Candidate filing begins
Monday, Nov 17, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I don’t know if anybody cares or not, but the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners sent out a list of candidates who filed this morning. Rahm Emanuel was the only major candidate who filed for mayor. And, so far 124 candidates have filed to run in the city’s 50 wards. Click here to see the list. And the Tribune has a brief look at some of the contested races. Click here for that.
I was in the 4th Ward shortly before the election and there were people all over the place with clipboards attempting to get folks onto the ballot.
…Adding… Greg Hinz…
No one yet has filed either for city treasurer or clerk. But a total of 124 candidates is running for alderman, an average of about two and a half for each of the city’s 50 wards, but less than 167 that filed first thing in 2011.
In nine wards that in general are represented by entrenched incumbents, only the incumbent filed. Those are the 12th, 13th, 14th, 30th, 32nd, 40th 42nd, 48th and 50th wards.
No incumbent filed in three wards. Those are the 2nd, in which the current alderman, Fioretti, is running for mayor; and the 36th and 38th wards. Incumbent 38th Ward Ald. Tim Cullerton is retiring, but neighboring Ald. Nicholas Sposato is running in the 36th after his ward was changed very substantially in reapportionment.
In a couple of other aldermanic notes of interest, Patrick Daley Thompson, grandson of Mayor Richard J. Daley and nephew of Mayor Richard M. Daley, filed to run in the family’s 11th Ward Bridgeport fiefdom, as expected. And Lincoln Park Ald. Michele Smith, 43rd, drew two challengers with the possibility of more to come.
38 Comments  
|
Question of the day
Monday, Nov 17, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* On election day, I posted this photo of Bruce Rauner casting his ballot…
An eagle eyed commenter noted at the time that Rauner had voted against retaining all judges.
* The president of the Lesbian and Gay Bar Association of Chicago, John Litchfield, penned an open letter to Rauner about his votes and Jack Leyhane published it…
Dear Mr. Rauner,
A photo of you published on November 5, 2014 with your completed ballot indicates that you voted “No” on every judicial candidate for retention to the Cook County bench, according to Republican Judge James G. Riley’s letter to the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin (published on November 10, 2014, and enclosed here for your reference). I, too, saw the photograph referenced by Judge Riley, and am disappointed to see that it confrrms his account.
This means you voted not to retain even the stars of the bench, the leaders and stand-outs, the innovators and those working to bring peace and resolution to families in our communities. Judges, perhaps more so than any of the elected officials in our state, have a direct and lasting impact on the lives of Illinoisans on a daily basis - whether it be petitioners in bankruptcy, divorce court, or child custody, or defendants in criminal cases or eviction proceedings. The issues our judiciary grapples with are deeply personal to the citizens of our state who deserve only the best on the bench.
Judge Riley’s letter is correct: the 2014 class of retention candidates enjoyed better bar ratings than most previous classes; no 2014 candidate received less than 50% “Yes” recommendations from rating bar associations; and only eight of 73 had any “No” recommendations at all. Prior classes of retention candidates have usually featured at least one or two with 100% negative bar ratings.
* The Question: Do you agree with Bruce Rauner’s decision to vote against retaining all Cook County judges? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
survey solutions
139 Comments
|
The ground game
Monday, Nov 17, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Chip is entitled to gloat…
“This was the biggest Republican win for governor or senator since Jim Edgar. We did it because we won all the moderates outright,” Rauner campaign manager Chip Englander said. “We won a higher percentage of Democrats while winning more Republicans and more conservatives than [Mark] Kirk or [Bill] Brady did.
“We had a ground game that nobody saw coming,” Englander said. “This was the biggest race in America. This race literally is one of the all-time greatest … I think we ran the best campaign in the country.”
Englander held up the victory as a model for not just future GOP candidates in Illinois but one for the nation.
