Here it is:

April 6, 2009

Neighbor-to-Neighbor

Election for City Council 2nd District is tomorrow. As 10-year residents of the Arbor District, located within the 2nd District, we feel the need to respond to Curphy Smith’s recent campaign literature. We have a long relationship with both Barbara Van Auken and Curphy Smith, and until now, we’ve remained rather quiet about this campaign. Information has been distributed from Curphy’s campaign camp that is over the top and unwarranted.

As many of you know, we have worked closely with Barbara on several issues concerning all of our neighborhoods. She has always been honest and forthcoming with information, which we respect. She’s dedicated to all the issues in the District, working tirelessly on them. Barbara’s promises to us have never been broken (we personally know Curphy Smith has broken vows and promises he’s made), and she has always worked hard for the 2nd District. Barbara respects Bradley University and its mission to provide a safe educational environment for their students and neighbors. Simply stated, Barbara understands the dedication and time commitment of being a council member, and is still passionate about being our representative. She desires the job…not just the title.

Her diligence to facilitate the rebuilding of the arbors in the Arbor District was supported not only by the neighbors, but the City Council. The City Council voted UNANIMOUSLY on April 10, 2007 to approve additional funding for the arbors, however most of the funds were allocated in the Capital Fund Budget before Barbara’s first term. The previous arbor was held together with metal bands, and a danger to public safety. The “extravagant monument, “ as referred to by Curphy’s campaign, is almost identical to the original, and was rebuilt per the request of the neighbors, to preserve a historical landmark for which the neighborhood is named; they weren’t rebuilt for Barbara’s benefit.

Barbara Van Auken has accomplished many great things and will do more for our District and our city. She has experience, fortitude, and she has our vote. Re-elect Barbara on Tuesday, April 7.

Respectfully,

Nathan and Michelle Wagner

To All Bradley Fraternity Presidents:

My name is Jeff Hall & I am one of the attorneys representing Sigma Nu in the case against Barbara Van Auken. As you may know, the election is coming up on April 7, 2009. There are some important dates I need you to inform your members about. It is imperative you do all you can to drive your members to register and vote. I send this email today with no time to spare. /

There is no secret that I am a strong supporter of Curphy Smith. I feel he would do a great job for ALL residents in his district, especially for Bradley students. That is why we need him elected. If Barb Van Auken wins, she will exact revenge on the Greek system at Bradley. You think it is tough now, just wait if she remains your council woman. Rumor has it that she is a very vengeful person and it would behoove every member of every fraternity to take 30 minutes out of their day tomorrow and go down to register and vote for “grace period voting”.

Tuesday 3/24/09 (tomorrow)

This is “grace period voting” meaning if you are not registered to vote you can register and vote at the same time. If you are registered already, you can still vote.

We will have transportation from the Student Center from 10am4pm (ish) to the election commission downtown. (it closes at 5pm). Students need to bring a driver’s license AND something with their Bradley address on it, such as: a bill–credit card or utility, or their Webster page from Bradley.

Saturday 3/28/09

This is “early voting” only. You must already be registered to vote at your Bradley address.

We are encouraging student car pooling, but will be providing transportation from the Student Center from 9am-2:30pm to the election commission. (it closes at 3pm). Students need to bring a driver’s license AND something with their Bradley address on it, such as: a bill–credit card or utility, or their Webster page from Bradley, or their voter registration card with their BU address on it.

I implore you to act. Now is the time to stand up and allow the city to hear your voice. If you vote with the drive and impetus we know students can possess, BVA will be voted out and no longer will Bradley students and Greek Members be underrepresented. You will make it easier for your successors. You will actually have real political power. That is a big thing to possess, especially around Peoria and Bradley.

We need at least 500 BU voters out of this election to win. Currently voter turn out is very low, but BVA’s supporters will vote for certain. You and your members are the secret weapon. Please take the time to go down to the election precinct tomorrow. It will only take 30 minutes. Further, grab 5 of your friends that aren’t in a fraternity/sorority and get them to go with you. We need all the help we can get.

Thank you for your time and I look forward to seeing you at the polls.

Respectfully,

Jeffrey R. Hall

My two cents: Of course, Bradley students have the right to vote. That should go without saying, but to avoid any silly comments suggesting I am implying the opposite, I’ll say it here. BU students have the right to vote and I support that right.

The question is: Where do they vote? Do they vote here, in Peoria, where they are attending college, or do they vote where they live? When I attended Eastern Illinois University, I slept in Charleston, but I was still a resident of Peoria. I voted absentee. I never cast one single vote for any local race in Charleston (although I do recall registering). Not that I didn’t care or didn’t have an opinion. Simply stated, I considered myself a Peoria resident and cast my votes in Peoria. My stay in Charleston was going to be temporary and I knew it.

I knew that Charleston residents would — and had every right to — resent transient student votes deciding who held local offices. And I strongly suspected that some EIU students who did cast votes in Charleston did nothing to cancel their hometown registrations, meaning they remained registered in two counties, which is suspect is not exactly legal. And I would not surprise me if one or more of my classmates did the absentee ballot thing AND voted in person in Charleston. I know that IS illegal.

So, while Bradley students have the right to register locally and vote locally, I would encourage them as a matter of personal honor and integrity to vote in the communities in which they actually consider themselves permanent residents.

