Chicago elections board says Rahm a Windy City resident

posted at 3:35 pm on December 23, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

What a relief!  The city where the dead vote now says a man who lived in Washington was actually living in Chicago, at least in his heart.  The city’s Board of Election Commissioners ruled that Rahm Emanuel never intended to give up his residency status, even though he moved to DC for almost two years:

Former White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel can run for Chicago mayor although he spent much of the last two years living in Washington while working for President Barack Obama, the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners ruled Thursday.

With the board’s decision, Emanuel clears a major hurdle in his bid to replace retiring Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley. Officials have tried to expedite mayoral ballot challenges before the Feb. 22 vote, and the board’s decision is almost sure to be challenged in the courts.

An election board hearing officer, who had presided over days of testimony in residency challenges to Emanuel’s candidacy, recommended early Thursday that Emanuel’s name be allowed on the ballot, saying evidence suggests that he had no intention of terminating his residency in Chicago, left the city only to work for Obama and often told friends he intended to live in Washington for no more than two years.

“Illinois law expressly protects the residential status and electoral rights of Illinois residents who are called to serve the national government,” hearing officer Joseph Morris , a Republican attorney in private practice in Chicago, wrote in his 35-page ruling.

That’s stretching the concept of national service a little far.  The likely intent of the Illinois law was to protect the residency status of people in the military, in elected office, or in the diplomatic corps whose jobs required them to travel.  Rahm took a dream job running the White House staff in Washington; he wasn’t representing the nation or his state, but himself.

CBS is correct that this will get challenged in the courts, but in the meantime, Rahm can set up shop and campaign in earnest.  He’s already running TV ads in the market and has more than 30% support in the polls.  Thanks to his national name recognition plus his own time in Congress, Rahm’s easily the front runner to replace Richard Daley and run the Chicago Machine.

As far as a court challenge goes, don’t expect much.  The state courts will probably show a great deal of deference to the board’s decision as a matter of course.  If they reverse it, it might be the biggest surprise in a Chicago court since the Black Sox confessions mysteriously disappeared in the middle of the trial in 1920.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Good.
Anything to keep him sniffing around DC looking for another job.

MassVictim on December 23, 2010 at 3:41 PM

fuggedaboutit

Chicago Board of Election Commissioners

pseudonominus on December 23, 2010 at 3:41 PM

What? Did you even begin to believe they would do otherwise? Never a doubt. Peas in a pod.

IrishEyes on December 23, 2010 at 3:42 PM

Good.
Anything to prevent his sniffing around DC looking for another job.

MassVictim on December 23, 2010 at 3:42 PM

Shocker!

PatMac on December 23, 2010 at 3:42 PM

WTF?

Wade on December 23, 2010 at 3:42 PM

I wonder how much Rahm had to pay to get that decision?

Socratease on December 23, 2010 at 3:42 PM

Really no surprise here. As soon as I knew he was running I already knew that he would be the next Mayor of Chicago….it is all a set up just like it was for Daly. It is called “Crook County” for a reason. I do not miss living there.

dlmcilvain on December 23, 2010 at 3:43 PM

Um, did you read this right? He’ll only be looking around DC again if this gets overturned or the Chicago voters turn him down. Not gonna happen.

IrishEyes on December 23, 2010 at 3:44 PM

What a joke.

AZCoyote on December 23, 2010 at 3:45 PM

“… Rahm’s easily the front runner to replace Richard Daley and run the Chicago Machine.”

You get what you vote for Chicago…

… Enjoy!

Seven Percent Solution on December 23, 2010 at 3:45 PM

hearing officer Joseph Morris, a Republican attorney in private practice in Chicago

Nice law firm ya got there, Morris….be a d***ed shame if something were to happen to it….

cthulhu on December 23, 2010 at 3:46 PM

IrishEyes, the funny part of your post is “Chicago voters turn him down” Voting is Cook County is just there for looks.

dlmcilvain on December 23, 2010 at 3:46 PM

I give him three years before prison.

