I voted today and for the first time ever, I had a problem, and they had to spoil my ballot.
Everything seemed ok, but when I put the ballot into the box, the ink on one of the votes smeared and it counted as if I had voted for more than one choice. The judges looked at me and I sort of think they were hoping I'd say ok and move on--meaning that the particular vote that smeared would not count . Even though it was just that municipal utility bundling vote in Deerfield, I didn't say ok, forgetaboutit. I wanted to vote again. The judges were pretty nice even though I created more work for them. They went through the spoiled ballot procedure and let me try again. It seemed to work. I hope it worked.
In any event, it's probably no secret for whom I voted, but I'll put it out there for fun.
US Congress: John Tree
State Senate: Julie Morrison
I voted for the unopposed Democrats so as not to be part of an undervote: Scott Drury for State Rep., Mary Ellen Vanderventer for Recorder. I don't always vote for the unopposed candidates, but I wanted to contribute to these vote counts today.
For Lake County State's Attorney I was torn, but ended up voting for Chris Kennedy.
Remember to vote and watch out for those extra runny ink pens.
Monday, February 27, 2012
E-10's Technical Awards
On Saturday, Tenth Dems members and friends were treated to another WCPT simulcast of the Tenth Dems Candidate Forum. For WCPT's part, they did a live remote broadcast of Dick' Kay's Back on the Beat. Tenth Dems provided that down-home Tenth District hospitality. Again, as it was last time, this event was a highlight of the congressional election cycle.
Whether you like Dick Kay or not, this event is fun. The crowd gets electric, sides rooting for their candidate, and that fires up the candidates.
Before the forum, we had a rare treat. One of our very own, John Hmurovic was on the show with Kay and Bill Brandt, currently working with the Tammy Duckworth campaign. They talked about the change in the district, the media and money in politics. I was glad to hear Brandt remembering, as we in the District must, that Bob Dold is a tea party candidate. I remember that Dold defeated Beth Coulson in their primary last time and did so as the tea party candidate. Dold seems to want to run away from that now.
Brandt predicted that Dold will get Super-PAC support and the Democratic challenger will have to rely on field work because there is no way to compete with the millions put into television by their Koch Brothers (and the like) supporters.
Hmurovic lamented that the media has given up its role in local political reporting. Kay and Brandt seemed to disagree, but I agree with Hmurovic. The major news media outlets put very little into these races, particularly our local television stations. Hmurovic was right when he said that the media tends to report more on the horse race part of elections than the issues. We have a bit more reporting out of the newcomer, Patch, but again they like the horse race, and we get nothing of note on television besides paid advertising. So, were do people find unbiased information about candidates?
Kay and Brandt seem to think social networking takes over. I use social networking sites, but it's mostly people sharing links with their friends and to the extent that there are few links to share, social media is not going to make up for reporting, and forget unbiased reporting. I really have no idea what Kay and Brandt were talking about there.
After the interview portion of the show, Kay took us to the Candidate forum. It's a little tough with the commercial breaks, and most of the questions were fairly generalized, but for what it was, Kay generally did a good job. I like that he asked them not only what they would do for the economy, but where would they get the money. He asked about PACs and the ill-informed electorate. He also asked them where they would disagree with Obama. He did, however, allow candidates to morph the question into something they wanted to answer, as all candidates are prone to do these days when they're attacked from all sides. The media and PAC question ended up being one about education in general. But, then Kay required a follow-up about communities where parents might not be equipped to support their children's education.
On the radio, time did not permit in depth discussion on any one issue. It might be fun to have something similar on one topic so some specifics can be discussed. Or, maybe that's just not worth it anymore because voters prefer the quick, emotional rather than substantive answer. Is that turning out good for the country?
On Sunday, the League of Women's (LWV) voters took over. They had their "debate", but it's not really a debate at all. In their defense, none of these "debates" are debates anymore. There are several different kinds of debates, but generally to be a debate, a forum has to involve some sort of discussion over a specific question with some evidence given, deliberation and persuasion. I'd argue that the LWV format takes the evidence, specificity, deliberation and opposition out of the format rendering it more of a candidate forum or a recitation of their website position statements.
LWV takes questions from the audience, but they edit out questions that could lead to serious disagreement and most of anything that would help a candidate distinguish himself from the others. They throw out the hard questions, don't let the candidates call each other on anything, and ask no follow-ups to ask a candidate to explain a statement or position. LWV didn't allow a question about Schneider's Republican donations and didn't allow anyone to call Sheyman on his work for MoveOn to stop discussion of single payer health care reform as he now runs on favoring the same.
LWV is supposed to have a strict policy that no unopposed candidates get to speak. However, when Republican State Rep candidate Lauren Turelli failed to show up (or call saying she would not appear), they let her opponent, Mark Neerhof, go on for quite a long time, unquestioned and unopposed, ranting about how limiting access to health care is good for health care. I think he means good for Doctors who don't want to help anyone who cannot pay and pay a lot for the service. I'm not sure how LWV judged that spectacle to be within their rules or within reason or fairness. In any event, I think it worked against Neerhof who looked bad up there ranting, and Turelli was probably strategically correct in declining to attend. She just should have been more polite about it, and RSVP'd, and from what I hear, she agrees with Neerhof on cutting health care to the middle class and poor.
Their Democratic opponent, Scott Drury, attended the event, but was not allowed to speak because he is unopposed. I get that Drury has no primary, and Neerhof and Turelli do, but LWV allowed Neerhof to go on and on, unquestioned and unopposed for a very long time. It was a rant on Neerhof's own terms, free advertising. A Republican allowed to rant and a Democrat shut out of the discussion, par for the course with the corporate media. I expected more from LWV.
LWV departed from another one of their rules, allowing a Republican tracker to tape the proceedings. Apparently, all you have to do to get LWV to break their rules is claim you're a student. They didn't get that someone can be a student and a partisan political tracker.
For these reasons and probably others, the E-10 technical award goes to Tenth Dems/WCPT for calling the event what is was, not a debate, but a candidate forum, allowing for comments to flow more organically back and forth, and for at least a few follow-up questions by Kay. In any event, I think we have a long way to go to improving the dialog among candidates. John Hmurovic is right. The media needs to do more to present the issues in an un-biased fashion.
Sunday, February 26, 2012
More E-10 Awards
The pre-show is over and everyone is glued to his or her seat as the awards are presented.
Best Tweeking of Answer
We've had several candidate forums and debates in the district over the past couple of months. I attended the two we had on this past Saturday and Sunday. On Saturday, the Tenth Dems and WCPT hosted a candidate forum. It was moderated by radio celebrity Dick Kay as part of his Back on the Beat program and the Tenth Dems provided the good old-fashioned Tenth District hospitality. Sunday's event was billed as a debate hosted by the League of Women Voters. I'm not sure it was really a debate, but we'll get to that later.
At both weekend events, the Illinois Tenth District candidates were given the opportunity to discuss Super PAC money. On Saturday, Ilya Sheyman answered with an unequivocal no. He would not take Super-PAC money and he would ask Bob Dold to agree. Schneider, Bavda and Tree were skeptical Dold would agree and said they would take Super-PAC money if Dold did.
I'm not sure it's that simple. Candidate's don't take Super-PAC money as I understand it. The Super-PACs just do what they do with their unlimited uncoordinated expenditures. It's only recently become unclear whether the expenditures are truly uncoordinated in the Republican Presidential Primary.
On Sunday, however, Sheyman made sure we understood. He'd take and has taken PAC money, just not super-PAC money. He said that PAC money, unlike Super-PAC money, is ok because contributions are limited and contrasted conventional PACS as associations of people interested in a particular issue while Super-PACs are unlimited and often dominated by corporate money. I'm left wondering, if the 550 volunteers came up with the Ilya Super-PAC, what would he do to stop them?
Most Extensive Positive Policy Explanations/Lost in the Weeds
Democratic voters often say they want to hear a positive message, not just appeals to stop the negative things done by Republicans, but positive statements about what Democrats will do. The E-10 award for most positive policy statements goes to Vivek Bavda. Unfortunately, this award goes hand-in-hand with another E-10 for the Most Lost in the Weeds.
Democrats are frequently accused of over-explaining specific policies while voters vote based on identity and emotion. Long policy explanations are a Democratic Party thing and no one does it better in IL-10 than Vivek Bavda.
Bavda has some wonderful ideas about education. He wants to use funds from the estate tax to build mandatory early childhood education and revamp No Child Left Behind. I'm not sure any of it will happen if under-educated and over-entertained people actually have to understand it, so the E-10 goes to Vivek Bavda. He wants and expects voters to know what exactly they are voting for. I hope he gets a policy job at the Department of Education one day.
Most Directly Taking it to the Republicans
Ilya gets some points here because he goes down the progressive wishlist on every question, single payer health care, roll back Bush tax cuts, all the stuff we've been talking about for years while the Republicans roll back the dialog so far that now we're defending contraception.
