* Veto session starts next week and I’m actually looking forward to it. I’m tired of sitting in my office all day. I need some action, man, and this office thing isn’t doing it, even if it is in my house and I can technically leave whenever I want.
Gov. Pat Quinn might not have a great week. A whole lot of his vetoes will be overridden and I haven’t seen so many legislators this angry at a governor since the days of rage under Rod. So, everybody, let’s chill out before the storm with a little Bob tune from Phish…
Ev’rybody’s ’neath the trees
Feeding pigeons on a limb
Attorneys have raised the possibility that an Illinois powerbroker accused of conspiring to shake down the Oscar-winning producer of “Million Dollar Baby” could take the stand in his own defense.
William Cellini’s attorney told Judge James Zagel the millionaire businessman will make a final decision by the end of Friday. Prosecutor Chris Niewoehner told Zagel he’d been told it was likely Cellini would take the stand.
The danger in testifying, of course, is that if he testifies and is found guilty his punishment could be more severe and his chances of winning any appeals are diminished.
* As I told you yesterday, Tom Rosenberg essentially testified on the stand that Cellini did, indeed, deliver a message from Stu Levine that he’d better pony up or lose his Teachers Retirement System business. That’s all prosecutors really needed to prove. Cellini’s legal team attempted to do some damage control during cross examination…
Cellini’s lawyer, Terry Gillespie, focused on Rosenberg’s relationship with Cellini and Levine in his cross-examination. While U.S. District Judge James Zagel disallowed many of his questions, Gillespie attempted to get across the defense’s contention that Cellini was only helping Rosenberg, a friend of 30 years, at Rosenberg’s request.
Rosenberg testified that he called Levine’s lawyer, former Chicago Ald. Ed Vrdolyak, to ask if Levine was holding up the investment. Rosenberg testified that he believed Vrdolyak when he said Levine wasn’t involved.
Levine testified this week that Vrdolyak was to share with him, Kelly and Rezko, a $2 million bribe they were plotting to extort from Rosenberg.
“I didn’t actually think it was Stuart Levine,” Rosenberg said regarding the call to Vrdolyak, “but I wanted to make sure.
Cellini’s attorney, Dan Webb, criticized the government’s case as weak and called its star witness, Stuart Levine: “the single most non-credible witness I’ve seen in my career.” […]
Webb also argued that the victim of an alleged extortion scheme, Tom Rosenberg, testified he never was asked by Cellini for a political contribution or anything of value.
But prosecutors said the conspiracy was clear: Cellini agreed with Levine and others that there would be state action on a state pension board in exchange for a campaign contribution to then- Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
U.S. District Judge James Zagel said the defense was “railing against charges that were not made.”
* Let’s go to the ScribbleLive machine. BlackBerry users can click here. Everybody else just follow along below…
* The Pantagraph editorial board dug up some quotes made by Pat Quinn in 1988 while pushing for a constitutional convention…
It’s time for a pop quiz.
Who said Illinoisans need “a way to bypass smug politicians” and wrote about “the painful fact … that Illinois government has slipped into a dangerous state of decay in recent years”?
That same person also asked, “What job-creating new companies want to do business in a state with an international reputation for corrupt politicians and bad government?” And he referred to the “involuntary ‘corruption tax’” paid because of “the lack of honesty in state and local government.”
I’ve already done one of these where I asked what the old Pat Quinn would say to the new Pat Quinn. So…
* The Question: How would Gov. Pat Quinn justify his current behavior to 1988 Pat Quinn?
* Senate President John Cullerton revealed how he plans to deal with Gov. Pat Quinn’s gaming expansion demands…
.“Well, what we’ll do is we’ll go down to Springfield and we’ll have the governor’s bill and we’ll present it and vote on it and we’ll see,” Cullerton said during an interview at the Tribune’s Chicago Live stage show at the Chicago Theater. “And if it doesn’t work, we’ll go back to the drawing board.”
Admitted Cullerton: “Right now there’s not the votes and we’re very disappointed the governor made this action.”
