BLOOMINGTON — Two of the Republicans looking to replace U.S. Rep. Tim Johnson in Congress don't like the way he pulled out of his re-election race, and believe his decision was orchestrated to benefit his former chief of staff, Jerry Clarke.
Johnson announced on April 5, about two weeks after he won the 13th Congressional District primary election, that he would not run for a seventh term in Congress. Clarke said that day that he was interested in replacing Johnson and that he had already begun calling the county chairmen who will make the appointment.
"It's not right. This is not right," said state Sen. Kyle McCarter, R-Lebanon, who told a Republican luncheon gathering in Bloomington that he is interested in the congressional seat. "You know what's really insulting about this? It didn't just happen. There was talk of this happening a year ago, and it's a real insult to the people. Like I said, their vote was taken away from them.
"I think we're used to politics as usual. The politics as usual is that you manipulate the system to put certain people in positions of power. That's not the way it ought to be. The people should decide who is going to be speaking for them. Remember, this power that (politicians) have, they don't own it. It's only borrowed from the people who elect them. We forget that. But when you have people in back rooms who decide they are going to put in place who they want so that they can control them and they can control what happens in this country, that's wrong."
McCarter said the county chairmen should slow down the process to appoint Johnson's replacement.
"We need to see who would represent the people best, not what person was decided in a back room deal who was going to get the job," said the one-term state senator, who lives in the Illinois suburbs of St. Louis. "This heir-to-the-throne idea in politics, I don't care what party you're in, it's wrong. It's an injustice and it doesn't work because ultimately, when you get that person in there, they don't serve us well."
Asked who benefited from Johnson's sudden retirement announcement, McCarter pointed to Clarke.
"There was definitely a favorite," McCarter said. "I think Jerry obviously had the inside knowledge about what was happening. But as long as the process slows down and everyone is vetted, if Jerry Clarke ends up being the choice of the chairmen, I'll be behind them. I'm trusting the chairmen to do their job."
Sam Spradlin, a Springfield truck driver who also wants to be considered by the GOP county chairmen, said Monday that "this feels like a hand-me-down to Jerry Clarke."
Spradlin originally had planned to challenge Johnson in the March 20 primary, then pulled out of the race.
"Tim knew he was going to quit the race before the primary. He knew ahead of time," Spradlin charged. "If they give this to Clarke, it's a travesty."
Spradlin also made his views known in a 5-minute video he posted Sunday on You Tube. In it he predicted that if county chairmen choose Clarke, "you will have a mutiny on your hands."
He said that "a lot of Republicans are crying foul that Tim ignored the primary process" and charged that this "seems like something that Rod Blagojevich would do."
Meanwhile, McCarter said he believes he has about a week to decide if he will be a candidate for appointment as the party's nominee.
"I feel like I'm being effective where I'm at. I don't want to force myself into a higher position even though I'm able to do it and I could do it," he said. "I want to do what is right. I don't want to be impatient. I want to be where God wants me to be, and that's all there is to it."
If the "legal process" was followed, Stephanie Holderfield would have been certified the winner. The "law" requires that votes cast for non-candidates are not counted. The "law" requires that voters be notified of errors in the ballot, such as those caused by a candidate withdrawing from the race legally. The "law" requires Stephanie Holderfield to be declared the nominee.
Instead, the corrupt Republicans in their mad request for power have cast aside the law and 100 years of election precedent to come up with their own interpretation of what should have been done, then the party "leaders" began threatening everyone in the room to fall in line.
When Tim Johnson calls to yell at precinct committeemen to fall in line, let's call this what it is... a rigged election and rampant corruption.
Tell me, why do the 16,000 some odd Republican primary voters not get a say in this? Why should they have some candidate they've never seen be forced down their throats as the nominee?
Because the corrupt party leaders say so. Nothing has changed since George Ryan went to prison.
These rhinos have got to go. We need to get some real TEA PARTY PATRIOTIC REAL AMERICANS to become precinct committeemen and we need to take over the local GOP from the Obama loving ELITISTS who have taken the vote away from WE THE PEOPLE!
If REAL CONSERVATIVES take back the GOP from the comsymps, we won't ever have to bend our knees to our former rhino overlords again. And it begins here locally. We need TRUE CONSERVATIVES to contest every vote for office and WITHIN the party. I know it's a lot more easier to protest by staying home and not voting. But instead we need to fight for the party from the inside. RIGHTWARD, HO!!!
