* Comptroller Dan Hynes is not running for reelection. He may run for attorney general if Lisa Madigan moves up, or he may run for governor is LMadigan stays put. But you can probably expect this issue to haunt him…
In the strongest language yet, funeral homes that have lost millions of dollars from a pre-need funeral trust fund are blaming Illinois regulators charged with keeping money safe.
Furthermore, funeral home directors allege, the state comptroller’s office, which regulates the pre-need funeral industry, kept the burgeoning financial crisis under wraps. By the time the truth emerged, it was too late to stave off losses that might now exceed $100 million, say funeral directors who are suing the Illinois Funeral Directors Association and others.
“Even state regulators who took on the responsibility for monitoring the pre-need trust failed to protect plaintiffs and other pre-need trust depositors,” funeral directors say in court documents filed Friday. “Indeed, when questioned by funeral directors on why the issue was not addressed in 2001, when the (Illinois Office of the Comptroller), but not the funeral directors, knew of a budding deficit, the (comptroller’s) response was that the deficit was ‘pennies on the dollar,’ as if that excused (the comptroller) from doing anything about it.” […]
“I’m not going to talk to you, I think that’s pretty clear,” Peg Roth, assistant comptroller, told a reporter after a June 4 meeting with funeral directors upset about the fund’s financial prospects. Roth told a reporter to ask the department’s spokeswoman what the comptroller’s office did about the troubled fund before 2006. But spokeswoman Carol Knowles did not return a phone call.
Not only did the fund lose money, but it was started by Roland Burris when he was comptroller. Burris was a registered lobbyist for the funeral home people, although Hynes claims he had no direct contact with Burris once he found out who Burris worked for. Still, it’s a bad connection. Nothing connected to Burris will turn out well.
* Meanwhile, remember last week when we discussed the “shackling” of pregant Cook County prisoners while they were delivering their babies? Well, the SouthtownStar has a follow-up entitled: Shackled in labor: ‘Dehumanizing,’ ‘outrageous’ which includes this quote from an attorney who is filing a class action suit…
[Attorneys] said it is absurd that women in labor could be a security threat or flight risk.
“We think that’s nuts,” [Kenneth Flaxman] said. “And we think the courts will agree with us.”
But, last week, the Sheriff Dart’s office shared a few news stories with me about attempted escapes by women prisoners, including one who was pregnant…
JAIL GUARD SUSPENDED AFTER PRISONER ESCAPE Chicago Tribune June 13, 1997
A Cook County Department of Corrections officer was suspended without pay Thursday pending an administrative hearing for allegedly leaving a prisoner unattended Wednesday night at Mt. Sinai Hospital Medical Center.
The prisoner, Latanya Burks, 26, of the 1500 block of South Keeler Avenue, escaped during the officer’s absence after giving birth. Burks has since been caught and is being held on $5,000 bond at Cermak Hospital…..
HOSPITALIZED INMATE DIES IN WINDOW FALL Chicago Tribune May 10, 1998
Joyce Nathan, 39, a Cook County Jail inmate awaiting trial on a murder charge, died Saturday afternoon after falling or jumping from a fourth-floor window at Cook County Hospital.
Nathan was in the jail’s unit in the hospital recovering from stomach surgery performed on Thursday, said Bill Cunningham, a Cook County Sheriff’s spokesman.
Guards stationed outside the ward saw Nathan going out the window, and they believe she was trying to escape rather than commit suicide, Cunningham said, though he declined to say what evidence led to that assumption. He could not say whether windows on the ward were locked, but he said that was being looked into.
HEADLINE: Sheriff nabs suspect who fled hospital
BYLINE: Frank Main and Stefano Esposito, The Chicago Sun-Times
Cook County Sheriff Michael Sheahan personally nabbed a drug suspect Friday after the hospitalized woman slipped past one of his guards — who was cited earlier in the day for leaving her unattended.
Lawanda Warren, 40, of University Park, escaped about 10 a.m. from Loretto Hospital on the West Side. The escape gave more ammunition to critics of Sheahan after a recent spate of escapes from the jail.
Warren had been arrested Tuesday by Chicago Police for alleged heroin possession and was admitted to the hospital after she complained of chest pains. She had not yet been booked into the jail.
* One of the problems with the complicated federal campaign finance regulatory system is it’s a federal regulatory system. Relatively small mistakes can make honest people look like criminals or hapless fools. Still, there’s really no excuse for this…
The Federal Election Commission is reviewing a complaint against the campaign of Democratic 10th Congressional District candidate Michael Bond, who currently serves Illinois’ 31st senate district.