This is right out of the old anti-Rod Blagojevich playbook. The House did this very thing to Blagojevich’s gross receipts tax proposal. They brought it to the floor and nobody voted for it. Shortly after, Blagojevich said he’d had an “up day.”
So, they’ll give the governor’s plan a fair hearing before the hanging. Then they’ll run their own bill…
Emanuel backed the measure that passed, and state Sen. Terry Link, D-Waukegan, has said he is preparing a measure to restore casino-type gambling at the tracks.
“The mayor has been very, very consistent and forceful,” Cullerton said of Emanuel’s support for a Chicago casino. “It’s fun to work with the mayor. I’ve learned a lot of new words. He’s focused. He’s very focused. He wants this extra money for infrastructure.”
But they’re probably gonna need a veto-proof majority because Quinn has said he opposes slots at tracks.
* As noted below, Quinn and Emanuel held a joint media event today about McCormick Place reforms. But I’m told by Illinois Information Service that no off-topic questions were taken at the event.
* Ruling Bolsters Union in Longer School Day Fight: Robert Bloch, the union’s lawyer, said the board’s ruling is less about preventing a longer school day than it is about preserving the union’s collective-bargaining rights. If CPS is not stopped, the administration will have “thrust a dagger into the heart of collective bargaining,” Bloch said during Thursday’s hearing.
* Suburban superintendents watching Springfield: Lawmakers could either reverse Quinn’s cuts at a time when the state budget is tight. Or, a plan has emerged to divert some money from local businesses taxes to pay for the offices. A spokesman for House Speaker Michael Madigan said there seems to be growing support for the local option. “I think there’s a lot of interest, Brown said.
* Hanging on to exchanges hinges on nailing down tax-break formula - CME, CBOE negotiations with state hung up on how to identify where trades originate
* Health Exchanges Still In The “Studying” Stage: In order for the landmark Affordable Care Act to be implemented successfully, Illinois, along with other states, needs to set up a health insurance exchange. The General Assembly, though, has dithered and what form a health exchange will take isn’t at all clear heading into the state’s fall veto session.
Friday, Oct 21, 2011 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
A recent front page Chicago Tribune story (“Electric Bill Shocker,” June 11) warns that coal plant closures are about to cause our electric rates to spike:
“Consumers could see their electricity bills jump an estimated 40 to 60 percent in the next few years.
The reason: Pending environmental regulations will make coal-fired generating plants, which produce about half the nation’s electricity, more expensive to operate. Many are expected to be shuttered.”
Consumers ARE ALREADY GOING TO PAY between “$107 and 178 a year” more beginning in 2014, according to CUB. More will come unless we act.
Illinois legislators have a choice. The Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Investment Act includes:
• Energy efficiency programs the IPA says will offset residential rate increases
• Solar rooftop support for business and government
• Expanded rate protections for Taylorville and other clean power projects
• 16,000 direct and indirect jobs, according to the University of Illinois
• Extensive MWDBE program for minority contractors
While opponents spread disinformation and use scare tactics, sponsors like Senate President John Cullerton and Representative John Bradley know that SB 1653 is a common sense approach to solving the serious problem of coal plant retirements.
Doing nothing is not an option.
Vote yes on SB 1653, the Comprehensive Energy Efficiency and Investment Act
* Larry Sabato has released his new list of congressional race rankings. NBC5’s blogger turned the rankings into narrative…
8th District: …this is an open seat. The Democratic primary is a contest between Tammy Duckworth and Raja Krishamoorthi. One of those two will be the next congressman, says Sabato, who rates this district “Likely Democratic.”
10th District: Rep. Bob Dold was drawn out of this North Shore district, but plans to run anyway. He won’t be favored. According to the Crystal Ball, his new district “Leans Democratic.”
11th District: Another open seat, in which the representative, Adam Kinzinger, is challenging a fellow Republican congressman in another district. Former Rep. Bill Foster is the favorite in this district, which is also rated “Likely Democratic.”
13th District: Tim Johnson has represented East-Central Illinois in Congress since 2001, but his new district goes all the way from Champaign to the Mississippi River. Most of this is new territory for Johnson. As a result, the Crystal Ball calls this a “Toss-Up.”
17th District: Freshman Bobby Schilling was elected in 2010 to represent a Western Illinois district that had been gerrymandered to favor a Democrat, by reaching into Decatur and Springfield. This time, the district takes in parts of Peoria and Rockford. As a result, it is rated “Lean Democratic.”
I’m not so sure about all of these, but I’ll agree with the 8th District. The primary’s the big race there.
The 10th is more Democratic than it was under the old map, but Dold is no slouch. Then again, he won by just two points last year in a huge GOP landslide. But neither Democrat who’s emerged so far appears to be all that ready for primetime.
The 11th is “Likely Democratic”? If the remap withstands judicial review, Foster will be up against Judy Biggert. It won’t be a slam dunk by any means.
I currently give Johnson an ever so slight advantage in the 13th. The district is more Democratic than his current one, and it has a ton of university students who tend to vote in presidential elections. But Johnson is a strong campaigner who is moving left by the day.
And the 17th District is also more Democratic, but Schilling proved to be one heckuva campaigner last year. Also, if Sen. Dave Koehler wins the Democratic primary, Schilling will be able to whack him on the tax hike and all the other quite liberal votes he’s taken. Lean Democratic, however, is probably accurate for now.
* Meanwhile, Joe Walsh continued attacking his primary opponent Randy Hultgren as a tool of GOP leadership during a campaign event yesterday…
Walsh said he is the “right kind of Republican” who is not afraid of a fight, not one like Hultgren who votes the way his party leadership tells him to vote.
“I get in a fight every week with my leadership,” Walsh said. “And here’s what the fight is about. [House Speaker] John Boehner … this is what he tells us every week: If we would just be quiet [and] don’t make waves right now. Privately, John Boehner … doesn’t want someone like me around. If it’s Randy Hultgren against Joe Walsh running for this Congressional seat, I can guarantee you John Boehner and other folks are going to do whatever they can to help Randy get elected. Randy does what he’s told by them.” […]
“What I’d rather do is have the fight,” Walsh said. “This fight is for the soul of what this country’s about … If we send the wrong kind of Republicans to Washington next year, we’re going to lose … If we send typical Republicans to Washington, I can tell you, the typical Republicans will do what helped get us in this mess and they’ll forget they’re Republicans.”
Is Speaker Boehner really that unpopular with Republican primary voters? I don’t know about Illinois, but a September CNN/ORC poll showed 56 percent of Republicans had a favorable opinion of the Speaker, while just 25 percent had an unfavorable viewpoint. I get that Walsh is attempting to paint himself as an independent, but campaigning against DC culture is one thing, actively campaigning against Boehner might be counterproductive.
“Simply more of the same from the congressman from the 8th District – baseless accusations and attempts to legislate through sound bites and grandstanding,” Hultgren campaign spokesman Andrew Flach said. “The residents of the 14th District deserve better.”
* Gov. Pat Quinn’s media guru Joe Slade White and the governor’s campaign manager Ben Nuckels co-wrote an analysis of last year’s gubernatorial campaign for Campaigns & Elections Magazine. As expected, they took the credit…
But going into the job, one of the tough decisions Quinn had to make was advocating for an increase in the state income tax. It wasn’t your typical campaign platform, especially in an election year dominated by jobs and the economy. And, as it turned out, a Republican tidal wave would sweep many safer Democrats with easier races, out of office. But that’s what we were faced with.
Knowing that executive offices are often won and lost on a candidate’s character and values, we drove that debate with a series of paid media spots against Brady, always posing the same question to voters: “Who is this guy?”
By tying each policy issue and legislative vote to Brady’s values and worldview, we were able to define him as someone voters should be uncomfortable with. The spot we crafted on Brady’s support to lower the minimum wage, for example, wasn’t just about lowering the minimum wage. It was about painting Brady as an out-of-touch multi-millionaire who doesn’t understand the struggles of everyday people. It was also about Brady’s values, demonstrating how he might look at other problems should he win the governor’s office.
