Sunday, July 31, 2005

A racing form for the 9 Republican Guv candidates; 6 debate tonight in Skokie

There are nine actual or potential Republican Primary candidates for Governor.

Six of those nine, including Rauschenberger, Oberweis, Brady, O'Malley, Birkett and Gidwitz, are scheduled to attend a forum of Republican Guv candidates tonight, sponsored by the Republican Jewish Coalition “RJC” [See here], which until the Reagan era, might have been thought to be an oxymoron. On the national level, the Jewish population [as well as non-Jews] has become increasingly worried about the Democratic Party’s (1) increasing reluctance to stand by Israel, with respect to Israel’s efforts to deal with Palestinian terrorists, (2) failure to perceive the dangers to Israel posed by Iraq and Iran, not to mention other countries hostile to Israel’s existence and (3) increasing reluctance to stand by, in terms of providing military assistance and troops for, any democratic or emerging democratic ally. Indeed, [See here and here, and here, for references to RJC events today about Israel with North Shore Cong. Mark Steven Kirk [R-Highland Park, IL; 10th CD]] in La Jolla, Irvine and Beverly Hills, California, respectively, {not a bad tour of duty for Commander Kirk; La Jolla is perhaps as close as one can come to Heaven on earth, even for those who don't believe in Heaven].

Similarly, there are both federal and state domestic policy issue positions, e.g., affirmative active, making government neutral instead of hostile to religion, taxes and spending, for which the Democratic Party may be viewed as less hospitable than the new Republican Party to the interests and preferences of the Jewish population than was previously the case. Ironically, the Republican Party needs more of an outreach program, or one could almost say, affirmative action program for Jewish voters. Indeed, who better than bar mitzvah boy and Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman to do this.

Although listed as attending the RJC forum, LaHood has had to cancel due to a “family emergency.” That certainly could be the case, but his absence will help fuel speculation that he is about to drop out, as has been rumored previously. Topinka is generally not attending Guv Candidate forums—no doubt because she views herself as ahead of the other Guv candidates [at least in name recognition] and she probably realizes articulating public policy positions is not her strength. Jim Edgar, of course, has not officially acknowledged he is even thinking of running, with Sun-Times columnist Carol Marin reporting [See here] that he loves to take his grandkids to the dentist in Colorado-no doubt much more so than debating six Guv wannabees in Skokie on a Sunday night]

In order of likelihood to get the Republican Party nomination—with my odds in brackets-- the Berkowitz racing form, provided gratis for tonight [you can’t tell the players without a program] is as follows:

1. Thirteen year State Senator Steve Rauschenberger [5 to 1] [Elgin]. Steve is more a plodder than flamboyant, but he is (a) smart, (b) very knowledgeable about state government, public policy and the legislative process, (c) very well liked by the edit boards, and (d) he is much more charismatic than he was a few years ago—he has learned how to throw out one liners, e.g., tourists spend more time in Springfield than Blagojevich. Raised 800 K in last six months. That was impressive, but he must repeat that at a higher level. Must give comfort to both social and economic conservatives that he is truly one of them, while continuing to reach out to moderates. Must keep Republican National Committeeman Kjellander from getting his scalp, which Bob wants badly. Rauschenberger will make his entry into Guv race official this Tuesday morning in Elgin.

2. Judy Baar Topinka, [10-1] [Chicago] Eleven years as State Treasurer, adored by Chicago Tribune and most of the mainstream Chicago metro media , along with Big Jim Thompson and Jim Edgar, as a pragmatic moderate conservative [as the Trib Edit Board put it last year during the Keyes mess] —another oxymoron. Truly disliked [some would say hated] by much of the Republican Primary conservative base, especially for her “in your face,” support of gay rights and perhaps to a somewhat lesser extent, for her pro-choice views re abortion, or pro-abortion views, as the social conservatives would say. Understands politics and winning quite well, and willing to deal, perhaps to a fault, to do so; tremendous name recognition relative to the others in the primary field, except, maybe for Oberweis, and Edgar, of course [See assessment of next candidate , below]. Historical strong ties to George Ryan could be major problem. But, if field narrows to Judy and two [male] conservatives who split the base vote, her Republican Primary chances are good, especially if Blago draws no primary opposition, allowing Judy to draw Democratic cross-overs, especially female pro-choice voters.

3. Jim Edgar [20-1] [Downstate and Colorado]. Very popular Ex-Governor, 1991-1998. Will turn 59, next month, but old for his years. Angioplasty and by-pass during his tenure as Governor mean that his wife, Brenda, and he, may not be anxious to jump into a stressful primary and general, not to mention the financial state government mess he inherits, if he beats Blago. It is assumed by mainstream media that his entry would clear the primary field. But, they do not realize it would probably take an armed militia to get Oberweis and his supporter Jack Roeser out of the primary. And, even Sen. Rauschenberger might decide to stay in the primary. If two conservatives stay in, Edgar almost surely wins the primary. Downsides for Edgar: He last won in 94. The political landscape has changed considerably. The Republican Primary could have significant speed bumps for Edgar, if only one conservative stays in, especially with a Republican primary base that is much more socially conservative than it was in 1994, and of course, Edgar is Pro-Choice. Downstaters now care more about issues than simple geography. Then there is that pesky, old MSI scandal. And, Edgar may not be the guy to argue against Blago fee increases or against Democratic Party Tax Swaps, with Edgar having adopted that Dawn Clark Netsch proposal after arguing against it in the 1994 campaign. The smart money says less than 50-50 that Edgar gets in, perhaps 40-60 or 30-70. Likely to announce his decision on August 18th at Republican Day at the State Fair in Springfield.

4. Jim Oberweis [30-1] [Sugar Grove, upstate]. Lots of net worth, and pretty good name recognition. The name recognition stems from his family Dairy business and his Wealth Management business, as well as his two primary runs for the U.S. Senate in 2002 and 2004, respectively [2nd Place finish in both]. First to officially announce for Governor. Lifetime entrepreneur with an MBA from the University of Chicago who started focusing on politics five years ago, or so. That is both his strength [says he will be candid to voters, unlike pols] and weakness [stumbled badly on Taliban abortion comment, upsetting pro-lifers; and stumbled on immigration, upsetting everybody except for hard core anti-immigrant wing of the Republican Party—fair or unfair, that’s the reality. Has recovered, but Taliban and Immigration were and are heavy crosses to bear---many are afraid he would stumble badly again, if he became the Republican nominee and many social conservatives still do not trust him.

5. Bill Brady [40 to 1], Twelve year State legislator, house and senate [Bloomington], currently in the State Senate. Continues to be active in his family businesses-- real estate, TV station, etc. Very polished guy. Handles media well; attractive family [the Brady Bunch?] and boyish looks-- could be attractive to female voters; good combined political/business background. Speaks well. Easy to like. Estimated net worth in the 4 to 6 million range. All of those ranked ahead of him have run or won statewide, giving them name recognition advantage. This is a good first run for Sen. Brady, earning him a better shot next time, a statewide slot other than governor this time, or he could do it this time-- if someone ahead of him stumbles. Has a downstate advantage that could be strong—when combined with his ability to come across north of I-80 as an upstater. Lost for Congress in 2000, losing in a three way primary to now Cong. Johnson—claims he got into race too late, a mistake he did not make in this race, having announced in an eleven city fly-around earlier this week, after campaigning with some intensity since early this year.

6. Pat O’Malley, [50-1]. 10 year former State Senator and lawyer/wealthy businessman, one of the 1992 Fab 5 state senators that included former U. S. Senator Peter Fitzgerald and fellow Guv candidate and friend, Steve Rauschenberger, as well as current State Senators Lauzen [Aurora] and Syverson [Rockford]. O’Malley got 29% of the vote to Jim Ryan’s 44% and Corinne Wood’s 27% in the 2002 R Guv Primary. Pat declined to endorse Jim Ryan after the primary, which some said sealed his fate for any future runs. Notwithstanding that view, Pat can self finance and he could have expanded his 29% base considerably, had he started working on doing so in 2003. Mysteriously to most, he chose, in large part, to stay out of things until recently. He could hurt some of his fellow conservatives by staying in, but he can’t win now unless all three of the above referenced conservatives stumble badly, and that ain’t going to happen.

7. Cong. Ray LaHood [80 to 1] [Peoria]. Nobody seems to be quite sure what Ray is doing in this race He is a smart, talented guy. He is the "go to guy," who knows House parliamentary procedure and presides frequently in the House, including during the Clinton Impeachment, because he was and is viewed as fair on both sides of the aisle. Speaks easily about the issues, national and state. Liked by his constituents and the media for his candor. Has a lot of respect in his district, but little name recognition outside of it. Mentored by former, long time House minority leader Bob Michel and still speaks with him regularly. Socially conservative, but conservative Republican party base distrusts him because LaHood (1) was one of three Rs in the House to vote against the Contract with America in 1994, (2) helped lead the charge to push Senator Fitzgerald out of his U. S. Senate seat, something for which the conservative base will never forgive LaHood, as Peter is now a conservative icon and (3) thought to be a part of the new Illinois Republican Party Establishment Leadership including Moderates Cong. Kirk, Minority Leader Cross and State Treasurer Judy Baar. Given all of these problems, why would LaHood give up a safe seat in Congress to take a flyer on a Guv race? He won’t. Smart money says he is out by Labor Day, if not before. Perhaps LaHood was in as a sort of stalking horse for the new Republican Establishment to prevent other contenders from getting downstate support, which would help Judy Baar keep upstate lead, until LaHood could transfer his downstate support to her. If that was the game plan, that is not working.

