Of course J.B. will settle; he can then blame Rauner for the wrongdoing

After covering units of government for so many years, there’s one rule of operations that I’ve picked up on.

PRITZKER: Willing to settle, he won't lose

If you sue a government, you’re probably going to wind up getting some sort of settlement – although very few will wind up becoming wealthy for life as a result.

SERIOUSLY, THE RULE that most governments use is that the moment the cost of attorneys fees to defend oneself become too great, the attorneys are under orders to reach a settlement.

Of course, that’s why so many lawsuits against government wind up being resolved with clauses saying there is no admission of guilt or wrongdoing. The government entity will claim this means they really didn’t do anything wrong – even if they wound up having to cough up some cash!

This concept is what pops into my mind as I learn of Gov.-elect J.B. Pritzker’s comments recently about how he wants to settle the lawsuits pending against Illinois government as a result of military veterans who were living at a Veterans Affairs facility in Quincy.

Those were the people who came into contact with Legionnaire’s Disease while living at the facility. Their families are the ones who are now suing, saying the state needs to compensate them for the deaths of their loved ones.

THESE INCIDENTS OCCURRED during the gubernatorial reign of Bruce Rauner – which has just over one more month to run. Pritzker says he fully intends to resolve these lawsuits – once he becomes governor come mid-January.

Of course Pritzker is going to want to resolve these lawsuits. He’ll be able to place full blame for any acts of wrongdoing on the previous gubernatorial administration.

And perhaps by cutting the state’s losses loose sooner rather than later, the state will be saved a bit of financial expense in the long run.

RAUNER: Will get the blame

Not that any of this will produce a definitive result as to what went wrong or who truly screwed up and caused the deaths of military veterans. But if partisan political points can be scored, who really cares about fact? Or the truth?

MAYBE IT’LL BE all about the payoff – with the families who have spent the past couple of years tangled up in court feeling grateful they’re getting some money. Not that money alone will truly make up for the loss of a loved one.

But it’s also about the partisan politics. Which means that a Rauner victory in last month’s general elections would have extended this process – at least long enough until Rauner himself would have concluded that a quest for a dismissal just wasn’t worth the expense in legal fees.

He would have paid them off, provided he got that concession of “no wrongdoing” on the part of the state.

Whereas Pritzker isn’t as concerned, because he can shift off blame to someone else. As for what money has to be paid out in settlements, I suppose Pritzker will be able to argue, “It’s not my money!” and will merely sign on the dotted line to approve the compensation for those who suffered a loss.

IT MAY ALSO be why Pritzker will be willing to go along with the General Assembly’s recent action to increase the amount of money people can win in such lawsuits (from $100,000 to $2 million apiece).

Illinois will wind up having to come up with significantly more in cash to settle the dozen lawsuits that are now pending against the state.

Pritzker would like to turn happenings of Quincy into 'yesterday's news'

But Pritzker will write it off as merely another expense we got dinged with as a result of the partisan gamesmanship of the Rauner administration. The new governor will be more than willing to pay out if he thinks it's his predecessor who will get dinged with the blame.

Which J.B. will regard as the ultimate prize, thereby making him the ultimate political victor with regards to the Quincy “issue.”

  -30-

On abortion, Rauner will be damned if he does, or even if he doesn’t

Gov. Bruce Rauner officially received a bill on Monday that I’m sure he wishes could just wither away – a measure related to an issue that tends to piss people off no matter what is said or done.
 

An ad abortion rights-types will soon send us

The issue being the termination of pregnancy and who, if anyone, has a right to make such a decision.

RAUNER IS GOING to have to put himself firmly on the record on this issue, and he’s going to have the entirety of Illinois’ electorate watching his every move.

If he just goes ahead and signs into law the bill approved by the Illinois General Assembly this spring, he’s going to get many of the social conservatives all riled up – in that they’re the kind of people who long for a past era when abortion could be considered a criminal act.

But if he uses his veto power to kill the measure, he’ll get a large share of Illinoisans outraged – largely the kind of people whom Rauner is hoping don’t take his defeat in the upcoming 2018 election cycle as some sort of crusade to be achieved by turning out to vote in strong numbers.

This particular bill was one approved by an urban Democratic majority in both chambers of the state Legislature of people concerned about social trends in our society that might try to push for a time when abortion would no longer be a constitutionally-protected idea as it has been since 1973.

