Illinois: The Most Corrupt State in the USA.

Manic Moran

Not my words, that of the US Attorney after they arrested the Governor today.

I mentioned in another thread that Governor Blagojevich was in trouble, and even more unpopular than Bush. Yesterday, amongst his travails, he announced he had nothing to hide, and he invited people "Go ahead, tape my calls if you like, I've nothing to hide"

Seems, however, the FBI were already doing just that and decided they had enough evidence to make an arrest.

Where's that 'Ha-Ha!' Nelson picture gone?

NTM

Otacon

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not my words, that of the US Attorney after they arrested the Governor today.

I mentioned in another thread that Governor Blagojevich was in trouble, and even more unpopular than Bush. Yesterday, amongst his travails, he announced he had nothing to hide, and he invited people "Go ahead, tape my calls if you like, I've nothing to hide"

Seems, however, the FBI were already doing just that and decided they had enough evidence to make an arrest.

Where's that 'Ha-Ha!' Nelson picture gone?

NTM

Was watching this on BBC News yesterday. Found it funny alright that he called on people to tap his phones and they were already doing it.

One thing though, how does the US Attorney come to the conclusion that Illinois is the most corrupt state after, afaik, one corrupt person? Seems a bit extreme no? Though now I am asking myself, where would be more corrupt?

Cronus333

He is the fourth governor to be arrested in the recent past for corruption. Blagojevich succeeded a governor arrested for corruption!

In addition Chicago is the only city in America which still has a party machine working in it -in this case the Daley Machine.

Nodin

Otacon wrote: »

Was watching this on BBC News yesterday. Found it funny alright that he called on people to tap his phones and they were already doing it.

One thing though, how does the US Attorney come to the conclusion that Illinois is the most corrupt state after, afaik, one corrupt person? Seems a bit extreme no? Though now I am asking myself, where would be more corrupt?

Guardian wrote:

Over the last 30 years, at least three governors, a mayor, and a few dozen local government officials in Chicago have been convicted of criminal offences. In 1994-2004, a total of 469 Illinois politicians were found guilty of corruption - more than any other region except central California and south Florida, Slate magazine reported. Blagejovich's Republican predecessor, George Ryan, pictured, is serving a six-year sentence for racketeering, fraud, bribery and money laundering. Political scientists attribute the corruption to machine politics and one-party rule in Chicago

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/10/illinois-governor-rod-blagojevich-bribes

Interesting to note that a steady stream of arrests and convictions deters them not at all.

Otacon

Forgive my ignorance

Nodin

Otacon wrote: »

Forgive my ignorance

Not at all. If he said "Chicago" out straight it would have been more obvious. And I only happen to recognise it because of reading up on Richard Daley and the irish connection there a while back. Its such a vast country the cities alone are almost worlds unto themselves. If anything its a reminder of how we're a mere drop of piddle in the great piss bucket of humanity.

Manic Moran

Here's the complaint. (warning, near 80 pages of evidence!)

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/iln/pr/chicago/2008/pr1209_01a.pdf

NTM

Black Swan

With all the corruption talk, I would have thought that the largest city (Chicago) in the so called "most corrupt state in the USA" would have also made the most dangerous list, but apparently not. But you still won't catch me alone riding the L at night there, even if it's not on the list!
Source: http://www.statestats.com/cit05pop.htm#500,000+

Now I did notice that San Jose was number one safest for its population category. Must be cause Manic Moran lives there?;)

To claim that Illinois is the most corrupt state, does this suggest that there is a ranking of the 50 states in terms of corruption? If so, I wonder where Alaska is ranked, with Republican US Senator Ted Stevens drawing a lot of recent press? Does Illinois have a CBC hat?

"He is the highest-profile lawmaker to be indicted in an Alaska political corruption investigation that began in 2004 and has resulted in seven convictions. Before the federal probe started, emboldened legislators in Juneau had worn baseball caps with the initials "CBC," which stood for "Corrupt Bastards Club."

