October 3, 2006

Jacobs' legislative accomplishments

A recent article and comments here have attempted to suggest that the fact that Sen. Mike Jacobs has been the "main sponsor" of 16 bills as a newbie senator is a remarkable achievment. A commenter who clearly seems to be on Jacobs' payroll has been leaving comments which are absolutely giddy about what a monumental achievement this is. (Try to believe it; they actually compare Jacobs to "Lincoln, Douglas, Straton, Stevenson, Dirkesn, Madigan, Simon and Durbin." Sounds like someone's gargantuan ego is running amok again.)

I have no doubt that Jacobs has been working hard since his appointment, but no one but Springfield types or real political geeks can get too excited about the number 16, nor do they have a clue whether or why it's held out as a reason we should all be really impressed. I think it was our star-struck commenter who said that no other freshman in the history of Illinois had ever sponsored that many bills that passed. Of course, they didn't cite a source for that fact, and as with all such unsupported claims, I'd be skeptical of it's truth.

In politics, the half-truth is an art form, like reporting that you were the valedictorian of your graduating class - but neglecting to mention that your mom was the teacher and the class consisted of 5 people. Sometimes details make a difference.

Yet more times than not, the public is tossed nothing but sweeping generalities which appear to inform, but which tells them nothing. Sen. Huffnpuff or Rep. Bombast are in favor of "improving education" or "strengthening our communities".

Specifics seem to be rare as frog feathers. We're just told something is really great without any attempt to explain why or if it's great, or even why we should care.

So without any further infomation, a senator sponsoring 16 bills is a nearly meaningless factoid to 90% of voters. For starters, what were these bills and what did they achieve for the people of the district and state? How do the bills affect these people's lives?

I did some looking around on the Illinois Legislature website and found this page which contains all the bills for which Jacobs is listed as the main senate sponsor.

Assuming that the 16 bills touted are bills which have actually passed into law, this list shows 3 Jacobs Senate bills passed and 15 House bills which became law originally sponsored by House members Boland, Verschoore, and others, onto which Jacobs then signed on as sponsor on the Senate side. For a bill to become law, it must be passed by both houses and signed by the governor.

This makes a total of 18 bills, a difference for which I don't have an explanation, other than that perhaps two more have passed since the 16 bill figure was mentioned.

Below are listed the three Senate bills and 15 House bills and their abbreviated titles. It includes links to the web pages containing their legislative history and further info, and the short description of the bill provided on the legislative website.

A few abbreviations: VEH=Vehicle MUNI=Municiple CRIM=Criminal CD=Code TECH= a technical change, such as moving a comma or deleting a sentence in the language of a bill. CMS=Central Management Services


1 - SB1666

Amends the Illinois Vehicle Code. Provides that an Illinois resident who is the surviving spouse of a person awarded the Purple Heart by a branch of the armed forces of the United States is eligible to be issued Purple Heart license plates.

2 - SB1826

Amends the Illinois Municipal Code. Provides that an unincorporated territory containing 60 acres or less may be annexed by any municipality that shares a boundary, in whole or in part, with the territory under several circumstances including, if the unincorporated area is bounded by one or more municipalities and a forest preserve district or a park district (now, forest preserve district). Provides that nothing in the Section shall be construed as permitting a municipality to annex territory that is owned by a park district without obtaining the district's express consent as provided in the Park District Code. Amends the Park District Code. Provides that a park district's property shall not be subject to annexation by a municipality without the express consent of the board of park commissioners. Effective immediately.

3 - SB2375

Amends the Illinois Insurance Code. Requires the Division of Insurance of the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation to enforce the provisions of a Section concerning the firemen's continuance privilege, including provisions relating to municipality self-insured benefit plans. Effective immediately.


1 - HB330
PUBLIC BLDG COMMN-CONTINUATION - Patrick Verschoore House Sponsor

Amends the Public Building Commission Act. Deletes a provision that requires any county that created a public building commission by resolution adopted by the county board to submit the resolution to the voters of the county. Makes corresponding changes. Provides that the county board of any county that has created a public building commission for a limited and specific purpose may expand that purpose by resolution.

2 - HB594

Amends the Volunteer Firefighter Job Protection Act to also provide volunteer emergency workers with job protections. Changes the short title of the Act to the Volunteer Emergency Worker Job Protection Act. Provides that the Act does not apply to municipalities of 3,500 or more. Defines volunteer emergency worker. Makes other changes

3 - HB596

Amends the Criminal Code of 1961. Provides that a person who knowingly and falsely represents himself to be fire fighter of any jurisdiction commits a Class 4 felony. Provides that a person who knowingly and falsely represents himself to be a fire fighter of any jurisdiction in attempting or committing a felony commits a Class 3 felony.

4 - HB828

Amends the Mobile Home Local Services Tax Enforcement Act. With respect to the notice for application of judgment and sale of tax-delinquent mobile homes, removes the requirement that the notice include the mobile home park where the mobile home is sited, if known, the model year of the home, and the square footage of the home. Provides that the vehicle identification number of the mobile home must be listed only if known. Effective immediately.

