Tag: Illinois

Vote was 114-1.  On to the Illinois State Senate this goes.

In case anyone was wondering this is the one guy who voted against:

Rep. Milt Patterson (D-Chicago)

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITI…

CHICAGO, Illinois (CNN) — The Illinois House of Representatives on Friday voted almost unanimously to impeach embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

The vote was 114-1, with three representatives not voting.

The matter now moves to the state Senate, which will try the case and decide whether to remove Blagojevich from office.

On Thursday, an Illinois legislative committee unanimously recommended impeaching Blagojevich amid corruption allegations.

Blagojevich was arrested last month after federal prosecutors alleged, among other things, that he tried to sell the U.S. Senate seat that President-elect Barack Obama vacated.

“Today is the day that we begin to give back democracy to the people of the state of Illinois,” Democratic Rep. Jack Franks, a panel member, said as he cast his aye vote Thursday night.

Blagojevich “has been AWOL and derelict of his duties. He has abused his powers, and he has brought shame to this great state,” Franks said.

“I believe that Rod Blagojevich is a liar, and I believe he is a thief,” Franks said. “He has stolen the trust of the people.”

The committee heard testimony Thursday afternoon from Roland Burris, the man Blagojevich appointed to succeed Obama in the Senate.

Burris denied any quid pro quo with Blagojevich for his appointment to the Senate. Burris, former attorney general for Illinois, is not accused of engaging in “pay-to-play” politics with Blagojevich.

Blagojevich denies any wrongdoing and has rejected calls for his resignation.

“I would have appreciated it if he had stepped aside, and we would not have been made the laughingstock of the country,” said Rep. Mary Flowers, another Democrat. She noted, however, that the governor is “innocent until proven guilty.”

The 21-member committee looked into Blagojevich’s actions on a number of issues beyond the federal allegations, including an allegation he withheld state money from a children’s hospital until he received a $50,000 campaign donation.

Rep. Chapin Rose, a Republican, called the alleged behavior “repugnant.”

“The report speaks for itself and contains many, many, many acts that I find, and most of my colleagues find, to be impeachable,” Rose said.

“The evidence is overwhelmingly damning,” he said.

U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald initiated a criminal complaint against Blagojevich after listening to wiretaps of the governor’s phone conversations.

Blagojevich was arrested December 9 but has not been indicted. A federal judge in Chicago told Fitzgerald he has until April 7 to decide whether to charge the Illinois governor.

The committee’s report said it found the government’s allegations against Blagojevich “shocking” and believes the information in the federal complaint “is sufficiently credible to demonstrate an abuse of office” that was “inconsistent with the governor’s constitutional oath.”

The Illinois committee’s report points out that Blagojevich does not need to be found guilty of a crime for the House to impeach him. “It would, in fact, be unreasonable to limit impeachable offenses to criminal conduct,” the report says.

“An impeachment inquiry is not a criminal proceeding and its purpose is not punitive. Rather, impeachment is a remedial proceeding to protect the public from an officer who has abused his position of trust.”

The committee pointed out that the criminal complaint against Blagojevich alleges he was secretly taped saying he would not appoint anyone to Obama’s seat without some form of compensation. iReport.com: Do you trust your political leaders?

“The governor repeatedly demonstrated that his decision to appoint a senator would not be based on merits of the candidate or on public policy, but rather on how that appointment could benefit him personally,” the report said.

“The governor directed various individuals to conduct inquiries on his behalf to negotiate deals for the Senate appointment, affirmatively setting into action a plot to trade the Senate appointment for something of value to the governor,” it said.

Blagojevich declined the committee’s offer to testify on his own behalf, the report said.

I know that it’s easy here at Swing State Project to get seduced by all the glitz and glamour of U.S. House races. (That sounds hilarious when you think about how incredibly nerdy it sounds, but, well, there’s a kernel of truth there.) Bear with me for a minute, though, as we drop down to the real meat and potatoes of American politics: state legislatures. I’ll try to keep everyone updated in future months about developments in some of the biggest contests, but here’s a primer to start with.

Here are some reasons why you should very much care. First, the states are often the crucibles for experimentation with progressive policy. That’s especially been the case over the last few decades of Republican domination at the national level, although hopefully that will change once we actually have a progressive trifecta in Washington.

Consider where the movement toward civil rights and marriage or civil union rights for gays and lesbians has occurred: it’s been purely at the state level. If and when truly universal health care happens, given the difficulty of getting it through Congress, it’s most likely to happen in some of the states (and the some of the boldest moves in that direction have already occurred in the states, such as in Vermont and Oregon… and not coincidentally, back when they had MDs for governors).

Also, the state legislatures are our bench for federal office. The GOP may be the party of wealthy self-funders popping out of nowhere, but the Democrats are largely a meritocratic bunch and many of our best have stints in the state legislature on their resume, where they honed their skills and built their networks. Just as one example, consider what the guy who, four years ago today, was representing the 13th District of the Illinois State Senate is up to now.

Finally, in most states, the state legislatures control the redistricting process, not just for themselves but for U.S. House districts as well. The entire shape and terrain of the nationwide electoral battlefield for the entire 2010s will be determined by who has control of the legislature in key states following the 2010 election. This is partly why we were so hosed during the early 2000s: GOP-held legislatures in states like Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan drew remarkably GOP-favorable maps. And even when the blue wave came in 2006, the pro-GOP gerrymanders probably saved them the loss of even more seats.

Some GOP-held legislatures are ready to flip now; others have the Democrats in a somewhat deeper hole, but a sustained push over two electoral cycles can have the Democrats in control in 2010. Let’s take a look at the key playing fields for this year and the next few years, starting with Republican-held legislatures that are within striking distance. (The rank order is mostly gut-level, although I did use some informal metrics involving the size of the state, how close the gap between the two parties is, and how much is at stake for that state with 2010 redistricting.)

