Question of the day
Tuesday, Dec 17, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Tribune editorial…
Chicago will soon be blanketed with [speed cameras], in hopes of slowing drivers around schools and parks. No more cat-and-mouse between cops and speeders. If you’re speeding, you’ll get caught.
Why not deploy the cameras on the interstates, where motorists feel they can barrel along with impunity?
It’s not a perfect solution. Illinois already uses cameras to enforce speed limits in construction zones, but some of those tickets have been thrown out because the photos aren’t sharp enough. Also, the ticket goes to the owner of the car, who is not necessarily the driver. And cameras are a poor substitute for troopers, who can recognize drunken or distracted driving and other safety violations, such as failure to wear seat belts.
Still, a reliable camera system could be a backstop in areas that troopers say are largely unpatrolled. And yes, it would be a big moneymaker for the state, judging from the number of speeders. Too bad. Drivers who brazenly disregard the posted speed limit deserve to get a ticket. It’s not up to individual motorists to decide — or guess — how fast they can safely drive.
* The Question: Do you support speed cams on Interstates and Expressways? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
free polls
81 Comments
|
* Please, don’t forget that if you’re coming to the City Club’s “Christmas with Rich Miller 2013″ tomorrow, we’re asking that you bring a toy or a gift card for a child ages 3-5 in Lutheran Social Services of Illinois’ early childhood program.
Thanks!
Comments Off
|
* Fox 32…
Illinoisans can begin applying next month for the state’s first-ever permits to carry concealed firearms. But the Cook County Sheriff complains to FOX 32 News that the system to screen those applicants is full of holes. Unless the system is fixed, Sheriff Tom Dart says he’s prepared to take extraordinary action to prevent permits from being granted to anyone with a serious arrest record.
FOX 32 has learned that Sheriff Dart sent a letter to the director of the Illinois State Police announcing his “blanket objection” to granting a concealed carry permit to anyone who’s been arrested even once in the last seven years for domestic violence, a gang-related crime or illegal gun possession. Even if they haven’t been convicted, Dart says, those charges are “red flags” that need to be pursued. […]
“I gotta imagine we’ll be objecting to hundreds, easily thousands of people,” Dart told FOX 32’s Mike Flannery. “What we’re gonna have is this massive influx of the applications. And they’re gonna be given out. And we’re just left holding the bag when the inevitable bad thing will happen. It happens in other states. And in other states they also have people who are armed who stop crimes. It happens both ways, I understand that. But when the inevitable bad thing happens, people will say, ‘Why wasn’t this person caught?’”
The law sets up a concealed carry board that is supposed to act on local police objections within 90 days. Dart will be jamming that system for sure.
The NRA’s Todd Vandermyde said that Dart’s intention to object to absolutely everyone with a prior gun arrest doesn’t make sense since the state’s public carry laws were declared unconstitutional.
Sheriff Dart’s letter to the State Police is here.
* Meanwhile…
Suburban police say it’s a frequent scenario: They’re called to respond to a tense situation at a house and don’t know if anyone inside is licensed to own a gun.
Bloomingdale Police Officer Levi McGhee warns a driver about speeding. McGhee, like many officers, believes having better access to FOID information would make police safer during such stops.
That information is held by the Illinois State Police, but the list of the state’s 1.6 million Firearm Owner Identification cardholders isn’t shared with local police.
Police often don’t have that clue to whether a gun might be in the house until the encounter is nearly over. Only after they’ve got a person’s name can they check it against the state’s list.
Some police officials say that’s a key shortcoming of the state law. They would prefer to have that information available ahead of traffic stops and calls to quell domestic disputes.
35 Comments
|
* I disagree with this AP report…
When Illinois lawmakers considered a landmark vote on same-sex marriage, religious and conservative groups vowed to retaliate against those who voted in favor by grooming potential primary challengers in next year’s elections.
But now that gay marriage is Illinois law and legislative candidates have submitted candidate petitions to election officials, the threat seems to have evaporated.
* For instance…
Yet of the 14 black House Democrats who voted yes, only half have primary challengers. Of the nine total challengers — most of whom are seeking public office for the first time — seven spoke to The Associated Press, saying same-sex marriage wasn’t among their top campaign issues. One supported the vote outright. Another wasn’t aware of how the incumbent voted. Two didn’t return multiple messages.
Just because they’re saying they aren’t making it a major issue right out of the gate doesn’t mean that the candidates aren’t connected to the churches. I’ve already identified several for my subscribers. There may be more.
* Also…
[GOP Rep. Ed Sullivan’s] challenger, Bob Bednar, said he doesn’t support same-sex marriage, but the former treasurer of the Lake County Republican Party said it’s not why he jumped in. [GOP Rep. Ron Sandack’s] opponent, suburban school board member Keith Matune, declined to state his position or say how he would’ve voted on same-sex marriage.
