His opponent’s campaign insists that State
Sen. John Sullivan (D-Rushville) is more
aligned with Chicago Democrats, but Sullivan
disagrees. One of the few downstate Illinois
legislators, he thinks that he has been able
to achieve many more things for his district
than expected. His proudest legislative work
came from something that “was more on a
personal level.”
“I had a young man, a national guardsman, who,
…when he went back to school to finish that
last semester, they told him that the state
wouldn’t help him with his tuition,” he
explained.
“I introduced a bill that said if you’re on
active duty, even though you’re not in a war
zone, if you serve at least five and a half
years in the military, and you’ve completed
‘x’ amount of years going toward your college
education, that you can, indeed, get that
six-month period of time to finish your
degree.”
What about his 2004 campaign? Sullivan says,
“My family has supported me tremendously.”
And they have. His campaign support includes
his mother and children, as well as his uncle,
Frasier’s John Mahoney, who hosted a
Chicago area fundraiser for him this year.
“My uncle, obviously, is somebody who knows
what I stand for and what my values are. He
has been very supportive of the campaign, and
I’m very proud of what he’s accomplished, and
he’s very proud of what I’ve accomplished,” he
said.
“This job is one of the most challenging jobs
that I’ve ever had. It’s certainly the
toughest job that I’ve ever had. Sometimes,
it’s frustrating, but I look at the job,
people, and the good things that I’ve
accomplished. It’s also the most rewarding
job that I’ve ever had. It’s a job that I
enjoy immensely and something that I want to
continue to do.”
Q: In 2002, it looked
like Sen. Donahue would remain in her seat,
with polls like The Quincy Herald-Whig
showing her with a lead. What made you want
to challenge her? Did anyone ever think you
couldn’t be elected?
A: First of all, I wanted
to get into politics pretty much my entire
adult life, and I hadn’t really been active in
politics until I ran for the Senate seat,
because my job and work kept me very busy. I
have four children who, obviously, demand a
lot of time. When I decided to get into
politics, I wanted to do it full-time. I
wanted to make sure that my commitments at
work were such that I could devote myself
full-time to this job.
I, before the ’02 election, after a lot of
discussion with my wife and family, decided
that the time was right. I had always looked
at the possibility of running for the Senate
or the Illinois House. As I got to look at
the makeup of the district and where I was
located in the district, I felt like the
Senate was doable.
Obviously, running against not only a 21-year
incumbent but running in a district that is
about 57, 58 percent Republican, I was biting
off a big chunk there. But the fact of the
matter was I felt like Sen. Donahue was not
working as hard as I felt like she should be.
She hadn’t had any competition in ten years;
nobody had run against her. I thought that
regardless how the election turned out,
whether I won or lost, that was going to be
best for the people here in the district.
Q: When you decided
that you wanted to run, how did your friends
and family react?
A: My family was very,
very supportive. I come from a large family.
I’m one of 11 children, and my wife is one of
eight, so we have a very large extended
family, as well as nieces and nephews,
in-laws, cousins and aunts – tremendous family
support. Their reaction was just
overwhelmingly positive. They worked
extremely hard, both in the ’02 election, as
well as this election. They’ve walked door to
door with me; they’ve put on fundraisers; just
lots of advice. It’s been truly amazing.
They’ve been very supportive.
Q: In the two years
since then, what have you learned from being
in Springfield, and what have you done to help
the district?
A: There’s a number of
things I feel like I’ve accomplished. One of
the first bills I had the privilege to carry
was the ethanol tax credit extension bill,
which, basically in the long run, will allow
investors and individuals to cooperate that
want to build and expand ethanol plants. It
gave them the commitment to know that this tax
exemption would be there for at least ten
years, so that they make the capitol outlays
to either build an ethanol plant or expand an
existing one that they would know that they
could be profitable for a number of years.
Also, I sponsored and created the Western
Illinois Economic Development Authority, which
is a regional economic development tool that
covers 13 counties here in west central
Illinois, and it has $250 million of bonding
authority that can only be spent in these 13
counties. That’s really where the difference
is. There’s bonding authorities all over the
state of Illinois and some that cover the
entire state. The problem is that there’s so
much money allocated to those authorities, and
by the time the money trickles down to west
central Illinois here, the money’s spent.
