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-

Is Kifowit’s trash talk any more crude than Trump-era Republican rhetoric?

Yes, Stephanie Kifowit, the state representative from Oswego who implied this week that one of her Republican colleagues ought to have his family infected with Legionnaire’s Disease, was rude and tacky in her comments.

KIFOWIT: Her moment of 'infamy?'

It was good to learn that after an entire day of trying to defend herself (claiming she was misinterpreted), she came out with an apology to the family of state Rep. Peter Breen – the legislator whose family was supposed to be infected and drop dead!

YET I HAVE to admit that hearing all the self-righteous GOP rhetoric condemning Kifowit for her trash talk was even more sickening than anything the representative said.

For these are often the same people who are so eager to defend their Republican colleagues, and President Donald Trump himself, every time they spew something stupid and crude.

Particularly with regards to the president, they try to claim his crude talk on oh so many issues is just The Donald being blunt-spoken and honest. Saying it the way it really is, they’ll try to claim.

It’s almost enough to make me think they deserve to be smacked about with Kifowit-style trash talk. In this era our society is now in, we’re going to have many people saying stupid things. We’re all going to be owed many apologies.

BREEN: Really a victim?

I ALSO HAVE no doubt that the next generation is going to look back on my own and wonder just how we all could have been pathetic enough to think that such behavior was acceptable.

Probably similar to how many of us in society these days look back on old segregationist attitudes and ponder just how anyone could ever have been so backward as to think such thoughts were civilized and proper.

All of this was triggered Tuesday by activity at the Statehouse in Springfield, where the big issue being discussed was a bill meant to raise the financial limits that exist for how much the families of seniors who lived at a veterans’ home in Quincy could sue the state to compensate them for the loss of a loved one.

Breen, a Lombard Republican, said he thinks there are too many questions, and that raising the limits (from $100,000 to $2 million) could be financially damaging to the state.

SCHNEIDER: A little too self-righteous!

THAT IS WHAT offended Kifowit to the point where she said how bad it would be if a “broth of Legionella” were to be put into the water supply of Breen’s family.

Kifowit initially tried defending herself by saying she meant her statement as a theoretical example, and not as a hard-and-fast outcome that she was wishing for. But she got buried under mounds of harsh rhetoric implying how cruel and heartless she was for even suggesting the death of a political colleague’s family.

“Kifowit should be ashamed of her remarks,” said state Republican Chairman Tim Schneider. “Since Rep. Kifowit has refused to apologize to Rep. Breen she should resign from office, as these remarks are unfit for someone serving public office.”

Of course, Kifowit later came up with an apology. When combined with the fact that Schneider’s own political influence these days is minimal (he couldn’t even win re-election earlier this month to his government post on the Cook County Board), it’s not likely that anybody is resigning from anything.

FOR IF WE truly expected resignations from political people every time they said or thought something stupid, we likely wouldn’t have any officials left to fill government posts.

TRUMP: How many apologies does he owe us?

It may be the ultimate truth about comprehending the ways of government and politics – it’s all a matter of trying to avoid saying something stupid. Then again, one’s idea of what is stupid or offensive all-too-often depends on one’s own partisan political leanings.

Going back to the example of our president, who has made so many rude and crude comments on so many issues that I’ve lost count, he’s not about to resign because of his mouth. His Republican colleagues in Congress enjoy the fact that Trump’s presence strengthens their own political status, so they’re not about to hold him accountable.

Which means that on a certain level, Kifowit probably deserves a bit of praise for the fact that she apologized for her bout of diarrhea of the mouth that she suffered from Tuesday.

  -30-

Avoiding talk of 'Quincy' while in Quincy key to analyzing gov. debate

Thursday is the last of the three official debates the candidates for Illinois governor will hold prior to Election Day, and there’s really one simple way of determining who comes out ahead.

We'll see a Quincy-centric world Thursday

Just how much does discussion focus on the Veterans’ Home in Quincy – the facility where several fatalities occurred from elderly residents who contracted the Legionnaires Disease.

BECAUSE YOU JUST know that Democratic nominee J.B. Pritzker is going to want to turn the entire session into a rant against how those men who served their country wound up dying while in the care of Gov. Bruce Rauner.

That’s actually a gross oversimplification of what really happened, but then again most of what gets said during a political campaign is oversimplification and distortion with only the slightest tidbit of truth to it.

So if we wind up being given the impression that Rauner is personally responsible for dead military veterans, it will mean that Pritzker will have “won” the debate – he will have been capable of having his version of “the truth” predominate.

Whereas if we wind up being given the impression that this election cycle is about a man who had the toilets ripped out of a mansion in order to get a significant property tax break (because it no longer qualified as an inhabitable home), then we can chalk up Thursday night to Team Rauner.

