ArchPundit

Turow on Obama

ArchPundit March 30, 2004 2 Comments

It helps to have an excellent writer profile you who happens to like you a lot.

I find the most interesting to be his ability to analyze legislation

In retrospect, that walk through the political shadows proved a turning point in Obama’s career. He recommitted himself to the Illinois Senate, where his intelligence and his growing savvy about the legislative process were combining to make him increasingly formidable. When Democrats took over the chamber in 2003, Obama won General Assembly approval of 26 bills, including legislation to expand healthcare benefits for uninsured children and adults, an earned income tax credit for low earners, and major criminal justice reforms.

The latter measures were of particular interest to me. In the summer of 2002, Obama had called me to get together to talk about death-penalty reform. For more than two years, I had sat as one of the 14 members of the Commission on Capital Punishment, a body that Gov. Ryan had appointed in 2000, after declaring a moratorium on executions in Illinois because of a growing record of mistakes in the capital process, most notably the death sentences of 13 individuals who were subsequently exonerated. In April 2002, the commission issued its report, including 85 recommendations for reform of Illinois’ laws.

Despite Ryan’s support for our recommendations, resistance to the measures ran deep in the General Assembly, due in large part to the barely tempered rage that had been been expressed by many Illinois prosecutors. After appearing at legislative hearings that spring, I grew skeptical that any of the proposals would become law. When I met Obama the following summer, he went through the recommendations with me, analyzing which proposed reforms had a chance of passing and which did not. I was impressed not only by the shrewdness of his analysis but also by his lack of rancor about those who disagreed with him and, most of all, by his refusal to bow to conventional wisdom about what was possible. There were a couple of provisions that had essentially been pronounced DOA, where I remember Obama saying, We might be able to do something there.

Oh, and no I haven’t seen any polls, but I check the Hotline every day so as soon as I see ’em, so will you.

What Should They Have Done Differently?

ArchPundit March 29, 2004 No Comments

OneMan is also running a good series on what Republican candidates should have done differently in the primary. The last is Jim Oberweis with the others linked from that entry. I hope he’ll continue to some of the others. I was thinking of the same for the Dems, but I think it is obvious so I’m leaning towards not ripping off his schtick. Any comments?

Ryan Divorce Files Go to A Referree

ArchPundit March 29, 2004 No Comments

The court case the Tribune brought to unseal Jack Ryan’s custody papers for his 9 year old son has been sent to a court referee to figure out what items should remain sealed to protect the child and what documents refer to simple disputes between Ryan and his ex-wife Jeri Ryan.

The telling part is the lameness of the arguments put forward by Ryan’s lawyer:

Ryan’s lawyer, Larry Ginsberg, said the situation has changed since Schnider’s original ruling.

“The detriment to the child is even more evident now,” he said. “The respondent is now the nominee for Senate for the Republican Party.”

Ryan won the Republican nomination in the March 16 Illinois primary. Some of his GOP opponents raised the issue of the sealed papers in the primary.

He said that the level of interest in the case has escalated and “it is now in the absolute worst interest of the child because it will be spun and reported.”

The judge commented at one point: “That’s the price of living in a free society that has open records, and Mr. Ryan is going to have to deal with that.”

I say lame because the interest of the child is only if there is information that damages the child. So information pertaining to the child’s whereabouts or his personal life separate from his parents is reasonable to exclude from the public only because it affects a party not included in the case, but the child trying to be protected. The rest is fair game and should be available because the courts should be an open institution. Protecting parents from embarrassment is not an acceptable reason to close files (or shouldn’t be).

In this case, the judge seems to be making very prudent decisions.

It is important to note that Jeri Ryan is now in favor of keeping the files closed. I’ve been somewhat reluctant to bring up some of this before, but I think it is important to note that the family did face a very serious and dangerous stalker some years ago. Jack Ryan’s fear of people misusing personal information isn’t without grounds. For some background on this there are some usenet discussions that detail the problems. As a warning they are not pretty and demonstrate a man who is clearly dangerous and in desperate need of treatment. Access his statements about Ryan here and for some of the Usenet commentary try here.

Not only did he do this on Usenet, he apparently sent many sexually explicit e-mails to Jeri Ryan and threatened her boyfriend Brannon Braga. So the concerns aren’t baseless, but instead of weeding out the material that is a concern from the rest, Ryan has created an issue that isn’t dying.