Contrast that to our positive spots in the final weeks of the race. They were all about Quinn’s character and values. This was our trump card. Throughout his life Quinn has worked to earn his reputation as an honest leader who was never afraid to speak up and battle special interests on behalf of everyday men and women. In an age of cynicism, Quinn’s low-key authenticity and reputation as an honest leader proved a powerful weapon. Our positive spots tried to capture that essence and remind voters that this was the guy who fought as a reformer and consumer advocate on behalf of middle-class Illinois families for decades.
Yeah, OK. One problem: Quinn’s positive spots in the final weeks were direct copies of the ads he had already successfully used in the last weeks of the Democratic primary (”You know me,” and “Ford jobs”). Neither White nor Nuckels were around for that primary race.
* And this is just standard operating procedure for Illinois. You simply cannot win Illinois without the support of “persuadable” suburban women. Every gubernatorial candidate since Jim Edgar’s 1990 campaign who has won persuadable suburban women has also won the governor’s race. So, it didn’t take a genius to undermine Brady with that demographic…
Our first ad in the Chicago area highlighted Brady’s vote to allow guns in or near schools. But it wasn’t just about guns. It was also about what type of person would take such a vote. To the Democratic base, the spot was about a candidate who seemed extreme—a candidate who didn’t seem to care about homicide or violence in the city. On another level, the spot was about the fact that Brady had a very different set of cultural values.
We reprised a variation of this ad in the final five days of the campaign, defining Brady on his vote against a ban on the sale of guns to convicted spouse and child abusers. Among women in the Chicago area, this tested as the top reason to cast a vote against Brady last November. But we didn’t want to run the ad in the general market. Instead, we blitzed all of the women’s programming on cable networks throughout the Chicago media market in the final five days with no response from our opponent. It was especially effective with persuadable women voters in suburban Cook County and the surrounding suburban “collar” counties—voters any Republican statewide candidate needs to win over to be victorious.
* Throughout the summer, I was writing that the Quinn campaign was avoiding Downstate in order to concentrate on the Chicago market. I was told by the Quinn campaign that I was wrong. Now, they say I was right…
In many instances, we only bought cable in multiple downstate markets while our opponent was attacking us on broadcast television. We wanted to advertise more heavily in the Chicago area—where our voters lived.
Also, the unions pushed hard for Quinn Downstate, which probably helped.
* And I’m not sure how innovative this media strategy was…
We used innovative media strategy, blitzing women’s programming on Chicago cable stations in the final days, and targeting key African-American voters in downstate Illinois on cable programming. We didn’t run a heavy direct mail campaign in small communities.
They didn’t run a heavy direct mail campaign anywhere. And Personal PAC’s TV ads focusing on women’s programming and direct mail targeted at its huge contact list were more effective, in my opinion.
* They won, so they have an absolute right to gloat. Joe Slade White’s 1990s-style ads worked better than I thought they would. Nuckels came to the game a green, inexperienced kid, but did his job as well as Quinn would let him. Just about everybody had written Quinn off in the summer, but he came back to win. A victory lap is allowed by his advisors. A more accurate accounting would’ve been appreciated, however. [This post was originally cut off. Not sure why. I fixed it.]
* Remember Arlene Juracek, the retired ComEd executive whom Gov. Pat Quinn recently appointed to run the Illinois Power Agency? Quinn ousted Director Mark Pruitt to appoint Juracek, who rose to the rank of ComEd vice president. The governor insisted there was no conflict of interest, even though former ComEd veep Juracek still owns a significant amount of Exelon stock. Exelon is ComEd’s parent company. Juracek’s new job involves negotiating power contracts on behalf of consumers, meaning she’ll be sitting across the table from Exelon execs.
Quinn wanted Director Pruitt out because he was resisting signing long term contracts with alternative power companies, like wind and solar. Pruitt did get the ball rolling on some wind power contracts, but in one of her first moves in office, Juracek reversed Pruitt’s decision…
In an unexpected move, she reversed Mr. Pruitt’s plan to solicit offers for 20-year contracts for wind farm developers — a priority of Mr. Quinn, who sees green jobs growth as a major part of his economic development agenda for the state. Instead, she plans to solicit offers for one-year contracts only, which the wind industry has complained won’t foster development of new wind farms in the state because developers can’t get financing unless they have long-term sales contracts.
