Chris "Star of Romania" Lauzen is down and out and with any luck he'll take some of the Christo-Cop vote with him. But what of Jim Oberweis? What can we expect? What's his message? Where is he weak?
Chris Lauzen brags in his campaign literature about all of the times he was the lone dissenting voice in a full Senate vote. Since he seems to have an almost unique talent for getting both political parties to bury their differences in order to oppose him, could Lauzen be the man we need to send to Washington in order to bring bi-partisanship back into the House?
Money is a big issue in the 14th Congressional race - but too many people are confusing the issue. Let's get some basics out of the way:
I believe in public financing of elections - but I don't believe in unilateral disarmament.
Leading Republican Jim Oberweis has said he will spend as much as $2.5 million of his own money for the primary and another $2.5 million for the general election - and experience suggests he could do that or more.
Leading Republican Chris Lauzen has already loaned his campaign $325,000 - and had $525,000 cash on hand in his third quarter FEC report.
Now, let me tell you about a Democratic candidate who is running in the 14th congressional district.
Want to give this story some exposure. Although anonymous at the site, the commenter (who doesn't want to be hounded by Lauzen's people) contacted me personally and I trust the source.
On Tuesday, December 4, 2007 at 7:45 p.m. my telephone rang. The man on the other end mumbled something about a company he worked for doing a "survey" to gather "opinions" but stated "we are not selling anything" very clearly and distinctly. He asked, "If the election for the 14th District were held today, which candidate would you vote for, Oberweis, Burns, Lauzen" very clearly and distinctly. Of only those choices, I picked Burns. Immediately, the man on the phone started talking about how Lauzen serves in the state legislature and how he has "ideas." I then asked, "Do you work for Lauzen?" He answered, "I work for America." I said nothing. Then he said, "Yes, I work for Lauzen." He proceeded to talk about Lauzen, I said I was not interested in Lauzen, he started to argue, and I hung up. Obviously, that man did not call me to gather my opinion on candidates. I then tried to use the *69 feature on the telephone to get the number that just called me, but that was not possible. I think that means someone paid a lot of money to set up that calling system, and I guess that also means that the phone calls were not being made out of some volunteer's house. The specifics on the phone transaction were that the recorded message from the phone company said that number could not be given out but if I wanted that number dialed, I could press "1" which I did. The message then repeated that the number could not be given out.
I would totally testify under oath that all of that happened as the truth as I heard it. I typed all this up soon after it happened when I could remember it the best. My guess is that all of it (misrepresenting a survey company) is probably just right under what campaign practices consider legal, and there was nothing illegal about misrepresenting a survey company or attempting to mislead a voter about the alleged fake survey. The man admitted to working for Lauzen so I personally consider the alleged fake survey an unethical dirty trick and a LIE.
Recently as I thumbed through the usual holiday pile of Christmas junk from my mailbox, came across a big glossy brochure with a picture of a child on the front. Under the picture are the words "One person can make a difference..." and I thought at first that it was an appeal for some charity. But looking down a little further, I saw the words "Chris Lauzen" and knew for a fact that it was an appeal for charity; but not of the usual kind.
Chris Lauzen is running for Congress and he has sent me the family photo album.
Let's look at what the IL-14 campaigns are doing today.
Chris Lauzen is busy positioning himself as Denny Hastert's heir. The article at the link, from November 19, crows about Lauzen's being "unbossable" by GOP moderate Gov. Jim Edgar. The author cannot spell Jim Oberweis' name.
Jotham Stein's campaign is generating "time for a change" press releases while Jim Oberweis is calling on the governor to schedule the special primary for the same day as the regular primary to save the taxpayers some money. No word yet on how he's going to crimp the huge straw that stretches from the U.S. Treasury to Iraq. Meanwhile, DeKalb County passed its FY2008 budget on November 21. It will have to dig up another $50,000+ somewhere for that third election.John Laesch's supporters can be found at DKos.
I do not know election law or why it is that the ballot petitions originally intended for a regular primary cannot stand for a special primary on the same date with the same candidates.
I do know that any person I can dig up to sign new petitions will understand beyond any doubt whom it is they must thank for this duplication of effort and added expense.
Let's look at what the IL-14 campaigns are doing today.
Chris Lauzen is busy positioning himself as Denny Hastert's heir. The article at the link, from November 19, crows about Lauzen's being "unbossable" by GOP moderate Gov. Jim Edgar. The author cannot spell Jim Oberweis' name.
Jotham Stein's campaign is generating "time for a change" press releases while Jim Oberweis is calling on the governor to schedule the special primary for the same day as the regular primary to save the taxpayers some money. No word yet on how he's going to crimp the huge straw that stretches from the U.S. Treasury to Iraq. Meanwhile, DeKalb County passed its FY2008 budget on November 21. It will have to dig up another $50,000+ somewhere for that third election.
