The answer man
Monday, Dec 22, 2008 - Posted by Rich Miller
* For whatever reason, the State Journal-Register editorial board thinks the House impeachment committee should tackle these questions. I’ll try instead…
Blagojevich treated rulings of the General Assembly’s Joint Committee on Administrative Rules’ and the Committee on Government Forecasting and Accountability as merely advisory. He freely ignored them, whether embarking on expensive health-care initiatives or closing prisons or arbitrarily moving divisions of state government. Is there a way the General Assembly could change this without violating the state constitution’s separation of powers?
The General Assembly greatly increased the powers of JCAR a few years ago. Blagojevich signed the bill into law. He then proceeded to ignore the law. Laws don’t mean much to this governor.
The governor has amendatory veto power, but Blagojevich used his veto pen to rewrite bills he didn’t like. Should there be more rigid guidelines for amendatory vetoes?
Probably, but he’d likely just ignore those, too. The only real way to accomplish this is via a constitutional amendment, which would need a three-fifths approval of both chambers and then go before the voters.
If the General Assembly would not authorize money Blagojevich wanted, he sometimes shifted money from other places in the budget. (He did this in 2006 and 2007 to devote $15 million toward stem cell research.) Can the governor’s power to make such moves be curtailed?
It sure can, but doing so would greatly harm his ability to deal with budget problems in tough years.
And then there is the biggie: Money. Blagojevich’s immediate legal troubles all are focused on money. Specifically, his race to squeeze big donations from campaign contributors before the new state ethics law takes effect Jan. 1 and to get big donations in exchange for President-elect Barack Obama’s Senate seat. If Illinois had a reasonable limit on personal contributions and stringent laws on corporate donations, Blagojevich probably would not have had the golden visions alleged by the feds.
Maybe. But, then again, maybe he might’ve just focused on padding his own pockets, rather than his campaign fund.
* Related…
* Ethics: An Illinois story
* What’s happened, what’s next in Illinois’ impeachment soap opera
* On with impeachment
* Impeachment panel awaits word from prosecutor
* Impeachment 101: A guide for Illinois
* Panel may call ex-deputy gov to testify
* We expect too little from our politicians
* Finally, the whole world can see how it is in Illinois
* Governor bringing state down with him
* The “Bleeping” Business of Corruption
* Illinois horsemen deny Rod Blagojevich association
* Horse racing bill may be part of pay-to-play plan
* How Blago Made My Novel a True Story
- DuPage Dave - Monday, Dec 22, 08 @ 9:43 am:
The JCAR situation is enough to impeach Blago. He knew the law and decided to ignore the law, which makes him unfit to serve as governor. Simple as that.
His contempt for the legislature goes back to his speech on State Board of Education regulations, where he referred to a stack of papers containing the regs as indicative of a “Soviet style bureaucracy”.
Was he really unaware- and I think he was- that the legislators to whom he was speaking passed the laws that resulted in those regs, and approved them through the JCAR process? He was, in effect, calling his listeners the Politburo of Illinois.
To sooner he’s gone, the better.
- wordslinger - Monday, Dec 22, 08 @ 9:44 am:
I suspect there will be a flurry of new legislation to rein in the executive in the wake of Blago.
- Captain Flume - Monday, Dec 22, 08 @ 9:48 am:
The funny thing about “loopholes,” as the SJ-R calls them, is that they are not loopholes until someone exploits them for purposes that are perceived as unpopular or nefarious. The Governor has used that same term for portraying how corporations pay taxes among other lawful practices. All the answers are correct, but the postulate seems erroneous.
If the Governor has been acting within the law, and it has not yet been proven otherwise, then he has been using the authority granted to the office he holds. Let’s see if he has exceeded that authority. It’s a painful process, and painfully slow, to make that determination. It affects the citizens of the state economically, taints every action and decision made by the executive branch. The abuses of which George Ryan was convicted should have put every voter, and every press organization, on alert about how to determine the worthiness of a candidate for public office. But as we have seen, neither the voters nor the press, is willing to diligently and dispassionately examine and discuss a candidate’s worthiness of the public trust. I fear that the public in Illinois asks and expects very little in terms of statemanship, forthrightness, and honesty from its candidates for public office. Whatever the outcome of the current impeachment proceedings, or the investigations of the U.S. Attorney, until Illinoians want and demand better than we have received, we will continue to get what we deserve.
- Mr. Curious - Monday, Dec 22, 08 @ 11:45 am:
I’m not sure what your issue is with that editorial. Doesn’t it make sense that when these things come up in the impeachment proceedings, the House and (eventually) Senate ought to pay attention to them and maybe see if there are things that might be altered to prevent a repeat of Blago’s misdeeds? Granted, there may never be another Gov. Rod, but as Joaquin Andujar says, youneverknow.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Dec 22, 08 @ 11:47 am:
===I’m not sure what your issue is with that editorial.===
I thought I explained that as fully as I could.
- Oberon - Monday, Dec 22, 08 @ 12:32 pm:
There is no separation of powers problem or issue with JCAR. Executive Branch rulemaking is a power delegated from and by the Legislative Branch, as is made crystal-clear in the Administrative Procdedures Act, 5 ILCS 100. So the Legislature is free to hedge or withdraw this delegation whenever it pleases. The existing statute makes it plain the Governor’s actions in ignoring JCAR were not only unlawful, but unconstitutional. I agree with Dupage Dave that even one such instance is sufficient to warrant impeachment, never mind that that the Health Care expansion also violated Article VIII, Section 1 of the Constitution by creating obligations of funds without an appropriation.