64 Comments - Levois - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:33 am: I wonder what is it with innocent until proven guilty? Impeachment doesn’t necessarily make him a criminal. He will have his day in court but there are other reasons for this whole impeachment fiasco, even if what got this going on the fast track was his arrest. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:33 am: I was surprised at the wrath some posters expressed over Rep. Mell’s vote yesterday. Folks know I have had it up to here with this Governor, but I completely understand and accept her vote. Those of us with relatives in office are conflicted when they take public stands we wouldn’t have taken. Impeachment is an issue I have never had to deal with, so I respect her difficult decision yesterday. - TominChicago - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:34 am: While it was somewhat gutsy for Mell to vote “no” instead of “present” or to abstain, she should have ended her comments with the first sentence. The rest of it makes her look dumb. Given the evidence before the House, its akin to saying that she will believe Blago over her own lying eyes. - Amy - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:39 am: Rich, very nice of you to express understanding of the difficult family situation Deb Mell has. glad the satellite feed came through on WTTW so we could watch you in action with Carol Marin! - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:40 am: I don’t know Deb from Adam. At first thought, I remembered her short-lived campaign for the 5th CD US Rep when she hadn’t even been seated at the IL House, along with this stubborn vote of confidence to her bro-in-law who didn’t deserve any, and I thought “what a lot of nerve.” A lot of nerve is a good asset when used in the right time and place. Hope she spends her family’s political capital wisely from here on out. - Erickson - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:43 am: She should have recognized the conflict of interest and abstained from voting. It doesn’t have anything to do with the “easy way out”. It has to do with recognizing a conflict of interest and acting accordingly. It leaves others to question her ability to identify a conflict of interest and act on it appropriately. - grand old partisan - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:44 am: I have to disagree, Rich. While it’s true that “members are not barred from voting on issues where they have a conflict of interest,” that doesn’t mean they can’t – or shouldn’t. I don’t think, as you suggest, that “hitting the ‘yellow’ button would’ve been the easy way out.” On the contrary, I think that many of the people who are criticizing her for voting the way she did would still have attacked her for abstaining. And she also would have faced criticism from people who agree with you that abstaining is a cop-out. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:47 am: ===I think that many of the people who are criticizing her for voting the way she did would still have attacked her for abstaining=== Exactly. - Greg - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:50 am: I don’t have a lot of sympathy for a family first mindset in a state with so many clans in office. May I be upset with the speaker in the event he puts family over principle in issues involving the AG or future gov? - downstate hack - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:50 am: Rich, I agree with you 100% on this. Give her a break and let’s move on. - Rob_N - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:51 am: Rich, Perhaps part of the reason I disagree with her vote (much like I disagree with now former Rep. Patterson’s excuses) is that the scenario of an embattled Governor’s sister-in-law being the sole vote against impeachment describes many of our state’s problems to a T on so many levels. She was there, voting, as an elected official … not as a sister-in-law. - I'mTellingYou - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:51 am: Being a Republican and watching the reporting of the Bush administration over the past 8 years, there is one thing that I have been reminded of over and over again. Life is anything but fair. Politicians are often propelled to the top of the mountain be taking unfair advantage of the current issues of the day and they are often plunged into the deep valley by being unfairly blamed for issues that they had no control over. Like it or not it’s the game. Life is unfair and then we die. Have a nice day. - Mommy - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:52 am: What ever happened to vote the way you want. Not the way everyone else is. So what if she voted NO, at least she was there to vote. - Cassandra - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:54 am: I agree. Political lives end. Families are forever.She made the right choice. More alarming to me, whatever her no doubt admirable qualities, is the fact that she is a state representative at all. Aren’t there any viable candidates in her district that aren’t related to Dick Mell or other clout heavy politicians. Those Chicagoans. They say they are modern folk but in their hearts they are subjects, dwelling in today’s version of the monarchies of yore. - Ken - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:55 am: VM, I like your posts (even if I don’t agree with most of them), but I hope your relation in public office doesn’t share all of your views. Keep on challenging the left. I enjoy it, and