Like I said, he’s entitled to gloat. It was an impressive performance all around. It obviously helped, of course, that his candidate was rich and willing to spend…
“They think this is the new model? Are any of them of legal age? Are they old enough to vote? I say that sarcastically, but the only thing new about the model is this guy dumps in $27 million of his own dollars. That’s the only thing new,” said Charles N. Wheeler III, director of the public affairs reporting program at the University of Illinois at Springfield.
Wheeler said Rauner pulled from the same historical playbook used by previous Republican governors: social moderate, fiscal conservative. “That’s the exact way that Jim Thompson, Jim Edgar and Gov. Ryan won. That’s exactly how they’ve won statewide.”
If by “model,” Chip means a socially moderate candidate who pays attention to the ground game and runs as an outsider, he’s right. But Charlie’s right, too. If your model depends on a really rich guy with cash to burn, then that’s not an easily replicated model.
* Also, Rauner didn’t have the advantage of a Republican patronage machine that those other governors had. He had to build his own ground game from the, um, ground up.
Without the governor’s office, the Democrats still have Cook County and the city to fortify them, which is a fallback position the Republicans haven’t had and why the party’s ground game completely collapsed post George. Rauner recognized this early on and was willing to fund a revival. It worked.
69 Comments
|
Poll: Undecideds ahead of Emanuel
Monday, Nov 17, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* A three-way race could send hizzoner to a runoff, according to a new poll conducted by Lake Research Partners for the Chicago Teachers Union…
In a three-way contest among Emanuel, Cook County Commissioner Jesus “Chuy” Garcia, and 2nd Ward Alderman Bob Fioretti, if the election were held today, Emanuel takes 33 percent of the vote; Garcia snags 18 percent, and Fioretti, 13 percent [with 36 percent undecided …]
When the race is narrowed to a head-to-head contest between Emanuel and Chuy, the race closes to only 5 points; 36 percent to Emanuel, 31 percent for Garcia, and 30 percent undecided. […]
By a more than a two-to-one margin, undecided voters view Rahm more unfavorably (62 percent) than favorably (26 percent). […]
Chicagoans are dissatisfied with the direction of the city with just 35 percent say things are headed in the right direction, while 50 percent say things are heading in the wrong direction, according to the poll.
That’s a lot of undecideds. Emanuel ain’t toast yet, but, man, if he’s really at 33 and 36 percent are undecided after almost four years on the job and most of those undecideds view him unfavorably, he’s starting to look just a wee bit crispy around the edges.
39 Comments
|
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
With the state legislative veto session upon us, lawmakers have an opportunity to do something good for small businesses in Illinois and their employees. They have the opportunity to vote yes on Senate Bill 2758 – a bill that will promote private savings and give small businesses in our state a competitive advantage in the marketplace.
SB2758 - the Illinois Secure Choice Savings Program – is a commonsense solution that will give small businesses the opportunity to provide a retirement account for their employees. Across the country, nearly 80% of small business employees don’t have access to a retirement savings plan at work (compared to only 22% of large business employees). Senate Bill 2758 will help to level the playing field for small businesses, giving them the opportunity to more effectively attract and retain qualified workers in a competitive hiring market.
So, what are small businesses saying about SB2758?
“Secure Choice is a win-win for the financial industry and the community.”
-Martin Cabrera Jr of Cabrera Capital (Chicago)
“[Secure Choice] allows me to attract and retain quality employees as well as provide an added value without the added burden and expenses levied on small businesses.”
Excell Lewis of XL Academics (Rockford)
AARP is proud to stand with small businesses across the state who support the Illinois Secure Choice Savings Program and we urge lawmakers to vote YES on Senate Bill 2758.
Comments Off
|
* My Crain’s Chicago Business column…
Wealthy trial lawyers could very well end up being the unsung heroes of Illinois residents who earn only the minimum wage.
Why? It’s all about leverage.
Ever since GOP candidate Bruce Rauner was caught saying he would cut the state’s minimum wage, or even abolish it altogether, he has claimed that he really wants to increase the minimum wage to $10 an hour, but only if it’s tied to things like tort reform and an overhaul of the state’s workers’ compensation program.
Trial lawyers make their money by suing people and corporations, whether it’s a doctor who allegedly committed malpractice, a corporation that allegedly polluted a local water supply or a company that employed a worker injured on the job.
Click here to read the rest before commenting, please. Thanks!
17 Comments
|
* The Paul Simon Public Policy Institute polled Rep. Mike Zalewski’s controversial anti-crime bill…
Some have proposed that the mandatory minimum sentence for those convicted of a felony involving a firearm should be increased from two years to three years. Would you favor or oppose this proposal?
Strongly favor 36.8%
Favor 30.0%
Oppose 16.0%
Strongly oppose 6.5%
Other/Don’t know 10.7%
Some have proposed a law requiring that convicted felons who have been found guilty of illegally carrying firearms would have to serve at least 85 percent of their sentence. Some
people a) support the law because they say it would make our laws more of a deterrent against violent gun crimes, and would take some of the most dangerous people off the streets and some people b) oppose the law because they say it would cost too much to house more people in already overcrowded prisons, and they worry that some law-abiding people might be imprisoned by this stricter law.
Which comes closer to your opinion, that
Convicted felons should serve at least 85 percent of their gun crime sentences 64.5%
We should not impose mandatory minimum sentences on felons convicted of gun crimes 25.2%
Other/Don’t know 10.2%
* From the Institute…
“Regardless of political affiliation or region of the state, these poll results show widespread public support for increasing to three years the mandatory minimum sentence for gun-involved felonies and Truth-in-Sentencing,” said Delio Calzolari, a lawyer and associate director of the Institute.
When broken out by region and political party, the poll found:
• Minimum Sentencing / Region. Support for increased minimum sentencing is over 60 percent throughout the state. In Chicago, 66.0 percent favor and 24.0 percent oppose with 10.0 percent undecided. Downstate shows the weakest support with 63.4 percent in favor, 22.1 percent opposed and 14.5 percent undecided. The strongest support comes from the Chicago Suburbs with 69.2 percent in favor, 22.1 percent opposed and 8.7 percent undecided.
• Minimum Sentencing / Political Party. Statewide, Republicans and Democrats show similar support in favor of bumping the minimum sentence from two to three years. 69.9 percent of Republicans favored the proposal as did 68.0 percent of Democrats. Republican opposition was 21.2 percent with 8.9 percent undecided. Democrat opposition was 23.2 percent with 8.8 percent undecided. Of those identifying themselves as Independent, 62.0 percent favored the proposal, 24.1 percent opposed and 13.9 percent were undecided.
• Truth-in-Sentencing/ Region. The greatest support for requiring felons to serve 85 percent of their prison sentence versus no mandatory minimum was Downstate, where 67.0 percent supported the 85 percent sentences and 21.5 percent chose no mandatory sentences. There were 11.6 percent undecided. The weakest support for Truth-in-Sentencing was in Chicago where 61.5 percent of respondents chose requiring felons to serve at least 85 percent of their sentences, 26.0 percent chose no mandatory minimum sentencing, and 12.5 percent were undecided. In the Chicago suburbs, 64.2 percent of respondents chose the 85 percent minimum sentence, 27.2 percent chose the option for no minimum sentencing, and 8.5 percent were undecided.
• Truth-in-Sentencing/ Political Party. Republicans favored this Truth in Sentencing proposal more than Democrats. Almost seven in ten Republicans (69.1 percent) chose the Truth in Sentencing proposal option as opposed to 65.3 percent of Democrats and 61.5 percent of Independents. Alternatively, 23.0 percent of Republicans, 24.7 percent of Democrats and 28.3 percent of Independents chose the option that minimum sentences should not be imposed on felons. Undecided Republicans, Democrats and Independents were 7.8 percent, 10.0 percent and 10.2 percent respectively.
• Combined Results/ Analysis Support softens when the policies are combined. Combined results show 51.5 percent of Illinoisans favor both the increased minimum sentencing and believe that convicted felons should serve at least 85% of prison sentences. Only 11.5 percent oppose both the sentencing increase and hold opinions closer to no minimum sentencing.
Emphasis added.
15 Comments
|
Madigan being Madigan, as Rauner shies away
Monday, Nov 17, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Doug Finke has a good story about Speaker Madigan’s new plan to set up the Lincoln Library and Museum as its own state agency…
The House State Government Administration Committee is scheduled to consider Madigan’s plan to make the presidential library and museum its own state agency. The latest version is proposed as an amendment to Senate Bill 218, which the Senate could approve quickly if it first passes the House.
“I think it’s up in the air right now,” said committee chairman Rep. Jack Franks, D-Marengo. “When we had our hearing up in Chicago, I wanted to give the interested parties an opportunity to get together and try to come up with some solutions to the structure. My suggestion to the speaker is to hear what these guys have been working on as opposed to necessarily moving a bill at this point. But he may have a different perspective.”
Franks didn’t even know about Madigan’s new bill when I called him over a week ago. That’s Madigan’s way.
* But “Madigan’s way” is more than a little premature. There’s a review board in place and it will make recommendations by January 15th. The board is being assisted by Brent Glass, the former director of the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of American History.
Passing legislation just because it’s Madigan’s bill (and because he wants to save the hide of the current advisory board’s executive director, who just happens to be the significant other of his 13th Ward district office landlord) before that review board has had a chance to weigh in would be a huge mistake…
“There are a lot of smart people looking at this issue and trying to figure out the best way to operate the library and museum so it pursues its mission as well as possible,” said Chris Wills, spokesman for the Historic Preservation Agency. “It won’t help anybody to rush and pass legislation before these people have a chance to offer their advice.”
* But this is interesting…
Rauner’s staff did not respond to a question about his position on making the library and museum a separate department.
I got a no comment when I asked them about this ten days ago.
16 Comments
|
Hoist with their own petard
Monday, Nov 17, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Peoria…
One local senator, Darin LaHood of Dunlap, sees the last few years of fall and lame-duck sessions as travesties, with legislation that has been foisted on Illinoisans without due consideration or due consequences for voters. He has two measures introduced that would effectively prohibit colleagues from voting on major measures between an election and when their terms end.
“The reason why we have a lame-duck session — or we should — is in case of an emergency, a catastrophe, something happens,” he said last week. “That’s the reason why it’s there, not to go in there and pass a piece of legislation you know you don’t have the votes for in a regular session.”
Particularly for those leaving office (and especially for those just defeated for re-election), the “problem is when you have lame-duck votes, you’re not accountable to the people that elected you,” LaHood argues. […]
“You’re not sworn in for part of your term, every day counts. Every day of your term, you have to be ready to do your job,” the Chicago Tribune quoted Quinn as saying late last week. “And I would say to all the legislators, this is not holiday time, this is working time.”
I tend to side with Gov. Quinn on this issue, but with a big caveat.
* In hindsight, which is always 20/20, the lame duck income tax hike bill was terribly flawed. Yes, the state was facing a “catastrophe” without those revenues. But the bill itself was poorly thought out, mainly because it was thrown together in such haste.
A big problem, one even admitted to by Senate President John Cullerton, is that the tax was set to expire in the middle of a fiscal year. The thought at the time was that they could use the threat of looming cuts to overcome 2014 campaign objections about the tax itself. But killing off much of the tax hike in mid-stream caused some real budgetary problems. And, of course, the threat of looming cuts never really worked.
* And that brings us to the second big problem: Hubris. The initial step-down from 5 to 3.75 is so big and so sudden that it can’t easily (or even possibly) be absorbed, leading many to figure that the “temporary” aspect was all a ruse from the start. It probably was a ruse, but they could’ve at least started with some baby steps, say half a point every year or two, just in case their plan didn’t work and the Democrats didn’t hold onto the governor’s mansion.
Instead, we now have a huge fiscal crisis facing this state and no politically easy way out of it.
* The lesson here is that bills with massive impact need to be more carefully considered. Yes, I know that the harsh political calculus often works against that. You come up with something you can pass and then pass it before the bottom falls out. But that calculus depends on rank and file members trusting that their leaders have concocted the right approach. The income tax hike clearly shows that the Democratic leadership utterly failed to do that.
The Speaker is often praised for looking at every possible angle before making a move. But he obviously didn’t do that here, and neither did Cullerton and Quinn. As always, they figured they were smarter than everyone else, and it turned out this time that they weren’t.
/rant
36 Comments
|
“I get nowhere unless the team wins”
Monday, Nov 17, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* A Republican legislator who most believe is actively auditioning for an agency directorship…
[GOP Senator Dave Syverson] voted against the temporary tax increase in 2011, when it was passed into law by the General Assembly. However, with a new governor coming in and the tax set to automatically roll back 2% in January, the issue is once again being debated by the Illinois General Assembly. “If the tax comes off in January, in the next 6 months we are going to end up with a multi-million dollar [budget] hole,” said Senator Syverson.
Without that money, Syverson warns that schools, daycares, and nursing home staff will not get paid. On top of that, the state will owe them interest.
First, it is automatically rolling back to 3.75 percent from 5. That’s not a 2 percent rollback. Second, the hole is multi-billion dollars deep.
* But, whatever. Syverson is obviously a team player. He will take any politically unpopular vote necessary to help his state - now that we have a Republican governor-elect, of course. Nevermind that he’s being mentioned as a potential director of the Department of Insurance. That potential personal advancement has nothing whatsoever to do with his profound courage. It’s the right thing to do.
No snark intended.
OK, well, maybe a little.
But, hey, take him at his word. He wants to help, and that’s not a bad thing.
* By contrast, here’s a Republican legislator who’s obviously not interested in “the team” and is therefore still clinging to the old magic beans solution…
However, Representative Joe Sosnowski (R) believes the state can save money from other funds to cover the projected income deficit. He says there’s half a billion dollars sitting in Medicaid alone that the state can save. “My feeling is, before we look to extending [the income tax,] we really need to look at our spending and what reforms we can do,” said Representative Sosnowski.
Stay away from baseball bats, Joe. [/snark because metaphor]
That clip may be a little harsh for morning (or work) viewing. Be advised.
44 Comments
|
Dealing with Madigan
Monday, Nov 17, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…
Last December, Bruce Rauner appeared on a WLS Radio talk show and revealed that he planned to form a new campaign committee to counter the power of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.
“We’re gonna raise a PAC, we’re gonna raise a fund dedicated to the state legislature, members of both parties who take the tough votes,” Rauner said. “We’ve gotta protect the members who take tough votes.”
“Right now,” Rauner continued, “Madigan controls the legislature from his little pot of cash. It isn’t that much money. And he runs the whole state government out of that pot. We need a pro-business, pro-growth, pro-limited-government, pro-tax-reduction PAC down there in Springfield working with the legislature for those who take tough votes.”
Word is that Rauner’s new legislative PAC will be launched relatively soon – perhaps after the governor-elect’s transition committee has finished its job.
Rod Blagojevich tried the same thing with his Move Illinois Forward PAC several years ago. As I pointed out on my blog when Rauner revealed his plans, Blagojevich’s PAC didn’t work out all that well, partly because Blagojevich was relying on a Democratic donor base that didn’t want to step on Madigan’s toes.
Rauner, of course, won’t have that problem. And he also has plenty of his own cash.
But how “little” is Madigan’s “pot of cash”? Well, the House Republicans believe that when it’s all said and done, Madigan and his candidates will have spent $10 million.
An Election Day tally showed that Madigan had raised $5.7 million during the cycle, but add in the money raised by his targeted candidates and the total rises to $10.6 million, plus another $290,000 in reported independent expenditures. The tally was conducted by Kent Redfield, an emeritus professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Springfield.
