Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Steel-maker moves HQ to Illinois despite tax hike
Posted in:
*** UPDATE 1 *** From a press release…
The Chicago for Rahm Emanuel campaign today announced that $10.6 million has been raised during the mayoral campaign through January 19th. An additional $1.1 million in previously raised funds was transferred from the congressional campaign account, for a total of $11.7 million.
The campaign is obviously awash in cash…
Demonstrating his expected money advantage over his competitors, mayoral candidate Rahm Emanuel is shelling out big bucks to run a campaign ad during Sunday’s Chicago Bears-Green Bay Packers NFC Championship game.
The cost of Emanuel’s ad is $5,000 a second, or $150,000 for the 30-second commercial, according to an industry source familiar with political TV advertising who was not authorized to speak publicly about ad buys. No other mayoral candidate has purchased time during the game so far.
*** UPDATE 2 *** Not so much…
Carol Moseley Braun‘s mayoral bid has not raised as much as she had hoped and will rely on door-to-door canvassing rather than an extended broadcast TV ad blitz, campaign spokeswoman Renee Ferguson said Thursday.
As of 3 p.m. Thursday, Braun and the other major mayoral hopefuls had not yet filed the campaign-finance disclosure reports that they are required to turn in to state officials by the end of the day. But Ferguson said Braun’s campaign raised about $850,000 — about $600,000 in the reporting period that ended Dec. 31 and another $250,000 in the first three weeks of January. […]
Ferguson said the Braun campaign filmed a TV spot Wednesday but would need to raise more money to air the ad on broadcast TV, which is costly.
* We’re waiting for an appellate ruling today on whether Rahm Emanuel meets the residency requirements to run for Chicago mayor. I put together this post to serve as an addendum, but I’m tired of waiting, so check back here for updates.
* Here is the audio of this week’s arguments before the appellate court…
* Coverage…
An attorney for two voters objecting to Emanuel’s candidacy argued again that the Democrat doesn’t meet the one-year residency requirement because he rented out his Chicago home and moved his family to Washington to work for President Barack Obama for nearly two years.
“If the house had not been abandoned by the whole family … we wouldn’t be here today,” attorney Burt Odelson told the panel of judges, all three Democrats.
Odelson so far has had little luck trying to keep Emanuel off the Feb. 22 ballot. The Chicago Board of Election Commissioners and a Cook County judge have both ruled in favor of Emanuel, a former congressman, saying he didn’t abandon his Chicago residency when he went to work at the White House.
More…
Judge Kevin Hoffman played devil’s advocate with lawyers on both sides.
Hoffman asked Emanuel’s challengers whether he should be allowed on the ballot because state election protects the residency status of anyone who temporarily leaves “on the business of the United States.”
Burt Odelson, the lawyer for the objectioners, said no, that exemption should only apply to members of the military.
“You can’t run with the hounds and hide with the fox,” Hoffman said.
Hoffman asked Emanuel’s lawyers to define the difference between “to live” and “to reside”, arguing that the two are synonymous.
“All this debate is completely academic,” said Kevin Forde, one of Emanuel’s lawyers. “There is absolutely no question that (Emanuel) was on temporary absence on business of the United States.”
More…
They questioned the argument of Burt Odelson, lead attorney against Emanuel, that leasing out the house meant Emanuel abandoned his residency.
“What’s the strongest case you have supporting that?” Hoffman asked.
Odelson mentioned some cases from the 1930s and ’40s. Odelson argued that President Obama would have no problem running for mayor because he did not rent out his house and so could occasionally spend a night there.
What if Emanuel could not afford to maintain two homes, Justice Bertina Lampkin asked. Wouldn’t Odelson’s interpretation of the law put an undue burden on the non-wealthy?
Well, with $60,000 a year in rent from the house and his $172,000-a-year chief of staff position, as well as his savings, that was not an issue for Emanuel, Odelson responded without answering her question.
* Chicago/Cook roundup…
* Mayor Daley’s nephew tries to get in on video poker business
* Daley says he’d like to write, teach after leaving City Hall
* Cut sales tax, but tax more services: Emanuel: But he removed one bone of contention that has derailed efforts in past years by not taxing lawyers’ or accountants’ fees.
* Wilco’s Jeff Tweedy To Headline Rahm Emanuel Fundraiser
* Chicago Police union endorses Chico
* Chico wins police union endorsement for mayor: Chico insisted it was premature to say anything specific about costs and cuts, and that he would negotiate with an open mind. Union officials said they believe Emanuel has made up his mind about cutting their benefits and that he would not be a friendly negotiator.
