Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Catholic Charities asks for emergency injunction
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Posted in:
* The Capitol Police report forwarded to the Sangamon County State’s Attorney includes a previously undisclosed written statement from Sen. John Sullivan (D-Rushville). Sullivan claims in his statement that he followed Sen. Mike Jacobs over to the Republican side because he knew Jacobs was angry. He said he stood about ten feet away from Sen. Kyle McCarter’s desk and watched. Sullivan said that after some arguing, the two poked fingers at each other, then began “poking each other in the chest.”
“Jacobs then pushed Mccarter in the chest - he did not make a fist,” Sullivan wrote in his statement. Senators Bivins and LaHood then “pushed Jacobs back.” Sullivan “pulled” Jacobs away from the area, he claimed.
* Sen. Jacobs said in his statement that he had attempted to contact Sen. McCarter to apologize, but claimed McCarter “failed to return my call.”
* You can read the full police report by clicking here. As you know by now, the local state’s attorney decided not to press charges against Jacobs. Sen. Sullivan’s statement could go a long way toward explaining why.
*** UPDATE 1 *** From Sen. Jacobs…
Over the course of the past week, I have reflected on the events that took place during the final hours of the 2011 spring legislative session. It was during the debate of Senate Bill 1652 that Senator Kyle McCarter made remarks that I felt were far more direct and personal than is customary for the Illinois Senate.
While I remain disappointed of the direction of the debate, I also recognize that my emotions clouded my judgment as I approached Senator McCarter on the Senate floor following that debate. In hindsight, my actions in engaging Senator McCarter were inappropriate and have resulted in little more than lowering the respectful standards of the Illinois Senate. This event was, admittedly, an embarrassment to the institution in which I serve. For this, I apologize to each of my Senate colleagues and the people of the 36th Legislative District.
On two occasions, I have reached out to Senator McCarter’s office to extend a personal apology for my conduct. To date, I have yet to receive a response from him.
*** UPDATE 2 *** From the Senate President’s office…
Senate President John Cullerton released the following statement after Sangamon County State’s Attorney John Milhiser announced that criminal charges will not be filed from an incident on the floor of the Illinois Senate:
On May 31, Senator Kyle McCarter was admonished by the presiding officer for “invoking personalities” during debate on SB 1652. Following a vote
on the bill, Senator Mike Jacobs confronted Senator McCarter. The Senate Sargeant-At-Arms immediately approached Senator McCarter about formally reporting the incident to the Senate. He declined to pursue the matter with the Senate.Senator McCarter elected to file a complaint with a Capitol Police who issued a report to the Sangamon County State’s Attorney. The State’s Attorney has recommended that this issue return to the Senate.
Personal attacks during debate and disorderly behavior should not be tolerated or condoned on the Senate floor. The conduct of both Senators Jacobs and McCarter is inconsistent with the Senate’s Rules governing decorum.
I am encouraging both Senators to reach an amicable solution among themselves. This will allow the Senate to move beyond this incident and focus on what matters to the People of Illinois.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 3:40 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Catholic Charities asks for emergency injunction
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Guess it’s time for McCarter to publicly accept Jacobs’ apology and move on.
Comment by Coach Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 3:58 pm
“Sometimes shining a light on something so brightly shows more of the blemishes than the shine”
“Classy” response by Jacobs, for something he did that that was so Class-less!
Here endth the lesson.
McCarter played this so poorly, that jacobs MIGHT have sympathy for doing something to badly …
“BOTH were poking fingers …”
“On two occasions, I have reached out to Senator McCarter’s office to extend a personal apology for my conduct. To date, I have yet to receive a response from him.”
WEE-ZEL
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:01 pm
Looks like the blame was all lopsided. Looks as though both men poked each other. Guess that just goes to show that people shouldn’t pass judgement until the full story has been told. This is old news. Thank you Rich Miller for always being so honest and professional in your reporting. You are head above the rest of the media….
and to Bill……….game over!
Comment by anon Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:02 pm
The apology was going along very well until the snippy insincere line at the end. Sometimes you have to know when to stop.
Comment by Gallery Sitter Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:03 pm
===The apology was going along very well until the snippy insincere line at the end. Sometimes you have to know when to stop.===
When someone tries to apologize, and the other party acts like a 3rd grader and won’t even LISTEN to an apology … I will leave it at that.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:06 pm
I applaud you Senator Jacobs for apologizing and being sincere in reaching out to apologize to him. It is classless to not accept or even take the call.
Comment by Jackie O Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:07 pm
Here, Senator McCarter, let me help you wipe that egg off your face.
