Democratic ethics reform plans surface
Thursday, Nov 14, 2019 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Tribune…
Illinois lawmakers are considering new disclosure requirements for lobbyists and public officials in response to an ongoing federal public corruption probe that has ensnared politicians from Chicago City Hall to the Capitol in Springfield. […]
Democratic leaders are proposing a joint House-Senate committee be formed to examine and propose changes to the state’s lobbying and ethics laws. The panel would issue a report by March 31. […]
The measure also would require more disclosure by state lobbyists, including making them disclose any unit of local government that they lobby and any elected or appointed office they hold.
House Republican leader Jim Durkin of Western Springs, whose caucus has issued repeated calls for overhauling lobbying and ethics laws, said there was no input from the GOP on the proposals Democrats introduced.
* Republicans had another complaint…
* Something not mentioned in the coverage so far is this problem pointed out by Mark Brown the other day…
Many lobbyists these days put as much effort into coming up with novel legal theories to avoid disclosing their clients as they do representing them.
And even when they do disclose, they often resort to a Russian doll strategy of obfuscation, where lobbyists are allowed to hide their efforts by reporting only that they’ve been retained by other lobbyists, instead of naming the underlying clients.
That’s exactly right and very well-put. Sub-contractors are supposed to disclose which clients they lobby for, but the law may be a bit on the vague side and far too many lobbyists don’t disclose who their real clients are. So, this provision was included in the new bill…
If the [lobbyist] registrant employs or retains a sub-registrant, the statement shall include the name and address of the sub-registrant and identify the client or clients of the registrant on whose behalf the sub-registrant will be or is anticipated to be performing services.
Good on Mark for highlighting this problem.
There is no mandate in the bill for lobbyists to disclose their income, by the way.
- Rabid - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 11:02 am:
The minority is in denial
- Altgelds Ghost - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 11:11 am:
Mendacity
- Merica - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 11:47 am:
the law only matters if it’s enforced. Our current ethics laws aren’t enforced, so why would these be enforced?
the barrier to enforcement is that the enforcing body has to make a decision to scrutinize politically influential people, something that has rarely happened here on a state level. it’s always the feds.
- Chicagonk - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 11:50 am:
Amazing that they think the answer is more disclosure instead of just banning elected officials from being paid to lobby other government bodies. Durkin needs to continue to ramp up the pressure and make this a central campaign issue if the Democrats pass another disclosure or task force law.
- Flat Bed Ford - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 12:02 pm:
Democrats are going to their standard play. Task force and wait it out.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 12:06 pm:
=== Democrats are going to their standard play. Task force and wait it out.===
(Sigh)
“Illinois pols are going to their standard play. Task force and wait it out.”
Better
- Chicagonk - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 12:38 pm:
@OW - Democrats own the response on this and should be judged accordingly. Durkin has been the one pushing for action now and there could and should be a bipartisan response to the ongoing corruption issues, so hopefully we do not see more can kicking. I’m willing to give them the spring if it means a better and stronger bill, but if there are no results next spring or all we get is a watered down bill, that will be on the Democrats.
- Just Me 2 - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 12:49 pm:
The purpose of these commissions is to come up with oddly agreed upon recommendations. Making the commission partisan means there is no interest in coming to agreement on solutions.
Also, I can’t help but notice the commission is entirely made up of lawmakers. History has proven lawmakers are unwilling to reform the way they operate. The commission needs participation from non-lawmakers, like maybe some voters.
- Just Me 2 - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 12:51 pm:
“Oddly” should be “totally”. Not sure how that autocorrect happened.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 12:52 pm:
=== Democrats own the response on this and should be judged accordingly.===
So the point is to make partisan hay, or get something done.
The same folks are ignoring that there was a ethics package in January
https://capitolfax.com/2019/10/30/senate-republican-proposal-addresses-half-the-problem-identified-by-former-ig/
The point of the exercise is… “if this is going to be a partisan finger point, we can just stop and hold them all accountable.
=== Durkin has been the one pushing for action now and there could and should be a bipartisan response to the ongoing corruption issues, so hopefully we do not see more can kicking.===
Again, angst for its own sake is the changing anything.
=== Durkin has been the one pushing for action now and there could and should be a bipartisan response to the ongoing corruption issues, so hopefully we do not see more can kicking.===
We “could” wonder aloud why the four caucuses can’t get one bill that will be strong, and passed, in the Spring.
The days of voting Red because “it doesn’t go far enough” are over, if that’s the mindset you’d like for the Spring too.
With respect.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 12:52 pm:
=== History has proven lawmakers are unwilling to reform the way they operate.===
Example?
- Donnie Elgin - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 1:21 pm:
Good on the dem’s for offing a fix to the corruption problem. They have all the first hand experience with the current issues, their input is vital.
- Chicagonk - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 1:32 pm:
OW - The mindset I have for the spring is that something will get done and it will be bipartisan. That being said, Durkin is right to keep the pressure on and if the bill doesn’t go far enough, Durkin and the Republicans should absolutely make it a campaign issue.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 1:34 pm:
=== Durkin and the Republicans should absolutely make it a campaign issue.===
Hope they’re prepared to answer Trump questions, especially in the collar counties.
The play is probably hope for a wash on that.
In Illinois specifically, this isn’t going to be a banned year for the Trumpkins and Raunerites.
- Just Me 2 - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 2:46 pm:
Oswego Willy - I’m going to assume your comment asking for examples of legislators behaving badly is snark, because if it is serious you haven’t been paying attention. The abuses of open door abuse, campaign finance abuse, and outside income abuse is overwhelming.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 2:53 pm:
=== I’m going to assume your comment asking for examples of legislators behaving badly is snark, because if it is serious you haven’t been paying attention. The abuses of open door abuse, campaign finance abuse, and outside income abuse is overwhelming.===
I think I’m clear, thanks.
=== === History has proven lawmakers are unwilling to reform the way they operate.===
Example?===
You’re saying “Dems” are unwilling to reform? They haven’t passed ethics reforms, haven’t Republicans joined in?
Are you saying there’s no reforms that have passed?
I wanna make sure where ya stand.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 14, 19 @ 3:00 pm:
“I know Pritzker wanted to “skip” it, but he made it, and isn’t the ramp suppose to increase *before* we see that leveling off and decline?“
Apologies
- El Perrito Fidel - Friday, Nov 15, 19 @ 4:54 am:
The horse already left the barn with the appointment of Patrick Joyce as State Senator.
Folks are done with political dynasties.
The appointment was rotted to the core.