According to Lake County Republican Chairman Dan Venturi, who filed the complaint against Bond with the FEC, Bond has declared himself a congressional candidate and expended money on behalf of his candidacy — without timely filing the proper paperwork and disclosures (due 15 days after declaring one’s candidacy). Venturi notes that, as reported by Team America some time ago, Bond has reserved a website address and several draft pages of the site can be accessed (although not by design, it appears).
In addition, it is beyond question that Bond officially declared himself a candidate weeks ago (April 29), as evidenced by a press release and statements to the media. According to Venturi, Bond’s campaign could be subject to a fine for failure to properly and timely file his disclosures.
The above story is from a highly partisan GOP blog, so keep that in mind, please. But Bond did declare his candidacy back in April, so the clock apparently started ticking then…
“After speaking with people in our communities, listening to their ideas and hearing their concerns, I’ve decided to run for Congress.”
If you’re gonna get in the arena, you have to be prepared, and part of that preparation is hiring experienced lawyers who can help you through the labyrinth of federal regulations.
…Adding… From Larry…
In fact, if you don’t spend $5,000 and run you don’t have to file at all. Obviously you aren’t going to win, but there are minor candidates who often don’t file for this very reason.
If you haven’t raised $5,000 yet, you don’t have to file. When you reach that threshold you have 15 days to file from that date. There is nothing in the complaint that alleges Bond raised more than $5,000 before May 16, 2009 so the Lake County Republican Chairman Dan Venturi is wasting FEC time and money with nothing other than a harassment technique while the FEC can barely keep up with legit complaints.
The Democrat Bond wants to run for Republican Mark Kirk’s seat, but Kirk still hasn’t made up his mind…
Republican U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk is still deciding what office he wants to run for in next year’s election.
Is it U.S. senator, governor or a sixth term in Congress?
Kirk wasn’t saying Monday. But he said he’s raising money for a “big campaign.” He wants to assess next year’s races before deciding.
Kirk, by the way, engaged in a bit of healthcare grandstanding yesterday…
As President Obama spoke with doctors gathered Monday for the American Medical Association’s annual meeting in Chicago, U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Highland Park) spoke with reporters about legislation he has introduced that would assure patients can keep their current doctor. […]
Kirk’s “Medical Rights Act” restricts the government from interfering with any decision and individual makes with his or her doctor.
Illinois Republicans are demanding that the state use more managed care for Medicaid, which would deprive people of choosing their own physicians and allow somebody other than their doctors to make decisions for them, but Kirk is apparently going the opposite direction.
Also, according to a recent National Journal article, Kirk’s district doesn’t appear on either Democratic or Republican “top tier” lists, which leads Swing State Project to speculate…
…maybe they aren’t confident about Mark Kirk vacating IL-10?
Discuss
- collar observer - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:27 am:
Bond - which ticket is he running on - D or R? He voted against HB174 - Dems - he needs a good primary opponent -
- Hank - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:31 am:
The funeral mess sounds like something a Daley relative would be involved in. Do we have all the players yet?
- Rob_N - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:34 am:
“Kirk’s “Medical Rights Act” restricts the government from interfering with any decision and individual makes with his or her doctor.”
It should be called “Kirk’s Do-Nothing About Health Care Act” because the language essentially blocks any real reform at all.
And why just government? Why not add in insurance companies too? They deny needed health care all the time when it isn’t “profitable”.
What’s that? You need a liver transplant? Eh, you’re going to die anyway so why spend the money.
Kirk’s propagandistic town hall on Saturday featured a bunch of Kirk-friendly doctors and, mysteriously, none of his constituents who actually thinks the health care system is completely broken beyond repair was called on. Go figure.
- 32nd Ward Roscoe Village - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:35 am:
Is this mess the reason for SB 1682 which was initiated by Hynes which amends the “Illinois Funeral or Burial Funds Act” and the “Pre-Need Cemetery Sales Act? Evidently, under current law, sellers of the pre-need trust accounts are not required to place funds with corporate fiduciaries for funds under $500,000. SB 1682 increases disclosures to consumers and strengthens oversight of consumer funds placed in trust accounts for future burials by removing the under $500,000 exemption and requiring all trusts held by licensed sellers to place such funds with corporate fiduciaries. It has passed both houses.
- Don't Worry, Be Happy - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:36 am:
>Kirk’s “Medical Rights Act” restricts the government from interfering with any decision and individual makes with his or her doctor.