Democratic offense

1) New York Senate

30 Democrats, 32 Republicans (62 total)

1 to tie, 2 to flip (Republicans would sort-of break the tie, as Joe Bruno is both Senate Majority Leader and Acting Lt. Governor because of David Paterson having become Governor, although he still gets only one vote)

Two-year terms, no term limits

Constituents per seat: 311,000

I think most prognosticators would agree with me that this is one is currently the big enchilada. The Republican edge in the Senate, resulting from the long-term presence of GOP lifers in seats that Dem-leaning areas (seriously… 7 of the GOP senators have been in place since the 1970s), has allowed Joe Bruno to single-handedly act as a brake on implementing the progressive agenda in New York.

Moreover, the opportunity for a Democratic trifecta in Albany (Dems currently control the Governor’s seat, and the Assembly by a wide margin) in 2010 would mean complete control over the redistricting process, and an opportunity to dislodge any remaining GOP Congressmen in New York. (Although it’s looking likely that there won’t be more than two or three left after the 2008 election!) New York is predicted to lose two house seats after the 2010 census, and the blow can be softened by making sure both are GOP-held seats.

We’ve edged two seats closer to takeover since the 2006 election via two special elections (in SD-7 on Long Island and SD-48 in far north Upstate). All 62 seats are up this year; unlike most other Senates, in New York, Senators serve two-year terms and are up for re-election every cycle. Robert Harding at the Albany Report has begun an ongoing series handicapping the competitive Senate races, and also started an excellent series of diaries profiling each of the Senate districts.

Of Harding’s most competitive seats, 8 of the 10 are currently GOP-held; the top two are SD-15 and S-11, two seats in heavily Democratic Queens held by GOP oldsters (Serphin Maltese and Frank Padavan). While polling of individual districts hasn’t begun, a Quinnipiac poll released yesterday found that, statewide, voters prefer a Democratic State Senate to a Republican one by a margin of 51 to 35.

2) Texas House

71 Democrats, 79 Republicans (150 total)

4 to tie, 5 to flip

Two-year terms, no term limits

Constituents per seat: 157,000

The Texas House has been controlled by Republicans since 2003. As you probably recall, their first order of business was to engage in the mid-decade DeLay-mander that led to the Dems’ electoral wipeout in 2004 (although several victims of that wipeout have managed to claw their way back into the House). Texas is predicted to gain as many as four seats in the U.S. House through 2010 reapportionment, and given the Texas GOP’s skill at creating bizarre tapeworm-shaped districts, it’s possible that, if we don’t have a seat at the redistricting table, all four of those seats could wind up GOP-leaning. (Given how close the House is, that seat is much likelier to come there than via the Governor or the Senate, where we’re in a deeper hole at 11 D/20 R.)

In addition, in terms of implementing policy, the House Speaker (currently Tom Craddick) is basically the most powerful person in Texas politics, much more so than the Governor. Four seats may seem a little steep – and this may wind up being a two-cycle project, although given the stakes, it’s critically important to follow through – but given the rapid demographic changes occurring in Texas (the same ones that are suddenly putting TX-07 and TX-10 within reach) it’s doable.

3) Pennsylvania Senate

21 Democrats, 29 Republicans (50 total)

4 to tie, 5 to flip (Lt. Governor, currently Dem, breaks tie)

Four-year terms, limit of two terms, half elected each election

Constituents per seat: 249,000

The Pennsylvania Senate is definitely a two-cycle project, as only half of the 50 seats are up for election in 2008, and it’ll be hard to turn more than one or two this year. I’m listing this as high as #3 because Pennsylvania is, after New York, the largest blue state where one of the legislative bodies is Republican-controlled. Like New York, this is because of old-school Republicans hanging on in areas that have long since gone Democratic, at least at the presidential level (Delaware, Montgomery, and Bucks Counties in particular). A prominent example is Majority Leader Dominic Pileggi, who represents part of Delaware County.

In addition, Pennsylvania is projected to lose another seat in the U.S. House in 2010, so control of the redistricting process will be key. (Hellish redistricting in 2000 managed to turn their U.S. House delegation from 11 R-10 D in 2000 to 12 R-7 D in 2002. Of course, spreading the seats as thin as they did wasn’t that wise, as we got the last laugh in 2006, flipping four seats.)

4) Nevada Senate

10 Democrats, 11 Republicans (21 total)

1 to flip

Four-year terms, limit of three terms, half elected each election

Constituents per seat: 119,000 (except for two multi-member seats)

Nevada is a smallish state, but it ranks high on this list because it’s so closely divided (only one seat needs to change hands to flip control to the Democrats). The Democrats already control the state Assembly by a safe 27-15 margin, and given Jim Gibbons’ problems, may well take back the Governor’s seat in 2010, in which case flipping the Senate would give them the trifecta.

Nevada is also important from a redistricting standpoint, as it will be gaining a seat in 2010. We have a good shot to create three Dem-leaning seats in Clark County, each of which contain part Las Vegas and part suburbs, so, again, control of the redistricting process is key.

5) Tennessee Senate

16 Democrats, 16 Republicans, 1 Independent (Speaker is R)

1 to flip

Four-year terms, half elected every election

Constituents per seat: 183,000

Tennessee’s Senate is one of two tied legislative bodies right now (Oklahoma’s Senate is the other one), but the Republicans currently control the Speaker’s seat (Ron Ramsey won the Speaker vote 18-15, including the support of one Dem). This is on the list because a shift of one seat would give the Democrats control (assuming that Rosalind Kurita, the Dem who flipped would vote for a Democratic speaker in the event of a clear Democratic majority). Democrats already control the House and the Governorship.

This is a bit lower on the list because Tennessee is expected to retain nine House seats in 2010. Changes around the margins, however, could either work toward making existing Democratic seats safer, or else trying to make TN-07 competitive.

Others to watch

The Michigan Senate would be near the top of the list, as we’re down 17 D-21 R and only need to pick up two seats to tie it (where the Dem Lt. Gov. would break the tie). Michigan has one of the most pro-GOP gerrymanders in the nation, which will need to be undone in 2010. However, we can’t do anything about it yet because no Senators are up for election in 2008; all 38 stand in 2010.

The Virginia House of Delegates is a ripe target, especially in view of having just taken over the Virginia Senate. We’re down 45 D-53 R-2 I (the Independents both caucus GOP), so a swing of six would give us the trifecta. This election, however, won’t happen until 2009.

As I mentioned, the Oklahoma Senate is also tied, split 24-24. We maintain functional control over the Senate because of the Democratic Lt. Governor, however (although a power-sharing agreement gives the Republicans control during the month of July, believe it or not).

Wisconsin’s Assembly is within reach, with Dems down 47 D-52 R. And both chambers in Arizona are close (13 D-17 R in the Senate, and 27 D-33 R in the House); Arizona is set to gain two seats in 2010, but redistricting control isn’t at issue as the decisions are up to a nonpartisan commission.

Democratic defense

Now let’s take a look at legislatures where we’re going to have to play defense. I don’t foresee this being a cause for alarm, given broader Democratic strengths this cycle, but the fact that we currently control 57 legislatures to the GOP’s 39 means that we do need to watch our backs.

1) Pennsylvania House

102 Democrats, 101 Republicans (203 total)

1 to flip

Two-year terms

Constituents per seat: 61,000

A strong gust could tip the Pennsylvania House back to Republican control (especially considering that, although the Democrats control the chamber, they elected a Republican as speaker in a compromise). Looking at the sheer numbers of Republicans left in the Dem-leaning Philly burbs, the general trends point in our direction, but at only 61,000 constituents per seat, local-level dynamics can make all the difference.

2) Michigan House

58 Democrats, 52 Republicans (110 total)

3 to tie, 4 to flip

Two-year terms, limit of three terms

Constituents per seat: 92,000

In Michigan, the Dems hold the House and the Governorship, although both somewhat tenuously. Controlling the trifecta in 2010 is extremely important, as the pro-GOP gerrymander in the U.S. House seats needs to be undone (the split went from 9 D-7 R in 2000 to 9 R-6 D in 2002, where it persists today). Michigan is predicted to lose one more seat in 2010.

3) Indiana House

51 Democrats, 49 Republicans (100 total)

1 to tie, 2 to flip

Two-year terms

Constituents per seat: 63,000

The Democratic margin is Indiana is very narrow, and the only thing keeping the GOP from controlling the trifecta (the GOP has solid control over the Senate, at 33 R-17 D). Indiana is not predicted to lose a U.S. House seat in 2010, but a GOP gerrymander could make life much more difficult for the three Dem House members representing red districts in Indiana.

4) Oregon House

31 Democrats, 29 Republicans (60 total)

1 to tie, 2 to flip

Two-year terms

Constituents per seat: 62,000

Democrats in Oregon finally took back the House in 2006, giving them the trifecta (they have solid control over the Senate, at 19 D-11 R). This is on the list mostly by virtue of how close it is on paper, but the disparity wasn’t much of an impediment on Speaker Jeff Merkley’s ability to push through progressive legislation. With strong Obama coattails and the Republicans defending several suburban open seats, look for the Democrats to gain a few seats (as Skywaker9 at Daily Kos has thoroughly detailed). However, Oregon is set to gain a House seat in 2010, with the possibility of a 5-1 delegation if the Dems divvy up Portland correctly, so holding the trifecta through 2010 is important.

5) Illinois House

67 Democrats, 51 Republicans (118 total)

8 to tie, 9 to flip

Two-year terms

Constituents per seat: 109,000

Illinois doesn’t actually seem in that much danger this year, with a decent-sized cushion and major Obama coattails. The main reason this is on the list as opposed to a chamber with smaller margins is that Illinois is set to lose a U.S. House seat in 2010, and although we currently control the trifecta, we don’t want the GOP anywhere near the redistricting table.

A few other bodies are worth mentioning: the Virginia Senate (21 D-19 R), Louisiana House (53 D-49 R-1 I-2 V), and Mississippi Senate (27 D-25 R) are all very close, but these are all off-year elections and won’t be an issue until 2009.

(You might be wondering what our safest chamber is. I’d say it’s the Hawaii Senate, which we control 22 D-3 R.)

“Moneyball” opportunities

Finally, I wanted to turn my attention to several more pickup possibilities, which I’m calling the “moneyball” states. These tend to be the smallest states, where redistricting isn’t an issue because each one only gets one U.S. House seat, so they aren’t high priorities for us. On the other hand, these are the chambers that can be flipped for the smallest possible investment. I calculated this simply by multiplying the number of seats needed to flip by the number of constituents per seat (and thus the presumed expense of flipping a seat). Two of these cases (Delaware and Montana) would actually give the Dems the trifecta in those states.

1) Montana House

49 Democrats, 50 Republicans, 1 Constitution Party (100 total)

1 to tie, 2 to flip

Constituents per seat: 9,000

Moneyball number: 18,000

2) Delaware House

19 Democrats, 22 Republicans (41 total)

2 to flip

Constituents per seat: 21,000

Moneyball number: 42,000

3) North Dakota Senate

21 Democrats, 26 Republicans (47 total)

3 to flip

Constituents per seat: 14,000

Moneyball number: 42,000

4) South Dakota Senate

15 Democrats, 20 Republicans (35 total)

3 to flip

Constituents per seat: 22,000

Moneyball number: 66,000

5) Alaska House

17 Democrats, 23 Republicans (40 total)

3 to tie, 4 to flip

Constituents per seat: 17,000

Moneyball number: 68,000

There’s a real shortage of information out there at the national level about individual state legislature races, so if anyone of you out there know of any blogs or individual diarists that excel at handicapping state legislature races, please let us know in the comments and we’ll be sure and keep up with them as we approach November.

