Brendan Reilly, The Phantom of Chicago's City Hall, Cable/streaming

This Week's suburban edition of "Public Affairs," airing in the Chicago metro suburbs, features Ghost guest candidate Brendan Reilly, candidate for 42nd Ward Alderman, being questioned, in absentia, on the issues by show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz. See, below, for the Public Affairs suburban airing schedule. You may also [Watch the show with ghost guest candidate Brendan Reilly on your computer].
*******************************************************
The failure of Brendan Reilly, Ghost Guest Candidate for Chicago's 42nd Ward Alderman, to keep his commitment to appear on "Public Affairs," is noted by show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz as he discusses the issues in the 42nd Ward race and questions, Reilly, in absentia, on various issues, including whether Reilly would be a "Daley boy," and an "insider"; does Reilly oppose pay to play, what would Reilly do to stop pay to play? to stop politics in city hiring and promotion; What would Reilly do about rising real estate assessments and rising property taxes in the 42nd Ward and in the City? over-development?; Is the Mayor focusing too much on bringing 2016 Olympics to Chicago and too little on improving education and finding private sector support for same; How well has Terry Peterson done in his effort to produce mixed inome public housing at CHA; education funding reform, should we have a "tax swap," i.e., an increase in the income tax and sales tax and a decrease in the property tax; a Chicago Casino? Living Wage ordinance: would he have voted for it? Is Reilly's word his bond? The quality of that bond? AAA or Junk? The strength of Reilly's commitment?
******************************************
Ghost guest candidate Brendan Reilly will be the featured guest on the Monday, Feb. 5, 2007 [8:30 pm, Cable Ch. 21] City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs."
*************************************************
The "Public Affairs," cinema page gives you a choice of more than twenty-five episodes of “Public Affairs," including this week's suburban show with ghost guest candidate for 42nd Ward Alderman in Chicago Brendan Reilly and recent shows with Sen. Syverson [R-Rockford], Metropolitan Planning Council President MarySue Barrett, State Rep. Paul Froehlich, Eric Zorn-Dan Proft, John McCarron, Gery Chico, former State Sen. Steve Rauschenberger, Chicago Mayoral Candidate Dorothy Brown [D] and State Rep. Julie Hamos [D-Evanston], as well as interviews, discussions or remarks with or by U. S. Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giulianiand many, many more pols on our video podcast page[Watch here].
***************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: What about education? Is that more important than Millennium Park. More important than the Olympics. Should the City Council be pressuring the Mayor to focus on other things, other than the 2016 Olympics? Only 6% of those coming out of Chicago Public Schools graduate from a college. What does our phantom candidate [for 42nd Ward Alderman] Brendan Reilly think about that? We would like to ask him, but he is not here. He said he would be here, he committed to being here; his campaign said it did not matter that Ald. Burt Natarus would not be here—Brendan Reilly would be here—He was going to sit right in this chair-- right where Ronald Reagan is sitting.

Ronald Reagan talking doll: There you go again.

Jeff Berkowitz: There you go again. Maybe Reagan was saying that to Brendan Reilly, I mean-- Reilly was saying he would be here. “There you go again.” But, Reilly is not here.

Jeff Berkowitz: Charter schools- are they a good thing? Renaissance 2010. What does Brendan Reilly know about that? What can he say about that? Is the Mayor going down the right path? A lot of people say Renaissance 2010 isn’t going in the right direction. Others say it shows Chicago Public Schools are reforming. They are going more toward Charter Schools, more toward competition, innovation. Where does Brendan Reilly stand on that? We don’t know. We just don’t know because he is not here.

Jeff Berkowitz: Is that a tough question. Is that something that would scare you away if you were running for Alderman in the 42nd Ward? “Oh, my God, Berkowitz is going to ask me about Charter schools, I don’t know what to say.” Is that what Brendan Reilly is saying? We don’t know because he is not here…He had his field representative [Adam] call me, less than 24 hours before [the scheduled taping] and he said, “The Campaign Chairman [Rod Nash] decided that Brendan Reilly can only lose from showing up.” So, he thought- whatever is happening here this evening—and you’re watching—he [Brendan Reilly] couldn’t match this, he could only lose, he could only do worse than this.

Jeff Berkowitz: We try to be fair and balanced. We don’t endorse any candidates. We don’t endorse Burt Natarus in this race. We don’t endorse Brendan Reilly in this race. We don’t endorse Mike Libert in this race. We don’t endorse. In defense of Mike Libert, we weren’t able to connect with him, so we… never got to ask him whether he’d be here. But, the other two had clear shots. Burt Natarus had a shot, Brendan Reilly had a shot. Both Natarus and Reilly are spending piles of dough on this thing. If they …say they want a campaign donation from you—they have to get the word out—they have to do direct mail and TV, I think you could say to the two-- whether it is Natarus or whether it is Brendan Reilly, you’d say, “Hey, you didn’t go on the Berkowitz show, I’m not writing you a check. Why should I do that? You had a half hour of free air time, right there. You could have answered those questions.” Brendan Reilly didn’t do it…
************************************************
Ghost guest Aldermanic candidate Brendan Reilly, as is airing this week on Public Affairs in 35 Chicago Metro suburbs [See below for the suburban airing schedule] and as will be airing on Monday, Feb. 5, 2007 [8:30 pm on Cable, CANTV] on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs. The show was recorded on January 21, 2007. You may also[watch the ghost guest candidate Brendan Reilly program here].
***************************************************
In twenty-five North Shore, North and Northwest suburbs, the "Public Affairs," show airs every Tuesday night in the regular weekly Public Affairs slot, 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19 or 35, as indicated, below.

In ten North Shore suburbs, the Public Affairs show air three times each week in its regular slots at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19, Monday, Wednesday and Friday, as indicated, below. ******************************************************
The suburban episode of Public Affairs with ghost guest 42nd Ward Chicago aldermanic candidate Brendan Reilly airs Tonight :

at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Buffalo Grove, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, parts of Inverness, Lincolnwood, Morton Grove, Niles, Northfield, Palatine, Rolling Meadows and Wilmette

And at 8:30 pm 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.

and this week on Monday night, Wednesday night and Friday night at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Bannockburn, Deerfield, Ft. Sheridan, Glencoe, Highland Park, Highwood, Kenilworth, Lincolnshire, Riverwoods and Winnetka.
***********************************************
The City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs," with ghost guest 42nd Ward Chicago Aldermanic candidate Brendan Reilly airs this coming Monday night at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21 [CANTV] throughout the City of Chicago.
****************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Sen. Syverson: Cable/Streaming- Taxes, School Choice and more

Tonight's City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs features Senator Dave Syverson [R-Rockford], airing throughout the City of Chicago at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21. For more on the show and links to watch the show on the Public Affairs cimema page, go here.

Obama: Kerry has fought FOR his country and ideals

Update to Team Obama’s typo: It took the Obama Presidential Exploratory campaign team less than ninety minutes to notice its typo and send out a corrected press release [and ninety minutes is a pretty good reaction time for that sort of thing; maybe Haldeman was wrong, maybe you can put the toothpaste back in the tube—just don’t try that at home, boys and girls, with a nuclear attack]:

From his earliest days in Vietnam to the Presidential Election in 2004, John Kerry has fought FOR his country and his ideals. I am proud to call him a friend and a colleague…[emphasis supplied].

For those Obama supporters who got in a tizzy about my calling attention to team Obama’s typo and having a little fun with it, please lighten up. For those Obama detractors who made more of this than they should have—remember, never overplay your hand. It is no great character flaw to have someone send out a press release with a typo on your behalf—unless it happens repeatedly, and that has not been the case with Team Obama. I wouldn’t have thought I would have to say it, but there, I did, just in case.

BTW, here is an example of another blogger, Dan Curry, who did not overplay his hand and blogged the typo within the spirit of good-natured fun, I am sure.

Further, I’d do the same with McCain, Hillary, et al. What can I say-- fair and balanced.

With the one exception, of course: Go Bears. And, that’s a bit of bias -- I can say with confidence—which Senator Barack Obama and I definitely share. Oops, there goes the Indianapolis vote for Barack Obama.
*************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Obama: Freudian slip or typo on the way to the West Wing?