Guess who opposed former Director Pruitt’s move? ComEd and Exelon, of course. This is a home run for Juracek’s former boss.
In addition, Ms. Juracek reversed Mr. Pruitt’s plan to solicit bids for power from “clean-coal” plants, a provision aimed at allowing the developers of the proposed FutureGen 2.0 project to finance the part of the project not subsidized by the U.S. Department of Energy. FutureGen is a top priority of Mr. Quinn.
Exelon and ComEd oppose these clean coal projects, as do other utilities. Another home run.
And, finally, Ms. Juracek removed Mr. Pruitt’s proposal to solicit bids from small-scale solar facilities, a priority of environmentalists’ and also supported by Mr. Quinn. She said in her report that she was committed to including the solar bids in future procurement plans, but would like the idea to be developed more in workshops with interested parties.
Once again, Gov. Quinn supported bids from solar companies, but ComEd and Exelon opposed it.
That’s three ComEd/Exelon home runs in just two weeks. I asked the governor’s office about this mess last night. So far, no word on their thinking. They didn’t respond at all to Crain’s. I’ll let you know if they come up with something later today.
The attorney general’s office says it has “concerns” about Juracek’s appointment. “Ms. Juracek was with ComEd for 15 years and championed the so-called `reverse auction’ that would have been devastating for consumers,” a spokeswoman for the agency said. “In fact, the IPA was formed in reaction to the reverse auction and ComEd agreed to return $1 billion to customers.” […]
According to the attorney general, there are “many questions that must be answered, including any financial interests or other connections [Juracek] may have with ComEd or Exelon.” Juracek confirmed she still owns Exelon stock. She said she has no plans to sell the stock but would place the stock “in a box and not do anything with it as long as I’m on the job.”
Yeah. Great. She’ll hold onto the stock, which will likely rise on this latest news.
* Juracek still has to be confirmed by the Senate. The governor also vetoed a bill this year which would’ve taken away his authority over the IPA. That bill was backed by House Speaker Michael Madigan. Expect an override and possibly a rocky confirmation procedure.
“Whatever happens going forward,” Ms. Juracek said, “the (procurement) process is so transparent. It’s virtually impossible for the director of the IPA to make a unilateral decision because of that transparency.”
As a friend of mine just pointed out, it looks like she managed to find the window between “possible” and “virtually impossible.”
Friday, Oct 21, 2011 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
The Illinois legislature is expected to consider SB 1653 during the veto session – a bill that could have us paying up to seven times today’s market price for electricity to build a power plant we don’t need.
With this legislation, Tenaska, an out-of-state energy company, is trying to build the Taylorville Energy Center (TEC), and they want to pass on the costs to Illinois consumers. According to Tenaska’s own report, this project and the above market price for electricity would cost us at least $286 million per year for 30 years, and could very likely be significantly higher.
And if that doesn’t get your attention — Tenaska wants Illinois consumers to pay even if their plant produces no power.
SB 1653 or any legislation that supports the TEC would have devastating consequences on our economy and would cost our state thousands of jobs. That’s why Illinois legislators have already voted against the power plant twice before and why it should fail again.
Labor unions that have stymied work rule changes at McCormick Place have agreed to terms that will reduce costs for convention exhibitors, sources said.
Leadership of Chicago’s unionized carpenters agreed Thursday to new language in their agreement with the convention hall, the sources said. The settlement marked the successful conclusion of lengthy negotiations that involved aides to Gov. Pat Quinn and Mayor Rahm Emanuel. Both were involved out of concern that lucrative conventions might leave Chicago because of costs.
The politicians scheduled a joint news conference for Friday morning at McCormick Place to ballyhoo the deal. Executives of the Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority, the agency that runs McCormick Place, signed off on terms this week with the Chicago Regional Council of Carpenters and Teamsters Local 727.
Having these two gentlemen on stage at the same time for the first time in months will certainly be a treat. I’m sure they’ll both behave themselves, but will the media? Doubtful. Wish I could be there.