8. Joe Birkett [150 to 1] Third Term DuPage State’s Attorney. Reputation as a smart, tough prosecutor. Came to State’s Attorney position behind Jim Ryan. Still plagued by people assigning blame between Jim Ryan, Joe Birkett and others for the botched prosecution of the infamous and immensely sad Jeanine Nicarico case. Imminent indictment of Brian Dugan for that heinous crime will not help Birkett put this behind him. On the plus side, Joe came within three points of beating Lisa Madigan, notwithstanding her dad’s muscle and money. But, that’s his weakness, too. Everybody views the guy as a prosecutor, notwithstanding the Nicarico mess, so how can Birkett run for Governor. He can’t and won’t. Will be out of the race by Labor Day. Party might like him to take on Lisa again, but that would be a fool’s errand for Joe. Lisa has made virtually no mistakes in the AG office and is viewed by everyone as unbeatable in 2006. Republican pol Jim Durkin all but said that publicly on Tom Roeser’s political shoot-out radio show this month when it was suggested Durkin should run for AG. Birkett will go into private practice for a few years, earn some big bucks and may return to politics, depending on opportunities--perhaps to run for AG in 2010 when Lisa runs for Governor.

9. Ron Gidwitz [250 to 1]. Helene Curtis heir and former State Board of Education Chairman. The epitome of a guy with significant civic appointments and a very successful family business. Gidwitz was given a large ownership interest and a CEO position, and he ran and grew the Company quite well, before he and other family members sold their interest for over 200 million dollars. Gidwitz had high-level appointments from both Mayor Harold Washington [City Economic Development Commission] and Mayor Daley [City College system]. He has raised lots of money for the Republican Party from his wealthy friends and contacts, and received credit from conservatives for raising money for both conservatives and moderates, despite his generally moderate Republican positions and beliefs. Has the net worth to try to buy name recognition, ala Blair Hull, but apparently not quite as much net worth as Blair’s 350 million dollars, or so. And, Gidwitz is likely to be much less successful than Blair was in essentially buying downstate Democratic votes by an intense, TV ad blitz. A very different dynamic in the Republican Party. Hard to buy the Republican base downstate in the same way Hull bought Democratic downstate votes with his senior healthcare ads. Also, Gidwitz, who entered the race officially last month, is starting too late. And then there is the so-called Joliet slumlord family business issue. On the plus side, Ron Gidwitz is a smart, nice business guy with some talented people around him. He is committed to improving the quality of education and he cares deeply about good government and helping people less fortunate than he. Unfortunately for Ron, that is not enough. He may stay in the race until filing time, but for no apparent reason other than he might want to see what it is like to run for Governor. He hurts Judy Baar by cutting into her moderate fundraising pool. Other than that, he would seem to have little impact on the race. Indeed, his potential impact if he gets out is substantial. For example, what if he viewed Rauschenberger as the best chance to bridge the moderate-conservative schism? If so, he could have a tremendous impact on the primary and perhaps general by chairing Rauschenberger’s finance committee. And, both Rauschenberger and Oberweis have pointed out that Gidwitz could be very effective as a high level administrator in either of their administrations. Both, no doubt, would like to woo Gidwitz to join their team, now.
***********************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********************

Friday, July 29, 2005

Skoien: Standing up to Daley or Twisting slowly in the Wind?

Gary Skoien, Cook County GOP Chairman, offered $10,000 to anyone providing information leading to the conviction of Mayor Daley. [See here].For that, he got fired from an executive level Chief Operating Officer position in the private sector [See here].

Today, Chairman Skoien held a press conference to discuss corruption in the City of Chicago. His wife and children were there to stand by him, as were a few political supporters. But, the so-called big guns, e.g., State GOP Chairman Andy McKenna and his predecessor, State Treasurer and likely gubernatorial candidate Judy Baar Topinka, couldn’t have put more distance between Skoien and themselves, on this whole issue

If Skoien had held the press conference a week ago, virtually no print or electronic media would have attended. Yet another, mundane dog bites man story, they would say.

However, today, the cameras could barely fit in the Loop Cook County GOP offices: CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox and more. Two of the three major political reporters in town, Mike Flannery and Andy Shaw, were there with their cameramen, both peppering Skoien with questions, many of which were pretty friendly. John Kass, the Tribune’s major guy on public corruption in Chicago and the journalist who invented the phrase Daley-Ryan Combine, couldn’t be there for the press conference because of a major matter he had to cover, but he was there right after to spend some quality time with Skoien, in a one on one interview.

Skoien made a brief statement to open the press conference and then skillfully used the questions from the media to make his case. Skoien will be lucky if 90 seconds of the 30 minute, or so, press conference makes it on the 6:00 pm news [or 4:00 pm or 5:00 pm or 10:00 pm], but he scored some major points, something no other Republican party leader has done in years. And some important media guys were there, too—so they could tell you about it.

Cook County GOP Chairman Skoien lost, along with a few other candidates, to Andy McKenna, Jr. at the end of the year, when the Republican State Central Committee chose its new State GOP leader. In his first six months of State GOP leadership, virtually nothing has been heard from McKenna-- about Mayor Daley, public corruption, or anything else, for that matter.

Today, Chicago, Cook County and the State of Illinois heard from Gary Skoien. It may not last. But, for today, the Republican Party in Illinois had a leader who was speaking. And the media were listening. You can take a listen, too, below:
*******************************************
Gary Skoien: The good news is that …I have a good family. Financially, I am in a good position. But, you know there are a lot of little guys out there that aren’t going to get a camera crew when they get smashed down by the [Daley Chicago] Machine. They aren’t going to get any attention on the radio when they lose their job or aren’t able to get a job because some political hack was hired in their stead…I understand why Mr. Reschke [CEO, Prime Group] did this [fired Skoien from his COO post at Prime, a real estate development company]. He [Reschke] is in fear, like every other businessman in the City [of Chicago]…so I understand what Mike did—he needs TIFs, he needs zoning…we all understand that if you get out of line against this Mayor, if you say what you think, you are out on the street. The thing that is the most shocking, of course, is that I work for the private sector. ..I don’t work in the [Daley] Administration or in a political office. It shows how far the tentacles, how far the intimidation, how far the threats, how far the fear goes...
********************************
Skoien: …You’ll find over the next few weeks that the phone has been ringing off the hooks and it [the Cook County GOP’s offer to pay $10,000 to anyone providing information leading to the conviction of the Mayor for Public Corruption] is going to make a difference.

Jeff Berkowitz: Have you heard anything from State GOP Chairman Andy McKenna, Jr.? Publicly, his office has said that this is your baby—I think that is what they said, essentially. Have you heard anything from Andy McKenna?

Skoien: No, not beyond that. And, it is my baby
.
****************************************
Berkowitz: Gary. you knew that this was going to happen [if you did this]. You knew, Mike Reschke was going to go ahead and do this, and so what was the point?

Skoien: No, No. I did not know. He told me last night at 5:00 pm. that this was going to happen. He said and he is a good friend and a political contributor of Mayor Daley and I would posit that every donor—every developer in the City of Chicago is a big contributor and a friend of Mayor Daley.

Mike Flannery [CBS 2-News]: Why is that?


Skoien: Because, the way you get business done in the City of Chicago without fear of any retaliation and what you are doing is by being on that team.

Flannery: On the Daley team.

Skoien: On the Daley team. And, if you don’t play you go nowhere. And, in this city, if you’re with them, you have a lot going for you. If you are against them, you’re in the woods…

Andy Shaw [ABC-7 News]: Do you think one issue for another election might be this corruption tax [discussed earlier in the press conference by John Cox], what it costs people to support—

Skoien: John [Cox] is exactly right. The corruption tax is huge. What do we pay the Duffs? What do we pay for incompetent employees? …Those dollars don’t go to schools. Shame on them. Shame on them for what they’re doing to the kids in the schools. That is the issue here. The issue here isn’t that some members of the Combine [Daley Ryan Combine] are upset because somebody said something that was a little strong against the Mayor of the City of Chicago.
****************************************
Skoien: I think the Mayor’s role in my firing has been playing out for sixteen years. And, everybody knows that if you take the Mayor on, you are toast. And, Mike [Reschke] knew it and he did what any rational businessman would do.

Berkowitz: You are saying that Mike [Reschke] knew that he had to do this. Mayor Daley wanted him to do this and he went ahead and did it.

Skoien: I didn’t say Mayor Daley asked him or wanted him to do it. He [Mayor Daley] has created a culture where Mike knew basically from what I saw—Mike actually said—I had to fire him because he took on the Mayor. That’s what he said--I mean, in his press conference.
****************************************
Berkowitz: Is it your statement that the public corruption leads directly to Mayor Daley. Is he legally culpable?

Skoien: You know, that’s what the U. S. Attorney does. I mean, the U. S. Attorney will decide what his culpability is and he is getting lots of help as Andy [Shaw] pointed out. Not just from us. He is getting lots of help. I am sure Mr. Tomczak is going to be helping him [and see here for how Chicago Water Department honcho Tomczak, and others, may have helped, on the City dime, now Congressman Rahm Emanuel beat Nancy Kaszak. And, it is going to go on and on from here. We all, as citizens, need to stand up and say enough is enough.
*****************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Would you think about running for Mayor [of Chicago] in 2007.

Gary Skoien: No, but I think there are a number of great candidates
. You know, John [Cox, who was standing a foot away from Skoien at the press conference] would be one. You know, we will see what happens with Ron Gidwitz. Mike Ditka [former Chicago Bears coach] is in the area. Jack Ryan, there are a number of names of people who would be interesting candidates to run for Mayor and I think some people might seriously think about it…
********************************
Press Conference, Cook County GOP offices, July 29, 2005
********************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Clark Pellett [City of Chicago GOP Chairman]. Did Clark Pellett say anything to you?

Skoien: You know-- he is in Europe.

Berkowitz: All this time. Since it started?

Skoien: I don’t know when he left but I have not spoken to him.

