Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Obama clashes with the Machine… in Philadelphia

Posted in:

Illinois
Obama

* Barack Obama has been endorsed by most of the Chicago Machine, but he is refusing so far to play ball with the Philadelphia Machine…

…Sen. Barack Obama has collided with the gritty political traditions of Philadelphia, where ward bosses love their candidates, but also expect them to pay up.

The dispute centers on the dispensing of “street money,” a long-standing Philadelphia ritual in which candidates deliver cash to the city’s Democratic operatives in return for getting out the vote.

Flush with payments from well-funded campaigns, the ward leaders and Democratic Party bosses typically spread out the cash in the days before the election, handing $10, $20 and $50 bills to the foot soldiers and loyalists who make up the party’s workforce.

It is all legal — but Obama’s people are telling the local bosses he won’t pay.

The article also quotes an unnamed Obama official as saying it had never been the campaign’s practice to make street payments.

* Obama is not unfamiliar with this practice. In the days leading up to his 2004 US Senate primary, Obama’s campaign fund distributed more than $47,000, mostly to Chicago ward organizations. The list of his pre-primary contributions can be found here, since the State Board of Elections website still doesn’t allow direct linking to search results, even after its much anticipated rehab.

Obama’s presidential campaign didn’t appear to hand out street money before this year’s Illinois primary. Not like he needed to.

* But Philly is a far different story. According to the article, the ward groups there want $400,000 to $500,000 from Obama alone. Wow. That’s borderline banditry.

Hillary Clinton is expected to pay up, by the way.

posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:15 pm

Comments

Of course she’ll pay up.
What was it that Phil Gramm called George Ryan?

Comment by Michelle Flaherty Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:19 pm
Regardless of what may, or not be, in the platform of the Democratic Party, it is things like this that continue to convince me that the Democratic and Green parties stand for ENTIRELY different things.

Comment by Squideshi Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:22 pm
Squid, now that you’re back, can you comment on your Green Party candidate Rob Sherman’s questionable racial views?

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:24 pm
Of course Hillary is, she wants to win, even though this isn’t likely now.

Comment by Levois Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:28 pm
Hillary Clinton is expected to pay up

But will she get what she paid for?

Comment by Pat Collins Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:30 pm
And didn’t Ed Rollins get in trouble for “walking around money” in NJ?

How is this different?

Comment by Pat Collins Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:31 pm
The difference was, he said he was paying people to hold down the vote, not gin it up.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:34 pm
Why is this a story?

Because it parrots Obama’s claim that he is a new-style politician, and Clinton as an old-style. It is all part of the narrative pushed by the Obama campaign, courtesy of his friends in the MSM. It is a puff piece to make him look good.

Frankly, anyone interested in writing about this situation, should include Obama’s real style of campaigning. A successful Chicago politician pretending to be above street money? Since when? Additionally, anyone trying to portrait Obama as some kind of clean politician should include how he first got into public office, maintained his office in the Chicago machine, and is now loosening any previous campaign pledges he made earlier.

Puff piece!

Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:37 pm
Smart move. Good press and makes Hillary look like an old-school ward-heeler. Plus, he’s going to win Philly withhout it. Hillary’s throwing her money away there.

Comment by wordslinger Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:48 pm
When I was in Sunday school, I was taught that the true measure of a person’s convictions and principles was what they did when they thought no one was watching.

Of course Obama’s going to take the high road in Philly. The spotlight is on, and he has a (largely underserved) reputation to protect. He needs to distinguish himself from Clinton, and maintain the illusion that he is different. But when no one was watching, when he knew he could get away with it because the expectation wasn’t there, he played the game just like everyone else. His stance in Philly says more about his political acumen than the strength of his character and integrity.

Comment by grand old partisan Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:50 pm
A little known fact.

The $10,000 cash reporting requirement for banks doesn’t apply to political committees.

Proving that some kinds of mob activity is permitted and other kinds isn’t.

Comment by True Observer Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 1:53 pm
“Squid, now that you’re back, can you comment on your Green Party candidate Rob Sherman’s questionable racial views?”

I did that immediately as soon as I read the post.

Comment by Squideshi Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 2:12 pm
Extortion

Comment by Anonymous Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 2:16 pm
I don’t know Philiadelphia politics, but it seems to me that paying street money would be counter productive and even unnecessary for Obama, especially since Gov. Rendell and most of the organization Dems are for Clinton. Why pay precinct captains to turn out Clinton voters? And if this is targeted to African American precincts, he doesn’t need to pay either, just keep smiling in TV ads.

Clinton’s money would be better spent to implement the disgusting Rollins strategy and pay to suppress the vote in AA precincts. That would be a better investment instead of encouraging turnout that only helps Obama.

Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 2:36 pm
Grand Old,

There were GOP state lege candidates in 2006 doing the same thing — paying canvassers hundreds of dollars to go door to door and turn out the vote. Happened in my own district in a losing effort.

Apparently one person’s “pay offs” are another’s “paid canvassers”.

Comment by Rob_N Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 2:59 pm
Rob -

Really? So, what’s your point?

I don’t remember claiming that Republicans didn’t or don’t engage in this sort of thing, and I don’t remember referring to “pay off’s,” but let me go back and re-read what I wrote….

…yep. Never said that. Didn’t even imply it.

Sen. Obama, on the other hand, does seems to find this practice untoward, despite having engaged in it himself only a few years ago. I think your hypocracy-dar is a bit off the mark today.

