Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Trouble ahead?
Next Post: Quinn takes on Blagojevich… again
Posted in:
* Slightly slanted lede?
Democratic Cook County state’s attorney candidate Anita Alvarez accused opponent Howard Brookins Jr. on Thursday of dragging his feet on child-support obligations, but he called the attack “disgraceful” and said the dispute stemmed from bills involving a doctor not fully covered by his insurance.
* Way down in the article…
Brookins fired back later in the day with documents appearing to back up his claim that he’s fully paid up on child-support payments.
* More from the Daily Herald…
Brookins, in a prepared statement, said “I have made every required child support payment from the time of separation with my ex-wife through today. In addition I have consistently provided health insurance for my son. This dispute stemmed from the fact that I provided health coverage … through an HMO, and my wife took him to an out-of-network physician. As a result, we needed the judge to determine who was responsible for the out-of-network payments.”
In one of the clearest dividing lines in the Cook County state’s attorney race, the one Republican and six Democratic candidates are sharply divided on whether to allow police officers to give out warnings instead of filing formal charges for possession of drugs in small amounts.
Four Democrats said they had problems with the concept while two Democrats and the Republican endorsed it Thursday.
* The Sun-Times looks at the horse race…
Allen had raised the most money by the end of 2007, with $351,774 on hand. Since Jan. 1, Allen has taken in at least $125,590 more. But Suffredin could be beating him in the money race, with $271,436 at the end of the year and an additional $391,883 raised since Jan 1.
And no one knows how the presidential primary will affect the race. Women turning out in force for HIllary Clinton could help Alvarez, the only woman running. And “if there is a huge [Barack] Obama vote, on the surface it helps Brookins,” the better-known of the two black candidates, Green said.
* The Sun-Times also looks at some business as usual. Brookins helped get money for a bigtime subdivision in his ward, and then apparently got his girlfriend (now his wife) a job selling the houses…
Brookins takes credit for scoring $87.1 million in public cash for the project developers, including $11.6 million from the city to entice developers to build. […]
After the deal was done, Brookins, who’s running for Cook County state’s attorney, says he remembers “asking these guys if we can refer people to them for work.”
So, he did. One of the alderman’s recommendations was his girlfriend, Ebonie Taylor, during his bitter divorce from his first wife, Nanette Brookins. Ebonie Taylor, who married Ald. Brookins after his divorce was final, got hired to sell the Beverly Ridge homes — which go for between $285,000 and $560,000 — for straight commission.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 10:09 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Trouble ahead?
Next Post: Quinn takes on Blagojevich… again
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Green’s conventional wisdom - that Obama’s vote benefits Brookins - is wrong. Obama voters are the Harold Washington coalition. Many are reform-minded foremost. Many are young. Not a preponderance are African-American. And if there is any machine to turn out black votes anymore, it belongs to Jesse Jackson Jr and to the progressive unions who showed their muscle in the aldermanic races. Not coincidentally, all the above forces are with Larry Suffredin.
Comment by Not so fast.... Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 10:16 am
I didn’t particularly care for the debate format. Aruza is a sharp guy, but it seemed like the candidates spent more time defending themselves from his questions, then showing how they differ from each other. None of the candidates could get on a roll or have lively exchanges with each other.
I think Milan had the best performance in the debate, showing his knowledge of the law and how he has implemented change in the office. Then I think it was Allen, who showed his common sense theme, which resonates with a lot of people, including me. Suffredin; did a good job explaining his lobbying gig, and he has the credentials of someone who can handle complex issues, knows the budget and the law.
Brookins needs to understand that if he’s not paying his rent, office bills, etc, how can we expect him to handle 900 people that are in charge of prosecuting arrested citizens?
I like how he grilled Alvarez on her statement that she will finally bring honesty and integrity to the State’s Attorney’s office. She couldn’t come up with an answer to that, I know she’s trying to distinguish herself from Milan, but c’mon, you’ve been at the office for some 15 years.
I like Brewer, he’s definitely a better candidate for the black community than Brookins, but I don’t think he will do as well. He has a great background for State’s Attorney, he seems level headed and doesn’t play the race card as much as Brookins.
As far as minority hiring…I don’t understand what the office is supposed to do. Force minorities to go to law school? Make them come to the CCSA office? I’m sure there are ways of doing it, but I don’t think that should be one of the bigger issues in the campaign. Although, I am a white male.
Comment by Matlock Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 10:24 am
Brookins must be the front runner by the way they are all going after him. The attacks seem pretty sleazy. I have not seen any polls but with so many candidates without name recognition they are probably inaccurate anyway.
Comment by Garp Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 10:37 am
I like Brookins. The flap about his lawyer’s office rent, now the finding his wife a job in a housing development in his ward, and child support payments aren’t looking very good for him right now. I don’t know it could still work out for him.
Comment by Levois Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 10:39 am
1. Brookins claims that Blacks have been wronged by the Cook County State’s Attorney ring hollow. As Tommy Brewer noted Brookins endorsed Devine last time. And as Bob Milan noted, he’s been friends with Brookins for 20 years and he never raised the issue he was discriminated against as an ASA until now. Brookins is merely appealing to Blacks on a legit issue, but has no track record of speaking on these issues, much less doing something about them.
