46 Comments - Geo. Ryan - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:29 am: Ah Rich, you son-of-a gun. You hit the nail on the head…couldn’t agree with you more. - Levois - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:31 am: I don’t think it’s Patrick Fitzgerald’s fault that others might be profiting off of making these politicians fearful of talking about politics on state time and on state property. - wndycty - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:33 am: Even though Schoenburg told him it was accepted practice in the Blue Room, I believe Schoenburg would have been the 1st to nail him on that, I seriously mean that. Rich I agree with you about folks being too cautious but can you blame them? - If It Walks Like a Duck... - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:35 am: When are we going to get a t-shirt that asserts: “I(We) put the ‘fun’ in dysfunctional politics!” - ArchPundit - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:38 am: You think it was you? - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:40 am: Yeah. I put things like that in my brain for 12-24 hours. After that, I don’t have room for them. - Doug Dobmeyer - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:43 am: Good thing the treasurer wasn’t wearing wool or he would have to bleat like a sheep - or was he and reporters missed an opportunity? Doug Dobmeyer - Dixieland Delight - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:43 am: Based on the ethics training state employees receive, I think Mr. Miller advised the Treasurer well. In a State so beleaguered by ethics concerns, I am pleased when our elected officials draw a clear line in the sand between what they do on “our” time and in their own free time. - Perry Noya - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:45 am: A prosecutor whose name your readers would recognize told me that a relative in state government, whose name you might recognize, said everybody is Springrield is afraid that everybody else is wired. Is this true? I’m in Chicago and don’t know. - Bill - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:47 am: Perry, If you are in Chicago you should be twice as careful and afraid. - DumberThanYouThink - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:55 am: Clearly the media believes the rules apply to everything and everyone but them. Lets ask Randall Sanborn — just for kicks - jerry 101 - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 11:00 am: Politicians and other individuals definitely should not be campaigning on state time, but the politicians should be allowed to answer reporters questions at press conferences, even political ones. - Niles Township - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 11:13 am: Now if Paul Miller would have only had the same influence when he worked for the Governor’s office, maybe we’d have a better governor! - Ghost - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 11:26 am: There is a difference between him using State time to support a canidate, and his responding to a question from a reporter. I would draw the line at the purpose of the press conference. If he called it for th epurpose of campaingning or supporting a campaign, then he is using state resources. if he calls it for somthing completly unrelated, then its ok to respond to questions from reporters. - SpfldPolitico - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 11:31 am: I agree with you on this Rich. I am a Republican and even i got sick at the article in the paper about Blago getting tickets to Hanna Montana for his daughter. He is the governor still and should be allowed to get tickets to a show and take his daughter. I think most people are just mad about things like that to be mad about something. - David Ormsby - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 11:31 am: It may be ridiculous but the Blue Room may need rules on “electioneering.” In the past, state elected officials have announced their candidacy for a new state office with supporters in tow from the Blue Room. Could they do it today? - Captain America - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 11:31 am: Although state employees, facilities and resources should not be used for political purposes, my impression is that constitutional officers and other elected officals are not prohibited from campaigning or other political activities during regular business hours. Otherwise, no incumbent officeholder could run for another position while while occupying some other elective position. Constitutional officers are inherently political creatures. In addition, no incumbent could campaign for reelection. The same logic would apply to city and county elected officials. What’s amazing to me is that various Illinois politicians continued to use public resources for campaigns after City Treasurer Miriam Santos’ conviction for doing so. Miriam once told me if what she did was illegal, then the feds should should back up a truck to City Hall and take everyone away. Her remark to me turned out to be prescient(sp?) in terms of some of the subsequent federal investigations and convictions of various state and local officials. Areas/activities like Blue Room press conferences should be classified as “safe harbors” for poltical discussions. - taxactivist - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 11:45 am: “This is not healthy.” Quite the contrary actually. FINALLY a healthy attitude of respect for taxpayers is starting to show. We need a LOT more of this. Hundreds of political operatives have been convicted in Illinois in the last few years so it is nice to see a politician at least feign some respect for the rule of law even after a prompt from his lawyer. Now we just need to get the reporters heads out of their rear-ends that think a fudge here and there is no big deal since the reporters are almost just as big of a problem as the corrupt politicians. More than 70 GRyan SoS employees worked to kick the Libertarians off the ballot in 1998, many of them proven to be on the taxpayer clock. One news story ran two days AFTER that election was over, which was 4 months after the incident happened. And then no other news organizations asked if the one who reported the corruption purposefully held the story until AFTER the election so their endorsed candidate wasn’t hurt by the news. GRyan is in jail now. The entire Chicago office of the State Treasurer “takes a day off” to work on another Libertarian petition challenge just 4 years later. Did reporters learn from GRyan’s corruption and ask good, relevant questions? No, it was apparently no big deal to them and they let it slide. We could look at examples all day. The media culture in Illinois is almost as bad as politics. The media has become so de-sensitized to corruption they almost always completely ignore it unless an actual indictment comes down. A lot of the stuff that happens routinely in Illinois would be front page, lead story corruption news in other states while it is barely even mentioned here. No, I say the example you provide shows the culture in Illinois may perhaps have some hope left for the future. Politicians and the media in Illinois need to move their “corruption line” closer to what Illinois citizens deserve. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 11:51 am: It’s absurd. Talking politics on government property is not the same as stealing government property for political campaigns, a la Fawell, or having staff out on the campaign trails on state time. I don’t know that anyone, including the U.S. Attorney, can enjoin anyone from talking about anything, anytime, anywhere. One of the Amendments, I think it’s the first one. Some common sense, counselor. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 11:52 am: Oh, Might Pendulum of Justice and public Opinion, Swing back to Us, thy loyal servants. - Steve - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 11:55 am: Honest Illinois citizens should hope politicians are running scared.The brazen disregard for the Illinois state constitution and state law is appalling.We really don’t know whether Giannoulias was trying to avoid a question but is makes the Broadway Bank linked banker look a little better.Speaking of the constitution does anything know if there’s going to be a legal challenge to giving free rides to seniors? Isn’t a violation of “equal protection under the law”? - VanillaMan - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 12:04 pm: Rules are demanded when abuse is rampant. What we have been witnessing in our government is politics gone wild. Not so long ago there was an understanding that our representatives worked at work and played politics when necessary. Since that time, the percentage of political playing has expanded while the amount of work done fell. Our current governor is a poster child for 24/7 campaigning, political fund raising, and deal making instead of governing. Blagojevich sets a poor example because he is a failure at the same time. If he could actually multi-task and govern effectively, perhaps you wouldn’t be forced to watch this charade - at this time. Governments are broken. Citizens are not getting value from their representatives. Work is not being done. Instead we see politics. This creates an atmosphere among voters of being deceived and manipulated. So voters are frustrated and want to see some real work done. People are angry. Consequentially, the amount of politics being done instead of work is being questioned. Until citizens start seeing issues resolved, political stories out of our faces, intraparty warfare replaced by bipartisanship on television, we will throw stones at our political leaders’ focus on non-work-related issues, especially politics. Yes, it is unrealistic. But what have we been seeing? Broken Illinois government, broken Democratic Party unity, a non-existent GOP, federal investigations of corruption out the wazoo, a governor is prison with the current one, who claimed to be an ethical reformer (’cough!’), looking like he’ll be joining him - Illinois is in a death spiral of stupidity! Debbie Halvorson is right on. Until she pulled that Obama on the transit bill, the lady has a conscience that is politically atuned. Giannoulais is another canary-in-the-coal mine. When these pretty little politicians start fluttering and squawking over this issue, then we have a new reality. When Blagojevich is gone and ethics is somewhat restored, or when something starts getting DONE in Springfield, this will be the new reality. - taxactivist - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 12:07 pm: But that said, Alexi is allowed personal breaks from his day job and directly following the “official” news conference he should be free to answer questions in the Blue Room of a political nature. The Blue Room is considered a public place and is open to be used by just about anyone I believe. It would probably be a good thing if our politicians spent more time in there being grilled by good reporters about all topics. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 12:20 pm: I must be out of the loop. Twenty years ago, candidates for office, incumbents and challengers alike, routinely used the Blue Room for campaign press conferences. Lawmakers went back and forth between questions on government and politics. Has this changed? Are the Republican and Democratic caucuses in each chamber allowed to use Statehouse rooms to discuss business off the floors? - Jaded - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 12:34 pm: I don’t fault the Treasurer’s staff for being overly cautious, but it is baloney. Any public official should be able to answer any question posed to them by a reporter at any public event. The only way reporters can get to some of these guys is through their prepared press announcements. Answering a question about a campaign and campaigning are two different things and should be treated as such. If Giannoulias didn’t want to answer the question, that is one thing, but saying he shouldn’t is pretty silly. - anon - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 12:35 pm: The issue was apparently NOT with where the Treasurer was speaking, but the subject matter at the time he was speaking. I wonder if there was a follow-up by any reporter after 5 p.m. or when the Treasurer was not on state time? - plutocrat03 - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 12:53 pm: Is it actually illogical? Candidates are elected to public office to do a job. It seems that an inordinate amount of time is spent running for office or helping friends run for office. The voters are entitled for their representatives full and undivided attention in performing their job. One way around this is to have the officeholders make themselves available after ‘working hours’ whatever that is to discuss political elements. As a taxpayer, I would kind of like to have a solid line separating work from politics. - Dauthus - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 1:04 pm: I don’t get it. Maybe I am missing the point, or maybe I am just way off base. When someone is on my payroll, they do the work I hired them for. That doesn’t include filling out a resume’ for another job, nor does it mean they can use the break room whenever they feel like it to discuss the failings of our company. When they are on their own time and outside of the office, they can do what they want. Politicians are on our payroll and should conduct the business of lawmaking at work. Campaigning should be done on their time, off the clock. Perhaps the reporters should schedule an appointment for an interview instead of expecting to get their news at a politicain’s job site. - Budget Watcher - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 1:23 pm: Rich, You don’t honestly think our Illinois political culture is over-correcting when it comes to ethics and corruption? Yes, the Treasurer probably was advised to be overly cautious in this one instance, but it was a small overreaction. I had to chuckle at the notion that Illinois politicians were being intimidated by the U.S. Attorney or the media into being too politically correct. That’s a funny notion. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 1:25 pm: In some ways, it is. If it was the first instance, I would’ve ignored it. But how the heck do we take politics out of government unless we want to live in a dictatorship of the bureaucracy? - truth101 - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 1:43 pm: Were the Treasurer an hourly employee he would have been out of line talking about politics while on the clock. But he is not an hourly employee. When he starts to punch a time clock then his detractors can run with these silly things. As long as they want to pay for his overtime. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 1:45 pm: Very good point. - so-called "Austin Mayor" - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 1:48 pm: “It used to be the accepted standard that a politician could answer a reporter’s question about campaigns no matter where they were or what time of day it was.” And it still should be. Politics is a necessary part of a democratic republic and should be addressed by elected representatives, when requested by our friends in the press. – SCAM - Bill - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 2:38 pm: VM, Can you ever, in any of your multi-paragraph tirades, on any topic, not mention the Governor? We all know that you don’t like him. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 2:53 pm: There is only one top dog in state government, and that is the person serving as governor. That person sets the tone of the gubernatorial administration, the tone of the debate, can effect legislation and issue executive orders. They are empowered to be our state governmental leader. Consequentially, when this office falls into the lap of an individual incapable of fulfilling the roles this office entails, then that individual fails across the board. The current occupant of this office spent a great deal of time collecting money, making deals and time traveling throughout Illinois campaigning for this position. He did not have to do so. No one forced him to do this. So, when Illinois succeeds at something he gets credit for it, often undeservedly and when something goes wrong, he also gets kicked for it, often undeservedly. But do not feel sorry for the guy. He wanted the job, fought and made promises to every voter for the job. His inability to learn his duties, his failure to even serve as a bench warmer/caretaker in the Office, and the political firestorms he causes are issues he should have considered before opening his big mouth, fluffing his big hair, and declaring his candidacy back in 2001. Thems the breaks! - Bill - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 3:06 pm: lol - anon - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 3:13 pm: “But how the heck do we take politics out of government unless we want to live in a dictatorship of the bureaucracy?” It may not be a dictatorship of the bureaucracy but we certainly live under a dictatorship of the politically well-connected. - Bill S. Preston, Esq. - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 3:14 pm: It’s ridiculous that he’d have to worry about answering that question on state time, but at least his staff is on top of it. And I would guess that they’ll have to stay on top of it until there’s a clearer rule - one where there’s at least a general consensus so he, and other electeds, won’t get hit by the very people who asked them the question in the first place: entrapment-loving media peeps. Rich, were you not the other person in the room telling him it was ok? If not, why not? Also, I doubt the Treasurer was using this as some tactic to avoid the question, a-la-Blagojevich. I’ve never heard of him ever backing down from a question about Obama. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 3:16 pm: ===Rich, were you not the other person in the room telling him it was ok? If not, why not?=== I sent the intern, so I wasn’t there. Also, the treasurer eventually answered the questions. - Dauthus - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 4:30 pm: truth101, I don’t quite follow your statement. Using your logic, any salaried employee can pick and choose when they are not “on the clock.” That just doesn’t seem very accurate. Elected officials are still salaried employees of the state, aren’t they? - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 4:31 pm: Elected officials are not “salaried employees.” Please, dump the goofy rhetoric. - steve schnorf - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 6:25 pm: The statewide constitutional officials aren’t on any clock. They get no holidays, no sick days, no vacation days, no personal days, unlike other salaried government workers. A confirmed department director could take 6 weeks or 6 months off and they would continue to get paid their salary until the governor dismissed them. An elected statewide official would never have to work a single day, and they would get paid. They could work 20 hours a day for a year, including weekends and they would get no overtime. It’s much harder to draw bright lines on these political issues for elected officials. Just as a simple silly example. Suppose a governor is at a fundraiser and they get a call that the national guard needs to be called out