BACK IN THE 1970s when that happened, Illinois government officials approved measures meant to bring Illinois law into compliance, while adding clauses meant to imply that if the Supreme Court ever changed its mind, state law would automatically revert back to its old status.

Some legal experts argued that such language was actually too vague to be taken seriously. But those people who strongly back the notion of abortion being a legal medical procedure didn’t want to take any chances.

Should Catholic Vote message include an "(or else!)"

They pushed for changes to be included in measures meant to clarify when public funds in the form of Medicaid can be used to cover the cost of a woman’s terminating a pregnancy.

That is the measure Rauner now has to decide upon. Backers in the General Assembly tried delaying the legislative process until Monday, hoping they could avoid sending him the bill until they could work out an agreement he would sign it.

BUT NOW, IT seems Rauner is going to be put on the spot – and he has hinted that a veto is a possibility.

But if he does that, it will outrage one segment of our society. Signing it, however, will also arouse the ire of those individuals who think they have a right to meddle in whether a woman terminates her own pregnancy.

The Catholic Vote group is calling the bill “electoral suicide,” while some conservative activists are saying this bill is an “integrity test” for Rauner. They say he will have broken their promises to him, and they just might have to vote against his dreams for re-election.

But the more urban segment of the state could wind up turning on him if he makes those individuals happy. A new poll by the Normington, Petts & Associates group that has 66 percent saying Chicago is on the “wrong” track also says more people blame Rauner (only a 19 percent “favorable” rating) for that moreso than any other government official.

THIS COULD BECOME merely another reason for people to be upset enough with Rauner’s gubernatorial term to want to vote for whichever Democrat manages to win the primary next March.

Now aside from the Capitol Fax newsletter in Springfield confirming that Rauner received the bill on Monday, I don’t know how quickly he’ll want to act. This may be a measure he’ll wait for as long as he can (60 days) before doing something.

It may even become a moment that makes him ponder why he was ever foolish enough to want to be governor. Oh, the headaches!

Why do I fear this will come up late in the day some Friday afternoon, or maybe in the days leading up to the Thanksgiving holiday weekend. Hoping we’ll be too pre-occupied with our family food fests to want to complain publicly.

  -30-

Does Donald Trump's vision of 'great' include return to old days on abortion?

I’d have had more respect for Donald Trump (not that I think much of the man to begin with) if he had stuck to his guns and maintained his original views expressed with regards to the issue of abortion.

Does this vision of 'great' include returning to the days of old with regards to terminating a pregnancy?

You know, the ones where he came out and admitted that a repeal of abortion in this country would naturally result in “some form of punishment” for the women who persisted in terminating pregnancies.

SUCH A VIEW is abhorrent. It is offensive and tacky. It is repulsive and completely antithetical to where our society is now and the direction it is headed.

Yet it is the way things once were. Back before Roe vs. Wade (the Supreme Court decision that legitimized abortion as a legitimate medical option), women could be brought to the attention of the police for criminal investigation if their miscarriage caught the suspicion of someone – medical or not.

The women would have to justify that it wasn’t their fault the pregnancy came to an end.

As for the women whose situations in life caused them to want to end a pregnancy, they knew they would have to take on a choice that would put them at risk of legal troubles for the rest of their lives should their secret become known.

NOW I HAVE to admit this attitude seems bizarre to me – particularly since I was 7 years old when the Supreme Court of the United States took its actions. The idea that an abortion was ever a matter for the police sounds like some sort of morbid fairy tale.

And this ‘tale’ is what Trump touched on when he opened his mouth to discuss abortion, in reaction to questions from MSNBC.

Because it is clear that if we had a repeal of the Supreme Court ruling that overturned all the old laws that criminalized abortion, there are certain states that would probably rush to reinstate some sort of penalty for anyone who thinks to end a pregnancy.

It probably would be the same states that now are all too eager to offer up laws protecting religious officials from the “discrimination” they “suffer” from having to treat decently people who aren’t exactly like themselves.

WE’D DEVELOP A patchwork of states where one can terminate a pregnancy, and others where they can’t. Actually, similar now to how some states throw up so many roadblocks to the procedure that it’s next to impossible for women to obtain.

Of course, the anti-abortion types of today will spew a certain rhetoric – claiming that all they’re doing is protecting women from having to deal with the “back alley butchers,” those un-licensed doctors who would be performing the procedure and putting women’s health at risk.

