River Forest doctor to run for Congress again

Dr. Jeffrey Leef, a Republican, promotes free markets, universal basic income

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Print

By Michael Romain

Staff Reporter

Dr. Jeffrey Leef, a River Forest radiologist who ran as the Republican challenger against U.S. Rep. Danny K. Davis (7th) in 2018, recently announced that he's running for Congress again. 

In an interview on Sunday, Leef said that he's wiser to how local electoral politics operate in Democrat-heavy Cook County, which should help him as he maneuvers his way onto the ballot. 

But even though Leef won't be an entirely new entity in his second bid for Congress, he'll still have to confront the novelty of running as a moderate in a party that's currently helmed by Republican President Donald Trump. 

"My approach is going to be the same," said Leef. "I go along through these things honestly and put my views out there, but I'm not as naive now of all the things that can happen."

On Nov. 8, 2016, Leef garnered around 16 percent of the vote in a head-to-head matchup against Davis, who has been in Congress for 20 years. But the high political drama happened during the Republican Primary race. 

Leef said he decided to run for the House seat because he was frustrated that so many races were going uncontested. Since he made his decision after the primary contest, he had to get nominated by his party's committeemen in order to run in the general against Davis. 

Leef secured the required nomination and minimum petition signatures to appear on the ballot, but a former Republican Party committeeman objected to Leef's candidacy. The ousted committeeman had been removed from his position after the Chicago GOP changed its bylaws to declare ineligible any committeeman who voted in Democratic primary races in the last eight years — a move that party leaders said was made in order to tamp down on Democratic interference in local Republican primary races.

The Chicago Board of Elections upheld the objection to Leef's candidacy, which would have kicked him off the ballot; however, Leef filed, and eventually won, a federal lawsuit that allowed him to stay in the race. 

"It was an eye-opener," Leef said of the experience, "but thank God I came out of it. It gave me faith in the whole process. We live in a two-party system here and the average guy should be able to express his views, run and let the people speak. I ask for nothing more than that." 

Leef said that, despite his considerable opposition to some measures taken by Trump and Congressional Republicans, he still has faith in the basic decency of the American people and of the country's institutions. 

"I agree 100 percent that the Trump personality is like no other that has been in office and I'm not saying that in a positive way, but his personality, if nothing else, was no mystery to people in this country," Leef said. "Sixty-million people voted for him and I'm not going to believe we exist in a country where there are 60 million racists, misogynists, Muslim- and Latino-hating people." 

Leef decried what he said is the tendency of many on the Left to caricature all Republicans based on the actions, and language, of far-right politicians and extreme right personalities, such as Trump. 

But Leef also voiced frustration with Congressional Republicans, who he said, "completely let me down." 

"For seven years, the Republicans lied, saying that they had something that had already been drawn up and ready to go," said Lee, a radiologist who said that he'll soon be assuming the role of director of interventional radiology at the University of Chicago's new South Side trauma center. 

"All they were doing was using the fact that there are fatal flaws in the ACA and yelling about it," he said. "They didn't have anything solid to replace it with. But because the Republicans were incompetent with the issue doesn't mean that that the ACA is good. There are some fatal flaws with ACA that need to be changed." 

Leef said that the country's healthcare system should be more privatized and subject to more competition and choice — an approach that he said should also be taken in other sectors, such as education.

The physician pivoted to his left, however, when laying out his most ambitious campaign platform. 

"I'm in favor of a universal salary that every American would be entitled to," he said. "It would be a certain base salary, let's say $40,000 or $30,000. You'll have that money and use it make your own choices — whether you decide to spend it on school or healthcare. There has to be cheap, baseline catastrophic personal insurance. You can't leave people without the means to pay for it. And the current plans are not affordable for the average person." 

CONTACT: michael@oakpark.com 

Reader Comments

7 Comments - Add Your Comment

Note: This page requires you to login with Facebook to comment.

Comment Policy

Jeffrey Leef  

Posted: October 24th, 2017 10:18 AM

Tom- your points are more than valid and pinpoint the very legitimate worry with the plan. A pretty good response, to paraphrase Milton Friedman, is that what you describe already exists with the plan we have used since the so-called war on poverty began . That system has proven to be an expensive , abject failure. I truly feel it's time for a new direction. Admittedly, I'm not an economist, let alone a noble prize winner , but I think this makes good sense. I will continue doing what I'm doing for years and read daily to learn more. Thanks for the discussion. It's truly appreciated.

Tom MacMillan from Oak Park  

Posted: October 24th, 2017 7:54 AM

You are ok with me Jeff. That idea is being touted by others, it is a really big change to be sure in how everything would work as far as entitlements go. Challenges I see are the citizenship issue and then also, money is given to someone and they blow through it and then what - there will be people still asking for even more. Where does it ever end?

Jeffrey Leef  

Posted: October 24th, 2017 7:24 AM

Tom - sorry i reacted sharply. It's just that I am more anti-communist than Reagan. One of the reasons a Guaranteed minimum wage has not flown is that it is difficult to explain. To be honest, my wife had a similar reaction. I will add a section on my website to clarify but I will add here that it would apply to citizens only and there would be stipulations such that recipients would be incentivized to work. This would cut our welfare bill in half.

Tom MacMillan from Oak Park  

Posted: October 20th, 2017 6:10 PM

Ok Jeff, don;' want to be silly so I read the article you shared. . So lets give every citizen money just for existing and lets do the other popular idea of not enforcing our borders and we can just give everyone in the entire world a salary for doing nothing. That is not silly at all, unless you are a person silly enough to work and pay taxes to fund it all. Good luck with your campaign.

Jeffrey Leef from river forest  

Posted: October 20th, 2017 5:47 PM

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/why-arent-reformicons-pushing-a-guaranteed-basic-income/375600/

Jeffrey Leef from river forest  

Posted: October 20th, 2017 1:59 PM

https://medium.com/basic-income/why-milton-friedman-supported-a-guaranteed-income-5-reasons-da6e628f6070 People should educate themselves before making silly comments

Tom MacMillan from Oak Park  

Posted: October 20th, 2017 9:18 AM

Universal Salary for merely existing? Should run as a communist party candidate.

Facebook Connect

Answer Book 2017

To view the full print edition of the Wednesday Journal 2017 Answer Book, please click here.

Quick Links

Sign-up to get the latest news updates for Oak Park and River Forest.


            
SubscribeClassified
MultimediaContact us
Submit Letter To The Editor
Place a Classified Ad

Classified Ad

Latest Comments