Brad Schneider talks a good game about some progressive policies he supports, but he worries me on some things. When he wasn't agreeing with Ilya, Brad was talking about running the country like a for-profit company and he seems unwilling to reject the Republican dialogue even when discussing progressive ideas. For example, he said at Sunday's LWV debate that he still agrees with oil exploration and extraction just wants to make sure the oil companies pay their fair share. He thinks we have to proceed slowly on health care reform. He's talking about buying time for underwater homeowners and moving them out to apartments rather than making the bankers take their share of the blame. The bottom line on Brad Schneider is that he's the candidate of the Mark Kirk Democrats, in other words people who say they are Democrats, but continuously vote Republican.
Brad and Ilya are mostly upset by each other. What about the other side?
John Tree talks about being appalled watching John Boehner say his main duty, as Speaker of the House, is to oppose the President, and appalled watching the Republican attack against women to cover for the improving economy. He's not happy with the defunding of education, "like a farmer who eats his own seed corn." Tree is talking plain sense and taking it to the Republicans for their actions. He gets the E-10 in this category.
The First Annual E-10 Awards
UPDATE AND CORRECTION:
Well, it looks I made a mistake. John Tree, and not Brad Schneider, reminded Ilya that this is not Jan Schakowsky's district. Per Tree: "It wasn’t meant to be a jab at Ilya. It was just meant to remind the audience that our district is very different than CD-9, with the implication being that running as Jan Shakowski in CD-10 is probably not a winning formula."
**********************************************
After a weekend of candidate debates, I'm finally at home, in front of the TV watching the Academy Awards pre-show with my favorite ice cream (Ben & Jerry's Phish Food) and the cat's asleep.
E-10 is going to use this opportunity to award the candidates, and hosts, for what they did best (and worst). So, without further ado, here we go with the First Annual E-10 Awards:
Red Carpet Fashion
You cannot give out awards these days without discussing fashion first and foremost. There's simply nothing to say about what each of the candidates was wearing, so let's talk about literature (lit) and yard signs, candidate fashion.
Ilya Sheyman went with the non-traditional purple and gold yard signs which his 550 volunteers have illegally littered all over the parkways. It's a fashion don't, but at least you can read then unlike Brad Schneider's red and blue on a white background with the distracting swirl.
Most noteworthy, and winning the E-10 Award for best "dressed" candidate is Vivek Bavda for his 4 page, full color glossy lit. Bavda's lit sports a background of Navy colors and a cute little girl holding up a Vivek Bavda sticker. It shows he's all about education and subtly (or not so subtly) telling us he's everyone's candidate.
Vivek's work with Teach for America is shown in a collage on page 2 followed by descriptions of his jobs and education plans. His experience fighting for progressive values is described on page 3 and page four contains his case that he's the best candidate to beat Bob Dold. But, the real value of Bavda's lit is that it tells a story answering the question asked at the top of page one, "Why did Vivek turn down a $250,000 Job?" His jaunty pose on the back shows a fun-loving confidence.
Most Shining Personality
On Saturday at the Tenth Dems/WCPT forum, on the radio and hosted by Dick Kay, Sheyman and Schneider went after each other's progressive creds. A small touch of tensions flared again on Sunday at the LWV debate, as much as the League will tolerate, when Ilya poked Brad for his worship of the blue dog, financial industry connected Melissa Bean, and Brad poked back at Ilya's affinity for our neighbors to the south.
Of course, Brad tried to be agreeable, and agreeable again, when he repeatedly said "I agree with Ilya." It seemed like he was trying to create a sequence for the next Ilya cable TV ad.
But, none of the tense disagreeing agreement between Brad and Ilya matched the warm wit of John Tree. John uses his name as a conversation starter. He has to be for the environment because as he says, "I'm a Tree." He said he'd make himself available after the LWV debate for all the tree huggers out there. John knows how to be tough and approachable all at the same time, so Tree wins the E-10 Award for best personality.
Most Painfully Truthful
I have to give the E-10 Award for most painfully truthful to Brad Schneider.He had the best painfully truthful line of the event on Sunday when he admonished Ilya's admiration for Jan Schakowsky with the unforgettable truth, "this is not Jan Schakowsky's district." John Tree earns painfully truthful creds for his statement to Ilya, "this is not Jan Schakowsky's district." (I mis-attributed this comment to Brad last night. Sorry. LWV format always puts me to sleep.)
However, Brad (still) wins the Painfully Truthful E-10 for his ultimate honesty on his Republican candidate campaign contributions. He's finally stopped trying to convince us that he was duped into thinking Mark Kirk a moderate. Truth be told, Brad donated and supported Mark Kirk, and even more conservative Republicans, for their pro-Israel votes. Brad will support anti-choice, pro-hate candidates if they will support military aid for Israel. Israel, not the USA, comes first for Brad and I admire him for finally telling us the truth about that, no matter how painful. Here's your award, Brad. Enjoy
Best Use of a Coined Phrase
Dan Seals was famous for his use of the coined phrase. "If you're digging yourself into a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging." "If we build a 15 foot fence at the border, pretty soon you'll see sales of 20 foot ladders."
The E-10 for best use of a coined phrase for the 2012 election cycle goes to John Tree for the "triple bottom line". The triple bottom line refers to a real measure of corporate success, not just profits, but people, planet and profit. The phrase was coined by John Elkington in his 1997 book Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. It's about making sure that corporate success takes into account it's true cost of doing business.
Bavda gets the second place nod for his use of the line, "never allow government to enter a woman's womb."
Best Use of Statistics
The E-10 for Best Use of Statistics goes to Ilya Sheyman. Ilya always seems to have the numbers on hand. He has 550 volunteers. Unemployment runs from 8% -19% in the district. John Tree told us that we're 15 trillion in debt, but Ilya knows exactly how much Brad Schneider donated to Mark Kirk, Mike Johanns and Bob Bennett.
Here's Part II of the E-10 Awards.
**********************************************
E-10 is going to use this opportunity to award the candidates, and hosts, for what they did best (and worst). So, without further ado, here we go with the First Annual E-10 Awards:
Red Carpet Fashion
You cannot give out awards these days without discussing fashion first and foremost. There's simply nothing to say about what each of the candidates was wearing, so let's talk about literature (lit) and yard signs, candidate fashion.
Ilya Sheyman went with the non-traditional purple and gold yard signs which his 550 volunteers have illegally littered all over the parkways. It's a fashion don't, but at least you can read then unlike Brad Schneider's red and blue on a white background with the distracting swirl.
Most noteworthy, and winning the E-10 Award for best "dressed" candidate is Vivek Bavda for his 4 page, full color glossy lit. Bavda's lit sports a background of Navy colors and a cute little girl holding up a Vivek Bavda sticker. It shows he's all about education and subtly (or not so subtly) telling us he's everyone's candidate.
Vivek's work with Teach for America is shown in a collage on page 2 followed by descriptions of his jobs and education plans. His experience fighting for progressive values is described on page 3 and page four contains his case that he's the best candidate to beat Bob Dold. But, the real value of Bavda's lit is that it tells a story answering the question asked at the top of page one, "Why did Vivek turn down a $250,000 Job?" His jaunty pose on the back shows a fun-loving confidence.
Most Shining Personality
On Saturday at the Tenth Dems/WCPT forum, on the radio and hosted by Dick Kay, Sheyman and Schneider went after each other's progressive creds. A small touch of tensions flared again on Sunday at the LWV debate, as much as the League will tolerate, when Ilya poked Brad for his worship of the blue dog, financial industry connected Melissa Bean
Of course, Brad tried to be agreeable, and agreeable again, when he repeatedly said "I agree with Ilya." It seemed like he was trying to create a sequence for the next Ilya cable TV ad.
But, none of the tense disagreeing agreement between Brad and Ilya matched the warm wit of John Tree. John uses his name as a conversation starter. He has to be for the environment because as he says, "I'm a Tree." He said he'd make himself available after the LWV debate for all the tree huggers out there. John knows how to be tough and approachable all at the same time, so Tree wins the E-10 Award for best personality.
Most Painfully Truthful
I have to give the E-10 Award for most painfully truthful to Brad Schneider.
However, Brad (still) wins the Painfully Truthful E-10 for his ultimate honesty on his Republican candidate campaign contributions. He's finally stopped trying to convince us that he was duped into thinking Mark Kirk a moderate. Truth be told, Brad donated and supported Mark Kirk, and even more conservative Republicans, for their pro-Israel votes. Brad will support anti-choice, pro-hate candidates if they will support military aid for Israel. Israel, not the USA, comes first for Brad and I admire him for finally telling us the truth about that, no matter how painful. Here's your award, Brad. Enjoy
Best Use of a Coined Phrase
Dan Seals was famous for his use of the coined phrase. "If you're digging yourself into a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging." "If we build a 15 foot fence at the border, pretty soon you'll see sales of 20 foot ladders."
The E-10 for best use of a coined phrase for the 2012 election cycle goes to John Tree for the "triple bottom line". The triple bottom line refers to a real measure of corporate success, not just profits, but people, planet and profit. The phrase was coined by John Elkington in his 1997 book Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. It's about making sure that corporate success takes into account it's true cost of doing business.
Bavda gets the second place nod for his use of the line, "never allow government to enter a woman's womb."
Best Use of Statistics
The E-10 for Best Use of Statistics goes to Ilya Sheyman. Ilya always seems to have the numbers on hand. He has 550 volunteers. Unemployment runs from 8% -19% in the district. John Tree told us that we're 15 trillion in debt, but Ilya knows exactly how much Brad Schneider donated to Mark Kirk, Mike Johanns and Bob Bennett.
