Question of the day
Monday, Aug 15, 2011 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The Chicago Tribune has made some demands of Gov. Pat Quinn on the gaming bill…
Tell the sponsors you’ll veto any effort to make the Illinois Gaming Board more responsive to politicians. The stench of Illinois pols trying to influence gambling decisions — legislators and two governors interfering in where to locate a casino, and now a new bill that would short-circuit state efforts to keep the mob at bay — gives you plenty of reason to tell lawmakers that you won’t change how Illinois regulates gambling.
Note that, despite the history of meddling by George Ryan and Rod Blagojevich, legislators want the Gaming Board administrator to be named not by the independent board, but by the governor, with Senate confirmation. The sponsors have smooth explanations for every regulatory change they propose.
Baloney. This is about clout: They’re fed up with those pesky state regulators and all their rules. Governor, tell the Legislature you’re sticking with the regulatory scheme that for two decades has protected the integrity of Illinois gambling.
The governor, with Senate confirmation, appoints members of the Gaming Board, which then in turn appoint the administrator.
* The Question: Should the Gaming Board’s top administrator be appointed by the governor with Senate confirmation, or should s/he be appointed by Gaming Board members, as is currently the case? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please. Thanks.
- steve schnorf - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 1:28 pm:
Someone please remind me of how Governor Ryan interfered with the gaming board and tried to influence where a casino was to be located.
- OneMan - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 1:35 pm:
Governor with Senate confirmation, too big of a job not to have them involved.
- 3rd Generation Chicago Native - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 1:38 pm:
I agree with one man, Senate involvement is needed here. And gaming board appointing, is like the fox guarding the hen house.
- Just the Facts - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 1:46 pm:
Steve - It was shortly after he kidnapped the Lindbergh baby.
- Observer of the State - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 1:53 pm:
I would hope the gaming board would choose based on experience and the ability to do the job. Having the Governor and the Senate involved brings in a level of politics that makes me uncomfortable.
- Cincinnatus - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 1:56 pm:
The Illinois Gaming Board is appointed by the Governor, with Senate confirmation. Why should the top administrator be any different?
- Rich Miller - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 1:59 pm:
===Why should the top administrator be any different? ===
Tollway, U of I Board, and lots of others do it that way. Guv appoints the board, then the board appoints the chief.
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 2:03 pm:
The administrator should be appointed by the person he/she works for. If he works for the Board, the Board should appoint him/her. Even though the Board is also appointed by the Governor, once they are on, they can only be removed for cause. They may be influenced by the Governor, but they can also be independent. What’s the worst that can happen to them - they don’t get reappointed? The administrator will behave differently (and not in a good way) if he/she doesn’t believe the Board is his/her boss.
- mokenavince - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 2:05 pm:
Have the board pick a chairman, most boards do it that way. Cinci this would mean Cullerton would
be the guy stirring the drink. Who would want that
he screws up enough.
- OneMan - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 2:13 pm:
Also since the gaming board implements policy set in large part by the legislature it seems to me they should have some say in the matter.
- 47th Ward - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 2:20 pm:
Steve,
The story may have overstated the role of Governor Ryan but you can’t deny he signed legislation that allowed the clouted-up Flynns to move into Rosemont before the Gaming Board torpedoed it.
Maybe this story will refresh you memory:
http://www.ipsn.org/rosemont/day_clout_struck_out.htm
There seem to be a lot of George’s friends mentioned here, not all of them favorably.
To the question: No. For my explanation, I’ll let Rhodes’ story suffice. Read it, seems like a lot of forgot some of the details of this sad little story.
- Ghost - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 2:30 pm:
I selected Gov with Senate approval; BUT I would remove the Gov from the process. How about a bipartisan GA group which selects the head of the Gaming Board.
- The Captain - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 2:42 pm:
I voted for the Gov with Sen approval above but really I’m for any method that puts an end to the A. Jaffe personal publicity tour as quickly and painlessly as possible.