This just in from Obama Presidential Exploratory campaign:

WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) today released the following statement on Senator Kerry's decision not to run for President in 2008:

From his earliest days in Vietnam to the Presidential Election in 2004, John Kerry has fought his country and his ideals…

Well, what do you know, finally, something that George Bush and Barack Obama can agree on.

You really have to proof-read those press releases before you send them out. Because, as Nixon’s close aide, Bob Haldeman, once warned John Dean about the dangers of talking to the prosecutors during the Watergate affair [before Dean did prison time and became a hero of the Democratic Left], “Once the toothpaste is out of the tube, it is awfully hard to get it back in."
*********************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Obama, Clinton and Edwards compete on War positions

In the post game interviews last night of the three top actual or likely candidates in the Democratic Primary for President, there were no clear winners in terms of their discussion of the Iraq War. As conservative commentators have said about the Democratic critics of the War, after listening to them, you have to wonder if they really would prefer to win in Iraq. And, that statement is not meant to question their patriotism or that of any of the Democrats or Republicans who oppose the President on the War. It does raise issues as to the coherence of the views of Obama, Clinton and Edwards on the War.

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Keith Oberman interviewed Former North Carolina Senator John Edwards’ and Senators Obama and Clinton last night after the President’s speech.

Edwards’ main focus was to pick on Hillary for not saying she was wrong to have voted to authorize the President to take military action in Iraq. Edwards has already given the antiwar lobby the equivalent of a “maxima mea culpa” for Edwards vote in support of the War. Hillary, on the other hand, apologizes to no one and takes no prisoners. Hillary will say, ”If I had known then what I know now,” and Hill expects that will suffice. However, Hillary does favor capping the number of troops in Iraq at current levels.

Senator Obama one-ups Hillary by favoring a phased re-deployment of troops, but he is vague as to locations to which he would re-deploy. Obama says that the President deployed too few troops to begin with and that 21,000 additional troops are too few to make a difference now. On, the other hand, Obama would not support sending in more troops now than the contemplated 21,000—defending that with the statement a military victory in Iraq can’t be achieved-- apparently no matter how many troops are deployed, thinks Obama. On that issue, Senator Clinton agrees with Senator Obama.

Obama, Clinton and Edwards say what is needed here is diplomacy—diplomacy by someone to persuade the Shia Iraq Government to work things out with the Sunni insurgents. Obama says phased withdrawals are another mechanism to pressure the Shia government to reach an accommodation with the Sunni insurgents. But, if the Sunni insurgents don’t want to deal, what do the Shia do then? Obama has no answer for that.

And, the candidates are silent as to how to take care of Al Qaeda or other foreign insurgents in Iraq. One would think that problem would require a military solution.

Notwithstanding the above inconsistencies and shortcomings, the positions of Edwards, Obama and Clinton on the Iraq War are supposed to be much preferred by the nation, say the pollsters, to that of President Bush. As W.C. Fields said, nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American people.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Obama’s response to Bush: Re-deploy, Retreat and Surrender?

President Bush asked the Congress and the Nation tonight to give his proposal for a new approach in Iraq a chance to succeed.

But, almost a half hour before the State of the Union address was completed by President Bush, U. S. Senator Barack Obama, an extremely likely candidate for President in the Democratic Primary, emailed his answer to the media. Although embargoed until completion of the President’s speech, Senator Obama was not going to be beat to the starting gate by Senator Hillary Clinton or any of his other competitors.

Obama’s response, with respect to the Iraq War, said simply:

Most Americans believe that escalation will not bring the war in Iraq to a responsible end, and that’s why I’ve proposed not just a troop cap, but a phased redeployment that will start bringing our troops home.

Senator Obama opposed the War before it was started and long before he became a U. S. Senator, and he spoke out loudly, articulately and clearly on the issue at anti-war protests at the Federal Plaza in the Chicago Loop before the war began.

However, as late as this summer, Senator Obama spoke, if not about winning the war, about stabilizing the situation in Iraq. See here and Watch here[McCain,McSweeney and Obama, July 22, 2006 .Not anymore, now he is re-deploying the troops. Where? He doesn’t say. Near the border of Syria and Iraq? Not so much. Most likely he means far, far away from Iraq. Try Illinois.

As Fox News Channel’s Brit Hume has said, re-deployment is another word for retreat, or as some would put it, surrender. The only question is—to whom is the U. S. surrendering? Don’t expect an answer to that question any time soon from Senator Obama [D- IL].
**********************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Sen. Syverson: Increase the income tax; Airing on Cable/ Streaming

Jeff Berkowitz: Is that a problem with the Republican image? Should Republicans take the pledge? Would you take the pledge not to raise the income or the sales tax?

Sen. Dave Syverson: No.

Jeff Berkowitz: So, you don’t believe in that?

Sen. Dave Syverson: No, because as a conservative, it doesn’t mean that you’re—it means doing the right thing. Every generation in this country, the leaders have sacrificed so that the next generation could have a better life. This is the first generation we have elected officials who are saying: we don’t care about the next generation. We’re going to spend today. We’re going to...
*******************************************
This Week's suburban edition of "Public Affairs," airing in the Chicago metro suburbs, features State Senator Dave Syverson [R-Rockford] debating and discussing tax increases, spending cuts, education reform, Republican Party reform, capital budgets, fiscal responsibility, job growth and much more with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz. See, below, for the Public Affairs suburban airing schedule. You may also [Watch the show with Senator Syverson on your computer].
*******************************************************
Senator Dave Syverson [R-Rockford], who along with Peter Fitzerald, Pat O'Malley, Steve Rauschenberger and Chris Lauzen comprised the "Fab 5," when they were first elected to the Senate Senate in 1992, debates and discusses with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz education funding,raising taxes, issuing more debt, a capital budget for the state; school vouchers-school choice; deferred maintenance at the University of Illinois; billions of dollars owed doctors; Medicaid and state pension issues, Pledges not to raise taxes; can the State GOP move ahead with Bob Kjellander as Illinois' Republican national committeeman; how much the State GOP spent during the last campaign cycle, should it have spent more on Tony Peraica- Republican Candidate for Cook County Board President, how much cash does the State GOP have on hand and much, much more.
******************************************
Senator Dave Syverson will be the featured guest on the Monday, Jan. 29, 2007 [8:30 pm, Cable Ch. 21] City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs."
*************************************************
The "Public Affairs," cinema page gives you a choice of more than twenty-five episodes of “Public Affairs," including this week's suburban show with Sen. Syverson and recent shows with Metropolitan Planning Council President MarySue Barrett, State Rep. Paul Froehlich, Eric Zorn-Dan Proft, John McCarron, Gery Chico, former State Sen. Steve Rauschenberger, Chicago Mayoral Candidate Dorothy Brown [D] and State Rep. Julie Hamos [D-Evanston], as well as interviews, discussions or remarks with or by U. S. Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giulianiand many, many more pols on our video podcast page[Watch here].
***************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: You know, he’s [Governor Blagojevich] taken the pledge, at least unofficially, he’s taken it. I don’t know if he’s signed anything, but he said in 2002 he wouldn’t raise the income tax, he wouldn’t raise the sales tax; he didn’t raise those taxes. He ran again in 2006—he took the pledge [not to raise the income or sales tax]. Judy Baar Topinka, she’s a Republican- she didn’t take the pledge, did she?

Sen. Dave Syverson: No, and I think in this case—

Jeff Berkowitz: Is that a problem with the Republican image? Should Republicans take the pledge? Would you take the pledge not to raise the income or the sales tax?

Sen. Dave Syverson: No.

Jeff Berkowitz: So, you don’t believe in that?

Sen. Dave Syverson: No, because as a conservative, it doesn’t mean that you’re—it means doing the right thing. Every generation in this country, the leaders have sacrificed so that the next generation could have a better life. This is the first generation we have elected officials who are saying: we don’t care about the next generation. We’re going to spend today. We’re going to spend today. We’re going to charge things. We’re going to bond, we’re going to borrow. We’re going to make them figure out how to pay for it.” And, that is more irresponsible than raising taxes to pay for what you need to do. The last four years, as a state, we’ve gone deeper into debt than any state in—

Jeff Berkowitz: So, you want to go less into debt? Is that part of your philosophy?

Sen. Dave Syverson: Oh, yes.

Jeff Berkowitz: You want to restrain spending?

