November 6, 2005

Meet Paul Rumler

Paul Rumler, the recently announced candidate for the 36th District Illinois Senate seat currently held by Sen. Mike Jacobs, is already ahead of the incumbant in the web site department.

As pointed out by alert commenter "Amigo91", Rumler's page can be found at

While it appears to be a work in progress, it contains some helpful information on the 26 year old candidate and his vision for the district.

Note: It's been brought to my attention that in the previous post re: Rumler's announcement, a link to comments made by Rep. Bart Gordon on Rumler's departure from his staff did not work. You can view the statement from the congressional record by clicking here and then clicking on the link in #3.


At 11/06/2005 11:33 PM, Blogger youngridemocrat said...

Everyone should welcome young Mr. Rumler back to the Quad Cities and to a campaign. We -- both parties -- can always use a discussion about issues ahead and challenges that confront the QCs.

As someone who has researched the Illinois Constitution and Illinois election law, and maybe it's more bureaucratic than it should be, I have doubts about this young candidate's ability to actually run. Take a look at Illinois election law. You have to be a resident of the district you want to run in a full two years before the general election in which you're running.

Simply put, if you're running in the November 2006 election you would have to be a resident of the district since November 2004.

So how do you live and work in Massachussetts and Washington in 2005 and turn around and run for the Illinois General Assembly in 2006?

I wish him well, but Illinois election laws are very stringent.
He may be ready to run in 2008, but I have doubts about 2006.

At 11/07/2005 1:15 AM, Blogger youngdem503 said...

If he was still registered to vote in the Quad Cities wouldn't that make him eligible to run?

At 11/07/2005 5:11 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

The 2006 Candidate's Guide from the Illinois Elections Commission shows that indeed, a candidate for state senate is required to be a resident for 2 years prior to election.

I'm not sure where you're getting the date that Rumler returned to the area though. I've looked through his website and the article on his announcement and nowhere does it specify a date that he returned to the area nor does it give dates for when he most recently worked in D.C.

I also got the impression that he worked in MA several years ago.

The fact may be that Rumler indeed meets the residency requirements.

I am looking into this and will report back if I get any further information.

At 11/07/2005 7:05 AM, Blogger shamalamadingdong21 said...


you posted a link to a speech given by
TUESDAY, JULY 6, 2004 saying he was sorry that Mr. Rumler was leaving. July of 2004 is certainly after March of 2004.

He may have a problem. It is not like he was away at college and came home to his parents house on break. He had a real job, making real money. Have you checked his voting history in recent elections in Rock Island County, I wonder if he registered and voted where he was working? I can't believe a good democrat would have not voted in the last presidential election!!

At 11/07/2005 7:20 AM, Blogger diehard said...

Who is this stroke you hired for a strawman Jacobs?

At 11/07/2005 8:00 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

This should be an interesting issue. I didn't notice the date on the floor comments of Rep. Gordon.
And are you saying that the two year requirement has to be keyed to the March 21st primary or is it prior to the general election?

The Board of Elections site says only that they must reside in the district "for two years preceding the election."

The relevant subsection of the Illinois constitution (Article IV, Section 2(c)) reads:
(c) To be eligible to serve as a member of the General Assembly, a person must be a United States citizen, at least 21 years old, and for the two years preceding his election or appointment a resident of the district which he is to represent.

In the general election following a redistricting, a candidate for the General Assembly may be elected from any district which contains a part of the district in which he resided at the time of the redistricting and reelected if a resident of the new district he represents for 18 months prior to reelection.
Again, only "preceding his election or appointment".

Is winning a primary considered being "elected"? I'd think not.

Also, we have no idea how contemporaniously Gordon's remarks were to Rumler's departure.

At 11/07/2005 9:50 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

I've been able to confirm that Rumler indeed meets the constitutional residency requirements in order to run.

He established residency in Moline in September of 2003

More later.

At 11/07/2005 11:39 AM, Blogger shamalamadingdong21 said...