Berkowitz: But, seriously, you are not getting any support. Is McKenna [State GOP Chairman, Andy McKenna, Jr.] calling you and telling you- Hey, lay off here. Or, is he just being quiet. Do you communicate with Andy, at all?

Skoien: Nobody is saying—All these guys, you know the deal. The guys who are part of the Combine [The Daley Ryan Combine]. Nobody wants to rock any boats. I think they are going to have a different view as a result of what happened yesterday, frankly, but I understand. And, I understand, the Speaker of the House [J. Dennis Hastert] has to work with the Mayor of the City. There is nothing in it for him to go after—after the Mayor.

Berkowitz: So you think—

Skoien: I think some of them would have been better off just not saying anything frankly because I think anybody who lives in the City or is in Cook County understands what goes on here.

Berkowitz: So you think you basically take this on yourself? McKenna stays out of it. [Speaker] Hastert stays out of it.

Skoien: I’m not asking. I don’t need it. I don’t need any of them to get into this. I think it is going fine. And, McKenna apparently put out a press release that was positive today.

Berkowitz: Did he?

Skoien: That’s what I heard. I haven’t seen it.
******************************************
Post Press Conference Questions and Answers, Cook County GOP office, July 29, 2005
******************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********************

U. S. Senator Obama wide of the mark on job creation

A major transportation bill passed the Congress late yesterday, overcoming some snags noted here. Almost two weeks ago, the core aspects of this bill were touted by U. S. Senator Barack Obama. One thing, in particular, that the junior senator from Illinois said warrants attention:

"[F]or every $1 billion spent on transportation infrastructure, it is estimated that 24,000 new jobs are supported. By providing Illinois with $1.2 billion per year in transportation funding, this bill will support tens of thousands of new jobs for Illinois families.

But, if that is the case, why not a 10 billion dollar transportation program for Illinois--- and for every state of similar population. That would provide, by the Senator’s math and economics, almost a quarter of a million new jobs for each state the size of Illinois. And, if so, why stop there? Why not a 100 billion dollar transportation program for Illinois—and for every state of similar population, which by the Senator’s math and economics, would yield several million new jobs for each state of Illinois’ size.

Senator Obama is sort of espousing Keynesian economics, of the sort that is not too popular, these days, even at his alma mater, Harvard, which used to be the bastion of Keynesian economics.

The truth is—it is unlikely that the Transportation Bill would provide 24,000 jobs, or anything like that. Although some new projects will certainly employ some new people, federal taxes will be raised to finance these transportation expenditures all across the country. The increased taxes will retard business growth and consumer spending all across the country-- including in Illinois-- retarding employment growth—in other sectors of the economy.

So, when you net things out, there will be little or no growth in jobs as a result of the federal government transportation program.

If taxes are not increased to match the increased spending, the federal deficit will grow, resulting in higher government borrowing and ultimately higher interest rates than would otherwise be the case, crowding out investment and employment in other sectors of the economy, resulting in no net change to the employment situation.

If the deficit is financed not by increased taxes or borrowing, but by the Federal Reserve expanding the money stock to “accommodate the larger deficit,” the larger rate of growth of the money stock ultimately will result in higher inflation and more jobs in the transportation sector and fewer jobs in other sectors, and again no net change in the employment situation, countrywide.

In short, the transportation bill may be good public policy—but if so, it is to meet a demand by the public for transportation spending on mass transit, roads, etc. The impact on jobs is likely to be a wash.

The way to create new jobs is through more innovation, increased productivity, improved and expanded education, and improved and expanded technical skills—all things that are more likely to arise through expanding the private sector and giving individuals greater choice and control over how their funds are spent [including for education, e.g., school vouchers, school choice] than by a “federal government jobs program.”

But Senator Obama shouldn’t take my word for it. He should check with his former colleagues on the University of Chicago Law School faculty, including Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner [who is half economist/half judge] and Professor Landes [a full economist]. They would be happy to tell him, I am sure, that there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch, especially if it is delivered by the federal government-- roadside, or not.
***************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
*****************************************************

Thursday, July 28, 2005

Joe Morris on TV: Grading “W” on “substance,” and “communications.”

This week’s suburban edition of “Public Affairs,” continues to feature Joe Morris, Chairman of the United Republican Fund of Illinois. For more about Joe Morris, the show with Morris and the suburban and City of Chicago airing schedule of “Public Affairs,” as well as a partial transcript of the show, [See here.]
*************************************************************
An additional partial transcript of the show is included, below:
****************************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: … [President] George Bush. Do you think you could grade him-- uh, objectively, and fairly-- again, the typical University of Chicago style--

Joe Morris, Chairman, Illinois United Republican Fund of Illinois: Yes. But, I have to give him two grades. One for substance, and one for process. “A,” for substance, the guy’s got, I think, a very clear understanding of what it is he needs to do in the job, and a spine of steel to stay with what he concludes he needs to do. I have to give him, I have to give him a “C minus”for his ability to communicate to the American people, whether through the media, or, over the heads of the media.

Berkowitz: Can’t speak, can’t articulate at all, right?

Joe Morris: He has plenty of people around him who can articulate very well, but he himself –

Berkowitz: Can’t.

Joe Morris: Has a very hard time selling his message.

Berkowitz: So, you give him—what? a “C minus”.

Joe Morris: A “C minus” for communication.

Berkowitz: What about on substance?

Joe Morris: I said an “A.”


Berkowitz: An “A?”

Joe Morris: An “A.”

Berkowitz: From the University of Chicago?

Joe Morris: An A for a steel of spine—or, a spine of steel.

Berkowitz: Domestic policy, you’d give him an “A?” Big spender, right? I mean the Heritage organization would not; [I mean] the Heritage Foundation would not give him that, would they?

Joe Morris: George Bush has made mistakes. There are, there are--

Berkowitz: Big time.


Joe Morris: Plenty of things to regret-

Berkowitz: “Big time,” mistakes, to borrow a phrase from [Vice- President] Dick Cheney.

Joe Morris: Plenty, plenty of things to regret in his [Bush’s] budgeting--Plenty of things to regret in his inability to use the veto pen. I think, I think that-

Berkowitz: [His] domestic policy has been a disaster in the words of conservatives, right?

Joe Morris: Um, well. In, in-

Berkowitz: Come on. Be fair. A disaster-

Joe Morris: Some, some aspects of his domestic policy-

Berkowitz: Education, his little compromise with Ted Kennedy? Come on. No Child Left Behind?

Joe Morris: If, if, uh-- I would be delighted to see No Child Left Behind-

Berkowitz: Left behind.


Joe Morris: Repealed, yes. I would be, I would be delighted if he had vetoed McCain-Feingold. I would be delighted if he was able to exercise budget discipline.

Berkowitz: He screwed up-- so far--social security reform-

Joe Morris: Oh, no, no. That’s a communications issue. If you’re-

Berkowitz: Well, it’s a major flaw.

Joe Morris: And, I’ve given him a “C minus” in his communications.

Berkowitz: Foreign policy, you give him an “A?”

Joe Morris: On, on social security, the guy’s got the substance of the issue right and deserves enormous credit for being willing to touch the so-called third rail of American domestic politics. Social security is a huge issue that needs to be-

Berkowitz: “A” for effort. But, what about substance?

Joe Morris: Substance? What--

Berkowitz: It’s dead in the water.


Joe Morris: We’re, we’re--

Berkowitz: Private [Or as the President likes to say, Personal Retirement] accounts are dead in the water.

Joe Morris: It’s, you’re, you’re-- You want to flip back and forth between communications and process on the one hand or substance on the other.

Berkowitz: Come on. Keep up with the flow. Keep up with the program.


Joe Morris: Come on, Jeff! Well, you can’t, you can’t whipsaw me--

Berkowitz: Who’s the host here? Come on [laughs].

Joe Morris: You can’t, you can’t whipsaw me between substance and process.

Berkowitz: What do you mean [I can’t]? There are no rules on this show.

Morris: Um, on tax rates, which in the long run, probably count more than this year’s spending bills.

Berkowitz: All right. I’ll give you that.

Joe Morris: The President every year has gone to Congress for a marginal tax rate reduction, and he’s gotten it. Every year, he’s gone to bat for ending the death tax; Russia has just repealed its death tax.

Berkowitz: Let’s digress for a second. Rod Blagojevich said—pledged-- no increase in the state income tax, no increase in the state sales tax. He has held firm to that. As a conservative, you would applaud Rod Blagojevich for that, right?

Joe Morris: I applaud him for his restraint on the sales tax and income tax.

Berkowitz: Ummm.

Joe Morris: You will notice that every other possible tax or user fee is increased.

Berkowitz: Small stuff, come on.

Joe Morris: Smoke and mirrors; smoke and mirrors-

Berkowitz: All right.

Joe Morris: Not a whole lot unlike the deficiency in President Bush’s administration on the spending side.
***********************************************
Joe Morris, Chairman, United Republican Fund of Illinois, recorded on July 17, 2005, as it is airing in the suburbs this week and as will be airing across the the City of Chicago on the City edition of Public Affairs this coming Monday night, August 1 at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21.
*****************************************************
Draft Transcript prepared by Amy Allen, who also does research for “Public Affairs,” and has her own political blog [See here].
***********************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********************

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Brady focus: Hope, Jobs and Opportunity; Comments on Blago, Kjellander, Education and Polls

State Senator Bill Brady [R- Bloomington] formally announced on Monday and Tuesday that he is running for Governor and he did so during a two-day, 11 city trip through Illinois. After making a statement about his run and his Contract with Illinois at his stop in Chicago yesterday, Sen. Brady answered questions from the press, and a partial transcript of the press conference is included, below.
************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: You have spoken previously and in the last few minutes about a net decline of jobs in Illinois under the Blagojevich administration. You said jobs [in Illinois] should have grown by 250, 000 [since Blagojevich came in] using national benchmarks. Instead, I think you said a few months ago there has been a decrease of about 17,000 jobs, giving a net decline of 267,000 jobs [in Illinois]. Pete Giangreco, the Governor’s—well, he speaks often on behalf of the Governor—he is a press guy [for Rod]. He, on my show, denied [the above] and said there has been a sharp increase [in jobs], especially in the last year, in job growth in Illinois. What exactly is it? Has there been a growth or decline [in jobs in Illinois since Blagojevich became Governor].