- Fight Fair - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 3:07 pm:
One would think Mr. Schnorf would recall George Ryan’s repeated interference on behalf of Emerald Casino, given that Mr. Schnorf himself was part of Ryan’s effort to squeeze the Gaming Board: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2002-09-09/news/0209090096_1_illinois-gaming-board-george-ryan-illinois-taxpayers
- anon sequitor - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 4:01 pm:
Although it may have some inherent flaws, I still prefer to have elected officials make the decision over a bureaucratic system, especially if the bureaucratic system controls the board, which they appear to do under the current setup.
- Keep it clean - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 4:05 pm:
would hope the gaming board would choose based on experience and the ability to do the job. Having the Governor and the Senate involved brings in a level of politics that makes me uncomfortable.
Ditto
- Capital View - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 5:05 pm:
I would prefer to see the Gaming Board as independent as possible, with officials as “clean” as former Rep / Judge Jaffe and legal advisor/ legislative liaison Caleb Melamed.
If the governor appoints the administrator, the administrator will not be answerable to the board.
The best model is to keep it as is, but as with the State Board of Ed, give the governor the opportunity to recommend an official to them to accept or reject. But the board appoints.
- reformer - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 6:43 pm:
Since legislators take donations from the gambling industry. it’s better to have the appointment one step removed from the partisan political process.
- steve schnorf - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 9:17 pm:
47, thanks for the cite. George’s interference then was, he signed the legislation that the GA passed, and he made appointments to the gaming board (remember how much recent Govs have been criticized for not making B&C appointments when there were vacancies), right?
Fight Fair, I wondered if you were referring to that Trib story, as silly and untrue back then as their accusation was today. I wish you would sign your name as I do. Then I would know if you were in any of the meetings with Newtson and me. Maybe you were a gaming board member back then.
Newtson prepared an actual script for those meetings with board members, and had me along as a witness so there could be no (honest) dispute as to what was said. And, unlike the Trib, and, I trust, most of you on here, I was actually there at the meetings.
We carefully and specifically told the individual Board members that we had no advice or suggestion for them as to where the 10th license should be located, but, IF THEY WERE GOING TO CHOOSE ROSEMONT, please tell us/do it in a timely manner so we could reflect the revenue in the budget.
So, I witnessed the history we are talking about here, not guessed at it. How about you?
- Dirt Digger - Monday, Aug 15, 11 @ 9:37 pm:
I think we’re ignoring the real issue here: why the Trib can’t supplement these ridiculously gassy editorials with 19th century style cartoons featuring fat stick pin wearing machine bosses.
- PrecinctCaptain - Tuesday, Aug 16, 11 @ 1:59 am:
Does this really matter? The governor could stack the board with whatever interests he wants and then those folks could hire an incompetent hack for administrator.
The system could also be set up like the federal SEC so that the Chair is like the administrator/chief exec.
The morons at the Trib editorial board, as usual, are missing the point. If it is so bad for some governor appointed hack to be administrator, why is it not bad to have a hack appointed by the gaming board commissioners?
- CircularFiringSquad - Tuesday, Aug 16, 11 @ 9:58 am:
“Baloney. This is about clout: They’re fed up with those pesky state regulators and all their rules. Governor, tell the Legislature you’re sticking with the regulatory scheme that for two decades has protected the integrity of Illinois gambling.”
The Tribbies — still reeling from Wrigleygate and Zell/ESOP scandals — are starting to look desperate here (probably because they are on the verge of being partially or completely ignored)
The decision has little to do with clout and everything to do with getting the do-nothing Jaffe-led gaming board to act.
They still control the license holders, vendors, equipment suppliers and workers.
The legislature did pick some towns that were passed over in the past, but the license holders will not be riddled with mob ties, because the Jaffe foot draggers will approve the applications
The Jaffe foot draggers pick the license holders/ managers in Chicago and Springfield, but local authorities not Las Vegas corporations run the show and keep the profits.
The bill is not smooth answers just a hard look at reality and an action plan that will do some good.
BTW the state fair component will probably end this week’s hand wringing about profitability.