Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: The harsh Medicaid reality
Next Post: The governor’s pension plans
Posted in:
* An attempt at hammering out an agreement over banning Super PAC money in the 8th District Democratic primary appeared to start out innocently enough…
Tammy Duckworth and Raja Krishnamoorthi both said Monday evening that they hope to reach an agreement banning super-PAC spending in their race. “Unlimited contributions undermine the American principle of ‘one person, one vote,’” Duckworth said in a statement. “And the secretive nature of Super PACs means voters can’t know who’s behind an attack ad. That’s not acceptable — the only money that should be spent in the 8th District is money that is fully disclosed before the election under federal election laws.”
Raja Krishnamoorthi’s campaign went a step farther in its response, offering a ban on all donations from political action committees, unions, lobbyists and corporations. Both versions of the agreement would force the campaigns to pay major penalties if it is violated. [..]
Their calls come after Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and Democrat Elizabeth Warren reached a similar agreement, which Duckworth’s campaign says they used as a model. Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) and Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.) have been arguing over the details of an agreement that would do the same in their race.
* So, if Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren could make a deal, you’d think Duckworth and Krishnamoorthi could do so as well. But Krishnamoorthi didn’t want to stop with just a ban on Super PAC money. He demanded concessions that Duckworth most likely wouldn’t ever agree to…
But Krishnamoorthi said he will make a promise with Duckworth only if it goes further.
Krishnamoorthi calls his terms “basically removing all D.C. money from this election.”
He also proposed that the candidates get rid of “paid media (ads)” by holding one debate a week until the election.
Krishnamoorthi says while he is “troubled by the advent of Super PACs, and their appearance on the landscape, in this situation I’d have to take a look at the idea (the Duckworth campaign) put forward.”
* By 8 o’clock last night, Duckworth’s campaign was attempting to put all the blame on Krishnamoorthi. From a press release…
Krishnamoorthi Campaign Tries to Leave the Door Open for SuperPACs
Refuses to Sign an Agreement with TeethRaja Krishnamoorthi’s campaign rejected the key pieces of Tammy Duckworth’s Super PAC pledge this evening, refusing to “have our budget held hostage by a third party.”
The only limitation Krishnamoorthi’s proposal would put on SuperPACs would be to reject direct contributions - something already banned by current law.
“Mr. Krishnamoorthi’s campaign is missing the point,” said Josh Levin, Duckworth’s Campaign Manager. “The only way to keep SuperPACs and other secret, unlimited money out of the race is to let them know that if they get in it will hurt the candidate they’re trying to support. If Scott Brown and Elizabeth Warren can agree to these terms, surely we can do the same here.”
“We are disappointed and surprised that our opponent has refused to sign the pledge. Instead of putting the voters first and setting an example for Illinois and the country, Raja’s campaign has chosen to put political gamesmanship first.”
* At 5:09 this morning, Krishnamoorthi’s campaign was countering with its own press release…
DUCKWORTH REFUSES TO FORGO D.C. & PAC MONEY OR ENGAGE IN DEBATES
Duckworth Campaign Refuses Pledge to Keep D.C. Money out of RaceTammy Duckworth’s campaign refuses to address the agreement put forth by Raja Krishnamoorthi, which (a) calls for both candidates to reject PAC and D.C. money and (b) calls for both candidates to engage in a series of substantive debates on the issues.
The U.S. campaign finance system undermines democracy due to a broad and systemic problem of huge amounts of D.C. money tilting the scales of an election. That is why Raja has proposed a plan that diminishes the impact of PAC and D.C. money on this election.
“Duckworth’s campaign is taking a page out of the D.C. playbook by muddying the waters instead of discussing the issue at hand,” said Deputy Campaign Manager Mike Murray. “The facts are clear. Raja’s proposal will allow voters to cast their votes based upon the strength of a candidate’s ideas and plans instead of the strength of a candidate’s financial support from Washington D.C. and PACs.”
“Instead of discussing Tammy’s ideas and policy solutions, Duckworth’s campaign seeks to avoid substantive debate on the issues facing working families and relies mainly on name recognition and D.C. money to try to win this election,” continued Murray. “The voters of Illinois’ 8th district deserve better.”
* And then at 10:03 this morning, Duckworth’s campaign was trying to raise money off the “controversy”…
Yesterday, I asked my opponents to join me in a pledge to keep Super PAC spending out of this race. An overwhelming number of you signed on to agree that unlimited, anonymous funding should have no role in our democracy. But unfortunately, my primary opponent refused to sign on to the same kind of pledge Elizabeth Warren and Scott Brown agreed to.
