I don't know Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear, but he has been smart to support the state's whiskey producers like he did yesterday. Obviously, distlleries provide jobs and are good for the commonwealth's economy, but the full scope of those benefits isn't always obvious.
Straight whiskey is just one of the types of distilled spirits you can find in a liquor store. There are many others. To be labeled 'Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey,' the whiskey has to be distilled and aged in Kentucky, which in addition to distillery and warehouse jobs, means they buy corn locally too.
You can't make Kentucky bourbon anyplace except Kentucky. You can make bourbon anywhere in the United States, but Kentucky bourbon is what people look for and want.
You know, like California raisins or Wisconsin cheese.
Kentucky bourbon does not have to be bottled in Kentucky. When the industry was struggling, a lot of it was not. When the industry is strong and the Kentucky business environment is positive for beverage companies, there is an incentive to bottle the bourbon close to the distilleries. Bottling is the most labor-intensive part of the process, so that means lots of jobs.
It makes sense for the big, international companies that control the worldwide beverage industry to consolidate their bottling as much as possible. If there are good reasons to bottle your bourbon in Kentucky, you might as well bottle other things there too. Typically the bottled and cased goods go into an adjacent finished goods warehouse, then are shipped from there to distributors. That means even more jobs, as well as business for local trucking companies.
Brown-Forman and Heaven Hill Distilleries have their headquarters in Kentucky and their bottling is there too, even for products not made in Kentucky or even the United States, such as Canadian Mist Canadian Whisky, which is bottled in Louisville.
Like bourbon, brandy is usually aged, but it is usually aged in used barrels, and since bourbon makers only use new barrels, they always have a lot of used barrels to sell. Heaven Hill brings its Christian Brothers Brandy in tanker trucks from the distillery in California to be aged in Kentucky, rather than shipping empty barrels out there. When it's ready to be bottled, that happens in Kentucky too. Constellation, which used to own the Tom Moore Distillery in Bardstown, does the same thing with its Paul Masson Brandy.
Sazerac Inc. is technically headquartered in New Orleans and the company has major operations there, but Mark Brown, Sazerac's President, lives and works in Kentucky. Earlier this year, Sazerac bought a large bottling house in Owensboro, Kentucky, along with several bourbon aging warehouses there. The company has three bottling houses in Kentucky. The others are in Frankfort and Bardstown.
When Beam Global acquired National Distillers in 1987, two of the assets it got were a distillery and bottling house in Frankfort and a rectification and bottling plant in Cincinnati. Cincinnati primarily made the company's DeKuyper Liqueurs line. Making liqueurs is relatively simple. You're mixing together ethanol (i.e., vodka), sweetener, and flavoring concentrates, then bottling the result.
Beam closed the distillery in Frankfort back in '87, but the site had a modern bottling house and good access to the interstate highway system. Beam still uses the aging warehouses there and has steadily expanded the bottling capacity.
It was recently announced that Beam will close the Cincinnati plant and those operations will move to Kentucky. Beam Global has three bottling plants in Kentucky. Cincinnati is its only bottling facility outside of Kentucky.
The change, which is expected to be completed sometime in 2011, will add 21,600 square feet to Frankfort. It is expected to create about 120 new jobs in Kentucky. Beam Global is headquartered in the Chicago suburb of Deerfield but its roots are in Kentucky and its biggest product is still Jim Beam Kentucky Straight Bourbon Whiskey. So, sorry Ohio.
Kentucky is a socially conservative state and about half of its counties prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages. You'll probably never persuade someone who believes alcohol comes from the devil that it is nonetheless good for business, and therefore good for the state, but that has always been the uphill struggle Kentucky's whiskey-makers face. In recent years it has gotten better. Let's hope it continues.
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Friday, December 18, 2009
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Patti Takes Manhattan.
In case you don't know, that's ex-governor of Illinois Rod Blagojevich and his wife, Patti, in Manhattan to promote Rod's new book. Both Rod and Patti are the creations of long-time Chicago Alderman Dick Mell, who made Rod politically and made Patti the old-fashioned way (she's his daughter). Rod's downfall began when he crossed his father-in-law.
Because they are so made-for-TV, I wonder if their act is actually selling? Do people believe them or, like me, just enjoy the show?
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Seven Down, Two To Go.
The number may change again before morning, but as I write this four University of Illinois Trustees resigned today. They are Kenneth Schmidt, David Dorris, Robert Vickrey and Devon Bruce. Three others had already resigned: Board Chairman Niranjan Shah; Lawrence Eppley, the former chairman; and Edward McMillan. The hold-outs are James Montgomery and Frances Carroll.