Rumler's own web site says he left his job in Tennessee and then:

"After moving back to Moline in September 2003, Paul "relocated" to Washington, DC in order to work for the U.S. Congress."

So he stopped by his parents' house on his way from Tennessee to "relocate" to a new job in Washington and that somehow establishes residency?

What does it mean to "relocate?" How about "the act of changing your residence" or "move or establish in a new location."

I stand corrected, the date needed to prove his "relocatiion" back to the District is November 7, 2004.

A quick search of the web shows that Paul Rumler was the contact person in May 2005 for internships with his employer Cong. Steny Hoyer:

"Please fax a cover letter and resume to the attention of Paul Rumler at (202) 226-0663. Important dates to remember: application deadline is April 15th,2005 interviews: April/May, and the ideal start date is May 30th, 2005."

Here is a quote from a recent court opinion on residency,

"As long as a defendant does not seek to exercise the rights of property or of citizenship incident to or resulting from permanent residence at his new location but instead continues to exercise those rights, including the right to vote, at his original location, he remains a resident at the original location for voter registration purposes."

There is much more to the analysis than satisfying this requirement, but it is a fact based inquiry and may be appropriate for someone to ask the State Board of Elections to rule on this issue.

We need the facts. I think Mr. Rumler needs to disclose his voting history and if he was registered to vote outside of Rock Island County since November 2004.

It is unfortunate that we can't find a candidate who has lived and worked in the District to challenge Sen. Jacobs. It will probably be left up to the voters to decide which candidate has lived here and can best serve the District, but the Democrats need to make sure that they nominate a candidate whose residency is not subject to an adverse ruling by the State Board of Elections.

Let's get the answer before we travel too far down this road.

At 11/07/2005 12:11 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

WOW! Are you SURE you're not on the Jacobs chow wagon??

It's amazing that you're attempting to count this guy out a day after he announces.

With his background, I don't imagine he'd have filed and announced his candidacy without being on solid ground re: his eligibility.

I suppose it's to be expected, but it's a bit discouraging to hear that there are those that are more that willing to cause a distracting fuss about this issue before they even have the facts.

Maybe Rumler will have to hire failed Supreme Court nominee Harriet "Harry" Miers. After all, she was the one who represented Dick "Dick" Cheney when he was allowed to be on the ballot.

It's against the law for both members of a presidential ticket to reside in the same state. (Why? I have no idea.)

Even though Cheney had owned a house and lived in Texas for years, he said he was a resident of Wyoming even though he barely had much more than a PO box there and hadn't voted for years.

If it's good enough for Dick.....

At 11/07/2005 12:15 PM, Blogger youngridemocrat said...

The issue is this - Republicans are already busily researching the kid's residency problem.

This isn't a Democratic issue, it's the fact that Republicans will lie in the bushes and throw him off the ballot if he gets through the primary. We're trying to protect the Dems and their hold on this seat. You can't let a residency issue ruin a candidacy. Important in this business to make sure it's right from the start. If it is, more power to Mr. Rumler.

At 11/07/2005 1:19 PM, Blogger illinoisone said...

Dope, I believe that Mr. Rumler could have actually counted as an Illinois resident if he worked for a Congressman and lived on Capitol Hill in the DC area.

The Residents of DC can vote for their City Council, and have one Congresswoman, Ms. Holmes-Norton, and can vote for President-- but have no State Senator or State Representative. Therefore, they can actually continue to vote in their home state of residency instead- such as this man may have done.

I have heard it's done quite often all over our country and that these Hill staffers make sure that they vote without fail. Hopefully, there is a record that Mr. Rumler did in fact vote - and hopefully as a Dem if that's what he claims to be.

I sure hope he is not one of those Illinois voters that never pulls a primary ballot - that would be a big disappointment.

At 11/07/2005 2:13 PM, Blogger hud50 said...