Second: Curphy Smith has every right to ask any eligible, registered voter to vote for him. He campaign has the right to register any eligible voter. His campaign has the right to drive voters to the polls. This is the stuff of grassroots politics.

Third: Permanent residents of Peoria are no different than the residents of Charleston and just might resent temporary occupants of dorms and student rentals helping to decide who sites on the Peoria City Council and other elected bodies long after these students have moved back to their real homes. People have the right to base their vote on anything they want to base it on. So while the Smith campaign has the right go after the student vote, permanent 2nd District residents have the right to decide to vote against Smith because he is going after the student vote, and would thus be beholden to them if he wins.

Fourth: If you were wondering whether the Sigma Nu fraternity’s lawsuit against Barbara Van Auken and others was politically motivated, I guess learning that that their attorney is electioneering for her opponent pretty much answers that question.

UPDATE: C.J. Summers beat me again and had a post up about this before I did (I decided to get 8 hours of sleep, instead). He also links to a PDF file that shows an anonymous anti-Curphy Smith flyer that’s going around, accusing the Smith campaign of violating election rules. A conversation with a Peoria Election commission official left me convinced it is not.

I considered coming back later, but decided to get it over with.

We chatted with out line mates about the weather, kids, what we were doing for dinner — you know, the usual bonding experience of voting. No one chatted about politics. No one mentioned WHO they were voting for. We all were resigned to having to wait, since the media’s been warning us for months that the lines would be long. The closest I heard to a complaint was a long, resigned sigh.

At one point, I did joke that turnout is probably going to be to close to 120 percent of registered voters. A guy in line behind me suggested I don’t even joke about that. I honored his wish.

We were united in our admiration for on particular line mate. Several mothers where there with children in tow. Most of the kids were in strollers. But this one young mother had three, approximate ages 3,2 and a babe in arms. The kids were astonishingly well-behaved (and were cute as all get-out). The women in line with me noted that it took some endurance to carry a baby that long.

And all I’m thinking was that this woman — I’m guessing she was half my age — had the perfect excuse for skipping the whole thing.

People really, really wanted to vote this year.

Already the pundits are at it, praising and bashing the choice, spinning their hearts out, slanting the news to suit their particular interests in the campaign. For now, let us set that aside.

Looking at the race as it now stands, with tickets for each side filled out, we are now destined to have a historic result come November. I already left a comment over at CJ’s Peoria Chronicle but I’d like to expound on it a little more. A historic outcome is probably going to be accompanied by an unprecedented campaign.

You can bet the Republicans have studied the Hillary Clinton campaign. The HRC campaign for President will serve as a trial balloon for the Sarah Palin campaign for Vice President. They will also apply the lessons to their approach against Barack Obama.

The tickets really do resemble each other is many ways.

• Each ticket has a traditional candidate (old/white/male) who has been in the Senate for quite some time and whose strength is in foreign policy.
• Each ticket has a non-traditional candidate (not old/white/male) who has little or no Washington experience. They are relatively good looking and focus on more domestic agendas.
• Each ticket represents and advocates a “Change” theme.

Say what you will about any of the four candidates, none have changed the race like the addition of Palin. Biden was the safe, insiders choice. One wonders who will actually be able to wave that “Change” banner most honestly.

Say what you will about any of the four candidates, none have changed the race like the addition of Biden. Palin is the freshest of faces. One wonders who will actually be able to wave that “Experience” banner the truest.

The debates will be more important than ever. Much like we (those of us that talk about such things) still talk of Lincoln-Douglas and Kennedy-Nixon, I think Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin will be spoken of long into the future. There has never been an election like this one.

One thing is for certain, the game is afoot.

Mosley-Braun weathered a string of ethics accusations during her six-year term, including criticism of her trips to visit the late Nigerian military dictator Sani Abacha, widely known for his human rights abuses. Mosley-Braun argued that it was America’s responsibility to pursue dialogue and even-handed policies in the interest of human rights.

Questions also arose about the funding of her trips to Nigeria. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee exonerated her, saying she used her own money.

“For all of the vilification that I received in my re-election effort, I was vindicated on every front. And there’s never been any shade of wrong-doing on my part in any way,” Mosley-Braun says. “So, if people talk about you like a dog, you can’t control what people say. But you can control what you do. And I am very proud that my record is clear, my integrity has been vindicated and I have an honorable record of public service to point to.”

She, like Clinton, confuses lack of prosecution with actual vindication. Her support of rulers who repress and murder their black citizens is a moral failure on her part, but not criminal.

There is no doubt that her harshest critics are those who would have found issue with anything she did in office as a senator or ambassador. But nothing justifies the aid and comfort she gave those murders in Nigeria. I found her career in the senate more undistinguished than criminal. But then, freshman senators are not supposed to be stars.

Mosley-Braun became U.S. Senator from Illinois after she defeated incumbent Alan Dixon in a primary race. Regular Dems — especially those in organized labor — were upset with Dixon because of his support of the North American Free Trade Act. This weakened his support base, which let the much more liberal Mosley-Braun capture the party nomination. She lost her re-election bid. Her only accomplishment in office was to make a huge fuss over the use of the Confederate Flag in southern states.

Carol Mosley-Braun,Black Press USA,Sani Abacha,Nigeria,election