Sen. Dave Syverson: Absolutely, we need to do a combination—

Jeff Berkowitz: What else is in the combination? Restrain spending, lower debt, what else?

Sen. Dave Syverson: Well, we’ve got to cut spending and we’re going to have to raise more revenue. Now, we can raise revenue two ways. In the short term, we’re going to have to raise some kind of a revenue stream to pay for a much-needed capital plan. But, second we have to create an environment where we can grow out of our economic problem. And, we do that by trying to keep the middle class here in Illinois—we’re sending those middle class manufacturing jobs out of the state because of our anti-business philosophy.

Jeff Berkowitz: High [business] fees?

Sen. Dave Syverson: High fees. High workman’s compensation costs. High unemployment costs.

Jeff Berkowitz: Implicit taxes on business, that’s what you’re saying—Governor Blagojevich has implicitly put those taxes there—and that’s hurt economic growth and therefore you generate less tax revenue?

Sen. Dave Syverson: We’re creating jobs, but we’re creating lower paying jobs…

Jeff Berkowitz: Well, Jim Oberweis, when he ran against Judy Baar Topinka and others in the Republican Primary for Governor…he kept arguing that there was no reason to raise taxes. He said if you have the kind of economic growth that you are talking about you will generate a fairly large sum of money [additional tax revenue] each year, so it is not like government is stagnant, it is growing—so there is no reason to raise taxes to have government grow even more in Illinois. Would you disagree with Jim Oberweis on that?

Sen. Dave Syverson: I would agree with him, in part. To get out of this mess, to grow out of it is not something that can be done in twelve months. The problem is now we’ve got a couple billion dollars in unpaid medical bills to providers that if it doesn’t get paid—hurts the providers who have to cost shift onto you and I. We’ve got a billion dollar pension payment that is due…and to defer and not to re-build our roads and our universities that are crumbling is irresponsible and so I would support some short term revenue increases, maybe even a temporary until we can turn around and grow out of this.

Jeff Berkowitz: What does that temporary revenue increase sound like. Is that a temporary increase in the income tax?

Sen. Dave Syverson: Well, I think we need to be looking at an income tax [increase]. If we do a sales tax [increase], remember we are surrounded by five states that have lower taxes…
******************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: So, basically, you’re saying you don’t see a way out without raising income taxes? …So, are you saying here on January 14th…you’re telling voters throughout the Chicago Metro area and when it airs in Rockford that you want to raise the income tax?

Sen. Dave Syverson: I think we have to raise the income tax. I said that during my campaign. But, before I would support that, there has to be …shared pain. And, that means before we ask the voters for more money, we have to go back and be responsible—make the cuts that we can make, do the reforms that we can do and then say, we need, at least temporarily money to fund at least the re-building of the infrastructure which would again spark the economy by putting a lot of people to work…

Sen. Dave Syverson: There certainly would never be a need for a two percent increase [in the income tax, going from 3% to 5%, which is actually a 66% increase relative to the current level]

Jeff Berkowitz: So, only a one percent [increase, which is actually a 33% increase relative to the current level].

Sen. Dave Syverson: A one percent would get you, I think, a little over 3 billion dollars. And, again, if it was used, not to expand programs, but only for--

Jeff Berkowitz: To pay for things like accrued liabilities?

Sen. Dave Syverson: [It would] have to be for accrued liabilities and bricks and mortar. And, you did that temporarily so that you could prove to the voters that you’re really doing it properly and if not, [we] would have to come back and vote on it again-- but that can only occur if we put in place reforms…
************************************************
Senator Dave Syverson, as is airing this week on Public Affairs in 35 Chicago Metro suburbs [See below for the suburban airing schedule] and as will be airing on Monday, Jan. 29, 2007 [8:30 pm on Cable, CANTV] on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs. The show was recorded on January 14, 2007. You may also[watch the Sen. Syverson program here].
***************************************************
In twenty-five North Shore, North and Northwest suburbs, the "Public Affairs," show airs every Tuesday night in the regular weekly Public Affairs slot, 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19 or 35, as indicated, below.

In ten North Shore suburbs, the Public Affairs show air three times each week in its regular slots at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19, Monday, Wednesday and Friday, as indicated, below. ******************************************************
The suburban episode of Public Affairs with Sen. Syverson airs Tonight :

at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Buffalo Grove, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, parts of Inverness, Lincolnwood, Morton Grove, Niles, Northfield, Palatine, Rolling Meadows and Wilmette

And at 8:30 pm 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.

and this week on Monday night, Wednesday night and Friday night at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Bannockburn, Deerfield, Ft. Sheridan, Glencoe, Highland Park, Highwood, Kenilworth, Lincolnshire, Riverwoods and Winnetka.
***********************************************
The City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs," with Sen. Syverson airs this coming Monday night at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21 [CANTV] throughout the City of Chicago.
****************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Better than Bears v. Colts: Barrett v. Berkowitz, on Cable and Streaming

MarySue Barrett: But, again, it’s a tripping up of terminology.
Choice, public-private choice, non-starter in Illinois.

Jeff Berkowitz: Why is that a non-starter?

MarySue Barrett: It just is.

Jeff Berkowitz: What do you mean? That’s not an answer.

MarySue Barrett: It is an ideological trick bag where you are not going to see a per pupil voucher given to parents. You can see experimentation with that in other cities and states: Milwaukee and Washington, DC.
**********************************************
Tonight's City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs," airing through-out the City of Chicago in its regular weekly time slot [8:30 pm, Cable Ch. 21], features MarySue Barrett, President, Metropolitan Planning Council, debating and discussing Education, Transportation and Suburban-City-Regional growth Issues and much, much more with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz. You may also [Watch the show with MarySue Barrett on your computer].
*******************************************************
Go here for more about tonight's show, MarySue Barrett and the Metropolitan Planning Council, as well as a partial transcript of tonight's show. For another partial transcript of the show, see below.
*************************************************
The "Public Affairs," cinema page gives you a choice of more than twenty-five episodes of “Public Affairs," including this week's suburban show with State Sen. Dave Syverson [R-Rockford]tonight's City show with MarySue Barrett, Metropolitan Planning Council President, and recent shows with State Rep. Paul Froehlich, Eric Zorn-Dan Proft, John McCarron, Gery Chico, former State Sen. Steve Rauschenberger, Chicago Mayoral Candidate Dorothy Brown [D] and State Rep. Julie Hamos [D-Evanston], as well as interviews, discussions or remarks with or by U. S. Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giulianiand many, many more pols on our video podcast page[Watch here].
***************************************************
MarySue Barrett: We [Metropolitan Planning Council] have been advocates of charter schools …and we would agree that the business community has presented a very strong argument that we need to dramatically blow out those parameters of experimentation. Again, we have done a lot of that. I don’t think we should get hung up on what the titles are: there are charter schools, there are contract schools and when a school is failing and needs to be closed down and reconstituted, there are lots of tools that the Chicago Public Schools has to date that ought to be provided to every district around the state.

Jeff Berkowitz: What about school vouchers and school choice? How about making that a part of the program…the idea that parents now …are getting about $12,000 per kid per year- that’s in kind, that’s what is being spent [from federal taxes, state taxes and local property taxes] on their education in Chicago. Would you favor the notion of giving at least a portion of those parents [a portion because it might be a pilot study] a $12,000 voucher that says you can stay in the public schools if you are happy; if not, go to the private school of your choice.

MarySue Barrett: I think there are limits to the experimentation that can happen in the short term.

Jeff Berkowitz: Why would that be one of those limits?

MarySue Barrett: But, again, it’s a tripping up of terminology.
Choice, public-private choice, non-starter in Illinois.

Jeff Berkowitz: Why is that a non-starter?

MarySue Barrett: It just is.

Jeff Berkowitz: What do you mean? That’s not an answer.

MarySue Barrett: It is an ideological trick bag where you are not going to see a per pupil voucher given to parents. You can see experimentation with that in other cities and states: Milwaukee and Washington, DC.

Jeff Berkowitz: You’re saying you couldn’t get it through the state legislature?

MarySue Barrett: But, look what is happening with 100 schools out of 600 in Chicago [the plan under Renaissance 2010]—that’s a significant percentage. Where, it doesn’t matter how many charters there are—you move toward a whole series of innovations: of private schools, of universities, of groups of teachers all being empowered to move forward. What can we do to help give those tools to other districts and schools around the State. So, public-public choice and experimentation where families really do have options, that’s very appealing.