- Conservative Veteran - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:39 am:
Last Sat., I attended a meeting of the Republican Organization of Wheeling Township, and Rep. Kirk was the guest speaker. Someone asked whether he’ll run for the U.S. Senate. Kirk said that he hasn’t decided. He said, “The White House chose someone they think is the perfect candidate for the U.S. Senate or governor. That person can’t run for both offices. A few days after that person makes an announcement, I’ll announce the race in which I’ll run.” I think that Kirk was referring to Attorney General Madigan. He knows that she’ll run for the U.S. Senate or governor, and he’ll probably run for the race for which she doesn’t run. Since Kirk probably won’t run for re-election, I hope that a Republican is planning on running for his U.S. House seat. I read that State Rep. Coulson might run.
- I'm Just Saying - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:40 am:
Hank that is the dumbest thing I have heard here in years……. Typical Drive by….
- Rob_N - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:53 am:
Con Vet, yes, several Republicans are rumored to be interested in running for the 10th should Rep. Kirk decide to move on.
But, his procrastination is costing them valuable fundraising time for a Federal campaign. The people I’ve heard as rumored have state campaign accounts which cannot be used for a Federal campaign.
That is part of the reason why Michael Bond started his campaign last April.
–
Adding, if Venturi and Team America think anyone will care about a slipped deadline in early 2009 … they should consider how many voters cared about McCain’s shenanigans with his ethically dubious campaign loan during the primaries last year.
(And if, dear reader, your response is “What are you talking about?” you’ve proven my point.)
- Pat collins - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:53 am:
I dont see how you blame Burris when a law was passed in 2001 giving Hynes the ability HE ASKED for to regulate that fund. He’s been in office 10 years?
And it’s Burris fault? If Burris should not have issued a license, why did it take him 10 years to find that out?
The Comptroller doesn’t have a lot of duties, and Hynes blows one of the few it has?
What a great record to run on for higher office.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:54 am:
This pre-need funeral fund mess is a Big Heaping Bowl of Wrong, with plenty to go around for everyone.
Where’s the fund manager in this? Didn’t they provide quarterly reports?
I’ve been able to track my investments daily online for years. The Comptroller and IFDA didn’t have that ability? No one asked questions?
Bad, bad, bad.
- Greg B. - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:56 am:
Some points on managed care restrictions and govt. restrictions.
1. Managed care doesn’t mean you can’t see the doctor you want nor does it mean you are denied services. Managed care just denies payment for out of network providers and services. If you can find the means to pay for it, then you can go out of network and get what you wish.
2. Of course managed care more often pays better than Medicaid and it offers more services than Medicaid.
3. The govt. interfering between patient and dr. means you don’t have the freedom to go out of network or purchase health out of the network. In many, instances you would go to another jurisdiction — such as Canadians and other foreigners coming to the US.
If you are in Medicaid today there are no limits to the amount of services you can get. You can see a dr., go the ER, etc. is often as you like on the tax payer. It’s an entitlement.
The fear of rational thinkers is that govt. run health care will result in rationing aka Europe where if you are 65 you can’t get a hip replacement. That’s a far cry from managed care.
- Team America - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 11:03 am:
Rob_N- point taken on McCain but all voters have to hear is “fined by the FEC for campaign violations” (if that happens) and that’s all they need.
- ivoted4judy - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 11:04 am:
I think L.M. is leaning heavily to a U S Senate run. If so, the whole Democratic primary is up for grabs. Alexi may reconsider a run for Gov, Hynes and Hamos and Franks vie for A G, with Turner, John Bradley and ChapaLavia eyeing Lt Gov.
- shore - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 11:06 am:
While I maybe a Kirk supporter I have a few concerns about him procrastinating.
1. It makes it tougher for the GOP to save his district. A few of us still like the GOP in the suburbs.
2. It makes it tougher for him to raise money for whatever he chooses. These offices won’t come cheap and as charlie cook pointed out the other day, he has no one in the party to help him the way kennedy/alexi has obama. The best surrogate he has is maybe mccain and that didn’t go so well here last year.
3. He will have to contend with a)a democrat party that is better organized here, meaning he needs more time b) a gop that is already on MAJOR defense nationally with several retirements in much more Red areas, meaning it will be tougher for him to get the 5-6 million the nrsc generally gives top tier challengers. c)the fact that he will have to at once define himself, build an organization, vote in d.c, and raise at least 20 million (amount spent in minnesota last year). And he still does the navy one weekend a month.
Tough going.
- FDR - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 11:25 am:
Like I said last week when Rich linked to the pregnant inmate story, this lawsuit puts the sheriff’s department in a no win situation. Either they run the risk of not cuffing a female to the bed and she escapes — in which case we ridicule the sheriff for not being able to guard a pregnant woman. Or they cuff her to the bed and we criticize the sheriff for being cruel.
