Two groups, one pro-choice and the other pro-life, are doing their best to bend
the Illinois Statehouse to their respective wills.
State Rep. Ruth Munson (R-Elgin) was defeated last week by Democratic challenger
Keith Farnham. The House Democrats dumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into
Farnham’s campaign, and Farnham himself walked precincts like it was a full-time job.
A pro-choice group called Personal PAC also played a role in the race. Munson,
who was considered pro-choice, voted against a compromise parental notification
of abortion bill supported by pro-choice groups. Personal PAC vowed to make an
example of her.
The group spent almost $374,000 between July 1 and Election Day, ranking it
ahead of some heavy Statehouse hitters like the Illinois Trial Lawyers
Association. It’s definitely not a minor player.
As Rep. Munson discovered, keeping Personal PAC off one’s back is not easy. Unlike many organizations, Personal PAC requires purity.
Most groups might endorse incumbents with 70 percent voting records (or even
lower), but that won’t happen with Personal PAC.
That’s why the group always campaigns hard for what it considers pro-choice
incumbents, even when challengers answer surveys indicating that they are also
100 percent pro-choice. This can cause problems, as it did this year when
Personal PAC went all-out for Republican Rep. Beth Coulson of Glenview. A whole
lot of Democrats thought the group should have taken it easier on Coulson’s pro-choice Democratic opponent, Daniel Biss. Personal PAC was not moved. It’s one thing to say you’re pro-choice, but it’s entirely another to prove you’ll stick with the organization every single time push comes to shove, as Coulson
has done over and over again without exception.
Meanwhile, some pro-life groups threw down the gauntlet last week. The groups
told the Senate Republicans to choose whomever they want to replace retiring
Senate Minority Leader Frank Watson, just as long as it isn’t Sen. Christine Radogno (R-Lemont).
Family PAC led the charge. The group, run by longtime conservative activist Paul Caprio, sent a letter to
Senate Republicans this week expressing dismay that the pro-choice, pro-gay
rights Radogno was being seriously considered as Watson’s replacement. Radogno, Caprio wrote, was “not in the mainstream of Senate Republican thinking on key family issues.”
Caprio said that while he has degrees of differences with various members of the
Senate Republican caucus, he believed that almost any other Senator in the
22-member caucus would be better than Radogno as the Republican leader.
Caprio wouldn’t discuss the list of possible alternative candidates, but he did say that he
could work with another declared candidate, Sen. Kirk Dillard, even though
Dillard (R-Hinsdale) had appeared in a television advertisement for Barack
Obama. Caprio said it was “stupid” of Dillard to do that, but he believed Dillard would be an honest broker,
unlike Radogno.
Sen. Radogno said last week that she has yet to speak with Caprio about his
campaign, but she’d like to sit down with him soon. She said as leader she would try to focus on
the issues that “bring Republicans together,” and vowed not to impose any of her beliefs on other members.
It’s not certain how much impact this move by Caprio and social conservative groups
will have. The Senate Republican caucus as a whole is very conservative and
pro-life groups are very influential with them. But they are also some of the
most independent-minded people under the Statehouse dome.
Rich Miller publishes Capitol Fax, a daily political newsletter, and
thecapitolfaxblog.com.
This article appears in Nov 6-12, 2008.
