A very interesting development tonight with the announcement of Lake County Cororner Richard L. Keller, MD, a Democrat, that he will not run for relection in 2012, despite just having defeated GOP challenger Michael Oster, MD, in the November 2008 election.Hmm...
He JUST won re-election, and he's NOW worried about the time commitment of the political aspect of his job, specifically fundraising?
According to Keller's D-2 filings with the State Board of Elections, Keller raised $0 the first six months of 2009, so he hasn't been beating the bushes for money so far this year. And with his election not until 2012, he'd have plenty of time to build up a war chest slowly but surely. His fundraising history also casts doubt on his stated rationalization, as Keller has never been a big fundraiser or spender, rarely if ever breaking $10K in a reporting period, as far as I can tell. And many of his donors appear to be labor unions, which usually don't take a lot of time or effort to hit up for funds.
In fact, in most periods when an election is not right around the corner, he appears to raise nothing.
Based on Keller's D-2's he's hardly being squeezed for time playing politics and raising money.
Something here smells like a corpse the coroner forgot to put back into the freezer for a few days. TA suspects there is much more than just a re-evaluation of Keller's life priorities behind this decision.
UPDATE 07/07/09 7:00 a.m.: Here's a News-Sun article on Keller with a scant more detail than the link above. This article confirms that the justification Keller claims is to avoid fundraising. Given the election is three years out, the timing of his announcement is at least, odd, and given his fundraising habits and track record, as discussed at the main post, above, it seems like an awfully weak justification. The Daily Herald also has something short up.
To badly paraphrase Paul Harvey, I'm looking for the 'rest of the story.'
Posts
15 comments:
That's just what the late Paul Harvey would say, TA. Yes, there must be more to the story but perhaps not in the case of Keller. Remember, this guy is an idealist. He established Health Reach rather than go into practice for himself. That aside, he must be more than naive to think that politics plays no role in any office, even that of Coroner.
We shall see. While making no accusations, sometimes you find that idealists follow the law as they believe it should be, not as it is.
...many rumors about Dr. Keller's departure...
Not to mention he is now an infamous whack job...
It seems clear that Keller is in trouble and trying to get out. My guess is that he stays in office until Terry "Dead Guy" Link can appoint a successor - maybe "Sneaky" Pete Couvall, his bankrupt sidekick.
Actually, I believe the County Board would have to nominate a successor, if Keller were to leave office for some reason, and if that happened soon, there would be an election for the office in 2010. The nominee would have to be a Democrat, I believe.
In the wake of any scandal that forced Keller to resign, that would probably be a boost to the GOP candidate for the office, not to mention Republicans Willard Helander, Mark Curran, and Bob Skidmore, who are all also up for election in 2010(I forget if Roycelee Wood is up this cycle; I think she might be).
If Keller and the Dems were smart, he would exit sooner rather than later to allow as much time as possible for any taint to pass, and get the new person settled in.
Of course, this is all assuming there is some scandal brewing just beneath the surface...
At least he will serve out his term....unlike the Princess of Alaska.
Just because someone is a Democrat, does TA HAVE to jump at the opportunity to allege, make wild GUESSES, and complain?
Also, this not being long after a discourse on decorum and respectfulness by TA that INCLUDED a lack of decorum and respectfulness ('stoneheaded' ring any bells) is unique, is it not
?
I can't help but wonder if TA will (continue to) sink into the Scandal-sheet category that many believe the Sun-Times (formerly owned by Murdoch-RRRR/GOP) did.
Is Lake County not allowed to have a competent public official (Gary Del Re and Michael -inconsistent administration of law and order- Waller are NOT being referred to here) who does not believe that he is entitled to an indefinite term of office? (Waller's inconsistencies were indicated in a Friday Daily Herald article and they are not a liberal bastion. In fact, there is not a vast liberal media conspiracy or bias that Mr. Hannity speaks to ad nauseum and at the same time is evidence of the opposite being the case).
Isn't it refereshing for someone of significant integrity (No, I'm not referring to Mark Curran or Mark Sanford here) to display an uneasiness toward the politics that most accept as par for the course and who is of the belief that fund-raising is a disproportionate part of running for office?
(Of course, if big contributions and scant qualifications weren't in vogue, where would Dan Duffy be? Where would Alan Keyes be? Where would Keith Gray be? And where would a certain Republican Congressman be who recently disclosed his D-2's not long after ticking off the Party faithful despite his "Thoughtful independent" and "Vote the person not the party mantra?" We still haven't heard what the party faithful felt about that slap in the face!)
Maybe TA should concentrate on their own house for a change and tell us the real reason Sara QUIT (quitters never win and winners never quit) instead of complaining about why someone who is actually qualified for his position is not running for re-election (maybe because he doesn't want to?!), why Matt Murphy's recent press conference was empty or lacked substance (again), and how Republicans will react to Pat Quinn calling the GOP's bluff regarding their claims that "Draconian cuts aren't necessary" (Radogno), "That we have time to resolve the budget impasse" let the calendar be darned (Beaubien, Cole, and Duffy), and that there is nothing to fear or act in an expedited fashion toward (Cross, Murphy, et Al).
