More Questions About Rep. Schakowsky's Mystery Earmark

Recently, Big Government told of a proposed fiscal year 2009 federal budget earmark intended for the Save-A-Life Foundation (SALF), a Chicago-area nonprofit that went belly-up late last year. The article questioned why IL Democrat Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, who introduced the appropriation, wanted to fund SALF years after the charity was the subject of a string of media exposes, including four hard-hitting ABC7 Chicago I-Team reports.

Rep. Schakowsky eventually cancelled her earmark for SALF, perhaps in response to scrutiny last January from a conservative blogger, Doug Ross. She wouldn’t answer his questions then, and, according to Big Government, she still won’t now. Here’s what Ross and Big Government wanted to know:

1. What was the dollar amount of Schakowsky’s intended 2009 earmark for SALF?

2. Why was Rep. Schakowsky funding a non-profit years after it was the subject of four ABC7 News Chicago exposes?

3. What’s the relationship between Rep. Schakowsky and the charity’s founder/president Carol J. Spizzirri, whose organization obtained “at least $8.6 million in federal and state grants”? (Chicago Tribune)

4. Does Rep. Schakowsky think SALF should be investigated in order to determine if those millions were properly spent?

Since Rep. Schakowsky’s 2009 SALF earmark didn’t get funded, do these questions matter? Why not let this sleeping dog lie and…move along, nothing to see here? On the other hand, one might ask if this illustrates the degree of due diligence Rep. Schakowsky applies to all her funding requests.

But this article isn’t about those questions, it’s about this question: Since the money didn’t go through, why should Schakowsky refuse to disclose the facts or answer whether or not she thinks the organization should be investigated? Since the ABC7 series, others have raised more questions about SALF and what happened to all the money they received? (And so will we, in a later article.)

SALF’s charter was to provide first aid training to school kids. Last year the Chicago Tribune reported that, according to its founder, Carol Spizzirri, “2 million children took the classes, many of them from the Chicago Public Schools.” However, in the excerpt from the first ABC7 report below, the CEO of the Chicago Schools expressed doubts about the number of kids trained. That would be Arne Duncan who has since become the country’s Secretary of Education. The segment linked above includes Duncan’s appearance as a cartoon character promoting the Save-A-Life Foundation.

Duncan was one of many high-profile Illinois officials who were close to SALF, so it’s safe to assume that when the ABC7 Chicago exposes aired, word got around to area pols. For example, a May 2007 news report (“Save-A-Life’s main government funding may be drying up”) features interviews with two former boosters, IL state senators Emil Jones Jr. (President Obama’s political mentor) and Donne Trotter, in which both distance themselves from SALF.

Is it possible that Schakowsky and her entire staff – she has offices in Evanston, Chicago, and DC – missed all four ABC7 reports? If so, her critics may wonder who’s minding the store.

But let’s give her the benefit of the doubt. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that all the critical stories failed to reach Rep. Schakowsky and her people. SALF representatives persuaded her to submit the earmark, but when she learned there were problems, she cancelled the money before it went through.

However, that line of reasoning doesn’t hold up when you examine the following.

First, who were the SALF representatives with whom Schakowsky arranged the earmark? This photo of a July 15, 2007 public appearance at Chicago’s Warren Park may answer that question.

Under the straw hat is Carol Spizzirri’s partner in SALF, Rita Mullins, who was mayor of suburban Palatine IL for 20 years until she was defeated in a “stunning upset” last year.

Then there’s the question of why Schakowsky refuses to say how much money she was ready to steer towards Save-A-Life. Why would she keep that a secret, especially since the funding was cancelled?

The answer may be that, in addition to the embarrassment caused by funding a long-discredited organization, her intended appropriation may have been $3 million, an unusually large earmark.

Where did that number come from, you ask? Well, it’s an educated guess based on the following facts.

Per her website, Schakowsky’s earmark was designated for the “Save A Life Foundation – Community Response Systems Initiative,” also known as “CRSI.”

Interestingly, a few years earlier there was another CRSI funding attempt for Save-A-Life, this one by a Republican. In June 2006, Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman introduced a $40 million CRSI bill to be funded by the Department of Homeland Security to the tune of $10 million per year for four years. That money didn’t go through either, but according to SALF’s annual report and federal court records, SALF was in line to be a recipient of Coleman’s attempted largesse.

+

]

The screenshot court record above comes from the complaint in a defamation lawsuit filed in 2007 by SALF against ABC7 reporter Chuck Goudie, ABC-TV, and three individuals. Two years later, Save-A-Life filed for voluntary dismissal and a short time later filed for voluntary dissolution as a corporation.

But before throwing in the towel, SALF’s attorney submitted Civil Disclosures as required by federal law. Here’s a screenshot from that document.

Could this be $3 million Schakowsky’s mystery earmark? Since the congresswoman refuses to explain, we may never know unless her constituents, a political rival, or a reporter with swat puts her on the spot.

If that happens, maybe someone will also ask if this other elected Illinois official was working with SALF well after the ABC7 exposes were aired. His name turns up in SALF’s 2007-08 Annual Report: