Franking hath its privledges for Schock
From Wikipedia:
“The franking privilege is a perk which grants an elected official the right to send mail through the postal system for free, often simply by signing his or her name where the postage stamp would normally be placed.
“In theory, elected officials and the postal service are both paid for by the taxpayer. The postal service represents a fixed cost – that is, adding the official’s mail to the existing mailstream does not change the postal system’s total costs. The franking privilege allows elected officials to send official mail without creating accounting transactions that, at the total government level, will cancel each other out.
“In practice, the franking privilege is applied to more than just the official mail necessary for the conduct of the office. Franking is one of the largest advantages of incumbency, contributing to a very high reelection rate in the U.S. legislative branch.
In the United States, members of the House and Senate are allowed this privilege.”
And so are members of the Illinois House of Representatives. Last residents of certain parts of Peoria — but not all of them — received mailers similar to this one from State Rep. Aaron Schock.(92nd District). This one ended up in the mailbox of a Central Bluff resident. Judging by the text alone, it’s supposed to be an announcement of an innocent neighborly get-together with various elected and unelected officials to discuss “issues important two our community.” More than 5,200 of these were mailed.
But the presentation suggests something completely different. There’s Rep. Schock’s handsome face, taking up nearly one-fourth of the page, right next to the names of City Council Representative Barbara Van Auken and Peoria Police Chief Steve Settingsgaard.
In my opinion, this mailer was designed to create an impression that Van Auken and Settingsgaard are supporters of Schock, who will face a difficult challenge from Peoria City Council member Bill Spears.
But that is not the case. Van Auken is supporting Spears, a friend and an ally on the Peoria City Council. Chief Settingsgaard, as a public employee, isn’t allowed to endorse candidates, and if he were, it’s doubtful he would support someone running against one of his bosses.
This is what I understand to have happened: Van Auken initially declined to attend, but agreed to do so at the urging of constituents who assured her the event was non-political. She was caught by surprise at the flyer and its implication of support for Schock politically, and thinks that some of her constituents might have been mislead about the event’s real intent. Settingsgaard also was reluctant to attend, but similarly was assured that the event was supposed to be non political.
Its normal and natural for both Van Auken and Settingsgaard to want to meet with citizens in these sorts of settings. Settingsgaard, who has held his job for slightly more than one year, has made it a point to improve communication between the police and private citizens.
There are other reasons why there are concerns over this mailing. A similar one to residents of the Peoria County Board’s 1st District announces a meeting with the principal of Harrison School and “vocalist” Pat Ward, who is a candidate the county board. It begs the question: How can someone who is not currently an office holder be expected to inform the public authoritatively on “state and local issues important to our community.”
It suggests these events are more political than educational. Any electioneering at all, and the event becomes political. That means if any candidate asks anyone for their vote, the mailing becomes an illegal use of state funds, according to one politician which whom I spoke.
The mailing has understandably caused Spears and Van Auken to have a discussion about the situation, and he’s OK with her explanation. Settingsgaard may back out, but there’s bound to be a complaint made to Peoria City Manager Randy Oliver (not from Spears, however).
Billy Dennis is a former reporter and editor at small daily and weekly newspapers in Illinois and Missouri. He comments on media, news and politics. He also owns and operates 
Can you point to where it says that the Chief and counsilperson support Schock? I’m having a bad day. It looks like there is going to be three people there from different perspectives to answer people’s questions. Isn’t this something the people of Peoria should want?
Clayton: Um … As I clearly stated, the text DOESN’T claim an endorsement, but the presentation and design DOES suggest one exists. It LOOKS like a campain mailing. If these was an innocent forum, there would be photos of all three or none. And there wouldn’t be Rep. Schock’s phone number on the thing.
I guess we see it differently. If this is a campaign mailing, it is very poorly done.
Have to agree with Bill on this one. This is a very subtle and clever way to imply something that may or may not be true.
Probably right out of Campaign Tactics 101
why does everything have to be twisted, and turned around? im a loyal democrat that will vote for Shock for all the things he has at least attempted to do for this area. I still cannot recall his predacessor ever having a local meeting. more power to him if he can get the police chief and others to attend by whatever means. why not just report the news without your twists and opinion. or better yet present both sides. lol im sure that would be impossible because us democrats only know one side right? left left left far far left
black helicopter: “why not just report the news without your twists and opinion. or better yet present both sides …”
Perhaps you didn’t read the title of this site: “Peoria PUNDIT.” I’m not a reporter. I’m a pundit. I write something akin to the politial columnists you see on newspaper editorial pages. I occasionally have my little scoops, but for the most point I advocate my positions and point to links I find interesting.
This stuff just “burns me up” as my father used to say (the original post).
The perks of incubentcy. And it is deregeur today. No one thinks twice about it. “Hey, I’m not violating any laws!”
Back when term limits were the big thing, I was against them – I’m not so sure anymore.
Black Helicopter you can not be a loyal Democrat and vote for Schock.
A loyal Democrat would vote for a Democrat and not be a fence rider.
Clayton,
To whom is the “we” which you refer??? Do you have a mouse in your pocket??? or do you feel speaking in the plural of me, you can spin the very inappropriate deceptive campaign literature that the very inappropriate deceptive candidate wishes to use as the bedrock of his re-election efforts.
Why couldn’t have Schock just left his photo off and titled the mailing :
“Community Coffee with Barbara Van Auken, Steve Stettingsgard and Aaron Schock”?
It’s a little fishy in my book. It didn’t take long for Eddie Haskell to learn the tricks of the trade.
