`

rauner reelection

Two Sides Of Same Fraudulent Coin

How do voters encapsulate the IL gubernatorial race? What do the candidates mean when they say “middle class”? Does JB not want to take a position on anything while Rauner has taken different positions on every issue? Would JB be prosecuted if there was a serious Attorney General? Dan and Lauren Cohn discuss the Illinois governor’s race.

Related Content

The Rough Road Ahead

Is the Republican Party having trouble resonating with voters in Illinois? Is it even trying? How will the unpopularity of Donald Trump and Bruce Rauner in the Chicago Metropolitan Area affect the strategy of Republican candidates running for office? How can Trump clear up misconceptions about Russia? Congressman Peter Roskam joins Dan and Amy to discuss. 

Related Content

A "Conservative" For Governor?

State Sen. Sam McCann is leaving the ILGOP to run as a "Conservative" Party candidate for governor. Is he doing so to win or just to increase JB's margin of victory over Gov. Bruce Rauner? Is a three-way race the only chance a downstate conservative has of winning the governorship? Sen. McCann joins Dan and Amy to discuss why he no longer associates himself with the Illinois Republican Party and what his new “Conservative” Party will campaign on.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. Who is losing population faster; Illinois, or the Illinois Republican Party? Jacobson: Hey-oh! Proft: Ehhh, it's interesting. We have...speaking of interesting...the governor's race just got a lot more interesting. You have Spalding. You have former... Jacobson: I haven't seen Spalding in a while! *chuckles* My kids asked if he DIED. Because, you know, he's been all over the airwaves for the past two years, and now he's gone and...you know, I mean they're taking a BREAK, obviously... Proft: Two years? It was like...four months. It just SEEMED like two years. Jacobson: It was...no, he started a LONG time ago! Proft: It wasn't TWO YEARS...*chuckling* Jacobson: He was dabbling, you know...him and children taking their food in the cafeteria... Proft: He was tired... Jacobson: ...and then walking down the street... Proft: He's gotta rest. It was physically exhausting for him, to spend...to write all those checks. But, so yes, Spalding, you've got former Governor Bruce Rauner, now you have state Senator Sam McCann, who's run several times, and won. Republican state Senator, downstate, Macoupin County. He has LEFT the Republican Party, and he has launched an independent campaign for Governor. He's gotta get 25,000 signatures to get on the ballot, and the filing is the last...the third week in June, that shouldn't be an issue. Sam McCann, here's a little piece of his announcement video yesterday. McCann (from tape): *slow inspirational trumpet and piano play throughout piece* They have failed us. Rauner and Chicago Democrats have led our state down the wrong path. Higher taxes, backward morals, and disregard for the rule of law is the Illinois they've created. It's time for a REAL transformation for the state of Illinois. I'm Sam McCann, and I'm running for Governor to put Illinois on a path to prosperity and promise. As Conservatives, we know and believe that you can't spend money you don't have, and that opportunity should exist for everyone, not just a chosen few. I'm running to restore what hard-working Illinoisans value the most: liberty, family values, and law and order. Proft: That music in the background... Jacobson: It's such a... Proft: You know what it conjures up to me? Jacobson: What? Proft: The convoy, the team bus and all the parents following... Jacobson: Oh, from "Hoosiers"? Proft: Following Hickory...yes! Game to game as they make their championship run! Jacobson: Well, the French horn is so profound in that piece. Proft: So, now in the interest of full disclosure, in my private life where I run this PAC, and support legislative candidates, and oppose other legislative candidates, in 2016 I allied with Governor Rauner, much to my ever-loving chagrin in retrospect, and backed a primary challenger to Sam McCann...for his state Senate seat, and Sam McCann won, and if I had it to do over again, I'd probably do it differently. But, but...we DO have some disagreements here, it's...but, it's a very interesting approach, and market positioning that Sam McCann is taking, as provided in that announcement video. But, for more specifics, we're pleased to be joined BY state Senator Sam McCann. Sam, thanks for being with us, appreciate it. McCann (Phone): Good morning, guys! Thanks for having me. Proft: So, you know...you kind of lay it out in your three-minute announcement video, but since we have the horse, let's get it right from his mouth. Why have you decided to leave the GOP and run against Rauner and Pritzker? McCann: Well, technically, we're in the PROCESS of leaving. We haven't really left, past tense. (Proft: Okay.) We're looking to form as a new Conservative Party, not running as an independent. (Proft: Okay.) We're looking to cause a paradigm shift, because it seems that the Republican Party has lost its way, it is totally unrecognizable to most of us, I think it's TOTALLY unrecognizable to most of us downstate into a good portion of the folks up in your area as well. So, what we're doing is forming...we're in the process of forming...the third party. I'm still the elected Republican sitting senator for the 50th District, until the...until the middle of January, 2019. (Proft: Right.) But what we are looking to do is be the next Governor of Illinois, move forward, move the state forward, and we're looking to bring people into this movement along the way. So if you're within the sound of my voice, give us a call, reach out, we would like to see you run for State Senate, State Rep, get involved up and down the ballot, across the state of Illinois. Jacobson: What is the name of your Party? McCann: It's the Conservative Party. Jacobson: So it's just the Conservative Party? Okay. Proft: So...so this is interest...I didn't appreciate this...so this is a conservative party, movement party, that you're starting, you're going to run under the Conservative banner for Governor, and you want to recruit people who will run under the Conservative banner for state offices, other than...you know, the legislative offices and the like? McCann: Well, of course, don't...I think that conservatives ought to have a voice in Illinois, and it seems to me that the two options they have now, neither one of those provide an adequate voice for conservatives in Illinois. Jacobson: What is your biggest point of contention with Governor Rauner and what he has done while in office? McCann: ...okay, well...how long do we have? *both laugh* Jacobson: Heh, okay. Proft: Alright, yeah...well...yeah, well... *dead air for a few seconds* Proft: Pick your top FIVE. McCann: Well yeah, okay, well, yes well, we could be here...I don't know how long this interview is scheduled to go, if this is a three-minute interview or a 30-minute interview. But I don't know where to begin, but I bet...I know, we could talk forever. From the transgender birth certificate bill, to a tax fund...taxpayer-funded abortion on demand, to the war on working people. You name it, we could...we could keep going...you revoke the right of conscience for health care providers. I mean, we're talking about a guy with an R after his name! Right? This is not Pat Quinn! This isn't Pritzker! This is a guy with an R after his name! And what's amazing to me is that the majority, albeit a SMALL majority, a small margin between Ives and Rauner, but the majority of Illinois Republicans say "Yeah, we're prepared to...we're prepared to follow this guy." Proft: Yeah, but here's the thing, Sam; it sounds kind of like you're running a Republican primary campaign in a general election, so is your candidacy... McCann: No, I'm...I'm...I'm running for the Conservative Party, because the Republican party has left, in Illinois anyway, I don't think nationally. I think nationally, the Republican Party is doing a pretty good job! I think President Trump is doing a great job, I think the Republican Party nationally...it's morning again in America. But in Ill...but in Illinois...I think... Proft: ...but let me (McCann: ...it's appalling.), let me ask you this though. Is it your estimation that the conservative base of the Republican Party is enough to win a three-way race for governor in a general election? McCann: You know, so...let me answer it this way. I would be the first to admit that a downstate conservative could not win a TWO-way race for governor of Illinois. Probably couldn't win a two-way race for any statewide office in Illinois, but certainly not governor, and I get that, totally. But I would also posit, that a three-way race might be the ONLY way a downstate conservative could. Proft: Now let me...let's go to an area where you know we have a disagreement, and this is on the public sector unions and some of the votes you've taken in particular with respect to collective bargaining rights, and the attempt to strip the governor of his collective bargaining rights with AFSCME a couple years back. And, do you see your apparent alliance with the public sector unions as one potential way to draw in people who may otherwise be considering voting for Pritzker? McCann: I think doing the right thing...shows. I mean, that's what I've heard, I mean that even though you disclosed it, and by the way Dan, I have no problem with you know...you and I have known each other for a number of years, not overly well, but we've known each other. (Proft: Yeah.) And we agree on a lot...I think we agree on the majority of issues. We disagree on a couple, this being one of them, but I did the right thing for my district, and my district responded, right? We won, and if I had not done the right thing, we wouldn't have won. And so, I think doing the right thing is always the right way to show the people that you are there for them, and not there for the party, not there for yourself, not there for a chosen few. And so yeah, I guess... Proft: But then (McCann: ...that still lingers.), I'm sorry, Sam, go ahead. McCann: No, so answering your question, yeah, I did what was best for my district, but ALSO, let's...let's talk about what that vote was, what that particular vote was. Because up until that point, up until that one particular vote, I had been with the Caucus 100%. 100%. I had voted with the Governor and the Republican Caucus 100%. Now there were a couple of those votes, up until that point, that I didn't really agree with. I thought that the Party, the Caucus, the governor was taking the wrong approach on these issues, you know it was the beginning of the budget stalemate standoff. But, I stuck with the Caucus. I told...I looked the governor in the eye, it's not like I held something, and voted out of left field. They knew it was coming for a couple of months, I looked the governor in the eye TWICE, just he and I, one on one, and told him what I was going to do, and...and said "You know, let's THINK about this. Is this the right approach?". So the vote that I took, it didn't...it didn't strip him of his rights to bargain...it's...when you say it that way, it's almost in a vacuum. You know, he ran on...they planted his platform and his campaign...was calling the AFSCME Union names, he said he would shut the government down if that's what it took to break them, and so on and so forth. So, he hadn't exactly set this jovial tone, he hadn't even really set a moderate tone, he set this tone of "I'm gonna go there and break that union." Proft: No, but I mean, but just getting beyond the tone to the substance of it, he is a proponent of Right to Work, and obviously the public sector unions and the trades are not, and you're not, and so that's a substantive disagreement, and you're not the only one who has that disagreement with him or with the proponents of Right to Work within the Republican Party or the Conservative movement within the state. But I guess my point is to say, so there's a substantive disagreement there on policy, and do you expect, or are you banking on as part of this to serve the interests of the public sector unions or the trade unions (McCann chuckles) or some combination there too on that issue? McCann: You know, I'm for working people, whether you're union, non-union, white collar, blue collar, public sector, private...private sector...I'm for working people, period end of story. I'm for all working people. If it takes a working person forward, if it brings working people up the ladder, I'm for working people. And furthermore, I think all the unions, for the most part, are going to be with the Democratic nominee. (Proft: Yeah, yeah.) I don't...I have...so when I took that vote, when you say AFSCME, and when other pundits were folks who take a different view of all this talk about the unions, you know, it's almost like you envision me up there on a stage with the President of the Union and, you know...I'm doing this for these LETTERS behind me on a billboard. I did...I didn't take that vote for the President of the Union, I didn't take that vote for those letters, AFSCME. I took it for those prison guards who are, for the most part, Veterans, and who are, for the most part quite frankly, downstate Republicans, and conservative independents or conservative Democrats, they were just trying to feed their family. You know, they start out making about $46K a year...I mean, and I could go on, there's all sorts of job descriptions, I'll use that one as a perfect example that there are...I spoke to some...I spoke to some workers from the Hope School, that serves the developmentally disabled in my district last night, before I went to Kingda Key (?), that...those people work for an average of $12, $13 an hour. You know, they're NOT making $100K a year, like Bruce Rauner has led a lot of people to believe, they're not going to make $150K a year in retirement. The people who are going to make $150K a year in retirement are the political cronies he's appointed to lead all the departments...actually, the sweet spot is all the DEPUTY directors, that make almost as much as the directors. Proft: Well let me, let me just explore this a little bit, just in terms of kind of the public sector union policy agenda. I mean, are you support...I know in your video you talk about wanting to repeal the Rauner-Madigan Income Tax hike, which I think is a fair way to describe and I think is a good idea, but what about things like the $15 minimum wage and some of the other agenda items for the Progressive Left, the public sector unions? McCann: Yeah, so...the minimum wage in this country, I think, needs to go up, but I think it needs to be set, you know, by Congress. I think, you know, there are 50 states, each state has the ability, and in there, there...and we...we have one of the higher minimum wages...I do believe the minimum wage needs to go up. BUT, it needs to be done across the board, it should be done at the Federal level, and I've told them that, I've (?) the folks when they come to visit with me...when I talk about the folks, I'm talking about their MEMBERS, I hardly ever see an official from the Union, I think I've met the President of the AFSCME Union...I've never really sat down and MET her. I've been on the same stage with her a couple of times, when they come...have me come to address their membership...I deal with those PEOPLE. Proft: Well then so, Sam, so it...so...so... McCann: So I'm not...yeah, I voted NO on that, I said that it...that needs to happen at the Federal level. Proft: If...but if you're not going to have significant Union backing, and you're up against two oligarchs, how do you put the resources together...I mean, this was the Jeanne Ives challenge, right? You're one of 59 Senators, she was one of 118 State Reps. People don't know who you are outside your district, so you've got to put together resources to market, and now you've got to put together resources to market into the resources being expended by two oligarchs, how do you make that work? McCann: Well, that's one reason I'm on the phone with you right now. (Proft chuckles.) We're looking to cause a paradigm shift. If you're within the sound of my voice, give me a call, text, email...three four...217-341-8524. Jacobson: Do you have (McCann: That's my cell phone number.) a website...oh, you're handing out your CELL PHONE number? McCann: Yeah! Proft: Okay, alright, let's hold on here. Jacobson: Roland Burris was on here, giving out his cell phone number. Proft: Yeah, exactly! Jacobson: And so, do you have a website that people can go to? McCann: And so, yeah, that's my cell phone number! Send me a text, and then I can follow that up with a phone call. I can't take everybody's phone call at once, but I can receive texts, and I will get back with you, because we want to cause a paradigm shift in Illinois, because it needs it. Proft: 217-782...what? McCann: 217-341-8524. Proft: *mumbling* eight five, two four...217-341-8524. Alright, text Sam McCann, all day and all night, BOY you're really gonna get more connected than you ever wanted to be, I bet! McCann: I...you know, a government that's by the people and for the people requires something, and that common denominator is the people. Proft: And do you have a website, or how is the campaign being put together, to even just get the signatures required? McCann: McCannForIllinois.com. McCann for...M-C-C-A-N-N F-O-R Illinois spelled out, dot com. Proft: Well, you mention in your announcement video, and you mentioned at the beginning of our conversation about values, and some of the moral issues where you and former Governor Rauner are at odds. And so, are you going to be somebody that leans into talking about social issues, rather than the approach that the Republican Party has taken, that to try and take Sanctuary State and the life issue, and all these other issues off the table and just pretend they don't exist? McCann: Yes, certainly. I think that's what we did in our announcement video, I think I broached those issues...I think I broached those issues there in State. Right, I think I hit that head on, if you watch the entire three minutes, and I think again, think about this; President Trump won not by running from all that, but by embracing it, right? So I don't think that the national party is having the problem that we're having, they're embracing it, they're pushing it, they're leaning in, and saying "Hey, this is who we are, and this is what...and this is why." You have to explain WHY, right? There's a lot of people who...they aren't like us, they don't pay attention to all of this minutia, this political minutia, and so they don't know WHY they feel the way they do on this issue, and when you have a deep conversation with them, they're like "Hey wait. That, that makes some sense." I mean, I get...that's why President Trump won, right? He didn't win because he converted the entire Republican Party. He won because the party was attempting to do what you just described. He had 16 opponents in the Primary, if he would have started out with one or two, he wouldn't have won, right? What he did by entering that race was the number of people who supported him in relationship to that large number of opponents...he was able to win enough Primaries to become the nominee. (Proft: Yeah.) How did he do that? He did that by getting a TON of conservative Democrats, a TON of Union conservative Democrats and independents and Republicans across the country, much like Ronald Reagan did, to become the next President of the United States. So, the answer to your question is YES, we're leaning in, we're embracing it, that's a big part of what we're talking about here. Proft: How do you...I thought to...Rauner's announcement yesterday was interesting...essentially part of it was to criticize your business background and some of the challenges that you've had in your business background. How do you respond to his response? McCann: You know, well, I would say that I have walked in the footsteps of the average Illinoisan, he has not. I think it's interesting that he is one of these guys who like a lot of politicians will get up there and say "Holy...we gotta make Illinois better for business, these poor businesspeople are going out of business, these poor businesspeople, they're having trouble hanging on!" Well yeah, I KNOW, because I'm one of those first generation "poor businesspeople" who started at the age of 23 with ZERO CAPITAL. I had nothing to invest, zero, right? I came from a broken home, no money, no inheritance, didn't inherit a business, didn't put together a bunch of venture capitalists to go and rate businesses. I started a little construction company because I...because there were...there was no JOBS to be had in the community in which I lived, and I...over the course of 25 years, we turned it into something. We had that little thing called a Correction in the economy back in '08 that caused me and a lot of other people in the construction business a lot of problems. So yeah, I would say to Governor Rauner, you know, I think it's interesting that you stand up there half the day and talk about how we should have pity on these poor little businesspeople, well, I agree! So why are you lambasting ME? Because I have had the same problem that thousands of Illinoisans ave experienced, and you see Illinois? For all those people listening, Governor Rauner has NO CLUE what you've been through, he has no clue what you're going through, and he doesn't really CARE! He just wants your vote, so that he can attain more power for himself and a couple of other people at the top of the pyramid. Proft: He is state Senator Sam McCann, an independent...Conservative Party is that he's starting candidate for governor who will file at least 25K signatures at the third week of June if he's gonna be on the ballot and try and challenge Rauner and Pritzker in the general election. McCannForIllinois.com is the website, Sam McCann thanks so much for joining us, appreciate it. McCann: Thank you guys, thank you Dan, thank you Amy, thank you very much! Jacobson: Good luck! And he joined us on our Turnkey dot Pro Answer Line!