it makes me look deeper into issues that I initially thought were cut and dry. - Tunes - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:56 am: Mell defintely should’ve voted “present” due to a conflict of interest. More of the same: Illinois politics as usual. Ack! - Ken - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:58 am: RM ===I think that many of the people who are criticizing her for voting the way she did would still have attacked her for abstaining=== Exactly. Perhaps she could have gotten the flu… Just as I think I will next Tuesday… - KeepSmiling - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 9:59 am: I agree, Rich. Mell’s vote was a public expression of support for her sister and her family. And it’s not like it was going to tip the scales on the outcome. There was plenty of room — plenty, plenty of room — for her contrary vote. It looks like Mell using the media’s attention on her vote to bring kudos to herself for being the first openly lesbian Rep was received by the media with a collective yawn. I think we’re done with the “first” awards for a while. - grand old partisan - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:01 am: Rich, I’m not following your logic. Abstaining would have been the “easy way out” of being criticized just as much as if she had voted against impeachment?? My opinion is that, in light of such a clear personal conflict, abstaining would have been the proper thing to do. And if she would have been attacked either way (abstaining or voting no), then why not just do the proper thing? - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:03 am: ===Mell defintely should’ve voted “present” due to a conflict of interest.=== There are no conflict of interest rules in the House. She was free to vote as she wished. She knows the governor as well as almost anyone, so she brings a special, if skewed, “expertise” to the debate. Screaming “Conflict of interest!” on this sort of stuff without explanation doesn’t cut it. You’ll have to explain your position better than that. Otherwise, you’re just posting a drive-by comment. And I despise drive-by comments. - Suzanne - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:03 am: I’m not so sure family is forever (unless one is really, really lucky) Still, Rep. Mell’s vote was understandable and, I imagine, a terribly wrenching way to inaugurate her start in the statehouse. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:04 am: ===then why not just do the proper thing? === Because that’s your idea of the “proper thing.” It doesn’t happen to be mine. Your opinion is not fact. - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:04 am: I think we’re done with the “first” awards for a while. At least until we have the first lesbian Pope. - Lurker - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:08 am: She does deserve a break. It’s her sister’s husband, for crying out loud. And those poor girls, her neices. They are suffering, too. ‘Family is family’ is right. - The Doc - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:09 am: I disagree. This isn’t your garden variety conflict of interest - the ties run much deeper and are much more personal. DM knows how the game is played - as you indicated, she’s Alderman Mell’s daughter, and he struck a deal to hand her the seat. There’s almost nothing to suggest Blago shouldn’t be impeached. A profile in courage she ain’t - courage would’ve been voting yes, as the overwhelming evidence suggests he’s at least incapable of executing his duties. DM’s statement is proof positive that she either doesn’t understand the fundamental differences between a legislative and judicial proceeding, or she willingly chose to ignore her duty as an elected representative. - Jechislo - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:09 am: I think she should have abstained from voting; with a verbal comment that she was in a no-win situation since Rod was family. Anyone who has any sense of decency would understand and agree with what she did. - Captain Flume - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:18 am: What rankles about Mell’s “no” vote is that is was based on a family relationship. Political family relationships are at the heart of much of the distrust and suspect behavior of our elected officials. Politics in Illinois is in fact viewed, and unfortunately accepted, as a family business. Anyone who has worked for a family business will tell you that blood will suffer much more bad decision-making and excuses for questionable behavior from family members than non-blood will. Though my own opinion is more “fact” than that of the blog-master, Mell’s impeachment vote was in my view just another example of why this state will continue to be mired in the festering pool of corrupt politics and politicians. It’s all in the family. - Bookworm - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:18 am: While I still believe it would have been better for Deb Mell to vote present, and I would not have blamed her for doing so, it’s hard for me to say what I would have done in that position, and it’s not as if it made any difference anyway. At one time I felt very sorry for Patti Blagojevich because I also was torn between a husband and a father who didn’t get along with each other. (Fortunately, they’ve patched things up and get along much better now.) My husband and my father had words (including a few four-letter words) with one another on several occasions. I cannot imagine what it would have been like to have those words plastered all over the news. I said, somewhat in jest last night, that if I were voting on impeaching some of my brothers-in-law I would have voted yes. On second thought, family feuds are easy to joke about but not so easy to actually live through, especially when children are involved, who are cut off from their grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, etc. as a result. Given that both Rod and Patti are in serious legal trouble (as is Rod’s brother) and a possibility exists of their children having BOTH parents sent to prison and/or deprived of any way to make a living, the Mell family faces some pretty hard choices right now. - Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:19 am: Her vote ultimately was meaningless. But she does need to understand that she was elected to represent her district, and when it conflicts with a family issue, she needs to deal with it accordingly. By representing her district first. I expect some snarky responses about legislative motives, but so be it. She knew the spotlight would be shining on her after her election because of her family relationships. I’ll cut her some slack under the circumstances and I refrained from commenting on it yesterday for the same reasons. Her vote ultimately was meaningless. - L.S. - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:20 am: I understand her vote and don’t think she should be raked over the coals for it. But a present vote would have been more appropiate. She should have said that as a sister and aunt she must obstain. But by voting no, Deb Mell the lawmaker is saying that the misdeeds of the governor do not warrent his removal from office. That’s a tough choice to defend. No one is going to beat her in that district, but as a matter of principle it was a bad vote. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:20 am: It was 117-1, right? Much ado about nothing. If you think she has problems, read up on the old Bulger family saga in Massachusetts. There a brother paid for standing by his brother. - Captain Flume - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:21 am: == Though my own opinion is more “fact” than that of the blog-master == Sorry, that should read “Though my own opinion is no more “fact” than that of the blog-master . . ” Boy, did that come out wrong the first time! - Pat collins - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:30 am: Regardless of what she “should” have done, I suspect 99% of her constituents will say “glad I wasn’t in those shoes” and slide her on this one. - Anon - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:34 am: Deb is a great person, and we’re lucky to have her in the ILGA. I wish she were my state rep. - Anonymous45 - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:36 am: I just got up off the floor after fainting, because I basically agree with Cassandra for once…I am just truly stunned that this has ocurred…somebody please run against her in two years…enough of the Mell influence in IL politics!! - Bill - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:40 am: Over and over everyone keeps harping on how this impeachment is not a legal proceeding but a political one in which each individual legislator votes however she feels. So, what’s the conflict. Deb voted how she felt and did what she felt was right. Good for her. I hope she has the courage and tenacity to keep voting her conscience. She’s got good political cover and can vote, basically, however she wants. Like it or lump it. - ChiGal - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:42 am: I can’t cut her slack. She is on the payroll now to represent her constituents, not her family. I feel for her, but if she actually wanted to start her political career by being honest, she would have abstained due to her personal situation. She put her personal situation ahead of what she was elected to do. Isn’t that what her brother-in-law is being accused of? They may be in-laws but she is showing that there really isn’t that much of a difference between the two. I’m sorry you had to make a tough decision Ms Mell, but you did run for public office. - Scooby - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:43 am: When she decided that she wanted to be a State Representative her predecessor was a year away from his pension and rather than wait and get in the easy way she wanted her father to throw his weight around so she could get the seat right away. She was impatient in wanting to be a State Rep, and she got her way. There’s a lot of benefit that comes with the job, and some responsibility. Now it’s an absolutely cruel irony that her first recorded vote put her family in a tough spot, but this is what she wanted and I think it’s unfair to ask everyone to give her a break when she’s only in this difficult position because that is where she demanded to be. Be careful what you wish for. - Dan S, a Voter and Cubs Fan - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:46 am: Anyone who would have thought Rep. Mell would vote any other way is kidding their self. If only that was the worst problem that family has caused Illinois Government we would be in the land of milk and honey. Her vote was her vote, not an issue. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:48 am: I’ll cut her some slack, but based on her comments it sounds like Abstaining makes more sense. She’s known the governor for 20 years, and can’t reconcile that with the evidence for impeachment presented in the House? Well, like a grand jury hearing, you can’t vote based on facts not entered into evidence, just on the facts presented. The Gov had the opportunity to present his case, and Mell had an opportunity to offer her own testimony, if she wanted. Neither were forthcoming. And impeachment is not a “guilty” vote, as others have clearly stated, and Mell should know by now. I can’t blame Mell for putting her family before the voters in her district, but she should be honest about her motives, and let the voters hold her accountably. I SERIOUSLY doubt that the voters in her district oppose the Gov’s impeachment and removal. - grand old partisan - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 10:56 am: Let’s be fair, Rich - I clearly pre-qualified that statements as being “in my opinion,” not a “fact.” - Tony - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 11:03 am: Mell was damned either way. If she would have abstained or voted present, she would have been chastised. She was put in a heck of a position by her own brother-in-law and she did what she thought was right. And remember, she isn’t the one impeached here or facing a federal court battle. - ChiGal - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 11:07 am: – Tony — How could you chastise her from abstaining? She has a conflict so she abstains. That is something you could respect her for. - zatoichi - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 11:14 am: She made a decision that was right for her what ever her personal reasons might have been. If the vote was 100-18 it would not have changed the actual outcome in any way. Let it go. - Phineas J. Whoopee - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 11:16 am: I find no fault in her no vote. I think supporting her sister at this time is actually a good thing. Announcing she was going to run for Congress before even being sworn in as Rep is another matter. I do think she will have competition for re-election. I know Mell is powerful but he is waning and this Blago thing hurts the family image. Besides she made some enemies the way they pushed out Bradley. - DisenfranchisedConservative - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 11:24 am: This is exactly what’s wrong with Illinois politics. Putting family before the people she is supposed to represent is wrong. Politics is a family business in Illinois and we might as well be the mafia on how we put family and friend morality before the public good. Blago would have never been elected if it wasn’t for his family. If Deb Mell is uncomfortable doing the right thing for the state over her brother in-law then she doesn’t need to be a state representative. But that is her profession, rather than a civic duty. Politics is a lucrative business in Illinois. And this mentality is what got us here in the first place. - Dan S, a Voter and Cubs Fan - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 11:29 am: DisenfranchisedConservative, AMEN - another progunner - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 11:41 am: –”…I appreciated her guts…” –”…I highly doubt there will be any political problems in her district. Who’s gonna beat her in a primary? She’s Dick Mell’s daughter, for crying out loud.” What guts? If there is no possibility for any real political backlash, what courage was shown by voting family over constituents? Sure, she may get some bad press, and certainly some bad comments from some folks here, but if this vote poses no threat to her current office, then how could this vote have shown any “guts”? Or is that comment in reference to the vote possibly harming her goal of achieving higher office? If that’s the case, then I guess I could see calling it “guts.” - chicago way - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 11:46 am: If you have a conflict of interest, the proper way to handle it is to abstain. That applies whether the conflict is personal, professional or monetary. However, mell is not the only person conflicted. If all conflicted abstained, their probably would have been only 20 votes - anon - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 11:51 am: She doesn’t deserve a break. That family has made their own bed (including her, who is only there because of her last name), and now they have to sleep in it. Boo-hoo. She’s there to represent the best insterests of her district and of the state, not to prevent personal family drama. She deserves all the flak she gets as a result of this. - John - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 11:53 am: Another perspective could be that Deb Mell is the ONLY legislator who has heard the Governor’s side of the story. And that may have played a part in the decision along with the family connection. Who knows whether he told her the truth. Maybe he told her a bunch of lies. But she could have come to the understanding that maybe the Governor isn’t completely innocent of any wrongdoing, but that the stuff that he actually did do didn’t rise to level of what a standard of impeachment should be for her. I don’t think that Rep. Mell would have voted against impeachment if she truly thought he was guilty of everything and deserved it, despite the family connection. She probably at least has some doubts about the whole thing because of that close connection. - Jake from Elwood - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 12:27 pm: Family comes first. Isn’t that the Chicago way? - Give her a break - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 1:07 pm: I