State Sen. Bill Brady: Check with the U. S. Government, as I did. The last results we had in, as of May were that Illinois was one of four states in the nation-since Rod Blagojevich became Governor—that lost jobs. We lost a net 44,000 jobs. The way that I get to nearly a quarter million—if we would have grown at the same rate as larger states, peer states—like us, we wouldn’t have lost jobs, we would have grown over 200,000 jobs. That’s how I get to the nearly quarter of million jobs he has cost us with his policies, since he has been governor.

Berkowitz: You are saying that since he stepped in the door as Governor there has been a decline of 44,000 jobs.

State Sen. Bill Brady: Yes, with a net loss of 244,000 jobs [in Illinois under Blagojevich] according to the U. S. Government

Berkowitz: And, with the [economic] growth, you are saying, there should have been a 250, 000…

State Sen. Bill Brady: Only four states in the nation didn’t grow. Every other state beside the four grew. If we would have grown at the rate of larger states, our peer states, we wouldn’t have lost 244,000 jobs. We would have grown at a percentage that would have increased job availability by over 200,000.

What specifically would you do differently from what the Governor did to bring about that increase?

I would not have instituted and I would have immediately repealed the 300 tax and fee increases that are unconstitutional and that helped rate us 49th in the nation according to Forbes Magazine…
******************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: Some suggest that the schism in the Republican Party is less about Pro-Life and Pro-Choice and more about reformers and non-reformers. I think that Senator Rauschenberger and Jim Oberweis [two other candidates for the Republican Gubernatorial nomination, and I should have added Pat O’Malley, of course] have essentially suggested that to be a reformer in the Republican Party these days, you’ve got to ask for Bob Kjellander to step down as National Republican Committeeman [from Illinois]. Do you agree with that? Would you ask Bob Kjellander to step down?

State Senator Bill Brady: First, let me say that I have proven myself as a reformer in the Republican Party, probably first when George Ryan was first elected. You know, you don’t have to research the media too much to find out that I was George Ryan’s first outspoken Republican critic. If I find someone backing out of a promise or doing something that is illegal, I’ll stand up and speak against it. And, I’ve done that. I have a proven track record of independence and proving to the people of Illinois that they can trust me. Secondly, I have not -- if Bob Kjellander is found guilty of anything, I will immediately call for his removal. But, to date, no one has shown me that Bob Kjellander is guilty of anything. And, unfortunately, this is exactly the kind of sidestepping that I think hurts our party. Rather than focusing on bringing the party together, focusing on defeating Rod Blagojevich and putting the values and the policies in place in Illinois that will help Illinois prosper, we get sidetracked.
************************************************
State Senator Bill Brady:…Why doesn’t he [Governor Rod Blagojevich] just take direct responsibility? The chief elected officer for the State of Illinois ought to be responsible and accountable for the number one issue facing our state. And, that’s the education of our greatest resource, our children. We don’t need layers of bureaucracy. We don’t need someone to blame when things don’t go the way you want as Governor. As Governor, I believe you need to take responsibility. You’ve got to eliminate that diffusion from responsibility and you’ve got to be accountable.

Jeff Berkowitz: What do you want him to do? What do you want the Governor to do with the State Board of Education?

Sen. Brady: I told you. Do what he promised he’d do two years ago. Abolish it [the State Board of Education].

Berkowitz: Yes, but he couldn’t get the legislature to agree with that. [Speaker Mike, in particular, didn’t want to park the State Board of Education at Hotel Blago]. They are Democrats. You are a Republican. How are you going to do that? [Get the Democrats to do, on Education, what Blago couldn’t]

Sen. Brady: I am not going to give up.
**************************************
Berkowitz: So, you are taking a pledge over the course of your four year term [as Governor]—there will no increase in the sales tax, no expansion of the sales tax base and no increase in the state income tax and no other fee or tax increases.

Sen. Brady: And, I took it a step further and I said I’ll repeal those tax and fee increases that Blagojevich imposed-- that drove jobs out of this state.

Another reporter: And, it’s 300 million dollars [of tax and fee increases] since Rod took office.

Sen. Brady: Yes
*******************************************************
Sen. Brady: One last question?

Berkowitz: Yes, what do the polls show? Have you taken any polls? Where do they put you?

Sen. Brady: Yeah, I asked my wife [Nancy] and three kids [lots of laughter from the Senator and the audience of 40, or so] what they thought and so far I haven’t read the results but I will let you know when I do.
******************************************************
Senator Brady Press Conference, July 26, 2005, Plaza Club, Chicago.
********************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********************

Tuesday, July 26, 2005

Joe Morris on TV this week: Grading Blago-- Trolls across the Board

Joe Morris: It’s a bipartisan grade [for Governor Blagojevich] for people in Illinois politics. Trolls across the board… I think he [Blago] has wasted a lot of his opportunities… He has insulted downstaters by his conspicuous dislike of—for most of Illinois south of I-80… He may still be re-elected, because we’ve got the George Ryan trial-- coming later this fall. We have any number of idiot Republicans ready to… launch new scandals, I’m sure.
***********************************
Morris: Paul Vallas has a clean reputation, a lot of accomplishments in the education area. He’s been out of the state for a while, not making enemies, both these guys [Vallas and State’s Attorney Devine] could mount serious challenges [to Gov. Blagojevich].
**********************************************
This week’s suburban edition of “Public Affairs,” features Joe Morris, Chairman of the United Republican Fund of Illinois. Morris, a senior level official in the Reagan Administration, ran for Cook County Board President under a reform, Republican banner in 1994. Although picking up almost a half million votes, Morris was not only ahead of his time, but ahead of his Party—as a reformer. Morris is usually thought of as the conscience of the conservative wing of the Illinois Republican Party, such as it is.

This show will also air throughout the City of Chicago [in the regular “Public Affairs,” City of Chicago time slot] on next Monday night, August 1 at 8:30 pm on CANTV, Cable Ch. 21 in Chicago.
**********************************************
A partial transcript of the show with Joe Morris is included, below.
*************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: …Rounding [out your bio], Joe Morris, you are married to Kathleen Morris? Right?

Joe Morris, Chairman, United Republican Fund of Illinois: That’s right, my highest accomplishment.

Berkowitz:…Joe, let’s give report cards to people… The governor, for instance, has been there for almost three years. Rod Blagojevich. When’s the last chance you’ve had to give the Governor of the state of Illinois a grade?

Joe Morris: Not since Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince came out and, your viewers will know that there’s, now, this whole new report card system based on Harry Potter’s grades at Hogwarts, where, apparently, the wizarding levels run from outstanding down to troll. I think that’s-- I think that’s just fantastic. So, I’m ready today to award some “outstandings” and some “trolls.”

Berkowitz: Okay. But, … you can’t do it as a partisan—we know you are that, but if you were at the University of Chicago, if you were writing an essay, if you were going to be graded on how fair and balanced and objectively you graded [Governor] Rod Blagojevich, give him a grade for the first two and a half years.

Joe Morris: It’s a, it’s a bipartisan grade [for Governor Blagojevich] for people in Illinois politics. Trolls across the board. Rod Blagojevich came into office with a tremendous head of steam- um, facing a Republican establishment beset with scandal. I think he has wasted a lot of his opportunities. He has made enemies out of rank-and-file Democrats as well as Democratic Party leaders. He has insulted downstaters by his conspicuous dislike of-- for most of Illinois south of I-80-- and for-- certainly for Springfield. He’s the first governor in memory who, with respect to whom legislative leaders in both parties require signed, side memos to make sure that they—that they’ve pinned the governor down on the deals that they make in, typical Illinois legislative fashion, at the end of-- at the end of [the legislative] session. Rod Blagojevich ought to be on his way-- on a cake walk to re-election. He may still be re-elected, because we’ve got the George Ryan trial, uh-- coming later this fall. We have any number of idiot Republicans ready to, ah, launch new scandals, I’m sure.

Berkowitz: Idiot Republicans? Really?

Joe Morris: Yeah. Yes

Berkowitz [laughing]: Any you want to name? Of those idiot Republicans?

Joe Morris: Sure. Well, the- the Republican Party, no less than the Democratic Party in Illinois, desperately needs reform. And-- and we have a walking embarrassment right now in our [Republican] national committeeman, Bob Kjellander, who has this yet unexplained eight hundred thousand [dollar] plus, uh, commission for, for unidentified services rendered.

Berkowitz: Oh, no. He told me just this week. You have to keep up with my blog.

Joe Morris: Oh, I’ve read your blog.

Berkowitz: … Didn’t you read what Mr. Kjellander said about that [$809,000 fee from Bear Stearns, See here].

Joe Morris: Yes, and I was unimpressed. So-

Berkowitz: He [Kjellander] worked months and months-

Joe Morris: Oh. I’m sure he did.


Berkowitz: Sometimes spoke to the folks at Bear Stearns four or five times a day-

Joe Morris: I’m sure he did.

Berkowitz: He can’t count up the hours.

Joe Morris: I’m sure he can’t.


Berkowitz: He [Republican National Committeeman Kjellander] doesn’t do lobbying, doesn’t do legislative work. He said that …He denied unequivocally that he had secured Republican votes for that Democratic bill [the 10 billion dollar Blagojevich Bond legislation]. You doubt the word of your Republican national committeeman? Bob Kjellander?

Joe Morris: I’m a bit skeptical.

Berkowitz: You are?


Joe Morris: I’m a bit skeptical.