Oh, c’mon. Bednar is running precisely because of the gay marriage issue, and Sandack was always gonna get a right-wing primary opponent.
* Look, for the most part, incumbents don’t want to bring attention to the issue because they don’t want to make waves with voters. The challengers will avoid the judgement of the “mainstream media” and save their fire for fliers, mailers and robocalls. And, trust me, that’s all coming if the money can be raised.
*** UPDATE *** And as if right on cue, Paul Caprio’s Family-Pac just did a robocall blasting Rep. Sandack for his votes for gay marriage and pension reform.
Click here to listen
Yeah, but no worries. The threat has “evaporated,” right?
…Adding… Rep. Sullivan also got hit with that Caprio robocall.
Yep. Nothing at all to see here, move along.
12 Comments
|
Rauner’s money
Tuesday, Dec 17, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Tribune…
If Chicago-area voters think they’ve seen a lot of Republican governor candidate Bruce Rauner on television lately, there’s a reason: He’s spent nearly $1.5 million on ads that began in mid-November and will wrap up before Christmas. […]
For Rauner, a wealthy equity investor from Winnetka, it’s a way for a first-time candidate to introduce himself to the public. His latest ad, which ran during Sunday’s Bears game, promotes his support for term limits. Though most voters won’t start to focus on the March 18 governor primary until well after the holidays, Rauner is spending nearly $300,000 a week during a five-week period. […]
The ad buy records also shed light on the audience Rauner is seeking. His campaign team is placing ads on programs in which audiences skew older — age 55 and above — rather than viewers ages 24 to 55 that traditional advertisers try to reach.
That strategy is in keeping with the demographic of Illinois Republican primary voters. In the 2012 GOP presidential primary in Illinois, nearly three-quarters of voters were 44 and older, network exit poll resulted showed, with a quarter of voters 65 and older.
He’s advertising a lot on Fox News.
One of the more interesting bits of feedback I’ve yet heard about Rauner’s new ad on this website is that it’s the clearest signal yet to Springfield “insiders” that the candidate has a ton of money to burn and will burn it at will. Candidates don’t advertise here because it’s too expensive and targeted for their purposes. Rauner just doesn’t care.
But because he may have wanted to send a message, it was money worth spending. We’ll see.
55 Comments
|
Golden Horseshoe Awards
Tuesday, Dec 17, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The 2013 Golden Horseshoe Award for Best Illinois State Representative - Democrat was almost unanimous. Rep. Greg Harris…
Have to go with Greg Harris. He not only passed landmark legislation like the marriage bill, but what is not so known is his work as an Appropriation Chair and the headaches and demands that go along with that.
He spent countless hours working with the state human services agencies crafting a budget that protected vital services at a time many were calling for more cuts. He also crafted legislation which made key changes in how abuse and neglect of those with disabilities is reported. When he was done crafting the bill, he moved it through the process quickly and without asking for any credit.
The work on human services issues is not flashy and is at times gut wrenching when dealing with issues that have profound impact on people’s lives yet Harris still does it, does it well and does it without drawing attention to his work.
Harris had a year many lawmakers can only dream about.
* Several folks also nominated Speaker Madigan, and not for the usual “he controls everything anyway” reasons, so he’s our runner-up…
Madigan is a closer. He made sure that SSM and pension reform passed. He voted for MMJ. He proved his worth as a leader. He took a stand against corporate welfare and has the quote of the year, to me. When he was told that ADM wants an answer on tax breaks by the end of the year, he said: “Okay, well that’s nice.” Brusque.
* The 2013 Golden Horseshoe Award for Best Illinois State Representative - Republican is a tie…
Rep. Ed Sullivan. While most floor leaders historically just drone on, both sides of the aisle actually listen to Sullivan because he is to-the-point and has a thoughtful perspective. Furthermore, as seen with the death penalty, marriage equality, and pension reform, he is not afraid of a tough vote.
And…
For Republican, I vote for Ron Sandack, who stood against his party, which is falling out of favor with voters in many ways. Mr. Sandack has good sense enough to see that being on the losing side of issues risks harming the future of the party.
Congrats to all. You really deserved it in a way crazy year.
* OK, on to today’s category…
* Best Illinois State Senator - Democrat
* Best Illinois State Senator - Republican
Don Harmon and Matt Murphy won last year, in case you have trouble remembering these things.
Remember, it’s absolutely necessary to explain your vote. A simple name or a quick drive-by won’t be counted. Thanks!
34 Comments
|
* I suggested months ago that there was something not quite right about the state’s first “medical marijuana clinic,” so I’m glad to see the state is taking some action…
Months before any Illinois residents can legally purchase pot, state regulators have filed a formal complaint against the doctor who opened Good Intentions LLC, the first medical marijuana clinic in Illinois.
The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, which inspected the clinic shortly after it opened in August in Wicker Park, said today that Dr. Brian Murray charged for “pre-certification for medical cannabis without conducting physical examinations” or “establishing a legitimate physician-patient relationship.”
The clinic vigorously disagrees.
“That’s absolutely false,” said Daniel Reid, general manager and spokesman for Good Intentions, which he said has received about 25,000 inquiries from potential patients since August. “He didn’t pre-qualify or anything of the sort.”
* From earlier this year…
On Wednesday, the clinic charged some people a $99 fee for an individual care plan that would later be formulated. […]
Stuart Bander, 50, who said he’s been suffering from multiple sclerosis for 20 years, was disappointed with the staff’s answers to his questions about the law.
“I know more than they do,” he said. “They’re doing nothing.”
* Look, I don’t particularly love the state’s new medical marijuana law. It’s way too restrictive. Just legalize it and get it over with already. But we do have a law now and hinky practices need to be avoided. From an IDFPR press release…
“Unlike some states, Illinois law does not allow for ‘medical cannabis clinics’ or practices that exist solely to offer cannabis certifications,” IDFPR Acting Secretary Manuel Flores said. “We want to make sure that patients who would truly benefit from the relief of medical cannabis are not misled and physicians are not violating the law.”
The Compassionate Use of Medical Cannabis Pilot Program Act does not take effect until January 1, 2014 and rules for administration of the Act have yet to be finalized. The rules will not be adopted until the winter of 2014. Any entity or individuals touting their ability to help with compliance with the Act or offering services in furtherance of obtaining medical cannabis before rules are adopted should be treated with extreme caution.
The Act only permits a physician who has a bona fide physician-patient relationship and is treating the patient’s qualifying debilitating medical condition to certify them for use of medical cannabis. A physician may only accept payment from a patient for the fee associated with the required medical examination prior to certifying a patient for use of medical cannabis. Physicians cannot accept payment for the certification itself.
There is no specialty in medicine that treats all the various qualifying debilitating medical conditions listed in the Act. This means that one physician could not properly treat all patients eligible to use medical cannabis. Additionally, IDFPR would not consider a physician to be treating a patient for a condition if the only treatment being provided is a written authorization for the used of medical cannabis.
Any physician advertising as a “medical cannabis clinic” will immediately fall under the Department’s scrutiny. It may be appropriate for a specialist who treats one or more of the debilitating medical conditions to advertise that they are open to providing written authority. But, it is not appropriate for a physician to advertise that the purpose of the clinic is to provide such written authorization.
* Lou…
“We did that to avoid what happened in California,” where physician offices or even websites were created solely to provide ID cards for medical marijuana, said Rep. Lou Lang, D-Skokie, a principal author of the law. “It’s a sham. We have no intention under our law to create a sham.”
24 Comments
|
Brady actually has taxable income this time
Tuesday, Dec 17, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Perhaps the biggest story about Sen. Bill Brady releasing his 2012 tax returns yesterday was that he actually paid taxes.
You’ll recall that Brady only reluctantly released his returns in the 2010 campaign, and when he did we found out that he didn’t pay state or federal income taxes in 2008 and no federal income taxes in 2009, which was partly because his businesses were so hard hit by the recession. From a Pat Quinn 2010 TV ad…
“We pay millionaire Bill Brady over $76,000 a year as a state senator. And he didn’t pay any federal income taxes?”
* This time around, Brady actually has taxable income to tell us about…
Brady released his 2012 tax returns, showing he paid more than $37,000 in state and federal income tax on $200,529 in income that year. The joint returns with his wife, Nancy, showed $66,998 in wages and salary from his legislative pay and an additional $133,000 from other business and investment income. He did not provide schedules that would offer further details.
Brady paid $28,100 in federal income tax and $9,268 in state taxes, according to the documents. Part of Brady’s legislative salary is not taxable because he elects to place it in a deferred retirement account, his spokesman said.
If you’re keeping score, that’s a 14 percent federal tax rate. Bruce Rauner’s rate last year was 19 percent. Gov. Pat Quinn’s rate was just under 18 percent.
That’s somewhat important to note because of the uproar over presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s rate…
The news is out that Mitt Romney paid a 14.1% effective tax rate on an income of over $13.7 million in 2011, a number that will strike many people as high but that is actually artificially inflated. He didn’t fully deduct all his charitable contributions in order to make sure his effective rate stayed above 13 percent.
* Back to Brady…
“Like many, we are on a slow climb out of a deep hole, but we are not yet out of that hole,” Brady said in a prepared statement issued Monday. “We have worked through many challenges over the last six years. Like others, we have downsized, liquidated assets and retooled our strategies. These have been tough and sometimes painful decisions, but they were necessary.” […]
While Rauner said he would put his extensive business holdings in a blind trust, Brady on Monday said his businesses do not present any current or future conflict with the responsibilities of being governor.
Discuss.
24 Comments
|
Comments Off
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|