TallDave on December 23, 2010 at 3:47 PM

Wow. Who could have guessed?

Ordinary1 on December 23, 2010 at 3:52 PM

Was there ever any doubt about this?

SlaveDog on December 23, 2010 at 3:55 PM

I disagree, Ed. If a person takes up a “political” position in the Cabinet or the staff of the President, that in my mind is a form of national service. It doesn’t matter that they were not elected. If he draws his paycheck from the Government, he is in the Government service. I submit that the same is also true of even the lowliest Senate staffer.

unclesmrgol on December 23, 2010 at 3:56 PM

Rahm took a dream job running the White House staff in Washington

It is also a job that everyone knows is temporary. There is no evidence I am aware of that stated that he intended to stay in DC indefinitely.

WashJeff on December 23, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Who really cares about this? Why is it news? Chicagoans deserve this dirt bag, let him run and be elected.

BierManVA on December 23, 2010 at 3:59 PM

unclesmrgol on December 23, 2010 at 3:56 PM

I agree. If we denied Rahm his historical permanent residence then we would have to deny military personnel stationed in a different state their permanent residency.

Grunt on December 23, 2010 at 4:00 PM

Wonder which (fellow) bath house traveler he bribed/threatened for the expected result?

“National service?” lol What a joke.

Cody1991 on December 23, 2010 at 4:00 PM

Rahm took a dream job running the White House staff in Washington

Rahm is the catalyst who converted a dream job into a nightmare, for an entire country.

For that he’ll be rewarded by the crooked people from Chicago. Merde!

Schadenfreude on December 23, 2010 at 4:01 PM

And another (Republican, natch) candidate was denied his spot on the ballot because of missing paperwork this same board itself lost. He even had signed receipts, and the board told him “too bad”.

JeffWeimer on December 23, 2010 at 4:04 PM

Who really cares about this? Why is it news? Chicagoans deserve this dirt bag, let him run and be elected.

BierManVA on December 23, 2010 at 3:59 PM

I care about it because I grew up near Chi-town and understood that no one who was cultivated in that cesspool should ever be near the White House. Plenty of people ignored the story or never understood.

Chicago is a disaster. It’s the mob. It’s mafia. It’s corruption gone wild. It’s in the White House. It’s Obama.

If people cared enough, it might not have occurred. Now we’re living with the disaster. And it’s more than the mafia and Daley. It’s the decades old influence of communist influence on the South Side community with the assistance of tools like Ayers, et. al.

That’s why it’s important. Stick your head in the sand if you want, but now we’ve got what we’ve got in the White House – a leftist tool with an axe to grind while being fed everything on a silver platter.

Chicago sucks, but that doesn’t mean that people should ignore it.

Cody1991 on December 23, 2010 at 4:07 PM

And just when you thought it wasn’t possible for Chicago to get any more corrupt……..

search4truth on December 23, 2010 at 4:08 PM

Of course Rahm’s a shoo in.
The cemetarys have already endorsed him and they always turn out the vote.

jjshaka on December 23, 2010 at 4:10 PM

Won’t it be fun to see a Democrat attempt to solve Chicago’s SEVERE fiscal issues? They are not totally stupid. They know if they keep jacking up property taxes that people will start to flee. Rahm is going to have to fight the unions to have any chance to bring Chicago’s fiscal house in order.

WashJeff on December 23, 2010 at 4:13 PM

Not a fan, but when one considers the other candidates running for Chicago mayor……

aquaviva on December 23, 2010 at 4:13 PM

I see dead people

Kini on December 23, 2010 at 4:15 PM

Why in the hell would anyone in his right mind visit Illinois or Cali, what with all the corruption and bad management each state has?

The people of each state get what they voted for, and if Dead Fish wins, they deserve him and the plagues he’ll bring.

madmonkphotog on December 23, 2010 at 4:17 PM

Was it ever in doubt?

Poor Chicago.