At least somewhere in Illinois there are consequences for corruption, although the apparent confusion among the individual trustees about the right thing to do is more evidence that the whole edifice is rotten.
So U of I is to be commended for doing something. I'm reminded of the three legislative leaders who simply demurred when asked to testify before the Mikva Commission. They are House Speaker Michael Madigan, Senate President John Cullerton, and House Republican Leader Tom Cross. That's how the Illinois General Assembly deals with corruption. By doing nothing.
Reporters covering the Soviet Union frequently remarked on how the whole system ran on favors given and favors owed. It's like the people who defend the rich because they hope to be rich themselves someday. Rather than demanding a clean system, the cloutless simply aspire to attain it.
At least somewhere in Illinois there are consequences for corruption, although the apparent confusion among the individual trustees about the right thing to do is more evidence that the whole edifice is rotten.
So U of I is to be commended for doing something. I'm reminded of the three legislative leaders who simply demurred when asked to testify before the Mikva Commission. They are House Speaker Michael Madigan, Senate President John Cullerton, and House Republican Leader Tom Cross. That's how the Illinois General Assembly deals with corruption. By doing nothing.
Reporters covering the Soviet Union frequently remarked on how the whole system ran on favors given and favors owed. It's like the people who defend the rich because they hope to be rich themselves someday. Rather than demanding a clean system, the cloutless simply aspire to attain it.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
U of I Leadership Should Go.
Once again, Pat Quinn looks like the only straight shooter on the Illinois political scene. (I first wrote about this here.)
Three University of Illinois trustees resigned before the Mikva Commission's report was released, including the Board chairman. All three suggested the rest should join them. They didn't. Then, based on the Mikva Commission's recommendation, Quinn asked the six remaining members to resign. They haven't and probably won't.
The Chicago Tribune reports that one of the hold-outs, Trustee James Montgomery, is defiant. He told Quinn's general counsel, "If the governor has a legal basis for forcing me out of the trusteeship, he is going to have to access that avenue and I will defend against that."
The commission's report said Montgomery once intervened on behalf of a rejected student who was related to his daughter's boyfriend.
The university's president and chancellor have a slightly more defensible reason for not resigning. They want the Board of Trustees to decide their fate.
Sure, Quinn is a politician who wants to put his loyalists anywhere he can, but he also recognizes that the current board has zero credibility. If they don't go, one way or another (Quinn can fire them), clout will have won and reform will have died aborning yet again.
Three University of Illinois trustees resigned before the Mikva Commission's report was released, including the Board chairman. All three suggested the rest should join them. They didn't. Then, based on the Mikva Commission's recommendation, Quinn asked the six remaining members to resign. They haven't and probably won't.
The Chicago Tribune reports that one of the hold-outs, Trustee James Montgomery, is defiant. He told Quinn's general counsel, "If the governor has a legal basis for forcing me out of the trusteeship, he is going to have to access that avenue and I will defend against that."
The commission's report said Montgomery once intervened on behalf of a rejected student who was related to his daughter's boyfriend.
The university's president and chancellor have a slightly more defensible reason for not resigning. They want the Board of Trustees to decide their fate.
Sure, Quinn is a politician who wants to put his loyalists anywhere he can, but he also recognizes that the current board has zero credibility. If they don't go, one way or another (Quinn can fire them), clout will have won and reform will have died aborning yet again.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Birthers Got Me Thinking.
My conclusion from the birther debate: Maybe U.S. president is just another one of those jobs Americans won't do.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Reforming Illinois Politics: Where To Begin?
An essential element of any corrupt enterprise is that participants in it cannot trust each other until all of them have been compromised. All of them. That is fundamental.
Since our city government, state government and premier state university have all been shown to be corrupt enterprises, we should assume that all of the participants, at least all who were or should have been aware of the corrupt practices, are compromised. If anyone is serious about reforming any of these institutions, the crucial first step is to consider all current participants culpable. Until they are removed and replaced—all of them—reform will be illusory.
The recently-adopted ethics reforms you are hearing about are cynical frauds touted by cynical frauds.
Pat Quinn may be the qualified exception. He is shaping up as the last honest politician in Illinois, at least on the Democratic side. (Republicans aren’t excluded because they’re more honest, but because they scarcely matter. That might change.)
The best evidence that Quinn is honest is the way the rest of them are going after him. Part of their strategy is to paint him as dishonest. In psychology, that’s called ‘projection.’ They also say he stood by while Blagojevich made a hash of things. What exactly did comptroller and presumed Quinn primary opponent Dan Hynes, also a constitutional officer, do that Quinn did not to check the governor?