5 - HB829

Amends the Property Tax Code and the Mobile Home Local Services Tax Enforcement Act. Provides that any moneys accumulated in the special fund for the payment of interest by the county treasurer in excess of $100,000 (now, $500,000) must be paid each year prior to the commencement of the annual tax sale, first to satisfy any existing unpaid judgments, and any funds remaining thereafter must be paid to the general fund of the county. Effective immediately.

6 - HB1182
VEH CD-ATV-DNR RULEMAKING Patrick Vershoore House Sponsor

Amends the Illinois Vehicle Code. Provides that the Department of Natural Resources may (rather than shall) adopt administrative rules regarding the operation of all-terrain vehicles and off-highway motorcycles.

7 - HB1339
BOAT & SNOWMOBILE SAFETY Patrick Verschoore House sponsor

Amends the Snowmobile Registration and Safety Act and the Boat Registration and Safety Act. Provides that a person who has not been previously convicted of or assigned supervision for operating a snowmobile or watercraft under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or intoxicating compounds (OUI), and has not had his or her operating privileges suspended under the applicable provision, is a first offender regarding the applicable provision. Provides that a forfeiture of bail to secure a court appearance or a failure to appear for trial is equivalent to a conviction. Provides that a person may not operate a snowmobile or watercraft while his or her privilege to do so has been revoked in this State, by another State, by a federal agency, or by a province of Canada. Provides that the Department of Natural Resources shall suspend for one year the watercraft operating privileges of any person convicted of misdemeanor OUI under a local ordinance or federal law and for 3 years the privileges of anyone convicted of felony OUI or reckless homicide. Requires the operator of a vessel to report an accident involving any injury requiring treatment beyond first aid (rather than any injury resulting in the victim's incapacitation for a period of 72 hours). Requires reporting of a watercraft accident resulting in $2,000 or more in property damage or complete loss of a vessel (rather than reporting of any accident resulting in $500 or more in property damage).

8 - HB1387
VEH CD-MOTOR CARRIER RULES Kevin McCarthy House sponsor

Amends the Illinois Vehicle Code. Adopts federal motor carrier safety regulations regarding: drug, alcohol, and controlled substances testing; training requirements; financial responsibility; and transportation of hazardous materials. Provides that violators of motor carrier safety regulations are subject to a civil penalty prescribed by federal regulations (rather than a civil penalty of no more than $5,000). Effective immediately.
Amends the Illinois Vehicle Code. Provides that the driver of any bus that meets specified requirements for a school bus must, in addition to following all other required procedures, turn off all noise producing accessories before crossing a railroad track or tracks. Provides that any school bus manufactured on or after January 1, 2006 must be equipped with a noise suppression switch capable of turning off noise producing accessories.

9 - HB1402
FIREMENS DISCIPLINARY ACT Michael K. Smith House sponsor

Amends the Firemen's Disciplinary Act. With respect to certain periods of suspension, changes references to "24 duty hours" (now, "72 hours"). Effective immediately.

10 - HB1919
GAMING-TECH Patrick Verschoore House sponsor

Amends the Riverboat Gambling Act. Makes a technical change in a Section concerning the annual report of the Board.

House Amendment No. 1
Deletes reference to:
230 ILCS 10/16
Adds reference to:
230 ILCS 10/7 from Ch. 120, par. 2407

Replaces everything after the enacting clause. Amends the Riverboat Gambling Act. Provides that the 3 licenses authorizing riverboat gambling on the Mississippi River, subject to approval by the municipality in which the riverboat was docked on August 7, 2003 and with Illinois Gaming Board approval, be authorized to relocate to a new location. Effective immediately.

11 - HB3258

Amends the Illinois Pension Code. Makes a technical change in a Section concerning downstate teachers.

Replaces everything after the enacting clause. Amends the Downstate Teacher Article of the Illinois Pension Code. Provides that an active teacher member of the Board of Trustees who ceases teaching may serve out the remainder of his or her term. Provides that a vacancy occurring in the elective membership of the board shall be filled by a qualified person selected by the remaining elected members of the board, rather than by the board as a whole. Effective immediately.

12 - HB3622

Repeals the Personnel Radiation Monitoring Act. Effective immediately.

13 - HB3770
CMS EFFICIENCY REVOLVING FUND Daniel V. Beiser House sponsor

Amends the Department of Central Management Services Law of the Civil Administrative Code of Illinois. With respect to savings realized from the implementation of State agency business processing efficiency initiatives, provides that savings realized by the Department of Transportation shall be deposited into the Construction Fund, rather than the Efficiency Initiatives Revolving Fund. Effective immediately.

