* An attempt at hammering out an agreement over banning Super PAC money in the 8th District Democratic primary appeared to start out innocently enough…

Tammy Duckworth and Raja Krishnamoorthi both said Monday evening that they hope to reach an agreement banning super-PAC spending in their race. “Unlimited contributions undermine the American principle of ‘one person, one vote,’” Duckworth said in a statement. “And the secretive nature of Super PACs means voters can’t know who’s behind an attack ad. That’s not acceptable — the only money that should be spent in the 8th District is money that is fully disclosed before the election under federal election laws.”

Raja Krishnamoorthi’s campaign went a step farther in its response, offering a ban on all donations from political action committees, unions, lobbyists and corporations. Both versions of the agreement would force the campaigns to pay major penalties if it is violated. [..]

Their calls come after Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and Democrat Elizabeth Warren reached a similar agreement, which Duckworth’s campaign says they used as a model. Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) have been arguing over the details of an agreement that would do the same in their race.

* So, if Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren could make a deal, you’d think Duckworth and Krishnamoorthi could do so as well. But Krishnamoorthi didn’t want to stop with just a ban on Super PAC money. He demanded concessions that Duckworth most likely wouldn’t ever agree to…

But Krishnamoorthi said he will make a promise with Duckworth only if it goes further.

Krishnamoorthi calls his terms “basically removing all D.C. money from this election.”

He also proposed that the candidates get rid of “paid media (ads)” by holding one debate a week until the election.

Krishnamoorthi says while he is “troubled by the advent of Super PACs, and their appearance on the landscape, in this situation I’d have to take a look at the idea (the Duckworth campaign) put forward.”

* By 8 o’clock last night, Duckworth’s campaign was attempting to put all the blame on Krishnamoorthi. From a press release…

Krishnamoorthi Campaign Tries to Leave the Door Open for SuperPACs
Refuses to Sign an Agreement with Teeth

Raja Krishnamoorthi’s campaign rejected the key pieces of Tammy Duckworth’s Super PAC pledge this evening, refusing to “have our budget held hostage by a third party.”

The only limitation Krishnamoorthi’s proposal would put on SuperPACs would be to reject direct contributions - something already banned by current law.

“Mr. Krishnamoorthi’s campaign is missing the point,” said Josh Levin, Duckworth’s Campaign Manager. “The only way to keep SuperPACs and other secret, unlimited money out of the race is to let them know that if they get in it will hurt the candidate they’re trying to support. If Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren can agree to these terms, surely we can do the same here.”

“We are disappointed and surprised that our opponent has refused to sign the pledge. Instead of putting the voters first and setting an example for Illinois and the country, Raja’s campaign has chosen to put political gamesmanship first.”

* At 5:09 this morning, Krishnamoorthi’s campaign was countering with its own press release…

DUCKWORTH REFUSES TO FORGO D.C. & PAC MONEY OR ENGAGE IN DEBATES
Duckworth Campaign Refuses Pledge to Keep D.C. Money out of Race

Tammy Duckworth’s campaign refuses to address the agreement put forth by Raja Krishnamoorthi, which (a) calls for both candidates to reject PAC and D.C. money and (b) calls for both candidates to engage in a series of substantive debates on the issues.

The U.S. campaign finance system undermines democracy due to a broad and systemic problem of huge amounts of D.C. money tilting the scales of an election. That is why Raja has proposed a plan that diminishes the impact of PAC and D.C. money on this election.

“Duckworth’s campaign is taking a page out of the D.C. playbook by muddying the waters instead of discussing the issue at hand,” said Deputy Campaign Manager Mike Murray. “The facts are clear. Raja’s proposal will allow voters to cast their votes based upon the strength of a candidate’s ideas and plans instead of the strength of a candidate’s financial support from Washington D.C. and PACs.”

“Instead of discussing Tammy’s ideas and policy solutions, Duckworth’s campaign seeks to avoid substantive debate on the issues facing working families and relies mainly on name recognition and D.C. money to try to win this election,” continued Murray. “The voters of Illinois’ 8th district deserve better.”

* And then at 10:03 this morning, Duckworth’s campaign was trying to raise money off the “controversy”…

Yesterday, I asked my opponents to join me in a pledge to keep Super PAC spending out of this race. An overwhelming number of you signed on to agree that unlimited, anonymous funding should have no role in our democracy. But unfortunately, my primary opponent refused to sign on to the same kind of pledge Elizabeth Warren and Scott Brown agreed to.

Please contribute $10 now to prove to my opponent that grassroots funding works–and it’s the right thing to do.

As I said yesterday, this will only work if my opponent agrees. Over 7,000 of you have contributed to my campaign–often in spite of tough financial circumstances–and I’m not willing to let your contributions be overwhelmed by millions of dollars in negative attack ads.

We’ve already seen the corrosive effect of Super PAC support in the Republican presidential primary. And frankly, I’m not surprised to see Republicans embrace unlimited, anonymous corporate funds. But using a Super PAC in a Democratic primary would be unprecedented. It’s just not who we are as a party and it’s not what we should aspire to be.

Thanks for standing with me,

Tammy

P.S. We can’t let millions of dollars in negative Super PAC ads manipulate the outcome of this race. Contribute $10 to our Anti-Super PAC fund now–because this race should be determined by grassroots support, not a few wealthy backers.