Jeff Berkowitz: Here’s a copy of “The ABCs of School Choice,” put out by the Heartland Institute, you might want to take a look at that when you have time. [The booklet was prepared by the Milton & Rose D. Friedman Foundation ,with information obtained from many sources, including Heartland Institute. You may obtain a copy, for free, by contacting either the Friedman Foundation or Heartland Institute at the linked web sites.]

MarySue Barrett: Um-um.

Jeff Berkowitz: Just tell me, when you say it [school vouchers-school choice] is a non-starter, are you saying that is your political assessment…are you saying that even if you favored it, you and your supporters couldn’t get that through the state legislature.

MarySue Barrett: We are big believers in picking the right issues at the right time. So, here I speak for the Metropolitan Planning Council and as a person who has been in the civic and governmental world, you can spend a lot of time tilting at windmills and I have no interest in doing that. So, we like to pick issues that have broad appeal, that fill a need and that can demonstrate results. Right now, we know what works. We will never get to scale unless the state steps in with a package of funding, quality and accountability. And, we can do that this year.
****************************************
MarySue Barrett, as is airing tonight on Public Affairs [8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21, CANTV] on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs. The show was recorded on January 7, 2007. You may also[watch the MarySue Barrett program here].
***************************************************
The City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs," airs every Monday night at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21 [CANTV] throughout the City of Chicago.
****************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Berkowitz joins Conlisk and Cunningham on CrossStreet Radio

Jeff Berkowitz joins Joan Conlisk and Karen Cunningham on the radio show, CrossStreet, tomorrow morning from 7-8:30 am on WKRS 1220 AM Radio, “The Voice of Lake County". Joan Conlisk, who hosts the show, weekly, with Karen Cunningham, says the hosts try to show both, or multiple sides of issues, and not necessarily take liberal/conservative/Democrat/ Republican positions.

In other words, fair and balanced, just like Berkowitz's Public Affairs TV show-- Watch on your computer. Maybe Berkowitz will go with the flow and do the same when he joins Joan and Karen tomorrow. Or, maybe not.

Joan, Jeff and Karen on Saturday morning. Should Don and Roma watch out? Tune in, Turn on and Find out.

On tomorrow morning's show, we will probably emphasize general interest issues, e.g., getting high by running, can singles have a life on the North Shore--but we may very well get into politics and public policy, including Senator Barack Obama’s continuing evolution as a Presidential candidate [does his barechest stack up, so to speak, with that of Hillary's ], educational trends in public education- School Districts retaining lawyers to monitor questions from residents at school board meetings, should the U. S. take on Iran, the Republican and Democratic leading Presidential candidates, is it too early to talk about 2008 challenges to Cong. Kirk and Cong. Bean from the right and left, should school districts with 2100 students pay their school superintendents $357,000, can the Democrats be trusted to run the Congress as reformers, is the Illinois GOP still kicking, is the freeze on energy rates in Illinois over, and whatever Joan, Karen and their listeners want to talk about.

Of course, you can shape the content of the show, ask questions, take a whack at Joan Conlisk, Karen Cunningham, Jeff Berkowitz or anyone else by calling 847 244 1220. For more about the show, its hosts and the station in general, go here.

The show’s signal reaches from Waukegan into Wisconsin on the north and into Evanston on the south, to the Lake on the east and to the west across the 10th and 8th Congressional Districts in Lake and portions of Cook County.

So, give Conlisk, Cunningham and Berkowitz a call and let them know what is on your mind.
****************************************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

School Board to residents: Tax dollars, yes. Questions, not so much

At the last Winnetka School Board meeting [December 19, 2006], an unannounced attorney, G. Robb Cooper, whose firm was retained by the Winnetka Board of Education, sat in on the School Board meeting and two weeks later sent a letter to a resident discussing the questions the resident asked at the meeting and stated, “I shall advise any offended Board member to seek personal legal counsel should you choose to continue to repeat false information and insinuations regarding this matter or any other matter.”

Talk about actions that may chill dissent. Next time you want to ask questions of your Winnetka School Board, you may want to bring along your lawyer. Of course, if you live in Winnetka you will be paying for your lawyer and the lawyer retained by the Winnetka School Board. The Winnetka School Board's lawyer advised the Winnetka resident attending the meeting: "We [the 22 attorney Wheaton based law firm of Ottosen, Britz, et al] represent the Board of Education for Winnetka School District 36 in a variety of matters including responses to FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] requests."

How much time did the attorney from the Wheaton based law firm spend at the Winnetka School Board meeting? Was he billing for the time? If so, what was the purpose of the lawyer from the Wheaton based law firm attending the meeting? How much did his law firm earn in legal fees from District 36 last year?

Did the Board make the decision to send the above referenced letter to the Winnetka resident? Or, was that a commnand decision by Supt. van der Bogert? Do the Board Members and/or Superintendent van der Bogert have a conflict of interest in any of the matters the Wheaton law firm is handling for the District? If so, has the Board's Wheaton law firm advised the Winnetka Board members or Winnetka Schools' Superintendent to retain their own lawyers?

You might want to attend the next Winnetka School Board meeting [Jan. 30] and ask those and other questions of the Board. But, generally, the Winnetka School Board Members do not respond to questions from residents at their meetings [See here]. If you do attend and ask questions of your school board, do you need a lawyer at your side? And, will you get a letter from Mr. Cooper with his assessment of whether or not you are repeating "false information."

And, if you are in Naperville, Lake Forest, Arlington Heights, Flossmoor, Darien, Bartlett, Schaumburg, or a village or city in another part of the state or the country etc., does your local public school board have lawyers sitting in on board meetings to assess the accuracy of what you are saying, and does the lawyer then fire off letters to you similar to the letter received by the Winnetka resident? Will I get a letter from the Winnetka Board's lawyer for writing this? What next, will your School Board re-write the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution?

Welcome to new wave thinking in K-12 public education--"We welcome your tax dollars, but not so much your questions. Moreover, the responses you get to your questions may not come from us, but from our lawyers, in writing and after the meeting. That having been said, feel free to ask away, if you don't mind waiting four hours to ask your questions at the end of the school board meeting."
***********************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

School Supt. van der Bogert paid 357K: What were they thinking?

Links added and fixed at 1:00 pm on Friday.
*******************************************
Winnetka Public School’s District 36 [2100 students] is paying it’s superintendent, Dr. Rebecca van der Bogert, $357,668 this year, her last year at the District. In the summer, Dr. van der Bogert starts a new job at the Palm Beach Day Academy [See here], a school that has been reported to be conveniently located to her Florida property.

This high level of compensation is perhaps even more surprising when put in the context of recent Winnetka School District 36 events, involving the Superintendent, the School Board and the Board's President Anne Kelly, taking us to tonight’s town meeting in Winnetka [7:30 pm, Skokie School auditorium, Winnetka] when the town will be asked to vote and confirm Anne Kelly as the Caucus’ slated candidate for another term on the School Board.

Not too long ago, Superintendent van der Bogert actions startled many in her own community, as well as others, when it transpired that she had recommended a new principal [for Greeley School] to the School Board, without informing the Board that the person, at the time, was a defendant in a wrongful death action filed by a family of a student who had died at a Glenview Public School. The family had sued the District and the person who had applied for the Winnetka Public School principal position, alleging failure to exercise ordinary care on the part of the defendants [See here].

When the Winnetka Greeley school community learned of van der Bogert’s failure to disclose by reading about the wrongful death lawsuit and it’s upcoming trial in the Chicago Tribune and other media, many parents and other residents in the community rose up in anger, but the School Board, including then and current School Board President Anne Kelly, publicly defended its Superintendent. Then, the Board made van der Bogert the top compensated North Shore, if not state, Superintendent. What was the Winnetka School Board thinking?

The $357,000/ year School Supt. van der Bogert is now back in the news with her Board, with a complaint being filed with the office of Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, alleging illegal electioneering by the District 36 Superintendent on behalf of School Board President Kelly, Open Meetings Act violations by her Board and improper use of confidential information by a School Board member relating to an issue raised by a parent about her child. See here and here.