By the way, does anyone bother to hold a 40 year old woman who is pregnant for the seventh time responsible for he own actions? Don’t rob people when your pregnant, jails typically aren’t the best place to get pre-natal care!
- Anon - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 11:31 am:
I think blaming Hynes for the funeral directors fiasco is a little like blaming FDR for World War II. If memory serves, Hynes has been the only comptroller to revoke licenses of cemeteries and funeral homes for their conduct with trust funds. Hynes single-handedly saved Peoria’s cemetery when his predecessor refused to do anything. The point is, if there was fraud, the persons committing the fraud vigorously attempt to conceal the fraud from the regulators. Hynes did not cause the problem with the funeral directors. Rather, he has been the most vigilant regulator or the cemetery and funeral industry in the history of the office. I confess that I am a fan of Hynes, and I think that he represents the type of good government that Illinois needs. I hope this does not “haunt” him in his electoral endeavors because it should not.
- ChiTownguy - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 11:49 am:
The complaint against Bond is nothing more than a partisan attack to do EXACTLY what Team America just said it was: give them a headline to say Bond is under investigation.
Either they don;t know the Federal law, or they don’t care and are wasting federal time and resources for political purposes. (Yes, I am biased, but here’s the facts.)
FEC paperwork for new Congressional candidates is due within 15 days of raising or spending $5,000. Announcing, not announcing, giving interviews, launching websites, yelling from roof tops, etc. doesn’t mean anything.
Here are the facts from the FEC website:
http://www.fec.gov/pdf/candgui.pdf
See page 5
1. Candidate Registration Threshold
An individual triggers registration and reporting responsibilities under the Act when campaign activity exceeds $5,000 in either contributions or expenditures. (Money raised and spent to test the waters does not count toward this dollar threshold until the individual decides to run for federal office or conducts activities that indicate he or she is actively campaigning rather than testing the waters. See Chapter 1, Testing the Waters.). The $5,000 threshold is reached when:
The individual and/or persons • he or she has authorized to conduct campaign activity receive over $5,000 in contributions or make over $5,000 in expenditures; or
The individual fails to disavow • unauthorized campaign activity by writing a letter to the FEC within 30 days after being notified by the agency that another person or group has received contributions or made expenditures of more than $5,000 on the individual’s behalf. 100.3(a) and 102.13(a)(2).
Seems pretty clear cut to me. Let’s not give this (or Team America) any more time or attention to help advance a personal partisan agenda.
- Ghost - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 12:14 pm:
=== Managed care just denies payment for out of network providers and services. ====
Ahh but who decides the network provider and services that are covered?
A network made of bottom tier doctors one step ahead of malpractice claims is not the best way to be treated. The medical choice stuff is about getting to choose the doctors who treat you instead of a overnemtn selected provider program.
Go look sometime at the providers who treat kids covered by “all kids”.
=== The govt. interfering between patient and dr. means you don’t have the freedom to go out of network or purchase health out of the network.===
With most its not an issue of going out of network, the issue is with the network itself. Who gets to say which treaters are “in” my network; who sets up the networks etc.
ALso many managed care programs provide financial incentives to gate keeper doctors to limit treatments and testing to save money. Not a good system at all.
How about this, a system where I can go to any doctor I want, as-long-as my primary care physician identifies that the treatment or visiti to a specialist is medically necessary.
Pingback ArchPundit | Michael Bond’s 15 Days…. - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 12:21 pm:
[…] Team America again screws up the facts with his breathless attack on Michael Bond for not forming a campaign committee within 15 days of announcing and links to two different links that are accurate, but not complete. […]
- Rob_N - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 12:24 pm:
Team America says, “point taken on McCain but all voters have to hear is “fined by the FEC for campaign violations” (if that happens) and that’s all they need.”
Yes, I realize that Kirk’s media control office can get the local papers to change their headlines and stories at the snap of a finger… ‘Need Susan Kuczka to add a quote? How many friendly quotes from supporters would you like her to insert? Say, while I’ve got you on the phone, is that headline biased enough for you or should we make it more harsh? You want fries with that?’
But here’s the clear counterpoint to your spin:
The campaign finance system is broken and this red tape gotcha game is another example of just how broken it is.
If I were Bond (and I’m not, don’t even play him on TV) that’s the tack I’d take. As Rich says, the Federal campaign system is … a Federal system. Full of mazes and pitfalls.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 12:24 pm:
Ghost was posting just as I was.
- Carl Nyberg - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 12:36 pm:
Does Kirk’s “Medical Rights Act” repeal the Hyde amendment?
Do poor women get abortions through Medicaid under Kirk’s plan?
Do military women and dependents overseas get to use military facilities to get abortions?
If Kirk’s for getting the gov’t out of messing with women getting government funded abortions, I’m sure the Right Wing of the GOP would like to hear about it.
If Kirk’s bill creates a carve-out that government can’t make health care decisions except in cases of abortion, how much credit should the media give Kirk (their darling) for being pro-abortion rights? Or is Kirk only a supporter of abortion rights when it’s an easy vote?
- Nanner - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 12:48 pm:
Rich, you ought to be ashamed to post Team America’s rantings without fact checking them yourself.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 12:50 pm:
Nanner, I’m ashamed of nothing. The complaint was filed.
I’m seriously considering banning the word “ashamed” from this blog. It’s the most overused word on the Intertubes as far as I can tell.
- Cheswick - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 12:52 pm:
It is my opinion that Burris did a grave disservice for the undertakers when they came to him regarding the comptroller.
Burris took them on as a lobbyist client. Instead, it is my belief, upon properly sizing up the situation, he should have advised them that they did not need a lobbyist to deal with the Comptroller; what they really needed was a lawyer who was experienced in state regulations and contract law. He could have then referred them to such a person, or taken the case himself, in his capacity as a lawyer and not a lobbyist.
When he approached the comptroller’s office as a lobbyist, Hynes said, “the comptroller doesn’t deal with lobbyists” (or words to that effect). And then, Roland did nothing. But, the problem still existed.
[Sorry for the “grave” reference. Couldn’t think of a better word.]
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 12:53 pm:
Kinda makes Rich’s point about the complexity of the regs. I find the Lake County Republican’s particularly inept in this case, but the law and regs are confusing and create all sorts of problems.
- Rob_N - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 1:25 pm:
Nanner, You ought to be ashamed about your pitifully weak attempt at shaming busy people.
Rich is right. He’s a reporter. The filing of an FEC complaint, even if it’s as bogus and partisanly-motivated as this one seems to be, is news whether some folks like it or not.
As Larry points out, that the complaint was even filed by a partisan guy who apparently couldn’t figure out what the election code actually said proves Rich’s point that the Federal code is a convoluted mess.
It’s up to Bond’s team now to contact Rich and any other newsy types to get their side to this non-story out there.
(It’s as good a test run as any for the 6-week-old campaign’s response efforts.)
- Anon - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 3:36 pm:
- ChiTownguy and Rob_N:
How can you say this is baseless? Bond was purchasing web domains and services. We all know he didn’t write that release himself - he paid someone to do it. He even admits to contracting with a pollster, media consultant, mail vendor and campaign manager to work on his congressional bid.
OF COURSE he is spending money! If he wasn’t, then all of the people listed above would have to be working for free and/or backdating their invoices.
What is wrong with the Lake County GOP pointing out that Bond is contracting with services and clearly spending money? It isn’t anything to be “ashamed” of, it is something Bond should have to answer to.
Make him prove that he is innocent…I bet you that he can’t.
- Rob_N - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 4:10 pm:
Anon 3:36, I didn’t say it IS baseless. I said it APPEARS to be bogus and partisanly-motivated.
You ask, “What is wrong with the Lake County GOP pointing out that Bond is contracting with services and clearly spending money? It isn’t anything to be “ashamed” of, it is something Bond should have to answer to.”
Mr. Venturi did not simply point those things out. He filed a complaint alleging that Sen. Bond should have registered with the FEC within 15 days of announcing his candidacy on April 29, 2009 nevermind that the actual FEC regulations require that candidates must file once they cross a $5000 threshold of money either raised or spent, not once they make an announcement.
A web domain is a few bucks at GoDaddy and elsewhere. Bond’s Congressional campaign website has not yet launched (as Team Am himself pointed out a few weeks back) and it could be being produced by volunteers for all you and Venturi know (or are you Mr. Venturi as it is?). And just because someone has signed a contract with a vendor doesn’t mean they’ve paid them money yet, just that they promise to do so once work is committed to…
That said, Team Am’s blogpost noted the Bond paperwork was filed in the first few days of June which would imply that Michael Bond either spent or raised the $5000 threshold sometime in mid- to late-May. At the outside, even if he hadn’t yet met that threshold perhaps he planned to in the near future and took care of the paperwork ahead of time.
Seeing as how he officially announced his candidacy at the very end of April that timeline makes perfect sense, as long as you don’t have Kirk-colored glasses on.
And Sen. Bond can easily prove he is innocent by producing the related paperwork (receipts for donations, checks written to vendors, etc).
…Mark Kirk’s team has a history of filing frivolous complaints with various election regulators. They filed a bogus complaint with the FEC over Dan Seals’ too-successful gas-a-palooza event. They’ve filed silly complaints over letterheads for Pete’s sake. And now they’re filing an APPARENTLY politically-motivated complaint against Bond.
