Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

* UPDATED x2 - Kelly’s lawyer admits she can’t raise or spend soft money * Outside counsel tells DPI that US Rep. Robin Kelly ineligible to be state party chair

Posted in:

Illinois
Updated Posts

* Memo to DPI central committee members…

* Perkins Coie attorney Brian G. Svoboda…

You have asked under what circumstances a federal officeholder or candidate may serve as Chair of the Democratic Party of Illinois (“the DPI”). The DPI maintains a federal account that raises and spends funds within the limits, restrictions and reporting requirements of federal campaign finance law. It also maintains a nonfederal account that raises and spends funds outside these same limits, restrictions and reporting requirements in connection with nonfederal elections. Federal law prohibits a federal officeholder or candidate from directly or indirectly establishing, financing, maintaining or controlling an entity that raises and spends funds outside of federal limits and restrictions in connection with nonfederal elections.

For an individual who is now a federal officeholder or candidate to serve as Chair of the DPI, one of the following events would need to occur:

1. The individual would need to resign from federal office and cease to be a federal candidate;

2. The DPI would need to cease raising and spending funds outside federal limits and restrictions; or

3. The DPI would need to curtail the Chair’s duties and powers so that he or she does not “establish, finance, maintain or control” the DPI for purposes of federal campaign finance law. While possible in theory, such action is impractical in fact. It would essentially turn the Chair into a purely honorary role, without power to direct large portions of the DPI’s activities. Because even such a restricted role would almost certainly result in a complaint to, and potentially an investigation by, the Federal Election Commission (“FEC”), we would advise against this approach without an FEC advisory opinion approving the specific arrangement.

The full memo is here.

The vast majority of money raised by DPI is under non-federal rules.

I’ll be asking for responses.

…Adding… My favorite comment so far is from somebody who said he was more interested in what Speaker Pelosi’s attorneys say. Um, Perkins Coie works for the DCCC. That firm represents basically everybody in national Democratic politics, including Sen. Durbin.

*** UPDATE 1 *** Response…

“A suggestion Congresswoman Robin Kelly is ineligible to be the Chair of the Democratic Party of Illinois is false and offensive. Federal and state elected officials follow all applicable election laws. Congresswoman Robin Kelly can be and would be the best person to lead the Democratic Party of Illinois as its next chair.”

“Illinois Democrats watched Georgia Democrats execute a winning strategy in November - led by their Chair of the Democratic Party of Georgia, Congresswoman Nikema Williams. Georgia Democrats were energized, mobilized and followed the law to big wins. Illinois Democrats can too. But it starts with new ethical and transparent leadership for a new day for Illinois Democrats — that’s with Robin Kelly as our next Chair.”

Pointing to someone else who might also be in violation is not a solid defense, but OK.

*** UPDATE 2 *** US Rep. Kelly has released a letter from attorney Michael C. Dorf. Most important part…

In its most basic interpretation, Section 300.62 would prevent you from raising or spending soft money in state and local elections. In addition, the DPI would be prohibited from spending soft money to the extent that you directly or indirectly “controlled” DPI. […]

I believe that policies and procedures can be constructed to permit you to serve as Chair within the provisions of federal law. These will include the delegation by you to others of certain spending authority as well as the erection of firewalls for designated activities to ensure that you are not directly or indirectly controlling decision making in those activities. Your ability to raise funds for use in state and local elections will be limited, but your ability to ascend the “bully pulpit” to advocate for Democratic policies, principles, and candidates on behalf of DPI should not be impinged.

So, a party chair who can’t raise or spend money. Pure figurehead.

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:20 pm

Comments

This battle gets more interesting by the hour.

Comment by northside reformer Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:25 pm
I have a hard time thinking Robin Kelly didn’t know this already.

Comment by questions Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:25 pm
Not to point out the obvious, but this is a rather transparent attack from the Madigan-Harris aligned wing of the party on the Durbin-Kelly wing. In trouble? Better change the rules.

Comment by Young Reform Dem Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:25 pm
== Madigan-Harris aligned wing of the party on the Durbin-Kelly wing==

I think you mean Pritzker-Harris wing

Comment by questions Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:27 pm
===…but this is a rather transparent attack from the Madigan-Harris aligned wing of the party on the Durbin-Kelly wing. In trouble? Better change the rules.===

(Sigh)

So I’m clear;

It’s an “attack”… to point out the seemingly obvious that Kelly is ineligible.

… but…

… changing the rules is fine, because… the alleged “attack” is correct in the interpretation?

That’s a long walk around the barn to claim “victimhood” for Kelly.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:28 pm
=== Pritzker-Harris===

The proxy fight is between Pritzker and Durbin.

Other names at this point are noise… unless they can bring weighed votes.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:30 pm
Sure, include Pritzker in there. But to me, disqualifying your opponent feels much more Madigan than Pritzker as far as strategy goes…If Harris already had the votes, then why release this?

Comment by Young Reform Dem Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:34 pm
I guess it’s not just the Republican party that’s screwed up internally. There must be something in the water or air in Illinois.

Comment by Responsa Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:34 pm
Kelly is only ineligible if she wants to stay in Congress. So there’s that.

But boy, you’d think somebody would have checked that out before starting a fight over this job. Assuming Kelly isn’t going to resign from Congress, a lot of people have egg on their face now.