Here's Part II of the E-10 Awards.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
Jack's Precious Moment
I saw Jack's Precious Moment last night. It's around for one more night at Chemically Imbalanced Theater on Irving Park Road. I wish I had noticed this sooner because I highly recommend it.
The performing company is called Will Act for Food because they collect imperishable food and money and donate it too the Lakeview Pantry. We brought a can of three bean salad and some canned asparagus, so they will act for bad food too.
The play, however, was not at all bad. It's about how false symbols and religion with a right wing agenda are failing middle Americans.
Jack is murdered by terrorists in Iraq. There's a gruesome video of the whole thing on YouTube. Bib, Jack's twin brother, knew Jack was no hero, and perhaps a murderer in his own right. Their mother had an odd fall down a long staircase leaving a smirking Jack at the top. Bib tried to tell their dad, Jim, about the incident, but Jim would not do anything about his favorite son's behavior.
Karen, Jack's now penniless, abused widow, became born again, as Jim required before the wedding. Born again by being baptized in a kid's pool, she embraced Jesus, or at least cheap kitsch that made her feel she had embraced Jesus, and kicked her model airplane glue habit. She also tried to make a family for herself, even if it meant she had to cook all the time for the ungrateful men in her life, and endure beatings from her husband, sporting the bruises her father-in-law pretended were not there.
Jim hasn't worked for years, and has relied on his not-so-favorite son Bib, a male nurse, for support (although he taunts Bib for his effort) and on Pastor Andy for spiritual and political guidance.
Bib makes a scene at the first memorial service. He's not sure the terrorists had it wrong in killing Jack. Jack was not a hero, or even a fallen soldier despite the refrigerator box with an American flag draped over it in the living room. Jack was a mean, ornery, wife-abusing, mother-killing cell tower contractor.
Pastor Andy doesn't want the terrorists to win, so he was very clear that he did not like Bib's speech at the memorial service. He threatened to kick Bib, and the rest of the family, out of the church for good. Jim is mad that Bib caused him problems in church, and Karen is busy trying to portray the godly woman she feels she's supposed to be, and hide her penchant for using curse words. No attention is paid to Bib's loss or mental health.
Nervous from hanging around Bib's house, that she, Jack and Bib also shared with Jim. Karen decides to focus her shaky grief on Precious Moments figurines. If you're not familiar with them, Precious Moments are those cherub-like, Aryan-looking, cheap statuettes that have an odd religious backstory. The founder models them after people, mostly children, who died is odd and tragic ways and appeals to Christian faith as his marketing plan. Now, the company runs a Christian theme park with a chapel. Of course, there's a connected 501(c)(3) organization. This is a real company and not just a story device.
Deciding that Jack's story is worthy of a Precious Moment figurine, Karen brings the family to the Precious Moments theme park in an attempt to have a meeting with the company's founder, Samuel Butcher. Bib cannot bring himself to go inside the chapel and waits in the parking lot where he meets Chuck, a free-spirited carni who runs a deadly ride called the Octopus. While the two young people are busy, dad Jim finds that he's being haunted by a giant-sized Precious Moments Angel. He tries to get Pastor Andy on the phone, he's in crisis over that YouTube video of Jack's murder. Pastor Andy eventually answers his phone to warn Jim not to watch the video or the terrorists win. Read a psalm and call me in the morning.
Eventually, each character finds their disappointment and their salvation in places different than they would have expected.
It's a good play and if you find yourself with a couple of hours free tonight, pack up the canned three bean salad and make your way over to W. Irving Park Road. Jack's Precious Moment gets 3 and one-half cat treats.
The performing company is called Will Act for Food because they collect imperishable food and money and donate it too the Lakeview Pantry. We brought a can of three bean salad and some canned asparagus, so they will act for bad food too.
The play, however, was not at all bad. It's about how false symbols and religion with a right wing agenda are failing middle Americans.
Jack is murdered by terrorists in Iraq. There's a gruesome video of the whole thing on YouTube. Bib, Jack's twin brother, knew Jack was no hero, and perhaps a murderer in his own right. Their mother had an odd fall down a long staircase leaving a smirking Jack at the top. Bib tried to tell their dad, Jim, about the incident, but Jim would not do anything about his favorite son's behavior.
Karen, Jack's now penniless, abused widow, became born again, as Jim required before the wedding. Born again by being baptized in a kid's pool, she embraced Jesus, or at least cheap kitsch that made her feel she had embraced Jesus, and kicked her model airplane glue habit. She also tried to make a family for herself, even if it meant she had to cook all the time for the ungrateful men in her life, and endure beatings from her husband, sporting the bruises her father-in-law pretended were not there.
Jim hasn't worked for years, and has relied on his not-so-favorite son Bib, a male nurse, for support (although he taunts Bib for his effort) and on Pastor Andy for spiritual and political guidance.
Bib makes a scene at the first memorial service. He's not sure the terrorists had it wrong in killing Jack. Jack was not a hero, or even a fallen soldier despite the refrigerator box with an American flag draped over it in the living room. Jack was a mean, ornery, wife-abusing, mother-killing cell tower contractor.
Pastor Andy doesn't want the terrorists to win, so he was very clear that he did not like Bib's speech at the memorial service. He threatened to kick Bib, and the rest of the family, out of the church for good. Jim is mad that Bib caused him problems in church, and Karen is busy trying to portray the godly woman she feels she's supposed to be, and hide her penchant for using curse words. No attention is paid to Bib's loss or mental health.
Nervous from hanging around Bib's house, that she, Jack and Bib also shared with Jim. Karen decides to focus her shaky grief on Precious Moments figurines. If you're not familiar with them, Precious Moments are those cherub-like, Aryan-looking, cheap statuettes that have an odd religious backstory. The founder models them after people, mostly children, who died is odd and tragic ways and appeals to Christian faith as his marketing plan. Now, the company runs a Christian theme park with a chapel. Of course, there's a connected 501(c)(3) organization. This is a real company and not just a story device.
Deciding that Jack's story is worthy of a Precious Moment figurine, Karen brings the family to the Precious Moments theme park in an attempt to have a meeting with the company's founder, Samuel Butcher. Bib cannot bring himself to go inside the chapel and waits in the parking lot where he meets Chuck, a free-spirited carni who runs a deadly ride called the Octopus. While the two young people are busy, dad Jim finds that he's being haunted by a giant-sized Precious Moments Angel. He tries to get Pastor Andy on the phone, he's in crisis over that YouTube video of Jack's murder. Pastor Andy eventually answers his phone to warn Jim not to watch the video or the terrorists win. Read a psalm and call me in the morning.
Eventually, each character finds their disappointment and their salvation in places different than they would have expected.
It's a good play and if you find yourself with a couple of hours free tonight, pack up the canned three bean salad and make your way over to W. Irving Park Road. Jack's Precious Moment gets 3 and one-half cat treats.
Tuesday, February 14, 2012
IL-10: The Real Race is Bavda vs. Tree
The press, the progressive/liberal/Democratic alternative press, and most people think that the real race in the Illinois Tenth is the pissing match between Ilya Sheyman and Brad Schneider. It's not.
Sheyman and Schneider trade barbs between each other about age and experience, and Republican contributions. Schneider has sent about 11 mailers to the same people over the past month. Sheyman has amassed support from the national progressive/liberal organizations because he's the "only true progressive". He has band of high schoolers knocking on doors and some real support from the peace people and a couple of grandmotherly looking women who pinch his cheeks and tell him how wonderful he is.
Ilya says no one really cares about his age and lack of experience. He ignores that most people are in fact talking about it. He ignores that most questions he's had to field from the endorsement sessions of these lefty national groups have been the equivalent of asking whether he prefers kittens or puppies. I was in his IVI-IPO session and the questions they were asking him were ridiculous. The two people who ran the show do not live in our district, know nothing about it, and had already decided to support Ilya because he was a 2004 DFA member and their buddy. They threw him softballs and whispered to the other attendees, none of whom knew anything about the race or district, to endorse him and they did, probably to get the show on the road so they could go home because IL-10 was not important to them. Most of the questions pitched to Ilya from our local township groups are about the same. He's getting softballs because his early supporters don't want him to mess up. While at least Vernon made him answer the same questions as the others, those were softballs too. Ilya is ill prepared for the firestorm that is going to come from the right in the general.
Brad seems to think no one notices that his support for Republicans and his ever changing story about same make him untrustworthy. He should at least tell the truth. That he's a one-issue, Israel guy. That might even appeal to some, if not a lot of district voters. However, he doesn't get (and those who would support that approach do not get) that our country's problems go far beyond what can be cured by sending more military dollars to Israel. We're allowing a very right-wing philosophy, and our fear of challenging it on any higher level, to bankrupt our people. We're kicking ourselves to the curb based on one-issue politics be it Israel, abortion or now even contraception.
Sheyman and Schneider are playing out our old IL-10 races. Our real, current IL-10 race is about much more than they can muster. It's about the ongoing strategy of the Democratic party and its reaction to the corporation-ism of our government and subservience of people to corporations and the financial sector. Both Sheyman and Schneider represent the old Democratic approach to handing the matter. The two newer candidates to the race, Vivek Bavda and John Tree, are playing out the contrasting approaches to our new world.