If, as the Kirk supporters say, Sen. Bond is a lightweight then why are they pouncing on him so soon?
(Of course, Team Am admitted why in an earlier comment — so they can drum up some disparaging talking points against the guy.)
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 4:21 pm:
===He voted against HB174 - Dems - he needs a good primary opponent ===
So did Susan Garrett, the only other legislative Dem talking about running for that seat.
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 5:47 pm:
===How can you say this is baseless? Bond was purchasing web domains and services. We all know he didn’t write that release himself - he paid someone to do it.
The federal campaign law isn’t about whether you are contracting someone to do something for your campaign. It is whether you have raised $5,000. That’s it. Many times you sign contracts before that point and given this early date, it’s entirely possible to have someone working not full time and pay no where near $5000 for press work or web work. In addition,if you are hiring a consultant, you often contract for the work well before they do the work and may not pay them until after the work is completed. Incurring debts is not the same as raising funds.
If you read the complaint it doesn’t even mention the $5000 threshold and thus is a bogus complaint. It doesn’t even allege the breaking of federal law or regulations as it is stated now. It claims that a law was violated with no actual claim that supports an actual reg or law being violated.
Now, if someone can determine that Bond raised $5,000 by May 11, 2009 they could file a complaint, but there is no evidence so far that he raised that much by that date. The complaint alleges he was a candidate and had engaged some vendors–neither of which are relevant to whether he was required to form a committee if he hadn’t spent $5,000.
- ChiTownguy - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 6:51 pm:
“Make him prove he is innocent?” Really?!
Come on…let’s hold ourselves to a little higher standards. This is what makes people so turned off by politics.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 6:53 pm:
Hey Rob N,
I filed two such FEC complaints against the Dan Seals campaign during the last election cycle on behalf of Kirk for Congress. One is still pending. The other one resulted in a finding that Seals improperly failed to record and report in kind contributions.
Frivolous? Go look them up. Both complaints were reported in the press. So what are you talking about?
I guess if you and ArchPundit see a van in some neighbor’s driveway and someone emptying the contents of the house into the van, you would first “point it out” then later call the police? Or do you call the police and let them deal with it? A good citizen calls the police.
Don’t complain when a Republican acts like a good citizen! : -)
- ArchPundit - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 7:27 pm:
====I guess if you and ArchPundit see a van in some neighbor’s driveway and someone emptying the contents of the house into the van, you would first “point it out” then later call the police? Or do you call the police and let them deal with it? A good citizen calls the police.
Bad analogy given the complaint doesn’t suggest any violation of the law. Again, read the regulations before making complaints. This is akin to filing a false police report. Of course, the police wouldn’t even take the complaint if you tried it because the situation is more like if you saw your neighbor in his own driveway with a moving van. He’s allowed to take his own stuff.
There’s simply no violation suggested by the complaint. No where is there a suggestion that Bond raise over $5,000 before May 11th. That’s the legal standard in this case.
This is complete amateur hour in the Lake County Republican Party.
- Rob_N - Tuesday, Jun 16, 09 @ 10:56 pm:
Louis, If the van in the driveway has the name of a moving company most people just let the movers do their jobs.
And that seems to be what’s happening here.
…I take it that since he’s got his nothing-better-to-do army out and about wasting the FEC’s time that Cong. Kirk is planning to stay put and play it by ear in 2012 after the redistricting.
Otherwise he’d be having Ace Ventura there filing complaints against Giannoulias and Kennedy…
Adding… Say, didn’t Chris Kennedy’s cousin “announce” that Chris was definitely running a few weeks ago? You guys are late with your complaint!
Also adding… Before someone from the Lake County GOP pipes about Sen. Bond’s May fundraiser, the guy still had some debt to pay off from his last State Senate campaign and that fundraiser was for his state committee, not his Federal campaign.
What’d Team America call his fellow Lake GOP’ers a few weeks back? “Dysfunctional?” Sounds like the wrong prefix.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 7:24 am:
You two would fail any Neighborhood Watch group. So if you see suspicious activity, you do nothing or maybe you would “point it out” but more likely you would not. Glad your not my neighbor! I’d get robbed every time!
Using your “waste of time” arguments, if you see suspicious activity, you personally must investigate it to the nth degree and then call the police after you have the proof beyond a reasonable doubt? A “false police report” means no suspicious activity, no cause at all for a call, not just that the police showed up and found everything on the up and up. The police urge calls for suspicious activity and to be on the watch for such activity. You two die hard Democrats feel otherwise.
If you smell smoke, do you call the fire department, or do you wait until the flames are lighting up your eyebrows?
