Quest for the Office of Attorney General

It's primaries season, with all those down-ballot offices and names you've never heard of and don't have time to research.  You probably know--more or less--who's running for governor.  But what about those other state-wide offices that usually fly under the radar but are, nonetheless, pretty powerful? 

Enter the Attorney General!

And no, the attorney general is not a warrior lawyer.  Though that would be pretty cool.

The attorney general (AG for short) is actually the lawyer-in-chief for the government.  According to the website of the Attorney General of Illinois, their job is to:

• Advocate on behalf of all of the people of Illinois
• Legislate with members of the General Assembly for new laws
• Litigate to ensure state laws are followed and respected.

 All of that sounds great; but what do they really do? 

Well, when mortgage companies engage in fraudulent practices, guess who takes them to court?  When ComEd screws you over, who has the power to hold that company's feet to the fire? When the mayor fails to adequately reform the police department in the wake of abuse and shootings, who has the power to demand and enforce better reforms?  When the federal government weakens environmental standards or rolls back birth control coverage, who has the power to sue them on behalf of the people of our state?  When there are suspicions of fraud or corruption at any level of government, who can investigate and who hold those officials accountable?

The AG.

So, although they might not wear war paint and wield a sword, the AG can be pretty bad-ass.  But only if they have the determination and experience to get things done...which brings us to these people:

First off, I want to make it clear that all of these candidates have law degrees and are experienced public servants. None are unqualified for the job, and they are all pretty solid Democrats.  If you really want to know more about their individual careers, you can visit their campaign websites.  In the meantime, here are some super-short resumes! 

• Drury: 
•  Illinois State Representative since 2012  
• former federal prosecutor
• Fairley:  
• Chief Administrator of the Civilian Office of Police Accountability (COPA)
• former First Deputy Inspector General and General Counsel for the City of Chicago
• former Assistant Attorney General in Criminal Appeals 
• former federal prosecutor
• Goldstein: 
• Democratic Committeeman for the 33rd Ward
• former Cook County public defender
• Mariotti:  
• law partner at Thompson Coburn LLP
• former federal prosecutor
• Quinn:  
• former governor
• former lieutenant governor
• former state treasurer of Illinois
• Raoul: 
• Illinois State Senator since 2004
• former Cook County prosecutor
• Rotering: 
• Mayor of Highland Park
• Ruiz: 
• former vice president on the Chicago Board of Education
• former chairman of the Illinois State Board of Education

It's wonderful that we have so many qualified candidates to choose from, but how do they distinguish themselves from one another? 

Not especially well, if you just look at news articles and campaign websites.  I found a lot of the usual platitudes about fighting corruption, increasing transparency, protecting consumers, etc.

A couple of candidates stand out for other reasons: State Senator Kwame Raoul for fielding the most endorsements and raising the most money, and Pat Quinn for his long political career, serving as Illinois State Treasurer, lieutenant governor, and then governor before he lost to Rauner in 2014.  All this is good to know, but it is not enough reason to give either of these men my vote.

I finally found what I needed in a video of the hour-long forum hosted on January 24 by the Chicago Tribune's Editorial Board.  The forum was well-moderated and there was plenty of opportunity for genuine discussion and disagreement between the candidates.  It gave me an idea of who these people are and how they acquit themselves under public pressure.

To spare you all the trouble of watching the whole thing, I have written up a detailed table of contents for the video.  I recorded the main questions and the time at which they were asked, along with a summary of the responses.  To see the full break-down of the forum, click here.  On this page, however, I will only include highlights from the debate, followed by my final impressions of the candidates.  

The Chicago Tribune's Editorial Board endorsement session: 

Democratic candidates for Attorney General (AG)
Jan. 24, 2018

HIGHLIGHTS

0:00:30  Introduce yourself and tell us what would your top priority would be as attorney general 

Nothing out of the ordinary here, though Drury and Quinn did not really say what their priorities would be.


0:08:45  What is the role of the AG in public corruption cases?  How would you leverage tools or get a bill passed?