YOU MAY BE wondering “What’s your point?”

RAUNER: Caused negligence that killed vets?

It’s that these circumstances shouldn’t be surprising. Political debates have the great misfortune of being so filled with nonsense that it’s a wonder anything useful comes out of them. There actually are times I wonder why political candidates bother to participate in them.

Personally, what I always try to look for when watching such an event is just how quick on one’s feet one is. How they handle the back-and-forth of answering back.

And also watching for that moment (which can crop up at virtually any point in time, usually most unexpected) when a candidate goes off-script and says something from the heart. Telling us what he really thinks about an issue.

PRITZKER: A toilet-less tax cheat?

OF COURSE, THOSE moments can be dreaded by a candidate because “honesty” can often be ugly – showing us just how insipid a political aspirant truly is and all-the-more reason why we shouldn’t bother voting for that person.

For what it’s worth, Thursday’s debate between Rauner and Pritzker is meant to be the “downstate” debate. Unlike the two previous events sponsored by the Chicago Urban League and the League of Women Voters that were held in Chicago, this one is being held outside the Chicago area.

It will have a panel of broadcaster-types from Quincy, Peoria and Rockford, along with a reporter-type from the Herald-Whig newspaper of Quincy. Which means it may well have questions that focus on the rest of the state – the part of Illinois where Rauner dreams he’s the favorite and that will lead him to a victory over Pritzker.

Now I don’t doubt the downstate Illinois types will vote against Pritzker because he’s “too Chicago-ish” for them. Although how they manage to tolerate Rauner is a mystery. It must be a really tight clothespin tacked onto their nose while they cast their ballots.

EITHER WAY, I’M sure many think this election stinks.

It is a victory for Pritzker’s part that his political operatives were able to get a Quincy-based debate as one of the events, and pressure Rauner into having to accept it. I have no doubt that the governor would rather be anywhere else in Illinois than in Quincy Thursday night.

Will gov candidates muck up the shores of the Mississippi River?

And as for Pritzker, it’s probably a matter of following the old political adage – “Avoid saying anything stupid!”

Because amidst all the cheap shots and distortions that both candidates will make about each other, we need to realize we’re getting our last glance at the two multi-millionaires who want to think that their personal wealth is significant enough to buy the political post of Illinois governor.

  -30-

Attorneys who prosecute for political reasons stink – no matter who does it!

There are those of a certain partisan political leaning eager to feed into a fantasy that a newly-elected state Attorney General Erika Harold would handle an investigation into the criminal behavior of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.

MADIGAN: Ending AG term w/ Gov. investigation

Of course, much of what these ideologues want to say is “criminal” amounts to little more than the fact that Madigan, as a Democrat, disagrees with many of the policies they’d like to see the state impose on all of us.

SO PERHAPS THERE is a touch of appropo to the fact that soon-to-be former state Attorney General Lisa Madigan is doing her own investigation against the man – Gov. Bruce Rauner – who has been aggressive in spewing the rhetoric that “Speaker Mike” is a crook.

Specifically, Lisa Madigan wants to determine if the outbreak of Legionnaire’s Disease that occurred at the Veterans Affairs facility in downstate Quincy in any way was worsened by neglect by the state that could constitute criminal behavior.

In short, is the man whose re-election desires are based on the notion that Mike Madigan is a crook really nothing more than a crook himself – one whose behavior resulted in aging military veterans in need of care becoming ill, or more than a dozen dying outright?

Or is all this rhetoric merely misuse of legal issues to try to punish one’s political opponents. Criminalizing politics – or at least the notion of being in an opposition party.

Ideologues would fight over whether Rauner … 

THAT MAY BE the scariest thought of all. Because it would put our society in the same league as many of the societies that we like to spew high-minded rhetoric about how superior we are to them.

To be honest, I don’t think Rauner has done anything blatantly illegal. Certainly nothing that ought to result in him spending the next few years following his possible Nov. 6 electoral defeat having to fight off criminal charges.

And while I don’t think that Lisa Madigan is somehow being a spiteful witch threatening to prosecute the man who keeps implying that her father is somehow worthy of criminal prosecution, you just know the conservative ideologues are going to want to view the issue in exactly such a manner.

… or Madigan is more of a 'crook'

If anything, Madigan’s actions are all the evidence needed as to why people who think that an “Attorney General Harold” ought to prosecute Speaker Mike are being downright ridiculous.

FOR THE PURPOSE of the state attorneys general is to serve as the lawyer advising state government on the limits of the law whenever they engage in their schemes on assorted issues.