Berkowitz [Big smile]: I’m shocked.

Joe Morris: And, I’m-- I have to say I don’t think that Bob Kjellander’s role in that transaction or others have been explained to the satisfaction of Illinois voters.

Berkowitz: All right… We’re kind of digressing. We were going to grade-

Joe Morris: No, you asked me for grades. So, I’m giving trolls across the board.

Berkowitz: … no, come on, give me a [letter] grade for [Governor] Rod Blagojevich.

Joe Morris: At this point I would give him, I would rate Rod Blagojevich a “D,” uh, a “D”


Berkowitz: A “D?” You’re a tough grader.

Joe Morris: Uh, he may face a primary challenge from within the Democratic Party. Uh, if he wins re-election it will be because my party throws the election. Not necessarily, not necessarily intentionally, simply with characteristic Republican incompetence.

Berkowitz: You think he [Blago] may [face a challenge]? Do you think Dick Devine might challenge him? [Cook County] State’s Attorney Dick Devine?

Joe Morris: That’s certainly one name I’ve heard. I’m glad that you’ve heard it, too

Berkowitz: [Former Chicago Public School System CEO] Paul Vallas?

Joe Morris:. That’s another name that I’ve heard.


Berkowitz: Jack Franks?

Joe Morris: That’s yet another name I’ve heard.

Berkowitz: But, it seems more like Vallas or Devine? What’s your bet? Vallas will do it?

Joe Morris: One or both of those may do it.

Berkowitz: You think. And, if they do, one or both could actually beat Rod Blagojevich and his fifteen to twenty million dollars?

Morris: Money does not always define outcomes in politics. Dick Devine has an outstanding reputation for cutting across ethnic and racial lines in Cook County. A great organization, people forget that before he was state’s attorney, he was, uh, deeply involved in political ward organizations in Chicago [and worked for a short time for the Mayor Richard J. Daley Administration, and for a longer period of time as the First Assistant to then State’s Attorney Richard M. Daley]

Berkowitz: Okay.

Morris: He defeated Jack O’Malley [for State’s Attorney in 1996], in an upset.

Berkowitz: You like State’s Attorney Dick Devine.

Morris: Paul Vallas-

Berkowitz: You like Paul Vallas.

Morris: Paul Vallas has a clean reputation, a lot of accomplishments in the education area. He’s been out of the state for a while, not making enemies, both these guys could mount serious challenges [to Gov. Blagojevich].
**********************************************
Joe Morris, recorded on July 17, 2005 and as is airing on the Suburban edition of Public Affairs this week [week of July 25] and on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs on Monday night, August 1 at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21. See, below, for a detailed suburban airing schedule.
*******************************
Joe Morris debates and discusses with Show Host and Executive Legal Recruiter Jeff Berkowitz grades for Gov. Blagojevich and President Bush; the successes and failures of Bush’s domestic and foreign policies, the ability of President Bush to communicate; the correctness, or lack thereof, regarding Pat Buchanan’s and others’ criticism of the Bush response to terrorism; the Karl Rove, Joe Wilson and Valeria Plame issue; likely Democratic and Republican candidates for President in 2008 and much, much more.
*******************************
The suburban edition of "Public Affairs," is regularly broadcast every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Bannockburn, Deerfield, Ft. Sheridan, Glencoe, Highland Park, Highwood, Kenilworth, Lincolnshire, Riverwoods and Winnetka.

The suburban edition also is broadcast every Tuesday night at 8:30 p.m. on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Buffalo Grove, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, Lincolnwood, Morton Grove, Niles, Northfield, Palatine, Rolling Meadows and Wilmette and every Tuesday night at 8:30 p.m. on Comcast Cable Channel 35 in Arlington Heights, Bartlett, Glenview, Golf, Des Plaines, Hanover Park, Mt. Prospect, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Prospect Heights, Schaumburg, Skokie, Streamwood and Wheeling.
*****************************************
Transcript drafts prepared by Amy Allen, who also does research for “Public Affairs,” and has her own political blog [See here].
******************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********************

Monday, July 25, 2005

Mark Beaubien on TV tonight: War, Taxes, Wealth and the Supremes

Was the decision to go into Iraq the right one? Were the Bush Tax cuts the right economic policy? Should wealthy candidates self finance? What kind of a Supreme Court justice should replace Justice O’Connor?

We discuss: you decide.
*******************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: … looking back now, since no weapons of mass destruction have been found, would you say that the United States made a mistake in going into Iraq, or do you think maybe, overall that it was a good decision?

State Rep. and possible 8th CD Candidate Mark Beaubien: I think that people need to remember 9/11, and the devastating fact that had-- something needed to be done, to let the world know [that] we would not tolerate that behavior… the weapons of mass destruction is somewhat disturbing, but the fact of the matter is [that] there were mass killings, tremendous human rights violations, and, and I think the decision to go in there was the right decision.
******************************************************
Tonight’s City of Chicago edition of “Public Affairs,” features State Rep. and possible 8th CD Republican Primary Candidate Mark Beaubien [R- Wauconda]. The show with Rep. Beaubien airs throughout the City of Chicago [in the regular “Public Affairs,” City of Chicago Monday night slot] tonight at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21 [CANTV]. See here for links to the topics discussed on and a partial transcript of tonight’s show with Rep. Beaubien, as well as for a partial transcript of tonight’s show with Rep. Beaubien.
***********************************************
An additional partial transcript of tonight’s show with State Rep. Mark Beaubien is included, below:
***********************************************
Iraq War:

Jeff Berkowitz: I know you haven’t decided yet, if you’re running in the eighth [Cong. Dist.], but just to get an understanding in general of your philosophy. We’ve been talking about social issues, and you, as a state rep, obviously, have not been dealing a lot with foreign policy. But, it’s something that people would want to get their arms around [as to your views]… would you have been a supporter, if you had been in Congress, representing the eighth congressional district… in the fall of 2002, would you have supported the President’s request to have Congress authorize him to take military action in Iraq?

State Rep. and possible 8th CD Candidate Mark Beaubien: Yes. Yes, I would have.

Berkowitz: You would’ve. And, looking back now, since no weapons of mass destruction have been found, would you say that the United States made a mistake in going into Iraq, or do you think maybe, overall that it was a good decision?

Rep. Beaubien: I think that people need to remember 9/11, and the devastating fact that had-- something needed to be done, to let the world know [that] we would not tolerate that behavior. Um, the weapons of mass destruction is somewhat disturbing, but the fact of the matter is [that] there were mass killings, tremendous human rights violations, and, and I think the decision to go in there was the right decision.

Berkowitz: So, even without the weapons of mass destruction?

Rep. Beaubien: Right.

Berkowitz: Also, some people put forward, you mentioned the humanitarian reasons, mass graves, three hundred thousand lives, perhaps, or more, being slaughtered by Sadaam Hussein. But, also, they mention having a model democracy in Iraq-Rep. Beaubien: Umhmm.

Berkowitz: If that emerges, [these people argue] that would be very healthy for that portion of the world, do you agree with that?

Rep. Beaubien: Yes.

Berkowitz: Is that partly a good motivation for the regime change?

Rep. Beaubien: There’s always been this role in the government trying to impose democracy on other people, and I think each individual area has to have it’s own form of democracy, and what specifically works here may take a different form over in Iraq.

Berkowitz: But, it’s one you would like to-

Rep. Beaubien: Oh, sure. I think the women getting educated, and, being, you know, part of society, and the right to vote, I think, is very important. But, whether it would mirror our constitution, or not, I don’t know.

Tax Cuts and Tax pledges:

Berkowitz: Would you take a pledge, you know, one of the big issues might have been what your view would be on the Bush tax cuts. Would you like to see those tax cuts? Number one, would you have supported them, if were in Congress-

Rep. Beaubien: Yes.

Berkowitz: You would have supported the tax cuts?

Rep. Beaubien: Ummhmm.

Berkowitz: Bush, in 2001, and 2003. Would you have supported the efforts to make those permanent?

Rep. Beaubien: Yes.


Berkowitz: Okay. And, and, would you take a pledge not to vote for any major increases in income taxes? Going the other way.

Rep. Beaubien: For years, when I was in the legislature, and you’re asking the same question now. I think it’s kind of irresponsible to come out and say [that] never would we do anything at any point in time. Uh, otherwise, why would, why would you be there? I mean, who knows what crisis we might face?

Berkowitz: So, you wouldn’t take that pledge. You would want to maintain that flexibility.

Beaubien: I think my record speaks for itself, by the way.

Net Worth and self-funding:

Berkowitz: You know-- Some people say that you could be a formidable candidate, aside from your views and your experience, but it is hinted that you have the ability to self-finance, if you ran in the eighth congressional district. Do you have that, ah, financial well-being where you can finance your own campaign?

Rep. Beaubien: Yes.


Berkowitz: So, you know, part of the disclosure is, if you run for Congress, you’ve got to disclose your net worth, within a range. What would be the range of your net worth?

Rep. Beaubien: I’m not prepared to discuss that.


Berkowitz: You’re not, but you realize that you would have to say that as a range [when filing a candidacy for Congress].

Rep. Beaubien: Yes, I understand that.

Berkowitz: And, we’re not picking on you. We ask that of everybody [all candidate for office], whether they’re a pauper or a wealthy person.

Rep. Beaubien: … I consider myself reasonably wealthy.

Berkowitz: Okay. So, you could and would self-finance your campaign, to a large extent? Is that right?

Rep. Beaubien: “Could” and “would,” are two different words.

Berkowitz: You could. Would you?

Rep. Beaubien: I don’t know…


Social Security Reform:

Berkowitz: Social security reform has come up…. [President] Bush put forward the program of personal retirement accounts, giving people, ah, some control over how their funds are invested-- and could be invested in the stock market and bonds. With limitations as they do for 401 (k)s-- Would you have supported that concept?