MainelyRight on December 23, 2010 at 4:21 PM

Won’t it be fun to see a Democrat attempt to solve Chicago’s SEVERE fiscal issues? They are not totally stupid. They know if they keep jacking up property taxes that people will start to flee. Rahm is going to have to fight the unions to have any chance to bring Chicago’s fiscal house in order.

WashJeff on December 23, 2010 at 4:13 PM

WJ, the Dems are that stupid. And I don’t understand why you think Rahm will fight for anything especially against the unions’ interests. With Rahm around it will be status quo. That’s all Chicago and Ill. will get for years to come.

There are few situations where I would throw in the towel and say that there is little hope, but Illinois along with Michigan and California would be the ones. Total losers who will feed off of the rest of the country.

If any of you live in these states, I hope you are proud to be welfare recipients. The rest of us have little to spare, and you’re feeding on us.

Shame on you.

Cody1991 on December 23, 2010 at 4:23 PM

“Ignorance is strength.”
–George Orwell

Emperor Norton on December 23, 2010 at 4:26 PM

Not a fan, but when one considers the other candidates running for Chicago mayor……

aquaviva on December 23, 2010 at 4:13 PM

Good point and thanks for posting that. He’s got the money and the backers. And sadly, he’s at an age which will keep him in that seat for the next three decades.

Chicago is the new Detroit.

sherry on December 23, 2010 at 4:27 PM

Really no surprise here. As soon as I knew he was running I already knew that he would be the next Mayor of Chicago….it is all a set up just like it was for Daly. It is called “Crook County” for a reason. I do not miss living there.
dlmcilvain on December 23, 2010 at 3:43 PM

Your observation was even obvious to myself who have never been near Chicago…

The fix is in, and the sheep will follow, even over the clift they can plainly see ahead…

Seems the precident of a well-known liberal naming the political position desired and getting it, has become a truism.

Friendly21 on December 23, 2010 at 4:28 PM

who really cares, if the idiots in chicago werent able to elect rahmbo they would elect some other corrupt socialist democrat.

chasdal on December 23, 2010 at 4:34 PM

WJ, the Dems are that stupid. And I don’t understand why you think Rahm will fight for anything especially against the unions’ interests.
Cody1991 on December 23, 2010 at 4:23 PM

Daley has been getting mad at the unions lately for not providing contract concesions. I assume that Rahm wants this job for 16 to 20 years (the normal duration for a Chicago mayor). He is not going to be able to keep that job if he raises taxes much more beyond current levels. Our IN neighbor has 1% constitutionally protected property tax cap that provides an convenient place to flee.

The Dems were afraid to increase the IL income tax before the election, they are trying to do that during the holidays, and Cook County held back property tax bills until after the election. This tells me that even the Dems feel that cannot raise taxes much more before the voters start to turn on them.

We do need a state bankruptcy law written at the federal level so the other states do not have to bail out my home state of IL. I heard the GOP is working on such a bill.

WashJeff on December 23, 2010 at 4:34 PM

What a crock of sh!t. Not that I expected anything else…

Dopenstrange on December 23, 2010 at 4:35 PM

Oddly enough, I drove by Claude Rains’ grave today.

Del Dolemonte on December 23, 2010 at 4:54 PM

i remember when rahm made the “big” sacrifice to leave congress since he wanted to be a big wig there. i’ve assumed that there was a deal made at that point..and when Daley suddenly decided to step down that that was the deal. rahm could follow Daley as mayor…and so it has been wired since since rahm joined Obama

and the flood of candidates into the primary is probably mostly wired to…helps rahm win a plurality of Dim voters.

r keller on December 23, 2010 at 4:54 PM

oh, i forgot, there was the little matter of Jesse Jr. i suppose that he was the one guy that maybe could get in the way

r keller on December 23, 2010 at 4:57 PM

How do you spell corruption? C-h-i-c-a-g-o

ultracon on December 23, 2010 at 5:03 PM

I disagree, Ed. If a person takes up a “political” position in the Cabinet or the staff of the President, that in my mind is a form of national service. It doesn’t matter that they were not elected. If he draws his paycheck from the Government, he is in the Government service. I submit that the same is also true of even the lowliest Senate staffer.