Looks like the guy was at the bottom of Steny's operation as a Staff Assistant


Abouchar, Keith Sr Policy Adv
Abrams, Ben Special Asst Alexander, Cory Chf Of Stf Bernards, Stacey Press Secy
Cogorno, Rob Floor Dir
Covey-Brandt, Alexis Ofc Mgr
David, Marta Outreach Dir DeFife, Scott Sr Adv - Policy Dwyer, Stephen Info Tech Dir Mahony, Gina Sr Adv - Policy May, Kathy Exec Asst
Packard, Liz Press/research Asst
Perez, Alejandro Floor Asst Ransom, David Communica Dir Romick, Brian Floor Assistant/Member Services Director
Rumler, Paul Staff Assistant

At 11/07/2005 3:17 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

The Rumler for Senate campaign confirms that Mr. Rumler has been a registered voter in Rock Island County since re-establishing his residency in 2003. He voted in the 2004 primary election and general election via absentee ballot.

It seems that he's indeed a qualified cndidate, though I doubt that will stop some from trying to make an issue of it.

At 11/07/2005 3:55 PM, Blogger Local Dem said...

It's good to hear that he is an eligible candidate.

In response to HUD50's comment about Mr. Rumler being at the bottom of the Whip's staff, I'm not sure I follow you. Can you infer all that from the job title? He certainly was at the bottom of your list, of course, your list was in alphabetical order. Bart Gordon thought enough of him to issue a statement on the record about Mr. Rumler. Must have thought he did a pretty good job. Maybe sometime down the road the Whip himself, Steny Hoyer, will weigh in on this issue.

We need to give this guy a chance here. I think that graduating Summa Cum Laude, working for 3 different legislator's, including the Democratic Whip in DC, holds a good deal of water. It certainly holds as much or more water than - working for your father, and being a "former Downstate Liaison to Illinois Secretary of State Jesse White".

Let's face it; our party could use a little rejuvenation. Sure this is only a State Senate position, but it's got to start somewhere.

I hope that Mr. Rumler runs a positive campaign; perhaps a breath of fresh air is needed. At least we now have the chance to choose our representation. Having two choices is infinitely better than having no choice.

At 11/07/2005 4:45 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Local Dem... ha! Good catch. The fact that the list was in alphabetical order kind of blows Hud50's comment all to hell.

But Hud, it's good to see you around again nonetheless.

At 11/07/2005 10:08 PM, Blogger youngridemocrat said...

Staff Assistant is one step above intern. Let's be real about this.
Quit inflating resumes. Quit inflating three months experience in Washington.

Having said that, I salute that experience. It's a good thing.

But someone who hasn't set foot in Springfield, expect maybe for a college field trip, isn't ready to hit the ground running in the State Senate.

I would be more than willing to back Mr. Rumler for an office that matches his experience ... township trustee, maybe township superviser, you oversee a big budget, make some policy, get your feet wet in the area party, pay some dues like so many others, etc.

Rumler for Township! Maybe Rumler for County Board. I'll go with that. We need new blood in our townships.

At 11/07/2005 10:37 PM, Blogger politicalwind said...

I say let's give this young guy a chance, an open mind. But I also wish he would have an open mind, as well, to learn from those who have been busting their --- for this party for years.

Young people today want to jump to the front of the line, without having paid the dues.

I wish folks like this young Mr. Rumler would take the time to attend Democratic party events before he decides to run. I wish he would spend some time appreciating the big handful of men and women who have paid their dues to the party, and who have helped other Democrats locally and nationally, and, therefore, are ahead of him in line.

Simply put, Mr. Rumler hasn't invested his heart and soul into the Democratic Party here. Perhaps if we give him ten years or so he would be matured and ready to run.

Now, I know, I sound naive, when has fairness entered the political arena. But it should. And folks who have paid their dues should have a chance to run, far before someone who floats back to town from college and decides to run.

It's not going to matter, anyway, because Senator Jacobs will win big. But it would have helped young Rumler to lay the groundwork first. He could build up good will by utilizing that approach. That, in a nutshell, is good politics. Too bad he didn't think about that before running.

