Do you get what you pay for?

During the spring 2005 campaign season, Elmhurst Press Word on the Street columnist, Tim Bryers wrote

"On Feb 25 Marcucci transferred $6,000 out of his campaign fund and gave it to People To Elect Chris Healy, who is running for Elmhurst Park Board Commissioner."

"Why would the mayor send money to a Park Board candidate? Because the city has a vested interest in what happens with Wilder Park and the future renovation of Wilder Mansion."

Interesting theory, Mr. Bryers, except that the City of Elmhurst didn't donate anything (that we know of) to the candidate. However, Mayor Marcucci routed a total of $9,000 to Healy's campaign. Could it be that it is Marcucci who has "the vested interest?"

Oak Brook resident and Historic Commission Chairman, Frank Catalano also ponied up for the Healy campaign, though Bryers mentioned no vested interest on his part back in spring of 2005. Yet, now that Catalano is campaigning to move the Elmhurst Historical Museum (EHM) into Wilder Park, his zeal for the Healy campaign stands in stark relief. TCL has received reports alleging that Catalano has stated that the Elmhurst park board will vote to move the EHM to the old library site. Can he count on his young protege to do the right thing? Can you?

***********

How much do you think a park board seat is worth? Until April, 2005, not a single candidate in the history of Elmhurst park board campaigns was required to file campaign finance reports because their campaign spending was too low to report (under $3,000). Yet last year Chris Healy's election campaign spent a whopping $18,156.19.

Is it worth noting that Elmhurst park commissioners serve without pay?

*****

The following information is based on the People to Elect Chris Healy, D-2 Semi-Annual Report 1-1-2005 to 6/30/2005 (Illinois Election Commission Campaign Disclosure filed October 3, 2005 at 9:05 a.m.)


Where the Money Came From

$9,000.00	Committee to Elect Thomas D Marcucci (includes $3,000 in-kind contribution)
$2,695.47	Friends of Lee Daniels (in-kind Contribution)
$1,500.00	Frank Catalano (includes $1,000 loan - not repaid)
$2,877.29	Chris Healy (includes $2,377 loan - not repaid)
$1,259.00	Mike Perrino,Salesman, Edward Don & Co. (includes $1000 loan - not repaid )
$250.00	Paul Brown
$775.00	not itemized - individual contributions and in-kind
$18,356.76	Total Individual/InKindContributions, Transfers and Loans

***********

Where the Money Went

$6,019.44	Mailing
$3,000.00	Consulting - Winning Systems (Donated by Comm to Elect Thomas D Marcucci
$2,695.47	Telemarketing (Donated by Friends of Lee Daniels)
$1,680.00	Signs
$1,409.66	Printing
$634.49	Fundraiser Food
$542.20	Postage
$500.00	Spring Rd. St.Pat's Parade
$485.05	Promotional Items
$449.00	Consulting - Winning Systems
$481.88	not itemized (includes $50 in-kind spending)
$259.00	Postage (Donated by Mike Perrino, Salesman-Edward Don & Co.)
$18,156.19	Total Reported Campaign Purchases
182.57	loan payment to Chris Healy
$18.00	unspent - remaining balance
$18,356.76	Total Purchases/LoanPayments and Ending Balance

Who Is Still Owed Money

$1,000.00	Frank Catalano
$1,000.00	Mike Perrino
$2,144.72	Chris Healy
$4,144.72	Debts & Obligations - Grand Total

***********
And now a few excerpts from the George Ryan Trial Transcripts

Closing Arguments

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Docket No. 02 CR 506

Plaintiff, )
5 )
vs. )
6 )
LAWRENCE E. WARNER and )
7 GEORGE H. RYAN, SR., ) Chicago, Illinois
) March 6, 2006
8 Defendants. ) 9:37 a.m.

9
VOLUME 90
10 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS - Trial
BEFORE THE HONORABLE REBECCA R. PALLMEYER, and a jury

(emphasis added)

During the testimony of many witnesses in the case, like Mr. Fawell, the defense asked them whether they had ever seen Mr. Ryan take any money to influence any decision or action. And again and again people said no. Well, George Ryan may have been greedy, but he was not stupid. He did not make announcements or press releases when Warner, Swanson, or Klein gave him or his family something in order to influence his decision-making. The loans, the vacations, the other benefits did not come in packages with bright red lettering that said, "This is to influence you."

Most importantly, keep in mind that this is not a case in which a public official had a specific price for each official act that he did, like a menu in a restaurant where you pick an item and it has a particular price. The type of corruption here -- that type of corruption where you give me this, I will give you that, is often referred to as a quid pro quo.

The corruption here was more like a meal plan in which you don't pay for each item on the menu. Rather, there is a cost that you pay, an ongoing cost, and you get your meals.

***

Now, just a few words about the concept of conspiracy. A conspiracy is nothing more than an agreement to commit criminal acts. It need not be in writing or any sort of formal agreement. A racketeering conspiracy is, in essence, an agreement to commit certain kinds of crimes that are connected in a pattern. The different kinds of crimes that Defendants Ryan and Warner conspired to commit, according to the indictment, included mail fraud, extortion, bribery, money laundering, and obstruction of justice.

The racketeering conspiracy that is the centerpiece of this case had two purposes: performing official governmental acts for the personal and financial benefit of Ryan, Ryan's family members, Citizens for Ryan, and certain of Ryan's associates, including Warner and Swanson; and second, promoting, concealing, and otherwise protecting the purposes of the racketeering enterprise from public exposure and possible criminal prosecution.

***********

The abuse of buying and selling votes crept in and money began to play an important part in determining elections. Later on, this process of corruption spread to the law courts. And then to the army, and finally the Republic was subjected to the rule of emperors.
Plutarch
Historian of the Roman Republic