McSweeney takes on Cong. Bean on TV in the 8th CD
Jeff Berkowitz: Well, then-- you would accept support [from unions] as she [Cong. Bean] did and you might vote for CAFTA which would be against their [wishes]—
David McSweeney: But, I would tell them [the unions] the truth. Jeff, I would tell them the truth up front.
Berkowitz: Which is?
David McSweeney: Which is that I would support CAFTA.
Berkowitz: And you are saying she [Cong. Bean] lied to them when she said—
David McSweeney: I am not going to use the word lie. What I am going to say is that she gave them strong indications that she would oppose it. She took their money…and then she turned around…and then voted for final passage [of CAFTA]. Again, I think that creates terrible skepticism about politics.
*********************************************************
Berkowitz: In that sense, you have changed your position. You would not go to that [making it legal for a woman to terminate her pregnancy only during the first eight weeks of the pregnancy] as a first step-- now you would like to have a constitutional amendment that bans it [abortion] completely, but that wasn’t your position in ’98, right?
David McSweeney: Jeff, I haven’t changed my position. What I have said is that I don’t think that the step is necessary from a tactical standpoint anymore—it is a different environment in 2005 than it was in 1998. But I strongly believe that we need to eliminate abortions in this country.
************************************************************
8th Cong. Dist. Republican Primary Candidate David McSweeney is the featured guest on this week's suburban edition of "Public Affairs." [See the post here] for more about David McSweeney and the last part of that post for a list of topics discussed on the show and the detailed suburban airing schedule of "Public Affairs."
McSweeney has a substantial organization up and running [including Campaign Manager Jim Thacker, who BTW managed [then 29 year old] Shawn Donnelly's 2nd place finish in the 10 candidate 10th CD Republican Primary in 2000, won by the current occupant of that seat, Cong. Mark Kirk]. McSweeney, a 39 year old investment banker, has the resources and fund raising ability to mount a serious campaign.
Moreover, Dave McSweeney has a good jump on his competitors, as he has essentially been doing this since January, if not before, and ran in the '98 primary against then Cong. Crane. At the moment, Teresa Bartels and Aaron Lincoln appear to be the only other candidates in the Republican Primary. Bartels has the resources [money and organization] to mount a serious campaign and rumors continue that Cong. Kirk helped get her into this and may help more in the future [rumors denied by the Bartels' campaign] and there are rumors that he has, or could, bail out.
Money and organization will be much more of a challenge for Mr. Lincoln, but he does have the name advantage in the contest [some are referring to him as Abe(based on his initials)Lincoln] .
In terms of the heavy hitters still out there [Resources, organizational support, name recognition, etc.], people are focusing on both Kathy Salvi and State Rep. Bob Churchill. Kathy has essentially said she is running, is now attending events and is scheduled to tape our show in early October. She is said to be quite well known in the family values crowd [especially Pro-Life circles] and her husband, Al Salvi, has good name recognition that may be transferable to Kathy. On the other hand, Al Salvi also has some negative baggage, which could also be transferable to Kathy Salvi. "For better or worse," as they say.
State Rep. Churchill appears to have pretty good name recognition and perhaps sufficient resources within his grasp to mount a serious campaign. He is expected to announce whether he will get in the race on or soon after Labor Day.
Other, apparently less serious candidates for the 8th CD Republican Primary, are still being mentioned as possibles, but it is getting late for anyone who wants to do it right, even if they have the resources and organization.
**************************************************************************
A partial transcript of this week's suburban edition of "Public Affairs," is included below:
*************************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: We thought we would give you the opportunity to give a report card to the current Congresswoman in that [8th Cong.] District, Melissa Bean [D- Barrington]. Let’s grade her. David McSweeney, what do you give her, try to be as objective as you can—grading scale of A to F, she’s been there now about seven months—how is she doing?
David McSweeney: I give her a D.
Berkowitz: a D? You are a tough grader.
David McSweeney: Absolutely, because she has established a voting record of inconsistency. One of the things that Melissa Bean has been doing is voting for final passage of the Republican bills- [but] a few minutes before, on the floor of the House, voting to kill them. I will give you a number of examples, Jeff. Class action reform. She voted for final passage—that would transfer the jurisdiction in certain cases from the state to the federal case--courts. A few minutes before, she voted to kill it. Bankruptcy reform, she voted for final passage. Again, a few minutes before she voted to kill it. Remember John Kerry? "I voted for it before I voted against it." It is a record of inconsistency. She voted against medical malpractice reform which is so important to keep doctors in this state…so I think the Bean record is very poor. What we need is a mainstream conservative like myself to vote how the district really wants to vote.