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/29/AR2008072901416.html

It would appear that there is some dispute as to which state of the 50 is most corrupt? Is North Dakota competing with Illinois for the number one spot? I guess it depends upon whom is asked?

"BISMARCK, N.D., Dec. 11 (UPI) -- North Dakota Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem said Thursday that a USA Today report that called his state the most corrupt in the nation is flawed.

The article Thursday reported North Dakota had the highest rate of public corruption convictions in the nation from 1998 to 2007. Legal Newsline reported that the Republican attorney general took issue with the story."

Source:
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/12/11/AG_takes_aim_at_state_corruption_rankings/UPI-88811229016021/

Manic Moran

You do have to admit, there is something of a difference in scale between a bunch of school board supervisors abusing travel money and a sequence of State Governors conducting scams and extortions.

NTM

Black Swan

Manic Moran wrote: »

You do have to admit, there is something of a difference in scale between a bunch of school board supervisors abusing travel money and a sequence of State Governors conducting scams and extortions.

Perhaps what we need is a corruption meter that we can stick in each state and thereby measure the volume and magnitude of corruption, establishing how rank each is? Lacking such a mechanical device, then a formula with a valid and reliable system of weights and measures of corruption, to where corruption both small and large can be accumulated and assessed, factoring in state population and other socio-economic-cultural demographics for comparison purposes?

For example, would we have to take into account the substantial differences in state population size between Alaska 683,478 (2007 estimate) and Illinois 12,852,548 (2007 estimate), rather than just count the raw number of corruption convictions per year? If the old adage that "power corrupts" has any merit, increasing size of population may be correlated with both increasing number of corruption convictions, as well as an increasing number in terms of severity of corruption? Perhaps a per capita ratio could be developed, to where one convicted corrupt US Senator from Alaska (e.g., Ted Stevens) is equivalent to (how many proportionately?) corrupt US Senators from Illinois (or governors, etc.) over time? And population size is only one factor, among many, before we could arrive by rigorous, scientific measures that were both valid and reliable for the rank-ordering of 50 states on corruption?

*cough!*

Rented Mule

Otacon wrote: »

Was watching this on BBC News yesterday. Found
One thing though, how does the US Attorney come to the conclusion that Illinois is the most corrupt state after, afaik, one corrupt person? Seems a bit extreme no? Though now I am asking myself, where would be more corrupt?

As someone who was born and raised on the southside of Chicago, and grew up within gthe constructs of Democratic machine politics, it would not surpirse me of this accusation.

If jom Edgar had not resigned as Governor, this should have been three consecutive Illinois governors that would have been/will be sent to prison.

Chicago Mayor Richard Daley is the next one in line to fall. He has been running unchecked for years now.

Manic Moran

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

For example, would we have to take into account the substantial differences in state population size between Alaska 683,478 (2007 estimate) and Illinois 12,852,548 (2007 estimate), rather than just count the raw number of corruption convictions per year?

Slate is on it.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2206523/

According to data collected by Dick Simpson, a political scientist at the University of Illinois at Chicago, more than 1,000 public officials and business people from Illinois have been convicted in federal corruption cases since 1971. Of those, an astonishing 30 were Chicago aldermen; that's around 20 percent of those elected to the City Council during that period. If Blagojevich ultimately goes to prison, he will become the fourth out of the last eight governors to wear stripes, joining predecessors George Ryan (racketeering, conspiracy, obstruction), Dan Walker (bank fraud), and Otto Kerner (straight-up bribery). If he gets assigned to the U.S. penitentiary in Terre Haute, Ind., Blagojevich could become the first governor to share a cell with a predecessor.

(A full 20% of Chicago city councilmen? Note that that doesn't count all crimes, only corruption convictions, and a Chicago City Councilman is probably more of an impact than a Bismark School Boardsman)

However

But don't count Louisiana out. According to statistics compiled by the Corporate Crime Reporter, it was No. 1 for the period between 1997 and 2006, with 326 federal corruption convictions. That's a rate of 7.67 per 100,000 residents. Illinois had 524 convictions in the same period, but with a larger population, its rate was only 4.68, which puts it an embarrassing sixth

(And rightfully so. Louisiana is the other state commonly associated with corrupt politicians)

The four in between were Mississippi (2), Kentucky (3), Alabama (4) and Ohio (5).

Speaking of corruption investigations, this week it was announced that the Feds were doing one now in New Mexico: Apparently a questionable company (CDR) which made large donations to some of Richardson's political action committees happened by coincidence to also get large contracts from the State.

And the House Ethics Committee has announced its expansion of its investigation of Charles Rangel for something they're investigating.

Got to admit, the Democrats timed that lot bloody nicely. After the election, but so long before the next election, everyone will have forgotten them.

NTM

The Mad Hatter

Olbermann did a 25 most corrupt US politicians over the last couple of Countdowns. Nixon's only number 20...

Part one

Part two

Anyone know why YouTube tags aren't working atm?

Pocono Joe

Believe it or not... Blagojevich’s campaign for Governor ran on a message of CHANGE and REFORM?

And Notice how many people from the political machine of Chicago and Illinois Obama is appointing to his administration? Hmmmmmmm.

Can you say “Change You Can Bid On”

JohnMc1

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Believe it or not... Blagojevich’s campaign for Governor ran on a message of CHANGE and REFORM?

And Notice how many people from the political machine of Chicago and Illinois Obama is appointing to his administration? Hmmmmmmm.

Can you say “Change You Can Bid On”

Its like Ebay and the "Buy It Now" function. I think Obama should come clean now. For a guy who claims to want to be open and transparent he plays dumb alot when something like this pops up. The problem for Obama is the longer this drags out it might effect his chances for re-election. While the wire-taps cleared Obama himself it has yet to be revealed what Rham Emmanuel's part in this.

Manic Moran

In the meantime, pay-to-play still seems to be a consideration. This time against Kennedy/Schlossberg.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/12/25/2008-12-25_lack_of_donations_to_city_state_dems_may.html

Lack of donations to city, state Dems may hurt Caroline Kennedy's bid for Senate
<snip>
Some say Kennedy, who is worth at least $100 million, missed an opportunity to curry favor among Democratic pols to establish herself as a serious political player as she lobbies Gov. Paterson for Hillary Clinton's Senate seat.

I seriously hope this woman doesn't get the seat.

NTM

JohnMc1

Manic Moran wrote: »

In the meantime, pay-to-play still seems to be a consideration. This time against Kennedy/Schlossberg.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/12/25/2008-12-25_lack_of_donations_to_city_state_dems_may.html



I seriously hope this woman doesn't get the seat.

NTM

I don't know how they cannot call that the same thing Blagovich is in trouble for. Saying she didn't donate enough to the Dem party is the same thing as trying to sell Clinton's Senate seat.

oscarBravo

I can sort of see the parallel, but surely you can't be comparing Kennedy to Blagojevich? Isn't it almost the inverse?

JohnMc1

oscarBravo wrote: »

I can sort of see the parallel, but surely you can't be comparing Kennedy to Blagojevich? Isn't it almost the inverse?

While Kennedy is not the same level of scum like Blagojevich the idea of not appointing Kennedy as Hillary's successor because she didn't donate enough to the Party is the same as what Blagojevich was trying to do.

Manic Moran

It's already fairly established that the only reason she's really being considered is that she's not a Smith or a Schlossberg or a Jones. That's a bad start. Now it's a further issue of 'Did she pay enough money?' This strikes me as being very little 'what do you know' as much as 'who did you know and how much did you give?' I mean, you can kindof see it in cases like giving the position of Ambassador to Ireland to a Kennedy, it's a pretty pointless job which can't do any damage. (I don't like that either, but it seems to be the done thing in the US) But a Senator is actually kindof important.