Related Content

IL GOP’s Purge Of Conservatives

Does the Rauner Party only like primaries when they want to get someone out they don’t like? What’s the future of the Illinois Republican Party? Will there be a challenge to party chairman Schneider? Lake County Sheriff Mark Curran joins Dan and Amy to discuss the unity Rauner and the IL GOP establishment preach, while they pursue a purge of conservatives from the party.

Related Content

Recapping The 2018 Primaries

Illinois has now moved on to the general election. While the governor's race didn't go as conservatives hoped, several conservative reform legislators prevailed in their primaries and are looking to take on the establishments of both parties. What should voters pay attention to now until November? On this post-election installment of "Illinois Rising," Dan Proft and Local Labs CEO Brian Timpone analyze the March 20 primary results and look ahead to the new campaign season. Conservative state rep candidates Darren Bailey and Jay Kinzler join the show.

WATCH THE FULL EPISODE HERE

SEGMENT 1

SEGMENT 2

SEGMENT 3

SEGMENT 4

SEGMENT 5

RELATED CONTENT

Boogeyman Politics

The strategic advice after the Illinois primary election is centered on which state is best to move to. Is the Democrats message in the 2018 elections going to be, “the government knows how to spend your money better than you do?” Is the circus like behavior surrounding Trump going to detract from substantive policy discussions? Congressman from the 6th District, Peter Roskam joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. Poring over the election results from yesterday, this morning. And before we get to our friend, Peter Roskam, a couple more calls...Steve from Gary. Steve (caller): Yeah, kind of depressed. I live in Indiana, but it shouldn't matter. (Proft: Hey, THAT should make you happier.) The invasion is going to continue. I mean...did you notice down in Florida, all the parents that they talked to from that shooting...*accent* they all tawlk wit a Noo Yawk accent! *end accent* Yeah, that sounds like a FLORIDA accent to me. That's the problem...these people MOVE to get away from these liberal Democrat politics, and they move...and they take their politics WITH THEM. Proft: Yeah, thanks for the call Steve, I get it. I mean... Jacobson: Bad interpretation... Proft: Impersonation? Jacobson: Impersonation I mean. Proft: New Yawk accent? Jacobson: He coulda done it betta. Ya know? Proft: Like butta. Mark, in Joliet. Mark (caller): Hey, good morning, Dan and Amy! Dan, you've been trying to explain to people for the longest time that people in Illinois are losing their property through taxation. And then this morning, Amy kind of joked that she might want to move out of state. Well, if I were Amy, or anybody that works in Illinois, and wants to continue working in Illinois, I would move somewhere like Wisconsin, that has a reciprocating tax agreement with Illinois, as opposed to Indiana where I actually live, and we USED to have one, until it went away under then-Governor George Ryan. So, basically, I have to pay income taxes in Indiana, as a resident, AND Illinois, because I work there, I get whacked pretty good, especially when they raise the tax rate by 66 percent a half-a-dozen years ago and another 33 percent a year ago. So, my point to you Amy or anybody else, move to Wisconsin and pay...enjoy a reciprocating tax agreement while you still can. Proft: Hmm. Ahhh. Thanks for the call, Mark, although Wisconsin is a pretty high combined state and local tax burden, BUT not as high as Illinois', of course. But here's the thing; it's fun to take these calls right after the election, and all the calls we're getting are related to strategic advice as to where to live, not Illinois. Interesting. Alright, more on this topic, we're pleased to be joined by Peter Roskam. He was a state legislator, before he was a big shot in Congress, and he joins us now. Peter, thanks for being with us, appreciate it. Roskam: Good morning, guys! Nice to be with you, thanks for having me on. Proft: Good morning. So you're a Wheatonian...let's get your take, your reaction, your comment on the Republican Primary Election, starting up obviously with the governor's race on our side. Roskam: Yeah, look...I think the Governor squandered a consolidated effort by being so provocative over the past year or so with these policy initiatives that were just off-putting to a lot of Conservatives, and Jeanne gave a very impressive run, essentially ran an insurgency campaign. And you saw that manifest itself in a lot of different areas across the state. So, here's the thing that voters are going to have to decide all across the country in November, in House races, and just really up and down the ballot; should...Nancy Pelosi, for example, be entrusted with the Speaker of the House again...I think that would be a disaster...should Mike Madigan be given more authority and so forth up and down the line. And so, these are threshold questions that the whole country is dealing with, because this will be a nationalized...in a way, in terms of House races that are going to be competitive this Fall, and it continues to amaze me that people, with a straight face, can say "Oh, the solution in Springfield is let's double down for more!" So I think there's going to be a lot of interpretation of these numbers over the days and weeks ahead. Proft: Speaking of competitive House races this Fall, you had like SEVEN candidates vie to face you, you had this Kelly Mazeski or whatever her name is, apparently is the winner. You know they're going to play the Boogeyman Politics, right? Especially in this state. "Everybody is a schill for Donald Trump!" How do you assess your Democrat challenger and your race this Fall? Roskam: So, it looks like it may have been Sean Casten that won. (Proft: Oh really? Jacobson: Oh!) Yeah, this is a little bit late-breaking, so...whoever it is, it's interesting. They've all said they were COMPLETELY against the tax plan that went through. All right, so that means they want to take the bonuses back from people, they think those bonuses are a bad idea? Or doubling the child tax credit, they're not into that? Or getting rid of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which hit 30K people in my constituency, or lowering these rates? What's interesting is...what's interesting is they're basically just parroting Nancy Pelosi, and so Pelosi called the bill "the worst Bill ever", and Armageddon, and that $1000 bonus was crumbs, and so forth. That's gonna be the playbook, I think. And so, you know, I just think that there is a lack of clarity about how the economy actually works. And the notion of cutting taxes and giving people tax relief, and regulatory relief, and the things that the 6th District has said historically "These are the things we value.", those values are now under attack. And here's the thing; I think campaigns where you have two competing views of the world, two competing views of the economy, two competing visions of the future and the direction you think our country should go...I think those kind of campaigns are INCREDIBLY invigorating. When they're about IDEAS, and they're not about personalities. And I think that these two ideas are gonna be on display, and I think the ascendant view, the invitational view, the view that values GROWTH, is the view that resonates in the 6th District. Jacobson: Well, as a Congressman, I feel like you're always running for office, because of the two-year terms. But Sean Casten, he's a Downers Grove businessman, who is running on climate change, so are you prepared for that fight? Roskam: Yeah, I mean...look, I am delighted to talk about ANYTHING up and down the line as it relates to policies. And I think, yeah, there's a...I fought for the restoration of Great Lakes funding, for example, in terms of making sure that the money is there to be cleaned up appropriately, to keep the Great Lakes safe. I fought to bring back $22M to Chicago for cleanup. So I think that the 6th District is interested in environmental stewardship, they're interested in a balanced approach to things, they have zero interest, in my view, at least a majority, has zero interest in the type of Draconian approaches that just hinder economic growth and don't give people opportunities. Proft: I gotta say, I'm looking at the Tribune site, which was allegedly updated at 6:09 this morning, and that's about five minutes ago. And they still got Kelly Mazeski up by 260 votes (Roskam: All right.)... Jacobson: Oh, so now I guess you don't have to WORRY about Climate Change! Proft: No no! What I'm saying is I think we have another Dewey Defeats Truman moment! Yeah, the Tribune is stepping on themselves again maybe, wouldn't that be fun? Roskam: Could be, could be! And there were some data problems last night with some of the websites, so... Proft: Yeah, yeah. So, you're kind of framing your race, now frame kind of the national...the national climate that you're going to face, that's beyond your control, starting with the President, and why don't we start, because there's been so much action there since Deputy Director Andy McCabe was fired, everything under the rubric "Russian Collusion", and with the House Intel Committee basically saying "No Trump Campaign operatives colluded with Russia," BASICALLY saying that, and then this furor around McCabe, and then Byron York asking a good question, "Well wait, if Manafort and Gates and Flynn didn't collude with Russia, well then WHO DID and can we get to the bottom of this in the not-to-distant future?" How does all of that play out and impact November? Roskam: So the...I don't know how it impacts November. I think the thing to keep in mind is just...keep an eye on where the investigation is, where it's going, and what is the fruit of the investigation and headlines in churn? So, we know that there's practically NOTHING that can be done that will satisfy the national Democrats right now, there's no point where they're going to say "You know what? It was looked at, you're right, turn the page." They're just not going to do that. So I think cooler heads have to look and say "What is the fruit of the investigation?", and the fruit of the investigation has to manifest itself soon, in terms of action and not just churn. And I think there's gonna be a lot of folks that are going to be saying "Hey! Get this done, bring the cases. If there's an allegation of collusion with the campaign, bring it! If not, turn the page!" Roskam: Are you afraid that all of this Stormy Daniels stuff...now we've got a Playboy model... Jacobson: It's "The Porn Star and The Playmate", Dan! Proft: Yeah, well, and it's not limited to them. Then you've got that Summer Zervos, whose case is moving forward, a lower cour...well, a District court essentially, rejecting Executive Immunity in that civil manner of defamation case. I mean, are you worried at all that a bit of the circus-like atmosphere around Trump with some of these individuals, and some of his past behavior, at least alleged behavior, detracts kind of from all of the substantive matters you were just discussing? Roskam: Yeah, it's not helpful. You would much rather have the focus be on the issues of the day, great principles that we were talking about just a couple of minutes ago, and not have it be distracted with all of this other drama. But, there's an irony, here. And that part of the irony, I think, is a national party, the Democratic Party, that has said for decades "Presidential misconduct has nothing to do with the capacity to lead!", now is sort of MARINATING in this. But listen, I'm not about to defend the activity that is being alleged against the President, if true, it's troubling. But that said, the irony, it's just palpable. Jacobson: How do you feel about Andrew McCabe being fired...two days before he was supposed to retire? Roskam: Look, I think...if it was an effort...to stick it to him, I don't know enough about the backstory, if there had been some back-and-forth drama. I just don't know enough about the details to be able to comment well on that. Proft: All right, he is Peter Roskam, Congressman from Illinois' 6th...he'll face a... Jacobson: He'll face who? Proft: Well, I mean he's gonna face SOMEBODY, whether it's Mazeski or Casten, either one they're gonna put somebody up and they're gonna come after Peter Roskam, you can bet that in this cycle in this state, so suburbanites better be on notice, and rally to help our friend Peter in the General. Peter, thanks for joining us, appreciate it. Roskam: Thanks guys, great to be with you!