unclesmrgol on December 23, 2010 at 3:56 PM

I found this in an earlier news article. Chicago apparently interprets “residency” fairly broadly:

To run for mayor, a candidate must be a Chicago resident for at least one year before the Feb. 22, 2011, election. Generally, if a candidate leaves the state for work yet retains ownership of a city property, maintains his voter registration and continues to vote absentee, he should not have a problem, according to Jim Allen, a spokesman for the Chicago Board of Elections.

“We don’t know what nature an objection might be so I don’t want to prejudge the facts that might be filed, but when someone maintains voter registration in Chicago we consider that person a resident,” Allen said. “It’s no different from someone (who is) in the military or travels a great deal on business.”

Jimbo3 on December 23, 2010 at 5:15 PM

No one really expected a different answer in Chicago, did they?

CatoRenasci on December 23, 2010 at 5:17 PM

I can’t get too worked up over this. I’m pretty sure he had the intention of coming back to Chicago. He’s a Chicago machine man, through and through. No way he’d ever permanently leave the city.

angryed on December 23, 2010 at 5:18 PM

Jimbo3 on December 23, 2010 at 5:15 PM

That stuff you’re quoting up there came directly from the Board of Elections who are interpreting the law to side with Rahm. The law is not broad, it’s very simple.

You must live in the City of Chicago for one year to be eligible to run for mayor. The only exception is military service. Period. The. End.

I’ve even heard quite a few Democrat talking heads on Fox who also say the law is clear cut and that Rahm should not be allowed to run. It will be interesting to see how the Illinois Supreme Court rules, because that’s where it’s heading.

Knucklehead on December 23, 2010 at 5:47 PM

This is actually good news.

In a few years, we’ll be reading about the Mayor of Chicago saying something like this:

“The city is broke. Today we have filed for bankruptcy. The Chicago employee retirement fund will no longer be sending pension checks to retirees. Sorry.”

BobMbx on December 23, 2010 at 5:47 PM

In a few years, we’ll be reading about the Mayor of Chicago saying something like this:

“The city is broke. Today we have filed for bankruptcy. The Chicago employee retirement fund will no longer be sending pension checks to retirees. Sorry.”

BobMbx on December 23, 2010 at 5:47 PM

I’d rather read something like this.

Former Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel was convicted today on multiple charges of corruption, perjury, jury tampering, malfeasance in office, embezzlement, stealing change from a blind beggar and wearing a pink tutu in public. He is scheduled to be sentenced next week and with the mandatory minimum he’ll be eligible for parole in the year 3535.

Oldnuke on December 23, 2010 at 5:54 PM

I’d rather read something like this.

Former Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel was convicted …
Oldnuke on December 23, 2010 at 5:54 PM

I have to go with BobMbx’s quote. I cannot wait to see a Democrat explain why we cannot afford defined benefit pension plans and an overly-expansive social safety net. We have Chicago politicians getting arrested ever year, that is not news.

WashJeff on December 23, 2010 at 5:58 PM

Poor Chicago.

MainelyRight on December 23, 2010 at 4:21 PM

Look, I grew up in Chicago, and if it is stupid enough to elect him mayor, then they deserve everything they get.

Kensington on December 23, 2010 at 6:00 PM

All the common sense has gone the way of the mastadon.

Limerick on December 23, 2010 at 6:05 PM

That’s stretching the concept of national service a little far.

I have to disagree on this one. If taking the call of your President to run the WH doesn’t qualify as national service.I don’t know what is. I certainly wouldn’t want a qualified conservative candidate to be disqualified from running in a local election because he moved to Washington at the request of the President.

I hope Rahm goes down in flames in the general, although, the primary would suffice. I just know I would feel different if he were a conservative. What’s good for the goose…

FireDrake on December 23, 2010 at 6:11 PM

Wonder how much this “decision” cost Rahm?