All too similar to the cheap talk that Trump spewed in the hours after realizing his talk about punishing women who want to terminate a pregnancy was going to have political and social repercussions.

It seems Trump thinks he can get away with slandering Mexicans and Muslims, and probably thought he could do the same with women. Only to have the backlash become too intense so he backed off.

WHICH IS WHAT makes me lose what little respect I have for the candidate. At least he initially was being honest about his abortion viewpoint not being concerned in the least about the situation of the women involved.

Because to be honest, if people were really concerned about protecting women from those alleged medical people doing abortions that can easily turn deadly, they’d be among the biggest proponents of legalization. Having them done in the legitimate hospitals and clinics where the whole process is above-board.

That is how we make it safe. That is how we eliminate the risk. All the other talk that usually comes up around the issue is from people who desire to butt themselves into a pregnant women’s private business.

Of course, it’s probably all a byproduct of that insipid “Make America Great Again” cap goes around wearing – as though he thinks it makes him look like a regular-kind-of-guy.

IT APPEALS TO a certain mentality of person who wants to think things were once better off for people just like himself, because other types of people have taken things away from him.

Those “types” of people probably include women, whom these people would like to put back into a form of subjugation.

What better way to do that by thinking the day will come when we can go back to calling the cops on women who are suddenly missing that baby bump in their bellies.

Not realizing that the resulting image will appear as ridiculous as those old “Dragnet” television episodes where Jack Webb’s “Joe Friday” character cracks down on the “hippie freaks” who threaten the existence of the “society” that Trump talks of wanting to return to.

  -30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: The law, as it now exists in Illinois with regard to abortion. Only the ideologues think we need a radical change backwards.

A DAY IN THE LIFE (of Chicago): Jackson’s health public, or a secret?

In just under one month, Jesse Jackson, Jr., is going to face sentencing for the criminal charges he pleaded guilty to as they relate to his use of campaign funds for personal expenditures.


JACKSON: Public, or private?

Attorneys for Jackson, the former Congressman from Chicago’s Far South Side and surrounding suburbs, have made it clear they want his health issues (he’s been diagnosed as being bipolar) to be a factor in what a federal judge for the District of Columbia takes into account when imposing a sentence.

BUT THOSE ATTORNEYS this week made it clear there are limits as to how much of his health data ought to be public. They want part of a sentencing memorandum to be sealed to the public.

The parts related to his health; specifically the parts that contain letters written by doctors who provide medical details of just how ill Jackson truly is.

There have been enough people who oppose Jackson for politically partisan reasons who hate the idea that health and physical fitness will be a factor at all. I’m sure they’re prepared to start ranting about how this is some sort of cover-up.

As though they won’t be happy unless they get personal details that they can then use to try to humiliate Jackson further than he already feels.

WHICH MEANS WE have to figure whether we agree with the attorneys, who this week said that releasing those doctor letters would, “disclose unnecessarily the defendant’s and his family member’s medical information, diagnoses and treatment to the public.”

Personally, I’m amazed that the Mayo Clinic (where Jackson went for some treatment prior to his indictment) provided as much detail as they did about bipolar disorder.

Although I’m pretty sure some people (the ones who think that the potential for a five-year prison term that Jackson faces isn’t sufficient) are going to complain no matter how this situation turns out on July 1 – the date that Jackson and spouse Sandi (the former 7^th Ward alderman) are scheduled for sentencing.

What else is notable in the land along Lake Michigan where two mediocre-to-sorry baseball teams prevail?

MOVING ON?:  First Crete. Now Joliet.

... except for detention

The latter city this week said it was no longer interested in being the location for a detention center designed for people who face federal immigration law violations.

Federal officials want to hire Nashville-based Corrections Corp. of America to build five privately-run facilities to hold people facing deportation – including one in the Midwest near Chicago.

But every single site considered thus far has aroused the anger of locals who don’t want any such structure built near them. Combined with the people who hate the idea of privately-run facilities for these offenses, it’s a wonder if any place will ever be willing to have a jail-like facility located nearby.

LET THEM COME. HECKLE THEM INSTEAD:  The Gay Pride Parade will be held this year on June 30, and the question is whether any political people will be seen among its participants.