I do not know election law or why it is that the ballot petitions originally intended for a regular primary cannot stand for a special primary on the same date with the same candidates.
I do know that any person I can dig up to sign new petitions will understand beyond any doubt whom it is they must thank for this duplication of effort and added expense.
So now it's about time for the other IL-14 candidates to start grumbling about the millionaires in their midst, Jim Oberweis and Bill Foster, and the "buying" of a Congressional seat. After a thorough read of the latest Federal Election Commission financial filings, it is evident to me that the charge has to be based on more than just one's bank statement.
Consider these fundraising numbers for the 3rd quarter:
Burns: unitemized receipts of over $9,600; itemized receipts from about 80 unique donors.
Foster: unitemized receipts of over $38,700; itemized receipts from about 275 unique donors.
Laesch: unitemized receipts of $19,250; itemized receipts from about 90 unique donors.
Lauzen: unitemized receipts not quite $5,400; itemized receipts from about 100 unique donors.
Oberweis: unitemized receipts of $2,200; itemized receipts from about 50 unique donors.
Stein: unitemized receipts over $11,800; itemized receipts from about 85 unique donors.
Unitemized contributions are small contributions that don't meet the threshold for separate reporting ($200 or less per individual or group per calendar year). They are considered a measure of popular support. Large numbers of so-called "small donors" can be an advantage because the candidate can go back to them again and again up to a limit of $2300 per candidate, per election. As you can see, Foster is that guy; his campaign claims more than 650 total donors at an average of $315 per donation, including 204 donors who each gave $14. In contrast, campaigns with a few "large donors," such as Lauzen's, have already reached some donor limits.
Also this is probably a year when the "Millionaires' Amendment" kicks in. As soon as a House candidate spends $350,000 of his own money, mechanisms for leveling the playing field, such as raised contribution limits, can kick in for eligible opponents and would apply in the primary and in the general.
Disclosure: I'm knocking on doors for Bill Foster
[Cross-posted at CityBarbs.com where this is the 3rd article on 3rd quarter fundraising.]
Planned Parenthood is opening a health center in Aurora. The health center is aimed to help fill the community's need for affordable reproductive health care. It offers Aurora's low income residents access to many services including:
pregnancy testing
a range of contraceptive options
emergency contraception
gynecological services
Pap tests
colposcopy services for abnormal Pap tests
sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing and treatment, including rapid HIV testing
abortion services (both surgical and medication) with sedation options
options counseling, including adoption referrals
The need for this center is real. A Naperville site opened recently saw 13,700 visits last year, mostly for birth control.
It should come as no surprise that anti-abortion forces have mobilized against the Planned Parenthood health center. A protest last week saw teens carrying signs reading "Planned Parenthood kills babies" and reinterpreting biblical passages to their own needs. Chris Lauzen, the State Senator currently campaigning to replace Dennis Hastert as representative from IL-14, was there too, extolling the throngs.
The Aurora Beacon News covered the story, but rather than present the story impartially and unbiased, they aligned themselves with the anti-abortion protesters, painting them as the only voice in this debate. The writer didn't even bother to contact Planned Parenthood to get their response.
This is a women's health center in an area that desperately needs it. It isn't the caricature that anti-abortion zealots paint. It is a place where low income women can go to get treatment for a wide variety of reproductive health issues. It is a place where they can get tested for HIV. It is a place where they can get counseling and birth control. It is a place where they can learn their options in a difficult time. And yes, it is also a place where they can get an abortion should they find it necessary, but not having the center available doesn't stop the abortions from occurring; it only drives them away from the clean, caring, supportive environment where options are given and preventative measures offered and pushes them into the background.
Where do the impoverished women of the area go when they need routine women's health exams? Where do they go when they are looking for contraception to avoid the need for an abortion? Where do they go when they need to know what their options are and how to get more information?
They need access. They need choice. They need Planned Parenthood.
Recent Soapblox convert, Swing State Project, has discovered the potential IL-14 battle should Dennis Hastert retire to maintain his Speaker's pension.
At least 3 state legislators are "looking at running" for outgoing Speaker Dennis Hastert's seat "if and when he retires." Pro-Hastert forces are "lining up" behind state Rep. Tim Schmitz (R), while "conservative" state Sen. Chris Lauzen (R) "has long eyed the seat and is expected to throw his hat into the ring." On the Dem side, locals are "very hopeful" that state Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia (D) will run (Capitol Fax newsletter, 11/30).
My understanding is that the GOP side of things is a bit more colorful than this simple description would indicate. Apparently, the "moderates" back Schmitz because they feel Lauzen is a right-wing nutcase. This story played out many times in 2006 - a radical wingnut beating a more reasonable candidate in the Republican primary - often to our advantage.
...
As for our team, I haven't previously heard of Linda LaVia. Anyone know anything about her?