GarandFan on December 23, 2010 at 6:22 PM

That stuff you’re quoting up there came directly from the Board of Elections who are interpreting the law to side with Rahm. The law is not broad, it’s very simple.

You must live in the City of Chicago for one year to be eligible to run for mayor. The only exception is military service. Period. The. End.

I’ve even heard quite a few Democrat talking heads on Fox who also say the law is clear cut and that Rahm should not be allowed to run. It will be interesting to see how the Illinois Supreme Court rules, because that’s where it’s heading.

Knucklehead on December 23, 2010 at 5:47 PM

The Illinois law just says you have to be a resident for one year and an elector. Let see how the Chicago Election Board has interpreted it in the past before jumping to conclusions.

Jimbo3 on December 23, 2010 at 6:45 PM

FYI, here’s is what I understand is the Illinois law:

(65 ILCS 5/3.1‑10‑5) (from Ch. 24, par. 3.1‑10‑5)
Sec. 3.1‑10‑5. Qualifications; elective office.
(a) A person is not eligible for an elective municipal office unless that person is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided in the municipality at least one year next preceding the election or appointment, except as provided in subsection (c) of Section 3.1‑20‑25, subsection (b) of Section 3.1‑25‑75, Section 5‑2‑2, or Section 5‑2‑11.
(b) A person is not eligible for an elective municipal office if that person is in arrears in the payment of a tax or other indebtedness due to the municipality or has been convicted in any court located in the United States of any infamous crime, bribery, perjury, or other felony.
(c) A person is not eligible for the office of alderman of a ward unless that person has resided in the ward that the person seeks to represent, and a person is not eligible for the office of trustee of a district unless that person has resided in the municipality, at least one year next preceding the election or appointment, except as provided in subsection (c) of Section 3.1‑20‑25, subsection (b) of Section 3.1‑25‑75, Section 5‑2‑2, or Section 5‑2‑11.
(d) If a person (i) is a resident of a municipality immediately prior to the active duty military service of that person or that person’s spouse, (ii) resides anywhere outside of the municipality during that active duty military service, and (iii) immediately upon completion of that active duty military service is again a resident of the municipality, then the time during which the person resides outside the municipality during the active duty military service is deemed to be time during which the person is a resident of the municipality for purposes of determining the residency requirement under subsection (a).
(Source: P.A. 95‑61, eff. 8‑13‑07; 95‑646, eff. 1‑1‑08; 95‑876, eff. 8‑21‑08.)

Jimbo3 on December 23, 2010 at 6:47 PM

I’ve been active in Chicago-area conservative circles for twenty-something years now.
Joe Morris is a solid conservative-certainly not a RINO.
He’s crossed me as a fair guy when it comes to the law.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 23, 2010 at 6:53 PM

It is also a job that everyone knows is temporary. There is no evidence I am aware of that stated that he intended to stay in DC indefinitely.

WashJeff on December 23, 2010 at 3:59 PM

If only there was a way to divine residency without reading people’s minds.

Here’s a crazy idea:

Residency is where you live!!!!

I also like your idea about letting the Dems deal with Chicago’s problems.

We should do that nationally.

Let’s have all the Repubs resign from Congress.

What could go wrong?

mockmook on December 23, 2010 at 7:07 PM

(a) A person is not eligible for an elective municipal office unless that person is a qualified elector of the municipality and has resided in the municipality at least one year next preceding the election or appointment, except as provided in subsection (c) of Section 3.1‑20‑25, subsection (b) of Section 3.1‑25‑75, Section 5‑2‑2, or Section 5‑2‑11.
Jimbo3 on December 23, 2010 at 6:47 PM

Thanks for proving my point. The man has not resided in the City of Chicago for the past year. And the pictures and video of all of his belongings in the storage unit he rented, really proves it, along with empty closets in his home that he rented out.

Knucklehead on December 23, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Knucklehead on December 23, 2010 at 7:11 PM

I know that I’m supposed to be your minion and all but I know Joe Morris a little bit.
From what I’ve seen over the years he’s a fair guy.
I kind of doubt he would have come to the decision he did if he didn’t believe that Rahm’s candidacy was within the law.

annoyinglittletwerp on December 23, 2010 at 7:18 PM

annoyinglittletwerp on December 23, 2010 at 7:18 PM

Makes no difference, the whole mess will end up in the Illinois Supreme Court. And I’m sure the police, firemen and teachers who are required to have 100% residency in the city are none too happy right now.

Knucklehead on December 23, 2010 at 7:23 PM

Rahm ‘Twinkle Toes’ Emanuel has the election sewn up already. The vigorish will flow and Chicago will get yet another corrupt clown for Mayor.

The Chicago Wheel of Life continues.

SeniorD on December 23, 2010 at 8:24 PM

I have just about lost all respect for courts and boards. Florida supreme court changing the rules in 2000 presidental election, NJ supreme cout allowing the late filing of a Democratic senatoral candidate, Alaska changing the write in rules and now Chicago. Rules/laws passed and used suddenly become changeable when a powerful somebody runs up against them. What rule of law; there is one only when it is the little people that run up against it. I won’t even get into the DoJ BS.

Such things were harder to see in the past with slower communications, but not today. There is NO shame being shown by just about anyone and the elites stick together even when the act is by the other political party.

amr on December 23, 2010 at 9:09 PM

Maybe Mrs. O’Leary’s cow can make a return appearance…

Gohawgs on December 23, 2010 at 9:55 PM

You get what you vote for Chicago…

… Enjoy!

Seven Percent Solution on December 23, 2010 at 3:45 PM

Now that is funny. What makes you think this has anything to do with voting. LOL….good one though.

whbates on December 23, 2010 at 9:55 PM

The Illinois law just says you have to be a resident for one year and an elector. Let see how the Chicago Election Board has interpreted it in the past before jumping to conclusions.

Jimbo3 on December 23, 2010 at 6:45 PM

So has it been established that he voted in Chicago (or anywhere else) during that time? Good question I think.

whbates on December 23, 2010 at 9:59 PM

What a shocker from the city that is recognized as the most corruptly governed city in the country.

Clink on December 23, 2010 at 3:56 PM

This was never in doubt, no matter what the law said on the issue. But in my opinion he has been a lifelong resident of the Chicago area, held a congressional seat in Chicago, owns a home in Chicago, and only went to D.C. to pillage the country with Our Idiot President.

He is a scumbag Democrat, but he is also a resident of Chicago.

Jaibones on December 23, 2010 at 10:00 PM

Chicago deserves Rahm “Tinker Bell” Emanuel.

David in ATL on December 23, 2010 at 10:02 PM

Assuming that residency is defined in the same manner as domiciliation under most state law, this is the right conclusion, regardless of what a scumbag he is.

You are domiciled in the state in which you permanently reside. If you move with the intention that the move is not permanent (ie, plan to return), your state of domicile does not change. The best example is that of a college student. If the student leaves the state to go to college, his state of domicile does not change to the state where the college is – he remains domiciled in his “home” state.

Selkirk on December 23, 2010 at 10:30 PM

Speaking of taxes, where and when did Mr. E pay his most recent (income, property, other) taxes? City, state, municipal/hospital district, etc.?

aritai on December 24, 2010 at 1:51 AM

Assuming that residency is defined in the same manner as domiciliation under most state law, this is the right conclusion, regardless of what a scumbag he is.

You are domiciled in the state in which you permanently reside. If you move with the intention that the move is not permanent (ie, plan to return), your state of domicile does not change. The best example is that of a college student. If the student leaves the state to go to college, his state of domicile does not change to the state where the college is – he remains domiciled in his “home” state.

Selkirk on December 23, 2010 at 10:30 PM

TITCR.

crr6 on December 24, 2010 at 2:19 PM

Chicago mayor, then IL governor, then…

Akzed on December 26, 2010 at 1:55 AM