Comment by TwoFeetThick Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:12 pm
You all have to be kidding. This site and the people posting are a joke. Must all be democrats and realted to Sen. Jacobs. He is a thug, if that had been a republican, you would have all ran him out of the capital with pitchforks. All this proves is once again how corrupt the system is in Springfield and how badly we need a tea party style revolution in Illinois. It is time the government be about the people once again and not a play house for the rich and corrupt.
Comment by Antiochian Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:12 pm
Interesting to see how two grown men are going to reach a solution between themselves. Wish I could be a fly on the wall.
Comment by Lil Enchilada Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:13 pm
TwoFeetThick
That just CRACKED me up!
Comment by Jackie O Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:14 pm
Well said Pres. Cullerton
Comment by Bones Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:15 pm
Antiochian, I hope you’ve enjoyed posting here because you’re gone.
Idiot.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:19 pm
Okay then…let’s move on. Public apology made. Doesn’t matter whether or not it’s accepted. It’s over and done.
Comment by Commonsense in Illinois Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:21 pm
The Senate statement makes it sounds as if the blame was equally divided. I wouldn’t divide it 50:50.
Sullivan’s statement may differ from that of Bivins and LaHood. If so, which one is more accurate?
Comment by reformer Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:21 pm
Hopefully now we can look at the real issue - Senator Jacobs sponsored and moved out Committee in under six minutes (he had Koehler present the bill, so he could remain Chair) an electric rate increase bill lobbied by his father, a registered lobbyist with ComEd.
Comment by SportShoz Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:21 pm
==When someone tries to apologize, and the other party acts like a 3rd grader and won’t even LISTEN to an apology…==
The whole thing sort of reminds me of grade school.
Comment by @ all Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:24 pm
I agree it doesn’t sound like the blame is 50-50, but there’s not enough blame to bother about. Make peace and move on already. This stops way short of being all that serious. If one member had punched another or something - which is an actual crime - that would be different. As Rich might say, move along, nothing to see here, these are not the droids we want….
Comment by Excessively Rabid Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:25 pm
I was in desperate need of a laugh today. Thank you, Rich. There is a lot to be said for swift justice. The occasional pruning of commentators is what keeps this site among the best, if not the best.
As to the topic at hand, let it end. No one got special treatment, both appeared to have behaved regrettably. At least one acknowledged his regret. My guess is the other will soon enough but probably too late.
Comment by What's in a name? Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:27 pm
–The Senate Sargeant-At-Arms immediately approached Senator McCarter about formally reporting the incident to the Senate. He declined to pursue the matter with the Senate. –
That can’t go over well with his colleagues. Trying to drag the cops into this dustup was a silly way to get 15 minutes of fame.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:30 pm
- All this proves is once again how corrupt the system is in Springfield and how badly we need a tea party style revolution in Illinois. -
Thank you for reassuring me that tea partiers like yourself aren’t capable of leading that kind of revolt.
Comment by Small Town Liberal Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:30 pm
It is a shame that there is more attention paid to whether or not Sen Jacobs closed his hand than the point McCarter was making that led to the conflict.
I am curious about why pointing out a conflict of interest on the Senate floor is against the rules. I am a lot more troubled by the relationship the sponsor of a utility rate increase bill had with the utility companies than by the fact that another legislator pointed it out on the floor. And if that is against the rules of debate by our representatives we as citizens are in a lot of trouble.
Comment by David Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:33 pm
===The occasional pruning of commentators===
Two lifetime bans in one day. That could be a record.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:33 pm
===I am curious about why pointing out a conflict of interest on the Senate floor is against the rules.===
It’s the “invoking personalities” rule. I agree fully that the far more important story here is the Jacobs thing. But at the moment, we’re dealing with a story about the fight itself.
Curious, though, that the Senate Republicans have not issued a statement about this matter at all.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:36 pm
Not to be a complete contrarian today but sometimes an apology may not be enough.
Do we really want a legislature where you can call someone virtually anything and/or physically assault them and an apology is enough? I make my kids apologize to each other, doesn’t mean they mean it.
Comment by OneMan Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:38 pm
Rich … this just in!
SGOP responds …
(Crickets)
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:40 pm
Can we please move on now?
Comment by Seriously??? Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:40 pm
===Can we please move on now? ===
I have a feeling that even when this assault allegation is over, that the real story may just be beginning. So, to answer your question, no.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:44 pm
Sorry for getting off topic, didn’t mean to criticize the coverage of the fight but the handling of the situation by Sen McCarter that allowed this to be more about the fight than the bigger issue.