Rep. Beaubien: Well, there’s been no final draft-

Berkowitz: I understand.

Rep. Beaubien: But the concept-

Berkowitz: The concept.

Rep. Beaubien: The concept [of personal retirement accounts] is one that I would agree with. I’d like to do it in the state of Illinois. We can’t afford to do it [in Illinois].

Berkowitz: We’re going to continue to speak as the credits roll, but I very much want to thank our guest, State Rep Mark Beaubien(R-Wauconda), who is thinking of running in the 8th Congressional District Republican primary. He’s been a good sport here this evening because he’s been willing to talk about national issues and state issues [even though] he hasn’t decided yet [if he is running in 8th CD. And, I got to single him out, because often people are very hesitant about coming on this show and, and a lot of people ask… before they come on the show, “What are we going to cover.” I have to tell you, this guy is very impressive, in that he just said “[I will] come on. I will come on the show, and [ask] whatever you want to ask, right?

Rep. Beaubien: That’s correct.

Berkowitz: We don’t endorse candidates; we’re not endorsing positions. But we do endorse the notion that candidates of all stripes ought to come on this show, and other shows and do what State Representative Mark Beaubien has done. Thank you very much for coming here.

Rep. Beaubien: Thank you.

Supreme Court nomination:

Berkowitz: The Supreme Court [nomination issue] has just come up-- as [Justice] Sandra Day O’Connor has resigned. What kind of person should President Reagan nominate to replace her. A-- some people view her as a centrist—[so should it be] another centrist, a conservative, What do you think?

Rep. Beaubien: Well, first of all, I don’t think President Reagan is going to make the nomination [Laughter].

Berkowitz: Did I say that? President Bush. Excuse me. Thank you for the correction. President George W. Bush.

Rep. Beaubien: You know, I really haven’t given that a lot of thought. I would hope that they would find somebody that would be acceptable to both sides of the aisle. The whole history of the Supreme Court is somewhat misunderstood. I mean, when they put Earl Warren on, they though he’d be a conservative. When they put-

Berkowitz: [President] Eisenhower said [about his Warren appointment], “That was the biggest damn fool mistake I ever made.”

Rep. Beaubien: I understand that.

Berkowitz: Sandra Day O’Connor-

Rep. Beaubien: [Justice] Souter was supposed to be a conservative-

Berkowitz: [President] Reagan put O’Connor [on the Court]. That’s why I brought Reagan into this discussion. So, you’re saying things change around. Should it be a social moderate; should it be a centrist? What do you think? Give me a two word answer.

Rep. Beaubien: I think it should be an independent thinker, someone that knows and understands the law and-- I basically believe in a strict construction of the constitution…

Berkowitz: So, you might like to see someone who construes the constitution narrowly? [Show ends].
*********************************************
Draft Transcript prepared by Amy Allen, who also does research for “Public Affairs,” and has her own political blog [See here]. ***********************************************************
State Rep. and possible 8th CD Republican Primary Candidate Mark Beaubien [R-Wauconda], recorded on July 6, 2005, as it is airing on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs tonight, July 25 at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21.
*****************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********************

Friday, July 22, 2005

Axelrod: In Defense of Corruption, Part 2?

David Axelrod, of AKP Message and Media, and long standing media and political consultant to Mayor Daley as well as many other pols, locally [e.g., U. S. Senator Barack Obama] and nationally [New York Attorney General and Gubernatorial candidate Eliot Spitzer], came out swinging on WTTW’s Chicago Tonight earlier this week, as he seemed to set the stage for the evolving response of the beleaguered Daley machine.

The Axelrod/Daley arguments are quite simple:

(1) Daley does not involve himself in politics, he just does government [Kind of the flipside of Democratic campaign consultant and Blagojevich media message/direct mail guru Pete Giangreco, who doesn't do government]. But, Mayor Daley doesn’t know how various people end up heading the City of Chicago departments or its sub-units, official and unofficial e.g., Intergovernmental Affairs, Personnel, Street and Sans, Sewers, Aviation, Water, Hired Truck, Hired Tow, HDO and of course Mayor Daley doesn’t know how the Department heads do their jobs or how a bunch of politically connected campaign workers might get jobs in such departments in the Daley Administration.

(2) Don’t none of you upstarts [like the BGA’s Jay Stewart ] get wise with us, we have been here 17 years and we know what’s good for the City. How long you been here, Jay? What could you possibly know?

(3) You want change? I’ll give you change, I’ll give you computerized, civil service employees- but if we do that, don’t expect your garbage picked up, your streets plowed, your kids educated, your water delivered and your friends elected [See here, McCarron Gives Daley a pass, or alternatively, McCarron: In defense of Corruption, Part 1].

and

(4)Don’t be picking on Iraq War veterans [who coincidentally happened to be “politically connected,”] and who we promoted by pretending to do a face to face, in person, interview when the employee happened to be in Iraq—really Jay, how could you raise such a thing? Where is your sense of patriotism? That’s all we were doing, trying to give some hiring points for this guy being a veteran. So, the Daley Administration fabricated an interview? What are you gonna do? Make a federal case out of it? Criminalize what should be a slight civil fine, if anything. My God, man, get a grip. Don’t you know anything about Chicago, government and politics. I wrote the book on this stuff. Really. You should read it.
***************************************
It was a masterful performance by David Axelrod, and the thing of it was—he wasn’t performing. He would do it for free. And, maybe he was.

We’ve been inviting David Axelrod on “Public Affairs,” for the last eight months and he said he would do our show, and he even set a date-- but then he cancelled and he wouldn’t reschedule, his assistant said he didn’t have the time for “fun things,” like “Public Affairs,” as he had too much work to do. But, it sure seemed like Axelrod was having fun on Chicago Tonight. We hope Mr. Axelrod will reconsider, as do our viewers. I can assure him that I can make it as much fun as Jay Stewart and Carlos Hernandez-Gomez, maybe even more.
*********************************************************
Chicago Tonight Segment Moderator Phil Ponce: David, how credible is it when the Mayor says he has no knowledge of what was going on?

David Axelrod: If you’ve spent as much time with him as I have, over 17 years, it’s actually very credible to me because I have been in meetings with him for 17 years, I have never heard him talk about jobs…never heard him talk about contracts, all I hear him talk about are fences and roof gardens and parks and libraries and schools…
**********************************************
Carlos Hernandez-Gomez [Political Editor, Chicago Public Radio]: …It always seems to take federal prosecutors to make something happen, whether it is the Shakman decree, thirty years ago, to work on patronage—

Axelrod: That wasn’t federal prosecutors, that was a private suit.

Hernandez-Gomez: Or the federal courts, I’m sorry.

Axelrod: That’s a civil matter, yeah.

Jay Stewart: They--were forced into it, as in virtually every major reform- this [Daley] administration has been forced into by scandal, or as in this case, criminal investigation.

Axelrod: I don’t know how long you have been in town, Jay, because I have been here since the beginning—the first thing that happened in this administration were budget cuts…new safeguards on hiring and so and—

Stewart: Apparently, the safeguards did not work.

Axelrod: Apparently, they didn’t; Apparently, they didn’t- and- in all cases. I think you are going to see some dramatic, new changes.
*****************************************
Stewart: … Their [City of Chicago] jobs are not supposed to be determined on political merit alone. And, that was the tenor of yesterday’s complaint [filed by the U. S. Attorney]. Not that politics played a role, [but] that it played a predominant role [in getting city jobs or promotions].

Axelrod: But the fact- the fact is--when you say, well, uh, interviews were, interviews were rigged, and so on—

Stewart: I didn’t say it. The U. S. Attorney’s office did.


Axelrod: I understand that. I understand that. And, presumably they’ll try to prove it. But, interviews are a subjective process. So, the fact is, you can almost—almost anything you do, if you want to—

Stewart: Like the guy [being interviewed] who was out of the country?


Axelrod: If you want to impute politics—yeah, that’s true, the Iraq veteran who got-- the Iraq soldier who got promoted, I’d like to see them take the case to court and get a jury to convict him for promoting a, for promoting this guy-- who happened to be in Iraq at the time—that he got promoted- but in any case, my question for you [Jay] is, uh, why not- you can impute politics to almost anything, so why not just-- just blow up the whole thing and just say, “let’s have a computer pick people.” Would that be progress? Would that be progress?

Stewart: Whatever the system is, I would like a Shakman type decree, so we don’t have to depend on this [Daley] administration to—

Axelrod: But, if we do—

Ponce: Hold on, gentlemen…
*********************************************
Panel Discussion on WTTW’s Chicago Tonight, July 19, 2005
**********************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********************

Thursday, July 21, 2005

Possible 8th CD candidate Mark Beaubien (R-Wauconda) [on TV] on Abortion

Jeff Berkowitz: [Pregnant as a result of incest, the girl goes] to a counselor and the counselor says “Okay, we better get somebody involved,” a judge and--

State Rep. and possible 8th CD Republican Primary candidate Mark Beaubien: I think what I would challenge people to do is-- get up tomorrow morning and try to find the juvenile courthouse in Cook County.

Berkowitz: Well, they can find Planned Parenthood; they can find a clinic to give them an abortion. Couldn’t they find somebody else who could maybe counsel them on this issue?

Rep. Beaubien: I don’t know how much further I want to go into this particular issue. I’m pro-choice.
********************************************
This week’s suburban edition of “Public Affairs,” continues to feature State Rep. and possible 8th CD Republican Primary candidate Mark Beaubien [R-Wauconda]. For more about the show, the detailed suburban and City of Chicago airing schedule and a partial transcript of the show, see here.
**********************************************
An additional partial transcript of the show with State Rep. Beaubien is included, below.
************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: …On the issue of choice-- as people talk about it, or life-- depending on who is presenting it-- the issue of abortion. Would you say you’re thought to be a moderate- pro-choice? Would you say you’re a thousand percent pro- choice?

