* Tribune…
A federal bankruptcy judge said Tuesday afternoon that Gov.-elect Bruce Rauner’s former investment firm won’t be held responsible for a fraudulent scheme to avoid liability in costly nursing home death lawsuits. […]
The judge found that those partners, headed by New York businessmen Murray Forman and Leonard Grunstein, were responsible for a ruse to hide the assets after the 2006 purchase of nursing home assets from the GTCR-controlled company. […]
[Judge Michael G. Williamson] called GTCR’s investment in the nursing home business “a financial disaster” triggered by misstated earnings that made the business vulnerable to its creditors and landlords starting in 2002. […]
Williamson said he believed [GTCR’s front man in the nursing home business, former principal Edgar D. Jannotta’s] contention that was “duped” by Forman and Grunstein, and said Jannotta had no way of understanding the circumstances around the New York investors’ move to place the liability-ridden subsidiary of the company under the ownership of an elderly graphic artist who had no knowledge of the company.
Wow.
42 Comments
|
Question of the day - Golden Horseshoe Awards
Tuesday, Dec 16, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The 2014 Golden Horseshoe Award for Best Republican Illinois State Senator goes to Matt Murphy. Oswego Willy’s nomination stood out…
In a Caucus that finds itself at times an echo chamber for thenselves to be in agreement with each other, what’s needed to break out of that cycle is someone who is willing to lead and make the case beyond talking points and at times frustration or anger.
Sen. Matt Murphy has consistently been a rational voice in a Minority Caucus that at times seemed pleased to be seen as the “Caucus of No”. Sometimes the way you present your thoughts is even more important than the points you’re making.
Sen. Murphy also understands what his district expects from him and balances his responsibility to his district and the state as well as anyone, and that shows someone who clearly understands who they are and how to serve the people.
I nominate Sen. Matt Murphy in hopes that his thoughtful ways will lead to the Caucus understanding that being for “No” after January won’t be a leadership trait, but working to make the case for what can be done will be embraced more outside the echo chamber.
* The 2014 Golden Horseshoe Award for Best Republican Illinois State Representative goes to Mike Bost…
Representative Mike Bost leaves the Illinois House of Representatives with a legacy of candor and being a tireless advocate for downstate Illinois. The Republican House leadership has a big void to fill.
During this legislative session, he was among a group of only 15 Republican House members who voted “yes” for important legislation that extended the hospital Medicaid Assessment Program and increased Medicaid funding for nursing homes. Although not popular subjects in the Republican Caucus, Representative Bost cast his vote for what he described as “the right thing to do for my district.”
His victory in Congress was achieved in a district that had repeatedly sent a Democrat to Washington, D.C. Bost out - worked the incumbent Democrat and was rewarded with the victory. Congress is gaining an experienced legislator who will not forget from where he came!
Both are well-deserved recipients.
* OK, on to today’s categories, with last year’s winners in parentheses…
* Best Illinois Congresscritter (Mike Quigley)
* Best “Do-Gooder” Lobbyist (Khadine Bennett)
Yes, these are disparate categories. Sorry about that, but we’re running out of time. Please do your best to nominate in both categories and explain your nominations or they won’t count.
36 Comments
|
Everybody just needs to calm down
Tuesday, Dec 16, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Mark Brown…
Ever since the November election, Quinn has seemed either determined to embarrass the people who voted for him — or indifferent when he does so — beginning with his Election Night refusal to concede defeat.
He followed that up with the wrong-headed decision to allow his appointees on the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority to hire his campaign manager for the lucrative job of executive director.
Now, we have him flirting with the idea he has the power to appoint a constitutional officer who could continue to serve until the next election — up to four years into the future. […]
Rauner, for his part, ought to take this opportunity to show he’s going to be the kind of politician he claimed during the campaign by embracing the call for an election that would limit the term of the person he appoints. […]
If this ends up in a court fight at this stage, it’s Quinn’s fault, plain and simple. If Rauner gets in the way of a special election, that’s on him.
While I’m kind of an agnostic on whether we should hold a special election in 2016 (when the Democrats will have a much better shot at picking up that office), I can’t disagree with the rest of Mark’s column.