At 11/08/2005 6:07 AM, Blogger maybesomeday said...

Wind, many others have jumped in front getting posh seats for no effort -- without paying dues that others more worthy have paid for decades with hard work for others - even running for office on their own steam and proving they are better candidates....than those given free seats at the show in Springfield!

We have had two appointments in the last couple years that fit that bill perfectly.

I would prefer to see no appointments and let everyone earn it the correct way -- and I am not alone in that thought Wind. Strawman or no - at least Mr. Rumler has the guts to put himself out there without a free ticket from his daddy or from the party chairman.

At 11/08/2005 8:17 AM, Blogger hud50 said...

youngridemocrat knows what he's talking about. staff assistant is entry level in virtually all legislative jobs. particularly in Congress.

At 11/08/2005 9:28 AM, Blogger Local Dem said...

A job with the Whip still caries more water than a job gifted from my opinion. He also worked for two other legislators. A pretty diverse resume for a fresh candidate.

At 11/08/2005 10:23 AM, Blogger qcdem said...

As a voter I like to have a choice other than "Jacobs" on the ballot. I am unsure what Rumler is all about, but I applaud his effort. Working for the democratic party in D.C. seems to be good experience. I would think he would get more experience in D.C. than "paying dues" in the Q.C.

We seem to be afraid of change within the party, and that does not look good for progress for our area.

At 11/08/2005 11:01 AM, Blogger A Leader For A Change said...

Paul Rumler seems to be all over the place lately, his press release sitting right next to Jacob's "pry foot from mouth" piece in The Dispatch this weekend and now after his announcement yesterday morning, it seems that all the local news stations have taken a sincere interest in what seems to be a rather viable candidate for the March primary. On top of that, I've noticed at least half a dozen strategically placed bright red "Rumler for Senate" campaign signs plastered throughout town. He certainly knows how to go about getting his name out there to the public.

I must admit, he appears to have quite a head on his shoulders. His educational background and the vast list of accomplishments generated by a quick google search and glance at his website are pretty commendable. And his political experience in DC and Boston might well provide him with a refreshing breadth of knowledge on how to make positive policy changes within the community. Hopefully the media coverage continues so we'll have a chance to gauge whether he's actually a suitable alternative to "Not Rosa Parks".

In direct regards to the recent posts challenging his political experience, they seem to be a bit more extensive than the previous posts have indicated. From my understanding, he spent 3 months in DC working with Bart Gordon followed by more extensive experience with Rep. Steny Hoyer, the Dem Whip. In my opinion these experiences shouldn’t be slighted. I think that quality vs. quantity is the more important issue in determining his suitability. And why should someone’s job title even become a factor?! We all know that your responsibilities within an office aren’t limited to the strict definition of one’s title. There’s significant overlap in responsibility, especially within the political sector and based on Gordon’s sentiments expressed on the House floor, my assumption is that Rumler has probably gone well above and beyond the confines of his title within each of his positions. That being said, it would be reassuring to gain some insight from the Rumler campaign as to how his prior experiences in DC and Boston may have prepared him for the state senate seat back here in IL.

As for “paying your dues” – GET REAL!! First and foremost, has Jacobs really paid any dues to this point?? I think not. As for the handful of tenured individuals whom have paid there dues and “deserve a shot” at the seat, the fact is that none of them appear to have the gumption to take a stand against the current administration and lay themselves on the line for the belief that they can do things any better. Many have aspirations of change, but few actually demonstrate the initiative to take the first step and challenge the actions and strategies of the current administration. I commend Rumler on his willingness to lay himself on the line and take a stand against the Jacobs legacy. With continued media coverage, we’ll soon learn whether or not he has what it takes to impact this area in a way that our current representation has failed.

As far as the residency issue is concerned, I think The Inside Dope is right - he's likely qualified, but that certainly won't stop others from challenging his residency status at some point in the near future. Until then, the issue is really a moot point – I can’t imagine that he hasn’t covered all the bases and spoken with lawyers to solidify the residency issue prior to his decision to run.