Posted on all Blue Majority sites. Daily Kos, Open Left and The Swing State Project.

A couple of weeks ago, I announced that Senator Barack Obama had filmed a commercial supporting Congressional Candidate, Bill Foster, who is running to succeed Denny Hastert in Illinois’ 14th District.

The Special Election, and the first real non-primary Congressional race to be decided this year, will be held this Saturday, March 8th.

This race is very close, and this commercial from Senator Obama will help us get Bill’s message of change out to the people of the 14th District.

There is a lot at stake in this race. The NRCC has launched an $850,000 ad buy for Oberweis in the district, and, according to The Hill:

NRCC Chairman Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said Monday that he recognizes the magnitude of the race to replace the former Speaker and he expects it to be close.

“We understand the symbolic importance of the race; it’ll be spun out of all proportion if we were to lose it,” Cole said. “It’ll be, ‘My God, it’s the end of the Republican Party.’ “

Now, with Senator Obama supporting our message of change, we now need your help to keep that message on the air.

With every dollar we raise, we can continue to make sure the people who will be deciding this election will see this appeal.

We have set up an Actblue page dedicated to supporting this television commercial.

Obama For Foster

Please help us turn Denny’s seat blue. Think about how you would feel if you woke up on March 9th and the headlines read, “Hastert’s Seat is now occupied by a DEMOCRAT.” The implied headline would be, “There are no safe Republican seats in November.”

I promised you the ad. Here it is:

Do what you can to help us keep Senator Obama’s support of Bill Foster for Congress on the air.

Obama For Foster

Disclaimer: I work with the Foster campaign, and I’m pleased to bring you this diary.

As many of you may know, John Laesch held a press conference this morning to discuss the unresolved election in IL-14.  At this point Laesch still trails his primary opponent by 355 votes in the general primary, although all the absentee ballots are not counted (in fact, County Clerks must wait until February 19th for their return) and there is still an outstanding question as to whether all the provisional ballots have been counted in all nine counties.

John Laesch has conceded the special primary to his opponent, who will run against Republican nominee Jim Oberweis on March 8 to decide who will fill the remaining ten months of Hastert’s term, but he has not conceded the general primary, which is still undecided until all votes are counted.  This morning Laesch held a press conference to answer the many questions the campaign has been bombarded with regarding his intentions.  I attended it.  And since the campaign has made it clear they will make no further statements, I will share my observations and the text of his remarks below.

First I’ll say that I spent election night in the Laesch for Congress office.  That was Tuesday.  John spoke to his supporters that night and, in response to a question from a reporter as to whether he would concede the special primary said that he would.  I recall that no one, not the AP, not the Trib, not a single Chicago TV station, was willing to call the regular primary that night – nor have they yet that I can discover – with so close a margin and no idea what military, absentee, and provisional ballots might be outstanding.  John certainly did not concede that race, and spoke about the need to look at those details the next day.  

My interpretation of this was that Laesch was conceding the special primary and not conceding the general primary – an interpretation that the media present then seems to share.  But I discovered the next day that, in an experience uncommon for me, as I have worked for the campaign in the past and have personal friends on staff – and in fact count John and Jen as personal friends by this point – that the lid, as they say, was on.  I couldn’t get another word out of anyone.  They maintained with me that there simply wasn’t anything going on beyond counting every vote, and until that was done, no decisions could be made.  I also needed to look no further than out my window to realize that several of the county clerk’s offices were closed, because of the rampaging blizzard going on, so there was no way anything like a normal canvass could proceed.

Heh.  So I went to the press conference.  

Al Nowakowski, a member of the campaign’s communications team, took the mike first and surprised at least me by introducing of all people Ben Mullenbach.  While some of you would readily recognize his DKos uid if I threw it out, I won’t.  Suffice it to say Ben spoke so eloquently and movingly of the simple fact that he was John Laesch’s very first volunteer, going up to him and pledging him his help after the very first political speech John ever made, and while Ben was still a sophomore in high school that I was amazed and suspect more Kossacks than I would be hoping Ben runs for office one day if they had heard it.  

I know Ben from way back in the ’06 campaign, and while I always knew he was always there doing a myriad of tasks, I was amazed because he goes diligently and rather seriously about whatever work is underway and this is a side of him that was new to me.  He spoke, without reference to notes or prepared text that I could see, about why John had so moved him to volunteer and it was so apparent he spoke for many of us, and moved all of us, who had, at various points in the last cycle or this, followed him in dedicating our support to John.  The campaign has not posted the audio of Ben, as I am writing this, but I feel they should.  I hope they do.  At the end of Ben’s remarks he introduced State Senator Mike Noland.

Senator Noland’s first remark was to ask how he could possibly follow that!  Senator Noland, himself pretty widely known throughout our area as a true grassroots candidate, compared John to, as he termed it, another Illinois politician, Obama, in that they have an uncommon ability to connect with the voters, which pretty much sent the crowd into a really wild round of applause.  Noland said something to the effect that one of the things he admired about John was that he was a fighter and would not give up easily.  I wish they had posted this on the campaign’s website as well, because I am struggling to recall all of Noland’s inspiring remarks, but suffice it to say that I approached him after the event to tell him I do not live in his district, but envy those who do.  Let’s just hope a video goes up on YouTube soon – there were a lot of cameras in the room.  In the meantime, I’ll just add that Noland introduced John, and offer the full text of John’s remarks below, and a link to the audio on the campaign website.

To the best of my recollection, John meticulously followed the text of these remarks.  I noted it strongly at the time, because as his media coordinator in ’06, I am well aware of the possibility probability inevitability that John will set aside his remarks and begin to speak extemporaneously.  Thankfully, he does that remarkably well, so I soon got over the near heart-attack it caused me the first few times he did so, but I could not fail to note that he was being uncharacteristically careful to stick to his prepared text.