Is that the best argument they have? For that matter, is Hynes the best candidate they have? Does nominating a hereditary politician really say, “we get it about business as usual?” Of course it doesn’t, because they don’t.
Last week, House Speaker Michael Madigan, Senate President John Cullerton and House Republican Leader Tom Cross all declined to testify before Quinn’s Illinois Admissions Review Commission, which is investigating the corrupt practices at U of I. Madigan’s spokesperson said the Speaker “has little to contribute to the probe” because “he was only responding to constituent requests.” Some elaboration on that right there would surely interest the Mikva Commmission.
By snubbing the commission, they’re telling Quinn he has no juice.
Whatever else Lawrence Eppley may have done, he did the right thing today by resigning and calling out both his fellow trustees and top university officials. He might just as well have mentioned every legislator who ever put in a good word for an applicant. It is a corrupt system and they are all part of it.
Eppley testified to the Mikva Commission that he wasn’t Blagojevich's go-between, even though he forwarded admissions requests from the governor's office. According to the Chicago Tribune, which has been vilified for reporting the U of I clout story, Eppley told the commission he didn't expect that passing along student names would give applicants special treatment.
Presumably, he said this with a straight face.
The 48th Ward Democrats Summer Picnic is Thursday, August 6, from 6 PM to 8 PM, at 4921 N. Marine Dr. near the Margate Park field house. New County Commissioner Bridget Gainer will be there, so will Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky. It is being hosted by Alderman Mary Ann Smith, State Representative Harry Osterman, State Senator Heather Steans, and the aforementioned Gainer and Schakowsky. The invitation came from Steans’ predecessor, current 48th Ward Committeeman Carol Ronen, whose eight weeks in the Blagojevich administration got her a $38,000 pension bump. (That whole sordid tale is here.)
So, yes, it is all of them.
Since our city government, state government and premier state university have all been shown to be corrupt enterprises, we should assume that all of the participants, at least all who were or should have been aware of the corrupt practices, are compromised. If anyone is serious about reforming any of these institutions, the crucial first step is to consider all current participants culpable. Until they are removed and replaced—all of them—reform will be illusory.
The recently-adopted ethics reforms you are hearing about are cynical frauds touted by cynical frauds.
Pat Quinn may be the qualified exception. He is shaping up as the last honest politician in Illinois, at least on the Democratic side. (Republicans aren’t excluded because they’re more honest, but because they scarcely matter. That might change.)
The best evidence that Quinn is honest is the way the rest of them are going after him. Part of their strategy is to paint him as dishonest. In psychology, that’s called ‘projection.’ They also say he stood by while Blagojevich made a hash of things. What exactly did comptroller and presumed Quinn primary opponent Dan Hynes, also a constitutional officer, do that Quinn did not to check the governor?
Is that the best argument they have? For that matter, is Hynes the best candidate they have? Does nominating a hereditary politician really say, “we get it about business as usual?” Of course it doesn’t, because they don’t.
Last week, House Speaker Michael Madigan, Senate President John Cullerton and House Republican Leader Tom Cross all declined to testify before Quinn’s Illinois Admissions Review Commission, which is investigating the corrupt practices at U of I. Madigan’s spokesperson said the Speaker “has little to contribute to the probe” because “he was only responding to constituent requests.” Some elaboration on that right there would surely interest the Mikva Commmission.
By snubbing the commission, they’re telling Quinn he has no juice.
Whatever else Lawrence Eppley may have done, he did the right thing today by resigning and calling out both his fellow trustees and top university officials. He might just as well have mentioned every legislator who ever put in a good word for an applicant. It is a corrupt system and they are all part of it.
Eppley testified to the Mikva Commission that he wasn’t Blagojevich's go-between, even though he forwarded admissions requests from the governor's office. According to the Chicago Tribune, which has been vilified for reporting the U of I clout story, Eppley told the commission he didn't expect that passing along student names would give applicants special treatment.
Presumably, he said this with a straight face.
The 48th Ward Democrats Summer Picnic is Thursday, August 6, from 6 PM to 8 PM, at 4921 N. Marine Dr. near the Margate Park field house. New County Commissioner Bridget Gainer will be there, so will Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky. It is being hosted by Alderman Mary Ann Smith, State Representative Harry Osterman, State Senator Heather Steans, and the aforementioned Gainer and Schakowsky. The invitation came from Steans’ predecessor, current 48th Ward Committeeman Carol Ronen, whose eight weeks in the Blagojevich administration got her a $38,000 pension bump. (That whole sordid tale is here.)
So, yes, it is all of them.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Marbury v. Madison Still Matters.