It’s gone, used up. This $250 million bonding
authority can only be spent here in west
central Illinois. That’s a very important
piece of legislation.
It’s more on a personal level – I had a young
man, a national guardsman, who went on active
duty while he was trying to complete his
college education. He was on active duty on
six months. At the end of the six-month
period of time, his enlistment ran out, and he
came back home, and he had one semester of
college to finish up. When he went back to
school to finish that last semester, they told
him that the state wouldn’t help him with his
tuition, because even though he was on active
duty, he wasn’t in a war zone. He didn’t go
to Iraq or Afghanistan, so they wouldn’t let
him finish up that last semester. He told me
about this. He said, “John, I would’ve gone
to Iraq or Afghanistan or anywhere my country
would’ve told me to go.
“They asked me to stay in the states and serve
here,” and that’s what he did. He felt like
that was not fair. So I introduced a bill
that said if you’re on active duty, even
though you’re not in a war zone, if you serve
at least five and a half years in the
military, and you’ve completed “x” amount of
years going toward your college education,
that you can, indeed, get that six-month
period of time to finish your degree. That’s
more on a personal level. He approached me
about what he thought was an injustice. I
worked together with him and with Springfield,
and we were able to pass legislation that I
think will certainly make a difference.
Q: What are a few
things happening each day in Springfield that
most people don’t know about?
A: I think that a huge
part of my job is the constituent work,
definitely taking care of the needs and
concerns of the people that live here in the
47th District. When we’re in
Springfield, I have a full-time office at the
Capitol, and I also have two district offices:
one in Quincy, and one in Macomb. It seems
like while we’re in session, while we’re in
Springfield, most of the focus is part of the
constituent work and what happens. While I’m
there, yes, certainly, we’re working on
legislation. When we’re done studying
legislation, we’re looking at possible bills
to sponsor, or we’re talking to individuals
about legislation, whether they and their
groups are for it, or whether they’re against
it.
Really, much of my time involves working with
my constituents and trying to address their
concerns and needs. I think one of the best
things about being in Springfield is when my
constituents, the people who live in my
district, come to Springfield to visit me,
either with a problem, concern, or just to
stop in and say hello. I think it’s really
important that people are involved, that they
know what’s going on in Springfield, that they
know who their legislators are, that they’re
approachable. They can come up and talk to
me. My door’s always open. I make every
attempt to try to address their concerns and
needs.
Q: Your opponent keeps
bringing up that you voted to elect Emil Jones
Senate President, saying that Jones’ views
don’t match up with your district. What is
your side – why do you believe it was right to
vote for Jones?
A: Certainly, I don’t
agree with everything that Sen. Jones agrees
with. We have different opinions on a number
of issues, but we also agree on some issues.
Pres. Jones realizes the importance of
education, as do I, and when I ran for this
office, I said that education had to be a
priority. I made it a priority, and that’s
with the help of Sen. Jones. We were able to
put $364 million, new money, into education
this year. We will put $30 million into early
childhood education. We will hold the higher
education budget at level funding. There’s no
cuts for education. These are things that the
President and I agree on.
There’s other
things that we don’t agree on. Gun control is
one of those issues he and I differ, probably
complete opposite ends of the spectrum on
that. He is still the type of the man who I
can go to and sit down, talk to him one on
one, and tell him where I stand on an issue
and how I feel about it. Even though we may
not agree on that issue, he is open-minded,
and he’ll listen to what I have to say.
My opponent is certainly trying to get a
message out there that I stand for some of
these very things, some of these so-called,
“liberal agenda” items. I don’t stand for
those. I am a gun owner. I have the
endorsement of the NRA. I’m pro-life. Always
have been, and always will be. These are
things that I feel very strongly about.
With all the talk about political agenda,
there have been no gun control bills that have
passed the Senate. We, downstate legislators
and myself, have been able to stop any type of
that legislation. On the contrary, we’ve
actually passed a pro-gun bill in the Senate,
including one bill that says if an intruder
breaks into your home, and you defend yourself
with a gun, that you can’t be prosecuted by
that municipality that you live in, even
though that municipality may say you can’t do
that.
My opponent says that these gun control bills,
that’s what the agenda is. Quite the
contrary. There’s been no gun control bills.