Fiscal Note (Central Management Services)
The Department of Central Management Services anticipates a significant impact from this bill, in the form of decreased revenues. Between FY04 and what is projected for FY06, payments from the Illinois Department of Transportation range from $21 million in FY04 to a projected amount of $4.4 million in FY06.

House Amendment No. 1
Changes the reference from the Construction Fund to the State Construction Account Fund.

14 - HB4298
CRIM CD-CHILD SEX OFFENDER Patrick Verschoore House sponsor

Amends the Criminal Code of 1961. Increases from within 500 feet to within 2,000 feet the distance from which a child sex offender may not loiter near a school or public park. Increases from within 500 feet to within 2,000 feet the distance from which a child sex offender may not reside near a school, playground, or a facility providing programs or services exclusively directed toward persons under 18 years of age or from a victim under 21 years of age.

Deletes everything after the enacting clause. Creates the Interstate Sex Offender Task Force Act. Provides that the Task Force shall consist of members representing the Illinois Department of Corrections, the Illinois State Police, the Office of the Illinois Attorney General, statewide sexual assault victim service providers, and such other criminal justice and law enforcement entities and organizations as deemed appropriate by the Illinois State Police. Provides that the Task Force shall examine: (1) the systems of communication between states regarding the interstate movement of registered sex offenders; (2) The laws of Illinois and its border states that restrict and affect where convicted or registered sex offenders may reside; (3) the extent to which law enforcement resources are affected by residency restrictions; and (4) the impact of residency restrictions on the parole, mandatory supervised release, and probation systems in Illinois. Provides that the Task Farce shall report its findings and recommendations to the Governor, the Attorney General, and the General Assembly no later than January 1, 2007. Effective immediately.

Provides that the Illinois Department of Corrections shall provide staff and administrative support services to the Task Force. Corrects a spelling error.

Deletes everything after the enacting clause. Amends the Sex Offender Management Board Act. Provides that the Sex Offender Management Board shall examine: the systems of communication between states regarding the interstate movement of registered sex offenders; the laws of Illinois and its border states restricting the residence of convicted or registered sex offenders, including but not limited to those enacted by the States of Iowa and Missouri; the extent to which State and local law enforcement resources are affected by these residency restrictions; the impact of residency restrictions for convicted or registered sex offenders on activities of, and on the resources required by, both county probation departments and the Illinois Department of Corrections. Provides that the Board shall report its findings and recommendations to the Governor and the General Assembly no later than January 1, 2008. Effective immediately.

Deletes everything after the enacting clause. Reinserts the provisions of the engrossed bill with these changes: (1) changes the membership in the Task Force to the Director of the Illinois Department of Corrections (or the Director's designee) who shall act as the Chair of the Task Force, the Director of the Illinois Department of State Police (or the Director's designee), the Attorney General (or the Attorney General's designee), one member of the General Assembly appointed by each of the following: the President of the Senate, the Minority Leader of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the Minority Leader of the House of Representatives; together with one member designated by the Illinois State's Attorneys Association, one member designated by the Illinois Association of the Chiefs of Police, one member designated by the Illinois Sheriffs' Association, and any additional members the Chair of the Task Force may designate; (2) provides that members of the Task Force shall serve without compensation, but may be reimbursed for actual expenses as the discretion of the Director of the Illinois Department of Corrections from funds appropriated for that purpose; (3) provides that the Task Force shall report its findings and recommendations to the Governor, the Attorney General, and the General Assembly no later than January 1, 2008 (rather than January 1, 2007); and (4) corrects a typing error. Effective immediately.

LINE OF DUTY-ELIGIBLE PARENT Patrick Vershoore House sponsor

Amends provisions regarding the payment of compensation under the Line of Duty Compensation Act. Provides that, in the case of a person killed in the line of duty who was born out of wedlock and was not an adoptive child at the time of the person's death, a person shall be deemed to be a parent of the person killed in the line of duty only if that person would be an eligible parent of the person killed in the line of duty under specified criteria in the Probate Act of 1975. Applies to a pending claim if compensation was not paid before the effective date of the amendatory Act. Effective immediately.

House Amendment No. 1
Requires a person to be an eligible parent as defined in the Probate Act of 1975 (rather than being an eligible parent under specified criteria in the Probate Act of 1975). Applies to a pending claim if compensation was not paid "to the claimant of the pending claim" (rather than "to the party") before the effective date of the amendatory Act.


At 10/04/2006 8:06 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is nice to se Mr. Jacobs working with his fellow Reprsentatives. Even with Bolands negativity twords Jacobs over Bolands family grudge shows that Jacobs is working for his community and not against Boland.
Nice job Senator Jacobs.

At 10/04/2006 9:59 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Wow... nice job indeed. What a portrait in courage and leadership to not carry on a ridiculous feud at least in public. A truly great accomplishment.

I'm sure all are happy to see any signs that these two are cooperating at least professionally and that's to both of their credit.

But I find it laughably ironic that while lauding this cooperation, people still insist on including all sorts of crap making Jacobs out as the hero and Boland the zero.

That sure helps calm the waters.

Make nice in public and stab the hell out of them on the blogs?

And I'd also ask, WHAT negativity has Boland shown towards Jacobs?

If you have no examples, don't make the charge.

I've gotten dozens of ridiculously pro-Jacobs comments which were incredibly negative towards Boland without any factual basis at all, but instead basic, low-brow smear attempts and transparent attempts to try to puff up Jacobs while dropping all sorts of reckless smears against Boland.

I've gotten hundreds of these goofy comments bashing Boland and making Jacobs out to be the second coming for simply showing up, but they're so juvenile and obviously manufacturered that I rarely post them.

I think I could count the comments I've gotten critical of Jacobs and promoting Boland in the past year on the fingers of one hand.

At 10/04/2006 12:05 PM, Anonymous RabbitEars said...

Jacobs gets results, Boland holds press conferences.

That's why Jacobs is cruising towards re-election, and Boland is in panic.

Generally Sen. Mike Jacobs' core supporters are better educated and more affluent than Boland's. Consequently, Jacobs supporters are much more interested in current affairs and have access to computers.

By the way, I saw Rep. Boland on television last night. He was standing in front of some machine guns and and some wild looking dude was prasing Boland for his plan to arm taxpayers. I noticed that YOU (the Dope) haven't mentioned a single word about Boland's desire to arm citizens with hidden firearms, but found time to devote a whole blog on Jacobs. What gives? Does this show a personal biase on your part towards Sen. Mike Jacobs?

As well, I have never seen you make any false allegations against Boland. What gives? What is that?

As far as Boland needing help to be a "Zero," I would say, "NO." Boland has done that all by himself! Thanks for the credit, but we truely don't desever it!

At 10/04/2006 5:53 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...


First, thanks for the belly laugh.

Boland holds press conferences?

HA! You couldn't turn on the damn TV without seeing Jacobs in front of a camera. He's show up for the opening of a can of tuna, for God's sake.

Everyone plainly sees that Jacobs is far more "guilty", if that's the word, of having press conferences and injecting himself into everything possible.

I barely see Boland in the press at all by comparison.

And we go again. The Children's Crusade is still at it.

I get so tired of doing so, but once again, I defy rabbit ears or anyone else to point to any time I've EVER written any false allegations about Jacobs.

I've written about Jacobs has been true, and you know it as well as everyone else.

As a matter of fact, I'm not aware of any "allegations" that I've made that weren't simply repeating what Jacobs himself had either said or done and which was reported in the press or put down in black and white in state documents.

So really, I don't understand why you keep trying to flog the lie that there's somehow been false allegations against Jacobs or anyone else made here by myself.

Get over it, OK.

Now, as to why I've never gotten on Boland for his stance on concealed carry, it's really quite simple.

I have no idea what his views are. I've never seen him quoted and I've never seen the issue mentioned in any literature.

He very well may support concealed carry, and if that's the case, I'd be equally disappointed.

But I don't know that to be the case, and I still don't, as I'd be a fool to take your word for anything based on past experience.

Jacobs' support for further endangering public safety was clearly spelled out in an article in the D/A. That's probably why I wrote about it.

I don't know Boland's position, that's probably why I didn't write about him.

Simple, really.

And as far as credit goes, I'd say you "desever" credit for refusing to stop beating a dead horse.

At 10/04/2006 10:05 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I read through all these bills and their descriptions and am left wondering what the jacobs people are making this seem like such a great thing for.

there's nothing there that does much at all. A bunch of stuff that affects business, little dinky stuff.

First he thinks he's Rosa Parks, now he thinks he's Lincoln?

Jacobs needs a check-up from the neck up.
He's a legend in his own mind.

At 10/05/2006 7:02 AM, Blogger rope-a-dope said...

Here's how the fued started TID, unfortunately I've been around long enough to have seen most of it.

In the '70's Denny Jacobs endorsed a Republican against Mike Boland for Township Supervisor.

A few elections later Boland and Jacobs both tried for State Senate, and Denny won by a farily slim margin.

The Jacob's clan has insisted ever since that Boland endorsed the Republican who was Jacob's opponent, but they are projecting their own actions onto Boland in an effort to distort the truth.

Yes it's true that Boland did attend a fundraiser for Jacob's Republican opponent, but Boland stopped far short of endorsing the Republican.

So to set the record straight, Denny Jacobs really did endorse a Republican against Boland, but Boland stopped short of responding in kind a few elections later.

Let the truth be told (there are newsclips to back all this up should anyone care to do the digging) . . . and tell folks you heard it here at the Inside Dope! ;)

At 10/05/2006 2:46 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Thank you for that dispassionate and objective narration of the history involved with this.
I was aware of it, but it is important to stick to the facts, at least for those who actually care about it anymore.

As in most feuds, it's essentially a slight or misunderstanding where one party simply can't let go of it and instead chooses to keep it nice and fresh instead of growing up and moving on. They cling to the anger far past when it should have been forgotten, and the other side then responds to attack, which spurs more attack, etc. etc. ad nauseum.

The whole thing is unfortunate, and I do hope that it's near an end. But comments here are discouraging, as they show that for at least some, it's alive and well.

I'm sure some will differ slightly with your account, but I'm certain that it's correct on most points.

There's been attempts in the past to distort the history of this, and it's good to hear the truth.

This will likely cause some to want to write "But Boland did this!" and "Jacobs did that!" but those are only skirmishes along the way.

So thanks again for that Rope. I wish we'd have more people just telling the facts without spin so people could views things without so distortion from one side or the other.

At 10/05/2006 2:53 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am divided, on one front, we had a Congressman (in Evans) that did not sponsor this many bills in a 24-year career, on the other front, if this is what he tried to get through in his first year...what does this say about his future with big-government (and a growing government)?

At 10/05/2006 2:59 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So far it seems the Jacobites are trying to tell us that Jacobs is really great for getting his name on several bills, none that are particularly notable or major, the fact that he's ridden a fat carp to some media coverage, and that he's raised a lot of money for himself.

Is this why Mr. & Mrs. 36th District should feel he's doing a good job for them?

Sounds like they're really excited because they think Jacobs is doing a good job for himself instead.

At 10/06/2006 6:46 AM, Blogger A_A_D said...

What a funny race TID.

Jacob's and his family run as Democrats, but vote more like moderate Republicans. As has been noted on your blog, the Jacob's family has even endorsed Republican candidates.

Beals' family is composed of Democrats. They are a regular working class bunch of people with good hearts.

So we have a Republican running as a Democrat, and a Democrat running as a Republican! It's no wonder some people think there's really no difference from one party to the next.

Perhaps I've just been around politics too long, or perhaps I'm getting extremely cynical, but it appears to me that we've reached an all time low in the quality of candidates.

At the moment I am longing terribly, desperately, for a legitimate third party.

At 10/06/2006 7:33 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Very interesting obvervation. Thanks, and welcome to TID

At 10/06/2006 7:41 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Denny Jacobs never endorsed a Republican.
Why are you people smearing Denny with these untrue accusations.

At 10/06/2006 8:14 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Here we go, just as predicted. The alternate reality crowd appears.

Is it the word "endorse" that isn't right? Would "support" be more accurate? Is that difference really a difference?

At 10/06/2006 1:53 PM, Anonymous AceDetective said...

The cool thing about facts is that they don't lie.

I hold in my hand a copy of the now infamous, "Democratic race losers will back Republican" article ptinted in the D/A back in 1986.

The feature story written by former Dispatch Writer Jerry Falstom reads, "Their primary contest for the Democratic nomination for the 36th District senate Seat ended seven weeks ago, but Denny Jacob and Mike Boland contiune to fued - this time OVER BOLAND'S DECISION TO BACK JACOBS'S REPUBLICAN OPPONET IN NOVEMBER."

Boland, a longtime East Moline Democrat, joined area Republicans at a fundraise Tuesday night for Harold "Bud" Ford.

Boland and Ford shook hands and spoke warmly after Go. Thonmpson, the featured guest at Ford's fundraier departed.

Ford said he welcomes Boland to his camp.

'I'm definitely not supporting Denny Jacobs," said Boland who lost to Jacobs 6,310 TO 5,303 March 18.

Boland said...he will actively campaign for Ford.

The story features glossy photos of Harold "Bud" Ford and a younger thinner Mike Boland.

I found no fact that Senator Denny Jacobs ever endorsing a Republican candidate for office.

At 10/06/2006 2:19 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Jacobs family are as good, decent, and kind a group as you will ever meet. To imply differently is quite a stretch.

At 10/06/2006 4:42 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Denny Jacobs is not in the public eye or under their scrutiny anymore. He's a private citizen.

At 10/06/2006 7:02 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I never realized that Denny jacobs beat Mike Boland so badly. You had said that it was a close race and these numbers if true are not close. A landslide no less. This seams to clear things up quite a bit.

At 10/06/2006 7:25 PM, Blogger A_A_D said...

Doesn't Denny still work as some kind of lobbyist?

And didn't he have his son appointed to hold his seat rather than let his son face an open seat without any of the advanteges of incumbency?

When Mike Madigan came to broker peace between Mike Boland and Mike Jacobs, wasn't Denny Jacob's sitting at Madigan's side along with John G.

The Jacob's family styling themselves as the "Kennedy's of Rock Island County" is what makes them all continued topics of conversation.

At 10/07/2006 1:17 AM, Anonymous McGurk said...

What exactly does it "clear up", other than there are still people who can't resist trying to rub salt in old wounds?
And as far as Boland supporting Denny's republican opponent, was this round 1, round 5, or round 8 in this feud. Seems like Boland felt that Jacobs had done something pretty dirty in his win for him to support is opponent.
So isd this where we're supposed to believe that it all started, Denny beat Boland? Seems kind of hard to believe.