An anniversary went mostly unnoticed earlier this week, the 206th anniversary of Marbury v. Madison, a landmark decision of the early United States Supreme Court.
I was reminded of this by a good essay in the current issue of Newsweek. You can find it here.
When conservatives attack the Supreme Court, or the federal courts in general, their reasoning usually is derived from a fundamental disagreement with the Court's ruling in this long-ago case. Many, though by no means all conservatives, favor a legal system more like Great Britain's, where even the highest court in the land is subordinate to the legislature. That has not been the American system for 206 years, but some conservatives have enormous capacity for resisting change.
I've often said that the conservative penchant for personal Constitutional interpretation is derived from the Protestant Reformation's tenant of personal Biblical interpretation. That may be okay for religion, but it doesn't work for law.
The Newsweek article also makes this point: "...for besieged congressional Republicans, the history of the embattled Federalists is ... instructive: the Federalists' position as unyielding opponents of Jefferson's administration led to their extinction as a political party."
I was reminded of this by a good essay in the current issue of Newsweek. You can find it here.
When conservatives attack the Supreme Court, or the federal courts in general, their reasoning usually is derived from a fundamental disagreement with the Court's ruling in this long-ago case. Many, though by no means all conservatives, favor a legal system more like Great Britain's, where even the highest court in the land is subordinate to the legislature. That has not been the American system for 206 years, but some conservatives have enormous capacity for resisting change.
I've often said that the conservative penchant for personal Constitutional interpretation is derived from the Protestant Reformation's tenant of personal Biblical interpretation. That may be okay for religion, but it doesn't work for law.
The Newsweek article also makes this point: "...for besieged congressional Republicans, the history of the embattled Federalists is ... instructive: the Federalists' position as unyielding opponents of Jefferson's administration led to their extinction as a political party."
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Yes, In Fact, They Are All That Bad.
One very unintended side effect of Barak Obama's election has been the national attention Illinois is getting about the sorry state of our politics and politicians.
It was kismet last night that I accidentally switched on CSPAN just as Roland Burris was beginning his speech yesterday at Chicago's City Club. They weren't showing it live, but at the stroke of midnight.
Like the train wreck it was, I couldn’t look away.
If Rod Blagojevich is an extreme example of the type, RoRo "The Real Roland" Burris is more typical, a mediocre hack politician and what passes, in Illinois, for an honest one. The room was full of them. Sweet Eddie Burke introduced Burris and Mean Paul Green was the MC. RoRo did some shout-outs. It was a real rogue’s gallery.
Burris had this bad speech, which he read badly, about what he has "learned" in his five weeks in the Senate. About two-thirds in he went off-notes, launched into some spirited shout-outs, hit a couple of his mausoleum highlights, then launched into his self-defense, all in the old black preacher-politician cadences of the sixties. As he always does these days, he invoked his civil rights era bona fides, seemingly unaware that they are not protecting him and he is debasing those accomplishments by using them in this tawdry affair.
"You know the real Roland." That was a good laugh line, but this one was better. "I will continue to be transparent." He is all of that.
May I suggest, to paraphrase Denny Green: "I am who I thought I was."
It was pitiful.
Then as a kind of coda, he went back to reading, poorly, his prepared speech, even though it continued along the self-defense lines. He said he would no longer discuss the controversy surrounding his appointment with reporters.
After that came the Q&A, audience questions read by Paul Green. It was funny because Green just dropped in questions about RoRo’s "issues," sprinkled in among the bland inquiries about public policy, ending it with one that Burris refused to answer.
Burris is in over his head. His colleague, Senator Durbin, on a fact-finding trip to Greece and Turkey, and after consulting the Oracle of Delphi, made a short statement. In it, he urged Burris to get some professional advice, as Burris is so clueless.
Things are breaking bad for Durbin too, when he should be giddy as the new president's main man in the Senate. Instead, Burris has become Durbin's special ball and chain.
Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (my U.S. Rep) is another one. Now she has some hair-brained idea that new Gov. Quinn can pull Burris and call a special election under the 17th Amendment. She wants the Senate job herself, but shouldn't, as the spotlight will spin onto her and she will have to talk about her convicted felon husband.
They're all from the same nest and considered good government types by Illinois standards, so they're genuinely surprised by how unflattering the national spotlight can be.
My fondest hope is that Durbin, Schakowsky, and every other Illinois office holder (yes, you, Heather) will feel that their jobs are in jeopardy and they need to take extraordinary steps to gain the public’s trust. ("Re-gain" seems to assume too much.)
I propose a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Isn't confession supposed to be cleansing or healing or something? Who wants to go first?