Related Content

Second Round Of Tax Cuts?

What happened to the Republicans who campaigned on repealing Obamacare? Are they now about to vote on a bailout for the exchanges? Heritage Foundation Economist and Wall Street Journal Columnist, Steve Moore joins Dan and Amy to weigh in on the latest in Washington and the Illinois primary race for governor.

Related Content

Closing Arguments On Election Day

As you vote Tuesday and get ready to see who prevails in the Republican and Democratic gubernatorial races, hear final thoughts on the races from Dan Proft, Pat Hughes and Republican candidate Jeanne Ives.

WATCH THE FULL EPISODE

RELATED CONTENT

Ives Within Striking Distance Of Rauner

Jeanne Ives is within striking distance of Gov. Rauner, and GOP voters are within striking distance of completely changing the political landscape in one election. Is there a turnout issue on the Republican side in the Illinois Primary? Is the progressive income tax on billionaires touted by the Democratic candidates for governor a Trojan Horse for a tax increase on all Illinoisans? Illinois Policy Institute's Marketing Manager, Eric Kohn joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. Talk a little bit of state and local politics, you know we're five days away from a primary election. Jacobson: How are you feeling? You're really burning the candle at both ends. Are you getting enough sleep, Daniel? Proft: I am...NOT, Mom, but I'm okay. Jacobson: How are your eating habits? Proft: Thanks to you and your little gerbil... Jacobson: Gerbil food packs? Proft: Gerbil food packs here, I'm managing to survive. New survey out yesterday in the governor's race on the Republican side, this was a survey done by Jeanne Ives' campaign....42-35. Jacobson: WHAT? No way, really? Proft: Rauner's down to a 7-point lead. So this is getting really interesting here with five days to go. Here's something else that's interesting. (Jacobson: Yes?) The turnout so far, total ballots cast...or ballots requested and awaiting return...the Democrats...this is from a bit earlier this week but you get the gist of it...the Democrats, as compared to this time four years ago, so an off-Presidential year, the last governor's race...125% of ballots cast from four years ago. So, they're seeing an uptick in turnout, they're at 125% of ballots cast in 2014, as we stand here a couple of days ago. Republicans? FIFTY percent (50%) of ballots cast from four years ago. (Jacobson: WOW.) So, you've got a real turnout issue on the Republican side. Now that can be a lot of things...it can be in part people that are sometimes Republican, sometimes Democrat deciding to play in the Democrat primary because they think that's where more of the action is, that can certainly be part of it. Can be part of Republicans thinking "Oh, well Bruce Rauner is gonna win this race, so I'll go pick the least competitive Democrat," trying to play that game. Or, and it can also be "Because Rauner is so awful, and I'm so fatalistic about this state, 90% of people think it's on the wrong track, that I'm just not gonna participate after Rauner's betrayals, I'm just done with the Republican party." Jacobson: I don't like that option. Proft: Well, I'm just saying, I mean, it could be...it's a multitude of factors, I'm just saying, so now you know that you've got a competitive primary in the Republican side, that Jeanne Ives can win. On March 13th of 1996...this is not a perfect comparison, but it's about the best we have in terms of huge upsets...on March 13th of 1996, Al Salvi was down 14 points to Bob Kustra, and...for the Republican nomination for US Senate...and of course, those of you old enough to remember, Al Salvi ends up winning that race by a couple of points. Jacobson: I remember. Proft: Yeah, me too. So, so...when things break, they break. Jacobson: What about Glen (?), remember him? He was on the Democratic side, but nobody saw that coming. Proft: Right, another good example, right. When, and...when things break, they break, and there seems to be momentum with Ives and... Jacobson: How was her fly-around yesterday? Proft: and...so Conservatives...Conservatives have an opportunity....like they haven't had in my lifetime, and speaking as a Conservative. And this...there's rarely an opportunity that comes along where you can finally change the political landscape in one election, in one night. I mean, change it for generations...and that's the opportunity that's present in the Republican governor's race. That's there for the taking, if Conservatives come out and vote, and vote for a Conservative candidate to be the Republican nominee for governor. That really is, because if you don't, we're going to have Surrender Republicans, Fake Republicans as Tucker Carlson calls Rauner, against Chicago Democrats. It will be the same old same old, and this Going Out of Business Sale for the state of Illinois will continue in its orderly fashion. Ives, and the possibility of stoking the revolt that has been visited upon all of our Midwest neighbors, that is watershed, that is game-changer, so that's the opportunity on Tuesday, and it is right there for the taking. Not my opinion, the NUMBERS say so. And Jeanne Ives was on Chicago Tonight, flying solo, as we talked about yesterday... Jacobson: Oh yeah! Because Governor Rauner was a no-show. Proft: Mmhmm! Jacobson: I LOVE Gubernatorial debates when...when the "Gubernor" doesn't show up! Because it was really...but it gave her another opportunity just to get her policies across to the people...it was good. Proft: John Cass wrote about it, Amanda Vinicky who did the interview of Ives, said on air that Governor Rauner...MONTHS of not responding to TTW whether he'd participate, and then on the day of the interview, his staff told WTTW that he had another commitment. Jacobson: Well, wasn't he down South, vetoing the gun bill? Proft: *chuckles* Yeah. On...so John Cass writes...he compares Rauner to the knight in the Monty Python movie who "bravely ran ran away". He goes on to write, "Rauner is counting on JB's shrieks to cover the sounds of his own footsteps running away from Jeanne Ives. As I keep telling readers, what is not said, what constitutes the negative political space, is often the most important part of a political story, and at the debate that he ran away from, Rauner's silence was excruciatingly loud. He didn't want a confrontation with Ives on those notorious ads he's been running against her, ads alleging that Ives, the conservative Republican state rep from Wheaton, is a creature of Democrat boss Mike Madigan. It's a complete falsehood, of course, and rather ridiculous, but Rauner must think they're effective. But those lies will make it impossible for him to patch the Republican Party back together should he win the March 20 primary, which is still very much in doubt," writes Cass. And he goes on to detail "Brave Sir Robin Rauner's" various betrayals, which have put him in the position he is, which is starting to drop like a stone. Ives addressed the matter, in part, during her Chicago Tonight appearance. Ives (from Tape:) Rauner said nothing, either. He knew all about this too, he never called for the LIG... Proft (cutting the clip off): THAT's about the Inspector General and sexual harassment, but this is her responding to the commercials in question that John Cass writes... Jacobson: Oh, where she's "with Madigan"? Where they're long-lost lovers? Proft: Yes, right. Ives (from Tape): The truth is that I'm...I would be Mike Madigan's worst nightmare, because I actually have the courage to speak up for taxpayers and expose the games that are going on down there, and to put people in uncomfortable conversations where they actually have to explain their policy choices, and that's something that Governor Rauner failed to do. But make no doubt about it (sic), Governor Rauner has lied to everyone about everything over the last three years, and he's now lying about my record, because he can't talk about his, because he has no record to talk about. Proft: "Lying about me because he can't tell the truth about himself", and here's the Ives value proposition. Ives (from Tape): But you know what, when you put these people in a box....look, nobody, NONE of the Democrat governor candidates and not Bruce Rauner, is going to lead the taxpayer revolt that has to happen in this state. Proft: That's it. The taxpayer revolt. That's the choice, ultimately. Ives is a vessel for the revolt, and Rauner is a vessel for surrender. So, that's your choice. For more on this topic and this race, as well as others and the policy implications, we're pleased to be joined by Eric Kohn, who's the marketing manager at the Illinois Policy Institute. Eric, thanks for joining us, appreciate it. Kohn: Good morning, thanks for having me. Proft: Good morning. So, one of the things that was being bandied about, and was talked about again at last night's Democrat debate, Democrat Gubernatorial Debate, is the Graduated State Income Tax, this is something that the Democrats are intent to do, they are openly talking about it, advertising it, because they think it's politically popular and unfortunately, they're right. But this seems to be the case, that if Democrats remain in control of the General Assembly, and Pritzker or Kennedy or Bist is our next governor, that you're going to see a hard move to graduate the state income tax. Kohn: Absolutely. It has been something you've heard from many of the candidates running, that we need a progressive income tax, that billionaires need to pay their fair share. But, we should actually take a look at what is really being proposed. So, you need...first, you need two things to happen. We have to change the Illinois Constitution, first you'd have to get rid of the clause in the Constitution that mandates a flat income tax. And if they were successful in doing that, then it's the same state lawmakers who are responsible for the political culture in this state, who are responsible for the policy choices that have put the state in the situation it's in, to set the new graduated income tax rates. State Representative Robert Martwick was kind enough to file a bill with progressive tax rates, assuming that this constitutional change would happen, and we took a look at 'em. And what we found out is that anyone in Illinois who's making more than $17,300 a year is going to see their taxes go UP under this plan. And if you want to find out exactly how it would affect YOU, you can go to IllinoisPolicy.org and use our Tax Calculator and find out what it would mean for you if this progressive tax was to become a reality. Jacobson: Well, do you...I mean...so, Chris Kennedy, he keeps saying that he's going to reform the income property taxes, income tax and property taxes in Illinois. Do you know, does anybody know about the actual PLAN that he has? Kohn: I haven't seen the actual plan that he has there, but I think it's worth pointing out that if we look at the current situation, Illinois already has higher property taxes than any other state that doesn't even have ANY income tax, we have higher property taxes than Florida and Texas, every other state that does not have an income tax, we have higher property taxes than. Which indicates again that, you know, it's...this is a different-natured problem, and moving to a progressive income tax, while it's being sold as this way to, "We'll tax billionaires and that's the way we'll fix our state," that's not how it works in reality. In reality, it is a Trojan Horse for tax increases on the middle class. The progressive income tax would mean an overall 21% tax hike on most families, and that's just something that Illinois families cannot take, especially after dealing with the impacts of a tax hike in 2011, it did go away, and then the tax hike that happened last year. Proft: Yeah, it's interesting, too, what's happening in New Jersey, Zero Heads reporting on this yesterday. "New Jersey prepares to raise taxes on ALMOST EVERYTHING as it nears financial disaster. New Jersey's fiscal situation so dire that new Governor Phil Murphy is proposing taxing: online room-booking, ride-sharing, marijuana, e-cigarettes, internet transactions, along with raising taxes on millionaires and retail sales to fund their budget, which would do what? Boost spending on schools, pensions, and mass transit." So, again, we're not the only ones...the only state providing a bad example of how to govern, there are others...but we're still the WORST, make no mistake. But this is exactly what Big Government Republicans and Democrats have been doing that makes us the worst governed state in the nation, and you have Democrats in states like Jersey and Connecticut, California, doing the same thing. Kohn: Exactly. You know, in fairness to Illinois, we often take a look at the numbers and compare between different states, a total tax burden, property taxes etc. And in fairness, New Jersey is often the one state that keeps us from being WORST in the country in a handful of categories. But, you can see the philosophy is generally the same there. You take a look at the impact of the tax hike we had in 2011, our chief economist took a look at it and found that it cost the Illinois economy $56B in real GDP and cost about 9.3K jobs. We fully expect the impact of the 2017 tax hike to be similar to that. And now, here we are again, rather than talking about a spending cap, or spending reforms, or fixing a lot of the structural problems that plague the state of Illinois, now we're talking about a supposed tax to make billionaires pay their fair share, that is actually going to make any Illinoisan making more than 17 grand a year toss up more to Springfield. Jacobson: So, is there a possibility to fund our schools without using property taxes? Kohn: Well, I'm sure it's possible. It would require, again, changing the actual structure, the way we operate state government, which is of course a hard conversation that, of course, people in Springfield really don't want to have. So, instead, we get these conversations like "Oh, we just need to raise the income taxes on the flat tax we have, we need a progressive tax." Meanwhile, property taxes continue to go up. Unfortunately, many in Springfield don't want to have that kind of uncomfortable conversation, so we're having on that, as Dan rightly pointed out, plays popularly when you talk about taxing billionaires, when people, if they go to IllinoisPolicy.org, use our Tax Calculator, see what the impact would actually be on their family, they'll find out what the progressive income tax really is about, and it's about raising taxes on almost all Illinoisans. Proft: There's something interesting, and this is really a below the fold if you don'[t live up in McHenry County, you're not aware of this. But there's an interesting binding referendum on the ballot. This is in McHenry Township, where Bob Anderson, who we've spoken to on the show before, he's like an octogenarian barber from Wonder Lake, has been fighting against Township for a long time and he was able to get a referendum placed on the November ballot, I should clarify, that will ask voters whether to abolish the Township's road district. The binding referendum is sort of the first in...first of recent and note of...under the umbrella of consolidation of government. Illinois has more units of government than any other state, as you were just discussing Eric, that's what in part drives the highest property taxes in the nation, because you have all these taxing bodies, and in many cases there are redundancies. So it's not a...it's not an attack on Township government vs. municipal government vs. county government. You know, sometimes Township government is a better, more responsible actor than the municipal government or the county government, and so on and so forth. The issue is the larger issue of we just have larger and larger layers of government with redundancies and inefficiencies and we have to reduce those layers and those numbers if we're going to reduce people's property taxes and give them their homes back, for example. And so I just wonder what you think about this referendum up in McHenry County, how important it is, and how impactful REAL consolidation of local units of government could be in terms of improving the fiscal stability of the state. Kohn: This could have a huge impact, and yeah, that's a great example of what is going on in McHenry County, there. You know, and it would...people look at this and say "Oh, it's never possible, this never happens." It actually...it has happened before. I hail from Belleville, in Metro East, and Belleville eliminated Belleville Township just about a year, year and a half ago. So, this can happen, and it's going to need to happen, as you said, if we're going to reduce the property tax burdens that Illinoisans have. In addition to Townships, another one that we've proposed, and I think should seriously be considered, is reducing the number of school districts. Not the number of schools THEMSELVES (Proft: Yeah.), but the number of districts that oversee them. Because, of course, each district, you have a Superintendent, you have administration, you have that same kind of redundancy that exists. And that...if we could reduce the number of districts by approximately, I believe, 50%, by having the same approximate amount of students per district that California has, so it just shows you just how out of whack we are there, and each one of those districts with the personnel is what is continuing to drive the property tax burden that Illinoisans are paying and increasingly choosing NOT to pay by getting out of the state altogether. Proft: Well right, and just on that score of consolidation of school DISTRICTS, this...Jeanne Ives makes this point all the time, 1/4 of the school districts in the state, 850 school districts...have ONE SCHOOL. So it's just an unnecessary layer of government, as you're...and administrative bloat...as you're suggesting, Eric. So there's opportunities to restructure the way we do things in Illinois, we could do it, if we're so inclined. Eric Kohn, the marketing manager at the Illinois Policy Institute, IllinoisPolicy.org, Eric, thanks for joining us, appreciate it. Kohn: Thanks for having me!

Related Content

Ives Stoking The Revolt Against The IL Ruling Class

Are you proud of the job Rauner has done? Are you proud of the campaign he's run? Are you happy living in the worst run state in the country? If no, then it's a yes to Ives on March 20th. GOP Primary candidate for Governor, State Rep. Jeanne Ives joins Dan and Amy to discuss Rauner’s dismal record, laughable campaign lies, and potential legal battle for using state resources and employees for political purposes.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy, and Jeanne Ives is up with her "Closing Argument" ads on television, you hear them on our station too when the breaks. But, a more interesting closing argument I think, or another interesting closing argument was made by Tom Morrison, who's been on the show before, he's a conservative Republican from Palatine, he's also one of the most respected legislators in the General Assembly, on both sides of the aisle, because he's a person of integrity. He's out walking for Jeanne Ives, and he filmed a little impromptu Facebook Live post. Morrison (Tape): Hello everyone, it's Tom Morrison, walking door-to-door here in Palatine. We're not fazed by snow or sleet or any of this...we're trying to elect my friend for Governor, Jeanne Ives. And the information that we're passing out deconstructs all these shameful Rauner TV and radio ads, trying to take her words out of context, distort her record, it's so easy to deconstruct these arguments if you actually know the facts. Look, I'm supporting Jeanne Ives because she's the REAL conservative in this race, she has the endorsements of me and NINE other state legislators from across the state, Republican organizations, conservative organizations, are supporting Jeanne Ives. So many of us trusted Bruce Rauner in 2014 and he really let us down these last three and a half years, and that's why we're supporting her. There has been no greater fighter for taxpayers or families than Jeanne Ives. Proft: Alright. And with that intro, we're pleased to be joined again by state Representative and Republican candidate for Governor, Jeanne Ives. Jeanne, thanks for joining us again, appreciate it. Ives: Thank you for having me on, Dan and Amy. I'm just...Tom Morrison is such a blessing, he's just been a real leader in this campaign. Proft: So what about...he's responding to the sole argument that Rauner has had against you for the past eight weeks, and 20 million dollar backing of that argument, that you're Madigan's favorite Republican? Ives: You don't have to trust my words, trust what everybody else says, who's been watching my work down there. They all know it's laughable, I mean even Greg Hines said, you know, Rauner gets the Oscar award for the most deceptive campaign lie this season. So just listen to what others say, you don't have to depend on my opinion, it's just not flat out right...it's not true. Jacobson: So, yesterday was the last debate before the primary, which is next Tuesday, and Governor Rauner, I noticed, was a no-show, you had the floor all to yourself. Any reason why he wasn't there? Ives: Well, he doesn't want to talk about his record, because he has no record of accomplishment, and quite frankly, he doesn't want to answer policy questions because he'll be embarrassed, just like he was before the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board. That was a pretty scathing debate that I had with him there, and it...you know, the headline that came out from there said that I CRUSHED him. It's because he does not know his policy, and it matters to people. Jacobson: Yeah, well one thing that he did do yesterday, he did veto the state's gun bill, but I noticed that he did it far far away from Chicago Media, he was at a radio station downstate, and said this. Rauner (Tape): That gun dealers are already Federally licensed, that is true. Jacobson: And I mean, obviously I watched you on Channel 7, and you agreed that the gun bill should have been vetoed, but do you think this is all political? Ives: Absolutely. It's just political expediency on his part. He...this campaign, and me specifically, boxed him into a corner on that gun bill. He knew he had to veto it if he was going to even have any chance on March 20th, which we...we think he's done on March 20th, but this is what he's done all the time. He'll never signal to you what he's going to do. So, he refused to fill out the NRA Survey in 2014, he didn't fill it out in 2018. But what you see with me, though, it's like...I will tell you ahead of time exactly how I feel about an issue, and I'm not going to hide behind a downstate radio state, where media can't respond or ask any targeted questions. But this is Governor Rauner, he's just ducking and hiding from the voters at every turn. Never tells you what to do...what he's going to do, and I guarantee you...he WILL sign those other gun bills, so he's getting ready to betray everybody else on the Second Amendment. Proft: Yeah, there was a change, because he said he would deal with the legislation after the primary initially, that was some of his offerings on what he was going to do on the topic of that gun bill, and then yesterday he hastily announced that he was going to veto it, and he vetoed it. So, this to me seems like it's another...because his internal numbers must be wobbly...this is a way for him to try and snow gun owners the way that he initially snowed so many people when he ran for office. Ives: But, Dan...this is a perfect example of who he is, and how we've seen him over the last three years. He's been back and forth on every major political decision. The Caucus, the Republican Caucus, who is closest to him and understands what's going in Springfield...first the Education Bill is a disaster, and then he signs it and his buddy Rahm says "I got everything I wanted, and more!" The Exelon Bill...the morning of, up to TEN AMENDMENTS, because Governor Rauner couldn't signal how he really felt about things and kept waffling and waffling. Finally, they get to the point where he's boxed in, and he signs the darn thing just to say he got something done. So the guy is...he has no CORE, so you don't know where he's ever gonna go on policy. He's just a transactional politician...just like Democrats have been. Jacobson: Yep. So you're on the driveway home, this is the last weekend before the election. What are your plans, where are you travelling, where are you trying to get the vote out? Ives: We're going down south today, I'm so excited, we're headed to the Metro East area, just outside of St. Louis so we're flying into Cahokia. We have a meeting there at 11:30, then we're headed to Marion right afterwards, meeting with some voters there at about 3:30, then we're flying up to Champaign, and we'll be there from 6:00 to 7:30 at the airport there, the finally we'll end up in Rockford at about 8:30, just connecting with voters outside of the Chicago area, just because we did Chicago media for the past two days, just trying to let people know who we are and where this campaign is headed. Proft: Story out yesterday, there's been a number of stories by the Edgar County Watchdogs, that we talked about on this show but hasn't really been picked up in any significant way, Capital Facts picked it up yesterday, but it's about emails they have from Diana Rauner, and the latest is perhaps the most damaging, it prompted the Edgar County Watchdogs to file a complaint with the Office of the Inspector General, the Executive...the Executive Office of the Inspector General, against Governor Rauner, accusing him of essentially using state resources for political purposes, which is the bases on which a couple of former Governors went to prison. And I wonder if you have a comment on what Rauner's...Rauner's response is "Oh yeah, any OIG investigation we will comply with, but there's no merit to this." Based on what the Edgar County Watchdogs have from these emails, where you have political people directing state people, it would appear...what comment do you have in terms of what the Governor should do? ...or not do? Ives: Every single email that has both a political staffer of Governor Rauner's and a paid state employee on the same email chain should be released immediately. I'm alarmed the fact that he would even put the same political staff in the same meeting room with state employees. That's alarming to begin with...I mean,as a state Rep, I would NEVER do that! I would never do it, I can't believe the Governor is open about doing it. And the emails, you know, and obviously they're also coming from his wife, I mean, she's even the one propagating some of this. Proft: Well, and the interesting thing (Ives: It's very alarming!) thing...and the interesting thing about the email that the Edgar County Watchdogs used as the frame for their most recent story is that you have Diana Rauner as the emailER, and the recipients include both political consultants and state employees, but they're using state employees' private email. So this is a way they were trying to essentially end run a FOIA and discoverability, but the Edgar County Watchdogs got the email anyway, and if there's...if there's a handful of those, as has been reported, you know there are many more. Ives: No doubt. And just the handful that we have already is actually cause enough for the complaint that the Edgar County Watchdogs put forward, and you know, even after Marasco wrote his memo saying "Look, you are really crossing the line here, potentially violating ethics laws in the state of Illinois," even after that, you find out when you look at the timeline, there's a report in the complaint that, sure enough, Rauner is officially signing the K-12 School Funding Bill, which is definitely something that Diana and political consultants weighed in on, to help save the Governor on that bill. And then he signs the Abortion Bill. And then he makes a comment about Repeal and Replace Obamacare, which for him is politically advantageous on HOW he responds to that. Proft: He didn't want...he didn't...he didn't want... Ives: So you see, even after he's warned, you see actions being taken. So there's a lot of missing emails there on what happened. Proft: And on the Obamacare, he didn't WANT Obamacare repealed and replaced? Ives: That's right. (Proft and Jacobson react with stunned surprise.) That's right. Jacobson: So when you travel, and when you meet people throughout the state of Illinois, and DuPage County and Cook County, what's their number one concern, what's their point of contention? Ives: Well, for Republicans it's largely the Sanctuary State bill, taxpayer funding of abortion, and just...people don't trust Rauner anymore. He's not somebody that he said he was going to be, and...you know, this wholesale disregard for what he's been doing to the state. So, it's a trust issue for Republican voters on March 20th. Proft: You mentioned the Education Funding Bill, and how Diana Rauner intervened to help prop him up. But that was a bill you voted against, why is that? Explain to people your perspective on that Ed funding bill that he counts as a success. Ives: Well, there's a couple things. One, Chicago got a massive bailout, and they have $17B in debt. And what's going to happen over time, really, is downstate schools, suburban schools, are gonna see their school money actually siphoned off through the state funding formula, and it's gonna go to Chicago to bail out their massive debt. The other two...the other thing is they never corrected the assessment problem. Chicago is hiding massive amounts of property wealth from the Education Funding Bill, and we told Rauner three years ago, you have to fix this assessment system. It's foundational to a fair education funding formula, and if you don't fix it, you fix NOTHING with Education. And he didn't do it. He didn't lead on the issue even though we gave him a PROGRAM to do so, and he hasn't fixed anything in Education, he just basically bailed out Chicago. Proft: What...one of the political arguments that Rauner and the kind of defenseless Rauner supporter makes against you is that Rauner is the only one that can beat JB Pritzker, because he's the only one with the big checkbook. How do you respond to, you know, you...Jeanne Ives can't win a general election. Ives: Well, first of all, we're gonna win March 20th, and Rauner had a big checkbook, and we're gonna spend a fraction of what he has in his war chest. So, I think that people are ready for the truth, and when it comes to JB Pritzker, and what he's selling, and what the Democrats all want, which is higher taxes, more spending, and they're gonna continue the corrupt nature of Illinois politics as it's been for years, we're gonna message that past their money and past their money spend. And people are just gonna look past the fact that...you know, here's the deal. With me, you know where I stand on every issue...with JB Pritzker, you have no idea. You know, all you know is that he likes to pull the toilets out of his second mansion to get a property tax break. And he's buddies with Blagojevich and he's got all these other nefarious contacts with state government that has destroyed the Illinois economy. So, we think we can message that, you don't...we're going to prove that the grassroots can actually take back the state, and it's not gonna take a billionaire to do so. Proft: Tell me, so this is what...something like I want to say...and this...this is about stoking the revolt against the ruling class, like we've seen throughout the Midwest. Ives: Precisely, and if you...nobody believes that any of the Democrats, or Rauner for that matter, is really going to transform Illinois the way that we need to, look. Worst run state in the country, second year in a row. Largest outmigration, second year in a row. And you know, look at the Florida job creation. Florida has gained, since 2000, well over a million jobs. Illinois' growth in that time? 21K jobs. That's pathetic for the 5th largest economy in the United States. So, you know, people are leaving Illinois, and nobody's talking about the real issues except for this campaign, except for me. And nobody, and nobody believes that any of the other candidates are going to actually transform Illinois and really lead the revolt, like you talked about, against the political ruling class. I've already done that. Proft: So, what's the question you want to implant in Republican voters minds when they go to the polls on March 20th? What do you want them to be asking themselves and answering affirmatively, Jeanne Ives. Ives: They should ask themselves "Are you proud of this Republican governor? Are you proud of the job that he's done?" And then, "Are you proud of the way he's run his campaign, with lies and deception?" Those are two important questions for Republican voters to answer. And I think on March 20th when they go into the ballot box...go to the ballot box, they're going to vote for Jeanne Ives. Proft: Alright, she is Jeanne Ives, Republican candidate for Governor, state Rep from Wheaton, Jeanne thanks so much for joining us, appreciate it. Ives: Thank you!

