Pat Brady: “There have been races where candidates were 15, 20 points down and ended up winning by 10. The 15-20 points numbers we saw from a couple of polls [are] inherently unreliable. So it’s a lot closer than that and no Republican I think is resigned at the governor losing. So we’ll see what happens in two weeks. The polls have been wrong the last four or five election cycles.”
On the GOP appealing to Chicago voters through ‘bread-and-butter’ issues
Brady: “The case can be made that the irritation at living in the city—and I’m a surburban guy, but I have lived in the city in my life—[are] taxes and services, and bread-and-butter issues that Republicans have to make the case they can do a better job delivering, particularly on property taxes and education. You want to be able to send your kids to school and get a good education. So there are issues that I think Republican philosophies will work better but we just need to get that message out more and get candidates to run and raise money and do it. The taxes are driving people and business out—and for no reason. Like I said before, there is no better city in the world I don’t think than Chicago, we just have to make it a livable place. And I think the Republican platform in general—outside some of maybe the social stuff—can work in an urban environment, we just have to have good messengers.”
“We just have to have good messengers” and we’ll win Chicago [exclamation point] Hooray [three exclamation points]
Willowbrook residents described sick children gasping for air and a disconnected government at a hearing Friday concerning the Sterigenics company, which officials are investigating over emissions of a cancer-causing gas.
The issue has roiled the Nov. 6 election campaign, with Gov. Bruce Rauner and state agencies taking heat for not informing people promptly about risks from exposure to ethylene oxide, a chemical used to sterilize medical equipment.
Gabriela Rios, a mother of two, lives a few blocks from the plant in southeast DuPage County. She told state lawmakers Friday at a hearing held by two House committees how her oldest daughter fell ill with mysterious coughing fits and vomiting. Later, her younger daughter had to be rushed to the hospital when “she was struggling to breathe and turned purple,” Rios said.
Rios, an attorney, said she herself has suffered heart palpitations, trouble breathing and a ringing in her ears that “makes me feel like I’m going insane.
Among those residents was Gabriela Tejeda Rios and her daughters. Rios said her family are the closest residents to the facility.
“We feel trapped. It’s easy to say ‘why don’t you just move?’ But we can’t,” Tejeda said. “It’s not an option for us. My children are being poisoned 24 hours a day, seven days a week. And I cannot protect them from it.”
After hearing from several speakers, some lawmakers called for action.
“At the very least, we need to temporarily shut this down,” said Representative Grant Wehrli of the 41st District.
Gov. Bruce Rauner on Monday accused Attorney General Lisa Madigan of doing her father’s bidding by painting him as the villain in the continuing controversy over the Sterigenics plant in Willowbrook. […]
The United States EPA told the company last December, that its emissions of EtO had been calculated at 1,000 parts per million, far exceeding the upper limit of cancer risk acceptability. The Illinois EPA was copied on that letter, but Attorney General Lisa Madigan’s office, which shares responsibility for environmental enforcement, said they had not been given adequate information on the Sterigenics issue.
Indeed, spokesman Eileen Boyce told the Daily Herald on Friday that the Rauner administration “hid information on the increased risks from the Sterigenics plant for over eight months. We then had to fight with the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to get access to needed information.” […]
“This is being politicized for the gain of the Madigan clan,” Rauner told NBC5. “It’s also been falsely said that somehow the governor wants to protect the company because the governor has an economic interest. I have no economic interest whatsoever in that business.” […]
“That’s one of the things I’ve learned the hard way—she absolutely is,” he said. “We have one of the most corrupt states in America, led by her father. She has never led an investigation of corruption, conflict of interest, or unethical behavior of her dad or any of his administration. How is this right? She’s there protecting her father, not protecting the taxpayers.”
* I’m thinking the company that demanded billions in public subsidies won’t be spending this cash out of its own pocket. From Crain’s Chicago Business’ manufacturing reporter…
Woo also said 75% of Foxconn's 13K future employees in Wis. will be "knowledge workers" and 25% factory workers. Tight labor market means the company will recruit in Chicago, and Woo wants to see "a commuter train all the way from Chicago to (Foxconn's site).” #MegaRegionSummithttps://t.co/LKVX8qveNo
What do Trump and Madigan’s character assassins have in common? Neither will lower your property taxes. Trump can’t. Madigan and his bought and paid for political assassins won’t.
In fact, Madigan and his assassins have a plan to increase your property taxes.
Either you take your house back, or Madigan and his suburban assassins take it from you.
This election is not about who’s in the White House, it’s about saving your house.
* Meanwhile, the Democratic Attorneys General Association reported yesterday that it had received $1 million from JB Pritzker’s campaign, so expect something there as well.
