« OH-16: Ralph Regula Running Again...Open Seat Soon? | Main | NY-Sen: Not Her Best Day »

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

IL-06: A Perfect Opportunity to Get On the Same Page

Posted by Tim Tagaris

It's not secret that there is a communication gap between segments of the netroots and the DCCC. While much of it stems from the 2004 election cycle, the flames were further fanned during the campaign for OH-2 earlier this year. A lot of people have their own personal pet beefs with the organization, and I have mine. I get very discouraged when out of the wildnerness comes a candidate in whom I can believe, and they receive little to no help from D.C. And while I completely understand there are only so many races they can get active in (50 I believe is the goal in 2006), I wonder why they can't meet us at least 1/50th of the way. So when I read this piece in the Chicago Sun-Times this morning, my heart sank.

Democratic congressional candidate Christine Cegelis delivered anemic third quarter fund-raising numbers, which means Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) will be shopping for another candidate to challenge her in the March primary. Cegelis is running for the west and northwest suburban seat being vacated by Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.) in territory heavily Republican but with Democratic potential for 2006. [...]

Between January and Sept. 30, Cegelis -- currently the Democratic front-runner -- raised $159,885 and has $48,973 cash on hand, according to reports filed over the weekend. Cegelis campaign manager Pat Mogge said that Cegelis is doing better than Rep. Melissa Bean (D-Ill.) did at a comparable point in what was seen then as her uphill long shot 2004 battle to beat former Rep. Phil Crane (R-Ill.).

DCCC spokesman Bill Burton, asked if the DCCC was satisfied with Cegelis' fund-raising, said, "the field is not set yet ... we have heard from some folks who are interested there.''

And this race is the perect example of the disconnect, at least in my eyes. Here you have a candidate who took 44% of the vote against a 34 year incumbent on almost organization and message alone. Christine was selected in the second round of the Dean Dozen, another substantial grassroots accomplishment. She was tremendously popular in the netroots, and just three weeks ago finished in 3rd place during the Democracy for America candidate vote.

When I read the Sun-Times piece, I get the feeling they either don't care, or just aren't paying attention, even though I know they do. This is obviously a candidate with wide grassroots appeal in the netroots, and most importantly inside her own district. I also think this is the perfect opportunity for the DCCC to give a little. They certainly should cease recruiting efforts inside the district. If a candidate emerges on their own, fine, but they shouldn't be complicit in that effort. I would also suggest that they take another step forward and back Christine Cegelis fully in a public show that they are willing to take a larger step towards working together with the grass/netroots.

Posted at 10:57 AM in Illinois | Technorati

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


This is another of those 'old-new' battles that is going on all through the Democratic Party.

I contributed my share both last year and early this year. It surprised me her candidacy was not embraced and encouraged by the DCCC. Not DLCer enough?

Posted by: stumpy [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 18, 2005 12:04 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Someone from the DCCC called yesterday asking for money. He was very sorry he did. I'm more likely to donate to a progressive long shot than to a non-progressive with a better chance of winning. I wish people like Bob Casey well-- really I do-- but I can't see donating money to anyone with DLC support anymore than with RNC support. My distrust in the DCCC is cascading towards DLC levels.

Posted by: DownWithTyranny [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 18, 2005 03:36 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Christine did "poorly" last quarter (as did everyone due to the hurricanes) because she's receiving NO support from the Party -- Rep. Emanuel lives down the road from her -- IN the same state -- & he doesn't give her the time of day!

Why isn't anyone polling on the ineffectiveness of Rahm Emanuel?

Why can't we poll to find out how many people want him GONE as the DCCC Chair?

As a resident of IL, we almost expect this of our entrenched, old-school incumbents -- lots of gerrymandering, no support. He's lucky this is a Democracy & I'm not his boss. He's an embarrassment to the Party & the people of the great state of IL. I would've fired his butt a long time ago. There are a lot of other people that can do his job (representative & DCCC chair) a lot better.