**************************************
Berkowitz: Now she [Congresswoman Bean] did vote for CAFTA, the Central American Free Trade Agreement. You would have voted the same way on that?
David McSweeney: Absolutely, but--
Berkowitz: So on that you are in agreement, right?
David McSweeney: But, let’s go through that. It is a very important fundamental issue. Melissa Bean took the money from the labor unions, she took their support, she told them that she would vote against it [CAFTA] and then she voted for it, but in traditional form, she voted against the rule to bring it to the floor of the House and then she voted for final passage, but I think it is a fundamental issue and it creates a lot of skepticism in people’s minds in politics when you have a politician who takes money, takes volunteers, takes support and turns around for what she considers short term political purposes and votes the other way. I am a supporter of CAFTA but I say outright that I support CAFTA, I support free trade…but that’s what creates the skepticism that people have about politics when people don’t keep their word and I don’t think she kept her word on what she promised her people.
Berkowitz: ..Would you accept support from unions?
David McSweeney: Absolutely. It’s all a game of addition…
Berkowitz: Well, then-- you would accept support as she did and you might vote for CAFTA which would be against their—
David McSweeney: But, I would tell them the truth. Jeff, I would tell them the truth up front.
Berkowitz: Which is?
David McSweeney: Which is thatI would support CAFTA.
Berkowitz: And you are saying she lied to them when she said—
David McSweeney: I am not going to use the word lie. What I am going to say is that she gave them strong indications that she would oppose it. She took their money…and then she turned around…and then voted for final passage. Again, I think that creates terrible skepticism about politics.
Berkowitz: Labor unions are said to support minimum wages, increases in minimum wages. What’s the current federal minimum wage and would you support an increase in that?
David McSweeney: I believe the current minimum wage is $5.15/hour and no I wouldn’t because I think it kills short-term jobs…it kills opportunities that are available to minorities and also young people who are trying to find [a spot for] themselves in the work force. It is much better if we focus on creating good, high paying jobs…
Berkowitz: In general, would you oppose the concept of a minimum wage.
David McSweeney: No, not the concept, but I don’t want to see any further increases in the minimum wage.
Berkowitz: So, if you had the opportunity, not that it’s likely to happen, but if you had the opportunity to vote on a decrease in the minimum wage, would you do so.
David McSweeney: It’s not a realistic option that is before Congress.
Berkowitz: I know, but hypothetically, would you favor that? If somebody said, we think this is causing unemployment, we think we would be better off with a minimum wage of $4.50/hour, would you support that?
David McSweeney: I would support-- Let me be very specific, I would support no further increase in the minimum wage.
********************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: One of the issues that came up toward the end of the [1998 8th CD Republican Primary] Campaign was your view on abortion. At that time, it was reported in the Press that your view in 1998 was that a woman should be allowed to terminate her pregnancy within the first two months—
David McSweeney: That was not my position.
Berkowitz: Was that an inaccurate statement in the Press at that time?
David McSweeney: Jeff--
Berkowitz: You know that there are articles that state that. Daily Herald says that. Pioneer Press says that. You realize that.
David McSweeney: Jeff. Let me tell you what my position in 1998 was and it has always been a consistent position. I said as a first step toward eliminating all abortions that we should eliminate abortion-- post the 8th week. What people have failed to report, including some of my political opponents, is that I always said that was a first step towards eliminating abortion.
Berkowitz: Okay and one of the papers did report that. But, it was reported that the organizations both were lukewarm on you—Pro-Choice [and] Pro-Life. The Illinois Federation for Right to Life did not endorse you at that time. They have [now endorsed you] and that has become a controversy, but…the person who was chairing the organization at that time, or that PAC, said you were trying to have it both ways by taking the position you just articulated. Do you remember that?
David McSweeney: I [pause] was not trying to have it both ways.
Berkowitz: But, do you remember that criticism?
David McSweeney: I was not trying to have it both ways, Jeff , No. 1.
Berkowitz: But, do you know- just try to answer that question. Do you remember? Was that a controversy at that time?
David McSweeney: I ran against an incumbent [at that time, 29 year incumbent Cong. Phil Crane] who was supported by the Illinois Federation for Right to Life and I am very proud to have the support of the Illinois Federation for Right to Life, right now and what I have been consistent on is that I am Pro-Life and that I strongly believe that we need to reduce and eliminate abortions in this country.