In short, they’re there to defend state officials, not be the prosecutors. It really is the individual state’s attorneys across Illinois who ought to be taking on such criminal cases.

Which in this case means the state’s attorney for Adams County, Ill.; that Western Illinois place along the Mississippi River that would like to think it is still a significant port city – and not just the place where residents of the local veterans’ home died due to appalling circumstances.

Yet State’s Attorney Scott Farha has been quick to not only distance himself from any such action, he was even quicker to dismiss Lisa Madigan’s actions as being, “politically motivated.”

THAT MAY, OR may not be true. Yet it also creates circumstances where people can quickly conclude that Farha, as a Republican, is merely being protective of his political party counterparts – rather than trying to get to the truth of what happened in Quincy.

Did we believe Nixon when he said he was 'not a crook'

This has become a case where partisan politics is going to interfere with ever determining what occurred at that veterans’ home – and who was in any way responsible.

Trying to determine if Bruce Rauner was more of a crook than Mike Madigan was gets us tied up with side issues that most likely aren’t relevant to the case. They’re distractions.

Besides, those of us of a certain generation know that in politics, there’s only one man who deserves to be called a “crook” – that’s Richard M. Nixon. Although I’m wondering if President Donald J. Trump these days is giving him a run for the money for that label?

  -30-

EXTRA: How many chances does Gov. Rauner need to say Madigan is corrupt?

Listening to Gov. Bruce Rauner say this week he wants there to be a dozen formal debates between now and Election Day reminds me of the 1998 election cycle.

Pritzker only wants three

Specifically, the portion of the cycle in which Democrats had their candidates fight it out for who would get to be the gubernatorial nominee who would ultimately take on Republican George Ryan.

THAT ELECTION CYCLE ultimately saw Southern Illinois favorite son candidate Glenn Poshard use his regional base to beat up on urban candidates John Schmidt, Roland Burris and Jim Burns. It also was one in which there were many debates.

It seems the candidates were traveling all over the state, making appearances and trying to make the locals feel like they were privileged to be in the presence of the gubernatorial aspirants.

Sounds great? Not really.

What I remember of that election cycle was that they became less about speaking to the would-be voters, and more about giving every broadcast organization involved in sponsoring an event a chance to pretend that THEIR debate was the ONLY debate that mattered.

Rauner must really want to say "Madigan evil"

WHILE NEWSPAPER COVERAGE wound up making these events all sound so repetitive of each other.

Largely because they were. Candidates mostly ignored the questions they were asked and used their time to issue rebuttals to whatever negative pot-shots were made against them. I can remember sitting through those events and feeling incredibly uninformed.

I was always thankful that election officials in the future went back to thinking in terms of three as the number of debates that were needed prior to an Election Day. Even though I do believe there is benefit to a structured-format event in which the candidates confront each other.

McCann will take 12 too

So to hear Rauner say he wants a dozen debates fills me with dread. How many times do we need to hear the man spew insipid claims of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan’s corruption? How many times do we need to hear rhetorical links of Madigan’s support for billionaire J.B. Pritzker’s candidacy?

THREE WILL PROBABLY be more than enough. Although I expect Rauner will insist on complaining he’s not being given ample times to screech “Dump Madigan!!!” to prospective voters.

If anything, Rauner is merely confirming my own political hypothesis – which is that the first candidate in any election cycle to complain about the number of debates is the loser.

So I’m inclined to be sympathetic to the Pritzker camp which has suggested three debates – although I’ll admit Pritzker is playing some hard-core politicking of his own in picking where they will be held, and pretty much making it a “take it or leave it” choice for Rauner to accept.

Two of the debates would be held in Chicago, with one to be co-sponsored by the Telemundo Spanish-language television affiliate along with the Chicago Urban League. Where I’m sure we’ll get tons of questions intended to remind us that Rauner is just a rich white guy who doesn’t get it. Along with reminders of all the vetoes Rauner made last week on measures related to immigration.

AS FOR THE one debate intended outside of metro Chicago, it would be set for Quincy, the city along the Mississippi River with a veterans’ home that has been the focus of instances of veterans who died from Legionaires’ disease. It’s probably the one place in rural Illinois where Rauner does NOT want to set foot.

Multiple debates didn't help Poshard win

And as for the traditional debate held by the League of Women Voters, that’s a group most likely not interested in cheap political pandering by any candidate.

I do find it intriguing that Conservative Party candidate Sam McCann is accepting Rauner’s offer of 12 debates. But that’s because he needs as much attention and opportunity as possible to let voters know he exists if he’s to be at all irrelevant come Nov. 6.