That is, unless you count some lame piece of legislation that he got two co-sponsors for: Arenda Troutman and some other alderman who got bounced.
2. Brookins is not a capable person. He screwed-up his rental property business. He screwed-up his relatively small law practice. He barely survived SEIU running John Q. Unionmember against him. Even if Brookins had a change of heart and gave a hoot about average Blacks, he lacks the skill set to affect change in a big bureaucracy like the Cook County State’s Attorney’s office.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 10:53 am
Not so fast…, how do those reform-minded voters feel about Larry Suffredin once they find out he was making money as a lobbyist while an elected official?
Suffredin is on my short list of candidates to support, but I found his answer to the question about his lobbying unsatisfactory.
Comment by Carl Nyberg Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 10:56 am
It’s unfortunate that the 2 democrats who support station adjustments are Brookens (who doesn’t seem all that well organized) and Brewer (who is unlikely to win). Alvarez asked if the person is being helped by this, but the criminal justice system isn’t really designed to help people per se. I actually agree with Peraica (dear God, help me!) that when you are considering cost, it’s simply expensive to deal with penny ante drug possession.
Comment by cermak_rd Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 11:01 am
There are bigger fish to fry, and for every so many warnings given, there are several beds opened up at the CC Jail for more serious offenders. Prosecuting personal users hasn’t done much to help win the war on drugs, but it has greatly overburdened the courts and overpopulated our jails. Those resources should be used toward dealers. You’ll NEVER be able to kill demand through prosecution, but demand won’t matter if you kill off the supply.
Comment by Snidely Whiplash Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 11:07 am
I thought the tone in the debate was pretty professional all the way around, but was I the only observer that wanted to invoke Lloyd Bentsen when Brookins invoked Harold Washington? You, Mr. Brookins, are no Harold Washington. On a related note, I just don’t get the Suffredin appeal. He wants to be State’s Attorney and he’s against the death penalty. He says “as State’s Attorney, I’ll close gun shops in the suburbs”, but he can’t do that, it’s up to the individual suburbs, not the State’s Attorney. He claims he’s tried “hundreds of cases”, but anybody who knows him knows that he works in politicians’ back chambers, not in front of a judge. The same is true of Allen, who has been focused on potholes and abandoned houses for a couple decades. Not that either of them can’t win, any one of the four candidates on tv can win, it seems to me. The result of this election will be quite interesting since the candidates are spending at least $2.5 million in ads to charm an electorate that is probably 75% undecided.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 11:30 am
Rich:
ABC 7 did a much more detailed look at the child support story. After watching it, I don’t think the Trib lede was slanted. If anything, the Trib and Sun-Times could have been tougher on Brookins.
Here’s the link:
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=5912489
According to Ch 7, Brookins was held in indirect contempt of court during the child support case, which means the judge felt like he was being jerked around. And in a real stupid move, Brookins’ lawyer asked the ex-wife in open court if they could hold off payment until after his aldermanic run-off, implying his cash was tied up in the campaign.
Brookins shamelessly plays the race card at the end of the report, saying the same charges were hurled against Harold Washington.
Brookins race-bating just might work. He can probably win the primary with only a third of the vote. Tony Peraica is licking his chops at the prospect of running against a badly wounded candidate in the Fall. It’ll be like Jack O’Malley vs. Cecil Partee all over again.
If Peraica wins, Daley, Madigan, Burke, Stroger, Mell, Berrios, et al., will pay the price for not getting together and backing a consensus Dem candidate during slating. Peraica is such a loose canon, he’ll find a reason to indict them all.
I can’t believe Daley has forgotten his father’s Number 1 Rule of Cook County politics: have a friend in the State’s Attorney’s Office.
Comment by Roger Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 11:36 am
“All you gunshop owners had better close, and now! At 6 foot 4, I’m a big guy!”
Comment by Snidely Whiplash Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 11:37 am
Funny…I don’t think I’ve ever seen an ad where somebody used his height to get elected.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 11:41 am
Roger, I think the more likely scenario would be that Peraica would finally get some of the patronage jobs he’s been dying for in order to back off.
Comment by Snidely Whiplash Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 11:49 am
Allen has a slender build which makes him appear taller than he actually is, however, I concluded that Suffredin is actually taller swaying my vote to him. Alvarez, when adjusting for female height, is quite tall and may be the best choice.
Comment by Garp Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 11:53 am
“As a former school yard bully, I’ll awe-strike criminals with all 6 foot 4 of my impressive height to exact guilty pleas them.”
Comment by Snidely Whiplash Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 11:59 am
This is what bothers me about Suffredin — he says he would be the best choice because he knows where all the bodies are buried in Cook County government. If this is true — and not puffery –why hasn’t he already turned the information over to Devine or the feds? He tolerated wrongdoing before but now that he can capitalize on it to win an election he’s suddenly offended by it?