What I find most encouraging about this guy from the start is that he doesn't seem to be on the Jacobs attack wagon. I imagine with the substantial amount of media coverage that his announcement has generated in the past few day that he's been asked to comment on Jacob's latest leather-laced gaffe. Yet to my knowledge he's avoided attacking his opponent's misspeak. If anyone finds any Rumler on Rosa quotes, please post! But if this is any indication of Paul Rumler's ability to take the high road and his intent to run a positive campaign, I'm very impressed. He's likely to have had ample opportunities to take a shot at the guy and few in his shoes are actually capable of passing up that opportunity. I've seen enough sleuthing politicians scooping for any dirt they can, and I for one would love to see a campaign that focuses on the issues rather than on mudslinging.

I’m very interested to see what this guy has to say. After watching his announcement on all the nightly news stations, he appears to be a breath of fresh air in a world of political smog. And with the current state of our area, a newcomer with some innovative ideas will at the very least challenge the current administration to earn their respect within the community. The QC has been in a state of stasis for too long, and progress is something that we have perpetually lacked. Hat's off to you Rumler! Show us what you can do!

At 11/08/2005 11:45 AM, Blogger Local Dem said...

Wow, very well put. I agree wholeheartedly. Let's embrace the fact that we now have a choice, and keep our fingers crossed that the race will remain free of mudslinging. Let's choose our Senator based on the issues.

At 11/08/2005 11:48 AM, Blogger JCKDNLS69 said...

Everyone knows this guy is Bolands boy... He used to work for Mike Boland Himself. What a coward you are Boland. If you wanted to take on another Jacobs you should have done it yourself. This Rumler guy looks like he just came out of the womb. Is he 20? Not enough age or life exerience. This guy doesn't stand a chance

At 11/08/2005 1:13 PM, Blogger maybesomeday said...

None of the seasoned experienced Dems will take on Mike Jacobs and risk the wrath of Denny.....and the clobbering that would happen with no money to compare with the riches they enjoy and have ultimate access to from very wealthy Republican and Democrat PACs.

That fact - that Denny can make life difficult for you in politics is legendary in Dem circles.... just look at the Denny Jacobs/Mike Boland relationship. That one will never ever be fixed---and all bridges have been burned over one small political move decades ago.

No one (with a brain) wants to get caught in the crosshairs of the Denny Jacobs manuevers politically and that is why this Rumler has to be a strawman asked to run by the Jacobs family - and I seriously doubt if he has anything to do with Boland. Nice Try jck69 - but you are dead wrong.

Denny has taken the mouthpiece from Mike and from now on Mike will appear mute (if he can that is).

At 11/08/2005 2:05 PM, Blogger JCKDNLS69 said...

Actually...Maybesomeday- you are wrong Check your facts. Rumler is a Boland BOY. Worked for Mike Boland- That is a fact. Check it out... Better luck next time.

At 11/08/2005 2:49 PM, Blogger illinoisone said...

I think he'll beat Mike Jacobs easly!

At 11/08/2005 3:17 PM, Blogger gbushsux said...

Where do you find more about mike jacobs? does he have a website or something like that?

Just trying to get up to speed on all of this.

At 11/08/2005 7:28 PM, Blogger maybesomeday said...

jk69 - quit making stuff up or give me some evidence...

I don't believe your assertions. However, my opion that the guy is a straw man found and set up indirectly by the Jacobs is quite possible here!

Rumler has no chance to win unless Mike keeps shooting off his mouth which is something Usher didn't think was part of the equation when he bragged about the candidate going public right before Mike Jacobs little bus eating episode!

At 11/08/2005 9:50 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Sen. Mike Jacobs has no web site. He does have a page on the Illinois General Assembly site, and it's linked in the sidebar, though it provides little info beyond what committees he serves on and what bills he's sponsored or signed on to.

