waiting months to be paid money the state owes them. A bill requiring 30-day reviews of state leases passed the House unanimously the same day. Legislation forcing the Regional Transportation Authority to submit to the state’s executive inspector general sailed through the Senate a day earlier.
House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie amended a bill to sweep special funds related to the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation. The sweeps will shore up other depleted funds that pay for oversight or regulatory activities. Currie passed a bill unanimously Thursday to allow the state’s ethics commissions to close some gift ban loopholes.
A Senate bill that has been stalled in the House Rules Committee since March suddenly was given new life and assigned to the House Executive Committee, the usual destination of high-priority bills. The legislation would require the state to make monthly payments to the state’s pension systems when revenue growth reaches a certain point. There’s no real growth now, but there will be some day.
Numerous other bills also were advanced last week, giving the impression of a whole lot of movement designed to placate various groups of legislators. The legislative leaders will need to make as many legislators as happy as possible if they want to do anything really major.
A long-stalled microloan program for small business, backed by several House liberals, suddenly was revived and sent to the Senate Executive Committee. Legislation favored by south suburban legislators creating the Southeast Commuter Rail Transit District passed the House. Casino owners are pushing hard for an exemption to the state’s smoking ban, and a bill to do that was moved through the House Executive Committee and teed up for a vote.
Some potentially interesting revenue bills moved as well. A bill making what is known in the lingo as a “technical change” to the Income Tax Act, which once was sponsored by Speaker Madigan and is co-sponsored by Majority Leader Currie, was moved to the House floor. Keep an eye on that one. It could be amended with a tax hike. A former Madigan bill was amended to decouple the state’s estate tax from federal levels. That very well could be advanced.
This burst of activity has the feel to some observers of things being put into place so that the really big stuff can be moved later on. Whether the trigger ever will be pulled on that big stuff is yet to be seen. Stay tuned.
* Meanwhile, Dave McKinney has an excellent piece about lame ducks and what they want…
SPRINGFIELD — Rep. Michael Boland (D-East Moline) said he has never voted for a tax increase in 16 years and would “feel bad spiritually” doing so now.
Rep. Suzie Bassi (R-Palatine) wants to see 401(k)-style retirement accounts established for new state workers, Medicaid reforms and an end to free transit rides for all senior citizens before she’d consider a tax hike.
And Rep. Paul Froehlich (D-Schaumburg), a Republican-turned-Democrat who voted against hiking the income tax as recently as last year, now seems to be warming up to it.
Meet three of the 18 departing Illinois state representatives — who along with a group of returning House members — figure to play a key role in determining whether Gov. Quinn gets a 33-percent increase in the state income tax in January, when his proposal is most likely to surface. […]
But if it was tricky for Quinn to cobble together a miniscule, 19,000-vote win in the governor’s race, getting to 60 votes in the Illinois House — the threshold he needs to pass a tax increase after the start of the year — could be every bit as vexing, if not more so.
Make sure to read the whole thing.
* Related…
* Is workers’ comp change on way in Springfield?
* State lawmakers expect busy spring
* Political writer: Troubles ahead in Washington, Springfield
* Erickson: Election is over; wait for solution isn’t
* Veto session: Second week could be frenzy or fizzle
* Statehouse Insider: About Quinn’s ‘mandate‘ …
* How to sell a tax increase
* Legislature must take next vital step in reforming public employee pensions
7 Comments
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|