With or without the rules his point in the debate was more than valid. Had he stuck to his criticism on that issue as opposed to this sordid mess, I suspect he’d have a lot more people backing him up. It looks like he is just about neatly boxed into being equal party to the altercation and it is curious his caucus hasn’t backed him up. But I do remember it was not just Jacobs he criticized for having a conflict of interest in the debate.
Comment by David Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:53 pm
–Curious, though, that the Senate Republicans have not issued a statement about this matter at all.–
It’s McCarter’s show. If I were the Senate GOPers, I wouldn’t want to get caught up in it if I could avoid it.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:53 pm
Great! Can’t wait to get to the real story in this whole mess. Power, corruption, greed…
Comment by sad Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 4:55 pm
===Had he stuck to his criticism on that issue as opposed to this sordid mess, I suspect he’d have a lot more people backing him up. It looks like he is just about neatly boxed into being equal party to the altercation and it is curious his caucus hasn’t backed him up.===
When you have the opportunity to take the high road AND ding the party that caused you pain, you do it.
If you decline the Chamber’s way of handling things, then say the Chamber didn’t offer you relief … and get cops and a state’s attorney involved, you are on an island … AND … you ignore overtures of an apology, enough so that the guy has to point out that you won’t take his call or HIS apology … I am NOT suprised the SGOP turned in crickets.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 5:00 pm
Two words…
BEER SUMMIT!!!!
Comment by 1776 Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 5:11 pm
Ok, so according to the police report 3 senators (McCarter, Bivins, LaHood), all Republicans, say it was in fact a punch, while two Democrats say it was some form of a hard jab/push/poke (Jacobs, Sullivan)? Has this now become a partisan issue too?
Comment by Anon Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 5:19 pm
I can’t help but notice that the Senate Democrats response to Capitol/Secretary of State police came three days later (on 6/3 versus 5/31), were typed (instead of written) and happen to cite a specific Senate Rule (7(3) C). Additionally, Jacobs’ statement makes wide use of the word “admonished,” just like the official statement recently released from the Senate President’s office.
I’m certainly not saying there is any kind of cover up or other kind of nefarious activity going on, but it seems like the Democrats took the time to get their stories straight over the Memorial Day weekend, typed them up and then have their press people parrot their version of events to the media. All in all, not a bad way to go…especially considering the Memorial Day Weekend help take a considerable amount of momentum away from this story.
Comment by Jimmy67 Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 5:23 pm
===especially considering the Memorial Day Weekend===
The incident occurred the day after Memorial Day.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 5:24 pm
My mistake…it all kind of runs together at the end of session.
Comment by Jimmy67 Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 5:34 pm
Rich, I completely agree. This incident is going to lead to a spot light on legisltors turned lobbyists and the relationships that continue once a former-legislator starts wearing one of those yellow badges. It can be done with honor, but too often it is not.
Comment by Not a Newcomer Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 5:43 pm
Tension is really high in the State house when you have legislators behaving badly.
Comment by South of the Loop Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 7:10 pm
I don’t think jacobs should have carried the bill and probably should have voted present too.
Comment by fred Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 7:30 pm
NAN, the badges are green this year. Yellow was last year.
Comment by Gallery Sitter Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 7:37 pm
Ahhhh it sounds like the main event is over. He said she said. Over and out.
Comment by jojo Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 7:59 pm
Senate issue , occurring on Senate floor , Senate counsel advises it is their issue and they will handle it. Capitol Police apparently decide otherwise and proceed under premise of Aggravated Battery - A Felony.
State’s Attorney get’s presented with a case that might not even survive the low threshold of Probable Cause at Preliminary Hearing and appears to be a sure loser at Trial with a standard of proof beyond a Reasonable Doubt. State’s attorney promptly and it would appear properly kicks it back to the Senate.
Capitol Police action seems strange on multiple levels. Did they exceed the scope of their authority ? Did they intentionally and unnecessarily put the State’s Attorney on the spot ? Did they overreact and let themselves be used ? Why ?
Don’t know the answers. Not even sure have the right questions. But seems strange that Capitol Police chose to proceed as they did.
Hopefully over.
Comment by x ace Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 10:09 pm
Jacobs still needs to answer what he is doing pushing a bill his father is lobbying for. I guess all that talk of ethics reform was a joke.
Comment by Fed up Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 10:24 pm
Fred,
You’ve got it. The real issue is clearly the amazing inappropriateness of a son carrying legislation for the father. Sorry, but that’s not an appearance of conflict. It’s a giant hairy stinking disgusting conflict of interest. Jacobs should have voted present and shut up. His failure to do so and his response to someone raising the issue speaks volumes about both he and the institution.
In case anyone can’t see it, let me spell it out. Dad financially benefits from son’s actions. It is a nearly perfect definition of conflict that would prevent his voting on the issue (or get you kicked off after you did vote) on any corporate or nonprofit board with a modern conflict of interest policy. Why should the Illinois General Assembly be any less stringent?
Comment by Chicago Cynic Tuesday, Jun 7, 11 @ 10:39 pm
So McCarter didn’t get the criminal charges he wanted and he isn’t accept Jacobs’ apology… will he be filing a civil battery suit or something? I’m not sure where else there is to go here.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Wednesday, Jun 8, 11 @ 12:15 am
Oh Bill….
Comment by Jackie O Wednesday, Jun 8, 11 @ 8:52 am
@Chicago Cynic
You hit the nail on the head. We can go round and round (pun intended) about the aftermath, but McCarter was right in pointing out the facts of the matter. I don’t see any problem whatsoever with doing that on the floor of the senate. This doesn’t have to do with Jacobs’ personality, he wasn’t talking about something unrelated to the business at hand, he specifically brought up a clear conflict of interest. If we would focus less on the reality-show brouhaha and more on what is actually happening, maybe we wouldn’t have to be derailed by trivial sideshows this.
Comment by Colossus Wednesday, Jun 8, 11 @ 8:57 am
Colossus -
I’m hoping Rich will post the transcript.
But from what I understand, McCarter didn’t accuse Jacobs of the appearance of impropriety, but of actually choosing his family’s financial interests over the interests of the public.
Now, we all can see that his family had a financial interest, but his argument also rests on the claim that this was a bad bill for Illinois.
And there in lies the conundrum for Republicans and the reason for silence from Senator Radogno.
Not only did Radogno vote for the bill, but you’ll see some pretty prominent GOP names up there along side her.
Like former gubernatorial candidates Bill Brady and Kirk Dillard.
And members of Radogno’s leadership team: Dale Righter, John Jones, Matt Murphy, Pam Althoff.
Even to a legislative novice like me, it sure looks like Radogno just didn’t personally support the bill, but she did some legwork to help pass it.
So, in calling the bill a bad deal for Illinois, McCarter is indirectly criticizing his own party’s leadership.
If I were advising Senator McCarter, I’d suggest he quickly and publicly bury the hatchet.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Jun 8, 11 @ 10:51 am
===McCarter didn’t accuse Jacobs of the appearance of impropriety, but of actually choosing his family’s financial interests over the interests of the public.===
Not true. He just pointed out that the sponsor’s father lobbied for ComEd.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1n-aAPg2bOI
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Jun 8, 11 @ 11:02 am
@Rich -
Thanks for posting.
He’s also said that the bill was anti-competitive as a result of “backroom deals” and “slick political maneuvering by powerful connected lobbyists.” It was at that point around 2:15 in his remarks that he was admonished by the chair.
Thanks BTW for posting. I found his remarks about campaign contributions by Ameren interesting. They gave the Senate Republicans $10,000 in March. They also gave McCarter $1000.
Maybe he’ll send it back?
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Jun 8, 11 @ 11:22 am
YDD, it’s nice to see that someone finally took the time to analyze that roll call. Some amazing stuff. The GOP put half their caucus on it to get it over the top.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Wednesday, Jun 8, 11 @ 11:30 am
@Michelle -
Big bills like this usually take some heavy bipartisan lifting from leadership.
And, BTW, Big Industry likes it that way. Notice the bipartisan sponsorship of the bill? Go take a look at the House roll call and you’ll notice that Tom Cross and nearly every member of Republican leadership voted for the bill as well.
Getting support from all four leaders helps quietly encourage rank-and-file members who are opposed to be good mushrooms and quietly vote their switches. Or at most offer a factual yet weak criticism of the bill that often includes the phrases “we can do better” or “doesn’t go far enough.”
Senator McCarter’s comments were a breach of that unwritten law: don’t attack your Leader’s bill.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Jun 8, 11 @ 12:39 pm
Does anyone else but be remember all of the Senator Sam Vadalabene dustups? Or Bill Black’s literal beat down of Terry Parke on the House Floor? (Pretty good video exists on that one.) Everyone just dusted themselves off and went on. No one called the cops or made this a big a deal out of it.
(Sorry I am late to this discussion. But couldn’t help providing this perspective.)
Comment by Madman Friday, Jun 10, 11 @ 11:51 am