And these suggestions that Rumler is somehow in Boland's pocket or a stalking horse for Jacobs are pretty flaky at this point.

If it's shown that Rumler worked for Boland as a teenager or something, I hardly think that's evidence that he's Boland's personal surrogate. Even if Boland supports his candidacy, it really doesn't mean much, other than the fact that Boland would rather have someone else as senator than Jacobs. And that can hardly be considered a crime.

As to Jacobs having somehow gotten Rumler to run against him, I only ask, WHY??!

What possible benefit would that give Jacobs?

Are we to think that Jacobs would search around and convince someone to go through the hassle of running only to make it appear as if young Mike has actually won an election for once?

That would be like taking out a loan and depositing the full amount back in the bank and having them transfer the payments each month automatically in order to generate a credit rating.

That to me seems crazy, but then again, I would put nothing past Jacobs.

Jacobs, or his alter-ego "HeadUsher" did indeed spout off a few times in comments here about watching for the announcement of his stalking horse candidate, suggesting that he was going to put someone up to run against him.

But this may have been Jacobs rather bizarre way of trying to muddy the waters in anticipation of Rumler's challenge.

And as bizarre as it is, it apparently succeeded in getting at least one person here to go for it hook, line, and sinker.

Anything's possible, but at this point, I think it's highly improbable that Rumler would allow himself to be used in such a way.

And at any rate, until there's some further information on either of these aspects, it's impossible to assert either of them as true.

At 11/09/2005 10:06 AM, Blogger Local Dem said...

Good insight as usual Dope.

I pose another question. If Rumler were a strawman for Jacobs, wouldn't Denny have insisted that he delay his announcement until the smoke cleared from Mikee's Rosa Parks debacle? I would think so.

I think it's more likely that the Clan got news of the Rumler campaign and decided that the suggestion of a strawman would somehow discredit him.

At 11/10/2005 6:48 PM, Blogger maybesomeday said...

Dope you must not know the Jacobs family very well and be unfamiliar of exactly what they are capable of and to what lengths they will go to get their way in politics....

At 11/10/2005 10:26 PM, Blogger CountyDemo said...

People used to say the same thing about the Kennedy Family!

At 11/11/2005 3:24 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Maybe, Trust me, I have become all too familiar with the lengths to which the Jacobs' will go to get their way politically.

Frankly, it came as a very disgusting shock to me, and still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

But with any luck, that's water over the dam.

But even with that in mind, I still don't see how they would think that the trouble of recruiting someone to run against Mike would be worth whatever supposed benefit it would bring Sen. Mike.

Ever since HeadUsher started spouting off about how Jacobs was going to run a stalking horse candidate I've been baffled as to the simple question, WHY??!!

The only benefit I could see in it for Jacobs is that he might have someone who they could pay off to take a fall in debates, or otherwise make Mike look competent.

Of course, after a win, Mike could then say that he actually had some people vote for him, but getting someone to go through the ordeal of being a candidate just so Jacobs could say he beat someone seems a bit bizarre. (not that Jacobs hasn't shown a flair for that in the past.)

And perhaps the biggest reason why I can't believe your stalking horse theory is the simple fact that Jacobs announced it here, not once, but a few times.

If he really was engaged in such a bizarre little plot, then he wouldn't be boasting about it here. This of course, is based on the assumption that Jacobs wouldn't do something so weird, which unfortunately as we've seen, isn't a given.

I think instead, that Jacobs had gotten wind of Rumler's plans and thought the "stalking horse" bullsh*t was a really clever way to cast doubt over Rumler from the start.

If this is the case, which I believe it is, then by continuing to insist that Rumler is a sham candidate in Jacobs' pocket, you're doing EXACTLY what Jacobs had hoped people would do.
You're falling right square into the trap that Jacobs laid out.

I'd hope no one would do that.

At 11/23/2005 2:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Playing dirty is no way to win the hearts of the voters. Looks like the ole man is dipping into his bucket of tricks to keep his son a float.


Post a Comment

<< Home