completely agree with Rich! I don’t think her vote accurately reflects the sentiment of her constituents, but I think they will understand and forgive her. If the vote had been closer — say a number of people voted no — then she might have been in a different situation. Her vote did not make a difference in the outcome, other than we can’t say he was unanimously impeached. Family is family, and you can’t fault her for standing by his side. If she had voted “present,” I think she might have had trouble years from now explaining to her nieces why she didn’t stick with her family. - Little Egypt - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 2:05 pm: I don’t have an opinion on how Deb Mell voted or should have voted. But I do have an opinion of whether she should have been elected or not. This state would be better off with none of the Mell (extended) family in any political position. - Cheswick - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 2:43 pm: She can look those little girls in the eye with a clean conscience. And 10 years from now she won’t have to explain to them why she voted to impeach their father on her first day on the job. - Rod Bla-gone-a-vich - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 3:13 pm: All in all I’d say that yesterday was an up day. - Chicago Cynic - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 3:15 pm: I think most people are missing the point. It’s not the vote that she cast that has people upset. It’s the nepotism in the first place. Here we go again. I’m sure she and Threemil will have much to discuss. Enough already! - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 3:18 pm: ===It’s not the vote that she cast that has people upset. It’s the nepotism in the first place.=== Get over it. She ran unopposed. Nobody even challenged her. - jake - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 3:57 pm: One thing in Deb Mell’s statement that rings true to me is that the allegations were not consistent with the person she had known for a long time. If the Governor had behaved many years ago the way he has behaved recently, he would never have been elected to anything, let alone Governor. When all ultimately comes out and we get hindsight perspective, I believe we will find out there is some personality disorder that has been developing over time. The self-destructiveness of the Governor’s behavior sets it apart from any other political corruption case that I know of. I have never seen anybody go out of his way to make powerful enemies as the Governor has done. - Thomas Westgard - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 4:36 pm: If Deb Mell couldn’t do what was in the best interests of the State of Illinois, it was her duty not to take the job. She could have recused herself from this vote; she could have resigned her position; even a case could be made why she should vote “Present.” By no measure is it in the best interest of her constituents for Blago to stay in office. Her decision to vote “No” was wrong and morally cowardly. - Toni H. - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 6:06 pm: With regards to Deb Mell and her No vote: Just shows you more of the same type of person elected by the Chicago Dems. Hey folks - you get what you vote for! Another big mistake. - Zora - Thursday, Jan 15, 09 @ 6:33 pm: And get a load of Mell’s response to Eric Zorn’s flogging. It’s classic form-letter-to-a-constituent tripe: Dear Eric, Thank you for your message, I appreciate your candor. As has been acknowledged, this vote was difficult and not how I anticipated beginning my term as state representative. You are one of my constituents and your feedback is important. I take nothing for granted and will work hard to earn your trust and respect. I am committed to providing high-quality services to the people in my district, and will be an active and responsive presence in our community. There is much work to be done in Springfield. The economy is a mess, people are losing their jobs and their homes. I am eager to get started, fighting on behalf of the people in my district. Before my next vote, please be in touch - I want to be sure to take all perspectives into consideration. Regards, Deb Mell So, is she saying that if we had only gotten in touch with her before her impeachment vote we might have swayed her? Is this a Daley-esque blame the complacent citizen defense? - 312 - Friday, Jan 16, 09 @ 1:45 am: I still agree w/abstaining, it’s too close of an issue personally (that can affect professionally) BUT I’m looking at this differently (ie, familial relationships)… If she voted YES, she would have been on Dad’s side. If she voted NO, she would be on Patti’s side. This may be a way to show her political independence from her father? Or not… I’m sooo glad I’m not in the middle of it, but (as a staffer would recommend she) would have abstained. Yeah, both sides mad that I didn’t side with them, but neither REALLY angry that I was publicly against either of them… Not like holidays are much fun around that household anyways! - Bobs yer - Friday, Jan 16, 09 @ 7:25 am: Aside from her display of political witlessness, I’m shocked (shocked I tell you!) by this display of nepotism in the 40th. Weren’t there any Daley, Madigan, Burke, or Cullerton kids than needed a job? Guess I can’t tell Ms. Mell to ‘Man up’, so Ms. Mell, next time you have to choose between your family and the State, either choose the people you represent or resign. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.