* Greg Hinz…
Chicago-area business leaders strongly believe that donating to a local politician or hiring a high-powered lobbyist adds to the city’s already serious corruption problems. But, according to a new survey, they also overwhelmingly believe that paying to play works.
The survey also finds that business leaders, by an 8-to-1, margin say that “things in Chicago are . . . off on the wrong track,” with 79 percent negative and just 10 percent positive.
The online survey of 428 Chicago-area decision-makers was conducted by Crain’s Custom Media in May for the Committee of Economic Development of the Conference Board, a nonpartisan, business-led policy group. Those polled by email indicated that their companies had at least $1 million in revenue last year and that they either hold a top management slot or serve on the firm’s board.
The results “are indicative of the constant sort of low-level scandals that seem to happen on a regular basis in Chicago,” said committee senior advisor Cindy Canary, a well-known local reformer.
* From the poll’s executive summary…
More than half (53%) felt that big campaign donors have a great deal of impact on increasing Chicago corruption, while 39% felt they have some impact.
The rating of impact of big donors on increasing Chicago corruption was significantly correlated with the rating of ethical behavior of Chicago officials. For example, among those who felt that big campaign donors have a great deal of impact, 71% also felt that Chicago official ethical behavior is a very serious issue.
Most (91%) felt that companies that engage with the political process in Chicago by using paid lobbyists and making political contributions gain a business advantage.
Slightly more than half (54%) of these respondents felt that campaign contributions give companies a more significant advantage than the services of paid lobbyists. However, this still leaves 46% who felt that the services of paid lobbyists give companies a more significant advantage than campaign contributions. Thus, respondents were roughly split on whether lobbying or contributions had the more significant effect.
More than half (54%) felt that lobbying of Chicago City Council members and other officials has a great deal of impact on increasing corruption, while another 39% felt this has some impact.
The rating of impact of lobbying on increasing Chicago corruption was significantly correlated with the rating of ethical behavior of Chicago officials. For example, among those who felt that lobbying has a great deal of impact, 72% also felt that Chicago official ethical behavior is a very serious issue.
Approximately eight-in-ten (81%) felt that Chicago’s elected officials are generally more responsive to lobbyists than to voters. Others either felt that Chicago’s elected officials are generally more responsive to voters than to lobbyists (9%) or they were not sure (10%).
More than half (58%) would support a program that encourages small-dollar contributions. One-in-six (17%) would not support this type of program, while 25% were not sure. The sizable proportion who were not sure suggests that there is room for further communication / education about this type of program, while the finding that the majority would support it suggests that there is significant potential for this type of program in the future.
Some (15%) felt that a small donor program would strongly improve the quality of candidates who run for municipal office in Chicago, while nearly one-third (32%) felt that this would lead to some improvement. Only 5% felt that this would have a negative impact, although many felt it would make no difference in the quality of candidates (35%) or they weren’t sure (13%).
The rating of the impact of a small donor program was significantly correlated with the willingness to support this type of program. For example, among those who would support it, 70% felt that a small-donor program would lead to at least some improvement in the quality of candidates, while this was true for 4% of those who indicated that they would not support this type of program.
Most (92%) felt that a form of crony capitalism is practiced in Chicago. (This was after crony capitalism was defined as the unhealthy relationship between some businesses and government, which can lead to favoritism in the form of tax breaks, government grants, and other incentives.)
Half (50%) felt that there is a lot of pressure on business leaders in Chicago to make political contributions, while 38% felt there is some pressure.
Full results are here.
- JackD - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 1:18 pm:
It would have been interesting if those with the experience had compared the perceived situation in Chicago to that in other major cities.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 1:20 pm:
–The results “are indicative of the constant sort of low-level scandals that seem to happen on a regular basis in Chicago,” said committee senior advisor Cindy Canary, a well-known local reformer.–
Fortunately, since about 1833, low-level scandals are regularly eclipsed by high-level scandals. Breaks up the monotony.
This is the goo-gooiest “survey,” ever. Keeps the “well-known local reformer” industry humming along, I guess.
Where did they think they were, Mayberry? Since the beginning, people have come to Chicago to make a buck any way possible. It sure wasn’t for the weather.
- Bogey Golfer - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 1:36 pm:
To all you CEOs who have recently relocated to the City, Welcome. And those of you who have moved from the suburbs, the difference between a Village Trustee and a Chicago Alderman is 3 more zeros.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 2:22 pm:
Oh, brother. Another survey, which represent the opinions of MBAs, answering loaded questions for a pre-determined goal. Yawn.
- Fred - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 2:36 pm:
See also: property tax assessment and appeal process. Its not about the individual personalities involved, its the corrupt nature of the system itself.
===It would have been interesting if those with the experience had compared the perceived situation in Chicago to that in other major cities.===
I can say that after doing business in Seattle Portland and Phoenix, Chicago and the suburbs have been a rude awakening. Decisions there are much less based on an individual’s personal preference.
I can’t speak to expectations on the east coast, but we we’ve been very surprised by how little regard is paid to the written rules.
- Harry - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 2:46 pm:
And this is a survey of those who benefit from the current system… “only” 91-92% see it as corrupt.
Survey those NOT on the inside and you would hit 100%, I guess.
- atsuishin - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 2:48 pm:
in order to develop real estate you need to donate to the alderman. I know this from personal experience. No matter how small the development you are expected to write a check. it is a very unhealthy system that is scaring investment away from a once great city.
- Just Me - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 2:55 pm:
Tell me someone who does like Chicago politics! (Besides the politicians and the lobbyists that is.)
- Rock Island Rocky - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 3:01 pm:
An outside the box idea would be to tax itemized campaign contributions over $150 to fund a small donor voucher program that can be donated to any registered PAC with the IBOE.
This is a problem nationally that politicians are overly influenced by large donations and a small donor program would balance things out.
- Jeff Trigg - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 3:03 pm:
Look at the difference between how Chicago treats the Cubs and White Sox. Free restaurants and video boards and rent for one, red tape and broken deals and strict restrictions for the other.
- Grougho - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 3:38 pm:
So if things change, businesses will quit hiring lobbyist and quit trying to influence legislators.
- walker - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 3:57 pm:
Have relevant experience in NYC, and NJ, and always thought of Chicago as bad but not worst, in business-government corruption.
There are at least two, equally culpable parties, to every corrupt act.
- Groucho - Tuesday, Jul 12, 16 @ 4:04 pm:
I have developed two properties in Chicago in the same ward at separate times. The alderman’s aid helped me in both instances with zoning. I was not asked for a contribution either time.