Rahm Emanuel can be replaced. The Party is long overdue for it, too!

Posted by: Philosophe Forum [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 18, 2005 08:13 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Granted the Democrats don't have the deep pockets and corporate links of their Republican counterparts, but why isn't Rahm out there organizing fundraisers for viable candidates like Christine? With a real opportunity to capture a traditional Republican Congressional seat, he instead whines about poor campaign funding and threatens to recruit other candidates for the Democratic primary. This disarray would almost certainly concede the election to the Republicans.

I'm not corporate bigwig, just a private citizen on a fixed income. I'm still going to set aside some money to help Christine's campaign. If Rahm isn't going to help Democrats get elected, it looks like its up to us.

Now, if we can just replace Rahm with DCCC Chairman who actually wants to get Democrats elected.

Posted by: pascal1947 [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 19, 2005 04:32 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment




Las Vegas Congressional democratic candidate Barry Michaels has a different approach in appealing for support through his “walking in your shoes” campaign. “I want to make it clear that I know what it feels to be the ‘average’ person; the one who has to sometimes struggle to make ends meet, the divorced single parent, and even someone who has made a mistake and has been behind bars.” He continued to explain that lawmakers are many times out of touch with their constituents’ needs and they start living a privileged life. “It’s not going to happen with me once I get in office. You don’t forget hardships. Instead you build on them and you have empathy for those who are having difficulties in life.”

Michaels, who among other things, was a former chiropractor, airline executive and real estate investor, has already demonstrated his bootstrap approach to successfully running a business. “I particularly admire those with that small business entrepreneur spirit. It is what helped make America great and I think we ought to do more to support it.”

His “walking in your shoes” approach will at times actually involve him wearing construction boots, scuffed everyday shoes, casual shoes and other foot apparel worn by workers in various professions. “This is one way I can visually demonstrate that I identify and care about a broad constituency here in Las Vegas. And once in office I want people to know I am never above them. I will do my very best to be responsive to their questions.” One way he plans to do that is to have an ombudsman in the Las Vegas office who will directly intercede between individuals, business, and government.

Finally, Michaels wants to stress that his life is an open book, “warts and all.” “I’ve made mistakes and I’ve paid for them – dearly at times. Nothing has been
’kept in a closet’ or swept under the proverbial rug. I have learned and I have changed and I want to help make life better for those whom I serve.”


Media Contact: (702) 391-0666

Posted by: MICHAELS FOR CONGRESS [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 5, 2005 11:08 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment


Nevada congressional candidate Barry Michaels is calling for the establishment of an organization known as the Youth Emergency Service Corps (YES). It would be comprised of college-aged youths from across the nation who are committed to public service. Similar in design to AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps, YES would be dedicated to providing a large reservoir of people to make up response teams in case of natural disasters such as floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, etc. both here in the United States and abroad.
Michaels explained, “Pakistan is a perfect example of such a need. Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf has called the world’s reaction to his country’s devastating earthquake ‘spotty’ and ‘stingy.’ He specifically singled out Western powers.” Michaels pointed out that this would otherwise be a great opportunity to help win the hearts and minds of Pakistanis to America in its battle against terrorists but groups such as Al Queda instead are seen as stepping in to fill the void. An overt presence of our troops would probably not be welcome there but non-military young people might be.
“Besides, our troops are already committed to the aftermath of the hurricane disasters, as well as the war in Iraq, so they would be hard pressed to respond. Besides they have a military presence and some foreign countries may not welcome that.”
On the other hand, eager, young people from all across America might be a welcome sight. Michaels doesn’t see them as extensions of the Red Cross although some of the work may be similar. “The Red Cross does a great job but in times of multiple crises they can be overextended as well. There are specific jobs that these young people may be best at.”
He sees a national campaign to encourage young people to register for this service which would be an all- volunteer organization. Michaels points out many times young people want some direction in life. The program would be designed to have initial sign-up and information and training sessions in cities through the country. When time of emergency, they would be called up (similar to a draft) although participation would be voluntary. “No one would force them to go,” says Michaels. Expenses would be covered but this would be a volunteer effort lasting from probably a few days to perhaps a few weeks. They would do a variety of jobs, directed by local officials. Most of all, they would be helping and finding a purpose in service.
As for funding, Michaels would look to a combination of government and the private sector to get involved, especially firms which do heavy on-campus recruiting. “I see this costing only a nominal amount of money, especially compared to all the good it would do.” http://www.michaelsforcongress.com