Backing an ineligible candidate? What a debacle.

Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:35 pm
Perkins Coie is Pritzker campaign’s lawyer, which doesn’t mean he’s not right

Comment by Ivory Tower Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:37 pm
i read through the opinion and tried to link the footnotes to the argument. talk about a stretch!

since when did dpi ask permission to raise money??? has illinois changed that much???

who would be challenging a kelly chair to the fec?
when would the fec meet on such a challenge?
how long would it take the fec to rule on it?

i thought Perkins Coie had a good rep. so it seems strange they would focus their opinion on something that, if taken, is likely to be ruled on in 10-14 years. that’s a reasonable fec timeframe.

so the dpi is basically arguing that it needs to ask permission to do something that numerous federal office holders do (control a non-fed committee) and have done for years. i believe there are existing illinois office holders who have non-fed pac’s now. this opinion, if it were, ahem, accurate would mean that they would have to abandon their non-fed committees. and that’s just absurd.

this doesn’t pass the smell test. i get the purpose. one candidate is successful at raising millions, the other is not. to date. so the side that hasn’t shown the ability to raise money is throwing stuff at the wall hoping that it keeps people from voting for the candidate who can raise the money needed.

smh…

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:37 pm
=== include Pritzker in there===

LOL, it’s Pritzker’s Proxy Pick.

Do better, this isn’t a place with folks passively following along.

=== But to me, disqualifying your opponent feels much more Madigan than Pritzker as far as strategy goes===

The victimhood again?

Friend, they chose someone who doesn’t qualify. They chose Kelly. Yikes.

=== If Harris already had the votes, then why release this?===

So by Wednesday, it can be a unanimous vote.

I mean… really?

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:37 pm
Is it normal for a Chair in state parties nationwide to have unilateral control over these accounts without approval of the central committee? Shouldn’t the chair be overseeing a professional staff and leading the committee, rather than being the one who completely runs the show?

Comment by NIU Grad Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:39 pm
== disqualifying your opponent feels much more Madigan than Pritzker as far as strategy goes ==

Uh, her position and the law disqualify her, not Madigan or a memo. If Kelly didn’t know this, there are bigger issues.

You really want to make this about Madigan but this has nothing to do with him. Time to move on, Young Reform Dem

Comment by questions Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:41 pm
JB’s personal attorneys are giving an opinion? I’ll wait to hear what Durbin’s attorneys say next and then decide.

Comment by Hmmm Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:44 pm
I’m not a lawyer and my reading comprehension in general can be called into question, but wouldn’t this disqualify her and a few others from being on the committee in general?

Comment by Excitable Boy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:45 pm
So no federal office holders can get elected to the state central committee since each of them indirectly controls the funds?

Comment by Dan Johnson Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:45 pm
i’d be more interested in what nancy pelosi’s attorneys have to say since this opinion widely discredits a very common, widely used practice by her members. but, like i suggested before, this is such pie-in-the-sky thinking pretending to be legal thinking that we’d have to wait until she stopped laughing.

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:46 pm
The plot thickens.

Comment by Frank talks Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:48 pm
I for one will resign as a Dem precinct chair if Harris wins. She sits around waiting for her marching orders from the machine.

Comment by Anon Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:53 pm
blood sausage

Comment by walker Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:55 pm
===i’d be more interested in what nancy pelosi’s attorneys have to say ===

Um, Perkins Coie is the DCCC’s firm. lol https://www.perkinscoie.com/en/professionals/marc-e-elias.html

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:56 pm
It would behoove Pritzker and Durbin to talk this through, the Kelly ineligibility, and put this to bed with everyone trying to save face and simultaneously not gloat.

It’s seems to be more in a “damage control” way than a cobbling to a majority way at this time.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:59 pm
I’m sorry some Robin Kelly supporters don’t like the law. But if Perkins Coie is correct - and there’s no way they’d put their name on this if they didn’t believe they were - then this is game over. And your complaint should be directed at the person who didn’t bother to vet whether this would be a problem in the first place and then created division for what may merely be a PR exercise.

Comment by Southern Skeptic Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 12:59 pm
Also, Perkins Coie has represented Durbin’s campaign https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/dick-durbin/expenditures?cid=N00004981&cycle=2018

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:00 pm
rich: i knew i’d heard of them! however, nancy doesn’t “control” the dccc and this reads like someone asked them to support an argument instead of providing an independent legal opinion. this opinion has implications beyond this specific race and i have doubts that it was provided to the speaker’s office.

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:00 pm
Southern Skeptic: i find it odd that you call it “law.” what i read looked like a particular reading of regulations from a commission that takes its time to make rulings, long after the facts are established. they had gone years without a quorum. they have a lot of years to make up for. hard to see how they would rule on it before this dpi chair term is up.

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:08 pm
=== Pointing to someone else who might also be in violation…===

LOL

The only thing better about that whole spiel is ignoring the whole “the ends justify the means” while trying to say it’s doing what’s “right”

The word “farce” immediately comes to mind.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:08 pm
===nancy doesn’t “control” the dccc===

OMG what planet are you on?

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:09 pm
Look, you wanna talk legal differences, then fine. But don’t just make stuff up. We’re not as stupid as you think.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:10 pm
This seems more legit than “Rahm can’t run for mayor because he’s not a resident” but boy that’s a lot of analysis to come up with a conclusion the FEC “would likely find” against Kelly. That technically applies to 51%-49% chance.

Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:20 pm
Who is the response from?

Comment by So_Ill Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:23 pm
the Anon comment on resigning if Harris is selected in indicative of the issue of the continuing machine connection and the problem with that. if Kelly cannot do it, need a third alternative. maybe Castro can be back in play.

Comment by Amalia Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:25 pm
More clarification needed. She can vote as a member of the DCCC on these expenditures now? But not as chair?
Maybe she can recuse herself. Maybe she should have always recused herself. Is the chair suddenly all powerful that he or she bypasses the rest of the committee?
Lots of questions.

Comment by S. Side Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:29 pm
=== need a third alternative===

Why?

If Harris (Pritzker) has the votes, then they have the votes.

If folks wanna leave they’re going to leave.

The chairman of a state party, and that party was essentially a mail indicia during the Madigan years, causing angst, it usually is a sitting governor’s call so maybe *the angst* isn’t in the norm.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:29 pm
Nikema Williams was not a member of Congress during the vast majority Georgia runoff (two day overlap from Jan 3 to Jan 5). However, she does remain Chair of the Georgia Democratic Party post-swearing.

Comment by Nuke the Whales Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:31 pm
If it is NOT M. Harris then I am resigning..Not sure what I am resigning from.. but I QUIT

Comment by NotRich Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:37 pm
What federal elected official in Illinois controls a non-federal committee since 2002?

Comment by ArchPundit Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:38 pm
I don’t have a dog in this hunt, but the Kelly folks really need to get a hold of themselves. What a potentially destructive response on the national level.

Countdown to National GOP & Georgia GOP adding this to the stolen election narrative in 3….2….1….

Comment by SpiDem Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:39 pm
I’m pretty sure Perkins Coie has never been DPI’s attorney before. But JB has definitely spent millions of dollars in legal fees with them. Interesting time for the Democratic Party to bring on new counsel.

Comment by Wizzard of Ozzie Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:40 pm
=== this to the stolen election narrative===

How is it stolen… if Kelly isn’t eligible?

It’s like the weekend hangovers are melting into Monday?

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:42 pm
===Interesting time for the Democratic Party to bring on new counsel. ===

Well, yeah, but would you have believed Mike Kasper? lol

That’s a logic trap.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:43 pm
===Interesting time for the Democratic Party to bring on new counsel.===

Prolly as interesting as someone might also want to say…

“Interesting time for the Democratic Party to keep on Madigan’s counsel.”

Can’t win either way.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:44 pm
Congressman Ken Buck also chairs CO State Party… by the line of argument asserted by Pritzker- no federal official could sit on State Central Committee. Dirty tricks late in the game as expected. Pritzker-Caprera want absolute control of the party and expected no opposition. If Harris had the votes- they wouldn’t need this little stunt.
People are desperate to avoid Fulks as DPI Exec Director- as he has not been effective at Think Big.

Comment by Pritzkers Pets Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:46 pm
Sorry Rich… lol

Same time.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:47 pm
- Pritzkers Pets -

Who is Morgan Lenore Carroll?

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:50 pm
The legal memo is supported by FEC publications:
https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/candgui.pdf
Prohibition The Federal Election Campaign Act (the Act) and Commission regulations restrict the ability of federal candidates and offceholders to raise funds. Specifcally, federal candidates and offcehold-ers, their agents and entities established, fnanced, maintained or controlled by them, may not solicit,1 receive, direct,2 transfer, spend or disburse funds in connection with a federal election, including funds for federal election activity, unless the funds are within the Act’s limits, prohibitions and reporting requirements. 300.61. In addition, federal candidates and offceholders may solicit, receive, direct, transfer, spend or disburse funds in connection with a nonfederal election only in amounts and from sources that are consistent with state law and that do not exceed the Act’s con-tribution limits or come from prohibited sources. 300.62.

Comment by ArchPundit Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:50 pm
This feels very similar to what happened to Rep. Cheri Bustos when she had to step back from serving on that anti-harassment panel in 2018 alongside Susana Mendoza and Senator Melinda Bush. Members of Congress face incredibly rigid restrictions from participating in certain types of activities that require fundraising or for them to serve as an official/officer in organizations that are in the political and advocacy space. How no one saw this coming is the question. What an unnecessary, distracting exercise this all has been.

Comment by Shytown Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:52 pm
I want more from the party than we got during the Madigan years. There are great opportunities for training, organizing, supporting candidates at the local level. We cannot afford to have a party that continues to support a big name. It has to support all of us.

Comment by Amalia Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:52 pm
Perkins Coie is a world class law firm that is not going to risk its reputation, let alone potential liability, by taking sides in a political cat fight with an opinion memo that is not legally correct. Given the breadth of the firm’s political clientele, there is no percentage in that for them.

Comment by SouthSide Markie Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:53 pm
- Pritzkers Pets -

Can you cite when Ken Buck was chair of the Colorado Democratic Party?

Thanks.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:53 pm
== who is Morgan Lenore Carroll? ==

What are facts anyway?