If Quinn makes this power play, contrary to the attorney general’s constitution opinion, it’ll be yet another stain on his already tarnished legacy. He has two choices here: 1) go out as a statesman or 2) go out as a partisan hack.
* As far as I can see the only politician showing true class in this whole saga has been Speaker Madigan. He has maintained a respectful silence throughout, except to encourage Quinn and Rauner to work things out.
The attorney general has also proved her worth by siding against her own party’s governor because she believes her interpretation of the law and the Constitution are far more important.
Rauner has attempted to interfere with Quinn’s rightful, temporary choice (although I do like Rauner’s suggestion). He has claimed that a special election would be unconstitutional when it clearly is not. Senate President Cullerton has once again rushed to the sound of the guns and flip-flopped along the way.
* And just when I thought I’d seen it all, Sheila Simon attempted to be relevant again with a Tribune op-ed…
Illinois needs a comptroller, and the opportunity to appoint one is an opportunity to consolidate two state offices. With the sudden death last week of Illinois Comptroller Judy Baar Topinka, I recommend that Gov. Pat Quinn and Gov.-elect Bruce Rauner agree to appoint Treasurer-elect Mike Frerichs to serve also as comptroller.
In the races for comptroller and treasurer this year, one of the issues frequently discussed was combining the offices. There was agreement among the candidates, across party lines, that functions of the two offices could be shared.
Most candidates favored a constitutional amendment to achieve the consolidation. I recognized that there was not support in the Illinois House to get this done, so I proposed a speedier way — sharing functions of the two offices through intergovernmental agreement.
Right now our state has the chance to take a shortcut to combining the offices, by having one person serve in both positions.
I’ve heard this suggestion numerous times. And just about every time, I’ve checked in with the Frerichs folks. They have maintained all along that they definitely do not want to get dragged into this mess, but they haven’t yet officially responded to a request for comment about Simon’s op-ed.
Either way, just as Rauner should refrain from telling Quinn whom to appoint, Simon ought to stay out of Rauner’s choice - especially since Frerichs has admirably steered completely clear of this whole mess.
59 Comments
|
*** UPDATED x1 *** Eavesdropping concerns
Tuesday, Dec 16, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Matt Dietrich…
A new version of the 50-year-old Illinois eavesdropping law arrived yesterday on Gov. Pat Quinn’s desk. If signed, it will let Illinois citizens record the actions of law enforcement officers on duty.
For the sake of the many social media conspiracy theorists who have spent the last several days madly posting otherwise, I will repeat: If Gov. Quinn signs this bill into law, you will be able legally to videotape police officers on duty and working in public.
I’m not sure how this caught fire and spread so quickly on Facebook and Twitter, because the whole point of the eavesdropping law revision was to remove language that made it a felony for any citizen to record a law enforcement officer on duty. It was that portion of the eavesdropping law that made it both unconstitutional and absurdly antiquated.
* The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Kwame Raoul, wrote this in the Sun-Times…
Under this proposed law, the public maintains the right to record police because police have no reasonable expectation of privacy while doing their job in public.
The problem with these explanations is the phrase “in public.” I asked the House sponsor of this bill after it passed whether citizens could record police officers while in their own home. That’s not exactly “public.” The sponsor said that situation could be a problem.
* So, I agree with the Illinois Policy Institute on this particular issue…
Under the new bill, a citizen could rarely be sure whether recording any given conversation without permission is legal. The bill would make it a felony to surreptitiously record any “private conversation,” which it defines as any “oral communication between 2 or more persons,” where at least one person involved had a “reasonable expectation” of privacy.
When does the person you’re talking to have a reasonable expectation of privacy? The bill doesn’t say. And that’s not something an ordinary person can be expected to figure out.
A law must be clear enough for citizens to know in advance whether a particular action is a crime. This bill doesn’t meet that standard, which should be reason enough for a court to strike it down if it becomes law.
* Also, Mark Wilson at FindLaw…
Illinois’ new law probably isn’t as bad as the critics claim, but its emphasis on “reasonable expectations of privacy” does mean that there will likely be disputes about enforcement, with police and citizens disagreeing over whether a conversation is private or public.