Posted by: MICHAELS FOR CONGRESS [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 7, 2005 08:15 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

SOCIAL SECURITY SOLUTION - Barry Michaels Nevada Democratic Congressional Candidate for '06 has a simple Solution to the Social Security Problem - By Michaels Nov 18th, 2005

The idea of privatizing social security does not solve the problem, instead it will place many of our senior citizens at risk. To me the idea of having control of my retirement account some twenty to forty years prior to my expected retirement, literally gives me the chills. How many of us would save for retirement, if those funds were not excess but necessary to survive in the present. I believe if it were ever to happen many seniors would find themselves out in the cold come their time of retirement.
The maximum social security withheld today is $5,580 based on a yearly salary of $90,000, anyone earning more is not taxed further. Lowering the rate and removing the lid will correct the problem. Like income tax structure where the wealthy pay a greater percentage then those earning far less.

The Medicare program needs to be reworked to include prescription drugs and those receiving benefits should not need to purchase private insurance to supplement the program. http://www.michaelsforcongress.com Media Contact: (702) 391-0666

Posted by: MICHAELS FOR CONGRESS [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 18, 2005 06:33 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment


I have a somewhat “checkered past” and paid the price several times over. As a convicted white-collar offender, I spent fifteen months of a twenty-one month sentence at a federal prison camp for security and tax violations. This part of my life I'm not proud of, but it is a part of my past and has caused me to learn some very costly lessons.

I believe this and other life experiences combined with my extensive business experience, can add a new breath of fresh air to the House of Representatives. This country needs new leaders with vision, one’s that can think outside the box and make a difference for the people of Nevada and our great nation. I know I can supply part of this need. My plans do not include bringing up what others have not done, but only what I can do.

No doubt during this campaign both the press and other candidates will bring up my past, but I believe it's just that my past. The mistakes I made are of public record and I can't change them. Lucky for me my offense occurred in California, a state that automatically restores civil rights upon completion of sentence. For the last several years I've been both eligible to vote as well as run for any political office. If elected, I know full well I will be under close scrutiny and I welcome it. Thanks for your support! For more information please go to my website: http://www.michaelsforcongress.com Media Contact: (702) 391-0666