At 10/07/2006 11:39 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is why it was written in the capital fax that Boland doesn't get along with others in springfield and that his nickname from them is squish.
He has this problem with everyone.

At 10/08/2006 7:20 AM, Blogger A_A_D said...

Well ANON 7/10/06 11:39 that one is actually pretty simple to answer.

Rich Miller (who writes CapitolFAX) is an old school chum of Mike Jacobs and drinking buddy of Denny's as well. He's heard their side of the feud over and over again but he really doesn't know Boland for squat.

Rich himself also tends to lean a bit to the Right, if you ask me. He's friends with George Ryan and family, and Rich's never been a fan of progressive Dems like Boland.

I honestly think Boland would be much better liked (and remembered) had not the Jacob's family spent so very much of their time trying to soil and smear his reputation.

As close as Rumler got to Jacob's with no name recognition or money, Mike Boland's biggest regret right now is probably his choice to listen to Mike Madigan.

With Denny retired and Mike Jacob's and Joe Moreno both defeated, it would have been an end to the family "dynasty" who styles themselves as the "Kennedy's of Rock Island County",

At 10/08/2006 12:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

More like the Corleones judging by their tactics.

At 10/08/2006 10:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Arthur Alexander Deco, Joe Moreno is no blood relation to the Jacob's. He was not even supported by his own sister-in-law(Jacobs Blood). Mike Jacobs won his primary and he would have beaten Boland as well. Boland got three votes for congress and will beat a little known name by less than Jacobs won his primary, where battles are usually run in these parts.

The only thing that you got right here is that Madigan runs Boland. He is spending tons of money for Boland. He has eight staffers here working full time for Boland. This is a huge undertaking and it is a sign as to the political trouble that Boland is in. Boland does what the Chicago boss says and that is bad for our area.

At 10/08/2006 10:29 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is Denny Jacobs going to endorse Boland's opponent?

At 10/09/2006 9:03 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think that Denny Jacobs will stay out of Bolands race as he has always done. Boland is a good legislator for this are. The above commentor states that Boland is run by Madigan. So what! Haring will be Run by the Chicago Republicans and that is even worse for our area. Boland should win in a comfertable margin and then think about his future. He should run state wide like he has always wanted to do.

At 10/09/2006 6:44 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

anon 22:29....thats a boland move..nice try tho!~

At 10/10/2006 6:09 PM, Blogger A_A_D said...

1977 Election for South Moline Township Supervisor was when I remember Denny supporting a Republican against Mike Boland.

"Truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it and ignorance may deride it, but, in the end, there it is." - Sir Winston Churchill

At 10/10/2006 6:37 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

AAD... thanks for that.

As I said, this boils down to a finger-pointing contest, but it's instructive to know what "round" of the feud you're talking about.

Someone might point out something one side did, as they've done against Boland above, but without the context of what happened before, it's largely meaningless.

I guess the ultimate goal would be finding out who stepped on the other's toes first, but that might be pretty tough to figure out.

And what a great quote.

Having been subject constantly to people pissing and moaning and attacking me viciously for reporting facts that they would have rather wasn't reported, and then being accused of being a horrible person and called every sort of vile name as if I'd done some terrible wrong, as if they actually think telling the truth is lying, I can relate to Churchill's observation.

It's pretty amazing, really. Like "A Few Good Men", some local politicians and their flunkies "Can't handle the truth."

Always puts me in mind of the Truman reply when people would tell him to "Give 'em hell, Harry!"

He said he just told the Republicans the truth and they THOUGHT it was hell.

I think I'll steal the quote to put on the masthead for a while.

At 10/11/2006 9:48 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Arthur Alexander Deco said... , now we are taking your word for it. Some anon that doesn't like the Jacobs family.
AceDetective said...
The cool thing about facts is that they don't lie.
Acedetective gave us this, "I hold in my hand a copy of the now infamous, "Democratic race losers will back Republican" article ptinted in the D/A back in 1986."
This is not made up see the difference TID. This is something from the papers with quotes. The D/A has more validity than Arthur Alexander Deco. So don't call it a finger pointing contest when on is made up and the other is proof. Jacobs is and was to smart to cross party lines Dope. Boland wasn't.

At 10/11/2006 10:08 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Don't argue with me about this silly crap. Frankly, I don't know where it started or by who, and I really, truly, don't care.

But the fact remains that you have supposed proof of one incident. I never said it wasn't true.

I have no idea if it is or not.

But as I pointed out eariler, which apparently went over your head, citing your one incident does not explain what may have happened before that point.

Is that episode 4 of the feud? episode 1? Episode 7? Without any context, it doesn't prove anything.

AAD may indeed be absolutely correct.

And there may have been some other little incident before that, and before THAT, and so on ad nauseum.