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 8:42 am:
Louis -
You’re deliberately missing the point in order to maintain your illusory spin.
What you’re calling suspicious activity is clearly legitimate activity under the actual, full and complete FEC regulations as has been pointed out ad infinitum.
Hence, the label “waste of time”.
It is certainly your right (as with Team Am, Dan Venturi, Mark Kirk, etc.) to claim legit activity is suspicious and thus file all the complaints you like… Doesn’t make it any less frivolous.
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 8:44 am:
PS -
If there actually is suspicious activity, “pointing it out” is the same as calling police.
You can’t even maintain your own spin logically.
- ArchPundit - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 9:41 am:
====#You two would fail any Neighborhood Watch group. So if you see suspicious activity, you do nothing or maybe you would “point it out” but more likely you would not. Glad your not my neighbor! I’d get robbed every time!
Using your “waste of time” arguments, if you see suspicious activity, you personally must investigate it to the nth degree and then call the police after you have the proof beyond a reasonable doubt? A “false police report” means no suspicious activity, no cause at all for a call, not just that the police showed up and found everything on the up and up. The police urge calls for suspicious activity and to be on the watch for such activity. You two die hard Democrats feel otherwise.
What you are missing is there is nothing suspicious here. Bond didn’t hold any federal fundraisers during this time and there’s no indication in the complaint that he raised $5,000.
There’s a twelve day period between April 29, 2009 and May 11, 2009. For him to have violated the law he would have had to raise $5,000 in those 12 days. That’s certainly possible, but that sort of delay is not suspicious or uncommon in federal campaigns.
What would be suspicious is if he had held a big fundraiser for his federal committee during those 12 days or had started a large online fundraising operation. He didn’t even have a working federal web site so the latter didn’t occur.
Remember, fire departments charge for false alarms in many localities now. The FEC ought to start doing the same.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 10:41 am:
Archpundit,
As I understand all the regulations that were posted, the issue is whether $5,000 was spent during that time frame. No one has any subpoena powers here to answer the question. Thus, you call it to the attention of the appropriate authorities. Just like the van example I used, if there is suspicious activity, a good citizen reports it (and die hard Democrats pretend it doesn’t exist! -:) )
You and Rob say no violation occurred. The Lake County GOP finds it highly suspicious that all those contracts were signed, a poll was commissioned and taken, a website constructed and other matters that you may not even be aware of without crossing that $5,000 thresh hold? I have run a number of local races and a few State Senate races. A not so good solid poll is half of $5,000. So how did he do this within the 15 day time frame after declaring?
Now if you both want to pretend there is no fire behind all that smoke, then climb into your asbestos suits. Otherwise, let the FEC sort it out, or better yet, Bond can immediately respond with the facts and figures to quell this little debate, and make the filers of the complaint look silly.
Right?
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 12:09 pm:
Contracts being signed is not the same as money being spent. Heck, most businesses invoice with a net 15- or net 30-day requirement as it is.
What website? There is nothing there. The work Team Am stumbled on through a backdoor URL is clearly incomplete. Even your friend Team Am repeatedly pointed out that Bond’s site isn’t complete.
If the work isn’t finished it’s quite possible no web design company was paid or even is being paid.
And, as you say, a poll was commissioned. When was the invoice due?
The burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused.
So far you’ve got nothing but politically-motivated “what ifs” based on the idea that $5000 in total was “maybe” spent during a week and a half time frame that falls outside the window of Bond’s filing date.
He could’ve spent $4999.99 on any or all of what you mention and he still wouldn’t have to file even today.
That’s the friggin’ point, Louis “Tenacious Blinders” Atsaves.
- ArchPundit - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 1:36 pm:
===As I understand all the regulations that were posted, the issue is whether $5,000 was spent during that time frame. No one has any subpoena powers here to answer the question. Thus, you call it to the attention of the appropriate authorities. Just like the van example I used, if there is suspicious activity, a good citizen reports it (and die hard Democrats pretend it doesn’t exist! -:) )
No, it says $5,000 raised. Even I write it wrong from time to time. There is no claim that he spent $5,000 or raised $5,000. Read the complaint–it simply says he must file within 15 days of announcing which is not a violation. It also says that he has some incomplete web site, but never suggests over $5,000 was raised. It says some things were done.
The complaint itself suggests no violation of the law. How hard is this to comprehend?
This kind of bad faith complaint is one of the reasons the FEC is overburdened. It’s also something that can hurt you as much as hurt your opponent. If you can file any complaint you want harassing your opponent, so can your opponent.