House Republican Leader Jim Durkin’s committees raised $4 million, but add a million dollars in independent expenditures and the money raised by Durkin’s candidates (much of it from contributions by the state Republican Party – via Rauner) and Durkin’s number rises to almost $7.9 million.
What Rauner is attempting to do here is strengthen his own hand as governor and maybe try to entice some of Madigan’s members into breaking party ranks on occasion.
But Madigan controls just about every aspect of a House Democrat’s existence. Everything from office and staff assignments to committee assignments to bills getting called to patronage and perks such as his numerous season tickets at Chicago sports stadiums – you gotta go through him. And if you try the nectar of a competing sugar daddy, things can get ugly.
But more competition is probably good for the system, as long as it doesn’t escalate into Blagojevichian levels of insanity.
But the governor-elect might want to also take a few minutes and read a Chicago Sun-Times story from 2012 in which Speaker Madigan explained what he most respected about the seven governors he had served with.
Actually, he didn’t say anything nice about the imprisoned Blagojevich, and didn’t have too many kind words for our outgoing governor, Pat Quinn. But he did heap praise on two Republicans: Jim Thompson and George Ryan.
Of Thompson, who was governor for a record 14 years, Madigan said that he was “a very intelligent person, a quick learner, very flexible. He understood … that you need to fashion compromise if you need to move forward.”
Of Ryan, who like Madigan was once the Illinois House speaker, he said: “George would say, ‘We’ve got problems. What do we have to do to solve these problems?’ A [legislative] leader might want to evade the question; he might have a strategic plan they’re working and don’t want to answer today. And George would just pursue, persist: ‘I want an answer!’”
Former Governor Jim Edgar accompanied Rauner on his final campaign swing. Of him, Madigan was less effusive in his praise: “a little more strident than Governor Thompson … more willing to engage in protracted negotiations in order to get what he wanted, especially out of the budget.” Even so, Madigan and Edgar did get plenty of things done.
Rauner will obviously have his own style, and he’ll have his own battles that will have to be fought with Madigan. But there’s no getting around the man. If the governor-elect meant it when he said on election night that he wants to find bipartisan solutions to the state’s many problems, he’ll notice how Madigan admires governors who forcefully attempt to overcome problems and move the state forward. He can be worked with.
* More from that 2012 article…
Madigan was most effusive in his praise for convicted former Gov. George Ryan, calling him “very flexible, very interested in just identifying problems and fashioning solutions.”
Ryan’s favorite approach was to gather all four legislative leaders in a room to work a deal, Madigan recalled. That would include Madigan; Daniels, who invited Madigan to speak and who fondly recalled the “two wonderful years” he wrested power from Madigan; former Senate President James “Pate” Philip, and former Senate Democratic leader Emil Jones. […]
Recalling one meeting, Madigan said, “George Ryan wanted a capital program. There were going to be fee increases, tax increases. He started with me. I told him ‘I’m for it — I think you oughta make it bigger.’ He got to Pate Philip. There’s a favorite method in the Legislature with the legislative leaders. The leader doesn’t want to look at the governor and tell him ‘No.’ So they blame their caucus members: ‘Our caucus won’t agree to that.’ Pate used to refer to his caucus members as ‘gorillas.’ It’s true: ‘My gorillas don’t like that.’
“There was this pause. Ryan just looked at him and he said, ‘You said that to me after everything I’ve done for you?’ And then he took him out of the room, took him into a separate room, and closed the door. There was a lot of screaming and shouting. They both came back and sat down and George looked at Pate and Pate said, ‘Governor, there will be enough votes to pass your bill.’ That was George’s method — very effective.”
25 Comments
|
TrackBill – An Introduction
Monday, Nov 17, 2014 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Attention government affairs professionals!
If you are someone who works hard to stay up to date on active legislation, you probably spend too many hours of your life slogging through multiple antiquated government websites. Do you ever wonder how much time you could save if you didn’t have to dig up this information manually?
TrackBill may be just the answer you are looking for.
TrackBill provides a platform that allows you to easily search, track, and report on legislation in all 50 states and the U.S. Congress. TrackBill’s intelligent search technology updates you within five minutes of any changes in the status of bills you are tracking.