Please contribute $10 now to prove to my opponent that grassroots funding works–and it’s the right thing to do.
As I said yesterday, this will only work if my opponent agrees. Over 7,000 of you have contributed to my campaign–often in spite of tough financial circumstances–and I’m not willing to let your contributions be overwhelmed by millions of dollars in negative attack ads.
We’ve already seen the corrosive effect of Super PAC support in the Republican presidential primary. And frankly, I’m not surprised to see Republicans embrace unlimited, anonymous corporate funds. But using a Super PAC in a Democratic primary would be unprecedented. It’s just not who we are as a party and it’s not what we should aspire to be.
Thanks for standing with me,
Tammy
P.S. We can’t let millions of dollars in negative Super PAC ads manipulate the outcome of this race. Contribute $10 to our Anti-Super PAC fund now–because this race should be determined by grassroots support, not a few wealthy backers.
*** UPDATE *** The Raja campaign has now issued its own fundraising appeal based on the disagreement…
Dear Friends,
The Citizens United decision equating corporate speech with individual speech was one of the worst decisions ever rendered by the Supreme Court. That is why I support a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.
Now my opponent is attacking me for my stance on this issue. Please contribute $25, $50, $100 or more now to help me stop the lies and tell voters about my plan.
I am asking my opponent to join me in a pledge to combat D.C. politics as usual by (a) refusing to accept D.C. and PAC money; and (b) holding a series of debates, one per week until March 20th, in order to let voters make a truly informed decision that is not solely based upon TV ads and sound bites in the upcoming election.
So far, she has refused.
The Citizens United decision highlighted and accelerated a growing problem in politics, which is that there is simply too much money in our political system, and much of it is directed from Washington D.C. This problem pre-dated Citizens United and will remain with us even after we overturn Citizens United. My opponent is pushing a misguided Super PAC pledge created by D.C. Republicans, which of course fails to truly address the problem of special interest money in politics. And, she won’t sign on to my pledge.
Click here to join me in calling on my opponent to take D.C. money out of this election and engaging in a series of debates to allow voters to make an informed decision.
My opponent should join me in improving our political system by pledging to hold a series of debates so that the voters of the 8th District can choose their candidate by the strength of their ideas and their plans for restoring prosperity to the middle class.
If you agree that we need to remove D.C. and PAC money from politics, and think the voters of the 8th District deserve a substantive discussion of the issues facing working families, then join me by calling on my opponent to accept the terms of my pledge.
I await a response from my opponent, and I look forward to a substantive discussion of the issues.
Best regards,
Raja
* Meanwhile, in other Super PAC news…
A super PAC opposed to incumbents from either party plans to spend several hundred thousand dollars in Illinois before the March 20 primary to unseat three long-serving members of Congress from the Chicago area.
The Campaign for Primary Accountability, a Houston-based group with more than $1.6 million cash on hand, is targeting Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Chicago; Rep. Judy Biggert, R-Hinsdale, and Rep. Donald Manzullo, R-Rockford. Under federal law, super PACs can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money as long as they do not coordinate with the campaign they are trying to help.
More…
According to the Texas Tribune, a nonprofit news organization, Linbeck contributed $775,000 to the Campaign for Primary Accountability, Joe Ricketts (patron of the family that purchased the Chicago Cubs) donated $500,000 and O’Keefe gave $100,000.
Curtis Ellis, spokesman for the super PAC, claims the group is nonpartisan and has carefully picked candidates throughout the country who have a chance to defeat long-term incumbents.
* Congressman Jackson responded via press release…
Jackson calls on Halvorson to Denounce SuperPac Support and Tell Pac to Stop Spending on Her Behalf
Today Congressman Jesse Jackson,Jr. decried the involvement of an outside Super Pac in the 2nd Congressional District race. The Campaign for Primary Accountability , a SuperPac formed by a wealthy Texas construction magnate named Leo Linbeck, III is reported to be spending money on robo calls and direct mail on behalf of Debbie Halvorson.
Congressman Jesse Jackson said, “This SuperPac is certainly no friend of Democrats. They are anti-Obama, anti-labor, anti-health care reform, I call upon Debbie Halvorson to actively and strongly denounce them and ask them to go back to Texas.”
* Halvorson hasn’t responded, but she did put out this press release…
According to a recent New York Time’s article, Representative Jesse Jackson Junior’s primary financial investor for the Peotone airport has been recently connected to the plot to smuggle Quadafi’s son to Mexico.