* Related…
* Last go for AG candidates: The two major party candidates to replace Democratic Attorney General Lisa Madigan will have their only televised forum on Monday. Democratic state Sen. Kwame Raoul and Republican attorney Erika Harold will meet on WTTW’s “Chicago Tonight” for a forum that airs at 7 p.m. The meeting also will stream on the station’s Facebook page and at wttw.com/news. The segment will be taped a few hours in advance.
* Mark Brown: Raoul, Harold, Harsy make closing arguments in battle to be state’s top lawyer: Appearing recently before an African-American audience recently on the West Side, Harold was asked if black people can trust her. “I know that as a black woman running for office as a Republican the first thing that people look to see is: Are you crazy? The second thing people look to see is: Are you a sellout?” Harold said. “I can tell you that you can absolutely trust me because one thing I can tell you is I am very proud to be a black woman.”
* Tribune Editorial: The case for Erika Harold: Don’t be ‘undecided’ on Illinois corruption
* Like the last one I told you about, this mailer was sent to a suburban, pro-life Republican woman…
* Meanwhile, Rep. Jeanne Ives was interviewed by the Sun-Times today…
Ives is asked who her supporters should vote for in gov's race: "I don't want them to vote for JB Pritzker. I don't want them vote for Sam McCann, who is JB Pritzker's associate…What I am really focused on is I don't want my voters to vote for any Democratic state rep." https://t.co/ASmpkBzCbF
* This is not really what the bill says and it’s not at all clear that Dan Proft’s papers would feel any impact. Politico…
A bill has popped up in Springfield that would require partisan (or biased) news sites to disclose the money they spend featuring candidates and causes. Neither Proft nor his newspapers are named in the proposed legislation, but it’s clear they would be affected by its passage.
“Political action committees funded by billionaires are using propaganda to confuse and mislead voters,” Democratic state Rep. Rob Martwick told POLITICO. He’s sponsoring the bill along with Republican state Rep. Steve Andersson from Geneva. “The public has every right to know that an article that has been pushed in front of them is nothing more than political advertising and it’s our responsibility to ensure they are not duped.”
Proft calls the measure “thuggery masquerading as legislation,” saying in an email, “We do not ’spend money on candidates’ any more than the Sun-Times ’spends money on candidates’ to promote every leftist candidate in Illinois spouting cultural Marxist pablum.” He called the legislation “a thinly-veiled attempt to eliminate news and views that both the Chicago Democrat crime families and establishment surrender Republicans who run this catastrophe of a state don’t like. We’ll fight them and anyone else who thinks the First Amendment doesn’t apply to the state of Illinois.”
Andersson says Proft’s web sites lack journalistic integrity. “Proft would argue his newspapers are ‘real,’ (but) even a fairly cursory look at the articles would demonstrate the clear bias,” he said.
Not-so-coincidental irony: Martwick’s Nov. 6 opponent, Ammie Kassem, is backed by Proft.
Provides that any expenditure made by a news publication or an entity that owns a news publication for the purpose of supporting or opposing a public official or candidate shall be treated as an in-kind contribution for the purposes of the Code.
As used in this Section only, “expenditure” does not include normal publication costs associated with a news story, commentary, or editorial, but does include costs associated with advertising related to a particular news story, commentary, or editorial.
* Martwick is trying to regulate ads like this one that ran on Facebook…
As the Chicago Tribune reported earlier this year, sometimes Proft’s Liberty Principles PAC will pay Proft’s LGIS to print paper versions of its editions and mail them to voters. And sometimes Proft will feature an article from one of his papers in a TV ad, like this one for former Rep. Dwight Kay…
But there is at least the appearance of a firewall. And as long as that legal firewall exists, this bill will likely accomplish nothing.
…Adding… And, as some have rightly pointed out in comments, if it does apply to Proft, then any news media that promotes a column or negative news story would have to register, and that ain’t gonna fly. There’s still a 1st Amendment.
*** UPDATE *** From Rep. Martwick…
Thanks for writing about the recent legislation filed by myself and Rep. Steve Andersson. I admit that any time we seek to regulate speech, we must proceed carefully. This is a first attempt that will be extensively and fully vetted through many committee hearings, to ensure that we do not have unintended consequences. However, I believe our intention is just. Reading the “tin-foil hat” conspiracy rant that Mr. Proft made in response to this bill, is all the clarity I need to see that I’m headed in the right direction. Proft’s papers are propaganda, plain and simple. Everyone has the right to free speech, but that is not without regulation. You cannot yell fire in a crowded theater and you cannot libel someone. However, a better comparison is to the “articles” run on your blog, which carry the disclaimer “the following is a paid advertisement.” It is a permissible regulation to ensure the readers know that what they are reading is a paid advertisement, so that they are not duped into believing the advertisement is journalism. Why should political advertising be done any differently? Proft runs the PAC that supports candidates. He owns the “newspapers” that write the stories. Then he pays to have those stories pushed and promoted on social media and search engines. That expenditure is a political expenditure and should be reported as such. This will not stop him from publishing his propaganda papers. He can write all the fake news stories he wants. This will only require that he add a modicum of transparency to the reader. As you wrote earlier, Mr. Proft lost a suit he filed, which shows exactly his intention. He wishes to be able to spend as much money as he wants, without being subject to any type of transparency or disclosure. This is propaganda and history has shown that it leads to very very bad consequences. I realize that any attempt to regulate this will be difficult, but this is a struggle worth having.
I voluntarily label ads as ads. I don’t need or want the government telling me what to do. And those ads Proft is running are political in nature, but if you’re going to regulate that stuff as campaign expenditures then every promoted tweet of a newspaper’s endorsements would also have to be labeled as such and I think the Illinois Press Association would have words with the sponsor. For instance, if the Sun-Times put any money behind this tweet should they have to report it? I would say “No”…
The Chicago Sun-Times endorses @robertmartwick for Illinois House in the 19th District. "To stop middle- and working-class families from fleeing the state, Martwick is convinced Illinois must change the way it taxes income." #twillhttps://t.co/5im1I5GPe8
“I’ll be a check on the Pritzker-Madigan agenda,” Republican attorney general candidate Erika Harold says in her latest TV ad about Democratic gubernatorial frontrunner J.B. Pritzker and Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.
Coincidentally, I had written on my blog a few days earlier that if “voters are looking for a check on J.B. Pritzker and Speaker Madigan and they can’t bring themselves to vote for Gov. Rauner, she might be a realistic option,” adding “It’s probably too bad she can’t just come right out and say that in an ad,” because Rauner is helping fund her campaign.
The Harold campaign was way ahead of me, however. They produced that ad months ago and waited for just the right time to release it.
And now, a similar line of attack is cropping up elsewhere. In southern Illinois, for instance, state Rep. Jerry Costello’s Republican opponent David Freiss says he’ll “always put southern Illinois first,” and then an announcer claims of Rep. Costello (D-Smithton), “He’d rubber stamp the Madigan/Pritzker agenda.”
I’m told that line or something very similar is being used as a closing statement to voters by House Republican candidates and incumbents “everywhere.”
They’re simply dealing with reality.
Lots of folks have certainly heard about the polling that has Gov. Bruce Rauner trailing Pritzker by double digits, so even if they are voting for Rauner many figure he probably can’t win. And if the polls are right, lots more folks have decided that they cannot vote for Rauner no way no how, but some of them are still uneasy about the future. Republican polling reportedly shows that independents and even a significant minority of Democrats want a “check” on whatever Pritzker and Madigan may do together.
Pritzker has never really pushed back hard against Rauner’s constant claims that Madigan will subjugate him if he becomes governor. And Rauner has birthed and nurtured those assumptions with millions of dollars in TV ads. Pritzker has only once countered that charge in in a TV ad, mocking the governor’s claims: “Mike Madigan hates puppies. Mike Madigan hates sunshine. JB Pritzker and Mike Madigan are Democrats. So JB Pritzker must hate puppies, and sunshine.” He hasn’t addressed it since.
Personally, I don’t think Pritzker will be Madigan’s underling. Madigan can’t just call a bunch of labor union leaders to steer them away from Pritzker’s next fundraiser (a favorite tactic) because the billionaire doesn’t need anybody else’s money. Madigan’s progressive caucus is steadily growing, and may grow further with this election, so stymying or slow-walking or under-cutting the wealthy Pritzker and/or his agenda could cause him real grief with his own membership.
And Pritzker’s strategy has never been to win by being likeable. It’s clear that the Democrat’s plan from the very beginning was to bury Rauner under an overwhelming avalanche of brutal ads that call him a “failure” and a “liar.” Just keep the governor’s negatives sky high, never take that foot off his throat and call it a day.
Property tax “fraud” allegation? Write another check and run a new anti-Rauner ad. Racial discrimination lawsuit by campaign staff? Write another check and run a new anti-Rauner ad. A buzzy TV ad showing an “unholy” marriage to Madigan with an “F-bomb” thrown in for good measure? Write another check and run a new anti-Rauner ad. Blam, blam, blam. Never let him gather enough strength to even stand up, let alone make a real fight of it.
These new Republican ads, therefore, might help down-ballot Republicans take advantage of a gaping hole that Pritzker has never bothered to close. At least, that’s the theory. We’ll know if it works come election day. And even if it doesn’t, the underlying theory ain’t bad at all and is probably all that at least some of them have left.