While browsing online or checking TrackBill’s iOS/Android app, subscribers can use keywords to quickly find the information they need – anywhere, anytime. TrackBill will keep you up to speed with real-time alerts via email, text message, or push notification.
TrackBill also generates an automatic calendar of your committee hearings, ready to sync to your phone with the click of a button. If you need to keep stakeholders informed about your research, you can use TrackBill’s Custom Reporting feature which creates personalized reports, branded with your logo.
Click here to learn more about TrackBill.
Comments Off
|
|
Comments Off
|
Good morning!
Monday, Nov 17, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* When the old party is voted out and the new party is voted in, hundreds of decent, talented people get kicked to the patronage curb. I was friends with many of them twelve years ago, and the same goes for many of them again today.
Like before, most will be OK. But the state’s one-year “revolving door” law means that not everybody will land on their feet this time around. To me, the law doesn’t make a lick of sense during a political party shift. It ought to be suspended.
But, whatever, this song is for those folks…
We’ve all had our ups and downs
It’s been mostly down around here
34 Comments
|
Allen: “It’s a steaming heap of letter”
Saturday, Nov 15, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
[Comments now opened.]
* Jim Allen with the Chicago elections board appeared with Rep. Tom Cross’ attorney Bill Quinlan on Fox Chicago Sunday with Mike Flannery to discuss Quinlan’s letter to the board alleging irregularities in the counting process and the board’s detailed response. And, yes, that’s the same Bill Quinlan who served as Rod Blagojevich’s chief counsel back in the day. It’s a must-watch…
* Meanwhile, the latest from Scott Kennedy…
UPDATE: 11/15 (11:00am)
I checked every election authority that has public data on a website this morning and the only further update was in Clark County where 3 new votes were added, all for Tom Cross. The new margin is Cross by 381 votes.
Also, Tom Kacich of the Champaign News-Gazette has some more information about the votes expected to be made public early next week in east central Illinois.
Later this afternoon I will have some info on what to expect this upcoming week when the clerks finalize their totals.
* From Kacich…
Hundreds of new votes will be counted in East Central Illinois next week in the state treasurer’s race, where Oswego Republican Tom Cross holds a thin lead over Champaign Democrat Mike Frerichs.
Most of the new votes, though, will come from Champaign County.
County Clerk Gordy Hulten said Friday that he expected between 475 and 500 new Champaign County votes would be added to the existing totals when late-arriving absentee and provisional votes are counted Tuesday morning. […]
In Champaign County, Hulten said, it appears there will be 325 late-arriving absentee ballots to count, plus about 150 provisional ballots. The Frerichs campaign hopes those ballots equal or exceed the 52.85 percent that Frerichs had unofficially in his home county on election night.
* Moving right along, the Frerichs campaign is trying very hard to shift the media’s focus away from Chicago and onto Downstate. I’m not sure they’ll ever win that argument. But it’s clear to me that they, at least, don’t want to make this about the votes left to count in Chicago and Cook County…
Updated vote totals released [yesterday] by the Frerichs campaign show him trailing Republican Tom Cross by only 312 votes as tallies came in across downstate Illinois. The downstate Democrat has received nearly half a million votes from the 95 counties of downstate Illinois, a number the Democrat says he must breach in order to win the hotly contested election. Current unofficial totals from all 110 election authorities across Illinois give Frerichs 498,225 votes in downstate Illinois, compared to: 477,439 in Chicago; 353,055 in suburban Cook County; and 342,309 in the six collar counties of DuPage, Lake, McHenry, Kane, Kendall and Will.
The Frerichs campaign says that as vote totals from mail-in ballots have been tallied in recent days from downstate Illinois, Frerichs has performed better than they had expected in downstate counties. In addition, Frerichs’ campaign notes that they have actually edged out Cross in ballot-counting in Republican-controlled Kane County since election day, receiving 1020 votes to 1015 for Cross. Frerichs says that while there are still tens of thousands of ballots to be counted from Rockford to Illinois’ southern tip of Alexander County, the current trend is in their favor.