Related Content

Diana Not Bruce Rauner Is In Charge

What is the “protocol” for the First Lady signing off on bills? Are the Rauners on the verge of being caught mixing their political operatives and taxpayer-funded state employees in violation of state law? Do Republicans not care about getting stabbed in the back by Rauner but more about his checkbook? Dan and Amy discuss the latest report from the Edgar County watchdogs whose emails from the First Lady may determine who’s really in charge, and it’s not Gov. Rauner.

Related Content

Ives: Nobody Trusts Rauner

Is Rauner calling Jeanne Ives “Mike Madigan’s favorite Republican” to shift the blame from his failed leadership? Speaking of Madigan, why isn’t every female Democrat legislator calling for his resignation after his egregious handling of sexual harassment complaints? What should be done for Veterans at their state-run home in Quincy that has another four confirmed cases of legionnaires after Rauner’s publicity stunt? GOP gubernatorial candidate, State Rep. Jeanne Ives joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. I'm sure you've heard the ads, we've discussed them...the Republican race for governor between State Representative Jeanne Ives and Bruce Rauner, Bruce Rauner's got a million-dollar plus buy this week on the networks, cable, radio...you've heard them on this station, the ads. The argument that Jeanne Ives is Madigan's favorite Republican, which you would have to be blithely ignorant or lacking in self-respect to believe if you're an Illinois Republican, and that's not ME saying that. That's a number of the leading conservative state legislators who have endorsed Jeanne Ives, saying it in a latter they released yesterday, calling on Rauner to stop...quoting..."to stop his shameful distortions and fabrications of Jeanne Ives' record. He can't defend his own policies, so he's using deep campaign coffers to flood airwaves and mail boxes with bogus attacks. Mike Madigan's favorite candidate?" Question mark? "It's BRUCE RAUNER who enacted key elements of the progressive social agenda, included taxpayer funding of elective abortions. It's Bruce Rauner who signaled he'd accept an income tax increase paired with reforms that never materialized. And it's Bruce Rauner who just proposed a new budget that relies on those taxes to balance spending, rather than proposing cuts." That's Tom Morrison saying that, Rep. conservative from Palatine, John Cabello, conservative from Rockford, also Trump's Illinois state director in 2016, John Cabello, Margo McDermott, conservative from Will County, David McSweeney, conservative from Barrington area, NW Cook and Lake County, Allen Skillicorn from Kane and McHenry Counties, Tim Bivens out Dixon way, Senator Kyle McCourt...Senator Kyle McCarter down Metro East near St. Louis...these are the leading legislators in the General Assembly who've actually worked with Jeanne Ives...and Bruce Rauner! So they can sort of separate the wheat from the chaff. So what say you, Governor? Are all of these legislators, are they Madigan's favorite Republicans too? What say you, Bruce Rauner supporters? Jacobson: You KNOW they're not gonna call in! But you could always throw the number out anyway. Proft: Yeah! 312-642-5600 Turnkey Dot Pro Answer Line, still looking for Bruce Rauner's supporters. Look, I'll give you the floor! And then I'll decimate you like Jeanne Ives decimated Bruce Rauner before the Tribune Editorial Board, but you can have your say! But you just have nothing to say, I know! 'Cause you're just voting for a checkbook, and you KNOW it. And your countenancing betrayals, a traitor in the...in our midst. And you KNOW it. So what are you gonna say, what are ya gonna say? Jeanne Ives and Tom Morrison and John Cabello and Peter Breen and Margo McDermott and David McSweeney and Alan Skillicorn and Tim Bivens and Kyle McCarter, THEY'RE the cabal? The conservative reformers? Kyle McCarter is the first politician in the history of Western civilization who actually abided his own self-imposed term limits! He's not running again for this cycle because he actually believes so much in term limits, he's willing to apply them to himself! But he's part of the Madigan cabal, down there St. Louis way? There's no credible case to be made, is there? Well, for more on this topic and other substantive issues, we're pleased to be joined by the aforesaid State Representative, Jeanne Ives, conservative Republican candidate for Governor. Jeanne, thanks for joining us, appreciate it. Ives: Well, thanks for giving me the opportunity to set the record straight! Proft: So, let's talk about...you've heard from your colleagues, so that speaks volumes about the veracity of what Rauner's saying. Ives: Oh! One little...yeah, one more data point on that though. I was just at another function on Sunday morning, and Mark Batinick and David Welter, and even Darlene Singer stood up there and said there's no truth to any of that. There's no way that she's Mike Madigan's best bestie down there. All three of them! Proft: Mark Badinick's a state rep from Plainfield, Republican. David Welter's a state representative from Grundy County, and Darlene Singer's a former state representative from Naperville, NOW running on Rauner's statewide ticket for Comptroller. Ives: Mmhmm. But Dan, here's the problem: every single one of those 73 sitting state. Republican state legislators down there ought to be saying the same thing. Where are their voices? Because this now is very personal. This is my record. He lied to the Cardinal, he lied to our Caucus, he lied to the public, but he's specifically lying about my record as a tax fighter. And everybody knows that's exactly why I went to Springfield, was to defend taxpayers. That's how I lead every speech, because it's the truth. Jacobson: So Jeanne, the first time you saw that commercial, did you fall off your chair or off the couch? Because even my Democratic friends know that... Ives: Well, I don't really watch TV, so I heard about it before I saw it, and nobody believed it. And even Democrats are just laughing hysterically, because they all know it's not true either. Proft: Well, address though...this...you know, one thing is...just because, for people that are generally uninformed but trying to be informed, that they don't understand the commercial and the bytes that were selected that try to paint you in that light, that you're some kind of flak for Madigan, bytes from your joint appearance before the Tribune Editorial Board. So just provide some context for our listeners about those bytes that were selected so that they have an understanding of what Rauner's doing here. Ives: Well sure. So in...during the Trib Editorial Board, all Bruce Rauner could say was "It's Mike Madigan's fault!" Everything was a blame shift. And he wanted to...he wanted to pretend that the entire last three years had nothing to do with his failed leadership. It was all Mike Madigan's fa...all Mike Madigan's...I got tired of hearing it! And so I made a couple of points, because the other question was "Are you gonna be able to fight Mike Madigan like Rauner did?" Well, absolutely, because I've already stood up to Mike Madigan. I've already defeated bills on the House floor with him sitting there, and so look...Mike Madigan's...I've also made the comment Mike Madigan voted for my bill. So apparently, when the policy...you know, I can do SOMETHING with this guy. I can either argue against him, or at least he understands some of my policies, good. And the other... Proft: Well, well, wait, well, wait...what was the policy that he voted for? Just so we're on point... Ives: Oh, sure. Well, it was a far-reaching debt transparency act that dealt with school districts. And even the staffer came up to me afterwards and said "I'm SHOCKED that Mike Madigan voted for your bill. That may be the first time EVER." I said "Oh, good! So maybe he thinks that schools are out of control." Whatever, he voted for my bill. Proft: So the point is to say that the idea is you're to, you know, bend people to your policy agenda rather than selling out to advance theirs. And that I suppose is the difference. Ives: Well, it's absolutely the difference! And then when he was blame-shifting to Mike Madigan, I said, "Well, it doesn't help to just make it have a personal attack against him, there you go again, you know, calling Mike Madigan names." Jacobson: Yeah....I've seen reporters their whole lives take things out of context... Ives: Yeah, it's just a bullying tactic. Jacobson: So, speaking of Mike Madigan, during the past week not one but two of his aides have been let go or forced to resign because of their bad behavior. What do you think should happen to Mike Madigan? Because if it was any other politician, I think he'd already have been forced to step down from his leadership role, but it's Mike Madigan. Ives: Yes, at a minimum, and I called for him to also just resign. He just needs to resign at this point. He...first of all, not having a Legislative Inspector General for three years, and knowing that there's 27 complaints sitting there, the guy is complicit in all the sexual harassment cases that have gone on down there. He's not interested in changing anything in the state, and specifically on this topic. So I don't know why every single Democrat female legislator isn't down there calling for his resignation too, if they really believe in this cause. So...he should resign. Absolutely. Proft: And you called for him to resign...Rauner and the Republican leaders, to my knowledge, have not. Ives: No, but you know, think about this. My...Bruce Rauner hasn't even called for the Auditor General, Frank Martino, to resign! He was a HAND-PICKED person by Mike Madigan, he's unqualified for the position, and not to mention he's under Federal investigation. So, I opposed Martino's appointment, I was the first to call for Martino to resign, and we can't get our Republican governor to do the same when he's Mike Madigan's first in command and now new Auditor general, in charge of checking the accounts on taxpayers' behalf. It's ridiculous. Jacobson: You used to be a Rauner supporter, correct, when he first ran? And now you're running against him, and just tell us why. Ives: Well, he's...you can't trust Bruce Rauner anymore. He lied to the Cardinal, he lied to our caucus, NOBODY trusts him, the lobbyists don't trust him...not that I care too much about them, but you can't do any deals with him. You can't make any policy go forward because you have no idea where he's going to come from at the next turn, and what he's going to cave on. So, nobody trusts Mi...nobody trusts Bruce Rauner, that the policies he put in place are a complete violation of the Republican platform, so I go to Republican events and say "What are we about? Pizza and beer in a social club? Or are we here to get something done? Are we here to advance a conservative reform agenda? Because Bruce Rauner at the top of the ticket isn't doing it." And so if you want to call yourself a Republican, you can't vote for him. Jacobson: Well, how are you being received around the state? Because I imagine you're travelling everywhere. Ives: Very well, very well. Standing ovation last night at a Bloom and Business meeting in Peoria, the night before a York Township...York Township, which is where there's quite a few establishment Republicans supporting Rauner, but I was right in the middle of there...York Township, standing ovation after my speech. You know, standing ovation down in...down in Jerseyville, you know which is far East side...or West side of the state. So, standing ovations everywhere I go, when I talk to Republican audiences about what's going on. Proft: This week, one of the things you talked about what's going on was the fourth confirmed case of Legionnaires at the Illinois Veterans Home in Quincy, just a few weeks after Governor Rauner's stunt of staying there for a couple nights, just a week after his appearance, or just about a week after his appearance before the Crane's Editorial Board, when he was asked if he would do anything different in terms of how he's handled the Illinois Veterans' Home in Quincy over the last 2.5 years where 13 people have died, and there's 11 pending negligence lawsuits against the state, and now after yet another declaration of a clean bill of health, four more cases of Legionnaires Disease. You suggested that you would take a different tack with the Illinois Veterans' Home, if you were Governor. What would that be? Ives: We would move them immediately out of those facilities. They have a systemic problem, you have a three year crisis! And I went to the facilities and I saw what the staff was doing, and the protocols they are doing in terms of heating the water and then cooling it back down right before it comes out of the faucet, I've seen the protocols on flushing that they're doing, I've seen the bed check that they're doing, and it's still occurring. You have a three-year history of it not being fixed...you have to move those people out! That's what, when I talk to a friend of mine who runs private nursing homes, that's exactly what he said he would have to do. Because in his case, he would be sued for millions of dollars if there was even ONE death. And we've had 13 deaths related to this, and we haven't done enough? Move them out, NOW! Proft: So, why haven't they moved them out? It seems like the obvious thing to do, the common-sense thing to do. So why has it taken 2.5 years and this kind of body count? Ives: Well, obviously, buck stops at the top. It's a failure of leadership, he doesn't want to pretend that it's that big of a significant problem. I think you've got a little bit of an issue that people are worried that you're going to close down the Quincy Veterans' Home altogether, which is a huge job area, job creation area for public sector workers down in Quincy. And I think that they're all concerned about that. But that shouldn't be our concern, our concern should be that veterans are DYING for something which is a preventable disease. It's preventable, and it doesn't happen in other nursing homes all the time with the three-year crisis history of this. They would have been shut down by the state. And yet the state won't shut down it's own facility. Jacobson: And the governor is the one who can make that call, Governor Rauner is. Ives: Absolutely he can, I guess. If he pretended that he was in charge he should have some authority. Of course he can make that call. Proft: In addition to the mail...to the television commercials, there's some mailers too. The most recent one I've seen suggests that you're for increasing property taxes in Illinois...(Ives: *giggles*, Jacobson: That's a good one, yeah.)...in Illinois, and my understanding is that you're a proponent of the same thing I'm a proponent of, which is capping property taxes at 1% of home value, like Indiana does, which would be a massive property tax CUT, and restore people's home equity, if we were to pursue that reform. What...where are you on property taxes? Ives: Absolutely! We don't need to freeze them at the highest level in the nation, we need to reduce them, and we need to cap them, so people can have a certainty that in the future they're not going to continue to rent their home from their local superintendent. This is outrageous! And you know, this is another one of the Rauner lies that...it's just incredible! I'm the one who waves the paper on the floor and says "Look, Mike Madigan is a person who actually represented seven of the top 12 property salesmen in Chicago, and they're under-assessed. They're assessed at only 42% of their value, what's the problem here? I'm the one who called out Mike Madigan for the games he was playing on assessments long before Bruce Rauner got into this game, long before he said anything. And for him to say that I'm not for property taxes reduction is ridiculous. He's just lying. You see it on my record! Proft: Yesterday we talked to Anthony Napolitano, who of course is the 41st Ward Alderman for the City of Chicago, about this new identification, Muni Identification Card, that Rahm Emanuel is promulgating for persons in this country illegally, for undocumented immigrants in Chicago, that would allow...that would...that people could use to register to vote...even though they're in this country illegally, thus the need for this Muni card in the first place. It's rather curious, it's curious to Napolitano, and actually a handful of other Alderman, Democrats, in the city, just a handful unfortunately. This strikes me as patently Unconstitutional, is there anything that can be done at the state level about this? Ives: Well, I just requested that legislation be drafted to prevent this from occurring, and absolutely prevent it from being used for any sort of voter identification process. So it's just...it's unreal! I don't think that I can go to Mexico and get some sort of ID card from their local municipality...I don't know why we're doing this. But this is the lawlessness you have from the Chicago Democrats and now Bruce Rauner when it comes to criminal illegal immigrants or illegal immigrants regardless. You know, so...Sanctuary State, let's take that one up. Every single Democratic candidate AND Governor Rauner have the same position on Sanctuary State, every single one of them. They do not care about the rule of law. I'm the only candidate who does. Proft: She is Jeanne Ives, Illinois state representative from the 42nd out in the Western burbs, Wheaton way, now a Republican candidate for Governor, challenging Bruce Rauner in the GOP Primary on March 20th. Jeanne, thanks for joining us again, appreciate it. Ives: Thank you.

Related Content 

IL Republican Party Vs. IL Rauner Party

Two more residents of the Illinois Veterans Home in Quincy are sick with Legionnaires. Rauner is on top of this, right? All under control? Is Rauner going to make a call to President Trump for federal assistance or is he too busy boasting about not having a relationship with the White House? Is Rauner’s lack of leadership going to leave Illinois out of major federal infrastructure funding? Illinois State Representative for the 52nd District, Dave McSweeney joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Electing Ives Is Absolutely Necessary For The Future Of Illinois

“Illinois is not broken, it’s fixed the way Democrats want it to be.” Whether it be the nationally known crime in Chicago, the locally known skyrocketing property taxes, or the betrayal of the pro-life voice in Illinois, it is clear that the state is in need of new leadership. Nationally-syndicated talk show host, Mike Gallagher is in Chicago to headline a fundraiser for GOP gubernatorial candidate Jeanne Ives. Mike joins Dan and Amy to discuss why electing Ives is absolutely necessary for the future of Illinois.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. We're gonna mix a little local and a little national here. Yesterday, State Rep. Jeanne Ives, the Republican candidate for governor challenging Bruce Rauner in the primary for the nomination, was on our friend and colleague Mike Gallagher, his nationally syndicated program... Jacobson: Which can be heard right after us, every morning 9-11, Dan! Programming note! Proft: That is correct, and Mike Gallagher concluded their exchange saying this. Gallagher (from tape): Join us to meet Jeanne Ives, who is absolutely necessary for the future of the great state of Illinois, and I'm excited for your candidacy, and I want to be able to support you any way I can. Proft: And I appreciate that, because Mike Gallagher is coming...or he's IN town, I should say, today to headline a fundraiser for Jeanne Ives out at the Weston in Lombard, and he's broadcasting from our OTHER friend's establishment...Tom Sadaka, the great Tom Sadaka, of Precision Payroll. Broadcasting from there this morning, and that Mike Gallagher and I are "sympatico" on the governor's race here, and the national heft weighing in on Illinois. It's nice to have somebody from out of state care about Illinois. We're pleased to be joined by our friend Mike Gallagher, now Mike, thanks for being with us, appreciate it. Gallagher: Well, I hate to start out the conversation by correcting you, but Dan, I'm not headlining. YOU'RE the headliner, (Proft: Oh stop you!), I'm accompanying you, I'm your sidekick... Jacobson: And I'm parking cars! Gallagher: Listen, when I heard that Dan Proft...Amy, when I heard Dan Proft was good with Jeanne Ives, I said that's all I need to know, I'm in! Of course, I've been researching her, and learning about her incredible career, her career in the military, her time in the State House, and it's time! It's time that Illinois sort of replicates what we've done nationally, and so I'm just ecstatic. Even though my trip here was fraught with peril...I sat next to a guy last night on the plane who was hacking up a lung, (Jacobson: Eww...) and I thought, you know, it'll be a miracle if I don't have double pneumonia by Friday. Do you remember the boy in the bubble? Jacobson: Yeah, with John Travolta. Proft: Oh yeah, sure. Gallagher: That's how we ought to travel. We ought to be able to put those big bubbles, those giant bubbles over our heads, maybe a couple of little holes to breathe out of. I was just leaning out into the aisle going "Only Gallagher. This stuff ONLY happens to me." He's just *coughing sounds*, I'm trying to put my hand up, I'm trying to put the iPad over my face, I'm trying to lean...it was just a terrible feeling! Proft: Couldn't you just borrow Hannity's plane? Gallagher: Yeah I wish. Proft: And why are you flying commercial? A guy like you, cmon. Gallagher: I'm a commercial flying kind of guy. Listen, we got to do that private plane thing for that cross-country tour we did right before the election, and I got a taste of it, and it was so fun, and I thought "No wonder these guys become so obnoxious when they get rich!" Because this is the way to travel! I mean just no waiting, you get right on the tarmac, no waiting, you know, wheels up whenever you want. No no no,I'm good ol' fashioned United 1K, and you know, *laughs* happy to be flying commercial. What are you gonna do? Jacobson: Well as a...at the national level, looking in on Illinois, I know you see our high property taxes, and how manufacturing is fleeing the state, but what do you think personally of Governor Bruce Rauner, and how he's leaning a BIT left, so to speak? Gallagher: Well, if I can borrow a phrase that Dan uses, and I hear you guys a lot say this, and believe me I listen to you every morning, on the way in...you're the best show prep, as I've told you before, that a guy could have. So, congratulations on your stellar work in 2017, I can't wait to hear Dan and Amy throughout 2018 and beyond. But, you know, Dan has said this a lot...nothing about Illinois is broken...Illinois isn't broken, it's fixed...just the way the Democrats want it to be. *Proft takes a dramatic bow, as this was the slogan of his own governmental campaign* Of course nationally, we always take a look at the crime rate in Chicago, and that has sort of been put at the doorstep of President Obama. But as you guys know better than anybody...property taxes, the sanctity of life! I mean, for this governor to basically betray the pro-life voice in Illinois with his abortion vote, that's something that's kind of hard to swallow. You know, to talk to Jeanne Ives, you get the sense that this is somebody who understands that a lot of people in Illinois are fed up, and want a change in direction, and she's the one to do it. And like I said guys, it's a little bit like replicating what happened nationally...a different direction, a different way of doing things. Hillary would have been a continuation of the failed Democrat policies of Barack Obama, now we need a governor in Illinois who’s going to correct the wrong policies of this guy. Proft: Speaking of failed policies of Democrats from Chicago, what do you think about getting another one in the White House, named Oprah? Gallagher: You know, it was interesting to see Trump's uncharacteristically gracious response this week. You know, "I like her, I don't think she's gonna run, but I like her very much, and we're friends." I mean, that's the dirty little secret...all these guys have palled around for years and years, and one of the tough things about the anti-Trump sentiment that Hollywood exhibits is a whole bunch of those guys have spent plenty of time at Mar-a-Lago, and at Trump Tower, and have wined and dined with Donald Trump and his family. So, I'm gonna be blunt, I've said, I warned people the other day...if she runs, that's gonna be a problem. That she's the perfect candidate for our times. (Proft: ...yeah.) She, you know...all people hear when they see Oprah is "You get a car, and you get a car, and YOU get a car!", remember when voters were literally saying "I'm voting for Barack Obama because he's gonna fill up my gas tank and pay my mortgage!" Remember that famous audio clip from an Obama voter? Proft: Obamaphone! Gallagher: So we say she's touchy-feely and you know, (Jacobson: She's likable!)...what's that? Jacobson: She's likable, and she IS the American Dream, but I don't know where she stands...I don't know what her policies are, and I don't think that she knows what they are, unless...I mean I think everyone's just assuming that they're left-leaning but you don't know. Gallagher: But does it matter? I mean really, at this stage of the game, I don't know that people would think it matters. There's such a hatred still for President Trump, despite even yesterday. Now the tide turned a little bit after his unprecedented open door, cameras rolling meeting on immigration. The hardliners are furious, the dreaded "A-word" is looming on the horizon, "Amnesty", for illegals and "Dreamers". But listen, this is in many ways the fear of a Trump opposition, that he was going to capitulate and be too touchy-feely with Democrats on the issue of immigration, but yet here was a President that, unlike the Michael Wolff book, seemed fully in command of his faculties, holding a meeting, talking in complete sentences and recognized everybody in the room. Proft: What's your perspective on the continued marginalization of Steve Bannon? He's doing an amazing disappearing act, deposed from Breitbart yesterday, as well as Sirius XM. The separation seems to me, from Bannon by Trump, the timing couldn't have worked out better for Trump. Gallagher: The stunning fall of somebody as formerly powerful and important as Steve Bannon has been quite a thing to watch. I mean, guys, you gotta be like me, you wake up every morning and think "Okay, we've got 97 things we can dive into today, and all of them are significant and in many ways preposterous." I mean, some of this stuff is just crazy, as you know. I mean, we hope to talk to Ben Shapiro today on the show, because Ben left Breitbart BECAUSE of Steve Bannon, and basically said way back then the things they're saying about Steve Bannon now, that you know, narcissistic, takes too much credit for everything, and basically he was the guy that let, you know, Michael Wolff into the henhouse. Which is a strange decision (Proft: Yeah...), everybody keeps wondering how in the world do you have a writer like Michael Wolff plant himself on a couch in the West Wing and write a book? You thought it was going to be a love letter? You thought it was going to be positive? Cmon! And apparently it was all of Steve Bannon's doing, when Bannon lost the support of Rebecca Mercer, a huge Republican donor, that's the end for him, I guess. And boy it's kind of stunning, losing the radio show and everything, I don't know what...Dan, I don't know where he goes from here, do you? Proft: I don't...I mean, I'm glad he's got those Seinfeld royalties coming in, so he continues to enjoy a decent lifestyle. Gallagher: I heard they kicked him out of the Breitbart Embassy as they call it, that townhouse on Capitol Hill, I think he loses the keys to that. So, he's gonna have to schlep it like the rest of us and find a place to live and pay for it. Jacobson: I think he's gonna have a second act. I heard there was talk of him running for President (Proft: HAH!) in 2020, but I don't think that's going to happen. He seems like the type of person who's not just going to stay home with construction paper and crayons. Gallagher: No no, he won't fade off into the sunset, but he really has been damaged badly by this. It just feels like there's been...ya know, you can put up with a lot of mistakes, but when it's betrayal, when it's...you have thrown the man under the bus like this, and his family! When you go after Trump's family, that's something that is verboten in Trump World, as we know. The President's not going to assoc...when you don't have the President...now! The President is capable of turning on a dime too, I mean it's possible that they'll kiss and make up. I don't know on this one, it's pretty personal and pretty raw and pretty ugly, hope to get Ben Shapiro's perspective on it later today. Proft: Alright, well "betrayal" brings it back full circle, back to Rauner, because Rauner betrayed the Republican party in this state the same that Steve Bannon betrayed President Trump. He is Mike Gallagher, of course, nationally syndicated talk show host, on our airwaves starting at 9 o'clock, right after our show, you mentioned he's gonna have Ben Shapiro on to talk Breitbart and Bannon's departure, and we'll see ya at lunch at the Westin in Lombard for the Jeanne Ives event. Mike, thanks so much for joining us, appreciate it. Gallagher: Can't wait to see you guys then, and keep up the great work guys, keep fighting the good fight!