NTM

oscarBravo

JohnMc1 wrote: »

While Kennedy is not the same level of scum like Blagojevich the idea of not appointing Kennedy as Hillary's successor because she didn't donate enough to the Party is the same as what Blagojevich was trying to do.

If you're going to draw that sort of parallel, you really ought to draw it between Blagojevich and whomever is accused of requiring donations. As it is, you're mentioning Kennedy's name in the same sentence as Blagojevich - the implication is subtle, but there.

Black Swan

JohnMc1 wrote: »

While Kennedy is not the same level of scum like Blagojevich the idea of not appointing Kennedy as Hillary's successor because she didn't donate enough to the Party is the same as what Blagojevich was trying to do.

Well, why don't you suggest that the USA get at the real issue of campaign finance reform, and recommend passing laws that stop corporations and special interest lobbies from influencing candidates with millions of dollars in contributions, starting with the oil lobby? How much did they contribute to candidates? What does the oil lobby expect in return? Isn't this defacto buying of candidates? Is there any candidate that did not accept monies from corporations or lobbies when running for high USA office? They all do, or they would not have enough money to compete. The whole USA political system is corrupted by this. All candidates are bought and paid for, either directly or through PACs, be they Democrats or Republicans!

JohnMc1

oscarBravo wrote: »

If you're going to draw that sort of parallel, you really ought to draw it between Blagojevich and whomever is accused of requiring donations. As it is, you're mentioning Kennedy's name in the same sentence as Blagojevich - the implication is subtle, but there.

I would but we can only insult the Jesse Jackson family so much. The fact that the conman, shakedown artist reproducedand his son is a politician in the most corrupt state says it all.

Blue Lagoon wrote:

Well, why don't you suggest that the USA get at the real issue of campaign finance reform,

I am. Are you? If there were campaign finance reform chances are Obama might not have won.

oscarBravo

JohnMc1 wrote: »

I would but we can only insult the Jesse Jackson family so much. The fact that the conman, shakedown artist reproducedand his son is a politician in the most corrupt state says it all.

I'm sorry. Jesse Jackson is Governor of New York?

When did this happen?

Or are you just picking random Democrats to level subtle slurs at, without actually having to come out and accuse anyone of anything specific?

JohnMc1

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm sorry. Jesse Jackson is Governor of New York?

When did this happen?

Or are you just picking random Democrats to level subtle slurs at, without actually having to come out and accuse anyone of anything specific?

Jesse Jackson Jr was one of the people listed as trying to buy Obama's Senate seat.

Do you watch the news?

oscarBravo

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Jesse Jackson Jr was one of the people listed as trying to buy Obama's Senate seat.

Which has what, precisely, to do with Caroline Kennedy?

JohnMc1

oscarBravo wrote: »

Which has what, precisely, to do with Caroline Kennedy?

The idea of selling a Senate Seat. Nice duck there.

oscarBravo

JohnMc1 wrote: »

The idea of selling a Senate Seat. Nice duck there.

So basically it's a mud-slinging exercise. Despite the fact that Caroline Kennedy is being criticised for not buying a Senate seat, you're going to keep mentioning her and Blagojevich in the same sentence.

It's almost funny.

JohnMc1

oscarBravo wrote: »

So basically it's a mud-slinging exercise. Despite the fact that Caroline Kennedy is being criticised for not buying a Senate seat, you're going to keep mentioning her and Blagojevich in the same sentence.

It's almost funny.

"Donating money to the party"= buying the seat. They're claiming she didn't donate enough to the party so might not get it. How is what the Party said to her any different than what Blagojevich was trying to do?

oscarBravo

JohnMc1 wrote: »

"Donating money to the party"= buying the seat. They're claiming she didn't donate enough to the party so might not get it. How is what the Party said to her any different than what Blagojevich was trying to do?

So basically, you're commending Kennedy for not being a party to corruption?

JohnMc1

oscarBravo wrote: »

So basically, you're commending Kennedy for not being a party to corruption?

We're talking about the Kennedy family here. She'll just open the checkbook again.