 

They usually are. But there’s a petition drive these days from people who say they want the elected officials kept out – on account of the fact that the Illinois House of Representatives could not be bothered to vote on the measure that would have legitimized marriage for gay couples.

Personally, I think that’s short-sighted. Keep in mind that the Illinois state Senate approved the measure (back on Valentine’s Day). Perhaps any political gesture should be aimed at the Illinois House.

Or better yet, let the political people march in the parade – if they have the nerve. Because I suspect the boos, heckles and taunts they would receive would make for a very uncomfortable environment. Maybe that’s what it will take to make them realize the short-sightedness of their actions last week.

DEFINE ABORTION!:  Rev. Michael Pfleger of the St. Sabina Parish is used to saying things that manage to tick people off. Although I suspect he will upset, and confuse, many interests when it comes to abortion.

FLEGER: Looking out for poor, regardless of who's offended

Pfleger, who spoke Monday night at Governors State University about how he thinks our society these days is doing harmful things to children, used the “A” word. Although he didn’t define it as a medical procedure.

He says that corporate entities, schools and others commit acts all the time that harm the chances of children to grow to adulthood and succeed in life, and he considers those just as bad.

“Whatever harms a child from growing to term, that is an abortion,” he said.

  -30-

Who says Mayo Clinic has a clue? Prosecutors want Jackson health issue

All through the whole Jesse Jackson, Jr. saga, there have been those (usually with an ideological or racial leaning – if not both) who have insisted that all the talk of the now-former Congressman needing medical treatment was some sort of scam.

JACKSON: Will his health be on trial?

The fact that he got admitted to the Mayo Clinic and underwent treatment? Not swayed. They probably want to believe that the Rochester, Minn.-based clinic is somehow on the take; perhaps a part of a criminal conspiracy that perhaps they should be prosecuted for as well.

A WHOLE LOT of nonsense talk is what it really comes down to. The people who have wanted Jackson out of office for years, if not just over a decade, want him out for ideological reasons.

They’ll take whatever grounds they can get to find a reason to depose him.

And those people, I’m sure, are going to be loving the rhetoric that we’re going to get from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, where on Friday a federal judge scheduled July 1 as the date that Jackson will face sentencing.

Because the prosecutors with the U.S. attorney’s office who are seeking to get a prison term for both Jackson and his wife, Sandi (the former alderman) are making it seem as though they want to use Jackson’s bipolar disorder diagnosis against him.

THOSE PROSECUTORS SAY they want their own medical experts to examine Jackson, on the off-chance that defense attorneys try to bring the issue up as a factor in sentencing.

As much as people complain that defense attorneys are willing to exploit a medical condition for the benefit of their clients/defendants, it is just a true that prosecutors can easily come up with their own “expert testimony” to refute any point that someone tries to make on their own behalf.

Yes, it bothers me that prosecutors are going to be feeding off the sentiments of those people who are so eager to dump Jackson from power that they’ll believe anything.

SANDI: What she gets for signing tax form

It ensures that this particular aspect of the case will linger for far longer than it deserves to.

PERSONALLY, I DON’T comprehend much of the animosity – particularly since those who were opposed to the Jacksons ultimately got what they wanted. They’re both out of political office and in situations where neither is ever likely to be capable of holding a political position of authority again.

The critics are getting what it was they wanted (and putting the rest of us through that whole ordeal of watching that special election cycle that bordered at times on the absurd). It’s as though now they’re getting greedy and demanding ultimate punishment.

Perhaps they think it has to be something more than the roughly 14 years of real time that former Gov. Rod Blagojevich is now serving at a federal corrections facility in Colorado?

I noticed one anonymous (of course) Internet commenter who claims that anything less than five years in prison for each Jackson is unjust. Even though the maximum sentence Jesse, Jr. could get is five years, while sentencing guidelines say the maximum for Sandi is two years.

THE JACKSONS (AS in the political family, not the musical one) are out of office and headed for prison. They’re going to suffer. Like I stated earlier, the ideologues are getting what they want!

But let’s not overdo things. Retribution for retribution’s sake makes all of us in society look sorry – even those who don’t support it but do little to nothing to stop it.

Which is why I’m hoping the federal judge in this case (also named “Jackson,” but not related) has enough sense to not let this issue get all out of hand during the sentencing.

The last thing that a criminal sentencing needs to devolve into is a medical diagnosis!

  -30-