* Illinois Policy Institute Exclusive: Dan Proft Interviews Alderman Brendan Reilly, Part 1
* Illinois Policy Institute Exclusive: Dan Proft Interviews Alderman Brendan Reilly, Part 2
* Ald.Dixon sues cops over 2009 drunk-driving arrest
* Preckwinkle, Dart stalled on Cook County budget cuts
* Fired aide asked employees for $100 to Stroger campaign fund
* County ethics chairman resigns after WGN-TV report
* Cook jail strip searches costs another $4.2 million
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 1:36 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Steel-maker moves HQ to Illinois despite tax hike
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Odelson is right. Rahm didn’t live here. The real question here is “Is Rahm above the law?”. My guess is that the Judges will say yes.
Comment by Bill Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 1:52 pm
While I personally like RM as a candidate, I agree with Bill here. Assuming that is the outcome, I do wonder if this whole debacle will be the catalyst for cleaning up election law requirements in Chicago. I would guess no. Further, I would guess that RM (and GC for that matter) are not above continuing to use such loopholes to prevent non-connected challengers from opposing Machine candidates.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 2:04 pm
“Well, with $60,000 a year in rent from the house and his $172,000-a-year chief of staff position, as well as his savings, that was not an issue for Emanuel, Odelson responded without answering her question.”
So Atty. Odelson doesn’t care about public servants who want to take a temporary assignment working for the POTUS and maintain their residency, but don’t have the money to keep two homes. Good to know.
Two years ago he was a Congressman from the 5th. He set aside his own career when the POTUS asked him to serve. He didn’t sell his home, or change his voter registration. He’s a resident, IMO.
Comment by SR Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 2:13 pm
What always gets me is this:
===Hoffman asked Emanuel’s challengers whether he should be allowed on the ballot because state election protects the residency status of anyone who temporarily leaves “on the business of the United States.”
Burt Odelson, the lawyer for the objectioners, said no, that exemption should only apply to members of the military.===
If they had intended it to apply to only people serving in the military, I think they could have clearly stated that in the law.
Comment by Lincoln Parker Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 2:26 pm
If Rahm hadn’t rented the house, he wouldn’t have had the $60k in rent from it.
Comment by titan Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 2:30 pm
The questioner was Thomas Hoffman, not Kevin.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 2:40 pm
only in chicago is working in the white house seen as a bad thing. seriously. i don’t know why rahm wants to be mayor, but being mayor of chicago isn’t that big a deal. rahm is stepping down from an important position to run for mayor. chicago is pretty lucky in that regard (btw, not a supporter of any mayoral candidate on the ballot)…
Comment by bored now Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 2:51 pm
This is ridiculous. If Rahm was not the front runner, if he was polling at 7% this discussion would not be happening.
So possibly one of the most qualified and able candidates running for the office is being attacked and maybe disqualified, because the least qualified and able can’t beat him on a level playing field.
Chicago and the State might be stuck with the likes of CMB, an associate of past sadidistic and violent dictators, and who also allegedly misspent her campaign funds on questionable purchases. Candidates of this ilk are acceptable but someone who serves several Presidents is not.
Anyone have any questions on why Illinois is in the condition it is in?
Comment by Irish Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 3:00 pm
===an associate of past sadidistic and violent dictators===
There was more than one?
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 3:00 pm
Sorry - a dictator
Comment by Irish Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 3:03 pm
Geez, Rahm’s lawyer didn’t do him any favors. Sounds like they were a little over-confident. Let’s just say he is tossed off the ballot, where do his supporters go? Split up or en masse behind… say, Chico?
Comment by Pembleton Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 3:22 pm
–i don’t know why rahm wants to be mayor, but being mayor of chicago isn’t that big a deal. rahm is stepping down from an important position to run for mayor. chicago is pretty lucky in that regard–
Yeah, who in Chicago would want to be mayor?
Rahm’s a selfless Mother Theresa. His peeps weren’t the sources for all those “If only Obama had listened to Rahm” stories in the national press last year when it looked like the healthcare bill would fail.
He “stepped down” because his ego and ambition could no longer allow him to support a boss loyally. He wants to be a boss.
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 3:37 pm
Why hasn’t Odelson ever brought up the fact that Rahm Emanuel’s real political ambition was to have a congressional leadership position (Speaker of the House)? It is well-documented that as recently as when Mike Quigley won the special election to replace him in Congress, Rahm Emanuel made it known that he wanted reclaim his congressional seat at some point. Going into last year, it was no secret to anyone that the Republicans were going to take the House, and let’s be honest, the prospects for President Obama in 2012 looked dimmed, and have only recently started looking better. Rahm didn’t become interested in being mayor until very late 2009 or early 2010. That is why his tax records indicate part time resident and why he needed to amend them, in an effort to cover his true intent. His true intent was not to reside in Chicago fulltime and he did not do that in 2009 or 2010.
No one has a problem with with Rahm Emanuel serving the POTUS, but other top WH officials from Chicago who served the POTUS kept their Chicago homes. If Odelson is off track, he is only off track with the place to lay one’s head argument. He should be arguing unfettered/unrestrained access to the residence.
I’m not sure why Odelson didn’t respond on the point as to whether or not Rahm Emanuel could afford to live in two places. Rahm Emanuel has money and could have easily hired someone to watch his home or had a security company watch it for him.
Rahm Emanuel gets to waltz into Chicago, run for mayor, make a fool out of everybody, and undermine the process? No, I don’t think so.
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 3:39 pm
What’s Rahm’s ground game looking like? How does it compare to the others in terms of number of feet on the street and geographic coverage? What’s Burke and the FOP supplying Chico with, and what efforts are the other supporters of the various candidates doing to GOTV?
The TV and radio buys are evident enough, but I would like to know more about the ground games.
Comment by Boone Logan Square Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 3:47 pm
Has Burt Odelson ever revealed who his client is in this thing? It’s getting ridiculous.
I know Emanuel’s not the client, but he should be, that’s the only person Odelson is helping at this point, besides himself I’m guessing.
There’s a reason why the other candidates aren’t focusing on Emanuel’s residency. They know it’s a silly thing to argue that he’s not a Chicagoan.
Comment by just sayin' Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 3:48 pm
- The campaign is obviously awash in cash… -
You’d think maybe they could charge less than $85 for general admission to the Jeff Tweedy show…
Comment by Small Town Liberal Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 3:53 pm
In light of the Braun campaign’s announcement that it “will rely on door-to-door canvassing rather than an extended broadcast TV ad blitz,” I’m even more curious to see what ground resources each candidate has organized to date.
Comment by Boone Logan Square Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 4:08 pm
=He wants to be a boss=
How sweet to be a boss
Floating in the blue
It makes one kind of cross
To be Chicago’s boss.
Comment by Rudy Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 4:11 pm
Anon 3:39 - Rahm’s rumored aspiration of being Speaker of the House has no legal bearing on this case and Odelson has to at least pretend that he’s not carrying this case out as a political crusade.
Moreover, if Odelson entered that into the discussion it would undermine his entire case, as it bolsters Rahm’s argument that he always intended to return to Chicago.
Comment by 44 Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 4:14 pm
Daley’s retirement present Emanuel with an opportunity that he was unprepared for, in terms of qualifying for the ballot, but, given the polls that indicated a disaster for Congressional Democrats, it was almost a foregone conclusion that Emanuel was going to be exiting the White House. Various reports had Emanuel gone by January of 2011 and the story was floated that Emanuel did not want to serve as COS for more than two years.
Rahm’s huddling with top election attorneys from the hour that Daley announced his retirement and his disasterous attempts to buy out the remainder of the lease from his tenants made it clear that Emanuel’s camp knew that he had a serious residency problem due to the fact that he had rented out his Hermitage Avenue property until the Summer of 2011.
The Election Code does contain provisions to preserve the voting rights of military personnel and people absent from Illinois for government business, but the simple act of voting is not identical to standing as a candidate for elected office. Rahm Emanuel’s thrifty behavior put himself into this pickle. He could have easily afforded to maintain two addresses, including one in Chicago if he had wanted to.
One thing that has always struck me as odd is the fact that his wife and children have not returned to Chicago. Presumably, enrolling in Chicago area schools two or three weeks into the new school year would have been to disruptive or so goes the Rahm party line. If Emanuel is elected and inaugurated and his family actually makes good on their stated intentions, they will not return to Chicago until next Summer. In the event that Rahm loses, does anyone expect the family to return to Chicago? During several breaks from campaign, the Emanuels opted to spend their time outside of Chicago. It does make you wonder.
If respecting case precedents means anything, Odelson ought to win the case. If political considerations prevail, the residency provisions of the Election Code are going to be shredded and numerous case precedents are going to be rendered meaningless. In many cases involving lesser known candidates, people who have faced residency issues similar to Emanuel have been disqualified from the ballot.
Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 4:17 pm
Raising less than a million dollars is NOT the way to become mayor of Chicago. The mayoral race is larger than many US Senate races across the country. A “grassroots” campaign is going nowhere fast.
From what I hear, DeValle is even worse at raising money than Braun - which is just embarrassing. I’m curious to see how Chico has done with his fundraising. I see him as the only real challenger here - and only if Rahm is held under 50% and Chico can then consolidate all the anti-Rahm opposition in a run off. Thats a VERY long shot.
Comment by jayhawk97 Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 4:18 pm
BTW - I WANT someone who is hungry to be the boss to be mayor of Chicago. It takes a very firm hand to run this city and without one, it would tear itself apart in a power struggle.
Choosing to run for Mayor (instead of back to Congress ot elsewhere) simply because an opportunity presented itself is not a negative IMHO.
Comment by jayhawk97 Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 4:20 pm
Anonymous,
He gave up any ambition for Speaker when he left his congressional seat to serve as chief of staff and it was filled by Mike Quigley. There was no indication at the time that the Republicans were going to take over the House two years later, or that Speaker Pelosi was ready to retire the gavel, and he wasn’t next in line for the job, anyway.
His interest in running for mayor leaked out around the time there was speculation that Mayor Daley might not run again. He was not going to run against Daley.
He’s a Chicago resident who left home to serve the POTUS and came back home, not some carpetbagger “walzing in” to run a la Alan Keyes.
I haven’t seen any evidence that he intended to stay in D.C. after his stint as Chief of Staff was over. He didn’t stay there when he left his job with President Clinton, either, and he lived in his district as a congressman, not D.C.
==Small Town Liberal: “You’d think maybe they could charge less than $85 for general admission to the Jeff Tweedy show” ==
Seriously. And on game day, no less. I wonder what happened to the $50 tickets that had been announced…
Comment by SR Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 4:25 pm
This race is over. Mayor Emanuel.
Comment by View from the Cheap Seats Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 4:29 pm
Not that anyone is paying attention, but Carol Moseley Braun has continued to question Emanuel’s residency. She did so on the day of former President Clinton’s visit.
There was a credible rumor in the 5th Congressional District that Emanuel had a preferred candidate in the special Congressional election, but that candidate lost the election to Quigley. The special election was notable for how few voters participated. Had Emanuel’s candidate prevailed, there was a Massachusetts/Kennedy type of agreement that when Rahm was ready to return to Congress, the placeholder would step aside.
Something must be wrong in the 5th District, two of its recent Congressmen (Rostenkowski and Blagojevich) have been convicted and Emanuel is always in court.
Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 4:41 pm
===This race is over. Mayor Emanuel. ===
Jane Byrne had $10 million for her reelection campaign in 1983 (almost $22 mil in today’s money). She lost.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 4:57 pm
Is it legal to transfer funds from a congressional (federal) campaign fund to a mayoral (state) campaign fund? I thought there was a wall between state and federal campaign funds.
Comment by cover Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 5:10 pm
cover, please do a google search. Until the first of the year, it was perfectly legal to transfer unlimited amounts from federal funds to state funds. You’ve got it backwards. But, I’m sure that Emanuel would risk prison by doing what you thought he did. Try to take a breath before commenting, please.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 5:12 pm
“almost $22 mil in today’s money”
Which only means the dollar has lost more than half of its value since then…I digress.
Comment by GetOverIt Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 5:20 pm
–“almost $22 mil in today’s money”
Which only means the dollar has lost more than half of its value since then…I digress.–
Why? Has the money supply and GDP remained the same?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 5:34 pm
Actually, a rather long line of court cases supports Rahm’s position. Not so much supports the objectors
Comment by titan Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 5:48 pm
Thanks for the clarification, Rich. Good thing I’m not running for office!
FYI, I live nowhere near Chicago, so it doesn’t matter to me if Rahm Emmanuel wins or loses that race. My more immediate concern is the Springfield mayoral election, as the new mayor’s property/sales tax policies will have a direct impact on the cost to non-residents (like me) who do business and shop in Springfield.
Comment by cover Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 5:52 pm
I just listened to the argument, and some of Odelson’a arguments were just laughable. He was seriously arguing that working for the President of the United States is not the same as working for the United States. He also admitted that a homeless person would qualify, so that means you don’t need immediate access to a physical structure where you can lay your head. Finally, if you accept his argument that Obama and Axelrod would qualify because they didn’t rent out their homes, what would that mean for a renter? Would a renter have to renew a lease on an empty apartment to keep his residency?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 6:11 pm
===Jane Byrne had $10 million for her reelection campaign in 1983 (almost $22 mil in today’s money). She lost.===
Yes, this race won’t be won with money alone. There are some powerful players working against Rahm. The court case is one example of that. I wonder how much that is costing him, and if the money will come out of campaign funds.
Comment by SR Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 6:20 pm
CMB seems to not know how to campaign. You are not going to win in Chicago without TV spots. End of story.
But while you’re raising money, certainly you could do much better and more, with online campaigning. Canvassing? In 2011? Really? Without the Democratic field organization behind it, “canvassing” will get Braun about as much money as selling Bibles door to door. The money spent paying the canvassers would be better spent making online spots, hitting the social media, creating buzzworthy posts that in turn generate free “earned media” coverage by pundits and reporters. And that online stuff stuff is working 24/7/365. She could put her ad up *today*, and it would get *some news coverage, which can, if managed properly, be leveraged into more fundraising. Which pays to put it on broadcast TV.
I don’t know why I’m bothering to give Braun advice: I voted for her once as a kid and that was a foolish mistake I’ll not repeat ever again. Terrible and unqualified candidate, even worse campaigner. I guess I just want to make it a little less one-sided of a race, to make Rahm work for it.
Rahm’s only true competition would be a Black/Hispanic coalition candidate, but those two groups won’t team up in time for this because their bases have been polarized from the manner of campaigning used by their respective “community leaders”. “Community Dividers” is more like it.
So really, it is Rahm by default, book it, done. Set your horoscope by it.
Comment by Gregor Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 6:22 pm
I moved to Chicago in 1982. When I heard how much Jane Byrne had raised, my immediate reaction was that anyone who raised that much money for a city mayor primary election should be immediately jailed. Like it was beyond a reasonable doubt evidence of corruption. I compared it to the Mexico City Police chief who left Mexico around that time and bought a huge estate in Greenwich Ct. right after his term expired…like on a salary of $10,000/yre or something. But this is Chicago.
Comment by park Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 6:36 pm
Odelson has only about a century’s worth of case precedents to support his clients’ objection, including cases that were reviewed by the US Supreme Court.
Emanuel’s arguments are terrific if the dispute was to be decided in a local tavern. There are fine line distinctions in play here.
If politics does not trump the law, Emanuel’s campaign is going the way of the Titanic.
Comment by Abandon Ship Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 6:52 pm
–If politics does not trump the law, Emanuel’s campaign is going the way of the Titanic.–
So if the appellate court goes with previous judge’s and CBOE rulings, they’re all playing politics and not applying the law?
Were they all at the tavern when they hatched this vast conspiracy?
Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 6:58 pm
Wordslinger,
Absolutely.
If you were familiar with the CBOE, you would appreciate how frequently is rulings are reversed. The toughest calls on ballot access cases are usually settled at the appellate level.
Emanuel has been treated much differently than other candidates with residency issues.
Comment by Abandon Ship Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 7:27 pm
But while you’re raising money, certainly you could do much better and more, with online campaigning. Canvassing? In 2011? Really? Without the Democratic field organization behind it, “canvassing” will get Braun about as much money as selling Bibles door to door. The money spent paying the canvassers would be better spent making online spots, hitting the social media, creating buzzworthy posts that in turn generate free “earned media” coverage by pundits and reporters
______________
I’m sorry but internet clicks don’t vote, and you don’t tailor a message to pundits. Web 2.0 should enhance face to face contact, not replace it. I think Braun is going to lose, badly, but in a race where trying to win the media war is gonna get her slaughtered (any earned media she gets can be immmediately putting what little money she has on the doors isn’t bad politics.
Comment by hammer Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 7:32 pm
oh, man! That Rahm, coulda, shoulda, woulda gone to work for him and gotten a promotion.
Oh wait, the election hasn’t been held yet. My bad, Dave!
Comment by Walter Mitty Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 8:03 pm
If he gets thrown off the ballot, he has a lot of time, and a lot of money to plot and execute a revenge strategy. Real question is, given today’s Trib polling, which of the three blind mice wants to play kingmaker?
Comment by think about it Thursday, Jan 20, 11 @ 9:51 pm
Abandon ship - you got that backwards. Rahm has supporting cases going back to the 1800s, which cases are much more on point factually.
If its decided ‘on the level then Rahm wins.
Comment by titan Friday, Jan 21, 11 @ 3:19 am