* Tribune…
Two leading female lawmakers have floated a set of recommendations aimed at improving the system for reporting and investigating sexual harassment at the Capitol, but questions remain about legislative leaders retaining control over complaints that are filed.
Democratic state Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie and Republican Rep. Sara Wojcicki Jimenez offered the “working draft” at a meeting of a House task force on sexual discrimination and harassment on Tuesday […]
Currie and Wojcicki Jimenez suggest that each legislative leader appoint a person who is responsible for receiving and reviewing complaints. That person would decide which ones should be turned over for investigation. Then, each leader would either employ their own investigator, refer investigations to an outside attorney or refer them to the legislative watchdog.
That structure reflects the current system, except that the roles of receiving complaints and of investigating them would be separated. Currie acknowledged that expecting staffers or lawmakers to complain to legislative leaders or their chosen representatives could have a chilling effect.
“There is an awkwardness, I recognize that,” Currie said.
Um, yeah.
The full document is here.
* From the “Open Questions” section, which means they’re still discussing it…
Adding additional punishment options to House Rules for lawmakers such as reprimand or censure for violations of the Ethics Act.
Long way to go, campers.
* But some legislators are working on a different track. Sun-Times…
Democratic women of the Illinois House on Wednesday held a closed door meeting at the Capitol with Alaina Hampton — the woman whose accusations of harassment led to the firing of a top political aide to Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan.
And while Hampton shared her perspective, women legislators are trying to look forward and introduce new legislation to help combat sexual harassment — and also to help empower women in politics. […]
“The broader context is to ensure that any legislation that comes out of part of a final package has the input of women around the Capitol who are impacted and will be impacted by the policies we implement,” [Rep. Ann Williams, D-Chicago] said.
Williams said the caucus plans to meet with female staffers, former female staffers, current lobbyists and other women at the Capitol to get their perspective.
* And this is from Rep. Kelly Cassidy’s constituent newsletter…
Last week, as stories of sexual harassment and abusive behavior as well as questions about how complaints were handled within Illinois political offices and campaigns swirled, I called for a proactive and truly independent investigation of the various entities involved with the House Democratic Caucus. Recognizing the challenge of finding someone locally that wouldn’t have some political or family connection to someone involved, I made clear that I intended to research both locally and nationally.
Over the last week, we have reached out to the local group Women Employed as well as nationally to the National Women’s Law Center, the National Conference of State Legislatures and the State Innovation Exchange. At the same time, we have been contacted by groups both locally and nationally who have expressed interest in the possible investigation. Each of these groups or firms were asked to submit a proposal outlining how they would accomplish a probe resulting in concrete proposals for change as well as to disclose any actual or perceived conflict along with their plan for addressing potential conflicts.
So far, four organizations have agreed to submit proposals. Once all of these proposals have been received, I intend to share them with the Speaker and the House Democratic Women’s Caucus in order to be as transparent as possible as we attempt to move forward and improve the culture of our operations. I am happy to share the results of my research with any of the other caucuses or members of leadership seeking to proactively make change within their own organizations as well.
* Rep. Cassidy also included a list of legislation to watch. Here’s one of the bills…
Provides that the Secretary of State or the Executive Ethics Commission, after the adjudication of a violation regarding sexual harassment under the Lobbyist Registration Act for which an investigation was initiated by the Inspector General appointed by the Secretary of State, are authorized to temporarily suspend or terminate any person, or lobbying entity for which that person is employed, registered under the Lobbyist Registration Act.
- SoAngry - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:12 pm:
Can we all please acknowledge…when it is assault including sexual assault…the proper protocol is to file a POLICE REPORT as it is a crime, not a just a “complaint”?
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:22 pm:
===are authorized to temporarily suspend or terminate any person, or lobbying entity for which that person is employed, registered under the Lobbyist Registration Act.===
Lobbying is protected speech, enshrined in the first amendment. This seems like an overreach to me.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:22 pm:
So Angry - Absolutely Agree. The new procedures must have a means to have a fair/impartial review of complaints (not Crimes) and as a Sifting Stage, either deny further action; or proceed to a Final Adjudication Stage which could impose sanctions or suitable response with Transparency.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:26 pm:
–Currie and Wojcicki Jimenez suggest that each legislative leader appoint a person who is responsible for receiving and reviewing complaints. That person would decide which ones should be turned over for investigation.–
What a surprisingly bad idea. What’s wrong with an inspector general? Like actually having one this time?
- the Patriot - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:29 pm:
And there it is, the Madigan Pivot. His problem, now becomes his chip. Letting others move from asking him to step down, to percieved change.
Just in case you didn’t believe Madigan was the best politician in the state, and maybe the country. He is the only male who covereed up sexual harrassment claims who will keep his job.
- Practical Politics - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:36 pm:
It is unbelievable how far behind the times the legislature is on this topic. In the private sector, human resources departments have been educating employees on the subject for almost twenty-five years or so. This is one “because Madigan” criticism that has a measure of credibility.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:38 pm:
==Lobbying is protected speech==
You aren’t entitled to official lobbyist credentials.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:39 pm:
@SoAngry– those options aren’t exclusive. And if you go to the cops and they don’t act, then what?
- Stand Tall - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:52 pm:
- Practical Politics - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:36 pm: - this statement is the truth, politicians pass so many mandates that they don’t think should apply to them. And has already been seen telling the leadership is the wrong approach as well as everything shows they have dropped the ball and played more cover thine ass as opposed to protecting the victim. And it is not like the leadership has not seen sexual harassment being done right before their own eyes at every level of the State government and turned a blind eye.
- Stand Tall - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:54 pm:
- the Patriot - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:29 pm: Also another true statement, all his boot lickers will work to keep him in power.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 1:58 pm:
===You aren’t entitled to official lobbyist credentials.===
The First Amendment says the government cannot prohibit the right of the people “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
I don’t see any mention of the need for credentials or permission. And if I’m stripped of my credentials by an administrative adjudication, I want a full refund of the outrageous, illegal lobbyist registration fee the state charges me to exercise my First Amendment rights.
Over. Reach.
- Gorilla - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 2:03 pm:
So angry — any sexual assault complaint should immediately be directed to the police. I don’t think the ethics officer’s or the members are asking that they be responsible for those complaints. They can’t handle them now and they shouldn’t in the future.
Each legislative caucus is an employer. They have some internal process to deal with human resource issues. They all have personal policies now, and methods for adjudicating complaints. Sorry to break it to you, but sexual-harassment is only one form of a human resource complaints that corporations, legislative caucus and every other employer deals with. Believe it or not the recommendations on this list are what most non-public employers do now.
- JB13 - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 2:29 pm:
You know, I’ve often heard it said that the best way to change a problem culture is to let the people responsible for the culture being a problem maintain control of the process of changing the culture, with zero consequences for creating the problems, beyond some unflattering news articles. Absolutely. It’s why Illinois is a model for the nation.
Now, if only we could get rid of Rauner and his extreme right-wing allies, everything would be just peachy.
Nothing to see here. As you were.
- Thomas Paine - Thursday, Mar 1, 18 @ 5:48 pm:
@A Patriot -
Madigan is not accused of covering up sexual harrassment. He has been accused by one victim of not moving swiftly enough.
Interestingly, he moved as fast or faster than the inspector general’s office after receiving the complaint.
Also, not a single attorney who handles sexual harrassment complaints for a living has suggested Madigan did anything wrong.