It was kismet last night that I accidentally switched on CSPAN just as Roland Burris was beginning his speech yesterday at Chicago's City Club. They weren't showing it live, but at the stroke of midnight.
Like the train wreck it was, I couldn’t look away.
If Rod Blagojevich is an extreme example of the type, RoRo "The Real Roland" Burris is more typical, a mediocre hack politician and what passes, in Illinois, for an honest one. The room was full of them. Sweet Eddie Burke introduced Burris and Mean Paul Green was the MC. RoRo did some shout-outs. It was a real rogue’s gallery.
Burris had this bad speech, which he read badly, about what he has "learned" in his five weeks in the Senate. About two-thirds in he went off-notes, launched into some spirited shout-outs, hit a couple of his mausoleum highlights, then launched into his self-defense, all in the old black preacher-politician cadences of the sixties. As he always does these days, he invoked his civil rights era bona fides, seemingly unaware that they are not protecting him and he is debasing those accomplishments by using them in this tawdry affair.
"You know the real Roland." That was a good laugh line, but this one was better. "I will continue to be transparent." He is all of that.
May I suggest, to paraphrase Denny Green: "I am who I thought I was."
It was pitiful.
Then as a kind of coda, he went back to reading, poorly, his prepared speech, even though it continued along the self-defense lines. He said he would no longer discuss the controversy surrounding his appointment with reporters.
After that came the Q&A, audience questions read by Paul Green. It was funny because Green just dropped in questions about RoRo’s "issues," sprinkled in among the bland inquiries about public policy, ending it with one that Burris refused to answer.
Burris is in over his head. His colleague, Senator Durbin, on a fact-finding trip to Greece and Turkey, and after consulting the Oracle of Delphi, made a short statement. In it, he urged Burris to get some professional advice, as Burris is so clueless.
Things are breaking bad for Durbin too, when he should be giddy as the new president's main man in the Senate. Instead, Burris has become Durbin's special ball and chain.
Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky (my U.S. Rep) is another one. Now she has some hair-brained idea that new Gov. Quinn can pull Burris and call a special election under the 17th Amendment. She wants the Senate job herself, but shouldn't, as the spotlight will spin onto her and she will have to talk about her convicted felon husband.
They're all from the same nest and considered good government types by Illinois standards, so they're genuinely surprised by how unflattering the national spotlight can be.
My fondest hope is that Durbin, Schakowsky, and every other Illinois office holder (yes, you, Heather) will feel that their jobs are in jeopardy and they need to take extraordinary steps to gain the public’s trust. ("Re-gain" seems to assume too much.)
I propose a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Isn't confession supposed to be cleansing or healing or something? Who wants to go first?
Monday, February 2, 2009
Dear Senator Steans, Reform Begins With You.
It seems like every time Senator Heather Steans (D-7th) sends me a legislative update, I get a blog post out of it.
Since Senator Steans does a poor job of keeping her web site updated, I'm posting her most recent one, which I received via email, here.
It's about what you would expect, including the last two paragraphs, which follow:
Today the sun is shining and I - like people throughout the state - am breathing a sigh of relief that we can start a new chapter. Clearly Illinois suffers from a culture of corruption that requires ethics reforms such as campaign contribution limits and greater transparency and oversight. We have an enormous budget deficit that has to be tackled. And we need a capital plan to restore our infrastructure and put Illinois residents back to work. I am confident that our new Governor, Patrick Quinn, and the House and Senate will now pull together to start the real work that needs to be done.
Please call or email me if you have any questions or would like further insights into the impeachment trial. I welcome your thoughts and suggestions.
Since she asked, here are my thoughts and suggestions:
Dear Senator Steans,
Respectfully, we do not need more ethics legislation from the same people who gave us all of the previous ethics legislation, then immediately figured out how to get around it and continue to do business as usual.
The current situation presents a unique opportunity for every Illinois legislator to lead by doing. What will you do to be more open and transparent about the way you conduct your own official business? What will you do to help expose the existing corrupt systems, individuals and groups of which you and every other legislator are aware? What will you do to demonstrate to your constituents that they and they alone direct your actions, even above and beyond the Senate and party leadership?
What will you do to show us—-prove to us-—that this really is a new chapter and not a repeat of the last reform movement, which as you may recall was led by the now disgraced ex-governor and his running mate, the new governor?
What can you say to us that we haven't heard a thousand times before? What can you do to show us you are really different?
Perhaps a good place to start would be the confession of past sins. What do you think?
Since Senator Steans does a poor job of keeping her web site updated, I'm posting her most recent one, which I received via email, here.