In Death of the Liberal Class, author Chris Hedges, talks about our new economic world with a shrunken middle class and far less equality of opportunity than we've seen in our lifetimes. Early in the book, Hedges describes his conversation with an early tea partier (before Americans for Prosperity took over). The man was Ernest Logan Bell, and angry unemployed veteran. Hedges concludes:
Hedges argues that the liberal class has failed to make headway against right-wing extremism because even when it's working as it should, it's too mired in the weeds of specific policy, and does not afford a grand vision to earn the emotional following of Americans.
Vivek Bavda is making his case based on some pretty good ideas he has for specific policy. He knows single payer is the right answer to our inequality and misappropriation of health care, but he feels that we cannot win the hearts and minds of Americans on the topic, so he's contrived a health care use for the reverse Dutch auction. It's probably not a bad idea, but you tell me how many Americans understand the reverse Dutch auction and guess how many tea partiers it will take to turn it into a "death panel". Bavda correctly wants to re-regulate Wall Street and give relief to underwater homeowners and he has some good ideas for doing so. I'm not sure he can explain them in 10 words or less.
Bavda's big idea on the economy is a bunch of little ones. He feels we cannot achieve a grand jobs program, but that we can get 90/94 widened (again). His jobs and economic plan is to push for several small, local projects. His idea is that the success of these projects will show some larger economic success and eventually convince Americans to go bigger. It's not necessarily a bad idea, but it does cause me to wonder if as our congressman, Bavda will get lost in the weeds and possibly be accused of promoting "pork", if unintentionally.
John Tree represents the other side of this spectrum. While an economics expert in his own right, Tree isn't rooting through the weeds of economic policy. He's rising above and looking bigger picture at the gut wrenching emotions of our economic situation. He's going after those in Congress who are causing the gridlock and pledges to take the fight to Bob Dold. Tree is the only candidate remembering that Bob Dold got his start with the tea party. Dold would have lost his 2010 primary to Beth Coulson without the tea party and owes them his career.
Tree tells his life story, about his childhood, his religion and early mission to Haiti, his military career and his various positions in business and business as a small business owner. He even tells his personal stories about his change of perspective and core values, his failed marriage, his new marriage, his children and the daughter he recently lost. These are not all success stories, but the overall success is that Tree has overcome his problems, survived and thrived and goes on with his family, including a new baby boy.
Tree uses humor and explained why at the Vernon Township endorsement session. "Humor defuses a lot of tension and it helps people listen and lower their natural defenses so we can communicate better and be able to chart out the path." Tree further explained that it helps him in a room that isn't full of friendly supporters. He's prepared for the brawl that the 2d half of this campaign will entail.
John Tree is capturing the worries and emotions of Americans. Tree is willing and able to take the fight to Bob Dold and his tea party. Tree is offering a place for those in the district who realize something is wrong, but reject real solutions because they simply do not trust the policy descriptions coming from the Democrats when Republicans are giving them an emotional refuge.
So, the real race is not between the two "I'm more progressive than you" pissing-matched candidates. The district has been there and done that. This race is between the technical policy-maker and the big picture survivor of the 21st century economy. While I think Vivek Bavda is a very smart guy with some good ideas and I'd love to see him on some committee or in some think tank discussing the economy and health care, I think the John Tree is the better candidate to stand up to Bob Dold and the tea party.
Sheyman and Schneider trade barbs between each other about age and experience, and Republican contributions. Schneider has sent about 11 mailers to the same people over the past month. Sheyman has amassed support from the national progressive/liberal organizations because he's the "only true progressive". He has band of high schoolers knocking on doors and some real support from the peace people and a couple of grandmotherly looking women who pinch his cheeks and tell him how wonderful he is.
Ilya says no one really cares about his age and lack of experience. He ignores that most people are in fact talking about it. He ignores that most questions he's had to field from the endorsement sessions of these lefty national groups have been the equivalent of asking whether he prefers kittens or puppies. I was in his IVI-IPO session and the questions they were asking him were ridiculous. The two people who ran the show do not live in our district, know nothing about it, and had already decided to support Ilya because he was a 2004 DFA member and their buddy. They threw him softballs and whispered to the other attendees, none of whom knew anything about the race or district, to endorse him and they did, probably to get the show on the road so they could go home because IL-10 was not important to them. Most of the questions pitched to Ilya from our local township groups are about the same. He's getting softballs because his early supporters don't want him to mess up. While at least Vernon made him answer the same questions as the others, those were softballs too. Ilya is ill prepared for the firestorm that is going to come from the right in the general.
Brad seems to think no one notices that his support for Republicans and his ever changing story about same make him untrustworthy. He should at least tell the truth. That he's a one-issue, Israel guy. That might even appeal to some, if not a lot of district voters. However, he doesn't get (and those who would support that approach do not get) that our country's problems go far beyond what can be cured by sending more military dollars to Israel. We're allowing a very right-wing philosophy, and our fear of challenging it on any higher level, to bankrupt our people. We're kicking ourselves to the curb based on one-issue politics be it Israel, abortion or now even contraception.
Sheyman and Schneider are playing out our old IL-10 races. Our real, current IL-10 race is about much more than they can muster. It's about the ongoing strategy of the Democratic party and its reaction to the corporation-ism of our government and subservience of people to corporations and the financial sector. Both Sheyman and Schneider represent the old Democratic approach to handing the matter. The two newer candidates to the race, Vivek Bavda and John Tree, are playing out the contrasting approaches to our new world.
In Death of the Liberal Class, author Chris Hedges, talks about our new economic world with a shrunken middle class and far less equality of opportunity than we've seen in our lifetimes. Early in the book, Hedges describes his conversation with an early tea partier (before Americans for Prosperity took over). The man was Ernest Logan Bell, and angry unemployed veteran. Hedges concludes:
Anger and a sense of betrayal: these are what Ernest Logan Bell and tens of millions of other disenfranchised workers express. These emotions spring from the failure of the liberal class over the past three decades to protect the minimal interests of the working and middle class as corporations dismantled the democratic state, decimated the manufacturing sector, looted the US Treasury, waged imperial wars that can neither be afforded or won, and gutted he basic laws that protected the interests or ordinary citizens. Yet the liberal class continues to speak in the prim and obsolete language of politics and issues. It refuses to defy the corporate assault. A virulent right wing, for this reason, captures and expresses the legitimate rage articulated by the disenfranchised. And the liberal class has become obsolete even as it clings to its positions of privilege within liberal institutions.Hedges sees liberalism as a safety valve from the natural tendencies of capitalism, making reform and greater equality possible, at least incrementally. It's failure over the last few years comes from the liberal class willingness to buy into the status quo to preserve its own status and perks. It's failure has allowed corporations to make too many gains over people and allowed the right wing to impose its will, even when most people don't agree with that will.
Hedges argues that the liberal class has failed to make headway against right-wing extremism because even when it's working as it should, it's too mired in the weeds of specific policy, and does not afford a grand vision to earn the emotional following of Americans.
Vivek Bavda is making his case based on some pretty good ideas he has for specific policy. He knows single payer is the right answer to our inequality and misappropriation of health care, but he feels that we cannot win the hearts and minds of Americans on the topic, so he's contrived a health care use for the reverse Dutch auction. It's probably not a bad idea, but you tell me how many Americans understand the reverse Dutch auction and guess how many tea partiers it will take to turn it into a "death panel". Bavda correctly wants to re-regulate Wall Street and give relief to underwater homeowners and he has some good ideas for doing so. I'm not sure he can explain them in 10 words or less.
Bavda's big idea on the economy is a bunch of little ones. He feels we cannot achieve a grand jobs program, but that we can get 90/94 widened (again). His jobs and economic plan is to push for several small, local projects. His idea is that the success of these projects will show some larger economic success and eventually convince Americans to go bigger. It's not necessarily a bad idea, but it does cause me to wonder if as our congressman, Bavda will get lost in the weeds and possibly be accused of promoting "pork", if unintentionally.
John Tree represents the other side of this spectrum. While an economics expert in his own right, Tree isn't rooting through the weeds of economic policy. He's rising above and looking bigger picture at the gut wrenching emotions of our economic situation. He's going after those in Congress who are causing the gridlock and pledges to take the fight to Bob Dold. Tree is the only candidate remembering that Bob Dold got his start with the tea party. Dold would have lost his 2010 primary to Beth Coulson without the tea party and owes them his career.
Tree tells his life story, about his childhood, his religion and early mission to Haiti, his military career and his various positions in business and business as a small business owner. He even tells his personal stories about his change of perspective and core values, his failed marriage, his new marriage, his children and the daughter he recently lost. These are not all success stories, but the overall success is that Tree has overcome his problems, survived and thrived and goes on with his family, including a new baby boy.
Tree uses humor and explained why at the Vernon Township endorsement session. "Humor defuses a lot of tension and it helps people listen and lower their natural defenses so we can communicate better and be able to chart out the path." Tree further explained that it helps him in a room that isn't full of friendly supporters. He's prepared for the brawl that the 2d half of this campaign will entail.
John Tree is capturing the worries and emotions of Americans. Tree is willing and able to take the fight to Bob Dold and his tea party. Tree is offering a place for those in the district who realize something is wrong, but reject real solutions because they simply do not trust the policy descriptions coming from the Democrats when Republicans are giving them an emotional refuge.
So, the real race is not between the two "I'm more progressive than you" pissing-matched candidates. The district has been there and done that. This race is between the technical policy-maker and the big picture survivor of the 21st century economy. While I think Vivek Bavda is a very smart guy with some good ideas and I'd love to see him on some committee or in some think tank discussing the economy and health care, I think the John Tree is the better candidate to stand up to Bob Dold and the tea party.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Tree Delights, Sheyman Recites and Brad Screws Up, But Wins the Vernon Township Endorsement, Part II
I think it's safe to say that if a candidate has started off by comparing himself to Bobby Kennedy, he's starting to dig himself a hole. Brad Schneider did that at about 2:10 pm yesterday afternoon in Vernon Township. Then, he failed to take Dan Seals regular advice about holes, and kept digging, particularly when he confronted the usual question about his Mark Kirk donations.
He's answers this question in various ways in the past, but always kept his cool and the words sounded good, even if the substance was not. However, everyone has bad days,and this one was Brad's. He didn't get upset or angry, but he got flustered. He accidentally said that 90% of what he contributed was to Republicans and of course that is not accurate. He has mostly give to Democrats, he's just given $3,300 to Mark Kirk and $250 to Bob Bennett in Utah, $250 to a group called Americans United in Support of Democracy that in turn donates to both Democrats and Republicans (likely based more on issues relating to Israel than actual democracy) with similar donations to similar pro-Israel groups, $250 to Republican Michael Johanns, and $250 to Joe Lieberman. A whopping $1000 to Mike Rogers of Michigan. Let me know if I missed something of note.
Brad went on to say that he was a single issue donor. He didn't say, but it's a safe guess that the issue is Israel. He then said he is not a single issue voter, but if he has a litmus test, it's choice. Bennett and Johanns wouldn't exactly call it choice, they'd call it abortion and vigorously fight against it. In 2003, Bennett got a score of zero from NARAL. A summary of Bennett's choice voting record can be found here. Rodgers is a big anti-choice guy and an anti-LGBT hatemonger with a zero rating by HRC. Mike Johanns' has a shorter, but similar voting record on choice issues. He also introduced something called the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act, which requires doctors to emphasize fetus pain to women seeking abortions after 20 weeks. Brad must have been out of litmus the day he made those campaign contributions.
His defense of these contributions was that it was 2002 and Israel was facing intifada. But most of these contributions were made much later than that, as late as 2009.
Brad also said that Mark Kirk made his first anti-choice vote in 2008. That comment fails to take into account Kirk's procedural votes to bring anti-choice legislation to the floor for a vote. It also fails to take into account Kirk's less than enthusiastic support for choice measures as set forth in the prior link.
Then, Brad touted Kirk's environmental votes. This neglects Kirk's early work for CEI, the group that funds ignorance on global warming and that Kirk kost the endorsement of both the League of Conservation Voters and the Sierra Club in 2006.
Schneider concluded that Mark Kirk was a "plausible moderate", "he changed, I didn't". Problem is that Kirk changed long before Schneider stopped giving. Frankly, I think Brad would be better off to just be honest and say that he'll support anyone who supports military funding for Israel no matter what else that person does or supports.
Vernon Township Democrats then posed the question to the other candidates, in fairness, but it got odd because what were the others to say on something they had nothing to do with? John Tree answered that he didn't want to speak to Brad's question and used the time to talk more about his candidacy, finding common ground where possible and opposing those who refuse to find the common ground. Sheyman chose to go point by point on what he supported while Brad donated to Mark. Ilya said "elections come down to choices". I'm still waiting for a good reason Ilya chose to preside over our local MoveOn while it's people attacked single payer health care reform advocates.
Vivek asked what we really want from our member of Congress, substance over style, the small, little things we can do to make a difference in the lives of everyday people. He does not think our race can be about the "rhetorical ideas" or we'll have the same problems they have in Washington. Huh? I thought we were trying to elect someone to handle the great "rhetorical ideas" under debate in Washington. Vivek wants our support because he's talking about things that can really happen.
Vivek, I have a tip for you. Read a book called Death of the Liberal Class by Chris Hedges. Hedges argues that conservative ideas are winning out in DC in large part because Democrats provide long-winded explanations of discrete policies while Republicans make emotional arguments about core values. While a lot of your ideas are good, Hedges would have a field day with your small success argument. I also have problems understanding how a few small successes would make a difference or even happen unless tied to something larger.
More later.
He's answers this question in various ways in the past, but always kept his cool and the words sounded good, even if the substance was not. However, everyone has bad days,and this one was Brad's. He didn't get upset or angry, but he got flustered. He accidentally said that 90% of what he contributed was to Republicans and of course that is not accurate. He has mostly give to Democrats, he's just given $3,300 to Mark Kirk and $250 to Bob Bennett in Utah, $250 to a group called Americans United in Support of Democracy that in turn donates to both Democrats and Republicans (likely based more on issues relating to Israel than actual democracy) with similar donations to similar pro-Israel groups, $250 to Republican Michael Johanns, and $250 to Joe Lieberman. A whopping $1000 to Mike Rogers of Michigan. Let me know if I missed something of note.
Brad went on to say that he was a single issue donor. He didn't say, but it's a safe guess that the issue is Israel. He then said he is not a single issue voter, but if he has a litmus test, it's choice. Bennett and Johanns wouldn't exactly call it choice, they'd call it abortion and vigorously fight against it. In 2003, Bennett got a score of zero from NARAL. A summary of Bennett's choice voting record can be found here. Rodgers is a big anti-choice guy and an anti-LGBT hatemonger with a zero rating by HRC. Mike Johanns' has a shorter, but similar voting record on choice issues. He also introduced something called the Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act, which requires doctors to emphasize fetus pain to women seeking abortions after 20 weeks. Brad must have been out of litmus the day he made those campaign contributions.
His defense of these contributions was that it was 2002 and Israel was facing intifada. But most of these contributions were made much later than that, as late as 2009.
Brad also said that Mark Kirk made his first anti-choice vote in 2008. That comment fails to take into account Kirk's procedural votes to bring anti-choice legislation to the floor for a vote. It also fails to take into account Kirk's less than enthusiastic support for choice measures as set forth in the prior link.
Then, Brad touted Kirk's environmental votes. This neglects Kirk's early work for CEI, the group that funds ignorance on global warming and that Kirk kost the endorsement of both the League of Conservation Voters and the Sierra Club in 2006.
Schneider concluded that Mark Kirk was a "plausible moderate", "he changed, I didn't". Problem is that Kirk changed long before Schneider stopped giving. Frankly, I think Brad would be better off to just be honest and say that he'll support anyone who supports military funding for Israel no matter what else that person does or supports.
Vernon Township Democrats then posed the question to the other candidates, in fairness, but it got odd because what were the others to say on something they had nothing to do with? John Tree answered that he didn't want to speak to Brad's question and used the time to talk more about his candidacy, finding common ground where possible and opposing those who refuse to find the common ground. Sheyman chose to go point by point on what he supported while Brad donated to Mark. Ilya said "elections come down to choices". I'm still waiting for a good reason Ilya chose to preside over our local MoveOn while it's people attacked single payer health care reform advocates.
Vivek asked what we really want from our member of Congress, substance over style, the small, little things we can do to make a difference in the lives of everyday people. He does not think our race can be about the "rhetorical ideas" or we'll have the same problems they have in Washington. Huh? I thought we were trying to elect someone to handle the great "rhetorical ideas" under debate in Washington. Vivek wants our support because he's talking about things that can really happen.
Vivek, I have a tip for you. Read a book called Death of the Liberal Class by Chris Hedges. Hedges argues that conservative ideas are winning out in DC in large part because Democrats provide long-winded explanations of discrete policies while Republicans make emotional arguments about core values. While a lot of your ideas are good, Hedges would have a field day with your small success argument. I also have problems understanding how a few small successes would make a difference or even happen unless tied to something larger.
More later.
Tree Delights, Sheyman Recites and Brad Screws Up, But Wins the Vernon Township Endorsement, Part I
Brad Schneider won the endorsement of the Vernon Township Democrats yesterday afternoon.
Vernon's endorsement session rules were very different from those at Northfield. Candidates were seated in alphabetical order on the stage at the Vernon Township headquarters. They made their opening statements in that order. Then, they fielded audience questions, submitted only in writing by index card, in the same order, except after a couple of questions, organization leaders realized that wasn't turning out fair, so they switched things around. An unusual feature of Vernon's rules was to allow member voting by email. Members did not have to attend the event to vote. It is my opinion that the absentee email voting rule won the day for Brad Schneider as, well, let's just put it this way, it wasn't his day. As I've mentioned before, I support John Tree for Congress.
Sheyman cast himself as the "true progressive", but one who will cross the aisle in the limited situations when it is appropriate. He recited all the talking points of DFA, PDA, MoveOn (pre-abandonment as MoveOn tends to abandon the issue when it gets tough), . Vivek Bavda was the practical, policy-innovating progressive. Schneider, the WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) and no, I'm not really a Republican, open door candidate. John Tree showed that he is a progressive who will take the race to Bob Dold, and do it with facts, strength and humor.