Comment by Anon Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 11:59 am
Regarding Allen, you hear a lot about prosecutors who become criminal defense attorneys to make some dough, but it’s unusual for a public defender to later become a prosecutor. That might bring some balance and insight to the office, especially when there is a history of some overzealous prosecutions.
Comment by Anon Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 12:14 pm
Both of them seem to be puffing their trial street cred. I’d be shocked if either of them had more than a couple jury trials in the past 20 years.
Brookins seems like he’s in court a lot, but he always looks defensive and a little inadequate on television. His videos are funny, that’s for sure.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 1:07 pm
Snides
What did Larry do to you? You slam him every chance you get. Bias is fine but just be up front about it.
Chiatty
Suffredin was a pd and did try hundreds of cases. Not a ‘claim’ its a fact.
Comment by mr Blackwell Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 1:10 pm
If he’s counting misdemeanor, non-jury cases from 20-25 years ago, I’m sure you could be correct. That’s consistent with the “he-man” pose in the alley with the crime tape.
And I wouldn’t slam Larry Suffredin, myself. He is a nice man, a professional and an ethical lobbyist. No, that’s not an oxymoron. I just don’t think he’s a good fit for State’s Attorney. It seems more like a power grab, but that’s one man’s opinion.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 1:14 pm
Don’t know how tall the various candidates are, but clearly Suffredin is “heads and tails” above the other candidates for State’s Attorney. Suffredin did not lobby County government, so I see no direct conflict of interest with respect to the way he has exercised his responsibilities as Cook County Commissioner. Suffredin has been an outstanding Cook County Commissioner!
Rich Miller commented recently that Suffredin was one of the most effective lobbyists in Springfield with an excellent reputation. I can’t understand why so many bloggers view Suffredin’s part-time lobbying activity as disqualifying him for consideration in getting your vote.
Suffredin is the only person among the three major candidates to attempt to assemble a multi-ethnic,broad-based coalition, which should tell you soemthing about the quality of his candidacy compared to Allen and Brookins.
Brookins appears to have so many financial skeletons is his closet that I would prefer anyone other than him as the Democratic nominee. I truly believe each and every one of the Democratic alternatives would be more honest and capable than Brookins. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that we won’t end up with another incredibly bad Hobson’s choice between the lesser of two evils, Howard Brookins vs. Tony Peraica in November.
Comment by Captain America Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 1:22 pm
Chiatty
That’s well reasoned, but I believe he’s talking jury trials. I could be wrong. Isn’t running for office, any office, a power grab?
Comment by mr Blackwell Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 1:26 pm
Cap’n:
Your last comment, of course, is the scariest. Peraica is a disaster. And Brookins, is unfortunately a lot like Todd Stroger: pleasant, good-looking and woefully ill-prepared for a major leadership role.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 1:29 pm
Alvarez just dropped 600 K of her husband’s money into the race. I think that will make her the biggest “fundraiser” in the bunch.
Comment by Up North Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 1:31 pm
mr. Blackwell:
In some sense, any run for office is a power grab. Maybe I’m naive, but this office should be a bit different. Managing 900 prosecutors is different than being a part-time county commissioner and it’s far different from decades-old experience as a public defender. Again, not that he and Allen aren’t capable of doing the job, it just seems like they’re more interested in the power than doing the job.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 1:32 pm
mr Blackwell,
Not to belabor anything, but there’s no way he tried hundreds of jury trials as a public defender. He’s probably talking about run-of-the-mill misdemeanor stuff at best. You’d have to be a p.d. or an assistant state’s atty for an awfully long time to accumulate even 100 jury trials. It’s probably a bit of puffery. Not the worst thing that will be spun this cycle, that’s for sure.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 1:47 pm
ALVAREZ, 600 K , TOO LITTLE TOO LATE.
Comment by SLICK Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 3:22 pm
I don’t know how anybody can say if anything is too little, too late in this race. The public is just now paying a little attention to this race and somebody might jump up and separate himself/herself. It’s got to be a pretty wide-open race. My guess is that the best-funded candidate won’t win because a leopard can’t change its spots, but somebody else who has a tv campaign will emerge victorious. I have a guess, but I don’t want to jinx anbody.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 3:29 pm
anyone have a good comparison election or remember anything like this ? i guess i’m not old enough to think of a comparison
Comment by judge smells Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 4:21 pm
The funny thing about being State’s Attorney is that it is almost impossible to move up from that office, like to AG, Gov, Mayor, etc. In the last 50 years, there has been one State’s Attorney who went on to bigger and better things - Richard M Daley. Adamowki, Hanrahan, Carey, Partee, O’Malley, Devine, etc. It is not a job to take if your looking for a stepping stone, which is what I suspect everyone of the Dems and Tony P is doing.
Comment by paddyrollingstone Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 4:54 pm
One must ask the question as to why the democratic party under berrios leadership would leave the states attorney’s race to chance and do endorsements in other races? was the recorders race important? what about dorothy brown? she ran against Daley. remember? what’s up with this party?
brookins is a disgrace and should he win i’ll vote for tony peracia. at least i know where he stands.
Comment by Doubting Dem Friday, Jan 25, 08 @ 10:01 pm