Comment by Shytown Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:57 pm
Do IDP rules allow the chair to unilaterally decide how funds will be spent? If so, that is a problem which a rule change should address. If the rules merely allow the chair signatory authority over the account, then a change of signer resolves the problem rather simply. Why allow an individual that kind of power when a Zoom conference is easy enough to hold to set parameters for expenditures. I would remain uncomfortable donating to a party committee where the funds were controlled by an individual. No one in Illinois is important enough to be, unto themselves, the party.

Comment by Draznnl Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 1:59 pm
Perkins has been DPI’s counsel for years on federal campaign finance law matters. See, e.g., this MUR from 2002: https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/current/30160.pdf

Comment by PolCounsel Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:01 pm
Ken Buck is as chair of CO state party…the GOP. Pritzkers Pets never stated it was Dem party… pesky facts Shytown

Comment by Read more carefully Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:03 pm
=== Pritzkers Pets never stated it was Dem party… pesky facts Shytown===

So… the premise is based on the state of Colorado’s Republican Party chair?

And “Pritzker’s Pets” is worried about (checks notes)… dirty tricks?

The grasped straws are getting fewer and weaker, lol

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:05 pm
GA & CO may have other structures for the campaign finance side or they may just have ignored the law as well.

Comment by ArchPundit Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:06 pm
SouthSide Markie: i see a carefully crafted opinion that fit the client’s needs. that does not denigrate their reputation. if anything, the best part of that opinion is rooted in reform beliefs — which isn’t exactly something that comes natural in illinois. i think if people actually read the opinion and see the qualifiers and then understand that there would be lots of democrats who would violate its tenets, you would see that this is all about how one side is trying to stop the progress of the other. politics ain’t beanbag. if i was on the other side, i’d try this tactic as well. but let’s not pretend it isn’t just that, a tactic to perpetuate power. dpi isn’t taking kelly to the fec if she wins. jb isn’t taking kelly to the fec if she wins. they are simply trying to stop her from winning. i expect perkins coie could argue both sides of this, without damaging their reputation. they were asked to argue one. and they did. it made me chuckle because illinois is, well, unique…

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:06 pm
bored now–but the FEC’s own literature supports this reading of the law. What federal office older still has a state committee that is active in Illinois?

Comment by ArchPundit Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:07 pm
Read more carefully, touché. But still, it looks like this is all going to resolve itself now.

Comment by Shytown Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:10 pm
== dpi isn’t taking kelly to the fec if she wins. jb isn’t taking kelly to the fec if she wins. they are simply trying to stop her from winning ==

Well let’s see how the IL GOP would try dragging this out in the weeks and months to come if Kelly got the gig.

Comment by Shytown Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:13 pm
== dpi isn’t taking kelly to the fec if she wins. jb isn’t taking kelly to the fec if she wins. they are simply trying to stop her from winning ==

*Anyone* has standing to file an FEC complaint, and it’s a certainty that one of Kelly’s future opponents or IL GOP wouldn’t pass up that opportunity.

Comment by PolCounsel Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:20 pm
bored now,

There’s always qualifiers in any opinion letter. The problem is not DPI or anyone else taking Kelly to the FEC. It’s the FEC filing an enforcement action against DPI on its own if she wins.

Comment by SouthSide Markie Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:20 pm
Shytown: so first we are asking permission to raise money and now we are asking permission from the gop???

ArchPundit: bobby rush, danny davis, etc etc. i think it would be easier to name those who don’t have a state committee than those who don’t.

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:21 pm
===The problem is not DPI or anyone else taking Kelly to the FEC. It’s the FEC filing an enforcement action against DPI on its own if she wins.===

and would would be the punishment? that they exclude the money raised? that would be unprecedented. that they force her to resign one position (the one they have “control” over would be the federal office)? yeah, i see nothing but tie votes coming out of the fec.

again, other state’s have had to deal with this exact issue and the solution was never to force the officeholder out of office, or candidate from the race. i find this tactic to disqualify one side from the race a standard chicago machine tactic. not sure perpetuating the machine will help democrats much. might even help the gop more…

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:30 pm
In a stunning reversal of events, Scott Drury, former Federal Prosecutor, is elected to DPI Chair “as a goof”.

Comment by Commisar Gritty Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:32 pm
=== again, other state’s have had to deal with this exact issue and the solution was never to force the officeholder out of office===

“So let it be”…. that’s your answer?

“Meh, it may or may not be against the rules, but if you question if it’s against the rules… that’s machine politics”?

I mean… it made me chuckle, sure.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:32 pm
Like sands through the hour glass…… it’s getting good now.

So do Harris/JB and Kelly/Durbin have a sit down tonight or tomorrow before Wednesday meeting? Get this all hashed out and move on before an embarrassing public Wednesday zoom meeting?

Comment by Frank talks Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:34 pm
Assuming based on precedent in GA and CO there is a pretty straight forward work around.

Comment by Lil Lebowski Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:35 pm
This…

=== Assuming based on precedent in GA and CO there is a pretty straight forward work around.===

… or this…

===other state’s have had to deal with this exact issue and the solution was never to force the officeholder out of office, or candidate from the race.===

Can’t be both.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:37 pm
1. The legal and rhetorical gymnastics by the Kelly backers on the blog is Olympics-worthy. “Reformers” are arguing a federal officeholder ought to be able to raise federal funds for her own race while also raising federal funds through DPI that she could control to spend on her race, evading campaign finance limits, is mind blowing. “Other states are doing it” is your defense?

