Karen Ramey: Fitzgerald and Lauzen 'Crazy' Enough to Question the Status Quo

Oh, how I hate to date myself.

Whether it is admitting that the little toehead I gave birth to is now an independent, emancipated adult (yes, that would be best described as off the parental dole), I must admit that sometimes I feel like the past comes around again.

In the early '90s there was a phenomenon born in political GOP Senate circles. Five newbies describing themselves as independent “from the system” entered the political landscape.

Senators Brad Burzynski, Peter Fitzgerald, Chris Lauzen, Steve Rauschenberger and David Syverson wore the term given them as the “Fab Five” as a badge of honor. They wanted to change the system, called for accountability for the taxpayers in their districts, speaking up early and often. Each achieved a level of distinction in his own right.

Kane County’s Senate freshmen gained notoriety early.

Rauschenberger was quickly named Senate Appropriation chairman. Lauzen was placed into the financial leadership structure. Senate leadership utilized his MBA business skills and CPA designation to question directors on various budgetary and spending decisions.

Those old enough to remember that their fellow Sen. Peter Fitzgerald, known to challenge the status quo, and parlayed his banking experience into a courageous run for the U.S. Senate.

I always admired the way that he stood up to the governor of the state of Illinois (no less) when it was “recommended” that he not consider running for the position of U.S. Senate.

He turned a deaf ear on those suggestions and launched a full scale campaign despite the attacks from the traditional leadership of the Springfield Sect composed of Gov. George Ryan and some of the Illinois Republican Party Leadership. After all that position was chosen for someone else.

A short time later, a rumor was perculating around the Capitol that perhaps there was a federal investigation surrounding Gov. Ryan. What would the future hold?

Fitzgerald went on to win the primary and the general election, replacing then Sen. Carol Mosely Braun.

I always had the feeling that even if voters may have had a difference of opinion with Fitzgerald in regard to social or other issues, they respected his independence, fortitude, and yes, even the courage to dare to challenge the “system.”

Fitzgerald was made to feel very alone in those days. The Springfield establishment all but ignored him after his victory. Fitzgerald always believed that government needed to remain independent amidst any investigation of scandal or illegalities. He said that he felt the best course of action was to appoint a U.S. attorney from outside the State of Illlinois, one that would remain separate from inside influences.

The suggestion by then U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert to consider naming an Illinois attorney fell on Fitzgerald’s deaf ears. The Springfield Sect was appalled since their suggestions were not usually ignored.

Well, we do know the rest of the story. A full investigation was completed.

The governor was indicted, convicted and imprisoned.

Fitzgerald had a bad habit of not looking elsewhere when no-bid contracts were given to those operating in the inner circles in Springfield.

His independent spirit (some claim due to his personal wealth) sent off alarms downstate and elsewhere. He could not be influenced by campaign donations or courted by special interests.

What other relationships could be exposed if this “renegade” were allowed to remain in the political process?

In most instances, when the member of one party achieves the status of holding such a high-level seat (such as the U.S. Senate) they are routinely left unchallenged in a primary.

This was not the case with Fitzgerald.

Hastert seemed unhappy about the quality of a politician to consider questioning the behavior of members of his own political party. He had ignored the plea to consider a different U.S. attorney.

So collectively most of the Illinois delegation made it clear that Sen. Fitzgerald should consider retirement. They would not pledge to support him.

He left with his dignity and integrity intact. (Not necessarily something you can say about some other political figures.)

Once Fitzgerald was removed it was time to focus attention on state Sen. Chris Lauzen.

At the same time Lauzen was gaining attention attempting to pass legislation supporting reform, freezing assessments and calling for open elections within his own Republican Party.

I don’t always agree with Sen. Lauzen on everything, but I do admire the courage of his convictions.

For every critic who suggests that he is “ineffective” in passing popular legislation there are “Lauzenites” who are fanatical in their devotion to his focus on taxpayers.

He won handily in his original district.

One redistricting action placed him into the neighboring home county of Dennis Hastert. Surely, the political system established there, with Hastert’s mentor, could remove him.

But what did Chris Lauzen do?

He formed his own army of volunteers in Kendall County and was once again re-elected. He made Kendall County his adopted sibling.

On Saturday, Lauzen announced he would run for Kane County Board chairman and not seek re-election as 25th District state senator.

In doing so, Lauzen may be following the lyrics of Paul Simon and be “crazy” enough “after all these years” to question the status quo once again, this time even closer to home.

And the voters may be just “crazy” enough to elect him again. And Dennis Hastert may not endorse him again. Or maybe he will?

And somewhere in Virginia, Peter Fitzgerald may be smiling.