Supt. Rebecca van der Bogert's compensation is tops for all superintendents on the North Shore, where 13 of the 15 superintendents earn more than 200K per year, and the median compensation is 241 K. Supt. van der Bogert barely edged out a nearby competitor, who earned 344 K this year. [See the Winnetka Talk, December 14, 2006 at pp. 34-35, article not on line], for the title of top ranking compensation on the North Shore. Van der Bogert’s compensation this year managed to exceed even the last year top North Shore superintendent compensation of long time New Trier High School Supt. Hank Bangser. What was the Winnetka School Board thinking?

Dr. Bangser retired last year as the 2nd highest paid Supt. in the State, with a pension of about 230 K per year for the rest of his life. The exact figure of van der Bogert’s annual pension was not available, but it will be substantial, depending, in part, on how much the Board’s purchased in terms of “out of state service credits,” for Supt. van der Bogert. Of course, Dr. van der Bogert will collect her pension along with her compensation from her new job in Florida.

Further, Winnetka’s School District 36 plans to go to referendum in the spring, asking its community to support the issuance of bonds for facilities renovation and other work that will cost Winnetka almost 80 million dollars to re-pay over the next twenty years. These interest and principal costs will add to Winnetka’s current average total cost of about $15,000 per year for educating its K-8 students in public schools.

Arne Duncan, CEO of the Chicago Public Schools, has a total compensation in the range of 220K for overseeing the education of 420,000 students. Supt. Van der Bogert, overseeing the education of almost 2100 students in Winnetka, is earning about 60% more than Duncan. Which educational system faces the greatest challenges to be handled by its Superintendent? Chicago or Winnetka? You don’t need a Ph. D. from the University of Chicago to answer that one. What was the Winnetka School Board thinking?

During the last decade, van der Bogert’s compensation has increased at a rate equivalent to an average of about 20 K per year, as Winnetka School Boards have pushed her total compensation from about 140 K to 357 K. Moreover, there are other affluent and middle class suburbs around the State whose school boards replicate the bizarre financial decisions of the Winnetka School Board [See here]. What are those school boards thinking?

Now, let’s take a look at the above referenced compensation decisions in the context of a major education funding campaign during the next few months, which will be led or joined by a number of civic groups, politicians and organizations such as A Plus Illinois, the Commercial Club and the Metropolitan Planning Council (“MPC”). These groups are or will be championing a multi-billion dollar tax increase for public schools across Illinois, and not just those in low income areas [Go here to watch on your computer MPC President MarySue Barrett discuss some of these education funding reform issues with Public Affairs show host Jeff Berkowitz, airing this week in Winnetka and 34 other Chicago metro suburbs, and on this coming Monday night, 8:30 pm, Cable Ch. 21 in the City of Chicago].

The “education funding reform,” campaign will seek to acquire broad based political support by promising some of the “new money,” to schools in middle class and affluent districts, as well as low income areas. These entities and politicians who advocate substantial increases in taxes for public education will state that various school districts, including those in Winnetka and other affluent suburbs as well as those in low income areas, need "State financial help," because they are in dire financial straits. Budget items such as “Special Education,” they will argue, are draining, financially, even the school districts in affluent areas. Only a massive infusion of state taxpayer money can save the public schools, they will argue.

However, it would seem many of these school districts need, instead, major financial reforms, starting with superintendent compensation, or does it really make sense to award a superintendent $357,000 dollars for overseeing the instruction of 2100 students and another [Sunset Ridge District 29’s Supt.] $344,000 for overseeing 515 students in two schools, and on and on it goes on the North Shore and no doubt, in many similar affluent and middle class suburbs around the State.

It certainly seems that the above referenced districts should not be put forth as “needy suburban schools districts,” to justify raising the state income tax by 66% [from 3% to 5% of your gross income], expanding the state sales tax to include services, e.g., legal, accounting, auto repairs, haircuts, private education, etc., installing a casino in Chicago and then taxing the heck of its customers and/or leasing the state lottery.

In short, given the way public schools are spending money, there is no reason for the state legislature to raise taxes by two to four billion dollars for education across the board in Illinois, and certainly not before major financial and other reforms are articulated and implemented. If the Illinois legislature and the Governor pass such a tax increase, then the voters will surely ask, “What were they thinking?”

Instead, school boards around the state should start compensating their superintendents, principals and teachers at reasonable levels, commensurate with their skills, productivity and performance. The Illinois state legislature should help parents and residents not by raising their taxes, but by removing public school monopolies.

To do this, state legislators and Governor Blagojevich should permit the dramatic expansion of charter schools and they should institute school voucher-school choice plans to provide parents with true public school-private school choice, so that competition in K-8 education can emerge and the public can find out how many superintendents overseeing 2100 students will be rewarded in a true free market with $357,000 per year compensation—similar to the decision of the Winnetka School Board to take good care of Supt. van der Bogert, at the expense of taxpayers.

Without this infusion of competition into the K-12 education business, the above aberrant school board compensation behavior will continue, and residents will continue to ask about their school boards and school superintendents, “What were they thinking.”
*****************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Better than American Idol: Barrett[MPC] on Education and Transit

Jeff Berkowitz: ... go to that point, Chicago Public Schools, $12,000 per kid per year. Why isn’t that enough?

MarySue Barrett: ... an adequate education costs- in today’s dollars- $6,400 per child, per year. And, the CPS- when you take away the additional funding for special education or bilingual education, high poverty—doesn’t have enough local resources to provide those needs. And, that’s true for the majority of school districts around [Illinois].
******************************************
MarySue Barrett: We are big fans of congestion pricing and again, we are not going to get there tomorrow-- in the same way that there is not going to be public-private school choice in Illinois tomorrow, there is not going to be a London style road...
********************************************
This Week's suburban edition of "Public Affairs," airing in the Chicago metro suburbs, features MarySue Barrett, President, Metropolitan Planning Council, debating and discussing Education Funding Reform, Transportation Choices and Government Planned/Market Planned Growth and much more with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz. See, below, for the Public Affairs suburban airing schedule, including a special airing in ten suburbs tonight. You may also [Watch the show with MarySue Barrett on your computer].
*******************************************************
MarySue Barrett, who worked in the Mayor Daley administration for seven years and has been President of the Metropolitian Planning Council for a decade, debates and discusses with show host and legal recruiter Jeff Berkowitz education funding reform, whether voters may view the current expenditure of $12,000 per kid per year in the Chicago Public School System as sufficient to educate kids well, whether the "foundation," i.e., minimum level of spending on education per kid statewide, should be increased; whether we should expand the state government caps on the number of charter schools and create school vouchers to permit school choice; whether we should have a "tax swap," i.e., an increase in the income tax and sales tax and a decrease in the property tax; what citizens might get "in exchange," for an income tax increase; the potential adoption of a merit pay compensation system in Illinois public education; the use of central planning as opposed to markets to guide suburban-city growth; the use of congestion [or peak load] pricing on the highways/ tollways, whether more roads or more mass transit should be emphasized; whether the concept of "sensible growth," or "smart growth," is based on a 19th Century or 21st century model of residential-job pattern choices and much, much more.
** ****************************************
MarySue Barrett, President, Metropolitan Planning Council, will be the featured guest on the Monday, Jan. 22, 2007 [8:30 pm, Cable Ch. 21] City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs."
*************************************************
The "Public Affairs," cinema page gives you a choice of more than twenty-five episodes of “Public Affairs," including this week's suburban show with MarySue Barrett, Metropolitan Planning Council President, and recent shows with State Rep. Paul Froehlich, Eric Zorn-Dan Proft, John McCarron, Gery Chico, former State Sen. Steve Rauschenberger, Chicago Mayoral Candidate Dorothy Brown [D] and State Rep. Julie Hamos [D-Evanston], as well as interviews, discussions or remarks with or by U. S. Senators John McCain and Barack Obama, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giulianiand many, many more pols on our video podcast page[Watch here].
***************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: …the state legislature is starting to meet…and one of the things they are focusing on is education funding reform, you and your organization are heavily involved in that issue…Chicago Public Schools (“CPS”)- they spend about $12,000 per kid per year…might some people say—and I know education funding reform is not just about Chicago, but a lot of it revolves around the needs of CPS, might somebody say, isn’t that enough, $12,000 per kid per year?