Who's with me?
The State Board of Elections advised Hulten to consult with the State's Attorney (Julia Reitz). Julia Reitz advised him that he should count Winkel's votes. His job is to simply count the votes and report the results.
The law is definately not clear and it would be nice if lawmakers clarified things for future elections.
"Tell me, why do the 16,000 some odd Republican primary voters not get a say in this?"
Technically, the majority of them voted for Winkel. When Winkel declined the nomination, it created a vacancy. By law, the elected precinct committeemen choose the nominee in this situation. I think everyone would prefer a special election so the voters directly choose, but the allegations of corruption are not valid. Wouldn't it have been more corrupt to ingore the law and ingore the advice of the State's Attorney?
It's corrupt because the voice of WE THE PEOPLE is being ignored. The vote should go to the person with the next most votes. Instead, we have back room sweetheart deals and cronyism of the first magnitude. Do you think we're dumb enough to believe that it's just happen stance that the people put in the place of the drop outs are ESTABLISHMENT RHINOS chosen by the cadre of party insiders? WE'RE NOT THAT STUPID!
I've never voted Democrat in my life. But in these two cases it might be the best option. A real Democrat might be better than a Democrat lite rhino party operative crony that never even signed up for the primary. If they're so interested in the position, why couldn't they do the hard work of gathering signatures and getting to know the voters in the primary?
What are primaries even for, anyway if we ignore them?
What is the rule of law even for if crazies will whine and cry about it when it is followed?
Maybe if you want more control over your party get off your butt and run for something...like precinct committeman! Or, lobby your legislators to change the election law! I hope you're willing to pay more taxes in order to support all the special elections you want to have!
When did I ever say that? She's a Republican in name only, something the "kewl kidz" (Internet speak) call a rhino (I'm not sure why, exactly). She is an elitist insider establishment party cadre.
Im so sick of establishment Republicans mocking WE THE PEOPLE who voted FOR SOMEONE ELSE. Who do you think you are to disregard us? The TEA Party rose up to resist the establishment elites telling us they are our "betters" and that they know best. Well, guess what? The people know best and we know when we see an insider corrupt deal. Spin it as much as you want. Mock us as much as you want. But well remember you dirision when we go inside the election booth!
Clarke said that day that he was interested in replacing Johnson and that he had already begun calling the county chairmen who will make the appointment.
Isn't that pretty much an admission? It seems like they think it's their seat to pass down to the next person, "Johnson's" seat or when the former governor tried to sell "Obama's" seat but those seats belong to the people. The people sitting in them are working for us. They are our employees. Not our superiors. They are not there to make our lives more difficult, to line their pockets or put their friends on the payroll. A republican does not represent the party and a democrat does not represent the party. If that's all they are doing in office and causing gridlock they are not upholding their oath of office. A lot of people need to be fired.
Who cares if he orchestrated it to help his colleague, isnt that what normal people do? Most of you people screaming the loudest are democrats who wont be voting for them anyway, hypocritical of you to put on a show of fake indignation. As far as i'm concerned anyone who will help stop this socialist administation is fine by me.
"Who cares if he orchestrated it to help his colleague, isnt that what normal people do? Most of you people screaming the loudest are democrats who wont be voting for them anyway, hypocritical of you to put on a show of fake indignation. As far as i'm concerned anyone who will help stop this socialist administation is fine by me. "
Commonsense: I am not a democrat and I am screaming also. I care that it was orchestrated. I like Tim Johnson. He has always supported us in the 15th District and has been a good congressman.
Why am I screaming? 1) When we do something for a colleague (as you call it) it usually doesn't involve having a seat in Congress. Commonsense, this our (the 13th District's) Congressional seat - not Tim Johnson's or anyone else's to give away. 2) Because of the likes of Jerry Clarke.
Jerry Clarke, the man (when all his past is drug out before voters), may actually lose to Gill. He is not someone I want to be HANDED a chance to lose the congressional seat to the democrats. I do know this congressional area is mostly republican, but not all of it. Also people are sick of the crony politics that have happened as of late. They don't want their voice silenced b/c a few people decided they wanted to give a colleague a chance.