Posted by: MICHAELS FOR CONGRESS [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 20, 2005 09:53 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Ex-Felons Right To Vote by Barry Michaels For Congress in '06
No other democratic country in the world denies as many people - in absolute or proportionate terms - the right to vote because of prior felony convictions. The extent of disenfranchisement is even more disturbing given that the right to vote can be lost for relatively minor offenses such as shoplifting. In the states that disenfranchise ex-felons, an eighteen-year-old first-time offender who receives probation upon conviction for a single sale of drugs faces a lifetime of disenfranchisement.  
Disenfranchisement laws are a vestige of medieval times when offenders were banished from the community and suffered "civil death." Brought from Europe to the colonies, they gained new political salience at the end of the nineteenth century when disgruntled whites in many Southern states adopted them and other ostensibly race-neutral voting restrictions in an effort to exclude blacks from the vote.
The racial impact of disenfranchisement laws is particularly troubling. In seven states, at least one in four black men are disenfranchised as an ex-felon. In Florida and Alabama, the number soars to one in three. Given current rates of incarceration, 40 percent of the next generation of African American men is likely to be permanently disenfranchised
State laws that govern voting in federal as well as state elections form of national "crazy-quilt." The right to vote in federal elections is thus subject to the arbitrary accidents of geography. A person convicted of theft in New Jersey, for example, automatically regains the right to vote after release from prison, while a person convicted of the same crime in New Mexico is denied the vote forever unless a pardon can be secured from the state governor.  
The disenfranchisement of ex-felons serves no discernible legitimate purpose. To the contrary, it arbitrarily denies ex-offenders the ability to vote regardless of the nature of their crimes or the severity of their sentences. It distorts the country's electoral process and diminishes the black vote, countering decades of voting rights gains. (Extracts from Human Rights Watch Letters (05/23/01) to US Senator Robert G. Torricelli , Mitch McConnell , Charles Schumer and Sam Brownback)
Since the U.S. Supreme Court has just recently refused to hear the argument, it’s clear to me that federal legislation is necessary in order to restore this injustice. When elected I plan on introducing a new bill that would do just that. Although the bill would restore the Right to Vote to all felons, I believe it will have little effect because the majority of those convicted of a felony would most likely not exercise that Right. On the other hand; those that do, would most likely make excellent and concerned citizens who have re-conformed to society.  
Lucky for me my offense occurred in California, a state that automatically restores civil rights upon completion of one's sentence. For the last several years I've been both eligible to vote as well as run for any political office.
Please - Help get me elected - it takes a great deal of capital to run a successful campaign.
Contribute Please - Help get me elected - it takes a great deal of capital to run a successful campaign www.michaelsforcongress.com Media contact: (702) 391-0666

Posted by: MICHAELS FOR CONGRESS [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 24, 2005 11:52 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment

Barry Michaels an unusual Democratic Congressional Candidate from Nevada's 3rd District asks; Do we want political parties to choose who represents us or should we the voters decide?

The purpose of primary elections are to select from multiple candidates, one candidate to represent the party in the upcoming general election. Does a political party that supports one candidate over another, prior to that state’s primary circumvent the law and does this practice cause some voters to be disenfranchised? Congressional candidate Barry Michaels who’s running for Nevada’s 3rd., district believes it does.

“If party members believe there are no other candidates running, other than those endorsed by the party, there would be little reason to vote knowing candidates who run unopposed automatically win. In fact party officials go even further by pretending there is no primary to discourage other candidates from running.

Apparently these practices occur all the time especially on official party websites where the public is led to believe their candidates are the only ones running. Statements such as: “meet the candidates” and “this website is updated every Monday from the FEC filings,” are deliberate attempts to mislead party members and sway their votes toward the candidates they have chosen. Michaels believes these practices are deceptive and create an environment that smells terribly of unfair competition. Every candidate should have an equal opportunity to represent the party and this should be decided by the entire membership by the primary ballot.

In states where party nominees are chosen by a primary election, the party should not endorse or promote any one candidate over another, prior to that state’s primary. It is the government’s responsibility to determine who is a candidate and what party if any they represent. In a democratic society such as ours, citizens are given the right to elect their representatives not just a few party elites.

Can various antitrust laws used to prevent anticompetitive practices and encourage unfettered competition be applied to political party’s that promote unfair competitive tactics? Michaels also believes there is great similarity between marketing a commercial product and running a political campaign.

These practices interfere with one of our most important constitutional rights, the right to vote. To be sure they include the right to be informed of all the candidates, registered with a party, that are running for office? Can one have an educated vote when parties continue to indulge in "back room, old boy's club" politics? Can the voters' voice be heard when the parties loudly promote the status quo? As a final comment; the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has long adopted the opinion that political parties are neither absolute nor comprehensive as to the rights enjoyed by wholly private associations.

Posted by: MICHAELS FOR CONGRESS [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 7, 2006 12:25 AM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment