|
Michael Madigan at work again.
In a political David vs. Goliath showdown Tuesday, David took a beating.
In this story about an underdog facing a much stronger foe, David is Mateusz 'Mat' Tomkowiak, 32, of Chicago's Mount Greenwood community. He's a Polish immigrant running for public office.
ADVERTISING
Goliath is Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, 75, who has been the state's most powerful politician since approximately the time woolly mammoths roamed the Upper Midwest.
South suburban residents outside his legislative district may be unaware that they can cast a ballot for Madigan. They may know him as state representative of the 22nd District, which includes Midway Airport on Chicago's southwest side.
Madigan also is elected to serve as state central committeeman for the 3rd Congressional District in the Democratic Party of Illinois. The district extends south and west of Chicago and includes parts of Oak Lawn, Chicago Ridge, Palos Heights, Orland Park, Homer Glen, Lockport and many other towns.
Democrats elect a committeeman and committeewoman for each of the state's 18 congressional districts. (Committeeman for the 2nd District is state Rep. Al Riley, of Olympia Fields.) From his elected post on the central committee, Madigan is able to serve as chairman of the state party.
Republicans use a different method to choose central committee representatives. GOP members will elect committeemen at county conventions, according to the Illinois State Board of Elections.
Tomkowiak filed paperwork to oppose Madigan for 3rd District state central committeeman on the March 20 primary ballot. It's a four-year term. He waited until the final day of the filing period to submit his paperwork.
Tomkowiak's petitions were challenged by Evelia Padilla of Chicago. If her objections are successful and Tomkowiak's candidacy is ruled invalid, Madigan would benefit by running unopposed.
Forms included a statement of candidacy and petitions containing signatures of "at least 100 of the primary electors of his or her party in his or her congressional district."
"We tried to catch him off guard," Tomkowiak told me. "Mike Madigan has a history of putting up phantom candidates."
Morning Spin: Rauner still won't say if he'll seek re-election
Jason Gonzales, who challenged Madigan's state rep seat in the 2016 Democratic primary, claimed in a lawsuit that the veteran South Side lawmaker put up "two sham candidates with Hispanic last names to split up the Hispanic vote," the Chicago Tribune reported in September, when a judge ruled the suit could continue.
Madigan enjoys party machine support in his legislative district, Tomkowiak told me. But in the much larger congressional district, Tomkowiak thinks he might have a chance in a head-to-head contest against the party boss.
After all, millions of dollars have been spent by Republicans on advertisements telling people how awful Madigan is. You can't turn on the TV, it seems, without seeing a commercial featuring a Republican governor from a neighboring state sarcastically thanking Madigan for ruining Illinois.
As requirements go, 100 signatures are relatively easy to attain. Requirements for other offices often number in the hundreds or thousands and commonly are based on a percentage of people who voted in the last election for a particular office.
Tomkowiak told me he collected some signatures at a Metra station in Oak Lawn and others by walking door to door in neighborhoods from Lemont to LaGrange. I asked how many signatures he submitted.
"It was recommended I turn in two to three times the number required," he said. "I did that."
Challenging petitions is a bit of a cottage industry in state politics. There are lawyers who specialize in the trade. I'm all for following the rules, but I think at times the process is shamefully abused. Don't ever let anyone tell you that Republicans are the only ones who engage in voter suppression tactics.
Typically, electoral boards often uphold petition objections on grounds many would consider technicalities. People circulating petitions on behalf of a candidate may not be properly identified on a form, for example.
I think it's reasonable that a form should be disqualified if it is not properly notarized. But ludicrously subjective methods of tossing out petitions include findings that forms failed to meet the "neatly fastened together" requirement, which neglects to specify whether staples or paper clips are preferred.
It may be unfair to characterize the practices as shenanigans or skullduggery because that would imply deceitful trickery. Instead, it may be better to think of the process as militant enforcement of the rules. A petition signature may be disallowed because an "i" wasn't dotted or a "t" wasn't crossed.
I witnessed a literal manifestation of that last point during testimony Tuesday in a 14th-floor conference room overlooking LaSalle Street at the State Board of Elections office in the James R. Thompson Center in Chicago.