Jerry Clarke was the campaign manager when Jim Ryan and Bill Brady lost their campaigns. Bill Brady's campaign would have been winnable if he had listened to people who said the race was closer than they thought. He was in the office of Lee Daniels when the IL house scandal broke and yes he was found innocent. But to be in an office and claim you didn't know anything about it was either a problem of his 1) being dumb or 2) being guilty and getting away with it. I think someone else said either way, Jerry Clarke doesn't need to be our candidate for Congress.
I do understand, as others have said, the people we've elected (Precinct Committeeman) elect the Party Chairman and the Chairman representing us choose a congressional candidate, but in this case, I don't know. I do not know if our newly elected County Chairman, Habeeb Habeeb (a good man as far as I know), will be able to not give in to the pressure of "go along to get along" due to the influence of the party bosses and politicians who can make his life rough if he goes against him.
So, Commonsense, I am not FAKING INDIGNATION. I AM INDIGNANT! I, like others, believe this was orchestrated to give Jerry somethng he couldn't have gotten on his own (if he gets it) - being our candidate for congress.
I am personally hoping that someone else is nominated such as Kyle McCarter. As far as I know, he doesn't have the baggage, he has done well while being in the IL Senate and seems to truly care about his constituents - like Tim Johnson does.
If it has to be this way, then I hope Kyle gets it.
Habeeb, I pray that you look for divine guidance in this decision and listen to the people who (us voters) have elected you - indirectly.
If Mr. McCarter's accusations are correct, the voters in this district have every right to be angry since they were essentially denied their chance to choose the nominee to replace Johnson.
This practice is a well-worn tactic in the history of Illinois political corruption, unfortunately. A few years ago, congressman Bill Lipinski in Chicago resigned after he won the primary so party insiders could pick his son to replace him, even though his son had been living in Tennessee for several years as a college professor.
I was amused by Spradlin's comments, and by the fact that they were included in this article in the first place. He dropped out of the primary and now he wants the nomination? He says a "mutiny" will occur if Clarke is chosen. There may be outrage, but of course not nearly as much as there would be if they chose someone as unqualified as Mr. Spradlin. How about a press conference instead of a 5 minute YouTube video if you want to be picked to run for Congress?
The Party didn't leave him in. He stayed in. The party has asked him to resign, take his name off the ballot, etc. The party isn't in charge of the ballot. Or him. But he can use his position to reduce any sentence he gets. In other words, he can negotiate with a prosecutor to give up the seat for having the charges dropped. If he resigns now he could go to jail. His voters must be thinking he's innocent until he's proven guilty. You remember that part of the law right?
innocent until proven guilty? that is quite a concept. is that why he is free today, until his trial, but yet others, say george zimmerman for example, is in jail until his trial? is he guilty until proven innocent? so, you are saying because smith is an elected official he can use his position of power to reduce his sentence? point was smith was caught and charged he should have been dropped from the ballot, period. if, he is found innocent he could always run again another time.
Are you equating bribery with murder? Just asking. Smith may have been charged but that isn't the same as convicted. Our legal system is founded of the concept of innocent until proven guilty. There are some other countries where it is the opposite. Now suppose his opponent really wanted to win, and set him up to make it look like he took a bribe but it didn't happen. But he was charged anyway. Should he still be kicked off the ballot? Because stuff like that used to happen. And the one who framed him would still be on the ballot. Now when one is charged with murder, especially after confessing to it, one does not get bail in most circumstances. So Zimmerman will be staying in jail. And Smith, if guilty will try to use his position to reduce his sentence. They have been doing it. "To save the taxpayers money." I would rather see them get extra time and spend the cash.
no, i am comparing both as potential felonies. i do notice how you take one stance on one subject then the about face on the other. your preconceived notions are showing. you say smith is innocent until proven guilty and should be allowed to go on with life until a trial. yet on the other had you say zimmerman admitted to murdering martin and will be staying in jail. i beg to differ. zimmerman admitting to killing martin but he did not say he murdered him. admitting to murder would damage his claim of self defense. i still say an elected official should be removed from office until the outcome is decided. as for your arguement of false charges can you see how that could be politcal suicide? not to mention the libel/slander aspect of it. there is enough made up manure in campaigning by both parties as it is.
Comments
News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.