A lot of the candidates' most basic positions and proposals are similar. They are all Democrats, and basically progressive, despite Sheyman's whispering campaign against Schneider and the others by name omission. John Tree even joked after the first question was answered by those in earlier alphabetical standing that "all the good answers were taken."
Social Security and Medicare
On the Social Security and Medicare question, the candidates positions (except perhaps Bavda) were basically similar with some candidates highlighting different aspects. All were in favor of removing the FICA cap as the best way to strengthen Social Security. Schneider's further advocated for keeping Social Security self-contained and growing the working population to increase payments into FICA. Everything works together, jobs, education and Social Security. He had an idea of allowing wealthy seniors to defer their Social Security as an deduction against an estate tax. On Medicare, Schneider worried me because he's bought into the Republican arguments that payment limits and caps will be required.
Sheyman hit all the basic progressive issue organization talking points, but pretty much just agreed with Schneider that the FICA cap has to go. He then focused on bulk purchasing under Medicare and observed that private insurance costs are rising at a rate greater than the increases under Medicare. Ironically, Sheyman advocated that ever illusive "public option" he abandoned as a leader of MoveOn.
Tree, last in alphabetical order, made his quip, and then focused on the Republican view of these programs, entitlements they can rob to pay current bills. He reminded us of the Tea Party's support for the Grover Norquist "sacred pledge" that they will never raise taxes, so all they can do is cut. Tree said that the Tea Party Republicans believe that it's every man for himself, but Tree believes that "we are all in this together." So, he proposes that in addition to eliminating the FICA cap, we need to protect Social Security from those who would rob from the fund. He agreed with Ilya on Medicare and on wholesale prices on prescription drugs.
Bavda agreed with removing the FICA cap, and then advocated for chained CPI (a plan with which I [and most progressive economists] disagree) and touted the benefits of increased immigration to increase payments in to FICA, much like Schneider's increase the workforce plan, but with immigrants. Bavda's health care approach is the reverse Dutch auction which I will explain some other time.
Transportation or the old Fake Moderate Voting Trick?
Ilya Sheyman commended Bob Dold on his support for the more mass transit friendly features of the transportation bill. Schneider and Tree were more skeptical. Schneider plainly said we cannot trust Dold. Tree explained the voting technique that Dold is using. I'll add that Dold learned it from Mark Kirk. It's the old vote with your party when it matters, vote against when it doesn't and take credit for being "moderate". Bavda's remarks centered on his small projects approach to the economy. Bavda feels that large jobs plans will not pass both houses of Congress intact, so it would be better to promote small projects such the road widening projects in the bill in question.
My Question, Not Asked, Not Answered
As I mentioned above, the audience was allowed to ask questions by submitting them beforehand on index cards. My question on the contraception controversy was not asked or answered. My reasoning for asking about it was not that I think any of the candidates are against contraception, but that I wanted to see who would recognize that none of this would be in issue if we had a single payer health care access program in place.
Underwater FHA, Freddie and Fannie Mortgages
John went first on this question, but first went for the laugh (and got it), kiddingly complaining that as the first candidate to answer he had no time to think of his answer. First, he observed the greed of the lenders and the GSEs in making bad loans while betting against the homeowners through derivatives. Then, after all that, the American people were told we had to bail out the banks or Main Street will be hurt. John observed that despite the bailout, "Main Street is hurting everywhere I go across the Tenth District, I see people who are hurting right now, financially. Worried about unemployment. Worried about their homes." He mentioned the state AG settlement fund for homeowner relief and went on to point out that these banks did "insidious things" and then bet against you.
Ilya complained that the settlement is not enough (and I can agree with that) went with Dick Durbin's cramdown approach, forgetting or perhaps forgetting to mention that the homeowner actually has to go bankrupt to get the benefit. He then advocated forcing the banks to renegotiate principle, a position with which I can also agree.
Brad recognized this as one of the greatest problems in the District. I thought he was agreeing with Ilya on reduction of principle because he talked a lot about the decrease in fair market value, but he said he'd really just want to help homeowners buy time. Then, he went back to say some people don't have the time and it sounded like he was back to Ilya's positon, but then he said he'd remove underwater homeowners to smaller homes or apartments and help them with "direct incentives direct investment and tax incentives" which sounds like short sales to me, but even though this is an area of my expertise, I'm not really sure what Brad is talking about here.
Vivek, again the policy strategist, wants to take mortgages to 120% of Fair Market Value per a plan suggested by Martin Feldstein. It's similar to what Ilya was talking about regarding reducing principle.I think Feldstein says 110%. He observed that the real estate market has not settled down and is stuck and sticking the entire economy in the mud. We need reforms beyond this, per Vivek, and he expressed support for consumer and derivative reforms.
Then, it got interesting. Brad was asked the Mark Kirk contribution question. More later
Vernon's endorsement session rules were very different from those at Northfield. Candidates were seated in alphabetical order on the stage at the Vernon Township headquarters. They made their opening statements in that order. Then, they fielded audience questions, submitted only in writing by index card, in the same order, except after a couple of questions, organization leaders realized that wasn't turning out fair, so they switched things around. An unusual feature of Vernon's rules was to allow member voting by email. Members did not have to attend the event to vote. It is my opinion that the absentee email voting rule won the day for Brad Schneider as, well, let's just put it this way, it wasn't his day. As I've mentioned before, I support John Tree for Congress.
Sheyman cast himself as the "true progressive", but one who will cross the aisle in the limited situations when it is appropriate. He recited all the talking points of DFA, PDA, MoveOn (pre-abandonment as MoveOn tends to abandon the issue when it gets tough), . Vivek Bavda was the practical, policy-innovating progressive. Schneider, the WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) and no, I'm not really a Republican, open door candidate. John Tree showed that he is a progressive who will take the race to Bob Dold, and do it with facts, strength and humor.
A lot of the candidates' most basic positions and proposals are similar. They are all Democrats, and basically progressive, despite Sheyman's whispering campaign against Schneider and the others by name omission. John Tree even joked after the first question was answered by those in earlier alphabetical standing that "all the good answers were taken."
Social Security and Medicare
On the Social Security and Medicare question, the candidates positions (except perhaps Bavda) were basically similar with some candidates highlighting different aspects. All were in favor of removing the FICA cap as the best way to strengthen Social Security. Schneider's further advocated for keeping Social Security self-contained and growing the working population to increase payments into FICA. Everything works together, jobs, education and Social Security. He had an idea of allowing wealthy seniors to defer their Social Security as an deduction against an estate tax. On Medicare, Schneider worried me because he's bought into the Republican arguments that payment limits and caps will be required.
Sheyman hit all the basic progressive issue organization talking points, but pretty much just agreed with Schneider that the FICA cap has to go. He then focused on bulk purchasing under Medicare and observed that private insurance costs are rising at a rate greater than the increases under Medicare. Ironically, Sheyman advocated that ever illusive "public option" he abandoned as a leader of MoveOn.
Tree, last in alphabetical order, made his quip, and then focused on the Republican view of these programs, entitlements they can rob to pay current bills. He reminded us of the Tea Party's support for the Grover Norquist "sacred pledge" that they will never raise taxes, so all they can do is cut. Tree said that the Tea Party Republicans believe that it's every man for himself, but Tree believes that "we are all in this together." So, he proposes that in addition to eliminating the FICA cap, we need to protect Social Security from those who would rob from the fund. He agreed with Ilya on Medicare and on wholesale prices on prescription drugs.
Bavda agreed with removing the FICA cap, and then advocated for chained CPI (a plan with which I [and most progressive economists] disagree) and touted the benefits of increased immigration to increase payments in to FICA, much like Schneider's increase the workforce plan, but with immigrants. Bavda's health care approach is the reverse Dutch auction which I will explain some other time.
Transportation or the old Fake Moderate Voting Trick?
Ilya Sheyman commended Bob Dold on his support for the more mass transit friendly features of the transportation bill. Schneider and Tree were more skeptical. Schneider plainly said we cannot trust Dold. Tree explained the voting technique that Dold is using. I'll add that Dold learned it from Mark Kirk. It's the old vote with your party when it matters, vote against when it doesn't and take credit for being "moderate". Bavda's remarks centered on his small projects approach to the economy. Bavda feels that large jobs plans will not pass both houses of Congress intact, so it would be better to promote small projects such the road widening projects in the bill in question.
My Question, Not Asked, Not Answered
As I mentioned above, the audience was allowed to ask questions by submitting them beforehand on index cards. My question on the contraception controversy was not asked or answered. My reasoning for asking about it was not that I think any of the candidates are against contraception, but that I wanted to see who would recognize that none of this would be in issue if we had a single payer health care access program in place.
Underwater FHA, Freddie and Fannie Mortgages
John went first on this question, but first went for the laugh (and got it), kiddingly complaining that as the first candidate to answer he had no time to think of his answer. First, he observed the greed of the lenders and the GSEs in making bad loans while betting against the homeowners through derivatives. Then, after all that, the American people were told we had to bail out the banks or Main Street will be hurt. John observed that despite the bailout, "Main Street is hurting everywhere I go across the Tenth District, I see people who are hurting right now, financially. Worried about unemployment. Worried about their homes." He mentioned the state AG settlement fund for homeowner relief and went on to point out that these banks did "insidious things" and then bet against you.
