* Natalie Hemby has written and co-written a ton of country music songs. She’s almost unknown outside of Nashville, though, because she’s not the one who records the material. So, for those of you who follow the genre, here’s a video of Hemby playing her smash summer hit…
You can climb the ladder
Just don’t rock the boat while I barbeque
Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill., has left the Mayo Clinic and is at home in the nation’s capital with his family, an aide said today.
“He’s home with his wife and children and he’s convalescing,” Rick Bryant, his chief of staff in suburban Chicago, told the Chicago Tribune.
Jackson, 47, was treated for bipolar depression at the clinic this summer. He began a medical leave of absence June 10.
Congress returns Monday after a five-week summer recess. Bryant, asked whether Jackson would be in attendance, said: “I am hopeful that he’ll be back on the job on Monday.”
-Illinois has prime seats on the Democratic convention floor, and for the Wednesday session labor leaders from the state were front row center. The group pictured above are Tom Balanoff, SEIU and a longtime Obama friend; Toby Trimmer, IFT; Dan Montgomery, IFT president; Tony Garcia, UAW and Ron McInroy, UAW president.
* Illinois has a little over 4 percent of the USA’s population, but it has almost 8 percent of the country’s local governments, according to a recent study by the US Census Bureau.
Illinois has 6,968 units of local government, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s preliminary 2012 Census of Governments, released last week. Considering the state’s population of 12.8 million, that means there’s one governmental body for about every 1,800 residents.
We have a whole lot of small municipalities and lots of counties. Just a handful of states have more counties than we do, and nobody has more municipalities. We also have a lot of townships here. Several states have no townships, and the Census folks combine “towns” with “townships” in their numbers. We have 1,431 in that category. Minnesota has 1,785.
* By far the biggest difference between Illinois and the rest of the country is in the “special districts” category. From the Census…
Special districts are organized local entities other than county, municipal, township or school district governments that are authorized by state law to provide only one or a limited number of designated functions. Fire districts, water districts, library districts and transit authorities are examples of special districts.
We also have TIF districts, mosquito abatement districts and other such things, giving us a grand total of 3,232 special districts - almost half our total number of local government units. The closest competitor is California, with 2,786 special districts, then Texas, with 2,309 special districts. Michigan has just 445, Ohio has 700, New York has 1,172.
* Legislation aimed at reducing the number of local governments died in the Senate not long ago. All that could pass was a non-binding study commission, and its commissioners now want more time to finish…
The Local Government Consolidation Commission likely will ask during the fall veto session that its Dec. 31 deadline be pushed back. The reasons, chairman Jack Franks said, are the long delay in appointments to the commission and the wealth of information it is taking in now that it is meeting. […]
The commission was created by a Franks bill signed into law in August 2011 by Gov. Pat Quinn. But it did not hold its first meeting until February, because legislative leaders took their time filling the commission’s 17 seats. […]
Franks said the commission is not only exploring consolidation of governments, but also ways that governments that stay independent can merge services. The commission also plans to identify roadblocks in state statute to promoting such efforts.
The House today voted 109-0 to put into law a bill that could affect a potential prosecution against former Bolingbrook Police Sgt. Drew Peterson in the cases of either one of his last two wives.
The bill, which is backed by the Will County state’s attorney’s office, would allow a judge to admit hearsay evidence into court for first-degree murder cases if the prosecution could prove that the defendant killed a witness to prevent testimony.
The House vote followed Senate approval a week before. Their votes meant lawmakers accepted changes proposed by Gov. Rod Blagojevich that allowed the law to become effective as soon as the House approved the measure.
* But by July of the next year, Peterson’s prosecutor was asking an appellate court to dump the new law…
Saddled with a botched police investigation, Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow pushed for a state law that would allow prosecutors to use hearsay statements against Drew Peterson at trial.
Dubbed Drew’s Law by legal experts and legislators, Glasgow hailed the bill’s passage as a way of letting Peterson’s third and fourth wives speak from the grave.
But now in an ironic move to convict Peterson, Glasgow finds himself fighting the law he helped create.
On the eve of Peterson’s much-anticipated murder trial, Glasgow delayed the case Thursday by appealing a ruling on the admissibility of some hearsay evidence. He argues that the judge’s decision — made under the guidelines established by Drew’s Law — should have adhered instead to less-restrictive common law.
But in winning his appeal, Glasgow had to ask the court to disregard the law he helped create in favor of the state’s common law, which doesn’t include the reliability requirement, a fact not lost on the appellate judges.
“This change in the State’s position is puzzling,” Judge William Holdridge wrote in the appellate court’s decision.
“If the legislature intended to facilitate the successful prosecution of criminal defendants who intentionally prevent witnesses from testifying (as the statute’s legislative history suggests), it is unclear why it passed a statute that imposed restrictions on prosecutors that are not found in the common law,” Holdridge wrote. “Regardless, after passing a more restrictive statute, one would expect the State either to enforce the statute as written or act to repeal the statute, not urge the courts to ignore it.”
And Holdridge wasn’t the only one to find Glasgow’s change in course puzzling.
“There’s irony, foremost,” said Harold J. Krent, the dean of IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, who noted that Glasgow was “actually potentially undercutting the power of prosecutors” when he passed his new law.
“The common law’s power was broader,” Krent said.
* The appellate ruling was based on an Illinois Supreme Court opinion issued after “Drew’s Law” was passed by the General Assembly…
Glasgow’s spokesman, Charles B. Pelkie, pointed out that the new law was put together and passed before the state supreme court rejected an appeal by Naperville murderer Eric Hanson, who shot his mother and father in the head and bludgeoned to death his sister and brother-in-law.
Hanson appealed his conviction on the grounds that hearsay cannot be used as evidence under the common law. The state supreme court denied this, upholding Hanson’s conviction and giving Glasgow the grounds for his appeal of Judge White’s ruling.
In the end, it was Stacy Peterson who helped convict Drew Peterson of murder.
Stacy Peterson, Drew Peterson’s fourth wife, is missing. Her family believes she’s dead and blames her husband.
But statements she made to two men before she disappeared were cited by a juror Thursday as being crucial in bringing down the brash, silver-haired former Bolingbrook cop.
It was the hearsay evidence against Peterson, the juror said, that convinced him and other jurors to convict Peterson of murder on Thursday in the 2004 death of his third wife, Kathleen Savio.
“Without hearsay evidence would I have found him not guilty? Yes. A lot of the jurors said that, too,” said Ron Supalo, a juror from Bolingbrook. “They were either on the fence or they thought he was innocent. And then with those two hearsay witnesses, bam.”
“Kathy told me that her husband … had told her that he could kill her and make her disappear.”
— Mary Parks testifying about what Savio said Drew Peterson told her.
“She wanted to know if the fact that he killed Kathy (Savio) could be used against him.”
— Divorce attorney Harry Smith testifying about a conversation with Stacy Peterson days before she disappeared in 2007. She told him she was convinced Drew Peterson killed Savio three years earlier.
* The Question: Do you believe that the House and Senate Democratic leaders are committed to passing real, comprehensive pension reform in a bi-partisan way? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
* Reporters have been trying for months to get Gov. Pat Quinn to answer questions prompted by my reporting that he had abandoned his staunch opposition to “racinos” - casinos at horse racing tracks. And for months, Quinn has been coy, not saying flat-out that he’s still opposed, but not ever saying that he could support it.
Well, the State Journal-Register editorial board finally got somebody on record. The SJ-R’s latest editorial is about the gaming bill and what the governor said in his veto message of that bill…
What he didn’t mention is whether he still opposes allowing slot machines at racetracks, something he used to talk about regularly but now does not mention. The political reality is that no gambling expansion bill will pass without them.
“That particular issue – we’re willing to discuss with the legislature,” spokeswoman Brooke Anderson, adding that Quinn would still like to see less of an expansion.
Was that so difficult? Sheesh. Finally, there’s a real opening here.
* House Speaker Michael Madigan was asked by Amanda Vinicky this week about his dual leadership roles as Speaker and state Democratic Party Chairman. He was pretty blunt about his goals…
“My long-term goal and desire was to be a strong Speaker. Also serving as the chairman of the party means that I’m a strong Speaker or a stronger Speaker. My view is that I take that power and use it to do good things… Well, it’s easier to do those accomplishments if you have significant power in the Legislature.”
* Earlier this week, House Speaker Michael Madigan hinted that the Democrats might go it alone on pension reform. He refused to say whether he would, indeed, push for such a Democrats-only roll call when interviewed later, however.
On Wednesday, Madigan’s GOP counterparts — House Minority Leader Tom Cross (R-Oswego) and Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno (R-Lemont) — weighed in on the speaker’s remarks, warning that the scenario Madigan hinted at could lead to a big property tax hike for downstate and suburban residents.
“We fear that Democrat leaders’ recent comments about passing a pension reform bill in January with Democrat-only votes will lead to a massive property tax increase, just like they shoved through the largest income tax increase on Illinois residents two years ago,” Cross and Radogno’s joint statement said.
“We can’t keep throwing new revenue at our problems, especially from the taxpayers in this state. We remain committed to passing real, comprehensive pension reform in a bi-partisan way that does not include another enormous tax increase on our residents,” the GOP leaders said.
The GOP concern is directed at Madigan’s continued insistence this week that a pension deal require that downstate and suburban school districts start picking up the state’s share of pension costs for educators in those school systems, a cost shift that Gov. Pat Quinn’s administration once estimated could free up as much as $20 billion for the state.
* The Question: Do you believe that the House and Senate Republican leaders are “committed to passing real, comprehensive pension reform in a bi-partisan way”? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
* The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has a new TV ad attacking Republican Bobby Schilling. Rate it…
* Script…
Everything moves faster these days…
Even the time it takes a Congressman to lose touch with us.
Like Bobby Schilling.
Schilling voted to cut Medicare, costing seniors an extra $6400 per year… to pay for tax breaks for millionaires.
And jobs? Schilling voted to keep tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas, and supports bad trade deals that hurt us here at home.
Bobby Schilling, it sure didn’t take long for HIM to become one of THEM.
*** UPDATE 1 *** The DCCC also has a far more aggressive TV ad ripping Republican Jason Plummer…
* Script…
Meet Jason Plummer.
He’s only had one full-time job, working for his dad, but he’s got millions in the bank.
He wants to be your Congressman, but praised a plan that would essentially end Medicare –
making seniors pay thousands more every year for health insurance…
…all while giving more tax breaks to millionaires like himself.
Jason Plummer: Giving tax breaks to his family. Ending Medicare for yours.
*** UPDATE 2 *** IL Review claims the DCCC stole their footage…
Hmmm, the DCCC and Enyart paid to have the ad produced. They’re paying television stations to run the spot. But they lack the professional courtesy to ask permission before appropriating our proprietary footage.
Given the DCCC’s and Enyart’s actions and outright theft, Illinois Review is demanding they immediately pull the ad, and publicly apologize. Stealing video from a conservative blog to create an ad that lies about a conservative candidate is beyond-the-pale. Or should be for the DCCC and Bill Enyart.
* If this had happened to the Illinois Republicans, everybody would be laughing about how it was just another example of how the party can never get its act together. But it happened to the Democrats…
It was just before midnight Friday when Illinois House Speaker and State Democratic Party Chairman Mike Madigan cast the state delegation’s 196 votes to nominate a “son of Illinois,” President Barack Obama, for re-election.
That happened to be 19 votes short of the 215 votes allotted to Illinois by the Democratic Party.
What gives? Somebody still holding out for Hillary?
A Madigan spokesman explained that under Democratic National Committee rules each state must submit a signed tally sheet with the names of each of its electors.
Illinois did not receive its tally sheet until 5 p.m. Tuesday and had to return it by noon Wednesday. Hence, nineteen people never got around to signing.
Oops.
Partying too much, perhaps?
Amazingly enough, I received no press release from the Illinois Republican Party about how this was all some Madigan plot.
* Meanwhile, the Madigan family - minus Shirley - posed for a convention photo…
I know we already have one caption contest today, but we just can’t pass this one up.
Asked again Wednesday whether he has any presidential ambitions — either now or sometime in the future — Emanuel did not hesitate.
“No. No. No. I’m not doing it. Ask my best friends I’ve known for years. No. Full stop. Stop it,” he said.
“I love my job. I love the work I’m doing. I love working on behalf of the people of Chicago. I love the work I do for them.”
It’s his standard response. Earlier this year, Emanuel even signed a handwritten pledge, when a reporter asked him the question: “I, Rahm Emanuel , will not run for another office — EVER.”
it’s a silly question. He’s not running for president.
Former White House chief-of-staff Bill Daley’s name has been floated as a possible Democratic challenger to embattled incumbent Gov. Pat Quinn, but don’t bother asking Daley about it. He doesn’t want to talk about a 2014 run.
“Oh, I’m not gonna get into that. Come on. That’s silly,” Daley said after dropping in at Wednesday’s Il. delegation breakfast in Charlotte.
“It’s a year- and-a-half away. That’s silly. You’ve got better things to do. You’re at a convention to elect a president of the United States from our home state and you’re worrying about some election 2.5 years from now. It’s silly.”
Quinn’s budget cuts and sagging poll numbers–along with an ugly fight with organized labor over his proposed pension reforms–has set him up for a possible primary challenge.
Asked whether he considers the governor vulnerable to a challenge from within his own party, Daley said, “I have no idea. I don’t know.”
Can we stop with the Bill Daley stories, please? The guy has never run for anything. I won’t believe it until I actually see it.
Rep. Aaron Schock of Peoria is serious—deadly serious—about running and is getting equally serious consideration from Chicago’s fat-walleted business community. His only true competitors appear to be former gubernatorial chief of staff Kirk Dillard and Illinois Treasurer Dan Rutherford, probably in that order. And a repeat of the cattle-call GOP primary of two years ago is possible.
Mr. Schock, 31, is the current wunderkind of the Illinois Republican Party. A fast climber who beat a local school board member after the district refused to let him graduate early from high school to attend college, he zipped through Springfield and then glided into Congress in 2004. That was after, he says, he turned down a $5,000 campaign contribution from Caterpillar Inc., eventually settling for a mere $25K. (He wanted $50,000.)
The point is, the kid is as hungry as they get and, perhaps more important, a fresh face for the governor’s mansion with more than $3 million in his campaign war chest. That could give him an entrée to the Chicago area, as could the fact that he’s raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for other party powers such as Illinois House GOP Leader Tom Cross.
Mr. Schock, in an hourlong interview, makes it clear he’s prepared to resist party pressure to run for the Senate instead. “I don’t plan to be in politics for 30 years,” he says. And while he hasn’t made a decision, he declares that CEOs “get stuff done” and that “you can’t change the direction of the state without a new chief executive.”
I’m hearing the powers that be weren’t all that impressed with Schock’s performance at last week’s convention, however. “Not ready for prime time,” was one phrase used. We’ll see. He’s got a ton of money, but with campaign caps in place, it’s not clear that he can transfer that federal pile to a state campaign committee.
Another contender, U.S. Rep. Aaron Schock of Peoria, sent out emails urging backers to respond to an online GOP gubernatorial poll being conducted by the Illinois Review, a conservative website.