And also, saying you're holding an article in your hand is impressive, but hardly proof. It might indeed be in the paper's archives, but I'll just take your word for it, as I don't care to bother looking around for it.

Why? Because, as I said, it's just one incident. That doesn't mean it was the first "shot fired" in this stupid feud. And beyond that, I really don't care who did what first. I doubt anyone can prove what happened conclusively and I'd imagine there's enough blame to go around. Frankly, I don't care.

The whole thing is ridiculous and I refuse to argue or be involved in trying to point fingers or assign blame.

If you want to dispute AAD, that's your choice. I have no position in it. If you want to carry this on, do it without me.

At 10/11/2006 2:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great Dope, I am glad that you, like Senator Mike Jacobs, has decided to put the past behind you. You two are very big to be able to do it. The whole point before this AAD started in was that Sen.Jacobs had taken legislation that Boland had pushed through the house and took the ball and ran it across the Senate to help Boland get these bills passed. I believe that Jacobs has tried to get past this fued and am glad that you have tried to get past it also. I am a democrat and to see this kind of crapp from AAD only hurts Boland when he is in a vulnerable position. It makes me wonder who's side he is on anyway.

At 10/11/2006 4:32 PM, Blogger A_A_D said...

"Self be the only prison that can ever bind the soul;
Truth is the only angel that can bid the gates unroll;"
- Van Dyke

At 10/11/2006 4:42 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

-- an unnamed aide to George W. Bush to reporter Ron Suskind.


At 10/12/2006 11:21 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Arthur Alexander Deco, I am glad that you have come clean and I hope that this will get you out of that prison that the truth has been barricading you inside of youself. The facts don't lie and to admit that Boland was the only Democrat that endorsed, or supported or whatever you want to call it a republican is big of you. The truth will set you free. Love Angel!!

At 10/13/2006 7:53 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you Dope for setting the record straight!

At 10/13/2006 9:43 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Anon above, can I assume you're referring to listing Jacobs actual legislative accomplishments?

I think that's relevant. I should do it for all local politicians, but since someone was intent on praising Jacobs for the number of bills he sponsored, I figured it was pretty important to know just what it was these bills were.

Now you know.

At 10/13/2006 11:12 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great Dope. It was especially good to see Mike Jacobs working with Rep. Mike Boland. It is nice to see that he is more about helping the area then carrying on a fued.

At 10/13/2006 11:34 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Interesting (but typical) that you try to give Jacobs all the credit for something which required the cooperation of Boland as well.

Ah well, some things don't change.

At 10/13/2006 1:25 PM, Anonymous INSIDEBOLANDSTUFF said...

Once again you fail to underatand how the process works.

For the record, if Boland passes a bill through the Illinois House, any sitting Senator can pick-up the bill (sponsor)and advance it through the Illinois Senate. Contrary to your assertion, the action takes no cooperation at all from the House memeber (in this case Boland).

The relevant portion of the equation is Sen. Jacobs picked-up Rep. Boland's bills and moved them through the legisltive process and onto the Governor's desk. Now the question becomes what bills, if any of Jacobs, did Boland pick-up and move to the Governor's desk? That information will tell you everything you need to know about who helped who and tried to end the fued.

Boland's misguided action after the Speaker came to Rock Island and told him what to do, have caused Boland serious politcal problems in his natural base (Democrats). Note Jacobs is "safe" while Boland's is in "serious politcal trouble."

The day before the primary election, Boland felt compelled to help his old staff member (Rumler)and break the truce. Now the shoe is on the other foot and the question becomes will Jacobs move to non-endorse Boland, or will he help carry Boland him over the goal line.

If I was Madigan, this is a question I would ponder. As always, time will provide the answer!

The only one to blame for Boland's current politcal problem is Mike Boland. If Boland would do the job we hired him to do and keep his nose out of everyone else business, he wouldn't be in the trouble he is in. Heck, his districtct is a "SAFE" District. Only Boland's personal problems have made it "COMPETETIVE."

It's time for Madigan to quit bailing Boland out, or for Boland to get with the program. Proppoing Boland up with campaign cash, only makes Boland weaker!


For every politcal action there is generally equal and corresponding reaction.

At 10/13/2006 7:06 PM, Blogger A_A_D said...

Don't twist my words ANON 12/10/06 23:21 - I admitted no such thing.

I have no personal interest in forwarding feuds, but I do have an accurate memory. I was once a member of MENSA, so you aren't dealing with a "mental midget".

I'm really just a simple student of history at heart, and I have had Representative Boland as a teacher. I actually see him as an inspiration, he grew up poor and may very well be one of the last of his kind of politicians.

I would, however, prefer to say nothing rather than have my words constantly misinterpreted and deliberately misconstrued.

TID - Can you just wake me up when the election's over??? This old cross eyed bear just wants to hibernate until all the vile nastiness is over!

At 10/13/2006 9:39 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Anon 13:25

If you're talking to me, my observation has nothing to do with not understanding the process.