“Let me begin by congratulating Bill Foster in his special election win.

We will be cheering him on in the special election.

This is what we know with respect to the regular primary election that was held on February 5th.

Currently, we know that there is a difference of 355 votes out of 75,000 votes cast in a historic Democratic turnout for this district. This is less than 1 vote per precinct.

Yesterday, February 7th was the first day when election officials could begin to count provisional ballots. As of today, there are a significant number of provisional and absentee ballots that remain uncounted.

We have been in close contact with officials in the 9 jurisdictions throughout the 14th Congressional District. And I would like to express my appreciation to all of the election judges who had to deal with the challenges that came with three elections in a very short period of time. It has been challenging for many of them and we are grateful for their continued effort to help us resolve some of the unknowns as we await the process.

By Illinois Statute, provisional and absentee ballots must be counted by February 19th. The regular primary must be certified by March 7th.

While we are awaiting the official election results, we remain committed to the Democratic process.

The next question I would like to answer is what is next for John Laesch?

I became involved in electoral politics because I disagreed with 2003 pre-emptive war policy and invasion of Iraq. I chose to run for United States Congress in 2005 after my brother received his orders to go to Baghdad. I have stated consistently that I will remain involved in electoral politics until every single U.S. soldier is safely home from Iraq.

My younger brother, Sgt. Pete Laesch voted with an absentee ballot on February 5th.

As of today, my brother’s vote has not been counted.

We have no choice but to await the final results of the February 5th Primary Election.”

I saw Dem County Chairs and PCPs there, and I saw volunteers I recognized and supporters I did not.  There were residents as from as far away as the farthest western edge of IL-14, almost at the Iowa Border, there were labor leaders, and Latino leaders, and Dem movers and shakers of virtually every category you could imagine.  They were obviously and sincerely enthusiastic in their support for this speech.  At one point, the crowd of supporters even broke out in a chant of “every vote counts.”

John’s answers in the Q&A also struck me as very concise and controlled for John – there was not a quip to be heard and there was no back and forth chit-chat involved.

The inevitable question came up as to whether John would ask his supporters to work for his recent opponent in the special election.  Laesch answered that every Democrat should support the Democrat on the ballot, then added: “I am a Democrat” which drew another round of applause.

After the speech, people just didn’t want to seem to leave.  I stepped out front onto the sidewalk of busy Downer Street in Aurora with a friend, so we could try to hear each other talk.  As we were talking a pickup stopped in the street, stalling traffic, and the driver leaned out the window and shouted “What did he decide?  What did he decide?” and I said “To wait for the votes to be counted.”

“Good,” he shouted, and looking over his shoulder at the backed-up traffic yelled “I gotta go” and drove on.  

cross-posted to Fireside14, PrairieStateBlue, OpenLeft, MyDD and DailyKos

the most important news at this point is that early voting has begun.  for those who live in illinois’ 14th congressional district, the ballot positions for the special primary election are:

Bill Foster

John Laesch

Jotham Stein

ballot positions for the regular primary election are:

John Laesch

Jotham Stein

Bill Foster

Joe Serra

the winner of the special primary election should expect lots of support.  the dccc put il-14 on it’s first round of red-to-blue races:

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), the campaign arm of the Democratic Party majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, has announced its initial roster of candidates in a program that will provide them with enhanced fundraising and strategic assistance – most of them for efforts to take over Republican-held seats in this year’s elections.

Candidate to be determined, Illinois’ 14th (North central – Aurora, Elgin, DeKalb). The special election to replace Hastert has been scheduled for March 8, and the parties will select their nominees in primary elections on Feb. 5 – the same day that district voters will cast ballots in the regularly scheduled primary election. The Democratic winner in both contests almost certainly will be Bill Foster, a scientist and businessman who has support from the Democratic hierarchy. Foster is personally wealthy and had early success raising campaign money from other sources, but the Democrats will give him plenty of extra help in the hopes of stealing a generally Republican-leaning district. The Republican field includes state Sen. Chris Lauzen and dairy executive Jim Oberweis, who is Hastert’s preferred candidate.

2004 vote for president: Bush 55 percent, Kerry 44 percent

the dccc won’t be the only democrats rushing in to help foster.

the lawsuit filed by the local election boards has been decided.  “A federal judge has approved an abbreviated calendar for a special March general election to fill a vacancy in the 14th Congressional District…. Judge Ruben Castillo set new deadlines for the tasks to be completed to take into account the time between the two elections.”  one thing i’m going to be paying attention to is how much differentiation there is between turnout in these two separate elections.

this is endorsement season and bill foster has wrapped up most of the newspaper endorsements.  foster got the major chicago paper’s endorsements.  the chicago tribune wrote:

Local Democratic leaders, though, seem to be coalescing around Bill Foster of Geneva, a particle physicist at Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory. Here’s a first for an Illinois campaign: Foster is endorsed by 22 Nobel Prize winners. Foster is a strong candidate, and he has our support.

the sun-times advised:

Among Democrats, we endorse retired Fermilab physicist and successful businessman Bill Foster of Geneva. His moderate views fit best with the 14th.

Foster’s physics background would be handy in addressing atomic energy and weapons issues and in defending continued funding of Fermilab and Argonne.

We are wary, though, of Foster’s support of a potentially Big Brother type of national employee verification card. He also favors putting up a real or virtual border wall.