MarySue Barrett: I think we have to start by setting the stage a little bit more broadly. There are tons of stereotypes that trip us up in this debate…we last had a serious debate about school funding and tax reform in Illinois ten years ago, so we are obviously long overdue…a lion’s share of the schools can’t support their own budgets out of the local property tax, which is true for 95% of the school districts around the state. If they had to totally locally fund, we’d fall short, almost across the board, there is a huge disparity, which I think most viewers won’t—

Jeff Berkowitz: I know, we’ll go through that. But, let me start with Chicago if we can. We’ll come back. I know you are saying that it is part of a broader debate, and it’s useful for the viewers to know that. But, go to that point, Chicago Public Schools, $12,000 per kid per year. Why isn’t that enough?

MarySue Barrett: I’m not a budget expert. So, I’m not prepared to retort whether $12,000 is the accurate statistic. I do know that it is a “foundation level,” district, which means that today in Illinois and this has been true since 1997, we’ve actually finally got a definition of what an adequate education costs- in today’s dollars- that’s $6,400 per child, per year. And, the CPS- when you take away the additional funding for special education or bilingual education, high poverty—doesn’t have enough local resources to provide those needs. And, that’s true for the majority of school districts around [Illinois].
******************************************
MarySue Barrett: …Fortunately, there are some new tools on the table, we funded “Illinois First,” …primarily off of a motor vehicle registration fee- if you go back to the earlier package, it was gas taxes, so all of those transportation fees are on the table—

Jeff Berkowitz: But, aren’t they the wrong way because the gas tax- it doesn’t track mileage, it doesn’t track usage [Berkowitz misspoke, the gas tax does sort of track usage, just not whether the usage is peak or off peak, which is the concept of congestion pricing-- charging much higher prices in peak periods than off peak periods ] …what we want as I understand it from reading some of …the opposing point of view to what your organization seems to take—You have a lot of congestion [on the roads]…because drivers are not charged. We now have the ability without toll booths to charge people, we have these transponders so you can track [time of usage, peak or off peak usage, etc.]--

MarySue Barrett: Not the competing view, that is our view.

Jeff Berkowitz: That’s your view?

MarySue Barrett: We are big fans of congestion pricing and again, we are not going to get there tomorrow-- in the same way that there is not going to be public-private school choice in Illinois tomorrow, there is not going to be a London style road [ congestion charge for driving into the central London, England area from 7:00 am to 6:30 pm, M-F, See here], but we do have, as you are saying, the tools because of the I-Pass system to de-ploy this kind of strategy. We are working with transportation agencies right now on some congestion pricing experiments that can show people some of the exciting things that can happen…a variation of what you are talking about is called private-public financing of infrastructure and you hear talk about that right now with the toll road system…
****************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: So, would you favor bringing back the notion of these jitney cabs that were sometimes more efficient to get people from point A to point B than cumbersome buses that are very large, very fuel inefficient [and travel with very low loads]. Would you go that far?

MarySue Barrett: Well, you know, the RTA is in the midst of its own strategic plan with its new leadership and I have a lot of faith that they are going to explore a whole range of options and I do think that the traditional CTA bus and train, Pace bus, Metra train lacks some in between steps that we need to explore as a Region and absolutely, there are some cheaper ways to go about serving it, but…[As you can see here, going back a number of years, jitney cabs existed in Chicago, at least some of the time, due to an essentially government created monopoly of the taxi business—a monopoly that raised the price of transportation above the competitive level and didn’t want to serve low income black areas, creating an opportunity for “jitneys,” i.e., private cars, to serve some main roads in those areas by picking up and dropping off customers for a nominal fee. Those were different times- different circumstances, but providers like jitneys might currently also be able to compete with quasi-government created monopolies in the transportation business, if the government wanted to “look the other way,” and let the jitneys meet some of the transportation wants of customers more efficiently than government licensed trains, buses and taxis].

*************************************************
MarySue Barrett, as is airing this week on Public Affairs in 35 Chicago Metro suburbs [See below for the suburban airing schedule] and as will be airing on Monday, Jan. 22, 2007 [8:30 pm on Cable, CANTV] on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs. The show was recorded on January 7, 2007. You may also[watch the MarySue Barrett program here].
***************************************************
In twenty-five North Shore, North and Northwest suburbs, the "Public Affairs," show airs every Tuesday night in the regular weekly Public Affairs slot, 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19 or 35, as indicated, below.

In ten North Shore suburbs, the Public Affairs show air three times each week in its regular slots at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19, Monday, Wednesday and Friday, as indicated, below. Tonight, there is special airing of the MarySue Barrett show at 9:30 pm on Comcast Cable Ch. 19 in these ten suburbs.
******************************************************
The suburban episode of Public Affairs airs every Tuesday night :

at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Buffalo Grove, Elk Grove Village, Hoffman Estates, parts of Inverness, Lincolnwood, Morton Grove, Niles, Northfield, Palatine, Rolling Meadows and Wilmette

And at 8:30 pm 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.

and every Monday night, Wednesday night and Friday night at 8:30 pm on Comcast Cable Channel 19 in Bannockburn, Deerfield, Ft. Sheridan, Glencoe, Highland Park, Highwood, Kenilworth, Lincolnshire, Riverwoods and Winnetka. In these ten suburbs, there is a special airing tonight, at 9:30 pm, of the show with MPC President, MarySue Barrett.

The City of Chicago edition of "Public Affairs," airs every Monday night at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21 [CANTV] throughout the City of Chicago.
****************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

Watch Spirit of M. L. King, Jr. Day: School Vouchers-School Choice.

Celebrate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. day by watching “Public Affairs,” tonight. The show, featuring State Rep. Paul Froehlich [R-Schaumburg], airs throughout the City of Chicago tonight at 8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21. For more about the show, a partial transcript and a link to our cinema page, which gives you the Freedom to Choose from 25 archived shows, including tonight’s Froehlich show, and to watch any of them “on demand,” on your computer, [Go here].

Tonight show links, in a sense, from Rep. Froehlich, who has raised the issue of the insufficient intersection of racial justice and the Republican Party [See here], to President Reagan to School Vouchers-School Choice to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Notwithstanding that nice, easy linkage, State Rep. Froehlich declines to connect the dots. Who would have thunk it? Maybe Rep. Froehlich will take the Freedom Leap another day, another time. We can only hope.
*****************************************
On the first national Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. day [1986], President Ronald Reagan, that great champion of freedom of choice for all and especially for minorities as a way of achieving “the Dream,” spoke of the special importance of school vouchers-school choice for those who live in poor areas:

So, we've done some boat lifting the past few years, but it's still not enough. We can do better. …in education, we propose the educational voucher system in which families that live in poor areas can use vouchers to send their children to any of a number of schools, whichever they think is doing better. No reason parents shouldn't be given more freedom of choice, and no reason schools shouldn't compete for students. [See here]

President Reagan well understood the importance of the competition brought forth by school vouchers as a mechanism especially important to those trying to acquire the intellectual skills necessary to overcome racial prejudice and exit poverty. The free market, when assisted by school vouchers, would be the great equalizer for low income people in general, but especially for minorities who suffered from “separate but equal,” for a century after the Civil War and for the last half century from shoddy, underperforming public schools.

Now is the time to try freedom of choice in education. Hard to see how it could be any worse than the status quo for those kids of low income parents in public schools and very likely would make life for them much better. Dr. King, who would be 78 today, I think would join President Reagan and say, “Let our children go.”

But, on this one, State Rep. Paul Froehlich, who was a big time supporter of Jack Ryan [noted for his support of school vouchers] is no Jack Ryan Republican. Nor is Froehlich a Reagan Republican on the use of school vouchers-school choice to achieve racial and economic justice. ***************************************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: …Is education another example where the Republican Party [in your mind] is on the wrong side in not being sensitive, in [not] being racist. Because you talk about disparities in education funding [across different neighborhoods that vary in socio-economic class] and you say that disproportionately affects racial minorities, so you want to change that—do you want to buy into the idea of a tax swap [For example, one variant of HB750, proposed last year, purportedly would have lowered the property tax and raised and expanded the base of the state income tax, resulting in a net increase of state tax revenue of at least four billion dollars/year with about two billion dollars going to additional state education funding].