It's about what you would expect, including the last two paragraphs, which follow:
Today the sun is shining and I - like people throughout the state - am breathing a sigh of relief that we can start a new chapter. Clearly Illinois suffers from a culture of corruption that requires ethics reforms such as campaign contribution limits and greater transparency and oversight. We have an enormous budget deficit that has to be tackled. And we need a capital plan to restore our infrastructure and put Illinois residents back to work. I am confident that our new Governor, Patrick Quinn, and the House and Senate will now pull together to start the real work that needs to be done.
Please call or email me if you have any questions or would like further insights into the impeachment trial. I welcome your thoughts and suggestions.
Since she asked, here are my thoughts and suggestions:
Dear Senator Steans,
Respectfully, we do not need more ethics legislation from the same people who gave us all of the previous ethics legislation, then immediately figured out how to get around it and continue to do business as usual.
The current situation presents a unique opportunity for every Illinois legislator to lead by doing. What will you do to be more open and transparent about the way you conduct your own official business? What will you do to help expose the existing corrupt systems, individuals and groups of which you and every other legislator are aware? What will you do to demonstrate to your constituents that they and they alone direct your actions, even above and beyond the Senate and party leadership?
What will you do to show us—-prove to us-—that this really is a new chapter and not a repeat of the last reform movement, which as you may recall was led by the now disgraced ex-governor and his running mate, the new governor?
What can you say to us that we haven't heard a thousand times before? What can you do to show us you are really different?
Perhaps a good place to start would be the confession of past sins. What do you think?
Thursday, January 29, 2009
What Are The Chances For Real Change In Illinois?
It should also be noted that while many Illinois public officials, including several governors, have been tried and convicted for criminal offenses, no major public corruption case has ever been brought by an Illinois prosecutor. They have all been federal, investigated by the FBI and prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s office.
Like this one.
The Illinois General Assembly has done its duty by removing Rod Blagojevich, but it needs to do much more. Everyone involved in Illinois government must concede what they all know. Corruption here is routine and Governor Blagojevich’s offense was one of scale, not of type.
Even in corrupt systems, there are sometimes limits. The guys behind the guys set those limits. Exceed them and you threaten the entire, corrupt edifice. Therefore, any person who goes off the reservation like Blagojevich did must be removed. It always goes down the same way. Federal authorities mysteriously receive enough evidence to begin an investigation. In time, they receive enough evidence to convict the targeted individual, and perhaps some co-conspirators, but never those at the center of the web.
Look at the Michael Segal, Near North Insurance case (2002-2004). One day he was favored, friend to the great and near great, then he was a goat. What changed? Did the feds just happen to discover his crimes or had he outlived his usefulness? Who made that decision?
It is likely that the prosecutions of Tony Rezko, Stuart Levine and Ali Ata were probably meant to send a message to Blagojevich, to get with the program or he would be next. He didn't and he was.
What does it say that not one of these guys has sung? Not one has told the tale and really laid out how it all works and who calls the shots. Once convicted, they quietly do their time. Levine sang, of course, which netted Rezko and others, but he has probably told all he knows. Segal, Ryan, and Sorich (Mayor Daley's patronage guy) have all been mum. Not one of them has told the whole story. Why is that?
It is hard to discuss the corruption of government in Illinois without reference to Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass. He calls it "the combine." Its members consist of corrupt political leaders, both public office-holders and private citizens, Democrats and Republicans. The third leg is organized crime.
Because they are all part of a criminal enterprise, they value secrecy and eschew publicity. Anyone who calls too much attention to themselves has to be removed. Periodic demonstrations of this fact, including evidence that even a governor is not immune, serve their purpose. In itself, the removal, conviction and imprisonment of Rod Blagojevich does nothing to change the system.
Only when crime doesn’t pay will it cease.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Nope, Nothing Suspicious About This.
This is about Illinois government. I promise to keep it brief.
I got a Legislative Update from my State Rep, Greg Harris. It explains the House's proposal to lease the Illinois Lottery and how it differs from the governor's proposal to lease the Illinois Lottery. Here is his list of the key differences:
Among them are the inclusion of strict ethics requirements, anti pay-to-play provisions, requirements for competitive bidding of the lease, caps on transaction fees, dedicated funds to guarantee use of the proceeds of the lease only as intended and not for political purposes, protections against exploitation of poor communities by the lessor, requirements for MBE/WBE/DBE participation, and protections for lottery employees.
Despite, or perhaps because of all those explicit ethics protections, I feel like my pocket is being picked. Oh wait, state-run gambling taxes only gamblers, and I don't gamble, yet I still feel like my pocket is being picked. Why is that?