That new Freiss ad, by the way, also attaches the Republican as closely as possible to President Donald Trump. Freiss says in the ad that he’ll “drain the Springfield swamp,” and the announcer claims Rep. Costello, by backing the Madigan/Pritzker agenda, would block Trump’s policies in Illinois. The ad also claims that Costello is funded by “anti-Trump” lobbyists. “Drain Springfield’s swamp and liberal Jerry Costello” is the conclusion.
As I write this, Trump is preparing to visit southern Illinois and area Democrats are bracing themselves for a possible regional Trump bounce. So, the ad is timely. This is not to say I think Rep. Costello will lose, mind you. He’s a smart campaigner and has been very popular.
Somewhere, somehow, a memo must have gone out to Republican lawmakers who voted for the American Health Care Act (AHCA), the Republican bill to repeal and replace Obamacare: If you are attacked for undermining protections for people with existing health problems, jab back by saying the claim got Four Pinocchios from The Washington Post.
That’s not true. Republicans are twisting an unrelated fact check and are misleading voters. We have found at least seven politicians who have done this.
Rep. Peter J. Roskam (Illinois’s 6th District): In a debate on Oct. 22, he said: “Sean [Casten] has falsely accused me of being against protecting people with preexisting conditions and that was fact-checked by The Washington Post, who gave that four Pinocchios.”
Rep. Rodney Davis (Illinois’s 13th District): In a debate on Oct. 18, he said: “The lies about preexisting condition coverage being taken away have been scored a Four Pinocchio by The Washington Post. Read the bill. In the bill, it specifically says, ‘Nothing in this bill shall allow insurance companies to deny anyone coverage for preexisting conditions.’” […]
We asked these lawmakers whether they would be willing to withdraw the citation of the Pinocchios. None agreed to do so.
That’s dismaying. These lawmakers have been put on notice that they are peddling a falsehood — and politicians who care about their reputation should acknowledge they made a mistake and offer an apology.
Instead, they apparently believe it is politically advantageous to continue to deceive the voters in their districts. It is especially galling because many accuse their opponents of spreading lies — and then cry Four Pinocchios.
We urge news organizations in the districts to highlight the brazen misappropriation of our fact checks. Sunlight is sometimes the best disinfectant.
Roskam said his Democratic opponent had falsely accused him “of being against protecting people with pre-existing conditions, and that was fact-checked by the Washington Post who gave that four Pinocchios.”
No such fact check exists. […]
We don’t hand out Pinocchios, but we have a similar measure for whoppers like Roskam’s. We rate it Pants on Fire!
[Congressman Rodney Davis’] problematic campaign statements extend to his debate performances, such as one in Decatur last week where he said that he “helped lead the charge to protect pre-existing conditions” in the Republican-backed American Health Care Act.
“Language matters,” said Davis, “and this language was in our bill. It rightly points out that nothing in this act shall be construed as permitting health insurance issuers to limit access to health coverage for individuals’ pre-existing conditions. Those are the facts.”
But among the facts is that ACHA “would have weakened protections for people with existing health conditions,” according to the Washington Post, the Congressional Budget Office and other sources.
“States would have had the option to make changes that could have left people with pre-existing conditions vulnerable to large increase in premiums, according to the CBO report,” the Post said. “In effect, the CBO said, in the states that took full advantage of the possible waivers, the guarantee that preexisting conditions are protected would be so undermined that it would be worthless.”
* Dan Proft and his Liberty Principles PAC sued in federal court earlier this year to invalidate the state law prohibiting any direct contributions to candidates from independent expenditure committees. Proft wanted the court to allow his IE committee to give direct contributions to candidates in races where the contribution caps had been lifted.
Proft claims that these groups do not pose a unique threat of corruption and it is not fair to ban them from contributing when all others can do so. To do that, in his view, unreasonably restricts the free-speech and free-association rights of the organizations and the individuals who comprise them. […]
Attorney General Madigan opposed this motion and moved to dismiss the complaint arguing that independent expenditure committees must re main independent. (Dkt. 19.) Because accepting Proft’s argument would erase the Supreme Court’s 40-year-old distinction between contributions and independent expenditures, the Court denies his motion for a preliminary injunction and grants Attorney General Madigan’s motion to dismiss. […]
It appears, then, that what Proft would really like is to have his cake and eat it too. Proft wants to enjoy the benefits of an independent expenditure committee (unlimited fundraising and spending abilities), while also enjoying the benefits of a PAC (capacity to directly contribute, communicate, and coordinate with candidates). “Choices have consequences,” however, and Proft must live with the limitations of the entity he chose to establish.
Today, the Rauner campaign is launching a new statewide TV ad featuring Governor Bruce Rauner and Lt. Governor Evelyn Sanguinetti. In the ad, Rauner and Sanguinetti list the major accomplishments of their first term, but note there’s more to do to save our state — which is why they’re asking Illinoisans for their vote.
