Progress Illinois

That was pathetic on Biggert's part. Every voter in the 13th ought to see this interview in it's entirety. Judy Biggert doesn't seem to know what she's talking about. A lot like McCain.

Like everything else from Haper: out of context and misleading.

I wish you had posted the entire debate. All you're going to do is let your opponents attack you for taking things out of context.

I thought the most disturbing part of the debate was that Harper said he would have voted for the first Wall Street bailout package, which was nothing more than a complete $700 billion giveaway to Wall Street. Is that what I'm voting for?

As Chair of the Finance Subcommittee for seven years, largely during control of congress by her party, Congresswoman Biggert endorsed and/or stood by the Bush administration’s decisions to let the financial institutions regulate themselves, under the mantra that regulation is bad for business. To understand how irresponsible this is, consider the idea of eliminating the highway patrol and asking citizens to ticket themselves if they drive too fast. Allowing financial institutions to set their own rules has caused worldwide economic collapse. Congresswoman Biggert sought to duck responsibility for the collapse by citing a 2001 memo she wrote, asking Fannie Mae to get rid of some of its mortgages.

Hold on. The credit crunch came about because Congress and the Bush administration allowed financial institutions to pursue profits with no rules. Freed of pesky regulations, the banks borrowed more and more, and then extended mortgages to anyone who would sign, many of whom had no hope of repayment. Then they packaged these junk mortgages together in supposedly creditworthy instruments and sold the packages for a profit before the inevitable defaults. This was the largest Ponzi scheme in history, done on Finance Subcommittee Chair Biggert’s watch. Did anyone watching get a sense that Congresswoman Biggert ever understood, or even today understands the depth of failure by her committee or the responsibility they must shoulder for the economic collapse?

CJ is right on the mark. I watched the show lasst night. Harper isn't posting here his non-answer to why he just moved into the country to run for congress. This kind of campaigning is so juvenile.

You can watch the whole debate here:
http://www.wttw.com/main.taf?p=42,8,1&pl=New%20Video%202
The two videos I posted above represent the entirety of both candidates' comments on either the economy, the bailout, or taxes. Not quite sure how I could be charged with taking anything out of context.

Harper grew up in Naperville, graduated from Wheaton College and has a MBA from U. of Chicago. He built a business in Chicago and he's been in England at Oxford University for all of two years studying for his doctorate.

I know Republicans think branding someone a foreigner is a winning strategy after photoshopping Tammy Duckworth's eyes in Roskam's ads to make her look like Mao Tse Tung's daughter instead of a "real" American but the same old tired fear tactics look incredibly stupid and petty these days.

CJ I hate to tell you but the fine print of the second bailout isn't any better than the first except for $150 billion in add ons that have their good points and bad. The reason the language in both bills was left so vague was to give Paulson maximum flexibility to come to his senses and adopt the equity injection solution which Republicans like Biggert were calling socialism. It's also left vague so Obama doesn't get hamstrung with $700 billion worth of boneheaded Republican idealogy masquerading as policy.

This is a really sad and juvenile way to attack someone who simply was being rushed by the show's host and producers. Its sad the way the Harper campaign is using these "Gotcha" tactics. But I guess that's what you should expect from someone that has never held office and isn't from the district.

Come on. She had almost a minute to get a decent answer out. That's not a lot, but it's also not much different than the guidelines in many of the presidential debates.

As for being rushed, I've been on Chicago Tonight -- on a Thursday no less -- and can tell you there's no producer squawking in your earpiece to wrap it up. In fact, there's no one in sight on that stage except the host. Biggert's been in Congress for ten years. You think she'd be a pro at handling these kind of appearances.

Finally, don't make this about the Harper campaign. They had nothing to do with this post. We watched the debate, as well have all the candidate face-offs on WTTW, and were struck by Biggert's performance (and not just the final answer). If you're going to criticize anyone, criticize us.

I'm a first time voter trying to get information on the candidates so and i eneded up here. I know clips can be misleading. Not sure what the context of this was. Not sure who is telling the truth and who is not. The only thing you can do is listen to what they say.

Scott Harper looks comfortable. Judy Biggert doesn't. BUT i dont care about that. What i do care about is substance...

In the first clip, Scott Harper starts with talking points... the same thing that we here all over the place lumping all republicans with Bush. Anyone who buys into these generalities is a moron and i am kind of insulted that he thinks i am stupid enough to believe that Judy Biggert (a moderate) is a crazy Bush supporter. But then he says something of substance... the deficit is huge and we have to fix that. I agree. But then he says its not going to happen because of the 700 billion bailout... which he said he supports. SO that is confusing.

Biggert starts off by saying we should not raise taxes. I agree that in this climate we can't. Then she talks about the democrats raising taxes. General statements like that are stupid too. Not all democrats like raising taxes. But if what she says is true, it doesnt seem like they will vote to raise taxes... they will just not vote to extend tax breaks which is a tax increase. She ends weak... obviously by saying SCHIP. But i have never been on TV. I am sure they try to rush your answer before the commercials which is why she seemed flustered.

On the 2nd clip Biggert had a lot of great information. Actual facts about the bailout. I hate the bailout, but hearing her role and what she has done makes me more comfortable - she seems to get it. Harpers experience shouldnt be ignored though. He makes great points too.

The debate looks like a wash to me. Yeah this article is trying to make it seem like Biggert lost, but on substance it is even. Biggert had more substance if you ignore the bumps along the road. Harper has experience as a business man.

I'll continue to look for more information. I love Obama. But dont want to vote straight ticket democrat. I am going to give Biggert the opportunity to win me over. Harper too.

What I got from the debate on the "Bailout" is Judy, in her own words, has been working on this finacial problem since 2000. It's know 2008. When she was asked about her results she goes into some kind of "Blame Game" responce. If you can't be mature enough to answer the question and not change the topic to "everyone is against me," you should not be overseeing the financial future of this country.
At my job, if you mess up that big they fire you, which is exactly what I did at early voting.

OMG - An "S-CHIP Corporation?" I never thought that such a dower dowager could get me laughing so hard. That should start a new category on Wheel of Fortune. It's not a "before and after, " It's more of a "Sandwich," like, for example, "Social Security Butterfly." And which country was she insinuating Scott Harper had just come from? And based on what - his exotic ethnic name? Too funny. I say - beyond time to retire, Judy.

Darren I commend you for trying to get information before voting. I suggest you go to WTTW Channel 11's website and look up the show the debate was on "Chicago Tonight". You'll find the whole segment which is only 14 minutes long. Please watch it.

Mrs. Biggert has been on the House Financial Services Committee for 10 years now. That whole time she's advocated deregulation, "getting the government off business's back" like virtually every other Republican. While some Dems on that committee have received as much or more than her $230,000 in campaign contributions from the financial community it has been the Republican party that has pushed to shrink government and it's oversight function to the point where we are today.

The reason she looked so uncomfortable is because she and her radical rightwing ideologue friends allowed Wall Street to write $62 trillion dollars worth of side bets (derivatives known as insurance swaps) unfettered by any regulations saying they had to have the money to pay off those bets in case they went bad. It was all based at it's peak of the bubble - that invariably happens when there is no government regulatory agency saying stop - on whether or not 3 bedroom bungalows in Stockton CA or 2 bedroom condos in Ft Lauderdale FL are really worth a million dollars. They're not. What's worse is there isn't $62 trillion dollars on the planet.

She stumbled and stammered because the only things she could think of to say were the same discredited tropes she's been peddling for years, "now is no time to raise taxes" etc. etc.

Actually now is the time to let those Bush tax cuts expire. This nation had less than 1 trillion dollars debt in 1981 when Jimmy Carter left office. $990 billion to be exact. We had a huge debt after WW11. We paid it off and funded all kinds of projects like building the interstate highway system, the GI bill that sent millions of returning soldiers to college, and all those FHA houses we built by taxing at a top marginal rate of 79% all through the Eisenhower years. Not to mention the Marshal Plan that kept Europe from succumbing to communism. Once we paid off enough of that debt JFK wisely lowered those top marginal rates at the top end of earnings. To 63%.

It took us over 200 years, 2 world wars, a civil war, umpteen recessions and depressions under both Dem and Rep presidents to run up less than a trillion dollar debt. In 27 short years of supply side, trickle down economics and huge tax cuts for the rich that they blew on chasing one Wall St. bubble to the next we've now ballooned that debt to over $10 trillion dollars. It's well on it's way to $11 trillion by the time Bush leaves office in January and it'll have to be at least $12 trillion when all is said and done if the "socialist" CPR we're applying to the bankrupt American financial system is going to work and the world is going to avoid a utterly disastrous depression.

Harper nailed it. The reason we're in the mess we are is because Congress, including Biggert, declined to regulate credit default swaps. She doesn't want to play the blame game because the blame lays squarely on her shoulders.

Glad she worked on the second version of the bill. You know, the version with a $2 million tax benefit for makers of wooden arrows for children; a $100 million tax break to benefit auto racetrack owners; $192 million in rebates on excise taxes for the Puerto Rican and Virgin Islands rum industry; $148 million in tax relief for U.S. wool fabric producers; and a $49 million tax benefit for fishermen and other plaintiffs who sued Exxon over the 1989 tanker Valdez spill.

Congratulations Congresswoman. Job well done. Really looking out for the average American taxpayer. Please stop looking out for us...we can't afford it anymore.

By the way, what the heck is an SCHIP corporation? There are S Corps and C Corps, and the SCHIP was the acronym for State Childrens Health Insurance Program, coincidentlay a bill you voted on (the SCHIP Extension Act of 2007).

Will, Scott Harper IS from the district, born and raised here.

Judy, on the other hand, told the Sun that her reason for changing her vote on the bailout bill was that she did not realize the poor economy was affecting the people of this district. You do not have to live in this district to understand the people of it, just as you can live here for decades and be completely out of touch with the people as well.

Both candidates were rushed in this debate. If anything, I think that shows very well how they will handle situations in Washington. After all, how many times has legislation, like the bailout, been rushed in response to a crisis? If she cannot handle being rushed in a debate, how can we trust her to make a good choice when the stakes are higher???

Biggert has been a virtual rubber stamp for Republicans and the Bush Administration. She does what she is told and must be held accountable for the terrible condition that our country is in. It is time for a change in DuPage County and my 13th District. The fact that Scott Harper has not been involved in any political machine makes him very attractive to me because I want real change in Washington. Denny Hastert was Biggert’s mentor and he has left, so it is time for her to leave. She’s had her chance to represent us and it is time to give someone with a truly independent outlook a chance to bring change to Washington. We don’t need any more professional politicians who put their party ahead of our country.

If Biggert's name was not all over this post and comments, I would swear everyone was talking about Shimkus. Everything that Retired Military Patriot said about Biggert -- goes double for Shimkus. Both of them are such an embarrassment to Congress and Illinois.

ALISON, MPA
http://philosopheforum.blogspot.com/
"Responsible Leadership Serving the Public Trust"