Comment by grand old partisan Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 3:26 pm
speaking of the much-anticipated update of the state board of elections web site.

its disappointing.

much like the sun-times/southtownstar, etc. web sites. not user-friendly. really small font sizes. use of graphics/images that aren’t necessary or germane.

now the state board of elections needs to re-do the re-do.

[i know. totally off subject, but its not that much better or user-friendly from what was up before.]

Comment by Anonymous Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 4:06 pm
It’s mentioned above, so it’s not off topic.

I’m going to have a long talk with those people next week. What a disaster.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 4:07 pm
Grand Old,

My point was and is: “Apparently one person’s “pay offs” are another’s “paid canvassers”.”

And I never said you said “pay off”, nor did I say you implied it.

Testy, are we?

I don’t dispute your presumption that this may reflect political acumen on Obama’s part to make mention that he is bucking (no pun intended) this political tradition. It’s a tradition used in more places than just Philly and used by both parties — even in blue Chicago and the red Chicago burbs.

But, I’ll also note that Obama was running for an office located in DC at the time of the $47k paid canvassers tab. Now that he’s there and he’s seen the partisanship and lobbyist-fueled special interests in action he is running his Presidential campaign to a different tune than his Senate campaign.

So be it.

Comment by Rob_N Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 4:32 pm
I’m full of PS today…

PS: As Rich noted, the 47k went “mostly” to Chicago ward orgs. But, some money also went to the DeKalb County Dems, etc.

Could it be that the money went to organizations that had endorsed him and that were actually doing work for Obama rather than simply “walking around money”? I leave it to the intrepid reporters among us to crosstab which orgs endorsed him for that primary vs which ones received transfers in.

–

…And that redesigned ISBE site sucks eggs. Is it too late to trash the revamp and go back to the old (much, much better one)?

Comment by Rob_N Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 4:39 pm
Rob, it was street money. Maybe not DeKalb, but just about every other contribution was for election day. It was well-known what was going on, and I’m pretty sure I wrote about it because I could see the contris coming through on A-1 reports.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 4:41 pm
Rob,

Excuse me, but you specifically addressed your comments to me. Why you felt the need to do so why pointing out that Republicans have engaged the practice in question, I’m not exactly sure. Nor am I sure how responding to that makes me “testy.”

To your point that “one person’s ‘pay offs’ are another’s ‘paid canvassers’,” in this case, it’s Obama’s in one of his own campaigns versus Clinton’s. That was my point. Why you felt the need to bring up what Republicans have or have not done in this discussion is, again, beyond my understanding.

Comment by grand old partisan Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 5:01 pm
Pardon me, that should have read: “….while pointing out that Republicans have engaged in the practice in question (something that I neither explicitly or implicitly denied)…”

Comment by grand old partisan Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 5:03 pm
Trick question:

Walking around money given to precint captains is for them to keep in addition to keeping the government job they have by delivering the votes in the precint.

Or, what other reason would there be for them to be given the money?

Comment by True Observer Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 5:50 pm
Rich and Grand Old,

Fair enough on all points.

Rich, If it was “walking money” were there then equivalent transfers out or expenses from those organizations which received the Obama for Illinois transfers in? (In other words, do the books balance? Even if they weren’t itemized expenditures, the “3rd Ward Democratic Org” and others should’ve listed an equivalent amount as an expense on Primary Day, no? Just curious.)

Comment by Rob_N Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 5:51 pm
pathetic excuse for Obama to create a “I am the reformer” view to reporters.

if you are really a reformer Obama, then why did you vote for the Cheney energy bill? are you and your consultant so hooked into Exelon that you cannot help yourself? I realize that Axelrod and Avis LaVelle created CORE (ironic use of a group name, huh?) and commercials to try and distract
from the Tritium leak at Braidwood, but voting for the Cheney energy bill was a horrible move Senator.

you are not a reformer Sen. Obama.

Comment by amy Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 6:02 pm
Anon406 and Rich,

I’m so glad you brought that about about ISBE’s new web cite. It’s absolutely AWFUL. The old one was simple, clean and easy, even if it was somewhat limited. The new won is a total disaster and impossible to navigate. I spent 20 minutes trying to do something I used to do in two.

I’ve worked with designers to develop lots of web sites. Somebody should sue the web firm for malpractice.

Comment by Chicago Cynic Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 6:37 pm
Speaking of Philly, Barack’s bundler and broker Jim Reynolds and his firm, Loop Capital, paid some “street money” out there a few years ago and almost got a big Federal headache in return. Ask Mr. Google and he will fill in the details.

Rich, while you’re asking the BoE about that Website, ask who the nimrod was who did the “work.” There are hundreds of middle and high schoolers around the ‘Patch who could have done a much better job, probably for free.

Comment by Fox Mulder Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 9:13 pm
I think the Founding Fathers would call “walking around money” bribery and corruption. Let’s just call it what it is and try to act embarrassed for the country and our state.

Comment by Disgusted Friday, Apr 11, 08 @ 9:31 pm
Why should taxpayers even have to foot the bill for these private party elections? They should pay for their own caucuses instead of asking taxpayers to pay for two public surveys.

Also, we’ve got the technology to run one election per year and eliminate spoilers with instant run-off, so why aren’t we using it to more accurately survey the public will?

Comment by Anonymous Monday, Apr 14, 08 @ 7:54 am