Question of the day
Wednesday, May 23, 2018 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Press release…
Illinois Attorney General Candidate Erika Harold today announced sweeping recommendations to address the Democratic majority in the General Assembly’s failure to confront the #MeToo movement.
“The failure by Speaker Madigan, Senator Kwame Raoul and the Democratic majority in the General Assembly to enact meaningful reform of the investigation and complaint resolution process is a failure of leadership,” Harold said. “Women deserve real reform, and as Illinois’ Attorney General, I will demand no less.” […]
Erika Harold recommends the following changes:
* the law governing the Legislative Inspector General’s position should be amended to provide for an investigation that is independent of the General Assembly’s influence.
* the ethics commission should be expanded to include members of the public, so that legislators will be accountable not just to their colleagues in Springfield but also to their constituents.
* if the ethics commission finds evidence that a legislator engaged in sexual harassment, retaliation or other misconduct, then a Complaint should be filed with the independent Illinois Courts Commission, as opposed to being resolved by the ethics commission.
* the Illinois Courts Commission should be empowered to censure, fine or recommend for removal members of the legislature found guilty of sexual harassment or other misconduct.
* the perpetrator’s identity should be made public, as the public is entitled to know which legislators abuse their power and position.
* The Question: Which of these recommendations could you support and which would you oppose and why?
- One Time - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:34 pm:
I would re-write to do right this bill and add the death penalty.
- ProIL - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:34 pm:
how do she feel about the ERA?
- A Jack - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:35 pm:
The ICC should not have that kind of power. It doesn’t jive with the separation of powers concept.
- Claud Peppers - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:37 pm:
Why limit it to just the General Assembly’s influence? It should be for all executive officials and employees.
- Honeybear - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:37 pm:
I don’t support any these.
Perfidious weaponizing
Of me too
Careful what you wish for Mrs Harold
- Stark - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:38 pm:
Some of these are fair, but the ICC recommending member removal is ludicrous from a Constitutional standpoint. Also, you shouldn’t serve on the legislative ethics commission unless you’re currently employed in association with the legislature, or were employed in association with the legislature for at least several years. Like putting your neighbor Carl on the zoning commission even though he doesn’t know what zoning is because you wanted “the public’s” input.
- Epic - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:39 pm:
The first two need points need more detail. If it’s independent then who’s running it? What’s the criteria for members of the public, is it everyone or like lawyers?
Third and fourth points seem fine to me, but honestly I don’t know much the Illinois Court Commission.
Fifth I’m fine with if it’s after the person is convicted.
- Ron Burgundy - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:51 pm:
OK with the first two, but bringing in another branch of government in the Courts Commission starts to lose me. The Courts Commission’s power should be limited to the judicial branch. If an independent body with public membership wants to make recommendations on punishment, that’s fine, but the GA should ultimately decide on the punishment. They will be accountable (in theory) for any deviations from the recommendations.
- Macbeth - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:52 pm:
How about start with ERA support — and then go from there?
- Moist von Lipwig - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:53 pm:
Sexual harassers should be given lower priority in adoption cases than gay couples.
- TominChicago - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:57 pm:
Yeah the ICC provision violates separation of powers and the provision in the constitution that leaves it to each chamber to establish their own rules and to expel by a vote of 2/3ds of members. You’d think a Harvard Law grad would consult the constitution before prescribing a remedy.
- Annonin' - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:59 pm:
How about we ask John Anthony — as a voice of experience
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:00 pm:
–The ICC should not have that kind of power. It doesn’t jive with the separation of powers concept.–
Exactly. A very strange recommendation.
I’d like to see some more meat on these proposals before forming any opinions.
I think this is just a quick-and-dirty political pop to yesterday’s news, as well thought out as a book report written on the school bus the day it’s due.
- crazybleedingheart - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:13 pm:
==- Peduncle - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:47 pm:
I’d like to #metoo Erika Herold and I bet you would too.==
No. But I would like to know what kind of person openly advocates sexual assault and tries to gin up a band of brothers into joking over it.
I would also like to know what kind of person needs to talk like this about a woman who assumes a public role.
I am also very interested in what kind of office, if any, would employ this kind of person.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:13 pm:
===Illinois Attorney General Candidate Erika Harold today announced sweeping recommendations to address the Democratic majority in the General Assembly’s failure to confront…===
To the QOTD…
What’s disappointing…
… is that Harold wants to make it about the Dems… abd not about doing something important.
“Illinois Attorney General Candidate Erika Harold today announced sweeping recommendations to address the Democratic majority in the General Assembly’s failure… “
This might be one time you’d leave the partisan politics of the policy.
It’s disappounting.
My take is… if Harold wants to have a bipartisan panel put these recommendation thru the rigors, make it about something bigger… then I’ll have a better grasp.
As others have said… need a bit more “there”
But if you want to make this a partisan thing…
- Perrid - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:15 pm:
- Make it independent of the ILGA - I assume she means not have to get the Comission’s permission? That I agree with. Does she want some kind of lifetime appointment? Does she want the GA not to be able to fire the LIG? What does independence look like to her?
- Members of the public on the commission - Needless fanfare. Especially if you are pulling the commission’s teeth in part 1.
- The 2 points about the Courts Commission - The first one I don’t know much about, but it sounds OK, the second is fairly ludicrous. You want to fine them, OK that’s doable, censure, sure badmouth them all you want, but remove them from office? The stupidity is breathtaking there.
- Doesn’t the LIG already offer reports to the commission? I know the report into Silverstein were made public, are other reports not public/ subject to FOIA? Not sure what she wants to add there.
- Perrid - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:16 pm:
- Make it independent of the ILGA - I assume she means not have to get the Comission’s permission? That I agree with. Does she want some kind of lifetime appointment? Does she want the GA not to be able to fire the LIG? What does independence look like to her?
- Members of the public on the commission - Needless fanfare. Especially if you are pulling the commission’s teeth in part 1.
- The 2 points about the Courts Commission - The first one I don’t know much about, but it sounds OK, the second is fairly ludicrous. You want to fine them, OK that’s doable, censure, sure badmouth them all you want, but remove them from office? No.
- Doesn’t the LIG already offer reports to the commission? I know the report into Silverstein were made public, are other reports not public/ subject to FOIA? Not sure what she wants to add there.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:16 pm:
Is everyone just going to ignore Peduncle’s comment??
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:18 pm:
–But I would like to know what kind of person openly advocates sexual assault and tries to gin up a band of brothers into joking over it.–
A loser.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:20 pm:
===A loser.===
… which is why I’m ignoring it.
- crazybleedingheart - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:21 pm:
Right, if #metoo has taught us anything it’s that only losers harass and assault, not powerful men, and the culture sorts itself out if it’s just politely ignored.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:24 pm:
–only losers harass and assault, not powerful men,–
Powerful men can be losers. I can think of many.
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:35 pm:
===Is everyone just going to ignore Peduncle’s comment??===
Trolls leave provocative comments intentionally to generate indignant responses. Not responding is not the same as ignoring, but it does have the practical effect of denying the idiots the response they want.
Not taking the bait isn’t the same thing as silence = consent.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:35 pm:
They need to make changes. We should not go another year without better safeguards in place.
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:43 pm:
To the question, I’d support this concept:
“the ethics commission should be expanded to include members of the public,…”
Why? Because I want to be the public representative on this ethics panel.
- Michelle Flaherty - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:51 pm:
Put the Courts Commission in charge of policing lawmakers and go ahead and transfer the Executive Inspector General powers to the House Rules Committee.
- walker - Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 9:31 pm:
The challenge remains: What does “independent” mean in the context of one branch of government self-policing? It is generally an IG roll, filled by someone selected by that branch.