2. The very folks in Team Durbin (it isn’t just Houlihan) who dreamed up the Robin Kelly Plan and made this colossal mistake want to be in charge.

3. Garcia and Castro should flip, while they can still get something for their vote.

Comment by Ferris Wheeler Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:38 pm
Also…

It’s “anti-machine” to ignore what a Colorado Republican Party chair is doing… for a better Illinois Democratic Party?

The comedy to that alone…

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:39 pm
Oswego Willy: i chuckled at the irony, as well. i don’t know anyone who buys that opinion wholeheartedly. lots of democratic federal office holders (that i’d reached out to in the last ~hour) disagreed. i got one person who thought it was an interesting start towards reform but was more interested in the specifics (ie, redistricting). we are quibbling as if this is all written on tablets. it’s not. again, more than one example of fed office holders controlling state political committees. i think williams did a mou. if anyone is going to stay within the legal guardrails here, it would be robin.

and she can raise the kind of money where not doing so would get the fec’s attention! but i still believe winning is everything, and i come at this from that specific perspective…

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:41 pm
=== lots of democratic federal office holders (that i’d reached out to in the last ~hour) disagreed.===

Honestly, and with respect, unless these office holders go on the record…

Hey, truthfully for me, I’m treating this exactly like watching west coast baseball;

I have no rooting interest, I’m here for the good baseball and I can’t stand watching when it’s bad.

I do know someone is going to lose, and the idea that things are “for the better” by either partially or wholly ignoring the rules or intent, that’s just bad politics and like bad baseball I can’t stand watching it.

Be well. It’s gonna be an interesting few days.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:48 pm
== and would would be the punishment? ==

A substantial penalty, as well as the cost of defense.

Comment by SouthSide Markie Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:51 pm
SouthSide Markie: probably. something that a mou could specify as kelly’s liability, not the party’s…

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 2:55 pm
Have the unions weighed in? I’m thinking they won’t want to be anywhere near a possible FEC complaint attached to a under Kelly as party chair.

Comment by Opening Date Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:05 pm
Eligible or not, I think it’s better to have a chair who isn’t spending so much time out of state anyway.

Comment by Ron Burgundy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:14 pm
== so first we are asking permission to raise money and now we are asking permission from the gop??? ==

Um, no. This is actually pretty easy to grasp if you take a step back from the horse you have in this race and put yer political hat on. Would you like to see the IL GOP drag this into court? I’d bet some some good money that there’s nothing more they’d like to do. I’d also bet they’ve already read through the memo and are tee-ing up potential arguments. There’s nothing they’d like more than a legit legal distraction to keep the Dem party from focusing on getting ready for the mid term fight.

Comment by Shytown Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:16 pm
==Eligible or not, I think it’s better to have a chair who isn’t spending so much time out of state anyway.==

By that logic it’s better to have a chair whose work is based in Springfield.

**Cristina Castro re-appears**

Comment by Redditor Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:35 pm
=== **Cristina Castro re-appears**===

This battle is between Pritzker and/or Durbin… thru proxy.

Ignoring that is misunderstanding what game you’re watching.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:37 pm
Shytown: the reason that i don’t think anyone faces the risk assumed in this opinion is because i don’t think a dpi under robin kelly would have the same bylaws. the risk is easily and predictably mitigated by signing a similar mou that williams did and makes rational and needed changes to the bylaws to fit within the guardrails that exist.

is creating a real democratic party org that is more inclusive, responsive to the concerns of all illinios democrats worth that risk? heck, yeah! machine politics have come to an end. electing an 8th ward pol to party chair? republicans will have more fodder from the continued machine control over the democratic party in illinois than anything they could take before the fec…

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:41 pm
Bored Now–just did a quick look at the Illinois committees and Rush doesn’t seem to be an officer of any committee. Davis is, but in looking at the contributions he’s following the federal caps which is the nub of the problem for someone being an officer of a state committee with different caps than the federal limits.

Comment by ArchPundit Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:49 pm
How does a Federal candidate run for State or local office without a state or local committee?

Comment by Griswald Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:52 pm
===changes to the bylaws to fit within the guardrails===

So, the chair can’t raise money?

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:53 pm
To the update: Kelly’s response is a political answer to a legal question.

Comment by Roman Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:53 pm
=== republicans will have more fodder from the continued machine control over the democratic party in illinois than anything they could take before the fec…===

With “Madigan”…

Raunerites are 0-8 with statewide offices (including Senators), super minoritied in both Illinois chambers, and are likely to be at 4 or 5 CongressCritters out of 17

I mean… that’s all under “Madigan” and that messaging.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:56 pm
—How does a Federal candidate run for State or local office without a state or local committee?

There is a small carve out. It’s on the same page of the FEC document I linked to above around p 157

Comment by ArchPundit Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:56 pm
=== So, the chair can’t raise money? ===

i don’t accept that as a real concern. ga dem chair/congresswoman williams raises non-fed money for ga dems that exceed fec regs.

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 3:58 pm
but mike’s letter makes my reply stupid.