Ilya complained that the settlement is not enough (and I can agree with that) went with Dick Durbin's cramdown approach, forgetting or perhaps forgetting to mention that the homeowner actually has to go bankrupt to get the benefit. He then advocated forcing the banks to renegotiate principle, a position with which I can also agree.
Brad recognized this as one of the greatest problems in the District. I thought he was agreeing with Ilya on reduction of principle because he talked a lot about the decrease in fair market value, but he said he'd really just want to help homeowners buy time. Then, he went back to say some people don't have the time and it sounded like he was back to Ilya's positon, but then he said he'd remove underwater homeowners to smaller homes or apartments and help them with "direct incentives direct investment and tax incentives" which sounds like short sales to me, but even though this is an area of my expertise, I'm not really sure what Brad is talking about here.
Vivek, again the policy strategist, wants to take mortgages to 120% of Fair Market Value per a plan suggested by Martin Feldstein. It's similar to what Ilya was talking about regarding reducing principle.I think Feldstein says 110%. He observed that the real estate market has not settled down and is stuck and sticking the entire economy in the mud. We need reforms beyond this, per Vivek, and he expressed support for consumer and derivative reforms.
Then, it got interesting. Brad was asked the Mark Kirk contribution question. More later
Friday, February 10, 2012
I can count on you for...
I'll tell you one thing, if I ever need to do an enormous number of different mass mailings, I know I can count on IL-10 Congressional Candidate Brad Schneider. I've received about 9 mailings in the past month or so, all of them different, but all of them saying pretty much the same thing...that Steny Hoyer loves him. Good for you, Brad! You'll be my resource if I ever need to discuss things with Steny.
If I ever need to accumulate a large group of high school students, I know I can count on Ilya Sheyman. He had his group at the Northfield TownshipDemocrats endorsement hearing, all in appropriate Ilya t-shirts, but none of them able to vote in the meeting and most of them probably cannot vote at all.
Ilya's also fairly good at getting his people to attack the other candidates while pretending he's running a completely positive campaign. It's like he has his own Mitt/Newt-style superPAC, except without the large amounts of money. The ever so underfunded, PCCC (the "Bold Progressives") his been caught sending around an email stating that Ilya's "opponent" 'supported Republicans who vowed to cut Social Security,' but failed to name the opponent Apparently, they're happy to keep their folks assuming it's all of them. Alan Grayson wrote a post on Kos stating that Ilya is the candidate who fought Robert Gibb's attack on the "professional left." Grayson forgot that Sheyman and his local MoveOn actually participated in Gibb's attacks by attacking single payer advocates during the health care debate. Ilya would be your go-to guy on supporting the President every time he backs down which might come in handy because the President just backed down again on contraception.
Last night, I had the opportunity to continue my discussions with John Tree. Tree answered some questions about his experience. I already knew that he ran a marketing company and had previously owned a granola company, and marketed various consumer products in the corporate world. He knows a lot about healthy food and cereal. He'd be the go to guy on logistics, statistics and marketing of Rice Krispies treats.
However, cereal is probably not going to be on the Congressional agenda in 2013 much. So what else does John Tree bring to the table? In the mid-1990s, as an active duty officer, Tree was the Chief of West Mediterranean Logistics for the 16th Air Force at Aviano Air Base, Italy, responsible for Air Force logistics support for Tunisia, Morocco and Israel. He never met Mark Kirk at Aviano as Kirk was over there in 1999.
John, a full Colonel with TS and SCI clearance, freely states that he's not and never was an Air Force pilot. Now, John is an Air Force reservist, frequently workings at the Pentagon in logistics. Logistics folks are the people who assess military resources and where to put them, often moving large numbers of people and equipment on a dime. One example John gave was the nuclear disaster in Japan. He was working at the Pentagon when that happened and he worked on the project of diverting resources to Japan as quickly as possible. There are also environmental components to logistics work and John can easily talk about and work on environmental issues such as clean energy and water safety and access.
Tree also answered the Ilya camp's new charge, one that has them absolutely Republican-style fake indignant, that he had not voted in primaries. John told my friend and I that it's military custom for officers not to vote in partisan elections. It's meant to cut down on political partisanship in the military. I can understand that because I always found it rather offensive when Mark Kirk used his military service for political gain and leveraged his political power to enhance his military resume. to enhance his political power. John promised me that we'd never have to see pictures of him in a fake flight suit pretending he's a pilot.
So, basically, John has experience in understanding, finding and allocating resources both internationally and locally, in businesses large and small and in the military. I think that's one of the major factors contributing to John's campaign suddenly taking off as it has. He has skills that are necessary to effectively represent the District in Congress.
If I ever need to accumulate a large group of high school students, I know I can count on Ilya Sheyman. He had his group at the Northfield TownshipDemocrats endorsement hearing, all in appropriate Ilya t-shirts, but none of them able to vote in the meeting and most of them probably cannot vote at all.
Ilya's also fairly good at getting his people to attack the other candidates while pretending he's running a completely positive campaign. It's like he has his own Mitt/Newt-style superPAC, except without the large amounts of money. The ever so underfunded, PCCC (the "Bold Progressives") his been caught sending around an email stating that Ilya's "opponent" 'supported Republicans who vowed to cut Social Security,' but failed to name the opponent Apparently, they're happy to keep their folks assuming it's all of them. Alan Grayson wrote a post on Kos stating that Ilya is the candidate who fought Robert Gibb's attack on the "professional left." Grayson forgot that Sheyman and his local MoveOn actually participated in Gibb's attacks by attacking single payer advocates during the health care debate. Ilya would be your go-to guy on supporting the President every time he backs down which might come in handy because the President just backed down again on contraception.
Last night, I had the opportunity to continue my discussions with John Tree. Tree answered some questions about his experience. I already knew that he ran a marketing company and had previously owned a granola company, and marketed various consumer products in the corporate world. He knows a lot about healthy food and cereal. He'd be the go to guy on logistics, statistics and marketing of Rice Krispies treats.
However, cereal is probably not going to be on the Congressional agenda in 2013 much. So what else does John Tree bring to the table? In the mid-1990s, as an active duty officer, Tree was the Chief of West Mediterranean Logistics for the 16th Air Force at Aviano Air Base, Italy, responsible for Air Force logistics support for Tunisia, Morocco and Israel. He never met Mark Kirk at Aviano as Kirk was over there in 1999.
John, a full Colonel with TS and SCI clearance, freely states that he's not and never was an Air Force pilot. Now, John is an Air Force reservist, frequently workings at the Pentagon in logistics. Logistics folks are the people who assess military resources and where to put them, often moving large numbers of people and equipment on a dime. One example John gave was the nuclear disaster in Japan. He was working at the Pentagon when that happened and he worked on the project of diverting resources to Japan as quickly as possible. There are also environmental components to logistics work and John can easily talk about and work on environmental issues such as clean energy and water safety and access.
Tree also answered the Ilya camp's new charge, one that has them absolutely Republican-style fake indignant, that he had not voted in primaries. John told my friend and I that it's military custom for officers not to vote in partisan elections. It's meant to cut down on political partisanship in the military. I can understand that because I always found it rather offensive when Mark Kirk used his military service for political gain and leveraged his political power to enhance his military resume. to enhance his political power. John promised me that we'd never have to see pictures of him in a fake flight suit pretending he's a pilot.
So, basically, John has experience in understanding, finding and allocating resources both internationally and locally, in businesses large and small and in the military. I think that's one of the major factors contributing to John's campaign suddenly taking off as it has. He has skills that are necessary to effectively represent the District in Congress.
Sunday, February 05, 2012
Northfield Democrats: No IL-10 Endorsement
UPDATE: In the comments from Carl Nyberg:
Committeeman Mike Kreloff wrote the following to me in an email about the Supreme Court endorsement, "Near the end of the meeting, I asked for a motion to endorse all the uncontested candidates along with an endorsement of Justice Theis by acclamation. The motion was seconded and passed (by acclamation)."So, NTDO has in fact officially endorsed Justice Theis.
************************************************
Today I attended the Northfield Township Democratic Organization endorsement session. The session lasted almost 5 hours and was difficult. In the end, however, I believe the organization did the right thing as relates to the Illinois Tenth District Congressional race. But, before I get to that, let's go back.
Judges
I met a whole lot of people running for Cook County Judge. Since I was inundated at the door, and live in Lake County, I'm not going to go into all the candidates. However, it should be noted that there might have been a mistake in the endorsement on the Supreme Court race. Mary Jane Theis spoke. Aurelia Pucinski was expected, but didn't make it to the meeting (I do not know what held her up), so the NTDO held up the endorsement vote for her. But after the long day, the organization apparently failed to endorse. I'm not sure what happened. Did I miss something? Did they forget?
In any event, Theis talked about wanting to provide more help to unrepresented defendants, but firmly stated that she did not feel the state could provide the representation. She touted greater participation in pro bono work since attorneys have to state their pro bono hours on their registration forms, a rule on which she personally worked. Frankly, I'd credit the bad job market for young attorneys and large law firm layoffs for the increase in pro bono work, but I have no statistics.