I got a Legislative Update from my State Rep, Greg Harris. It explains the House's proposal to lease the Illinois Lottery and how it differs from the governor's proposal to lease the Illinois Lottery. Here is his list of the key differences:
Among them are the inclusion of strict ethics requirements, anti pay-to-play provisions, requirements for competitive bidding of the lease, caps on transaction fees, dedicated funds to guarantee use of the proceeds of the lease only as intended and not for political purposes, protections against exploitation of poor communities by the lessor, requirements for MBE/WBE/DBE participation, and protections for lottery employees.
Despite, or perhaps because of all those explicit ethics protections, I feel like my pocket is being picked. Oh wait, state-run gambling taxes only gamblers, and I don't gamble, yet I still feel like my pocket is being picked. Why is that?
Friday, February 29, 2008
Tell the Truth.
Honesty always is a popular subject during political season. I've been meditating today, not so much about the sociopathic act of outright lying as about dissembling, deflecting and misdirecting, the political arts.
Among regular people, and even politicians, who regard themselves as fundamentally honest, there are two kinds of people. (Aren't there always?)
For one kind, when they are asked a question, their first thought is, "what's the right answer?" i.e., the true answer.
For the other kind of person, and this is where most politicians fall, their first thought is, "what's the most advantageous answer?" i.e., what answer will work out best for me.
The first kind of person may, upon bringing the true answer to mind, still dissemble if the stakes are sufficiently high and their principles are sufficiently low, but the second kind skips that step and goes right to formulating the most advantageous answer, regardless of its veracity. Such people may still tell the truth but when they do, it's mostly a coincidence. Their calculation of the best answer happens also to be the true one.
I consider myself to be of the first type, but I don't take credit for it. For both types, which you are is mostly a function of how you were raised. The second type of response is probably the most intuitive so unless you are taught at a young age to think the first way, you probably won't.
Both of my parents stressed honesty with us and, most importantly, they walked the talk, my father especially. He is so honest he once carried on a spirited fight with the IRS to convince them that he owed more than they said he did, and he was pleased when he finally won the argument.
His first thought is "what's the true answer" and, unfortunately, his second thought is usually, "what's the most thorough answer."
I've inherited that as well.
Among regular people, and even politicians, who regard themselves as fundamentally honest, there are two kinds of people. (Aren't there always?)
For one kind, when they are asked a question, their first thought is, "what's the right answer?" i.e., the true answer.
For the other kind of person, and this is where most politicians fall, their first thought is, "what's the most advantageous answer?" i.e., what answer will work out best for me.
The first kind of person may, upon bringing the true answer to mind, still dissemble if the stakes are sufficiently high and their principles are sufficiently low, but the second kind skips that step and goes right to formulating the most advantageous answer, regardless of its veracity. Such people may still tell the truth but when they do, it's mostly a coincidence. Their calculation of the best answer happens also to be the true one.
I consider myself to be of the first type, but I don't take credit for it. For both types, which you are is mostly a function of how you were raised. The second type of response is probably the most intuitive so unless you are taught at a young age to think the first way, you probably won't.
Both of my parents stressed honesty with us and, most importantly, they walked the talk, my father especially. He is so honest he once carried on a spirited fight with the IRS to convince them that he owed more than they said he did, and he was pleased when he finally won the argument.
His first thought is "what's the true answer" and, unfortunately, his second thought is usually, "what's the most thorough answer."
I've inherited that as well.
Saturday, January 19, 2008
All Politics Is Local
Back in November, I berated Illinois State Representative Greg Harris for, as I called it, "lying for a worthy cause."
I'm not backing away from any of that. Just one thing in that post was wrong. I said Harris is my State Representative and he isn't. He represents the 13th District and I'm in the 12th. I don't know which of us is worse, him for sending me a constituent newsletter or me for reading it and not automatically knowing what district I'm in.
With the primary coming on February 5, I looked it up to make sure I don't waste any time on races in which I can't even vote.
To that end, I've gotten a lot of mail from candidates for State Senate, 7th District, even though I'm in the 6th. Direct mail, by its nature, should be able to pinpoint voters exactly. There may be some overlap in a mailing piece shared by several candidates, but when it's a single candidate mailing, why would they waste a penny sending fliers to people who can't vote in that election? I'm close to the border, but it shouldn't matter. The address is the thing and when I look it up to see what district I'm in, I'm using the same database they used to get my address.
Primaries in Illinois usually aren't this early, but they moved it up this year so Illinois would be part of Super Tuesday. Unfortunately, the local races, for offices like state senator, are being overshadowed by the presidential primaries.