Berkowitz: But, do you still adhere to the 1988 [sic--1998] position that the abortion procedure should be allowed during the first eight weeks of pregnancy.
David McSweeney: I never said—
Berkowitz: But not after that.
David McSweeney: Jeff. Let me just be specific. This is important. So, let’s talk through this issue.
Berkowitz: Okay.
David McSweeney: I never said it should be allowed. What I said is that as a first step, from a tactical standpoint for eliminating all abortions, that we should eliminate all abortions post the 8th week. That’s what I said. I believe at this point—that was when Bill Clinton was President of the United States—when we did not have a clear Republican majority in the same way that we do right now. We had it in the House but not as great [in terms] of numbers in the United States Senate. I don’t think that step is necessary now. I think that we can eliminate abortions. I think that the Supreme Court is going to be the real battleground here over the next couple of months, as we have seen in [U. S. Supreme Court nominee] Roberts’ nomination. Hopefully, eventually, Roe v. Wade will be overturned. I think that will be a [inaudible] development.
Berkowitz: In that sense, you have changed your position. You would not go to that as a first step now—you would like to have a constitutional amendment that bans it [abortion] completely, but that wasn’t your position in ’98, right?
David McSweeney: Jeff, I haven’t changed my position. What I have said is that I don’t think that the step is necessary from a tactical standpoint anymore—it is a different environment in 2005 than it was in 1998. But I strongly believe that we need to eliminate abortions in this country.
Berkowitz: Do you remember Felicia Goeken, she was the Chair of the Illinois Federation for Right to Life [PAC]—
David McSweeney: Sure, absolutely.
Berkowitz: Do you remember that she is quoted at that time as saying--she was quoted-- that you are “Double talking,” that you, David McSweeney, “Can’t have it both ways, that’s a double position there.” Do you remember that criticism from her [Felicia Goeken]?
David McSweeney: She never said it to me but she was quoted in the Daily Herald.
Berkowitz: She was. Okay.
David McSweeney: Jeff, let me finish, please. She was quoted in the Daily Herald as saying that and she was supporting [then congressman] Phil Crane and she was a great woman. I admired her.
********************************************
David McSweeney, 8th CD Republican Primary candidate, recorded on August 21, 2005 and as is airing on the Suburban edition of Public Affairs this week [week of August 28] and as will be airing on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs on this coming Monday night, Labor Day, September 5 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
*************************
David McSweeney: But, I would tell them [the unions] the truth. Jeff, I would tell them the truth up front.
Berkowitz: Which is?
David McSweeney: Which is that I would support CAFTA.
Berkowitz: And you are saying she [Cong. Bean] lied to them when she said—
David McSweeney: I am not going to use the word lie. What I am going to say is that she gave them strong indications that she would oppose it. She took their money…and then she turned around…and then voted for final passage [of CAFTA]. Again, I think that creates terrible skepticism about politics.
*********************************************************
Berkowitz: In that sense, you have changed your position. You would not go to that [making it legal for a woman to terminate her pregnancy only during the first eight weeks of the pregnancy] as a first step-- now you would like to have a constitutional amendment that bans it [abortion] completely, but that wasn’t your position in ’98, right?
David McSweeney: Jeff, I haven’t changed my position. What I have said is that I don’t think that the step is necessary from a tactical standpoint anymore—it is a different environment in 2005 than it was in 1998. But I strongly believe that we need to eliminate abortions in this country.
************************************************************
8th Cong. Dist. Republican Primary Candidate David McSweeney is the featured guest on this week's suburban edition of "Public Affairs." [See the post here] for more about David McSweeney and the last part of that post for a list of topics discussed on the show and the detailed suburban airing schedule of "Public Affairs."
McSweeney has a substantial organization up and running [including Campaign Manager Jim Thacker, who BTW managed [then 29 year old] Shawn Donnelly's 2nd place finish in the 10 candidate 10th CD Republican Primary in 2000, won by the current occupant of that seat, Cong. Mark Kirk]. McSweeney, a 39 year old investment banker, has the resources and fund raising ability to mount a serious campaign.
Moreover, Dave McSweeney has a good jump on his competitors, as he has essentially been doing this since January, if not before, and ran in the '98 primary against then Cong. Crane. At the moment, Teresa Bartels and Aaron Lincoln appear to be the only other candidates in the Republican Primary. Bartels has the resources [money and organization] to mount a serious campaign and rumors continue that Cong. Kirk helped get her into this and may help more in the future [rumors denied by the Bartels' campaign] and there are rumors that he has, or could, bail out.