Rep. Paul Froehlich: I am looking for some solution to reduce that disparity. We’ve got the biggest disparity in the country between rich and poor districts when it comes to spending; we’ve have maybe the second biggest disparity between blacks and whites in test scores. And, we can reduce that problem.

Jeff Berkowitz: We have a lot of blacks and a lot of minorities in non-performing schools right here in the City of Chicago, right?

Rep. Paul Froehlich: That’s right.

Jeff Berkowitz: And a number in the suburbs. But, in the City of Chicago at least one of every two kids probably is in a failing school.

Rep. Paul Froehlich: Um-um.

Jeff Berkowitz: Some people in the Republican Party want to give people school vouchers, some school choice, let them an exit from those schools.

Rep. Paul Froehlich: Um-um.

Jeff Berkowitz: And eighty five percent of the kids in the Chicago Public Schools are minorities, so they be would beneficially affected by school choice-school vouchers, so the argument goes. Do you agree?

Rep. Paul Froehlich[R-Schaumburg]: The kind of choice that we have in Chicago and we could get more of has to do with charter schools.

Jeff Berkowitz: So you would like to expand charter schools?

Rep. Paul Froehlich: Yeah, Chicago has thirty [charter schools].

Jeff Berkowitz: But, why not give people the chance to go? Give them the eleven thousand dollars—that’s what we spend now in the city of Chicago, more than $11,000 per kid, per year [Actually, it is more than $12,000]-- give them a voucher that says if you aren’t satisfied with the Chicago Public Schools, if there aren’t enough charter schools as alternatives, you may go to the private school of your choice. And minorities would be disproportionately benefited. Let’s focus on the city of Chicago. You want a justice system? You want an equity system? You know, it might be twenty years before you can change how much money is given to minorities. You could change [their choices] tomorrow if you can get people in the House and Senate to agree with you. You want to work on that program?

Rep. Paul Froehlich: I don’t think Illinois is likely to embark on-

Jeff Berkowitz: You know, there was Jim Crow legislation in the South, and people would say, “I don’t think we’re likely to get rid of Jim Crow legislation.” And some heroic blacks and whites stood up and changed the world [or, at least the United States].

Rep. Paul Froehlich: Right.

Jeff Berkowitz: Is it time for Paul Froehlich and others to change the world in the [Illinois] State Legislature, even though you look at it and say it’s an uphill battle?

Rep. Paul Froehlich: I’m looking for the kind of change that’s politically feasible.

Jeff Berkowitz: So Martin Luther King, Jr.—you’re telling me he just said, “I’m looking for what’s politically feasible,”—and that’s what guided him? Are you telling me that’s what Martin Luther King did? Because we want to be with his spirit here [tonight].

Rep. Paul Froehlich: Martin Luther King—I think he understood something about political realities.

Jeff Berkowitz: He did? I thought he actually did what was right and what was just and said, “I’m going to do what’s necessary and use civil disobedience to change the world,” and he did. Maybe it’s time for Republicans to take that path. But you’re not going there?

Rep. Paul Froehlich: I’m not.

[Dr. Martin Luther King was instrumental in the founding of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) in 1957, a group created to harness the moral authority and organizing power of black churches to conduct non-violent protests in the service of civil rights reform. King continued to dominate the organization. King was an adherent of the philosophies of nonviolent civil disobedience used successfully in India by Mahatma Gandhi, and he applied this philosophy to the protests organized by the SCLC. See discussion here.]
***********************************************************************
State Rep. Paul Froehlich [R], as is airing tonight on Public Affairs [8:30 pm on Cable Ch. 21, CANTV] on the City of Chicago edition of Public Affairs. The show was recorded on Dec. 27, 2006. You may also[watch the Paul Froehlich program here].
***********************************************
Draft of above transcript prepared by Amy Allen, who also does research for “Public Affairs,” and has her own political blog [See here].
*************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Show Host/Producer of "Public Affairs," and Executive Legal Recruiter doing legal search can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
******************

State GOP shows Bob Kjellander to the door

Jeff Berkowitz:... “If someone like Karl Rove gave Kjellander a call and said ‘I think it is time for you to go,’ do you think Kjellander would give up his position as National Committeeman from Illinois"

Sen. Dave Syverson:... At this point, we did what we had to do. He is doing what he has to do. I think it sends a message that as a Party we are going to have a zero tolerance level, which is what we have to do. So, we go on from there. Whether he stays there for the next year and a half or whether he goes, that really won’t make a change in what we are trying to do in the Party.
******************************************************************
The Republican State Central Committee, under the leadership of State GOP chairman Andy McKenna, Jr. got around to dealing with the “Kjellander affair,” at its quarterly meeting today in Bolingbrook, IL. The meeting lasted for about two hours in its public session and for about an hour in executive session. The Kjellander matter was dealt with in executive session and consumed only a small portion of that session.

Reliable sources indicated that it was State Central Committee member Mary Alice Erickson who stepped up and made the motion to try to push her colleague Bob Kjellander out of the national committeeman’s role he plays for Republicans in Illinois.

After the Executive Session, Chairman McKenna indicated that the Central Committee approved the motion encouraging Bob Kjellander to resign as an Illinois member of the Republican National Committee, due primarily to a "loss of confidence of leadership," as reported here.

Reliable sources also indicated that the weighted vote, while not unanimous, was “pretty overwhelming, over 70%” to encourage septuagenarian Kjellander to find something else to do, other than representing Illinois on the RNC during his golden years.

In response to the vote, Kjellander said, “I am not resigning because I have done absolutely nothing wrong.” [See here]. However, Kjellander did not join the rest of the State Central Committee when Chairman McKenna announced, publicly, the Committee’s vote to encourage Kjellander’s resignation.

Moreover, notwithstanding Kjellander’s denials of wrongful conduct, some of the problems caused by Mr. Kjellander are raised by John Kass, who forever is discussing the Daley-Ryan Combine, or a variant of same:

While backing Topinka, he [Kjellander] received $4.5 million in questionable "finders fees" in state pension deals through Blagojevich's administration. The pension funds are at the center of a federal grand jury investigation. involving Democrats and Republicans. [See here].

State Senator Dave Syverson [R-Rockford] sits on the State Central Committee’s Executive Committee with State Central Committee member Mary Alice Erickson and with Chairman McKenna. This reporter asked Sen. Syverson in a phone interview after today’s State Central Committee meeting, “If someone like Karl Rove gave Kjellander a call and said ‘I think it is time for you to go,’ do you think Kjellander would give up his position as National Committeeman from Illinois.”

Syverson responded:

I don’t know. That’s a good question. I am not sure what contacts from Washington there have been on this. I know some in the Illinois congressional delegation have had discussions. I don’t know if they have been with Bob or with people in Washington, but the concerns of some in the congressional delegation have been raised, as well. At this point, we did what we had to do. He is doing what he has to do. I think it sends a message that as a Party we are going to have a zero tolerance level, which is what we have to do. So, we go on from there. Whether he stays there for the next year and a half or whether he goes, that really won’t make a change in what we are trying to do in the Party.

If you have any suggested questions for Sen. Syverson, please send them promptly to this reporter, as we will be videotaping the good Senator for “Public Affairs,” tomorrow.
********************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********

Berkowitz joins Joan and Karen on CrossStreet radio program

Jeff Berkowitz joins Joan Conlisk and Karen Cunningham on the radio show, CrossStreet, this Saturday morning from 7-8:30 am on WKRS 1220 AM Radio, “The Voice of Lake County". Joan Conlisk, who hosts the show, weekly, with Karen Cunningham, says the hosts try to show both, or multiple sides of issues, and not necessarily take liberal/conservative/Democrat/Republican positions. Perhaps Berkowitz will go with the flow and do the same when he joins Joan and Karen tomorrow. Or, perhaps not. Joan, Jeff and Karen? Watch out, Don and Roma Turn on, Tune in and find out.

This Saturday morning we will probably emphasize general interest issues, e.g., getting high by running, can singles have a life on the North Shore--but we may very well get into politics and public policy, including Senator Barack Obama’s continuing evolution as a Presidential candidate [and his barechest stack up, so to speak, with that of Hillary ], educational trends in public education- retaining lawyers to monitor speech at school board meetings, should the U. S. take on Iran, the Republican and Democratic leading Presidential candidates, is it too early to talk about 2008 challenges to Cong. Kirk and Cong. Bean from the right and left, can the Democrats be trusted to run the Congress as reformers, is the Illinois GOP still kicking, is the freeze on energy rates in Illinois over, and whatever Joan, Karen and their listeners want to talk about.