I do like Theis' background as a public defender and I'm glad she's interested in working on fairness in the system.
Water Reclamation
I really like Debra Shore and so does NTDO. She was endorsed with a healthy vote, as was her slate. I learned that the reason for the slate is to try to get Shore elected President of the Board. I think she'd make a good choice. Her slate includes Kari Steele, a chemist, and Patrick Daley Thompson (yes, I hear related to Richard J. and Richard M. Daley).
The group endorsed Kari Steele and I'm glad they did. I've heard some claim that she's not qualified. Her pitch is a bit cute, but I've looked at her credentials and believe she is qualified. She has a Bachelor's of Science in Chemistry. She works professionally as a formulating chemist for L'Oreal. It's a problem solving job that takes scientific skill, business acumen and creativity. She's also done a stint at the District itself, albeit short. I do wonder if a bit of sexism in the sciences is at work among people who dismiss her candidacy.
Thompson discussed his experience from the real estate law perspective. Having done a lot of that myself, I agree that there are a lot of conservation and environmental issues that he must have dealt with over the years. However, he became passionate only when he started talking about his work to keep Illinois from adopting conceal carry. I'm not so sure Patrick is all that interested in sewage. But, he can carry on a credible discussion about MWRD funding.
Clerk of the Court
The group endorsed Rick Munoz, a few people expressing concerns about Clerk Brown's political history. Munoz is running on the slow implementation of electronic filing. I'm torn by this race. I use the clerks office frequently. I find it much better than what it was years ago with the staff far more polite and helpful. However, we still have to go down the the Daley Center for most filing and file review. The clerks computer system is cumbersome and difficult to use. I'm just not sure Brown is the problem or that Munoz will be able to make the reforms he seeks. There are a lot of other factors in the Clerks office including funding and state Supreme Court control over local county clerks. I'd like Munoz to give some data showing where he thinks Brown has gone wrong and how he can do better.
Illinois State Senate District 29: Both NTDO and my endorsement
Susan Garrett and her Grover Norquist no tax increase pledge are retiring from office, leaving the state senate district seat open. The best known candidate is the W. Deerfield Township Supervisor, Julie Morrison. She's endorsed by most of the local Democratic politicos and I have to say she'd done a pretty good job at W. Deerfield. Her credentials include her budgeting acumen, her keeping the tax rate down, and her added responsibilities as caseworker on the social services end of township business. Not said on her behalf in the meeting is that she works for the food pantry all the time, has obtained a significant amount of grant money for social services and has done good work for the disabled of the township. She's a solid candidate and she made a strong speech.
However, I also found her opponent, Milton Sumption, appealing. Sumption is a true outsider which is an intriguing idea for Springfield, so mired in budget problems caused by business as usual. Sumption has a business and finance background. Too many answers to his IVI-IPO questionnaire essay questions state that he wants to study the issue more, which may be honest, but doesn't say much about his candidacy. His IVI-IPO answer on pension reform was very general--fairness and sustainability. However, at the NTDO meeting, he rejected the idea of cutting off teacher's pensions as one member of the audience suggested. One of his IVI-IPO answers did cause me to pause as it shows his connection to the financial industry. He does not want to regulate bank and credit card fees and sees the "free market" as the best regulator. Since when, Milton?
As NTDO, I go with Julie here because I know her and know she is good at working with numbers and with people in need. Julie's background is working with children in juvenile court. She's pretty much a lifelong public servant, in some not-so-glamorous jobs. Sumption's resistance to consumer protection reforms gives me pause. However, I like Sumption and hope he stays active with the Democrats and decides to become one very soon.
Ilinois 9th CD
Jan Schakowsky, one of the best in the House if not the best.
She has a primary opponent, Simon Ribeiro. He's a teacher and he's running to be Jan, but more. He has a point on health care when Jan decided to leave the single payer cause to support whatever the Obama Administration came up with.
I'm not sure he has he messaging down and rambled a bit in his speech to NTDO, but I think with some experience, one day Simon will make a fine candidate. I hope he continues to work for progressive ideals.
Illinois 10th CD
For the record, I have decided to support John Tree.
Tree spoke first, well before the others, because he had to leave for another endorsement session downtown. He talked a bit about his background in the military and then went into his views on the gridlock in Congress and how to get the economy rolling. He was asked about Israel and answered with a brief description of his experience working with the Israeli military, his support for the country and his recognition for the need of a two state solution.
The rest of the IL-10 speeches were made at the end of the session. Vivek Bavda spoke first in the second round. Bavda's big idea is a lot of smaller ideas. He feels that congressional gridlock can be broken down one small jobs and infrastructure program at a time. He also discussed his experience in education through Teach for America. My only criticism of Bavda is that he probably needs to think bigger picture and show that he has a broader vision. He's a likeable guy.
Brad Schneider was up next. He made his pitch with a strong confident voice. He brought up his Mark Kirk contributions, probably because he knew it was coming. This time Schneider talked about Kirk's support for Israel and endorsements by several progressive organizations such as Planned Parenthood and Sierra Club. In short, he's back to having been duped. Questions from the audience pushed him further. There was clear anger in the room over his Mark Kirk support. As former blogger Kevin Roos aptly put it, how could the group accept Brad's claim he has been duped by Kirk when so many of the activists in that room knew who and what Kirk was from the start?
Ilya Sheyman came out attempting to portray the nice guy, in an unusually small voice (did he have a cold?). He's not going to say anything bad about either candidate (because he was going to let his surrogates do it for him and they did--so much for his "high road"). Sheyman touted his work on health care (which I dispute) and his vast experience opening the Tenth Dems Community Connection, and his work for Senator Obama for a few months. The rest was the standard progressive pitch. He claimed that no one he's encountered in his campaign has questioned his age or experience. He seems to have forgotten about me.
My recollection of Sheyman's work for Community Connection is that he was there at the very beginning, and attended meetings and helped out, but the real work was done by others. The late and great Chuck Knight was the key person in its inception. Now, Laura Tomsky is doing the heavy lifting for the group as far as I know. I'd ask Ilya to describe what he did for Community Connection and tell us his actual dates of active work for the organization.
The questions pitched Ilya from the audience were personal endorsements from supporters disguised as questions. No one asked him the tough questions on Israel although I do not know why he should be given a pass on the issue as no one else was. Ilya seems to be blessed with softball questions from Democratic organizations, DFA, IVI-IPO too, so I'm not sure how he'll do when confronted by Bob Dold supporters. In fact, Ilya appears to still be at the stage where adults only compliment his work, the "good boy" stage of life where everything you do is cute or good. I'm not sure how Ilya will react when up against John Boehner and crew.
The group then settled into a sometimes tense (although not loud) battle between the Sheyman supporters upset with Schneider's Kirk support, AIPCA ties and financial sector business background, and the Schneider supporters claiming Ilya too young and too liberal for the district, and therefore unelectable. Had it been earlier in the day, had there been more chairs and more air in the room, and had the candidates brought rice cakes, low fat proteins, carrots and celery to much on instead of coffee and sugar, things might have gone better.
As cooler heads prevailed, people started to reconsider John Tree as a good fit for the district, a strong candidate with a leadership background. I spoke up about Tree's experience with environmental issues and strength on economic issues that I feel he will back up with action.
I can see John standing up to House Republicans far better than his opponents. Tree's only drawback is that his late entry in the race puts him behind on money and on the ground campaign workers, but that could be remedied with support from organizations like NTDO, couldn't it?
In the end, Mike Kreloff and Elaine Nekretz made a pitch for no endorsement. They pitched for unity and cautioned the group over the divisiveness in the Sheyman/Schneider battle. I appreciated their comments because had I titled my initial post about Sheyman (linked above), Not to be rushed into a decision. I think Sheyman's early support came from people anxious to find their candidate early to get a jump start on the competition and ultimately Bob Dold.
No endorsement won out, but not as a concept in and of itself. Sheyman drew the most votes--22, but not enough to meet the 60% requirement, Tree did better than expected with 12, but competed with No Endorsement at 13. Schneider felt the wrath of the progressive Democratic crowd frustrated by years of hard work against Schneider's selected candidate, Mark Kirk and got a surprisingly small number of endorsement votes.
Thoughts
I may be biased, but it's not a natural bias, just common sense that brought me to Tree weeks ago. It seems to me Tree won the day at NTDO because he's what all those undecided and hesitant Democratic voters are looking for, a strong economic and social progressive, with military and foreign policy credentials, and all sorts of business experience from large corporations to small mom and pop companies. More than that, Tree has seen good times, bad times, happiness and heartache, poverty and wealth. He's seen religious faith and secular need, and his experience with conservatism brought him to progressivism. He's had both success and failure, and pulled success out of failure, and strength out of hardship.
John Tree requires no division in our ranks and need not cause additional angst among Democrats sick of failure in this District and progressives sick of disloyal representation from Blue Dogs and fair weather friends. John Tree is a good candidate because he is truly representative of the New Tenth District. As he is representative, he can represent it well. I urge everyone to reconsider their early positions and consider John Tree for Congress IL-10.
The NTDO endorsement session was a process for IL-10 Democrats. I hope the entire District notes where that process led them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)