Which means it’s really sad that Rauner, an incumbent with significant personal wealth (he essentially bought the post in the 2014 election cycle) feels he’s just as desperate. All the more reason many voters have already shifted their focus to the mayoral election cycle of 2019.

  -30-

I’ll be watching outside Obama gathering in Quincy for any real campaign news

Quincy, Ill., hasn’t had this many Chicago people pay attention to it since the days some four decades ago when the Chicago Cubs had a minor league affiliate there.

Yet all of the political observers who specialize in Second City, and perhaps even a few amateurs who think the activity on Capitol Hill is as intense, are going to be watching the Mississippi River town of some 40,000 people to see what President Barack Obama does during his visit on Wednesday.

OFFICIALLY, OBAMA IS visiting several “middle-America” municipalities this week as part of what he is billing as a “White House to Main Street” tour – as though popping into Quincy and several other places just like it will suddenly make him more aware of what the people of our nation want from their federal government.

But the Quincy stop is going to get some extra scrutiny because it will be the only one on this tour that puts him within the boundaries of Illinois. Technically, it is official government business, and NOT a campaign stop.

So taxpayer funds will wind up covering the cost of travel and security and all the other nuances that get involved anytime a president takes it upon himself to commingle with the public.

But that distinction between government business and campaign business is going to get blurred, because Obama earlier this week gave invitations to just about every Democratic government official in Illinois – including Gov. Pat Quinn and Democratic Senate nominee Alexi Giannoulias.

THE LATTER IS facing his own political perception problems that Republican partisans are eager to exaggerate into matters of grave significance – and seeing how Giannoulias deals with this conduct will tell us a lot about whether he is fit to serve in the U.S. Senate.

But there are those who are trying to read into his invitation some sort of support from Obama – a sign that the president is going to take a strong hand in trying to get his one-time basketball-playing buddy back on track from having to deal with the image that Republicans want us to have – one of a mob-tied banker who’s being bailed out by the same taxpayers who are paying for Air Force One to make a stop close enough to Adams County, Ill., that he can be in Quincy.

If this commentary reads like I am mocking the idea that Obama can (or will) do anything of significance to “save” Giannoulias on Wednesday, you would be dead-on accurate.

Personally, I will be surprised if Giannoulias, or Quinn, or anybody who serves on our local political scene, is allowed to say anything of significance that would allow them any specific attention. This appearance is about promoting Obama’s federal governing credentials, not bolstering our local campaign scene.

THE ONLY REAL significance would have been if Giannoulias had somehow been denied an invitation, although I personally would not have considered it to be too much of a snub.

But he didn’t.

Obama invited Giannoulias, along with Quinn (who should be smacking Republican gubernatorial nominee William Brady’s campaign all over the place these days, but isn’t) and just about any other Democrat with a pulse.

It’s not a specific honor. I’d be amazed if Obama said anything that could be construed as supportive because this just wouldn’t be the place for it.

ADAMS COUNTY IS not some Democratic stronghold. Obama lost that county in the 2008 general election by a 60 percent to 38 percent margin to Republican opponent John McCain (although he beat Hillary R. Clinton in the primary there by a 57 percent to 39 percent margin).

In fact, the website of the Quincy Herald-Whig newspaper (I like that name) had a completely-unscientific (but possibly honest) reader poll that had 73 percent of respondents saying they would neither try to see Obama, nor watch him on local television, during his visit.

So for all those people who are convinced that Wednesday is going to somehow influence our local elections, I’d be very skeptical. In fact, about the only reason I’m going to be watching what happens in Quincy is that I’m curious to see how the counter-demonstration progresses.

A group calling itself Quincy’s “Tea Party movement” plans to hold its own rally outside of the hall where Obama is hoping to hold a “town hall” session. Inside the hall will be an impromptu session that is as completely-scripted as any public appearance a president makes.

OUTSIDE WILL BE an event more chaotic, in that who’s to say what these Tea Party types are capable of doing.

Will we get a vocal, but respectful (as in acknowledging the office, regardless of the man in it), voice of dissent? Or will it deteriorate into some sort of raucous mess that winds up making the Republican Party in Illinois have to issue some sort of lame apology and denial that they were even involved?

Be honest. That option is much more likely than the thought of Giannoulias saying anything interesting, or getting any kind of real support while he gets to stand on stage during the event and serve as a presidential prop of sorts.

-30-

EDITOR’S NOTES: They’re already acting in Quincy as though they are being snubbed, pointing out that the president didn’t say much of anything on his arrival in Illinois on Tuesday. He is hitting towns in Iowa and Missouri before returning to Quincy for a Wednesday town hall forum.

No matter how much some people want to believe it so, Alexi Giannoulias is likely to be the least interesting aspect of what will happen Wednesday in the Gem City.