Related Content

“Rauner Is The Fringe Candidate"

Why is Rauner ducking debates? Jeanne Ives, conservative reform candidate for governor, called for an IG investigation in the Rauner administration after a memo from his former general counsel implies state resources were being used for political purposes. After another income tax hike, Illinois' designation as a sanctuary state, and signing a bill that provides abortion on demand, Rauner has proven that he stands for nothing and can no longer blame Madigan for his failures. Illinois State Representative for the 52nd District, David McSweeney joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. And Amy, we have our annual trip coming up. It's been cemented and we're pleased to roll it out today! What is it? Jacobson: Well, it's that time of year where it's always cold and snow in Chicago, but it's always sunny in...are you ready? Drumroll...in Riviera Maya, Mexico! That's where we will be heading in 2018 with Apple Vacations, and you're invited to come along with us. We'll be staying at this place, are you ready, the Secrets Maroma Beach Riviera Cancun Resort and Spa in Riviera Maya, Mexico! Proft: Hmm. And I know someone who won't be joining us, that's Mario Batalli, who has taken a leave from Eat-aly and his restaurant empire because of accusations of repeated sexual harassment. Mario Batalli, the next man down. *quietly* I thought I'd...you know... Jacobson: Okay, so the... Proft: *laughs* Maybe he'll beat us TO Riviera Maya! Jacobson: Right! Proft: We're heading there in 2018 with Apple Vacations. You're invited to come along with us. We'll be at the Secrets Maroma Beach Riviera Cancun Restaurant and Spa in Riviera Maya, Mexico. Jacobson: Or Resort. But restaurant is fine... Proft: Did I say restaurant? I've got Eat-aly on my mind! Jacobson: Yeah, because of Mario! Proft: RESORT and Spa in Riviera Maya, Mexico. Nine gourmet restaurants...THERE's the restaurants...Eat-aly not one of them...six bars, unlimited premium drinks, 24 hour room service, beautiful unlimited adults-only luxury resort situated on Maroma Beach. Recognized as one of the world's best beaches. Jacobson: Get more information and book your trip by visiting 560TheAnswer.com/passport. Now the price that Apple Vacations has secured for this trip is really incredible, and exclusive to us, but it's only available for a limited time, because I remember a LOT of my friends tried to go with us last year, but the trip was sold out. This sells out every year, so don't miss out! Enjoy a week in Riviera Maya, Mexico, with us, Dan and Amy. Visit 560TheAnswer.com/passport. Proft: Alright, switching gears...we have to do some state and local stuff. By the way, before we get to the governor's race, and joined by State Representative David McSweeney, Republican from Barrington, did you see this? Bob Miller, we report on Bob Miller extensively. He's the former Algonquin Township Highway Commissioner up in McHenry County? Jacobson: Yeah, and they made those videos? Because you know, they were really bored at work and put them on YouTube? Proft: A family in that post for 50 years was using the town...the Highway Commissioner's office in Algonquin Township in McHenry County there like his personal piggy bank. $400,000 worth of salary for Miller and family members. He gets beat in the primary, well the...yeah, the primary election in the municipal elections early this year, by Andrew Gasser, and thankfully so, and in no small measure to our reporting at McHenryTimes.com. And you know is going to get paid out his pens...and by the way is under criminal investigation, I understand, for the way he ran the Algonquin Township Highway Department. Now he's an employee of Nunda Township, also McHenry County, making $40 an hour as a consultant. Yeah. Jacobson: Consulting for WHAT? Proft: Consulting for the township. I mean, it's unbelievable, this is Illinois. Algonquin Township Highway Commissioner for 24 years, and his father and his grandfather and his great grandfather and his great-great grandfather going back to the founding of our country, basically. He also, on the way out the door, purchases including tickets to Disneyland, $47,000 payout for sick pay, I mean it's just incredible. Edgar County Watchdogs has been on this story too. And the suggestion is there are law enforcement authorities looking his conduct as Algonquin Township Highway Commissioner. What the hell is Nunda Township thinking about by hiring him as a consultant at this point? I mean, it just never ends in this state, which is why people end their tenure living in this state. Alright, governor's race. Bruce Rauner peppered with questions last week after Jeanne Ives announces she will challenge him...in the Republican nomination for governor, state Rep from Wheaton. He would not commit to debates, so that issue is being pressed. And then this memo that surfaced on Friday, this is rather interesting. From Rauner's former general counsel, which provided a lot of detailed advice and counsel on the use of state resources for political purposes. We had a couple of governor's go to prison for using state resources for politics. And the implication is that was ongoing in Governor Rauner's office, or at least there was a desire for it to occur, thus the need for this memo from his former general counsel, named Dennis Marasco, who wrote this memo, it was announced he was going to leave the end of August, he ultimately got escorted out of the Thompson Center before the end of August. It's all very curious and the Governor's office isn't saying much. So maybe we could get some inside insight from State Representative David McSweeney, Republican legislator from Barrington, Dave thanks for joining us, appreciate it. McSweeney: Thanks for having me on, Dan. Proft: So why don't we start with the Marasco memo? And why don't you tell us, as you know, a state legislator for a few terms, how you read that memo and every...kind of the text surrounding it? What do we have here? McSweeney: On August 21st, Marasco, the general counsel to the governor at that point, wrote a memo calling for complete independence of the governor's office from political operations. On August 23rd, he resigned. On August 24th, the governor told his staff that was not true, that Marasco is still there. And on August 25th he was escorted out of the building. The strange thing is that there have been stories that there is an EIOG investigation that the administration wants affirmed. You may have seen the famous clip of Mary Ann Ahern asking the governor multiple times about the situation and he just wouldn't answer the question, as is usual with this governor. My concern is that Marasco has raised some serious issues and concerns, he didn't go into detail about practices in the past. But I support Jeanne Ives call for an EIOG FULL investigation of what the background for the memo is and whether there's anything else going on in this rascal situation. Even this morning there was a story in Politico that this administration won't answer the questions, the only thing they will say is he resigned, which is not consistent with the timeline. But this is business as usual with the Rauner administration, very secretive, not providing answers and that's why we need Jeanne Ives as governor, frankly. We have a governor who's not in charge of the state, he admitted it the last week, and that's pretty clear to all of us down in Springfield. Jacobson: Yeah, he's not in charge. McSweeney: I mean, he told us, Amy! Jacobson: Right, but I mean, ...I heard! I mean, people in the National Guard are like "Well if he's not in charge, then who's in charge?" McSweeney: He looks like...instead of a legislator like Jeanne Ives who's fought for lower taxes and lower spending...I know she's going to be in charge. I support her. And in a strange way, the biggest Madigan ally in Springfield is Bruce Rauner. Dan and I worked for a long time, outside of his radio job, to defeat progressive income tax. That was when there was 71 Democrats and Paxson was governor. We get Bruce Rauner as governor, he talks about a tax increase for two years, begging for it, wanted his capital compromise, and we end up with the 32% increase in the income tax hike. Bruce Rauner worked in hand with Madigan on making Illinois a Sanctuary State. Guess who signed Madigan's abortion bill, providing taxpayer funded abortions through the ninth month of pregnancy? So Bruce Rauner is the kind of guy who loves to go out and criticize people, call people names, but when push comes to shove, he's been Madigan's biggest ally. And that's why we need real change in this state, and that's why Jeanne Ives will be governor. Proft: And so, Rauner is making everything him vs Madigan, right? And ultimately he'll have to address Pritzker or whoever the Democrat nominee is, more substantively as well. But him fighting the good fight vs. Madigan, you're suggesting the evidence doesn't back up that claim, and there was another flap. This is a little below the full, but it's still important, and it may be illustrative of the point you're making. This is about the chief procurement officer to monitor a dealing with Medicaid services. And there was some back and forth between you and the governor's office about the nature of this procurement officer, and how independent this person is as it pertains to something as important as the oversight of the state's Medicaid program. McSweeney: Steve Osterberger is a good friend of both of ours, Dan as you know. He's been saying for years that we need to address Medicaid spending. And he's right, that's 22% of the budget, pensions are about 21%. You don't address pensions, Medicaid spending, you can't address the budget deficit in this state. So I have been very very interested in following this procurement process for new case providers. And it's been a complete lack of transparency. And specifically, one of the items is that the Rauner Administration hired McKinsey, a consulting firm, $12.5 million, no bid contract. The governor November 30th said there WAS a competitive bid, though it's outside the process. So at the hearing last week I asked about that, the head of the agency said there has been NO vetting, so the governor's information was incorrect. Then the governor said the chief procurement officer who voided the contract, because this is a no-bid contract, is controlled by Madigan, and there's no evidence of that. Even that creates a LOT of problems in this state, no doubt about that. But what I don't understand is why the governor isn't being transparent about Medicaid, about his no-bid contract, why isn't he being transparent about what his projections are for Medicaid? No numbers have been provided, that's one of the things that would validate his promise, let's see if we get them, we're going to start writing letters everyday. But it's just another example that the governor is absolutely right, but again that's the worst Republican governor in America, according to the National Review, and that's that he's not in charge, and this is another example of that. Proft: And on this point, it turns out Capitol Facts was reporting on this, which is kind of an industry newsletter and blog, that Rauner's chief counsel in 2015 actually recommended the procurement officer who Rauner is now suggesting is controlled by Madigan. So it seems like whenever Rauner gets in trouble, or is shown to have said one thing and done another, or said one thing and then said the opposite thing, he just says "Well...Madigan!" as his cover story, as...his alibi, for his either change of heart or hypocrisy or incompetence. McSweeney: Absolutely. And it turned out that Jason Barclay, the general counsel that worked for Mitch Daniels, I wish that Bruce Rauner actually governed like Mitch Daniels by the way, recommended this person. So, you know, the governor clearly didn't tell the truth in this situation. And you know, on the Madigan issue, he hasn't met with him for a year. One of the things you've been saying and I've been following that for years is...Madigan is just a man. He doesn't have superpowers, he's not smarter than anyone else. Bruce Rauner everyday makes Madigan out to be a god, he's increasing Madigan's power, and he refuses to deal with him. I think Peter Breen's letter after Rauner signed the abortion bill that destroyed Henry Hyde's legacy, but it's probably one of the greatest documents I've ever read in politics. He just took down Rauner, and I think he (Rauner) is probably scared of Madigan. Obviously he blames him for things, but then he won't engage with him. That's why I think Jeanne Ives will be a great governor, hopefully we pick up the ninth seat, that's the most important thing to take control. But if Madigan is still speaker, can you imagine Jeanne Ives in Madigan's office, while Maddie was eating his apple every day for lunch, Jeannie respectfully but STRONGLY advocating for what we believe in? That's what we need, an active governor who's not scared and intimidated by Michael Madigan, who doesn't act as Michael Madigan's agent like Bruce Rauner...Sanctuary State, Tax Increase, Abortion on Demand paid for taxpayers, that's why it's so important that Jeannie wins this race. Jacobson: Well, and now it also says a lot about him as a man and a governor if he won't debate her. That is...I can't even imag...I mean...even Todd Stroger debated...who was it, Tony... Proft: Tony Parika. Jacobson: Parika! You have to do that, I think it's a responsibility to the voters to have a debate. McSweeney: (*cut off, presumably "I can't"*)..blame you. If Rauner is intimidated by Michael Madigan, he's sure going to be intimidated by Jeanne Ives. I mean, Jeanne's tough! That's why I support her. And I really like Jeanne because she's always great...I mean, we don't agree on everything. We probably agree on about 95% of the issues, but when she doesn't, she'll come and talk to me, we'll talk and she'll be very direct about it. Rauner doesn't like direct people. And I think she would absolutely destroy him in a debate. I think he's scared to debate Jeanne Ives. Proft: Yeah, I can tell you from my interactions with him that yeah, you're right, he doesn't like direct people. He just sits there and says nothing, he kind of likes to play Pontius Pilate when there's controversy, not lead. Let me ask you this question, it's a political question, because of course the governor's people are suggesting "Look, Jeanne Ives is a fringe candidate, she can't win, I'm the inevitable nominee, and I'm the only chance we have to defeat the Democrats because I have the big checkbook." He's not saying "because I have the big checkbook", he's saying "because I've taken on Madigan" blah blah blah, but it's really because of the checkbook. And that's persuasive to, you know, a lot of establishment Republicans who can't seem to get out of the...get off the hamster wheel of continuing to do the same things we've been doing for the last 20 years and the super minority. But how do you respond to that, to the idea that Jeanne Ives doesn't have a chance, Rauner's contention she's a fringe candidate, she can't win, she can't win the primary, she can't win the general? McSweeney: Well, the fringe candidate is Bruce Rauner, let me be clear. He actually destroyed, absolutely DESTROYED, Henry Hyde's legacy. We've abortion on demand paid for by taxpayers through the ninth month of pregnancy. Illinois is a sanctuary state. He HATES President Trump, won't even say his name. And he's responsible for the tax hike we've had for a number of years. So the fringe candidate is Bruce Rauner. He can't win a general election. He stands for nothing. I'm a Reagan guy, as you know, and we need to stand on what we believe. I think Jeanne as a military veteran, as a conservative leader, as a strong person, will be able to stand up to Pritzker and Barrios and all the tax increasers. I mean, people are, as you know, sick and tired of the tax increases in this state. Jeanne will run as an anti-tax conservative who will reform this state. That is much better than a wishy-washy governor like Rauner, the worst Republican governor in America, who's raised taxes, made Illinois a sanctuary state, and we have abortion on demand through the ninth month of pregnancy. He can't win. Jeanne can. Proft: He is state representative David McSweeney, conservative Republican legislator from Barrington. Dave, thanks as always for joining us, appreciate it. McSweeney: Thanks, appreciate it. Jacobson: And he joined us on our Turnkey Dot Pro Answer Line.