Of course, you can shape the content of the show, ask questions, take a whack at Joan Conlisk, Karen Cunningham, Jeff Berkowitz or anyone else by calling 847 244 1220. For more about the show, its hosts and the station in general, go here.

The show’s signal reaches from Waukegan into Wisconsin on the north and into Evanston on the south, to the Lake on the east and to the west across the 10th and 8th Congressional Districts in Lake and portions of Cook County.

So, give Conlisk, Cunningham and Berkowitz a call and let them know what is on your mind.
****************************************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz, Host and Producer of Public Affairs and an Executive Recruiter doing Legal Search, can be reached at JBCG@aol.com
***********

Bush, Obama, Scales and Terry Moran: a virtual conversation

Senator Barack Obama [D-IL]: ... I think it is entirely appropriate for us to investigate what options are available to us to condition whatever steps further that the President wants to take that involve U. S. taxpayer money and more importantly, American lives.

ABC's Terry Moran: So, the Democrats-- it sounds like-- will get in the game, as it were.

Senator Obama: Absolutely.

[Ed. note: Yes, Terry, “As it were.” Or, if Moran were being a fair and balanced journalist, he might have had a follow-up for Senator Obama: So, does that mean your fellow Democrats and you will try to cut off funding for Bush’s proposed surge? Instead, Moran wimped out, yet again. Not only are Moran’s questions not good journalism...]
****************************************************
Jeff Berkowitz: The theory is that when the Iraqis become convinced that security is being provided, along with job opportunities and a future, they will join with the good guys and rat out the bad guys. That is what in general makes for a successful counter-insurgency. “Winning over the hearts and minds,” of the population, it is called. [This is somewhat different from the famous saying of Chuck Colson in the Nixon administration—“When you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.”]
***********************************************************
As usual, the commentary on President Bush’s proposal for Iraq was more interesting than the speech setting out the proposal. Retired Army General Bob Scales, a military analyst for the Fox News Channel, gave one of the better descriptions and assessments of the plan to FNC’s Brit Hume shortly after the President’s Wednesday night speech. And, of course, Senator Obama [D-IL] was on the tube weighing in, as well. See below.

Scales said the plan is to deploy eighteen Iraqi brigades and five United States brigades into mixed Sunni-Shiite neighborhoods in Baghdad—and those neighborhoods make up almost two million people. General Scales said those military numbers give what military doctrine calls for, one soldier for every fifty civilians [Of course, that calculus includes a large component of Iraqi, as opposed to U. S., soldiers].

The principal focus of the Iraqi-US effort will be the Sunni insurgents, foreign fighters and Al Qaeda [although the Shia militias will be controlled, too]. Scales said the ratio of friendly to enemy forces will be about ten or fifteen to one, so the metrics point to better ratios than the U. S. has had in the past.

Moreover, the whole focus of the new plan is different from what the U. S. had been doing the last few years in Iraq, which is to fight the insurgents in battle and then return to their large bases, away from the civilians. The goal is to break Baghdad up into nine districts, put Iraqi and U. S. soldiers in each district, and have them clear, hold and build in each district. That is, all the soldiers will be living in the district and their new mission is to provide security for the Iraqis in the portions of Baghdad that need it most, including both Sunnis and Shiites.

Further, the U. S. troops will stiffen the Iraqi military resistance and train them while they fight—and also see that the Iraqi soldiers have the back-up they have been missing: firepower, administration, maintenance, medicine, communications and transport. This embedding of the U. S. troops with the Iraqis is a key point in the new Plan, according to Scales.

The theory is that when the Iraqis become convinced that security is being provided, along with job opportunities and a future, they will join with the good guys and rat out the bad guys. That is what in general makes for a successful counter-insurgency. “Winning over the hearts and minds,” of the population, it is called. [This is somewhat different from the famous saying of Chuck Colson in the Nixon administration—“When you have them by the balls, their hearts and minds will follow.”]

On the sectarian side, if the Shiites can be protected from the Sunnis, the Shiite militias will be less popular and they can ultimately be dismantled. When the Sunnis realize that the Iraq government and the U. S. are putting the Shia militias out of business, the Sunnis will buy into the new Iraq. When that happens, the Iraqis and U.S. are left with a more manageable force to fight: Al Qaeda and various foreign troops coming in from Syria and Iran. Also, U. S. warships now off the coast of Iran may give pause to Iran as to how much support they want to lend to the insurgents.

Thus, from General Scales’ perspective, President Bush’s new plan well recognizes that the issues to be dealt with are military, political and economic—and his plan deals with all three.

However, Scales is skeptical of the long term effects of the new U.S. plan, with his concerns being three-fold: (1) The U.S. and the Iraqis don’t know what the enemy will do, and as former Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld often said, “The enemy has a brain,” (2) The U. S. doesn’t know how effective the Iraqi soldiers will be [and past performance is not encouraging] and (3) President Bush may not have the six to twelve months that the above requires, especially if the Iraqis falter initially, the reports back to the U. S. are negative and the Democrats and some Republicans say “enough is enough,” and Obama and Hillary race each other to pull the plug on congressional funding [Presidential candidate John Edwards will join them in spirit, but he is no longer in Congress, having given up his seat in ’04 for Edwards' first run for President].

Now, let’s go to Senator Barack Obama on Nightline last night, who Terry Moran introduced as “a leading Democrat,”-- to deal with Moran’s question: Can the Dems stop the Bush surge and do they have a plan. You can watch Senator Obama on Nightline here, and read his answers below:

Barack Obama: …there is not a military solution to the problems that we face in Iraq right now, they are political. The problem that we have is that Shia and Sunni are unwilling to compromise and arrive at the sort of accommodations that would lead to stability…a phased withdrawal is the only leverage we have to force that political accommodation.

[Moran could have followed up with the question: “Isn’t it the case that the problems are military, economic and political,” as Bush’s new plan for Iraq highlights? Instead, Moran asked lamely, “Do you believe we’ve lost,” eliciting a mushy answer from Obama that we might get a relatively stable Iraq that is not a terrorist safe haven if we can get the various factions to work together; Actually, Senator Obama's answer to this question is fairly consistent with what he said to Berkowitz in July, 2006, [See here].
********************************************
Senator Obama: …absent from the President’s plan are any consequences for their [the various factions in Iraq] failure to engage in the kind of political accommodations that are necessary.

[Moran could have asked this follow-up to Obama: Don’t you think that the Iraqi government realizes that if things don’t get better in Iraq soon, politically or otherwise, Bush will be forced to start a withdrawal, due to political pressure from the Dems? How do you like those consequences? But Terry Moran is not noted for asking tough questions of Democrats. Instead Moran agreed with Obama, “So, troop withdrawal is a kind of leverage.” Way to wimp out, Terry Moran. And, this is the same guy who would snarl at Bush at Presidential press conferences. Boy, what a difference a political party makes.]

Terry Moran: Finally, I want to pick up on something you said, are you pledging for the Democrats that the Democrats will not try to cut off funding or put some kind of sunset on the funding for this troop surge or escalation.

Senator Obama: What I think is important is to recognize that neither Republicans nor Democrats are going to put American troops that are on the ground at risk. But, I think it is entirely appropriate for us to investigate what options are available to us to condition whatever steps further that the President wants to take that involve U. S. taxpayer money and more importantly, American lives.

Terry Moran: So, the Democrats-- it sounds like-- will get in the game, as it were.

Senator Obama: Absolutely.

[Yes, Terry, “As it were.” Or, if Moran were being a fair and balanced journalist, he might have had a follow-up for Senator Obama: So, does that mean your fellow Democrats and you will try to cut off funding for Bush’s proposed surge? Instead, Moran wimped out, yet again. Not only are Moran’s questions not good journalism, they don’t make for very good TV. Another pretty boy on ABC News to join George. And, Terry had a little hatchet job on President Bush with Doug Wead and Ron Suskind in another segment of Nightline on Wednesday night, but that’s another post]
**********************************
Nightline, January 10, 2007
************************************