* From what I’ve been able to determine, this was a legit poll and the question was asked just in case Dan Proft’s Liberty Principles PAC jumps into the GOP primary race for Jonas Petty…
JONAS PETTY of Pittsfield had raised less than $600 in his primary race against state Rep. C.D. DAVIDSMEYER, R-Jacksonville, as of Dec. 31, but survey calls going into the district have been accusing Petty of getting outside money from a questionable source.
Petty says he is being bullied with “blatantly false accusations.”
And Davidsmeyer, who had more than $146,000 in his campaign fund as of Dec. 31, is offended by the tactic as well.
“I have nothing to do with this,” Davidsmeyer told me. “It legitimately hurts us both.” Some people, Davidsmeyer added, “are going to think that I’m behind it, and that’s not my character.”
Petty led me to some people who received “survey” calls late last week. NIKI ARCHER of Pittsfield, an accountant who supports Petty, said the caller from “Victory Processing” asked some basic questions about her intent to vote, but moved to a line of questioning that seemed to be positive toward Davidsmeyer and attacked Petty as “receiving funding from Chicago.” That funder, she was told, had also supported a “child molester.”
This sounds as if somebody might think that Petty is being supported by Liberty Principles Political Action Committee, a group that has gotten millions of dollars from Lake Forest businessman RICHARD UIHLEIN. But there’s no indication that Petty is getting such support.
You’ll recall that the HGOP is using the very same hit against House Republican Leader Jim Durkin’s primary opponent, Mickey Straub. Mike Z is running that campaign and he uses Victory’s polling, a company run by his old friend and fellow Rauner campaign vet Mike Schrimpf.
* Meanwhile, the pressures of a primary campaign, even one that hasn’t yet amounted to much, may be getting to Rep. Davidsmeyer…
Mark later tweeted that Rep. Davidsmeyer wants to confine his cuts to kicking undocumented kids off the program in order to save the state $38 million. But, of course, somebody would end up paying when those kids go to the emergency room.
* Related…
* The trouble with Medicaid work requirements: Kicking people off is one way to save money on Medicaid. But under a 1986 law signed by President Ronald Reagan, hospitals are obligated to provide patients with emergency care regardless of their ability to pay. If Medicaid doesn’t cover these bills, hospitals and taxpayers will.
- the coming storm - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 1:48 pm:
How did Democrats let this get so out of control?
I’d like to know numbers. How many illegals in school districts, colleges, SNAP, TANF, Sec8, Medicaid, etc.
There are so many legal residents that need help it is just obscene the Democrats play emotional games with the rule of law and show favor to this group.
- Demoralized - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 1:53 pm:
The Representative is all heart. Seems to be a lot of that “heart” going around when speaking of undocumented kids. The inability of some to distinguish an undocumented child brought here through no fault of their own to an adult undocumented immigrant boggles the mind.
You don’t punish a kid for the sins of the parents.
- wordslinger - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 1:53 pm:
–But under a 1986 law signed by President Ronald Reagan, hospitals are obligated to provide patients with emergency care regardless of their ability to pay. If Medicaid doesn’t cover these bills, hospitals and taxpayers will.–
Rep. Davidsmeyer would teach that RINO Reagan what a real conservative is, amirite?
“Real conservatives” kick children off of health insurance.
- Anonymous - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 1:54 pm:
So $600 and some petitions is all it takes to scare Davidmeyer into saying stuff like this?
- RNUG - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 1:59 pm:
I’m all for saving money, but this is penny wise and pound foolish. In terms of promoting overall public health, you get a lot of benefit by ensuring all kids are healthy.
- 47th Ward - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 2:06 pm:
These kids were brought here by their parents. The kids didn’t break any laws. Why should they be punished?
Someday this guy is going to have to explain the motivation for this bill to a Higher Power. I don’t think he’s going to have a satisfactory answer.
- wordslinger - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 2:09 pm:
–Why should they be punished?–
And we’re talking insurance here, not welfare or even a hot meal.
Not everyone who’s covered uses it. And those who do — as the post pointed out, you’re going to pay for it one way or the other. Better to spread the cost over a large insurance pool.
- New Slang - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 2:13 pm:
Rep. CD says in his bio he’s “all around common sense” …
Ummmmmm.
This illegal immigration piece really plays well in Trump-land. Unfortunately, short sided thinking when it comes to denying kids (illegal or not) basic health care.
- How Ironic - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 2:23 pm:
I had an enlightening discussion with my father in law about EMTALA and how cutting people off benefit programs doesn’t ‘lower cost’. He was stunned to learn that people (or kids) that don’t have regular health care, STILL GET SEEN at the ED, at a much higher cost to taxpayers than if we just put them in medi-caide.
I honestly think the people that support these types of rules have little understanding of healthcare, and the cost shifting that occurs because hospitals can’t send people away.
- @misterjayem - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 2:34 pm:
1. “A helping hand is one thing, but a handout to those who are here illegally is not right.”
2.
Only one of those two knows what’s “not right”.
– MrJM
- wordslinger - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 2:43 pm:
–I’d like to know numbers. How many illegals in school districts, colleges, SNAP, TANF, Sec8, Medicaid, etc.–
Are you entitled for someone else to find that information for you? Do you have some disability that keeps you from using google?
Finding that information ain’t a heavy lift. Grab your bootstraps and have at it.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 3:00 pm:
===Do you have some disability that keeps you from using google? ===
Racistwingnutitis?
- wordslinger - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 3:03 pm:
chronicvictimyalgia?
- Rich Miller - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 3:20 pm:
Entitledchronicfatiguesyndrome?
- DuPage Bard - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 3:40 pm:
#winning #MAGA #Merica
- m - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 4:02 pm:
= I was a stranger and you did not invite me in=
I think the verse could offer a lot of people some insight on the immigration debate.
- Cheryl44 - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 5:18 pm:
Why didn’t people complain about illegal immigrants back when they were mostly Irish?
- Jocko - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 5:35 pm:
As the joke goes, just wait until Davidsmeyer finds out Jesus isn’t white and doesn’t speak English.
- JoanP - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 6:07 pm:
@Cheryl44 - “Why didn’t people complain about illegal immigrants back when they were mostly Irish?”
Most Irish immigrants came to this country legally, at a time when we didn’t have the strict immigration laws we have now.
That didn’t stop the Know-Nothings (an actual political party). “No Irish need apply” signs were rife. There was tremendous anti-Irish feeling, fed in no small part by anti-Catholicism.
- Downstate Rube - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 6:33 pm:
The Irish were treated terribly. Maybe you should try the Google.
- illini - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 7:19 pm:
But what about the Japanese citizens living on the West Coast that were forcibly relocated to “camps” during WW2?
What would happen if we tried that yet again?
- wordslinger - Monday, Jan 22, 18 @ 8:34 pm:
–Most Irish immigrants came to this country legally, at a time when we didn’t have the strict immigration laws we have now.–
The first law limiting immigration to the United States was the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 (thanks for building the railroads, now get out).
The Immigration Act of 1924 was designed to exclude all Asians and severely limit Catholics, Jews and Orthodox from southern and eastern Europe (Italians, Greeks, Poles, Russians) while promoting that of Protestants from Western Europe and Great Britain.
That stayed in effect until 1952.