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:00 pm
We can all seek advice and counsel from outside counsel so let me do a very quick memo to the party: who actually believes having a member of the Chicago City Council makes political sense for a statewide party post? That’s the most basic question and memo that no one is addressing. Sure, the Governor should have major say in who the state party chair is. Absolutely he should. But what an odd choice. It’s not politically smart. It plays into the GOP playbook. The Governor could have made this easy with lots of different choices. The elephant in the room is that, regardless of who has the juice to get this done, the ultimate choice of a Chicago City Council member reflects poor political judgment.

Comment by west wing Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:00 pm
===In its most basic interpretation, Section 300.62 would prevent you from raising or spending soft money in state and local elections. In addition, the DPI would be prohibited from spending soft money to the extent that you directly or indirectly “controlled” DPI.===

If I was Kelly I’d ask…

“Who put me here to embarrass me like this?”

You can have this job but can’t do any of things necessary to do the job well?

That’s what Kelly’s own counsel is suggesting.

Again, if I were Kelly, I’d be more upset I was out in a position to be embarrassed like this.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:03 pm
== How does a Federal candidate run for State or local office without a state or local committee? ==

There is an explicit exception in the regs for that, OC notes it in the memo.

Comment by PolCounsel Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:04 pm
Agree with West Wing

Comment by walker Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:05 pm
== So, a party chair who can’t raise or spend money. Pure figurehead. ==

You say that like it’s a bad thing.

Comment by Roman Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:12 pm
PolCounsel - thanks - how is a Congresswoman able to be Party Chair in Georgia?

Comment by Griswald Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:13 pm
===With “Madigan”===

yep, madigan knew how to parry those thrusts. With “Madigan”…

madigan is gone. if you think the message that illinois dems controlled by the chicago machine doesn’t hurt in the collars and downstate, we may just be about to test that belief — without madigan. i’d be scared. much safer to support someone who is not tied to the chicago machine. much…

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:14 pm
The fact that Robin Kelly released her own legal memo that basically supported the Perkins Coie conclusions is a level of political incompetence that should disqualify her from the job.

At a minimum, she now has to explain, in detail, how she would seek to change the bylaws and operations of DPI if elected. Otherwise, her election would neuter the entire organization

Comment by SpiDem Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:18 pm
=== if you think the message that illinois dems controlled by the chicago machine doesn’t hurt in the collars and downstate, we may just be about to test that belief — without madigan.===

The man was at less than 30% approval after tens of millions spent against him.

You’re afraid of the “Chicago Machine” branding after Madigan?

That makes zero sense to the actual elections and politics of the last 10 years.

You think the GOP has tens of millions of dollars to waste on “introducing” Harris?

You think a “Harris” movie is on the horizon?

You think you’re not pointing to the Madigan “boogeyman” under the bed, in actuality you think the “Chicago boogeyman” is hiding somewhere else in the room.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:18 pm
LOL @ Bored Now who wants to “reform” the Democratic Party of Illinois by urging them to take actions that are potentially illegal. OK.

==2. The very folks in Team Durbin (it isn’t just Houlihan) who dreamed up the Robin Kelly Plan and made this colossal mistake want to be in charge.==

The Central Committee might want to remember this fact. It’s most salient. How would they do on an actual campaign with actual voters, against a GOP pointing out that the Dem Chair is raising money illegally?

Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:20 pm
If anyone knows how to structure things so Robin can lead legally it is her elections lawyer. He is widely respected for his work, a nice man, and he has worked for progressive causes. I would trust that he can structure things to make it work.

Comment by Amalia Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:22 pm
Honestly I’d rather have a party leader who focuses on building the organization and electing Democrats than solely using the committee to raise funds. I get the value of having a chair who can raise federal funds but I don’t think that’s a deal-breaker. Kelly could just make sure she has a strong finance committee and delegate those fundraising responsibilities accordingly. If it doesn’t work out, the Central Committee should replace her.

Comment by Downstate Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:27 pm
=== I would trust that he can structure things to make it work.===

Here that is. This sound like someone who can wholly engage in the role as a party chair?

===Your ability to raise funds for use in state and local elections will be limited, but your ability to ascend the “bully pulpit” to advocate for Democratic policies, principles, and candidates on behalf of DPI should not be impinged.===

According to Kelly’s own counsel, Kelly can’t do the job in its entirety. Kelly would in monetary issues be… “impinged”.

So the pitch is…

“Vote for Kelly and you get a figurehead that can’t fulfill the duties prescribed according to her counsel”?

It’s an odd pitch, but it’s a pitch all the same.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:29 pm
===focuses on building the organization and electing Democrats===

And you do that without raising and spending money… how?

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:31 pm
Kelly was basically already running on an understanding that Houlihan would be doing a large amount of the work on her behalf. This just confirms that to be the case.

Comment by Downstate Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:31 pm
===Houlihan would be doing a large amount of the work===

He’s a US Senate employee, which means he has even tighter restrictions.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:32 pm
Rich, I could be wrong but I don’t think the only one who can raise funds for the party is the chair.

Comment by Downstate Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:33 pm
===but mike’s letter makes my reply stupid.

A much better response would have been to just say

Nevermind.

Comment by ArchPundit Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:34 pm
===raise funds===

You forgot “spend funds.”

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:34 pm
I’m saying that if she’s willing to delegate some responsibility to Houlihan, she’d be willing to delegate fundraising to someone else. It’s not what’s been done recently but having a party where the powers/responsibilities are spread out among several committee members and staff doesn’t sound crazy to me. Maybe she got Castro on board by offering her a significant role with the party. Maybe fundraising could be tha let role.

Comment by Downstate Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:35 pm
JB is spending lots of political capital, so his people can run the show. The guv needs as many friends as possible, and this is an odd strategy to make friends.

Comment by Former reformer Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:35 pm
@borednow- you must be new. CSouth of I80 wants to create it’s own state. Do you think Southern Illinois voters know the difference between Robin Kelly and Michelle Harris?
If you haven’t noticed the collar counties have had the only growth in Illinois these past years, houses are flying off the shelf, those folks didn’t come from out of state they came from the City of Chicago. So go ahead and now offend your newest voting base in the collars that should go over well.

Comment by Frank talks Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:35 pm
=== I’m saying that if she’s willing to delegate some responsibility to Houlihan, she’d be willing to delegate fundraising to someone else.===

So… now it’s Kelly, Houlihan, another one here, another one there… what, it’s now a bunch of cronies with “you have one job” things… then… why even have Kelly if so many other people are doing *her* job?

=== JB is spending lots of political capital===

It’s a proxy battle between Durbin.

Nothing more.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:38 pm
ArchPundit: indeed

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:44 pm
Don’t get me wrong, I see what y’all are saying. Would it be a non-starter for her to pitch her chairmanship as a decentralization / demonopolization of power? Like turn this limitation from a negative to a positive?

Comment by Downstate Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:47 pm
Frank talks: robin kelly represents south of i-80. i believe it is the only congressional district that represents urban, suburban and rural areas.

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:47 pm
Man, more than 100 comments here. Is the state chair really that important?

Rich, can you post something about the state senate just to calm things down?

Comment by Roman Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:48 pm
Look, it’s over She can run, but she can’t s serve. You can contort yourself into a million pretzels to think it can happen. but it can’t.

Comment by Someone you Should Know Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:50 pm
Memo to party: With JB’s funds, what’s the issue with Robin Kelly as fundraiser? Memo to party: Raise your hand if you think electing a Chicago City Council member to state party chair is smart politics?
If that is considered smart politics, then Illinois Democrats are in a world of hurt in future campaigns.

Comment by west wing Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:51 pm
Goodness?? Rep. Kelly, you can’t effectively do the job due to your current federal position which you do not, I presume, plan to resign for.

Therefore, please drop out of the DPI race and let Alderman Harris have @ it. She is able to navigate the ship without any limitations.

Comment by Pizza Man Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:53 pm
===With JB’s funds, what’s the issue with Robin Kelly as fundraiser?===

Why would Pritzker *want* to first have his choice to first lose to someone who can’t legally do the job… than fund the party because of it?

This is comical.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:54 pm
With JB’s. funds, she can’t direct the spending of them, so all she is, is a figurehead, and that’s what the common complaint was with the last administration.

Comment by Someone you Should Know Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:55 pm
===With JB’s funds===

How would that work, by the way?

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 4:59 pm
On the soft level, he can donate what. he wants, at the hard money level, he’s restricted. to the same restrictions as you and I

Comment by Someone you Should Know Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:00 pm
It is not smart politics to elect a Chicago City Council Member as chair.

Comment by Amalia Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:04 pm
- Amalia - Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:04 pm:

Says who? Obviously not in the opinions of the politicians elected on the state central committee.

Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:09 pm
I’m usually one of the participants not one of the critics, but there had been a lot of needless bull**** and personal criticisms in the comments to this post. I thought Kelly would win, but new **** has come to light, man. It’s a very complicated case. Lotta ins, lotta outs. We need to just chill out.

Comment by Ducky LaMoore Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:20 pm
We can debate this more, but I’m guessing that Kelly’s lawyer’s response moves the remaining undecideds over to Harris. Why would DPI want to endure the risk when there is what every politician craves, ie, the easier route.

Comment by SouthSide Markie Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:29 pm
Come on , Illinois is exempt in all manner of raising money

Comment by Justin Voter Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:31 pm
So after that ridiculous broadside accusing Perkins and Coie’s claims as “false and offensive,” her lawyer comes out and agrees with the first letter. So either they didn’t bother to check, or they just ignored it. Either way, this is exactly the kind of half-baked clown-show we want to avoid for DPI. Good grief.

Comment by Southern Skeptic Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:32 pm
BTW, I don’t place much of the blame for this fiasco on Kelly nor do I place it on Durbin. This is a Bill Houlihan production. And as Rich pointed out earlier, as a Senate employee, he can’t do what he’s been claiming anyway. Unreal.

Comment by Southern Skeptic Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:42 pm
===I don’t place much of the blame for this fiasco on Kelly nor do I place it on Durbin.===

If you’re Kelly how can you not look around and wonder aloud, “how did I get mixed up in this circus sideshow?”

Kelly’s own counsel made her own position seem ridiculous.

Someone put Kelly in that spot, Kelly agreed to be here.

Goofy at jump street.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:45 pm
And to the newest post AFL-CIO chimes in. Not good for Kelly.

Comment by Frank talks Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:53 pm
===So, a party chair who can’t raise or spend money. Pure figurehead. ===

Other state parties have hired staff to the extent that the state party is operated by the executive director who is a full time employee and oversees day to day operations while managing other employees of the state party, even in states where the party apparatus is small. The state central committee effectively functions in the same manner as a corporate board.

This historically has not been done in Illinois, but it begs some questions, like “Where is the DPI’s staff? What are the day to day operations of the party? Who is performing those duties? Are they getting paid?”

I have previously noted that I do not believe a member of congress has the free time to commit to being the chair of a state party, and my opinion on that is not changed — however I think a member of congress would have no campaign finance compliance issues with being the chair of a state party that operates like a modern organization with paid full time staff carrying out day to day operations.

Georgia, for example, has eleven full time staff including an executive director. If the intention of the Democratic Party of Illinois is to step into the 21st century and operate like a modern political party that is not dependent on unspecified labor from unspecified people for the maintenance of day to day operations, then Representative Kelly would have no compliance issues by being chair.

https://www.georgiademocrat.org/officers-staff/

Comment by Candy Dogood Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 5:57 pm
Candy Dogood: ding ding ding.

we need a new vision. the old one was dependent upon one person. we need a dem party that includes and excites all democrats in illinois…

Comment by bored now Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 6:10 pm
Yes Candy, couldnt agree more.

Comment by PolCounsel Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 7:35 pm
…though don’t think this was the intention of kelly backers in putting her forward. Pretty sure they were just unaware of the restriction

Comment by PolCounsel Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 8:18 pm
=== then Representative Kelly would have no compliance issues by being chair. ===

No.

A campaign committee in Illinois has a chair and a treasurer.

What Robin Kelly’s own lawyer is saying is that Robin cannot be the chair of the campaign committee. She cannot raise funds or spend them.

Not could she “run the party” by delegation. If you have staff that are in control of spending the money, and the staff report to the chair, then the chair is still effectively in control, and that would run afoul of the law.

They are making this all up on the fly, which really has to have you wondering how they would run the party or a statewide campaign in 2022.

At this point I feel bad for Robin and whomever from Durbin’s political operation talked her into this mess. She should just withdraw and say her constituents come first.

Comment by Ferris Wheeler Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 8:21 pm
===Pretty sure they were just unaware of the restriction ===

Her lawyer’s letter says otherwise.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 8:25 pm
I was pulling for Cong. Kelly but this is starting to look awfully coffin nail-ey

Comment by Commisar Gritty Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 8:41 pm
=== however I think a member of congress would have no campaign finance compliance issues with being the chair of a state party that operates like a modern organization with paid full time staff carrying out day to day operations.===

What exactly do you base this on, as Kelly’s own counsel seems to say Kelly’s limitations are deep.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 8:49 pm
Seems the only people who have a problem with electing a member of the chicago city council are those rooting for a different horse. Harris is well respected across the party and is a doer who doesn’t seem interested in her political future as much as she is having an opportunity to lead our party during an exciting but uncertain time. Those who keep trying to drag this out for Kelly behind the scenes all seem to have a stake in her winning, ie its about them. Let’s hope clear, cool heads prevail tomorrow.

Comment by Shytown Monday, Mar 1, 21 @ 11:31 pm
@shytown it’s not about them…it’s about not trusting JB. Few people want to see him install his own fiefdom at DPI. Caprera/Fulks in charge of state party- no thanks. People supporting Kelly feel she is more likely to bring reform.

Comment by Nah Rebecca... Tuesday, Mar 2, 21 @ 7:32 am
=== People supporting Kelly feel she is more likely to bring reform.===

… and yet Kelly’s own legal counsel stated she can’t fulfill the duties… “but reform”

Yikes.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 2, 21 @ 7:47 am
=== Few people want to see him install his own fiefdom at DPI.===

… and yet as tradition, governors usually control the state parties.

Odd position to have your angst.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 2, 21 @ 7:51 am
I agree with those that think it’s a mistake to have a Chicago Alderman in charge. That feeds the divisive rhetoric that Chicago runs everything and ignores test of state.

Not to mention those nervous about any sort of checks and balances on Pritzker’s power given his wealth. Granted he will find a way to donate to whatever candidate he chooses regardless but at least there might be a little less power concentrated in the hands of one person and staff.

As others point out Kelly has the fundraising experience and with good staff it seems likely the toothless FEC would allow with enough delegation. And it would need litigated.

She’s got years municipal government, state and federal experience without backing of Pritzker & Madigan.

Public trust is key. Illinois ranked 3rd most corrupt recently. I see Kelly as a chance for restoring public trust and taking steps to ensure we distribute power throughout state with Durbin’s Springfield staff.

Kelly makes more sense to me on various levels for sake of strengthening party statewide and building bigger war chest for 2022 and 2024. Plenty of folks in IL still support 45 and he’s not going anywhere. We need to raise as much as we can from not just Pritzker.

Comment by Peanut Tuesday, Mar 2, 21 @ 2:04 pm
===feeds the divisive rhetoric that Chicago runs everything===

House Speaker and the Senate President both live in the suburbs.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 2, 21 @ 2:11 pm