His personal hero — and a man whose commitment he tries to emulate — is his late father, Bill, a law professor who helped write the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

foster also won the endorsements from the kane county chonicle and the dekalb daily chronicle.

the aurora beacon news and the ledger sentinel wrote about john laesch’s endorsement by his hometown mayor, valerie burd.  

there’s been plenty of stories about the candidate debates.  the telegraph and daily gazette had this write up, and the beacon news had this one, about the debate two weeks ago.  more recently, the beacon news (here and here) and the daily herald wrote about this weekend’s debate.  in other coverage, the courier news wrote about the candidate’s different approaches to health care, while the daily herald looks at their views on iraq.  chicago’s abc station had this piece about the race (although i never got it to play on my computer).

in more candidate-specific articles, the beacon news and the courier news covered jotham stein’s announcement of his economic plan.  the daily herald covered bill foster’s reaction to president bush’s visit to chicago while the beacon news covered foster’s increasing concentration on his forthcoming republican opponent.  the beacon news also took a tour around the world wide web, looking at the candidate’s websites.

the laesch campaign continues to conduct much of its efforts online.  there were campaign updates herehere, here, here, here and here.  downtowner adds her perspective here and here.  daddy4mak gets excited about pat quinn’s endorsement as does howie klein.  he also hails the endorsement from noam chomsky while calling this race the most “important race in the entire country on February 5.”  archpundit wonders why laesch wants to get rid of the alternative minimum tax (i guess if the leading candidate supports fiscal responsibility, you may as well come out against it).

live leak had this video of the quinn endorsement.  the national pda joined the il-14 and chicago branches in endorsing laesch.

foster has gained more support.  bill baar has been faithful in posting mailers from the candidates, including foster’s: here, here and here.  foster also has a new television commercial, which can be seen here.  

jotham stein has put up a series of youtube videos, on fermilab, buying a seat in congress, and food and health care for every child.

there are still a number of opportunities to hear the candidates.  on thursday night, they will participate in the aurora beacon news/cbs 2 debate (which will also be webcast).  sunday morning WBBM-AM will air a candidate forum on the “at issue” program.  both of these forums provide people numerous chances to compare the candidates on the issues.

the foster campaign reports:

We’re talking to a lot of voters these days, especially with our Aurora field office up and running.

Iraq, of course, is a big issue in the minds of voters, as is frustration with politics-as-usual and squabbling in Washington.  However, we’re also seeing an increase in concerns over jobs, the mortgage crisis, and the general state of the economy.

The message remains that Bill Foster’s background as a scientist and a businessman will enable him to confront the challenges facing this district and this country, and change the bickering ways in Washington that prevent anything from getting done.

it adds:

We’re continuing to run a campaign that’s focused on the issues and telling voters about Bill Foster.  That stands in stark contrast to the Republican candidates in this race, who seem to be more focused on attacking each other than on talking about issues that matter to voters.

Bill is receiving a lot of organic support from the scientific community, which is excited by the prospect of sending an accomplished physicist to Congress.  They recognize how critical that background will be to tackling the tough technological problems – energy independence and health care, for example – America faces.

early voting has begun, and jotham stein and bill foster both have votes.  given the popularity of early voting this time, it seems that this race could see a record primary turnout — for both elections.  vote twice.  it’s your right…

With a few filing deadlines past, I think its time we take a look at which races we should be looking at in the coming year.  There will be many races where fundraising will be key and netroots support can make that fundraising possible.  

Illinois is going to be an interesting place come this November, especially if Barack Obama is the Democrats presidential nominee.  With Dick Durbin a safe bet for his Senate Seat, the Democrats could have 2 very big coattails for their downballot races and there are many opportuities in this state.  

We have a great chance to get rid of a DINO in Dan Lipinski early on in the 3rd Congressional District with Mark Pera, who would then be a safe bet to win come November.  It is imperative that we give Pera our full support early on as he will need every dollar to overcome the now splinterd anti-Lipinski vote.  Everyone here understands that we will need Democrats of all shapes and colors to overcome the Republicans, but what we really need are good Democrats, especially in Districts that should have good Democrats like this one should.  

The second race to watch is the 6th congressional district, where 30 year army veteran, local businesswoman, and the former director of the Illinois Department of Homeland Security, Colonel Jill Morganthaler is running.  While the current holder of the seat, Peter Roskam beat Tammy Duckworth by the skin of this teeth, he did so during a year that has no presidential or senatorial coattails to assist the downballot races.  Col. Morganthaler can give Roskam yet another race for his life and anywhere we can put Republicans on the defense is one less place they can attack us and leaves less money for them to defend other seats.  

The Democratic held 8th CD is next on my list, though at first look, it appears Congresswoman Melissa Bean will escape a real challenge this year.  The main Republican candidate is businessman Steve Greenberg, and while he is raising some money, Congresswoman Bean has over 1 million dollars more than Greenburg has all together and Greenburg will have to spend that money beating back a couple of minor primary challengers and introducing himself to the district.  I expect this district, which Republicans hope to contest, won’t be much of a race, but Bean has had recent close contests, is listed as a Frontline Dem by the DCCC and is on the NRCC target list, so we’ll keep an eye on this race until it proves to be the blowout I’m expecting.  

the 10th congressional district will see a Democratic primary between 2006 nominee Dan Seals, and a Clinton Administration official, Jay Footlik.  Seals is the favorite to win the primary at this time and is raising significant amounts of money.  He will once again challenge Republican Mark Kirk and with his name recognition higher after last years close defeat, the DCCC should play heavily here.  Coattails can also play a part in this race as well.  Just like 06, this race will once again be a race to watch (and spend money on)

In the 11th CD, state senate majority leader Debbie Halvorsen is in the race for this open seat.  It appears that New Lenox Mayor Tim Balderman will be her opponent though he has to face some minor primary challengers first.  Halvorsen has significant support and name recognition as her state senate district overlaps this congressional district.  I’d give Halvorsen a slight edge in this race thus far and it is by far one of our best pick up opportunities in the state.  