*** UPDATE *** From Ed Yohnka at the ACLU…
The eavesdropping bill on the Illinois Governor’s desk prohibits the recording of *private* conversations absent all-party consent or a warrant. It defines *private* to mean when a person intends the conversation to be private under circumstances that reasonably justify that expectation. Thus, there will be a statutory limit on recording private conversations, and no limit at all on recording non-private conversations.
When is a conversation private? That term in the Illinois statute is the same or nearly the same as similar terms in the federal eavesdropping statute and scores of state eavesdropping statutes that have been on the books for many decades. A host of judicial decisions, interpreting these statues and also the Fourth Amendment, have addressed whether people have a reasonable expectation of privacy in a variety of conversations involving a variety of circumstances. If the Illinois Governor signs the bill on his desk, the new statute’s line (was the conversation private?) will be interpreted in light of this well-developed body of judicial precedent.
When do police have a reasonable expectation of privacy? Police clearly do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy against recording by civilians when they are on-duty in a public places and speaking at an ordinary volume. This was a holding of *ACLU v. Alvarez*, which protected the First Amendment right of civilians to audio record such non-private police conversations. But this is just one of the many circumstances in which police do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy. On-duty police generally will have no reasonable expectation of privacy when they speak to civilians, including in many non-public places. For example, police cannot reasonably expect to be free from audio recording by a home owner when they enter a private home to enforce a warrant, or by a suspect being interrogated inside a stationhouse interrogation room. *ACLU v. Alvarez* is just one of the many judicial decisions finding that on-duty police lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy against recording by the civilians they speak with. On the other hand, two off-duty police officers might have a reasonable expectation of privacy when they speak together in a squad car with the windows up and no one else present, or whisper to each other in a deserted public park. Whether the location of the conversation is public or private is one relevant factor among many in deciding whether there was a reasonable expectation of privacy.
When do other government employees have a reasonable expectation of privacy? In light of the case law, on-duty government officials who knowingly speak with members of the public as part of the performance of their government jobs will generally not have a reasonable expectation of privacy against civilian recording of those conversations.
25 Comments
|
The power of Joe
Tuesday, Dec 16, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* During the last week of veto session, famed trial lawyer Joe Power (the guy who did more to bring down George Ryan than almost anyone else) showed up in Springfield to testify in favor of a bill that he said was his idea. Power’s bill would cut the number of jurors in civil trials by half and raise their pay. The legislation was said to be cost-neutral and flew out of both chambers over GOP objections.
But it’s not cost neutral…
It would triple the amount Cook County spends on jury pay, from the $3.1 million budgeted in 2015 to $9.5 million. Lake County taxpayers would have to come up with another $500,000. Will County would have to find $300,000.
* And the Tribune expects something else is at work here…
Smaller juries require smaller jury pools, so fewer citizens get those pesky summonses. Six-member juries can be seated more quickly, and their deliberations are shorter. They reach consensus more easily and deadlock less often. They’re more efficient, in other words. But there’s a trade-off.
Larger juries are more diverse, which means they’re more likely to reflect the views of the broader community. The quality of their deliberations is higher — they have better collective recall of the testimony, and the debate is more rigorous. With more voices, it’s less likely that a single juror will dominate the discussion and more likely that a dissenting juror will have an ally.
Most tellingly, larger groups have a moderating effect on the size of jury awards. […]
Given the choice, plaintiffs’ attorneys usually opt for six jurors; attorneys who defend against those lawsuits want 12.
There are times when major legislation needs to be passed in a hurry. This was not one of those times. The Democrats did this as a favor to the trial lawyers because they knew Bruce Rauner wouldn’t back the idea.
* Related…
* Madison County, Illinois named one of the nation’s five worst “judicial hellholes”
33 Comments
|
*** UPDATED x1 *** Rauner to speak on budget
Tuesday, Dec 16, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Oh, this ought to be rich…
Gov.-elect Bruce Rauner plans to speak about the state budget at a Better Government Association event.
Rauner is scheduled to make the remarks today during a luncheon in Springfield.
The event starts at 11:30 at the Sangamo Club. Rauner hasn’t said much about the budget beyond how it’s worse than anybody thought. And the BGA’s Andy Shaw isn’t exactly known for his state budget acumen. But one of the members of Shaw’s “Springfield advisory council” is Mike Lawrence, who has plenty of experience on the issue. Hopefully, Mike will be able to get a word in edgewise.