Isn't governance supposed to include the prevention of unnecessary cuts, delays, and incomplete service? What business would be run in this manner? What with a desire to borrow (a band-aid not a solution, Mr. Murphy) and have 2-3 month budgets? I wouldn't invest in such a company and wouldn't elect any of the current crop of GOP talkers, er public officials to a board or high-ranking executive office.
Could this be one reason businesses go North?
*As many a GOP'er may not be familiar, the quotes are indicative of something actually being attributed to the person referred to and is the complete opposite of glossy brochures with no information and double-talking blogs that demand decorum though wouldn't know decorum, compromise, and greater good if it hit them in the head. It is also the opposite of constant mud-slinging. It is based in reality; something most people live in on a daily basis where most of the GOP want to claim THEIR entitlements though prevent others from being able to exist.
Uh, I'm sorry, what?
1. Isn't it refreshing to have a well-qualified public official not believe that he or she has a right to an indefinite term of office?
2. Isn't it refreshing to not see a politician not engaging in gamesmanship like Ms. Schmidt is?
3. Isn't it nice to see a politician not fully embrace the exhorbitant resources expended upon elections?
4. With the departure of Ms. Palin and with Mr. Ensign and Mr. Sanford not leaving when they should leave by their own standard, it is nice to see a public official finish a term of office they were duly elected to.
Dr. Keller is not one to pontificate, hold unnecessary press conferences, and produce wasteful, empty brochures and manuals. I guess I can see how the GOP is not used to this.
I think that the GOP needs to review their own actions regarding electoral 'choice,' substantive, alternative ideas for the people of Illinois and the US, and why they are considered the party of obstruction and the party of no.
Does this dumbing down help? Or was that another feeble attempt at dodging and weaving and should I be expecting my glossy brochure in the mail paid for by the Authority of the government a la Ms. Cole?
See, you CAN boil down the manifesto to a few bullets. Since you made the effort, here's my response:
1. Isn't it refreshing to have a well-qualified public official not believe that he or she has a right to an indefinite term of office?
Answer: If I thought that was the real reason Keller decided not to seek election, I might agree with you. So why run for re-election and then announce you're quitting a few months later? And why not tell everyone while you're running that you only intend to serve two terms? No, there's more here, friend.
2. Isn't it refreshing to not see a politician not engaging in gamesmanship like Ms. Schmidt is?
Answer: You'll have to be more specific. There's certainly plenty of gamesmanship to go around with politicians of both parties, but again, if this was Keller's real reason for his announcement, I would be more open to your point.
3. Isn't it nice to see a politician not fully embrace the exhorbitant resources expended upon elections?
Answer: Ask Terry Link and his Victory Illinois fund, and Senator Dick Durbin, and the 10th Dems, and Michael Bond how much money they throw around Lake County to buy elections, and then come back here and get up on your soapbox.
4. With the departure of Ms. Palin and with Mr. Ensign and Mr. Sanford not leaving when they should leave by their own standard, it is nice to see a public official finish a term of office they were duly elected to.
Answer: As much as you would like to paint all Republicans with the same brush, we here are not responsible for Ms. Palin, Mr. Sanford, etc. I would note that Keller was not chased out by the media and frivolous investigations, like Palin was.
Bottom line: Let's give Keller a few weeks and see what happens. Perhaps we'll be seeing some more announcements soon...
TA-
As inarticulate as he was, I gotta go with Anon here. While, at a high level, politicians would make this move as a form of damage control, I have a hard time imagining such ju-jitsu from a county coroner.
As your own evidence states, he's never been particularly pleased with or competent at fundraising. Having heard him speak on several occasions, Keller often expressed his wonder that a coroner was elected at all, and was fond of saying the job should be filled another way. I think here what you have is a guy who is mostly apolitical, was looking to serve his community, and eventually got sick of the politics involved.
I rarely accuse anyone of this, because I find it tacky and unprovable, but I really do have a hunch that this is not how you would react to a Republican making the same move, TA.
PS: When I said I agreed with Anon, I meant in opposition to TA's post on Keller. Sorting through the many points that were made, I think this qualification is appropriate.
Tikki and others- let's put it this way: Leaving aside the fact that Keller's fundraising history does not support a claim that it was too much of a burden to deal with every four years, I have other sources for my suspicion that it's not the whole story. Nothing I can print (yet). But give it a few weeks and let's see if anything develops. Perhaps I'm wrong. But we shall see.
Hey, TA here's a heads up. If the Washington Post story is true, Lisa will run for re-election as AG. Let's see if this is verified, but the Washington Post has the story. I think this trumps this Keller story. Big time.
Anon 9:55, I've searched for a link to a current Washington Post story and can't find what you're referring to. Can you provide a link?
Palin announces she is quitting as Alaska Governor and the media is abuzz over rumors why, including claims that she is in legal hot water.
Keller, with three years to go on a term he was just reelected to, announces that he will not seek reelection, gives a pretty lame reason why as opposed to stating that he wants to spend the next three years upgrading the office, and the media is NOT abuzz over rumors why.
Double standard?
You betcha!
Louis G. Atsaves
Post a Comment