Directly quoting the complaint:
“Over 15 days have transpired since Bond announced his candidacy for Congress and thus he is in violation of FEC regulations, including 11 CFR Sec(s) 101.1(a) and 102.12(a). ”
He then says that Bond is putting consultants on retainer and so is expending funds.
Signing a contract for future services (if there is even a contract at this point) is not a trigger. Raising $5,000 is. It’s that simple. Regardless, he could spend money up to what he raised during that time as long as he raised less than $5,000 by May 11th.
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 3:11 pm:
Directly quoting the complaint:
“Over 15 days have transpired since Bond announced his candidacy for Congress and thus he is in violation of FEC regulations, including 11 CFR Sec(s) 101.1(a) and 102.12(a). ”
…Even Team Am admits that the FEC gave it a MUR# and put it under review just because Ace Venturi added in some regulation numbers.
I wonder how many regulations could be included in a frivolous complaint against Mark Kirk? Probably only limited by an overactive partisan imagination.
Say, maybe enterprising individual worried about moving vans, smoke and mirrors, and partisan politics could file a complaint with the Illinois State Board of Elections since Kirk is rumored to be mulling a run for governor… He even said (speaking to the Republicans of Wheeling Township) that he’s going to make his decision (pending someone else’s decision).
That’s tantamount to a declaration of candidacy which clearly must mean some suspicious activity took place, requiring an FEC and an SBE investigation!!!
;)
- Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 3:18 pm:
Boys, you both are beating a dead horse on this issue. The best advise to those riding a dead is: “dismount.”
Bond can clear up this little controversy pronto with some disclosures. He’s had over 24 hours now. What’s he waiting for?
Remember, the Lake County GOP has had some success with challenging petitions and filing requirements of local Democrats. Notwithstanding your claims of “overly partisan imagination” I would suggest that Senator Bond step up and do a little show and tell.
Either he makes the local GOP look dumb or . . . . .
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 3:48 pm:
Lou,
When will Mark Kirk step and do a little show and tell?
Either he makes random blog commenters look dumb or…..
After all, he may be involved in suspicious activity at both the Federal and state level and complaints may soon be filed which may or may not lead to case numbers being assigned!
That’s at least twice as bad as a van in a driveway… or smoke… or something else that might sound really bad if you don’t know what you’re talking about but is easily explained when you actually pay attention.
And keep in mind, this isn’t the first time you have been wrong about your GOP colleagues’ crass politically-motivated shenanigans, Louis, as you went on and on during the spring with your pointless drivel about Rep. Mark Walker and matters on which you apparently had no clue (out-of-order parliamentary moves in the House chamber + angry GOP-funded robocalls to targeted districts = politically-motivated shenanigans).
- Rob_N - Wednesday, Jun 17, 09 @ 3:48 pm:
PS -
The horse was dead when Ace Ventura filed the frivolous complaint.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Jun 18, 09 @ 12:28 pm:
Rob,
Keep trying to ride that dead horse. And don’t go changing the subject now. Crass motivations in politics are not the exclusive behavior of the GOP. The Democrats are masters at it. Pointless drivel is what you are tossing at me right now.
Bond just needs to open his books and say: “See?” And it will magically go away.
Right?
- Rob_N - Thursday, Jun 18, 09 @ 3:07 pm:
Louis,
Why doesn’t Kirk open his books? He might possibly maybe could be under investigation any moment now. PETA and the Mounties from Canada might even launch their own investigations since now you’re dragging horses into this.
And, if as you claim has happened, he has spent $5000 on staff (including media staff one would presume) then they would’ve jumped on this and personally sent you, Team “Quite Possibly Chicago’s Worst Lawyer” America, and Dan “Ace Ventura” Venturi your own personal copies engraved in gold (since they’re clearly rolling in dough according to you).
Then again, as Larry has pointed out over and over, even if he spent $5000 that wouldn’t matter because the only criteria is whether or not he raised $5000.
And he hasn’t even held a fundraiser for the Congressional campaign.
Why don’t you go out and find your mysterious donors that you claim have contributed $5000 in the aggregate to his campaign?
Where are these people?
Where are their canceled checks?
Why can’t you find them?
It’s been days and you have yet to provide any evidence that Bond has raised more than $5000 outside of his filing timeframe — just hypothetical baloney about smoke and vans.
…
Finally, you write “And it will magically go away.”
Yeah right. Cong. Kirk’s water carriers will just change his headline from “Bond is under investigation” to “Bond was under investigation”.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Jun 18, 09 @ 3:12 pm:
Are you guys still debating this?
lol
- Rob_N - Thursday, Jun 18, 09 @ 3:50 pm:
Why the heck not? Must be too hot and muggy for Louis to play games outside.