* You can watch live coverage of the event via BlueRoomStream, by clicking here. I’ll get a ScribbleLive thingy up and running as well, so check back here.
…Adding… You can also listen live on WMAY and online at the station’s website. Also, BlueRoomStream says there’s poor Internet access at the Sangamo, so it can’t stream the event live.
*** UPDATE *** Yikes. I’m late to the party. Here’s your feed…
49 Comments
|
Rauner has pricey VIP inauguration packages
Tuesday, Dec 16, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* AP…
Gov.-elect Bruce Rauner’s inaugural festivities will include a dinner at the Capitol, a concert at the Prairie Capital Convention Center and a free event at the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum.
The Winnetka Republican launched a website Monday with a schedule for the 2015 inauguration.
Rauner takes the oath of office during a ceremony Jan. 12. Rather than the traditional inaugural ball that evening, he’s planning a concert with a yet-to-be-named “famous musical act” at the PCCC.
Concert tickets are $125. Tickets for an inaugural dinner and reception are $1,000 per person.
Other events are free. They include admission to the museum on Jan. 11 and an open house with Rauner and other elected officials at the Old State Capitol on Jan. 12.
The website is here.
* I told subscribers almost two weeks ago about some expensive “VIP” packages that the Tribune reports aren’t advertised on Rauner’s new website…
Illinois Gov.-elect Bruce Rauner has announced the first details of next month’s inaugural festivities, including an offer of lead sponsorships at $25,000 and dinner at $1,000 per person.[…]
The not-for-profit inaugural committee formed for the event has listed a range of sponsorships providing special VIP seating to various events with levels ranging from $2,500 to $25,000.
Sponsorships of $10,000 and $25,000 offer tickets to a “private after party” following the Sunday dinner and to a special post-inaugural governor reception and dinner the following day. Those events were not listed at the inaugural committee’s event and ticket website, illinoisinauguration.com. […]
Among those named as honorary co-chairs for the inaugural event was David MacNeil, the founder and CEO of Bolingbrook-based MacNeil Automotive Products Ltd., which manufactures WeatherTech car mats. MacNeil gave $218,750 to Rauner’s campaign, state records show.
…Adding… The headline for this post was changed after a commenter pointed out that if you look beyond the inauguration schedule page, and click the “menu” button in the upper right-hand corner, you will see the list of “sponsorship” opportunities…
Inaugural Lead Sponsor $25,000
Included Benefits:
• 1 Table (8 tickets) to Official Inaugural Dinner on Sunday, January 11th with VIP seating
• 4 Tickets to Private after Party on Sunday, January 11th
• 4 Tickets to Inaugural Ceremony on Monday, January 12th with VIP seating
• 4 Tickets to Governor Reception & Dinner on Monday, January 12th
• 4 Tickets to Inaugural Concert on Monday, January 12th
• Listed as Lead Sponsor on signage at Inaugural Events, in Inaugural Program, on other printed materials and website
Inaugural Supporting Sponsor $10,000
Included Benefits:
• 4 tickets to Official Inaugural Dinner on Sunday, January 11th
• 2 Tickets to Private after Party on Sunday, January 11th
• 2 Tickets to Inaugural Ceremony on Monday, January 12th with VIP seating
• 2 Tickets to Governor Reception & Dinner on Monday, January 12th
• 2 Tickets to Inaugural Concert on Monday, January 12th
• Official Recognition in Inaugural Program
Inaugural Sponsor $5,000
Included Benefits:
• 4 Tickets to Official Inaugural Dinner on Sunday, January 11th
• 2 Tickets to Inaugural Ceremony on Monday, January 12th with VIP seating
• 2 Tickets to Inaugural Concert on Monday, January 12th
Capitol Sponsor $2,500
Included Benefits:
• 2 Tickets to Official Inaugural Dinner on Sunday, January 11th
• 2 Tickets to Inaugural Ceremony on Monday, January 12th with VIP seating
• 2 Tickets to Inaugural Concert on Monday, January 12th
46 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
|