After a long discussion on the role of the AG in public corruption cases (see here for details), some serious drama erupted at 0:24:10 when Drury suddenly started attacking other candidates, both individually and as a group. He claimed they were "beholden to the powers that be" and that "they've been schooled in ethics, it seems, by Joe Berrios"--a savage burn, considering how corrupt Berrios has proven himself to be. Drury went on like this until he was interrupted by a visibly angry Mr. Ruiz, who responded by touting his own corruption-busting credentials in the Forrest Claypool scandal: "I came in and saved the day from that corruption, Scott, unlike you...you talk a good game but what have you done?"

The moderators eventually calmed everybody down.


0:27:35  Do campaign contributions or conflicts of interest compromise you?

This was a contentious part of the forum because the current front-runner, Raoul, is suffering from a minor scandal over a $100,000 campaign contribution that he received from tobacco company titan, Don Levin.  The other candidates claim this creates an intractable conflict of interest for Raoul since there is a pending case against Levin's company in the Attorney General's office.

Raoul insisted that he is "not for sale" and pointed out that every candidate has taken contributions from various groups.  He refused to return the money to Mr. Levin, and, when Goldstein asked if Raoul would recuse himself from the Levin case if he is elected, Raoul stated that he would not (see 0:30:50).

As the debate got more heated, both Raoul and Ruiz got very aggravated with one another.

The moderator then questioned Rotering about some apparent connections between her and the increasingly unpopular Speaker of the Illinois House, Mike Madigan. The moderator stated that 45 or 50 people who work for Madigan had collected ballot petition signatures for Rotering.  Rotering claimed she knew nothing about this; however, the moderator said it was a matter of public record and seemed incredulous that Rotering could be unaware of it.  

0:37:00  About the pending consent decree for oversight of the Chicago Police Department: Yes or no, are you committed to taking that over the finish line?

Every candidate said yes, they would follow through on the current attorney general's efforts to get Mayor Rahm Emmanuel to "accept a federal judge's oversight of the Police Department" and to pursue more significant reforms of the Chicago police. 

 
0:37:36  Referring to Cook County Assessor Joe Berrios's resistance to sharing public records from his office: How would you assert that "a government record is a public record, period," and get as close to the Florida standard [of full disclosure] as possible?

This part of the forum got interesting (though no one answered the question), because at 0:39:56 the moderator pointed out that Raoul was the only one of the Democratic candidates who had not called on Joe Berrios to resign. When asked directly whether he thought Berrios should step down, Raoul replied, "I think that's a question for the voters to answer," adding, "I believe in the democratic process."

Fairley then jumped in, expressing her disappointment with the lack of leadership in the Democratic Party on the Berrios scandal. "He should step down. It is unconscionable what is happening in that office," she said vehemently.  She spoke of "ever-entrenched political leaders" who get into positions of power, use them for their own benefit, and stay there forever. She flatly rebutted Raoul's stance, saying, "The process is not working."


0:41:10  Yes or no, should Cook County Assessor Joe Berrios step down?  Are you endorsing anyone for Cook County Assessor?

Everyone, except Raoul, said yes.  Goldstein and Ruiz both endorsed Fritz Kaegi.  After Drury answered the question, he started tooting his own horn again until the moderators cut him off.  

Fairley, at 0:43:26, added that Berrios stepping down would be "really important for the health of the Democratic Party" since it would show that the party "has some integrity."  She argued that "people are losing confidence in our political process because of that."


0:44:27  How would you fight against the Trump administration?  On the other hand, isn't there already enough for the AG to do at the state level?  Why waste precious resources taking on fights at the federal level where other watch-dogs are opposing Trump already?

All the candidates agreed that federal issues are not separate from state issues.  They agreed that the federal government is currently assaulting our most basic human and civil rights, and that this should be a concern of the Illinois Attorney General.  Most candidates cited environmental concerns, as well.  The moderators stressed that Illinois's fiscal resources are quite limited and that there are only 375 lawyers in the AG's office.