As other people worry about the presidential campaign, or the state of democracy in the Middle East, I worry about the brand of it we get here in Chicago. A favorite trick is for organization office-holders (i.e., office-holders that are part of Daley's Democratic Party organization) who are not going to run for re-election to quietly resign before their term ends. A suitable replacement is chosen by the organization and appointed to complete the term. That person then, low and behold, becomes the incumbent seeking re-nomination.
Does it go without saying that, in most of Chicago, the Democratic primary is the election, so scarce are Republicans in the city? My actual Senator and Representative are unopposed in the primary.
These resignations and appointments are always timed so potential non-organization candidates don't know that the real, known incumbent has been replaced by a new, unknown incumbent who might have been vulnerable to a primary challenge, if you had known about it in time to get on the ballot. That's how Harris, the rep for the 13th (not my district), got his job and candidacy. Heather Steans, who is running for senator for the 7th, hasn't been appointed to fill her predecessor's term yet, because Senator Ronen merely announced her intention to resign this year, but Steans reportedly had the inside track, although she denies it.
The only reason I know about this is because another candidate, Suzanne Elder, did move quickly to get on the ballot. Now Steans, the organization's choice, is calling herself an "independent Democrat."
Since I can't vote in that election, I thought I'd write about it. This early resignation thing is SOP here. The senator who is resigning, Senator Ronen, got the job the same way. Recently, a couple of local officials used the same trick to pass their office down to one of their children. You know, like Egypt's Hosni Mubarak is trying to do.
The way democracy works in Chicago is that if you want to run for public office, you join the party, work hard for the organization's candidates and causes, "don't make no waves, don't back no losers," and wait your turn. For the most part, candidates are chosen by local committees, I'm not saying they're all picked by Richard M. Daley himself, but they sure aren't picked by the electorate in an open and transparent democratic process either.
That would risk too many unintended consequences.
I'm not backing away from any of that. Just one thing in that post was wrong. I said Harris is my State Representative and he isn't. He represents the 13th District and I'm in the 12th. I don't know which of us is worse, him for sending me a constituent newsletter or me for reading it and not automatically knowing what district I'm in.
With the primary coming on February 5, I looked it up to make sure I don't waste any time on races in which I can't even vote.
To that end, I've gotten a lot of mail from candidates for State Senate, 7th District, even though I'm in the 6th. Direct mail, by its nature, should be able to pinpoint voters exactly. There may be some overlap in a mailing piece shared by several candidates, but when it's a single candidate mailing, why would they waste a penny sending fliers to people who can't vote in that election? I'm close to the border, but it shouldn't matter. The address is the thing and when I look it up to see what district I'm in, I'm using the same database they used to get my address.
Primaries in Illinois usually aren't this early, but they moved it up this year so Illinois would be part of Super Tuesday. Unfortunately, the local races, for offices like state senator, are being overshadowed by the presidential primaries.
As other people worry about the presidential campaign, or the state of democracy in the Middle East, I worry about the brand of it we get here in Chicago. A favorite trick is for organization office-holders (i.e., office-holders that are part of Daley's Democratic Party organization) who are not going to run for re-election to quietly resign before their term ends. A suitable replacement is chosen by the organization and appointed to complete the term. That person then, low and behold, becomes the incumbent seeking re-nomination.
Does it go without saying that, in most of Chicago, the Democratic primary is the election, so scarce are Republicans in the city? My actual Senator and Representative are unopposed in the primary.
These resignations and appointments are always timed so potential non-organization candidates don't know that the real, known incumbent has been replaced by a new, unknown incumbent who might have been vulnerable to a primary challenge, if you had known about it in time to get on the ballot. That's how Harris, the rep for the 13th (not my district), got his job and candidacy. Heather Steans, who is running for senator for the 7th, hasn't been appointed to fill her predecessor's term yet, because Senator Ronen merely announced her intention to resign this year, but Steans reportedly had the inside track, although she denies it.
The only reason I know about this is because another candidate, Suzanne Elder, did move quickly to get on the ballot. Now Steans, the organization's choice, is calling herself an "independent Democrat."
Since I can't vote in that election, I thought I'd write about it. This early resignation thing is SOP here. The senator who is resigning, Senator Ronen, got the job the same way. Recently, a couple of local officials used the same trick to pass their office down to one of their children. You know, like Egypt's Hosni Mubarak is trying to do.
The way democracy works in Chicago is that if you want to run for public office, you join the party, work hard for the organization's candidates and causes, "don't make no waves, don't back no losers," and wait your turn. For the most part, candidates are chosen by local committees, I'm not saying they're all picked by Richard M. Daley himself, but they sure aren't picked by the electorate in an open and transparent democratic process either.
That would risk too many unintended consequences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