Tomkowiak was present, like a would-be David. Goliath was not there, though some might say his equally formidable surrogate was in the room.
Previous scrutiny by State Board of Elections staff had disqualified all but 107 of the signatures submitted by Tomkowiak. The purpose of Tuesday's hearing was to consider the testimony of Diane Marsh, 80, of Westchester. Marsh identified herself as a forensic document examiner and handwriting expert.
Tomkowiak, who represented himself, challenged Marsh's credentials, saying some of the professional organizations that certified her skills ceased to exist years ago. Hearing officer Bernadette Matthews, the state board's assistant executive director, dismissed Tomkowiak's line of questioning as "speculative" or "lacking foundation."
Matthews also ruled that Tomkowiak could not submit 38 affidavits he obtained from people who swore that they had, in fact, signed his petitions. The deadline was Friday to submit evidence to be considered at the hearing, Matthews said.
Tomkowiak pleaded that submitting the affidavits prior to the hearing would have allowed the handwriting expert to know which signatures had supporting evidence of authenticity.
"Can you see how that is unfair to me?" he asked.
Matthews deemed the affidavits inadmissible.
"My job as hearing officer is not to rule on the motives or intent of the objectors," Matthews said.
Across the table from Tomkowiak sat Michael Kasper, general counsel for Madigan's Illinois Democratic Party. Kasper, wearing a dark suit and bow tie, is a highly skilled attorney who successfully argued the Illinois Supreme Court should strike down the 2016 ballot initiative known as the Illinois Independent Redistricting Map Amendment.
Supporters of the "fair map" initiative collected nearly 600,000 signatures in an effort to end gerrymandering and reform how legislative districts are drawn, but the state's highest court by a 4-3 vote found the question to be unconstitutional.
"The Illinois Constitution is meant to prevent tyranny, not to enshrine it," dissenting Justice Robert Thomas wrote at the time.
Across from this Goliath of Illinois election law sat Tomkowiak, a puny David.
"I'm not well-versed in the law," he said during the hearing. He holds a doctorate in political science and has taught at Princeton University and the University of Chicago, according to his campaign website.
In addition to his bid to run for a seat on the Democratic Party's state central committee, Tomkowiak intends to run as an independent in November for the 3rd District congressional seat held by Democrat Dan Lipinski, who faces a primary challenge from Marie Newman.
Tuesday's hearing largely consisted of Marsh offering her expert analysis of comparisons between signatures on Tomkowiak's petitions and those from voter registration documents filed with county clerks.
I sat through about 90 minutes of testimony. Marsh remarked about differences in slants, ending strokes, the curving parts of letters — the sorts of anomalies that reminded me of swift slaps on the wrist by a ruler-wielding educator who taught me cursive writing.
"I would say the signature on the petition is a non-genuine signature," Marsh repeatedly testified. "The person who signed the registration is not the same person who signed the petition."
Tomkowiak would object, saying he had an affidavit from the person swearing to the authenticity of the signature, but it was evidence that could not be considered.
"Do you hold that opinion to a high degree of scientific certainty?" Kasper would ask Marsh before receiving an affirmative reply.
I stayed until the number of signatures found to be inauthentic reached nearly a dozen, or more than the eight needed to achieve a finding that Tomkowiak failed to gather a sufficient number of signatures to appear on March 20 ballots.
"I'm going to accept the testimony of the expert and overrule the staff ruling," Matthews repeatedly said, though she did reject the expert's opinion on at least three signatures.
I reached out to the state party to offer Madigan a chance to comment on the objections to Tomkowiak's petition.
"As with any objection, you want all the candidates for office to follow the rules," spokesman Steve Brown told me. "When the rules are not followed, questions can be raised. The rules are not that complicated."
My efforts to reach Padilla by phone this week were unsuccessful. She was not present at Tuesday's hearing.
The eight-member State Board of Elections will decide on the objections to Tomkowiak's candidacy when it meets Thursday at the Thompson Center. Petition objections must be resolved this week, as county clerks are required to certify ballots for the March 20 primary on Thursday.
_________________ Frank Coztansa wrote: conns7901 wrote: Not over yet. Yes it is. CDOM wrote: When this is all over, which is not going to be for a while, Trump will be re-elected President.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