Debbie Halvorson stated:
“Representative Jackson is once again walking a fine line when it comes to ethics. According to Congressman Jackson himself, SNC-Lavalin is the one of the primary financial investors for the Peotone Airport and he has a long-standing relationship with this corporation. This makes me call into question the firm’s ability to fund the airport and whether we even want a firm here in Illinois who is connected to a plot to smuggle a member of Quadafi’s family into Mexico. On top of the connection with the airport, Representative Jackson voted last summer to bar funding for President Obama’s Libya operation. This doesn’t pass the smell test.”
The NYT story is here.
* Related…
* Brown: Voters disappear from city rolls: There were 1,279,971 registered voters in Chicago as of Monday morning. Barring an unexpected last-minute surge, that will leave us short of the previous low for a presidential primary — 1,307,519 — set just four years ago when Barack Obama bested Hillary Clinton and that slick lawyer from North Carolina whose name I’ve already forgotten. Oh, yeah, Edwards. City election officials estimate that leaves 400,000 to 500,000 individuals in Chicago who would otherwise be eligible but aren’t registered. “We view it as a real problem,” Chicago Board of Election Commissioners Chairman Langdon Neal said of the registration totals, which have been trending in this direction for quite some time despite constant efforts to make it simpler to sign up.
* ADDED: Illinois Supreme Court election: Does anybody even know it’s on the ballot?
* ADDED: Kinzinger, Sheyman hit TV in races for Congress
* ADDED: VIDEO: Kinzinger for Congress “Our Debt” Ad
* ‘Progressive’ Sheyman up with first ad
* VIDEO: Sheyman for Congress: American Dream
* Manzullo calls for teamwork, end of super PACs at DeKalb town hall
* VIDEO: Walsh: “Clergy feels stabbed in the back” by Obamacare
* Rep. Kinzinger announces local supporters
* Partisan clash jeopardizing local transportation projects
* Congressmen don’t like transportation bill
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 10:59 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: The harsh Medicaid reality
Next Post: The governor’s pension plans
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Even if various candidates denounce SuperPac assistance, what is to stop the SuperPacs from jumping in anyway? Some of those PACs are one issue type of groups. I mean, even Obama has now indicated that he will accept SuperPac assistance.
These various candidates are walking on thin ice. First they denounce them, then they accept assistance from them because their opponents didn’t denounce them with the same ironclad vigor that they did. I don’t see any win for them or their opponents under this scenario.
They are here. They are legal. They have been formed to assist both sides, Democrat and Republican. They will butt in on various races. We all need to get used to it, including campaigns on both sides of the aisle.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 11:12 am
After watching the video of the debate between Halverson and Jackson Jr you have to wonder how Jr isn’t running away with this. The district must be tired of him because he handled himself very well and Halverson had nothing in the debate. Not really a fan of either but Jackson really came across well.
Comment by Fed up Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 11:36 am
–According to the Texas Tribune, a nonprofit news organization, Linbeck contributed $775,000 to the Campaign for Primary Accountability, Joe Ricketts (patron of the family that purchased the Chicago Cubs) donated $500,000 and O’Keefe gave $100,000.–
It was Old Man Ricketts’ money that bought the Cubs. It’s going to be a tough sell to lawmakers that the team needs public help for Wrigley Field when they’re throwing around big money targeting incumbents.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 11:40 am
The Ricketts family is worth a column from you. Last week the daughter hosted a glbt fundraiser for obama, the next week the father is running super pac ads, this on top of the issues they have with the ballpark last year and the fathers funding of some conservative think tank I think we talked a lot about on here.
The Sheyman ad is really smart for one reason. they use people from the district who are well known small business owners (instead of random actors) that people in the district are going to look at and say I know that person and remember the ad.
Comment by Shore Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 11:49 am
Are you kidding, Shore? That Sheyman ad is wretched. He didn’t even synch the audio properly.
Comment by so... Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 12:21 pm
I wonder if Raja or Tammy actually intended to sign such a pledge or if each just figured they would ratchet up the stakes until the other one balked.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 12:26 pm
OK, I am not the only one. The Sheyman ad is out of synch with its audio.
Its also a paltry $9,000 cable buy, so no one is going to see it aside from the free media it generates.
Comment by ChiAnon Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 12:33 pm
Is anyone else distracted by the background music in Kinzinger’s ad?
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 12:40 pm
@Pot Calling kettle - Duckworth’s campaign initiated this whole thing. We were forced to respond, and frankly this thing came out of left field and is not what I think voters care about.
For example, what is the basis for the following excerpt from Duckworth’s email blast:
“I’m not willing to let your contributions be overwhelmed by millions of dollars in negative attack ads.”
I don’t understand how such a comment can be directed at our campaign while still maintaining a straight face… I must have missed all the negative Ads attacking Duckworth that were paid for by millions of dollars from Super Pacs.
I guess Duckworth’s campaign prefers any topic that allows them to forego participating in a substantive debate on how best to strengthen the middle class and grow our economy.
Comment by Mike Murray Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 12:44 pm
I will not agree to use money from SuperPacs unless you agree to a debate a week. Another way to put it … It’s ok to use SuperPAC money since you will not debate me. Is this what I’m reading? Nobody, with any political sense, would agree to that.- and Im sure Raja’s camp knows that. Sounds like typical DC politics to me
Comment by One to the Dome Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 12:53 pm
I do hope Tammy accepts Raja’s challenge to debate who would be the better congressperson, rather than continuing to debate the fundraising rules.
Comment by Robert Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 1:04 pm
@Dome, that is not what we are saying at all, but Tammy’s campaign is muddying the waters.
We are against Super Pacs, we will just not sign on to some pledge that gives a third party control over our budget. Period. What if GOP runs an attack ad on Tammy in Primary, then we would lose money? Makes no sense and the whole topic smacks of hypocrisy from a candidate raking in PAC money hand over first. But like I said, we can’t not respond…
Comment by Mike Murray Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 1:08 pm
Sheyman uses people in that ad who are well known in the community, I think it’s a nice touch and I am not usually someone who says nice things.
I am personally a big fan of candidate debates and after the clunker candidates of last year-walsh, cohen, plummer, I think they’re really needed. If any of you are out there and can video tape and post online would be good.
Comment by shore Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 1:44 pm
Perhaps the Rickets SuperPAC is targeting Sox fans?
Comment by OneMan Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 1:51 pm
so this makes me wonder, what superPAC does raja have lined up to attack tammy? it’s obvious that his “offer” was a poison pill designed to make his opponent look bad (not that there’s anything wrong with that!), so i guess it makes me suspicious that he’s got a superPAC lying in wait…
Comment by bored now Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 2:07 pm
The Kinzinger music comes up too much. It’s standard, needle-drop John Williams “Star Wars/Superman” knockoff.
Jason Plummer used similar music last primary.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 2:17 pm
What kind of plane is in the background when Kinzinger talks about flying combat missions? It looks like a small passenger prop plane. Was he flying generals over combat areas, or is it the wrong plane…just curious.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 3:03 pm
With regards to superpacs I don’t remember a single person getting rewarded in the 2002 elections for the campaign finance reform act (feingold and shays were eventually defeated and mccain lost his presidential bid, meehan, the 4th sponsor either retired or is still around) that was passed in the first half of bush’s term in office. Ethics can sink people, I am not sure a candidate’s position on a superpac can win them votes. I think this debate is a loss for raja because it takes him off his “jobs” message aka my private sector employment because I was defeated for public office bit.
There’s a similar debate going on in massachusettes and the voters don’t care according to polling.
http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2012/02/money-doesnt-ma.php
Comment by Shore Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 3:11 pm
I am the not-so-happy recipient of endless emails from Tammy Duckworth’s campaign. I would “unsubscribe” except that they are so fantastically juvenile, I cannot bear the thought of not reading them anymore.
One thing is clear from the endless stream of emails: Tammy Duckworth’s campaign think people are stoopid. Furthermore, I get the sense that they are written in the hopes of hitting a target of old people with dementia who pull out their checkbooks mindlessly.
Comment by Knome Sane Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 3:47 pm
So if I’m either candidate, and I can’t legally coordinate with any Super PAC, how exactly am I going to prevent them from running an ad, by saying pretty please?
Seriously, that’s asinine. Play by the rules in place and if you don’t like them, change them when/if you win. I mean, let’s say I’m a candidate and I sign this pledge along with my opponent. Then a super PAC run by my opponent’s friends runs a negative ad against him, causing an earned media backlash against me because I’ve “broken” the pledge (even though I couldn’t coordinate legally) AND I would have to pay a fine to boot.
I dunno, sounds like you’d have to be a moron to even discuss signing one unless you’re looking a quick plug. Oh, they both got one.
Comment by Thoughts... Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 3:54 pm
@Mike Murray, the “political” part becomes when you bring up the debates as a condition on agreement not to use SuperPAC money. I understand why you would want debates (after reports of trailing in the polls), but to attach that to money? Why attach the two bothers me.
It appears both sides are poised for a onslot of negative ads because the other will not agree to their unrealistic terms. Like I said,typical DC politics.
Comment by One To the Dome Tuesday, Feb 14, 12 @ 7:38 pm