0:58:58  Police accountability

Drury talked about his history of working to end wrongful convictions and change policing procedures, saying "we worked really hard when it wasn't popular to be talking about police accountability." 

Fairley talked about all that still needs to be done to achieve police accountability. She said we must develop a strong, detailed consent decree for the Chicago Police Department, but she emphasized that police reform is a statewide issue. She said that not enough is being done to investigate police issues all over the state, and she described her experience training investigators and her legal experience evaluating those kinds of cases. [Fairley is chief of the Civilian Office of Police Accountability].

Raoul pointed out that he had sponsored legislation that created the Torture Inquiry Commission. He also worked with Drury on the legislation that Drury had mentioned.  Raoul serves on the Commission of Police Professionalism, and he said he wants to move from police certification to police licensing, which would require stricter standards for someone to become a police officer.

At 1:02:00, however, Fairley shot back at Raoul by asking, "Why did you pass a bill that actually says that when an officer is accused of sexual misconduct, that the officer must be investigated by a separate agency except for if you work for the Chicago Police Department?"

To which Raoul replied, "Because I thought COPA [the Civilian Office of Police Accountability] was a separate agency."

Fairley said sternly, "It requires law enforcement. Obviously, you didn't read the bill very well."

Raoul, oddly, made no effort to reply to this.

Ruiz talked about his long history working for community policing, going back to 1992, and how his community, in particular, has suffered from lack of police accountability.

Rotering said, "We know that community policing has to be the future of policing" and talked about the importance of putting resources into this issue. 


1:04:15  Mr. Quinn, why are you running?  Why not step aside for younger people?

Quinn said that "democracy is not a spectator sport."  He talked about his past achievements in office, and he stressed that "we need an ethics initiative in Illinois."  He believes the AG is someone who can rectify this situation.  Mariotti responded by pointing out Quinn's failures in office and his loss of the governorship to Bruce Rauner, arguing that it's time for Quinn to get out of the way.

Goldstein talked about his work as a criminal defense attorney and his dedication to helping the poor.  He then responded to Mariotti by saying it's "reprehensible" to tell someone they shouldn't run for office. "That's Cook County Democratic Party nonsense," trying to coerce people to get out of the race, he said. "It's undemocratic."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Final impressions

A month after the Editorial Board's endorsement session, the Chicago Tribune gave their endorsement to Sharon Fairley.  After watching the session myself, I have to agree.

Fairley stood out in an understated way.  She did not allow herself to get angry or attack others like Ruiz; she did not waste time fatuously praising herself like Drury; she did not mince words or dodge questions like Quinn.  Every time she spoke, she was focused, articulate, level-headed, and smart.  She expressed real passion for the work to be done and did not hide her disdain for the more spineless elements of the Democratic Party leadership.  Perfect.

Raoul, the current front-runner, was also articulate and focused--but maybe not so smart. I found it deeply concerning that he refuses to call on Joe Berrios to step down, even when the man is plainly doing a lot of damage to low- and middle-class people, and also, as Fairley pointed out, to the reputation of the Democratic Party and the people's faith in their political system.  Raoul's refusal to recuse himself as attorney general from the Levin case, in spite of the obvious conflict of interest, also shows a pride, foolishness, and lack of political acumen that could undermine him as attorney general.

Sharon Fairley was the only candidate who truly inspired my confidence and admiration. The Tribune described her as "a fearless and tested change agent who comes to the job with calluses from dealing with politics, but without debilitating conflicts of interest. She has a stellar academic and career record."  And she "impressed us in her short tenure as chief administrator to Chicago’s Civilian Office of Police Accountability, which replaced a plodding and toothless police oversight agency [...]. Fairley also has served as general counsel for the city of Chicago’s inspector general, a role that immersed her in investigations of wrongdoing throughout city government."

In short, Fairley has the experience, the drive, and the integrity to turn the Attorney General's Office into the tenacious government watchdog that it should be.  Let's give her the job and let this awesome lady get to work.