State Rep. Mark Beaubien [Wauconda]: I’m pro-choice. How one defines that, it’s--

Berkowitz: Does that mean you’d be opposed to parental notice?

Rep. Beaubien: I supported parental notification, and would support it, if you could provide for the thirty percent of the people that aren’t covered by that. If you talked to state’s attorneys, and you talked to prosecutors, there’s an amazing number of street children, there’s an amazing number of people who are impregnated by their fathers, their uncles, their father’s friends, their brothers, uh-

Berkowitz: There’s an amazing number of people who don’t have parents, guardians or who are impregnated by their--

Rep. Beaubien: Don’t, don’t, don’t, don’t, don’t, don’t-- It’s hard to go to your father, and say, “I need permission to have an abortion.”

Berkowitz: It’s hard to go to your—

Rep. Beaubien: It happens. It happens--

Berkowitz: I’m sorry. Go ahead. I didn’t mean [to interrupt]--

Rep. Beaubien: How do you go to your father, when it’s your uncle who’s the one who got you pregnant? These things do, in fact, happen. Far more frequently than people realize.

Berkowitz: Would you say that thirty percent of the population-

Rep. Beaubien: The--

Berkowitz: Or thirty percent of the time [that] a young lady becomes pregnant? Or a child--

Rep. Beaubien: I think the number-- the number that was tossed around, and I don’t claim to be an expert on this. For seventy percent of the people, going to the parents is a natural and-- and fundamental thing. When I was in law practice, I did about three hundred adoptions, and that’s pretty much the statistics. I ran into street children, I ran into people who walked into the delivery room and delivered babies, without any--

Berkowitz: So, what percentage, would you say, of women, or young ladies, children, female children, become pregnant, or become impregnated by, either their parents or-

Rep. Beaubien: I wouldn’t begin to—begin to have statistics [on that].

Berkowitz: Why wouldn’t judicial bypass work in that situation?

Rep. Beaubien: Because-

Berkowitz: [Pregnant as a result of incest, the girl goes] to a counselor and the counselor says “Okay, we better get somebody involved,” a judge and--

Rep. Beaubien: I, I think what I would challenge people to do is-- get up tomorrow morning and try to find the juvenile courthouse in Cook County.

Berkowitz: Well, they can find Planned Parenthood; they can find a clinic to give them an abortion. Couldn’t they find somebody else who could maybe counsel them on this issue?

Rep. Beaubien: I don’t know how much further I want to go into this particular issue. I’m pro-choice.

Berkowitz: You’re pro choice. You favor parental notice, as you’ve just explained.

Rep. Beaubien: I think you have to have--

Berkowitz: What about partial birth abortion? Would you oppose a law that banned partial birth abortions?

Rep. Beaubien: I supported the “Born Alive [Born Alive Infant Protection Act]” bill this year, I voted for it. I would support a partial birth abortion bill that made an exception for the health and life of the mother.

Berkowitz: Okay.

Rep. Beaubien: And, I’ve been on record for saying that. And again, I would support parental notification, if grandparents-- or there are other alternatives for people to go to.
*******************************************
State Rep. and potential 8th CD Republican Primary Candidate Mark Beaubien [R-Wauconda], recorded on July 6, 2005 and as is airing on the Suburban edition of Public Affairs this week [week of July 18] and on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs on Monday night, July 25 at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21. See here for a detailed suburban airing schedule.
*******************************
Draft Transcript prepared by Amy Allen, who also does research for “Public Affairs,” and has her own political blog. [See Obiterdictumblog here].
******************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********************

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

Nominee Judge Roberts to be confirmed with 70 to 80 plus votes

Revised slightly on July 20, at 12:50 pm:

...Bush, if he wanted a good shot at a legacy of appointing a solid, conservative Supreme Court justice who may be there until 2040, or so, and therefore outlast and make up for Justice Souter, who is viewed by conservatives as the most tragic mistake of W’s father [there’s that application of the Obama/LBJ quote once again...
********************************************
You know what I think the most important thing was, I think he [President Bush] sat down with John Roberts [actually the two did sit down and talk last Friday, but Bush did not reach a final decision until around 11:35 am today] and saw a kindred soul. Saw somebody [and he] just liked the person. I think Bush- that’s the way he reacts. If it had been somebody he just loved who would have caused a fight, he still would have nominated him. I think it was the personal confluence of those two gentlemen that led to this. And, the other things are important, but secondary.

So said generally conservative columnist David Brooks [New York Times] in a very good one hour discussion with generally liberal Mark Shields and balanced, but somewhat right leaning Stuart Taylor [National Journal] that was moderated by PBS’s Jim Lehrer on PBS tonight. The discussion immediately followed the President’s short statement to the nation tonight [8:00 pm CST] that he was nominating John Roberts, D. C. Court of Appeals justice, to the Supreme Court to replace Justice O’Connor.

The hour, or so, discussion was interrupted by "drop-in" statements from the likes of Nan Aron [the very liberal Alliance for Justice advocate], Senator Chuck Schumer [D], the very liberal Senior Senator from the State of New York, Ben Nelson [D-NE], the moderate Democrat Gang of 14 Senator, Aron’s very conservative counterpart whose name escapes me and John Cornyn [R], the conservative senator from Texas who sits on the Senate Judiciary committee and who previously sat on the Texas Supreme Court.

The majority view from the above, the web and all over [what can I say, I am a fairandbalanced scavenger of other people's ideas] is that Roberts was a reasonably safe pick for Bush, if he wanted a good shot at a legacy of appointing a solid, conservative Supreme Court justice who may be there until 2040, or so, and therefore outlast and make up for Justice Souter, whose appointment to the Supremes is viewed by conservatives as the most tragic mistake of W’s father [there’s that application of the Obama quote of LBJ once again, "Every man is either trying to live up to his father's expectations or make up for his mistakes."]

Roberts is a safe pick in that much of his career has been spent making conservative arguments, including the twenty-five of thirty-nine arguments he won before the Supreme Court, for which someone else was ultimately calling the shots as to which side to take. This was true in large part when he was Associate Counsel to President Reagan, the principal Deputy Solicitor General for W’s Dad [Will the Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats go after Roberts’ Deputy SG internal memos, as they did with DC Court of Appeals nominee Miguel Estrada--who, BTW, conservative bloggers are already suggesting as a replacement for Roberts on the DC Court of Appeals] or in private practice at the prestigious Washington, DC based law firm of Hogan and Hartson.

So, although Roberts is thought, with reasonable certainty, to have a conservative philosophy, it will be hard to paint him as pre-judging, in a conservative way, cases that will come before the Supreme Court, because the conservative arguments he made for many years are not necessarily his own, but arguments on behalf of parties or clients that his superiors directed him to support. At least, that is an argument that can be be made by the Bush team in place to support Roberts' confirmation. The team is headed up by former Senator and Actor Fred Thompson and its mission is to shepherd Roberts through the confirmation process, and the above is a strong defensive arrow in the team's confirmation quiver. However, the flip side of that is that conservatives are a little more concerned about Roberts' being a true, blue conservative that they would be if he had been authoring conservative opinions for the last ten years, or even five years. This is even more so for social conservatives who want to make dents in Roe v. Wade, if not reverse it outright.

Judge Roberts' expected strength in the confirmation hearings was very troublesome to his liberal critics. Indeed, because Roberts was a DC Court of Appeals judge only for the last two years and apparently has not been the prolific author and speaker that Judge Bork was, Senator Schumer, in the first hour after the Judge Roberts nomination, argued essentially that the Senate can’t Bork Roberts from that paucity of written work product. That's not fair, Schumer seemed to say. The U. S. Senate, according to Senator Schumer [and Senator Durbin], to decide how to vote [or perhaps if Roberts even deserves a vote] need a lot of answers to how Judge Roberts would articulate his judicial philosophy with respect to the major issues, if not cases, with which Roberts will grapple if he sits on the highest court in the land. Or so, Senator Schumer and his liberal colleagues in the Senate will argue.

Schumer was one of three judges on the Senate Judiciary Committee to oppose Roberts’ [16-3] confirmation to the DC circuit court of Appeals [The other "no votes," came from Senators Kennedy and Durbin]. Schumer said that was, in part, because Roberts “did not answer questions fully and openly when he appeared before the Committee.” Senator Schumer gave as an example his request to Roberts- to which Senator Schumer claimed other nominees have responded- to identify three U. S. Supreme Court cases of which Roberts was critical.

Senator Schumer said that Judge Roberts refused to respond to that request when he appeared, last time around, before the Senate Judiciary Committee. No doubt, Judge Roberts would say that giving such answers would be too close to giving his opinion on matters and cases that are likely to come before him- on the DC Court of Appeals, then and on the U. S. Supreme Court, now.

Schumer said “now it is a whole new ball game.” Perhaps.

But, maybe that is so only for Justice Schumer and his more liberal Democratic Senate Colleagues. The betting is that a guy who holds a Harvard college and Harvard Law School degree, clerked for the very well respected 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Friendly and U. S. Supreme Court Justice Rehnquist, was Associate Counsel to President Reagan and the principal Deputy Solicitor General under President George Herbert Walker Bush, was approved pretty easily to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, i.e., by unanimous consent, doesn’t have an extensive paper trail and is viewed as more like the gentleman Rehnquist than the sarcastic, hot-tongued Scalia can withstand the Nan Arons and Chuck Schumers of the World.

But, you ask, can't the likes of Schumer, Durbin, Kennedy and Aron marshall a lot of support to oppose Judge Roberts, especially after their armies on the left have been assembled for the showdown at the OK Corral. Possibly, but it is not likely. Yes, as David Brooks pointed out tonight, this might be a tough decision for Hillary and the other 2008 potential Democratic presidential candidates in the senate, e.g., Edwards, Kerry, Biden, etc. On the one hand, they do not want to upset the conventional liberal and farther left primary wings of the Democratic funding base, e.g., George Soros, etc., who will be needed by such candidates for funding and advocacy support.

On the other hand, for the general election, Hillary, Edwards and Biden may want to continue to strike a more moderate note. And, Pols like Senator Obama, who has to be thinking of VP, or even President, in 2008 face a similar problem with this confirmation vote. [You are surprised to hear "President Obama," as a possibility? Chicago Tribune columnist Eric Zorn has noted at least several times on his blog that the order of the Clinton-Obama potential ticket should probably be reversed, and who wants to argue with Eric?]

Most likely scenario? No filibuster, Judge Roberts is confirmed with 70 plus and maybe 80 plus votes. Unlike Bork, Judge Roberts would be very difficult for the hard line, far left Democrats to morph into a back alley abortionist [Although Bork was clearly not a fan of Roe v. Wade, the specter of back alley abortions was raised by Judge Bork's intellectual criticism of Roe, thus morphing the intellectual, Judge Bork into a "back alley abortionist." This has to be one of Ralph Neas proudest moments, no doubt.

Such a morphing won't happen to Judge Roberts for several reasons. One, the Republicans have learned how to defend that game, and they are ready. Former RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie and Former Senator/Actor Fred Thompson are ready for Team Schumer/Aron. Two, Judge Roberts is no Judge Bork [who was once described to me by a liberal as a White Man's Don King]. And, I mean that as no criticism of Judge Bork, who even many liberals would concede was unfairly maligned and caricatured in his Senate confirmation hearing. Team Bush will not let that happen again.

Remember, you heard it first at “Public Affairs.” For a contra view, See Slate, which picked Judge Roberts as second most likely on the short list to get the appointment but anticipated a bit more of a battle in the Senate.
*****************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********************

State Rep. Beaubien on TV: Running in 8th CD Republican Primary?

Jeff Berkowitz: ...[I]n terms of name recognition, you think you might have name recognition in twenty or thirty percent of the [8th Cong.] district, or more?

State Rep. Beaubien [R-Wauconda]: Probably.


Berkowitz:...It gives you an advantage [in the 8th CD race]?

Rep. Beaubien: Yes.
********************************************
This week’s suburban edition of “Public Affairs,” features State Rep. and possible 8th CD Republican Primary candidate Mark Beaubien [R-Wauconda], who was first elected to the Illinois legislature in 1996, replacing Al Salvi who won a tough U. S. Senate Primary that year over then Lt. Gov. Bob Kustra. This show will also air throughout the City of Chicago [in the regular “Public Affairs,” City of Chicago time slot] on this coming Monday night, July 25 at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21 [CANTV].
**********************************************
A partial transcript of the show with State Rep. Beaubien is included, below.
***********************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: While we’re talking about running, are you running in the 8th congressional district, Republican primary?

State Rep. Mark Beaubien: I have not made a decision on that yet
, as I think we’ve talked about before. It’s a very, very, serious decision. I’ve enjoyed and been honored to represent my community in the urban area. I want to think about where I can be most effective in continuing that role, and I have not come to that conclusion yet.

Berkowitz:…it’s July 6th. How soon are you going to make that decision?

Rep. Beaubien: Before Labor Day. I think there’s been a rush to judgment, particularly in the eighth congressional district by everybody saying—Who is going to run and Who isn’t?

Berkowitz: Yes.

Rep. Beaubien: Traditionally, by Labor Day is the time people make decisions. I think that’s when [State Rep.] Bob Churchill [R-Grayslake] will decide. I think that’s when others will decide. And, people keep saying, “Are you going to run? Are you not going to run?” I will take my time, and make a decision—

Berkowitz: It is likely that the current incumbent, [Cong.] Melissa Bean, who’s a Democrat-

Rep. Beaubien: Umhmm.

Berkowitz: And who beat [Cong.] Phil Crane after he had held that seat for thirty- five years. I think we can safely say that Melissa Bean [D- Barrington, 8th CD] will be running for re-election.

Rep. Beaubien: I think that’s a fair, fair assumption.

Berkowitz: Dave McSweeney has said he is running.

Rep. Beaubien: Umhmm.

Berkowitz: He’s a Republican. Teresa Bartels, I think has said she’s running-

Rep. Beaubien: Correct. Yes, she has.

Berkowitz: She is a Republican. Do you know her?

Rep. Beaubien: Yes, very well.

Berkowitz: Uh, [Rep.] Bob Churchill said on this show he will decide [at the time] you said-- some time before Labor Day.

Rep. Beaubien: Umhmm.

Berkowitz: The Salvis, Al or Kathy. I think most recently Al has said he is not [running], that he has no intention to run.

Rep. Beaubien: That’s my understanding. He hasn’t said that to me, but that’s my understanding.

Berkowitz: He said that to me. He has no intention to run-- now.

Rep. Beaubien:[laughs] Okay.

Berkowitz: No, he has no intention to run. Of course, that could change. It has changed from time to time--

Rep. Beaubien: Umhmm.

Berkowitz: In other races. Kathy Salvi, his wife-

Rep. Beaubien: Right.

Berkowitz: … She may run. You know Kathy, as well?

Rep. Beaubien: Sure.


Berkowitz: You know Al?

Rep. Beaubien: I know all these people. They’re very fine people, and they’d make excellent-

Berkowitz: Now, they are all what you might call conservative, right?
Social Conservatives?

Rep. Beaubien: I would call them social conservatives.

Berkowitz: And, you would say you’re a social moderate?

Rep. Beaubien: Yes, that’s correct.


Berkowitz: Would you say, on economic issues, that you’re a conservative?

Rep. Beaubien: I am very conservative and I think my record with the budget office is pretty clear on that.

Berkowitz: Now, if all those four ran: McSweeney, Bartels, Churchill, and Salvi-one of the Salvis- as social conservatives, and you ran as a social moderate, do you think you’d have a good shot at winning?

Rep. Beaubien: Well, we’re getting into areas—I haven’t decided whether I’m going to run yet, or not.

Berkowitz: But, hypothetically, if you do.

Rep. Beaubien: I think historically, if you look at [Cong.] Judy Biggert, if you look at, [Speaker] Denny Hastert, et cetera, the individual who represents the area-- uh, as a state legislator or as a state senator-- does tend to have a pretty good leg up on name recognition and success.

[Ed. Note. Hard to imagine, but talking about JDH: it was 1980, just one score and five years ago that now U. S. House Speaker J.Dennis [Denny] Hastert finished third in an Illinois House primary. However, the State House incumbent became fatally ill and Hastert was chosen to take his place on the November ballot. Six years later, after the March, 1986 primary, Cong. Grotberg, with whom Hastert had interned when Grotberg was a state senator, was fatally stricken with cancer and Hastert again was chosen by the Party as a replacement....Hastert won 52-48. See Barone’s and Cohen’s Almanac of American Politics: 2004. So, boys and girls, it is possible that holding a state legislative seat is very important for name recognition and success in winning a congressional seat. But, untimely [or perhaps timely] deaths and good relationships with the party leaders can help, too. Alternatively, perhaps JDH was chosen by the Party in 1986 to run in the Congressional general election because of his name recognition, which may have reflected his six years in the Illinois State House. Or, maybe not. We discuss, you decide.]

Berkowitz: So, you-- because you have been a state rep in that area-- you have represented, what, one eighth of that district, or so?

Rep. Beaubien: Oh, much more than that. I was born and raised in Waukegan, I had my law practice in Cook County-

Berkowitz: Palatine?

Rep. Beaubien: Lake and Cook. And I represented part of McHenry County and I’ve had relations out there over the last thirty or forty years.

Berkowitz: So, in terms of name recognition, you think you might have name recognition in twenty or thirty percent of the [8th Cong.] district, or more?

Rep. Beaubien: Probably.


Berkowitz: Yes, okay. It gives you an advantage.

Rep. Beaubien: Yes.
*****************************************
State Rep. Mark Beaubien [R-Wauconda], recorded on July 6, 2005 and as is airing on the Suburban edition of Public Affairs this week [week of July 18] and on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs on Monday night, July 25 at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21. See, below, for a detailed suburban airing schedule.
*******************************
State Rep. Beaubien debates and discusses with Show Host and Executive Legal Recruiter Jeff Berkowitz Guns, Gays and Abortion; the resolution of the state budget deficit by the Governor and State Legislature in May, 2005, the role of the legislative budgeteers in that resolution; whether the Governor and the legislature reformed much of the state pension fund system, whether the capping of suburban and downstate teacher/administrator salary increases at 6% per year in their last four years for purposes of calculating pension payments will have an impact on state pension costs; the role of unions in state legislative issues; the War and foreign policy; the Bush Tax Cuts and Tax pledges; the Supreme Court nominee to replace Justice O’Connor; net worth and self funding; and much, much more.
*******************************
The suburban edition of "Public Affairs," is regularly broadcast every Monday, Wednesday and Friday at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Bannockburn, Deerfield, Ft. Sheridan, Glencoe, Highland Park, Highwood, Kenilworth, Lincolnshire, Riverwoods and Winnetka.

The suburban edition also is broadcast every Tuesday night at 8:30 p.m. on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Buffalo Grove, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, Lincolnwood, Morton Grove, Niles, Northfield, Palatine, Rolling Meadows and Wilmette and every Tuesday night at 8:30 p.m. on Comcast Cable Channel 35 in Arlington Heights, Bartlett, Glenview, Golf, Des Plaines, Hanover Park, Mt. Prospect, Northbrook, Park Ridge, Prospect Heights, Schaumburg, Skokie, Streamwood and Wheeling.
*****************************************
Transcript draft prepared by Amy Allen, who also does research for “Public Affairs,” and has her own political blog [See Obiterdictumblog here].
******************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********************