“Mike Frerichs is from a farming family in downstate Illinois, we ran a positive campaign focused on his efforts to boost the economy, and we worked hard to earn the vote of downstate Illinois,” says campaign spokesperson Dave Clarkin. “Polls leading up to Election Day showed this race statistically tied, and the vote totals have seesawed back and forth as tens of thousands of ballots have been counted. However, those vote totals have clearly been seesawing in our favor all across the state, and it is a trend we hope to see continue as the tens of thousands of remaining ballots are counted.”
Yes, they’re not doing too badly in Downstate, but it’s my view they can say the “current trend is in their favor” (although it remains to be seen whether that’s true) because a ton of votes are not yet counted in Chicago and Cook.
…Adding… A quick e-mail from Kevin Artl…
I appreciate the “downstate roots” argument, but c’mon. There is no reason to suggest the spreads on these counties will significantly change when their remaining votes are counted. Furthermore, the spreads are very solid for Cross, overwhelming double digit wins across every downstate media market. In fact, Frerichs lost every media market outside of Chicago by double digits, including 6 by 20 points or greater, even though his campaign outspent Cross almost 6:1 on downstate TV.
Mike Frerichs hometown media market (Champaign/Springfield/Decautr): Cross wins 57-39
Evansville: 70-26
Paducah: 59-35
Peoria: 59-37
Quad Cities: 53-42
Quincy: 61-35
Rockford: 59-37
St. Louis: 55-40
Terre Haute: 67-29
Media market info is from Scott Kennedy’s site.
Frerichs won 6 counties.
Cook, Vermillion (Senate District and only by a few hundred), Champaign (Senate District), Rock Island (few hundred), Alexander and Fulton. The largest spread was obviously in Cook (Chicago included), the rest were all single digit spreads.
Vermillion, Champaign, Rock Island, Alexander and Fulton account for about 16% of the remaining votes to be cast in the Collars and Downstate. The 96 counties Cross won (the overwhelming majority by double digits) account for 84% of the remaining votes to be counted outside of Cook and Chicago.
…Adding More… It never ends with these guys. Frerichs campaign…
Tom Cross stated time and gain he needed to garner 20 percent of the vote in Chicago to win, while the Frerichs campaign believed we had an opportunity to outperform in downstate Illinois. Tom Cross came up short in Chicago with only 19.47% on election night (compared to 20.6% for Rutherford in 2010), while we are largely succeeding.
In downstate, Tom Cross is performing 2% lower and 60,000 votes worse than Dan Rutherford did in 2010, while Mike Frerichs is receiving tens of thousands of more votes than Democrats did in 2010 in downstate. For example:
Dan Rutherford won Champaign County by 12,000 votes in 2010, Mike Frerichs is on pace to win it by 5,000 this year, a 17,000 vote net loss for Cross.
Cross is winning Adams County on the other side of the state with 63% of the vote, but Dan Rutherford won it with 69% of the vote, a net loss of 3,000 votes for Tom Cross.
That is not to say that there were not bright spots for the Cross campaign downstate on election day, but on the whole Tom Cross under-performed Dan Rutherford (a downstate candidate) by 60,000 votes downstate and 140,000 votes statewide.
In downstate, Frerichs has seen a net gain of 235 votes since election day. The Cross campaign correctly point out that is not statistically significant to the overall vote total. What is significant is that Tom Cross needs the downstate mail-in and provisional ballots to go sharply in the other direction and they are not. Moreover, there is no reason to expect provisional ballots to trend sharply in Tom Cross’s favor downstate. If anything, we expect same-day ballots cast from Rockford to SIU-Carbondale and from SIU-Edwardsville to Danville to trend even more in Frerichs’ favor.
Mike Frerichs is currently receiving more votes from downstate than from the city of Chicago, a trend that will hold.
28 Comments
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
   
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|