*** UPDATE *** The Raja campaign has now issued its own fundraising appeal based on the disagreement…

Dear Friends,

The Citizens United decision equating corporate speech with individual speech was one of the worst decisions ever rendered by the Supreme Court. That is why I support a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.

Now my opponent is attacking me for my stance on this issue. Please contribute $25, $50, $100 or more now to help me stop the lies and tell voters about my plan.

I am asking my opponent to join me in a pledge to combat D.C. politics as usual by (a) refusing to accept D.C. and PAC money; and (b) holding a series of debates, one per week until March 20th, in order to let voters make a truly informed decision that is not solely based upon TV ads and sound bites in the upcoming election.

So far, she has refused.

The Citizens United decision highlighted and accelerated a growing problem in politics, which is that there is simply too much money in our political system, and much of it is directed from Washington D.C. This problem pre-dated Citizens United and will remain with us even after we overturn Citizens United. My opponent is pushing a misguided Super PAC pledge created by D.C. Republicans, which of course fails to truly address the problem of special interest money in politics. And, she won’t sign on to my pledge.

Click here to join me in calling on my opponent to take D.C. money out of this election and engaging in a series of debates to allow voters to make an informed decision.

My opponent should join me in improving our political system by pledging to hold a series of debates so that the voters of the 8th District can choose their candidate by the strength of their ideas and their plans for restoring prosperity to the middle class.

If you agree that we need to remove D.C. and PAC money from politics, and think the voters of the 8th District deserve a substantive discussion of the issues facing working families, then join me by calling on my opponent to accept the terms of my pledge.

I await a response from my opponent, and I look forward to a substantive discussion of the issues.

Best regards,

Raja

[ *** End Of Update *** ]

* Meanwhile, in other Super PAC news…

A super PAC opposed to incumbents from either party plans to spend several hundred thousand dollars in Illinois before the March 20 primary to unseat three long-serving members of Congress from the Chicago area.

The Campaign for Primary Accountability, a Houston-based group with more than $1.6 million cash on hand, is targeting Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Chicago; Rep. Judy Biggert, R-Hinsdale, and Rep. Donald Manzullo, R-Rockford. Under federal law, super PACs can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money as long as they do not coordinate with the campaign they are trying to help.

More…

According to the Texas Tribune, a nonprofit news organization, Linbeck contributed $775,000 to the Campaign for Primary Accountability, Joe Ricketts (patron of the family that purchased the Chicago Cubs) donated $500,000 and O’Keefe gave $100,000.

Curtis Ellis, spokesman for the super PAC, claims the group is nonpartisan and has carefully picked candidates throughout the country who have a chance to defeat long-term incumbents.

* Congressman Jackson responded via press release…

Jackson calls on Halvorson to Denounce SuperPac Support and Tell Pac to Stop Spending on Her Behalf

Today Congressman Jesse Jackson,Jr. decried the involvement of an outside Super Pac in the 2nd Congressional District race. The Campaign for Primary Accountability , a SuperPac formed by a wealthy Texas construction magnate named Leo Linbeck, III is reported to be spending money on robo calls and direct mail on behalf of Debbie Halvorson.

Congressman Jesse Jackson said, “This SuperPac is certainly no friend of Democrats. They are anti-Obama, anti-labor, anti-health care reform, I call upon Debbie Halvorson to actively and strongly denounce them and ask them to go back to Texas.”

* Halvorson hasn’t responded, but she did put out this press release…

According to a recent New York Time’s article, Representative Jesse Jackson Junior’s primary financial investor for the Peotone airport has been recently connected to the plot to smuggle Quadafi’s son to Mexico.

Debbie Halvorson stated:

“Representative Jackson is once again walking a fine line when it comes to ethics. According to Congressman Jackson himself, SNC-Lavalin is the one of the primary financial investors for the Peotone Airport and he has a long-standing relationship with this corporation. This makes me call into question the firm’s ability to fund the airport and whether we even want a firm here in Illinois who is connected to a plot to smuggle a member of Quadafi’s family into Mexico. On top of the connection with the airport, Representative Jackson voted last summer to bar funding for President Obama’s Libya operation. This doesn’t pass the smell test.”

The NYT story is here.

* Related…

* Brown: Voters disappear from city rolls: There were 1,279,971 registered voters in Chicago as of Monday morning. Barring an unexpected last-minute surge, that will leave us short of the previous low for a presidential primary — 1,307,519 — set just four years ago when Barack Obama bested Hillary Clinton and that slick lawyer from North Carolina whose name I’ve already forgotten. Oh, yeah, Edwards. City election officials estimate that leaves 400,000 to 500,000 individuals in Chicago who would otherwise be eligible but aren’t registered. “We view it as a real problem,” Chicago Board of Election Commissioners Chairman Langdon Neal said of the registration totals, which have been trending in this direction for quite some time despite constant efforts to make it simpler to sign up.

* ADDED: Illinois Supreme Court election: Does anybody even know it’s on the ballot?

* ADDED: Kinzinger, Sheyman hit TV in races for Congress

* ADDED: VIDEO: Kinzinger for Congress “Our Debt” Ad

* ‘Progressive’ Sheyman up with first ad

* VIDEO: Sheyman for Congress: American Dream

* Manzullo calls for teamwork, end 
of super PACs at DeKalb town hall

* VIDEO: Walsh: “Clergy feels stabbed in the back” by Obamacare

* Rep. Kinzinger announces local supporters

* Partisan clash jeopardizing local transportation projects

* Congressmen don’t like transportation bill