Money and organization will be much more of a challenge for Mr. Lincoln, but he does have the name advantage in the contest [some are referring to him as Abe(based on his initials)Lincoln] .
In terms of the heavy hitters still out there [Resources, organizational support, name recognition, etc.], people are focusing on both Kathy Salvi and State Rep. Bob Churchill. Kathy has essentially said she is running, is now attending events and is scheduled to tape our show in early October. She is said to be quite well known in the family values crowd [especially Pro-Life circles] and her husband, Al Salvi, has good name recognition that may be transferable to Kathy. On the other hand, Al Salvi also has some negative baggage, which could also be transferable to Kathy Salvi. "For better or worse," as they say.
State Rep. Churchill appears to have pretty good name recognition and perhaps sufficient resources within his grasp to mount a serious campaign. He is expected to announce whether he will get in the race on or soon after Labor Day.
Other, apparently less serious candidates for the 8th CD Republican Primary, are still being mentioned as possibles, but it is getting late for anyone who wants to do it right, even if they have the resources and organization.
**************************************************************************
A partial transcript of this week's suburban edition of "Public Affairs," is included below:
*************************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: We thought we would give you the opportunity to give a report card to the current Congresswoman in that [8th Cong.] District, Melissa Bean [D- Barrington]. Let’s grade her. David McSweeney, what do you give her, try to be as objective as you can—grading scale of A to F, she’s been there now about seven months—how is she doing?
David McSweeney: I give her a D.
Berkowitz: a D? You are a tough grader.
David McSweeney: Absolutely, because she has established a voting record of inconsistency. One of the things that Melissa Bean has been doing is voting for final passage of the Republican bills- [but] a few minutes before, on the floor of the House, voting to kill them. I will give you a number of examples, Jeff. Class action reform. She voted for final passage—that would transfer the jurisdiction in certain cases from the state to the federal case--courts. A few minutes before, she voted to kill it. Bankruptcy reform, she voted for final passage. Again, a few minutes before she voted to kill it. Remember John Kerry? "I voted for it before I voted against it." It is a record of inconsistency. She voted against medical malpractice reform which is so important to keep doctors in this state…so I think the Bean record is very poor. What we need is a mainstream conservative like myself to vote how the district really wants to vote.
**************************************
Berkowitz: Now she [Congresswoman Bean] did vote for CAFTA, the Central American Free Trade Agreement. You would have voted the same way on that?
David McSweeney: Absolutely, but--
Berkowitz: So on that you are in agreement, right?
David McSweeney: But, let’s go through that. It is a very important fundamental issue. Melissa Bean took the money from the labor unions, she took their support, she told them that she would vote against it [CAFTA] and then she voted for it, but in traditional form, she voted against the rule to bring it to the floor of the House and then she voted for final passage, but I think it is a fundamental issue and it creates a lot of skepticism in people’s minds in politics when you have a politician who takes money, takes volunteers, takes support and turns around for what she considers short term political purposes and votes the other way. I am a supporter of CAFTA but I say outright that I support CAFTA, I support free trade…but that’s what creates the skepticism that people have about politics when people don’t keep their word and I don’t think she kept her word on what she promised her people.
Berkowitz: ..Would you accept support from unions?
David McSweeney: Absolutely. It’s all a game of addition…
Berkowitz: Well, then-- you would accept support as she did and you might vote for CAFTA which would be against their—
David McSweeney: But, I would tell them the truth. Jeff, I would tell them the truth up front.
Berkowitz: Which is?
David McSweeney: Which is thatI would support CAFTA.
Berkowitz: And you are saying she lied to them when she said—
David McSweeney: I am not going to use the word lie. What I am going to say is that she gave them strong indications that she would oppose it. She took their money…and then she turned around…and then voted for final passage. Again, I think that creates terrible skepticism about politics.
Berkowitz: Labor unions are said to support minimum wages, increases in minimum wages. What’s the current federal minimum wage and would you support an increase in that?
David McSweeney: I believe the current minimum wage is $5.15/hour and no I wouldn’t because I think it kills short-term jobs…it kills opportunities that are available to minorities and also young people who are trying to find [a spot for] themselves in the work force. It is much better if we focus on creating good, high paying jobs…
Berkowitz: In general, would you oppose the concept of a minimum wage.
David McSweeney: No, not the concept, but I don’t want to see any further increases in the minimum wage.
Berkowitz: So, if you had the opportunity, not that it’s likely to happen, but if you had the opportunity to vote on a decrease in the minimum wage, would you do so.