We’ve actually passed pro-gun bills.
In regards to Pres. Jones, he is a man who is
open. He’ll listen to both sides of an
argument. With him having the ability to
control the agenda by being in leadership, he
has not done that. That pro-gun bill I was
just mentioning – he could have held that up
in the Senate. It could have not been
released, or it could’ve been not heard, but
that’s not what he did. He listened to his
members and his colleagues, and that bill was
released, and we passed it.
Q: The Ernst campaign
uses a quote from the Canton Daily Ledger:
“Sullivan said school districts in Cook County
and the Collar Counties have more in common
with those in downstate Illinois than many
people think.” What are some of the
similarities that people wouldn’t expect?
A: There’s different
parts of the state that are struggling with
their education funding like we are. They are
needing more dollars. Their tax base is
dwindling, and as the tax base dwindles, their
education dollars dwindle. More specifically,
in areas of Cook Co. and Chicago, they are
facing some of those same problems in the
dropping of their assess valuations. What I’m
saying is, there’s other areas of the state,
not just us downstaters, not just us in
western Illinois, who realize we need to get
away from our over-reliance on property taxes
to fund our schools and at least come up with
a more equitable way to fund our schools.
There are other areas of the state that feel
that way as well. What we have to do as
legislators is find some common ground and
work toward the betterment of our constituents
our children.
Q: You had your own
response ad, accusing Ernst of using
government funding for trips and raising
taxes. Can you explain more about that?
A: As a park board member
and president of the park board, property tax,
real estate levy tax was raised 76 percent
while he’s been on that board. Obviously, out
of that money that’s been raised, there’s
trips that have been taken around the country,
all at taxpayers’ expense. I think that’s
important. At a forum he and I had last week
one day, he said, “I don’t believe in raising
taxes.” I think that it’s important for
people to know that indeed, he has raised
taxes. One thing a challenger can do is just
sit out there and make accusations towards the
incumbent. In this case, he’s saying one
thing but has done another, and I’ve pointed
that out.
Q: “Sullivan votes
with Chicago” is something you’ve probably
heard many times. Your recent commercial says
that is a misinterpretation. When do you feel
you have voted for the 47th
District, and how do you think people have
come to believe that?
A: Obviously, I have to
look at every piece of legislation. If
there’s a piece of legislation that is going
to be detrimental to my district, if it’s a
bill that’s going to hurt people in my
district, I’m not going to support that bill.
If it’s a bill that’s going to help my
district, but it’s also going to help other
areas, including Chicago, obviously, I’m going
to support that bill. If it’s an issue that I
think is right for me and my district, I’ll
support it. If it’s an issue that is not
right for me and my district, I won’t support
it. The classic example is the proposed tax
on agriculture] inputs: fertilizer, feed, and
chemicals. That was something that would’ve
had a devastating input on my district, and so
I did not support that. I was actually
successful in getting it stopped. That was
just one example. Every proposal, every bill
has to be judged for its merits.
Q: People in western
Illinois have been through so many ads and
political coverage. In your own words, why
should people reelect you on Nov. 2?
A: I have spent the last
two years covering my district, talking to the
people in my district, representing my
district, listening to the people in my
district, and I think that is definitely one
of the most important things that a legislator
can do. I have 13 in the 47th
District. It’s the largest Senate district in
the state of Illinois. I certainly have a
challenge in trying to get to all those
communities and talk to most of those folks,
but it’s something that I have made a
commitment to do.
For the last two years, I’ve had office hour
tours. In other words, I travel to a
community that I normally wouldn’t have office
hours in, and just go to a courthouse or city
hall and set up a traveling office there,
allow people to come in and ask questions. If
they have problems or concerns, I’ll try to
address them, and I’ve done that in all 13
counties throughout the district on numerous
occasions. I try to make myself accessible to
the people, which is very important.
The other
reason I think people should vote for me is I
represent my district. I stand for what I
think a majority of the people believes in.
I’m willing to work hard to represent those
values in Springfield. When you go back and
look at some of the accomplishments of the
legislation I’ve passed, those were all good
bills, and they were good bills for the people
here in western Illinois.
Politics
Today 
Politics
Today:
John Sullivan (D-Rushville)
for District 47 State Senate