For my last major pick up opportunity, we go to Illinois 14th district, formerly held by the Congressman no one on this site will miss in Denny Hastert.  John Laesch is the 2006 nominee and he is back again this year but has had some lackluster fundraising numbers thus far, not including his 4th quarter totals.  Meanwhile, Bill Foster, a scientist and local businessman has over 500,000 cash on hand and appears to be the favorite to get the Dem nod, especially after getting the endorsement of Senator Durbin.  The Republicans will have a serious primary between State Senator Chris Lauzen and the businessman who has lost a race for just about everything, Jim Oberweis.  Oberweis appears to be the favorite of the Republican establishment but Lauzen has raised more money.  Lets hope they beat the crap out of each other and that things get really really nasty.  

On the bottom of my listing here, are 4 races that have candidates who seems to be doing ok in fundraising but aren’t excelling, though with a little netroots help, may just make life even more miserable for the GOP in this state and nationwide.  

Scott Harper in the 13th congressional district, Robert Abboud in the 16th congressional district, the 18th congressional district, where Democrats will choose who the nominee will be after the only filed candidate, Dick Versace, dropped out, and Joe McMenamin in the 19th congressional district have all raised over 50,000 dollars and could become thorns in the side of a GOP that is going to be stretched to its limits.  These lower races here could also burst onto the scene in a similar fashion as those of Carol Shea-Porter and Nancy Boyda, especially if Obama is the nominee.  Illinois has the potential to be a hotbed of Democratic activity next year and we need to give them all the support we can.  

I’ll be doing the rest of the states shortly and then intend to update the lists as things go on.  

if media was all that mattered, the race against rep. dan lipinski would be lopsided.  lipinski has generated a lot of negative publicity in his run-up to re-election, and you’d expect someone to take advantage of it.  the incumbent faces a mini-scandal, one that doesn’t particularly help his image as he tries to seperate himself from his father (who handed him the seat in 2004).  kristen mcqueary lays out the reasons for the lipinski scandal, and rich miller, of the capitol fax blog, summarizes:

Bill Lipinski games the system to get his kid elected to Congress. The son keeps his dad’s cronies on the payroll, and two of them (includng one who remains on the payroll) are getting payments from his father’s childrens’ charity fund, which doesn’t appear to be doing a lot of charitable work except for Dan Lipinski’s benefit. Dan shares an office with his daddy’s lobbying firm and even pays that firm for advice, but he insists he never talked with daddy about a project that the elder Lipinski is working on.

mark pera has emerged as the early netroots favorite.  he’s demonstrated that he’s serious about this race, lining up pat botterman as his campaign manager and julie sweet as his deputy.  pera has gotten the dfa endorsement and convinced the local dfa groups (all outside the 3rd) to send in the troops.  pera just announced the endorsement of citizen action, which has been a bellweather endorsement in the past.

pera has two videos up on his youtube page, “Mark Pera on the issues” and his first television ad, “It’s Time”.  it’s no surprise that pera is generating support from the netroots, given his efforts to appeal to them in the language we understand.

but pera is also following the traditional campaign plan, having commissioned a benchmark poll by penn, schoen and berland [PDF].  archpundit breaks it down:

401 Likely Democratic Primary voters +/- 5%

Lipinski Re-elect 35 percent

Wrong Track: 81 percent

Generic Congressional Approval: 37 percent

prairie state blue’s maven notes that mark pera won the ballot lottery.  

also jumping into the race has been former prosecutor and army reserves lt. colonel jim capparelli.  capparelli’s main justification for entering this race appears to be that pera and the baby lipinski both live in western springs (does lipinski really live in illinois???).  but unlike the pera campaign (to this point), the capparelli presence has just been catching up.  he talks on his website talks about campaigning at the metra stations, and there seems to be a sparse nature (so far) to the website.  as yet, no one seems to have seen him (although you’d expect that to change).  

capparelli also generated some publicity,  has a youtube page, where you can find this introductory video.  his website now hosts a blog, although it appears to be only for the purpose of answering questions (or taking testimonials) rather than actively engaging the netroots or incorporating them into his campaign.

one capparelli supporter says, in the capital fax blog, that “the unions are playing a huge role in city elections and Capparelli has been lining up their support.”  that certainly remains to be seen, although the citizen action endorsement for pera (who’s board and members who vote on endorsements is full of union representatives) may forebode otherwise.  it’s been reported that capparelli has the endorsements of local 399 of the operating engineers and teamsters local 786.  that comment may be indicative of the strategy and expectations around the capparelli campaign and it will be interesting to see whether union support favors one candidate or is dispersed across the field.  

one of the big disputes in this campaign is the presence of machine plants, or shills, expected to divide the anti-incumbent vote (for the incumbent’s benefit).  jim capparelli has taken great exception to being called a shill for the machine [PDF] even though it is said that “Many of his positions – on the war and abortion, for example – appear to mirror Lipinski’s.”  palos hills mayor jerry bennett also faces the accusation that he is the machine plant.  kos has examined bennett’s past and identified this continuing connection between bennett and lipinski:

Palos Hills mayor Jerry Bennet — a Lipinski ally — is supposedly running a legit race. Yet he endorsed Lipinski two years ago — an endorsement that has been reposted on Lipinski’s new and updated campaign site:

   Gerald Bennett, the Mayor of Palos Hills and a health care executive, said Congressman Lipinski’s proposals were an “excellent approach to helping American families become better health care consumers.”

   “The Congressman should be lauded for working with colleagues in both parties to craft initiatives that will not only improve health care availability and delivery, but also have a great chance of being enacted,” Mayor Bennett said.

and yet, appearances can be deceiving.  unlike john kelly, who was regarded as the shill in lipinski’s first democratic primary in 2006, bennett has come to play.  he’s put together a well-regarded campaign team, with alex behrend, mia phifer, vasyl markus and lake research partners (celinda lake’s polling firm).  bennett garnered the endorsement of the other challenger in 2006, john sullivan.

bennett’s reason for running can be found here:

A life-long Democrat and South Sider, Jerry Bennett is the only person running in Illinois 3rd Congressional District with the background and broad-based appeal in both the City of Chicago and the Cook County suburbs to win the February 5th Democratic Primary. Voters previously supportive of Dan Lipinski are fed up with the Congressman’s support of George W. Bush and Jerry Bennett offers both realistic Democratic change voters seek and experience required.

the real problem is that lipinski seems to have alienated every single democratic constituency there is.  given that democrats don’t always agree on their priorities, it should be no surprise that there are different people running against a vulnerable democrat for seemingly different reasons.  if only he wasn’t mired in scandal and the machine wasn’t under serious strain, he might have a better chance of weathering the storm.  the presence of three serious challengers (at this point, i’m taking their word for it) certainly increases lipinski’s chances at re-election.

what will be interesting to see is whether voters coalesce around one single candidate.  if this is going to happen, it will begin before the television commercials get aired or perhaps even the billboards and lawn signs go up.  voter contact is the only reliable means for generating such a consensus.  as such, it’s interesting to look at the ground activity of these campaigns.

the capparelli campaign reports that they’ve been making a big push going door-to-door for at least the last three weeks “with a big mailing.”  they’ve been hitting different wards in the city and get started at 8am every saturday morning.  while they have a campaign headquarters (5602 1/2 w 63rd st), they appear to meet at different locations each saturday (so call the office if you want to help out).  jim capparelli has also been making the veteran’s circuit, speaking at a veteran’s day rally as well as at local vfw halls in the district.  their campaign calendar shows a couple of fundraisers scheduled over the next few weeks.

the pera campaign has been out in the field a little while longer.  the campaign reports that mark pera has been going to train stations every (weekday) morning and walking with volunteers in the afternoons.  they have also been conducting weekend canvassing with both the northside and oak park dfa groups.  they report that they have a major outreach push on for december 1st and 2nd, as well as an id canvass on the 8th.  the campaign reports fund-raisers planned for the 10th and 13th.  most of their volunteer activities start out of their campaign office, at 7061 s. willow springs rd in countryside, although northside dfa car pools in from the city.  i can’t seem to find a calendar on the website, but i might have missed something.

the bennett campaign also has a campaign headquarters set up at 7229 w 103rd st in palos hills.  the volunteer who answered the phone (they were in the midst of “a big conference call”) didn’t feel capable of answering any other questions about the campaign.

the lipinski campaign clearly relies on the machine for his re-election.  the problem with this strategy this february is that the on-going battle between the governor and the speaker may divert forces from helping lipinski.  there isn’t a lot of crossover wards where the speaker will be defending incumbent state house members and il-03.  and one just doesn’t get the impression that lipinski’s seat is that important — at least, not more important than the speaker’s forces in the general assembly.  it matters how these four campaigns divide the map, where they concentrate on — and where they have pre-existing support.  

all four democrats can be contributed to online through actblue.

After being nailed by the Chicago Tribune over his suspicious Latin American investments, it looks like Rep. Jerry Weller (R-IL) might not be running for re-election. According to the Daily Southtown, Weller is certainly sending those signals:

Rumors are circulating that Weller may decide against another term, particularly in light of the bad press he is receiving over his Guatemalan financial interests. Phone calls, I'm told, have been made to his top donors indicating he may be preparing to “hang it up.” His family, after all, lives in Guatemala. That's a long commute.

[…] 

He has not returned phone calls to the media, no matter the topic, for weeks. 

In addtion, The Capitol Fax reports that Weller hasn't started circulating the nominating petitions required for his name to appear on the ballot. 

So who'll step in to fill the void if Weller opts out? Although he's also taken up the habit of not returning phone calls from the media, it's rumored that Joliet bank president Jim Roolf is considering a run for the Republicans. And Emily's List is heavily recruiting state Senate Majority Leader Debbie Halvorson (D-Crete) to enter the race. It's pretty certain that this seat, with a PVI of R+1.1, will be competitive no matter what Weller decides.

(h/t to Faithfully Liberal) 

Since we're all having fun speculating potential successors for Hillary Clinton in the Senate should she win the Presidency, let's take a moment to look at Illinois, too.

Assuming Barack Obama crushes Tom Tancredo in the 2008 Presidential election, whom might Gov. Rod Blagojevich appoint to serve the final two years of Obama's Senate term?  Whom would you like Blago to appoint? 

The most common name that I've heard batted around for a hypothetical Senate promotion is Attorney General Lisa Madigan.  Other possibilities could include Comptroller Dan Hynes, who finished second to Obama in the 2004 Senate primary, or perhaps a Representative like Jesse Jackson, Jr.

Any other possibilities?  Tammy Duckworth?  Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn?  Blago himself?  (Shudder to think.)  Leave your thoughts in the comments.

Weeks after failing in his bid to become the next President of Bradley University, Republican Rep. Ray LaHood of Illinois' 18th District has announced tonight that he will retire after seven terms in the House, according to the Associated Press.

LaHood's retirement will create an open seat in the 2008 elections, and provide Democrats an opportunity (if only a tough one) of picking up another seat in the House.  With a PVI of R+5.5, the 18th District supported Bush by a 54-44 margin in 2000, and by a wider 58-42 margin in 2004.  It would certainly be a tough district for any Democrat to win next year, but House Democrats have proven to be more able campaigners in red territory than Republicans are in bluer turf.  Indeed, seven of last year's 30 Democratic pick-ups in the House came in even redder districts than LaHood's.

So who might run for the Democrats?  DailyKos diarist MrLiberal suggests State Senator John Sullivan, a credible campaigner in the district, or Kevin Lyons, State's Attorney for Peoria County.

Keep your eyes peeled on this race.  It may be a tough nut to crack, but the NRCC can ill-afford too many more retirements like this one.