Are you expecting people to believe that Jacobs just "picks up" Boland's bills in the senate without a word to Boland?

That's kind of weird and doesn't sound like they're working together too well. But that's what you're trying to suggest.

I think it's more likely that they do talk to each other on such matters and Boland coordinates his bills with Jacobs.

You can still insist on dumping on Boland and dismissing every and anything he does or doesn't do, while simultaneously puffing Jacobs, but every time you do so it only is visible evidence that the feud is alive and well.

At 10/13/2006 10:53 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...


A few important facts:

1. There are a few, and very few, maybe two at most, commenters here who lie like most people breath. Oddly enough, the only thing they have in common is a rabid support of Sen. Jacobs and a freakishly thin skin about anything remotely negative about the senator, especially if it's true.
There are also some others who enjoy taking cheap shots, but who don't provide anything to back up their silly comments.

2. These types are not only capable of twisting and warping the truth until it's unrecognizable, they also are quick to smear and twist people's words to try to attack them. It's nearly impossible to debate or argue with these types because they simply won't stick to facts or what you actually wrote.

They seem to be capable of nothing else, as it's always what they do. It's like they've lied for so long that the truth and reality have long ago become unimportant to them, and honesty is a laughable notion.

3. I've had to deal with these sorts of "people" for over a year, and it's disgusting and frustrating in the extreme, trust me. Primarily because it often seems that I'm the only person who actually fights back or objects to them and their methods.

BUT... these goons rely on intimidation. It's one thing they thrive on. They'd be very happy if their harassment served to chase off anyone who would dare speak ill of their guy or anything he does, and allow them to continually bash his perceived enemies, often unfairly, and praise Jacobs as if he's the second coming to the point where it makes people's head's hurt.

(raising issues against an opponent or supporting a candidate isn't wrong of course, but if you blast past the limits of honesty and believability when you do so, it's tiresome at best and safely falls into the BS catagory.)

These more agressive commenters have already turned off a number of my best and brightest commenters, and for that I greatly resent their habit of lies and dishonest "debate".

So while I certainly empathize with you and others who have the reasonable expectation that they could talk "straight" here without having goons attack them with a vengence, (imagine what it's been like dealing with them for over a year.) I would urge you and others to keep one thing in mind.

If you and other rational readers choose to keep your views to yourself due to being turned off by these people, or the fear that you may get attacked, then you will be allowing them to be the prevailing voice. By staying silent, you will have essentially allowed them to hi-jack the blog and set a very low standard.

I don't want that to happen, and have done all I could to avoid it, but I am just one person and frankly, I get VERY tired of trying to keep them honest and both arguing their points and pointing out their dishonesty.

If you agree with me or my views, there's nothing that says you can't add to them.

If reasonable people such as yourself and many others would simply participate MORE, rather than less, these cretins would be the ones who are overrun, which obviously would be a much better outcome.

To maybe overstate the case, for bad folks to prevail it requires good folks to do nothing.

People who enjoy a blog need to have a sense of ownership and community and actively participate to protect the blog and enforce basic rules to create a pleasant and insteresting place to debate, argue, and share some laughs.

When someone steps out of line, the regulars need to let them know and if they persist, run them off.

But again, honest, reasonable, and rational people simply have to jump in and participate, and perhaps even more importantly, speak up and call B.S. on these people.

If enough people would at the least speak up against people who make reckless and goofy comments, they'd be driven off and it would be known that that sort of nonsense is not appreciated in these parts.

Rational readers have a stake in determining what this place is like. I can't stress that enough.

I try to fight back and set some minimum standards, but it's NOT supposed to be me against all comers and that's NOT what I either want or intended it to be.

The more voices heard here the better, and there's no rule that you can only comment if you disagree with someone. If you agree with someone, add your own comment, even if it's just to say, "I agree".

If enough readers of good will would simply participate.... I could see the day where I could step back and simply let the readers police and enjoy their own place here.

If any readers are put off by the more unpleasant commenters here (even me on occasion) please don't react by NOT participating. Rather add your own views and thoughts.

As long as they're honest, stick to established facts, and contribute something to the discussion, it doesn't matter what your views or politics are. Say what you want, but simply repeating something you heard Rush Limbaugh said isn't really that interesting or credible.

Participating is free, relatively painless, and even if people may disagree with you and your views might get disagreed with from time to time, it's nothing to worry about. It's just the nature of free discussion.

I know there's many intelligent, witty, and rational people out there, as many of them particpate already. (thanks!)

All I'd wish is that MORE honest, reasonable, rational, bright and witty folks would join in, speak up, and make themselves known here and by doing so, prove that there's more smart people out there than it may appear, that they outnumber blowhards, and that a lively and interesting blog community is possible.... even around here!

I may be trippin', but that's always been my wish and my goal.

If you have any ideas or suggestions as to how that could better be achieved, by all means send an e-mail and share it with me.

End of sermon. We now return to you regular broadcasting


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home