David McSweeney: It’s not a realistic option that is before Congress.
Berkowitz: I know, but hypothetically, would you favor that? If somebody said, we think this is causing unemployment, we think we would be better off with a minimum wage of $4.50/hour, would you support that?
David McSweeney: I would support-- Let me be very specific, I would support no further increase in the minimum wage.
********************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: One of the issues that came up toward the end of the [1998 8th CD Republican Primary] Campaign was your view on abortion. At that time, it was reported in the Press that your view in 1998 was that a woman should be allowed to terminate her pregnancy within the first two months—
David McSweeney: That was not my position.
Berkowitz: Was that an inaccurate statement in the Press at that time?
David McSweeney: Jeff--
Berkowitz: You know that there are articles that state that. Daily Herald says that. Pioneer Press says that. You realize that.
David McSweeney: Jeff. Let me tell you what my position in 1998 was and it has always been a consistent position. I said as a first step toward eliminating all abortions that we should eliminate abortion-- post the 8th week. What people have failed to report, including some of my political opponents, is that I always said that was a first step towards eliminating abortion.
Berkowitz: Okay and one of the papers did report that. But, it was reported that the organizations both were lukewarm on you—Pro-Choice [and] Pro-Life. The Illinois Federation for Right to Life did not endorse you at that time. They have [now endorsed you] and that has become a controversy, but…the person who was chairing the organization at that time, or that PAC, said you were trying to have it both ways by taking the position you just articulated. Do you remember that?
David McSweeney: I [pause] was not trying to have it both ways.
Berkowitz: But, do you remember that criticism?
David McSweeney: I was not trying to have it both ways, Jeff , No. 1.
Berkowitz: But, do you know- just try to answer that question. Do you remember? Was that a controversy at that time?
David McSweeney: I ran against an incumbent [at that time, 29 year incumbent Cong. Phil Crane] who was supported by the Illinois Federation for Right to Life and I am very proud to have the support of the Illinois Federation for Right to Life, right now and what I have been consistent on is that I am Pro-Life and that I strongly believe that we need to reduce and eliminate abortions in this country.
Berkowitz: But, do you still adhere to the 1988 [sic--1998] position that the abortion procedure should be allowed during the first eight weeks of pregnancy.
David McSweeney: I never said—
Berkowitz: But not after that.
David McSweeney: Jeff. Let me just be specific. This is important. So, let’s talk through this issue.
Berkowitz: Okay.
David McSweeney: I never said it should be allowed. What I said is that as a first step, from a tactical standpoint for eliminating all abortions, that we should eliminate all abortions post the 8th week. That’s what I said. I believe at this point—that was when Bill Clinton was President of the United States—when we did not have a clear Republican majority in the same way that we do right now. We had it in the House but not as great [in terms] of numbers in the United States Senate. I don’t think that step is necessary now. I think that we can eliminate abortions. I think that the Supreme Court is going to be the real battleground here over the next couple of months, as we have seen in [U. S. Supreme Court nominee] Roberts’ nomination. Hopefully, eventually, Roe v. Wade will be overturned. I think that will be a [inaudible] development.
Berkowitz: In that sense, you have changed your position. You would not go to that as a first step now—you would like to have a constitutional amendment that bans it [abortion] completely, but that wasn’t your position in ’98, right?
David McSweeney: Jeff, I haven’t changed my position. What I have said is that I don’t think that the step is necessary from a tactical standpoint anymore—it is a different environment in 2005 than it was in 1998. But I strongly believe that we need to eliminate abortions in this country.
Berkowitz: Do you remember Felicia Goeken, she was the Chair of the Illinois Federation for Right to Life [PAC]—
David McSweeney: Sure, absolutely.
Berkowitz: Do you remember that she is quoted at that time as saying--she was quoted-- that you are “Double talking,” that you, David McSweeney, “Can’t have it both ways, that’s a double position there.” Do you remember that criticism from her [Felicia Goeken]?
David McSweeney: She never said it to me but she was quoted in the Daily Herald.
Berkowitz: She was. Okay.
David McSweeney: Jeff, let me finish, please. She was quoted in the Daily Herald as saying that and she was supporting [then congressman] Phil Crane and she was a great woman. I admired her.
********************************************
David McSweeney, 8th CD Republican Primary candidate, recorded on August 21, 2005 and as is airing on the Suburban edition of Public Affairs this week [week of August 28] and as will be airing on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs on this coming Monday night, Labor Day, September 5 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
*************************
<< Home