Related Content

New Directions

Four years after being elected on the promise he "Shake Up Springfield," Governor Rauner told Illinoisans he "isn't in charge." His tenure has been marked by a series of betrayals to his base. Now he tells us he isn't in charge? The families and businesses of Illinois need a leader who will lead the charge in Springfield. In March, they will have a chance to elect such a leader. Pat Hughes explains in this edition of Two Minute Warning. 

RELATED CONTENT

How Tax Cuts Will Help IL Businesses

Major tax cuts and reforms are coming at the federal level, with a lot debate on what their impact will be. On this edition of Illinois Rising, Dan Proft and Pat Hughes get the perspective from an Illinois business owner on how tax cuts will help businesses and individuals and spur economic growth. They also talk to former state Rep. Rich Morthland, who is running for lieutenant governor on Jeanne Ives' ticket, about his race. And Proft and Hughes discuss the sudden announced departure of Luis Gutierrez from Congress.

WATCH THE FULL EPISODE HERE

SEGMENT 1

SEGMENT 2

SEGMENT 3

SEGMENT 4

SEGMENT 5

RELATED CONTENT

Rauner: Weak Man In Powerful Office

Gov. Rauner says he's not in charge so his failure is not his fault. Why run for reelection if he’s not able to do anything? Rauner’s campaign message is vote for me because I’m not Madigan since he has no record of his own to run on. Running mate of GOP primary opponent (Jeanne Ives) and former state legislator, Rich Morthland joins Dan and Amy with his reaction to Rauner’s abysmal lack of leadership and the attitudes of fed up voters outside of the Chicagoland area.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. So, Governor Rauner yesterday had his anti-Al Haig moment, Amy. Jacobson: Yeah, it’s like his tail was between his legs. He looks disheveled, he seems rattled that Jeanne Ives is challenging him. I gotta tell ya, I watched his press conference on three different stations, just to make sure I had this right but, listen up Dan...he’s not in charge! He’s not. Rauner (from tape): Illinois would be on a great future, we’d have 200,000 more jobs in this state, we would have lower property taxes in this state, we would have term limits in this state, if I was in charge. I am NOT in charge, I’m trying to get to be in charge. Jacobson: This was one of those moments where it was just like “...what?” And this is what he said on Channel 5, that Mike Madigan is a mobster. Rauner (from tape): He has rigged the system, he controls it, it is a mafia protection racket, and until he’s gone, we are not going to fix Illinois, and we’re not going to have a good future. Proft: Yeah, here’s what he’s trying to do. First of all, for a governor, especially the governor of...by the way, governor’s office in Illinois? Powerful office. Bruce Rauner, weak man. That’s the disconnect. For a governor to say “I’m not in charge”... Jacobson: That’s scary. Proft: Is that what he campaigned on in 2014? “I’m not...I’ll turn around Illinois, if Mike Madigan let’s me. I’ll turn around Illinois, with these qualifiers.” Was that the campaign promise? The outsider, no-nonsense business guy, he was going to take on these intractable problems, and the established political order in Springfield, the way that the run-of-the-mill politicians for the last several generations haven’t been able to...wasn’t that his values proposition? So now, as someone retweeted, his response in running for re-election is “I’m not responsible for my failure”? Boy, that’s compelling leadership in these difficult times in Illinois. Jacobson: And Jeanne Ives yesterday, who’s running for governor, introduced herself to the media, you know, we know her here on this program, but a lot of people don’t...and she held her own. Ives (from tape): The decision came when after HB40, that was the last straw, and colleagues and people from around the state started calling me saying “we need somebody to stand up to him, because Republicans hold Republicans accountable. Proft: Yeah, and by the way, with respect to the governor, we wouldn’t have a job killing, Capitol fleeing, massive structural tax increase without 15 House Republicans, HOUSE REPUBLICANS, folding in with Madigan. So where’s the leadership within your own party, such that you keep Republicans in line, Governor? Or are you not going to be in charge until we, what, suspend both parties? And you’re just the...dictator of the state? I mean, the complications presented by the General Assembly, especially the longest-serving speaker at the state level in U.S. history, are obvious. They were obvious going in, and they’re obvious today. And yes, he should be held to account, and yes he is a bulwark against a better Illinois, there’s no question. But, to be a crybaby bed-wetter about it? Jacobson: It’s true. I need a leader. He’s in charge of the national guard, the Illinois National Guard. “I’m not in charge here!” I don’t need to hear that from you! Proft: You were surprised with the possibility that Madigan would be the House speaker, if you’re elected governor. You didn’t contemplate that when you ran? Obviously that’s not true because that question has been asked of Republican candidates for the better part of three decades, “How ya gonna deal with Madigan? How ya gonna deal with Madigan?” Now I don’t assume Madigan is going to be there in 2018, because I think the Republicans have a chance to pick up the nine net seats to depose him, I really do. Jacobson: That’d be wonderful… Proft: But...BUT...the idea that you wouldn’t contemplate it, or four years in, after promising to have the state income tax back down to 3%, pre-Quinn, and having it back up to Quinn levels, with Republicans complicit, and frankly Rauner complicit, because he did a Pontius Pilate on that, “I’m gonna stay out of it, whatever the General Assembly decides, then I’ll make my decision.” That’s leadership? That’s why we have what we have. “My failure is not my fault.” That’s what Rauner is saying. Jacobson: But as Governor, as Republican governor, he needs to get the Republican members in line. He needs to whip them into shape and he did not do that! Proft: (312)642-5600, Turnkey Dot Pro Answer Line. 64636DA, Turnkey Dot Pro Text Line. Are you inspired by Rauner’s Al...or anti-Al Haig moment? Or is that fair for him to just blame Madigan and say “Well I can’t do anything if he’s there.” Well then, why are you running for re-election? Jacobson: Jeanne Ives pretty much called him a liar yesterday. Ives (from tape): He is a traitor to our policies and that’s why I’m challenging him. Proft: They did! He said he would veto HB40...he signed it. He signed sanctuary city, he signed trans birth certificates, bailouts of public utilities like Exelon, increasing health care premiums to support Pat Quinn’s Obamacare Medicaid expansion...it’s not just on the moral issues. He’s a big government Republican. So again, do we want to hold people accountable for their policy choices, and the leadership opportunity they failed to consummate, or are we just gonna say “Ahh, you know...he’s got a big checkbook, and he’ll probably win. Since he’ll probably win, I’ll just go along with the program, you know like we did with Mark Kirk last year when he won re-election. Oh wait.” Jacobson: Well, speaking of the checkbook real quick, Jeanne Ives...well she did a real good job because everybody said “there’s no way you can win, he is a millionaire, he will put millions into his own campaign.” Ives (from tape): It doesn’t matter how much money you have, in the end you cannot buy back your trust after a betrayal. So Rauner is going to spend a lot of money paying high-priced consultants to try and tell people that he is somebody who he is not. Proft: Well, that’s it, and isn’t that what Rauner is doing? “I want you to vote for who I am NOT, not who I am.” Isn’t that what Rauner is doing? “I want you to vote for me because I’m not Madigan. Don’t vote for me because...I don’t want to be judged on what I’ve done, I want to be judged on what Mike Madigan has done.” Is that compelling? For more on this topic, we’re pleased to be joined by the aforesaid Jeanne Ives’ running mate, remember you run as a ticket, Jeanne Ives’ Lieutenant Governor candidate is a former state legislator from the Quad Cities, his name is Rich Morthland, and Rich joins us now. Rich, thanks for being with us, appreciate it. Morthland: Good morning, Dan, it’s good to talk to you. Amy, it’s good to make you acquaintance! Jacobson: Yes! I can’t wait to get to know you. Proft: We heard about you from Jeanne when we had her on the show yesterday, just a quick background. A farmer, college educator, former state legislator, and also a locally elected official as well. You’ve had an interesting and diverse professional and political history, and I wonder how you react to Governor Rauner’s “I’m not in charge” comment? Morthland: Dan, that is SO reflective of the way his administration has done everything! It’s been an abdication, a dereliction, of his Constitutional duty, we’re all constitutional here, we all understand our balances of power, and he has a lot of it. And what he did through his statements was to acknowledge that he does...or not to acknowledge, but acknowledging the fact that he won’t embrace the powers that he has under our Constitution. And he’s advocating it all to Michael Madigan? I know Mr. Madigan! I’ve served under him in his chamber, I understand he’s a powerful man. But this isn’t his state! And I’m sorry, I’m getting a little agitated, just so you know like any good Republican I’m driving to work right now, I’m co-teaching classes this morning at our Galva Kewanee campus at Black Hawk College. But I’m telling...it’s just astonishing that this man is not doing his job, and he hasn’t done since he got in, and now he has once and for all said “It’s not my fault.” Jacobson: Well, what made you decide to join the ticket with Jeanne Ives? Morthland: Jeanne Ives, well...she is SO incredible, she is an amazing leader, she is well-trained, well-versed, I mean we all know the legacy of West Point. I mean, let’s be honest...Jeanne Ives knows the MEANING of the word “retreat”, but it was only a vocabulary word they made her study. I mean, come on! That woman is going to march forward, she knows how to create coalitions, she knows how to assert authority, everything that “Benedict Rauner” has NOT done. And she is going to do it and I am just absolutely honored that she has chosen to place me on the ticket. Proft: Give us a little bit of on-the-ground perspective as a downstater, or as somebody from the Quad Cities, or as somebody right next to Iowa there, a border community, a border region, what the attitude of Republicans in your neck of the woods and as you travel around the state, particularly downstate, what the attitudes you hear about Governor Rauner from Republicans? Morthland: Well, you’re right, Dan. I do live in a border area, you know I used to say when I was running for my state rep district, that the biggest problem with my district is that it has five bridges out, and people are using them. You know, what I hear from people as I go around the state and I am going to continue to go around the state, because obviously Jeanne chose me because I am neither from Cook, nor the collars, to reflect the geography of the state of Illinois and the views of the state of Illinois….it’s betrayal, day-in, day-out, and everyone has their own straw that broke their camel’s back of support, and they’ve turned away, and they’ve turned away irreparably. When Jeanne says we know, that we have the polling data that says he can’t win, if he were re-nominated...she’s not kidding. We hear it every day on the ground. Jacobson: So when’re you gonna come to Chicago and introduce yourself? When’s your coming out party? Morthland: It would be wonderful. I would love to come up to the city! We were there, obviously, just last weekend, for various events including Farm Bureau, it was, it was kind of...it’s always fun to go to the Farm Bureau Convention, because I’m a lifelong member, and when I was first a legislator, the Farm Bureau had a program, they’ve since abandoned it, because it doesn’t work on Chicago Democrats. They had a program where they would adopt legislators, and I remember walking away from the event where they did adoptions with a bunch of Chicago Democrats, and they said “Rich, Rich! Did the Farm Bureau adopt you?” And I said “It’s kind of hard to adopt MYSELF.” Proft: Yeah, right. So that perspective too, because sometimes we forget north of I-80 that agribusiness is the number one business sector in Illinois. Obviously you’ve got John Deere in your neck of the woods, and Caterpillar in Peoria and thousands of family farmers across the state. There’s this stat that I love, and correct me if I’m wrong on this, but every Illinois farmer feeds 52 families. Just to give you kind of the impact of not just the economics at the macro level but also at the micro level in terms of, you know, feeding people, feeding people the world over. Proft: Great job with numbers as usual, Dan. But we don’t just feed people, we also provide...all sorts of...food, fabrics, fuel, we do on Illinois agriculture, and now with the advancements, amazing...soybean acres nationally are about to exceed corn acres because the soybean is such a versatile plant that we can do so much with it. But, Illinois is the breadbasket of America, and agriculture...you’re right. If I were headed to our Moline campus, it’s next door...not by accident...to the world headquarters of John Deere. And that’s something that I never take for granted when I’m doing my job of educating Illinois’ young people. By the way, it’s...don’t forget, I’m a community college professor, and like about half of all community college professors, I’ve had real jobs. And my...oh I’m really gonna get in trouble for this one...and my full-time teaching job really isn’t among them, I love it, but it’s not the real job that I’ve done. I’ve just...when you’re raised on a farm, and you’re a farm kid...it makes something out of you that can never be removed. And it’s just a real honor that Jeanne’s sought that out in a running mate. Proft: Alright, he is Rich Morthland, former state legislator from the Quad Cities area, as well as you heard, farmer, community college professor, and running mate to state representative Jeanne Ives, they are the ticket challenging Governor Rauner and Evelyn Sanguenetti in the Republican primary for governor. Rich, thanks so much for joining us, appreciate it. Morthland: Thanks for having me, folks.

Related Content

Trump Finally Names New IRS Commissioner

“Justice delayed is justice denied.” The DOJ settled class action suits being prosecuted by some 400 conservative groups who were targeted by the IRS for their political and religious views. The House and Senate passed the budget framework leading the way for tax reform despite claims of internal strife within the GOP. Will Rep. Roskam be supporting Rauner in his reelection campaign? Representative Peter Roskam from the 6th Congressional District joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Rauner Funding His Campaign Because No One Else Will

“He is without integrity and if you're without integrity then it doesn't really matter what position you're taking in any given moment because how can I trust him.” Governor Rauner is not the guy he said he was going to be and his reelection ad is trying to distract from that. Will he face the consequences in the primaries or the general election? Dan and Amy take calls from listeners who voice their concerns.

Related Content