for some emergency. Do they have to wait to issue the order until they leave the FR? Or, can an elected legislator take both political and governmental calls in his district office? How about legislative caucuses, by definition a partisan activity? Rich is exactly right, we have gotten way off the deep end on this work/politcal activity thing, but we are paying for our own sins of the past. Like most things, I suspect it will find a way of leveling off as time goes by. - Annonymous - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 9:10 pm: While I’d like to agree with those who feel that this is just an overreaction and it will soon level off, I’ve seen time and time again that there are bigger issues at play. And everyone’s taking advantage of those issues in one way or another: Politicians, Corporate America (assuming such an animal still exists), Voters, etc. While legislation, corporate policies, processes, etc. are often ambiguous to a certain extent, we’ve generally lost our ability–or desire–to 1) determine when ambiguity is/is not beneficial, 2) clearly identify and communicate when something is supposed to be proscriptive or a guideline, and 3) generally understand something within the spirit of why it was written (i.e., “THINK”). At best, I’d like to think that same is a result of sheer stupidity of those involved. At worst, some are intentionally “screwing up” because we’ve become a society that likes–or needs–to shun responsibility and accountability, and therefore try to allow ourselves the greatest amount of flexibility so that we can 1) more easily get out of a jam if required; 2) make a quick buck illegally, unethically, or irresponsibly; and 3) use ambiguity to just generally hang someone to prove we’re better. Ethics, which are generally subject to interpretation are a perfect example. Someone starts with an interpretation, including a determination of applicability; someone else usually documents what people read to understand what is/is not acceptable behavior in accordance therewith; and others read the documentation to understand how to execute in practice. Then, we have legislative and regulatory bodies, auditors, and often the Press judging whether the practice is “correct”–even if that’s not their role or core business. Also because the variances in even UNDERSTANDING the written word are getting greater because of for one, language barriers in this great new global village, we’re finding ourselves in an environment where several sets of the same documentation and communication are required to “teach” properly. And who wants to pay for all that work and maintenance? (In some instances, we even have people who don’t speak English well, nor understand our culture or legislation, WRITING the documentation that Americans read because overseas rates are lower. (And that’s happening more than anyone would like to think.)) People are therefore becoming more adept at using those errors to take action to “save themselves” and/or to promote their hidden agendas. While I don’t want to jump all over the Press, I’ll use them as a sample culprit. Someone screws up because they can’t understand (for a variety of reasons as mentioned above) the documentation that’s supposed to help them behave correctly. The Press catches on and cover the story for a few days. However, because the Press are not in a position to always bring the matter to a formal conclusion (assuming that they’d even bother to provide coverage long enough to do so if it WERE brought to a conclusion), the audience is simply left with the impression that what was done was bad because, well…the press jumped all over it as “bad”. Therefore, readers whose value systems ALONE would have “helped” them behave as they should have, become confused. So, heck, if I’m confused now, I can’t be held responsible and accountable any longer for my bad behavior, can I? Wow…that’s cool…look at what I can do with all that flexibility! OR, on the other hand (as in the subject case), someone will decide to switch over to the other extreme, and do NOTHING because of the perceived risk involved–even if it’s way off base and/or will result in extreme inefficiencies, eventually culminating in confusion or further inaction once again. Most things just don’t “level off” anymore (or as quickly) because there are too just too many variables and obstacles involved in learning how we’re supposed to do things today. Worse, it seems as if the number of variables and obstacles are growing at a rapid pace. - Annonymous - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 9:13 pm: Sorry for the length of the post, Rich. I’m having a bad day in the global village and needed to vent to keep my sanity. - Close Observer - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 9:34 pm: Rich, you and the other reporters are right on. First, the General Counsel at a Treasurer press conference? Never happened with Topinka. Does the Treasurer’s GC not know that with an elected official there is no distinction between “state time” and “personal” time? The elected official is elected for a fixed term, and can only be fired or held otherwise accountable by “the people”. That means end of term or impeachment/conviction by the people’s representatives. If questioned about his talking politics at any time, Gianoulias merely has to say that he was on his own time, and that’s it. Now in Miller’s defense, he stated, “we prefer that you not…”. But he still threw in the false distinction between an elected official’s “state” and “personal” time. But Gianoulias meekly went along with it, either as a convenient excuse or a fundamental misunderstanding. He’s done some good things with the office, but he’s not the superstar everyone is making him out to be. Example: he did not renew Topinka’s rule against office employees using Comp Time for political activities. Topinka prohibited this, requiring employees to use vacation or personal days to do any political work–such activity was prohibited during comp or sick time; Alexis’ new ethics policy contained no such prohibition on comp time political activity. - soccermom - Thursday, Jan 17, 08 @ 10:26 pm: Treasurer Giannoulias is right to avoid the slippery slope. While he, as an elected official, can talk politics if he likes, his staff shouldn’t be paid by taxpayers to do political work. If they’re staffing him for a news conference on state time, he should stick to state issues. Sorry Bernie. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.