Gary, by “we” Clayton meant that “he and Bill” see it differently. I. E., “we” meant “you and I”.
Personally, I think this was a slick trick; perhaps good ol “Turd Blossom” has a handbook of some sort?
Is he hosting (and paying for ) the event?
According to the flyer – this is HIS show and the other two people have agreed to attend. If it is, in fact, HIS show, then I don’t think the flyer is deceptive.
Also, if it is his show and he got two non-supporters to agree to appear with him, then that is one heck of an accomplishment.
Bill, Dennis et. al. I’d have to go back and check your postings to see if you objected to the same”franking” priviledges when used by Ricca. I don’t recall Gary et. al. objecting then an my recollection is that the piece hit much closer to election day. I guess you could say you expected better from Schock even thought its sauce for the gander. The difference to you may be the “implied” endorsement. From a political tactics perspective hasn’t this created the opportunity for a huge boomarang? Won’t whatever benefit Schock recieves from the “implication” be swamped by this negativity? So IMO, either Schock is politically to cute by half and too stupid by double (which his history has not shown) or his “political gambit” really is by doing something in the community to promote dialogue. As for the first district, I think Pat Ward is there for entertainment, not political speechifying. Many in that area know her and would be more likely to come if they knew she would be singing. I don’t hear you complaining that FREE coffee and cookies will be provided as some sort of impropert inducement (yet). Isn’t it the same thing really? Barb is free to criticize the incumbant’s voting for while in SPFLD. at his coffee, and certainly Madigan has or can well supply Spears with sufficient info to do so if they choose. Sorry for the long post.
You offer folks free coffee and cookies and that eventually leads to pie and lemonade and before you know it’ll be an ice cream social!
Oh, the humanity!
Ollie is correct is answering Gary’s question about my post. It wasn’t that hard since the posts are in the order that they are posted.
I guess I’m just glad to hear that the chief is out in the public answering questions. Hopefully there will be some tough questions with good answers. It’s easy to come out and field questions when everything is going smooth, but I doubt many people think that that is the case.
My screen name switched. I was clayton on the first post. I apoligize for the extra post.
Will it be safe to go to One World that morning? I mean I don’t want to get shot while walking from the parking lot in back.
I’ll try this one more time.
It’s the hugely expensive mailers from Topinka’s office, (remember George Ryans mailings for years before his gubernatorial bid), Jesse White’s office, Blago’s office.
This stuff was never designed to be a piggy bank for campaigning.
The congressional accounts, in particular, were supposed to defray the expense of replying to citizen mail.
It was supposed to be about transparency – not P.R.
But then again, I’m living in a political fantasy land, I guess.
Hoosier: Schock stupid? Hardly. He’s smart and well-spoken.
The mailing, by the way, is sent bulk rate or non profit rate. Which means someone has to put up a bond for the permit and pay for the postage when it’s entered into the system. Schock pays for this, probably either out of his pocket or from his donations. If the mailing has a name on it, it can not be forwarded if that person moved, it becomes waste mail and is thrown out. FYI
And none of the stuff that Bill Spears has been doing over the last year on the City Council has been designed to “aid” his election???? There have been several items over the last six months that have been done to give him a platform on which to run….if I’m wrong about this then I’m SURE that he won’t reference them in his campaign materials. While we may wish politics were a nicer engagement, it isn’t unfortunately. I don’t have a problem with the flyer (nor actually with Bill Spears creating a record for himself). If Schock hadn’t held the forum, he’s open to criticism for not addressing the issues in his district. If he holds one, he’s criticized for turning community issues into campaign issues. No win – he should just do what he thinks is right.
It would also be interesting to see if Jennifer Davis gets herself into another ethical lapse again this campaign. If you remember she was slamming Schock in her column and supporting Ricca Sloan (by implication) when her husband was working on Sloan’s campaign…..”Oh, did I forget to mention that?”. wonder if hubby is working for Bill Spears or lending him support?
I just hope that something comes from the crime forum. That’s my interest in the event. I hope that people put the bullcrap politics aside and develop concrete plans on making this city a safe place to live. People are tired of the crime. Drugs are rampant, parents are irresponsible, children are growing up to be hoods and then being shot…let’s focus on something that matters vs. who is supporting whom for an election months away.
[...] The separate profiles on Aaron Schock and Bill Spears seems seem focused on different things. The Schock profile starts with an anecdote that supposedly shows how Schock is an ethical campaigner, having rejected an ad in 2004 that accused his opponent of driving a foreign car. Left out of the article is the fact that Shock this summer was sending out campaign literature in the guise of taxpayer-funded constituent mailings. These mailings appropriated the names of public officials without their permission and they demanded Schock stop. See for yourself: [...]
[...] The separate profiles on Aaron Schock and Bill Spears seems seem focused on different things. The Schock profile starts with an anecdote that supposedly shows how Schock is an ethical campaigner, having rejected an ad in 2004 that accused his opponent of driving a foreign car. Left out of the article is the fact that Shock this summer was sending out campaign literature in the guise of taxpayer-funded constituent mailings. These mailings appropriated the names of public officials without their permission and they demanded Schock stop. See for yourself: [...]
[...] the thing is that Schock has a history of bending if not breaking what should be simple and easy to understand campaign rules. With the media and voters hype-sensitive to crooked electioneering, one wonders what other rules [...]
[...] is hardly a virgin when it comes to appropriating the names and images of people who do not endorse, and who have in [...]
[...] Schock has held legislative office, we have a past experience to guide us in predicting how he would make use of the [...]