|
*** UPDATED x1 *** Question of the day
Wednesday, Nov 27, 2019 - Posted by Rich Miller * As we’ve discussed twice before this month, the legal definition of when a contribution is received is the day it is deposited in the bank. So, we don’t know exactly when these contributions were actually made without checking with the respective campaigns or ComEd’s PAC…
* The Question: Should ComEd’s political action committee stop contributing to legislators’ campaign funds for a while? If so, for how long? Make sure to explain your answer. Thanks. *** UPDATE *** From Kimberly Lightford’s campaign…
The checks with redactions by me… 
|
 |
|
|
- DuPage Saint - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 11:35 am:
Discretion is better part of valor. I would lie low for several months even skipping primaries. Figuring most of key players will be around after primaries without your help. And politicians are smart enough to realize you will b back sooner or later. Old habits die hard.
- Shytown - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 11:35 am:
Worthy of discussion. I think the bigger question is should companies regulated by the state even give political donations to begin with? That would really take opportunity for corruption off the table.
- Ron Burgundy - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 11:37 am:
I would recommend they keep a low profile until this investigation hits some sort of public conclusion, but there’s nothing stopping them. Contributions are a two way street, though, and the public is free to judge those that accept them accordingly.
- Quibbler - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 11:39 am:
(a) Yes. (b) Forever, because Com Ed should be brought under (small-d) democratic control and run for the benefit of the public, not corporate shareholders or politicians. The #DemocratizeComEd campaign is intended to do just that.
- Annonin - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 11:42 am:
How they redirect the loot to worthy cause?
That could be Friday QOTD and save Capt. Fax wasting a lot of energy
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 11:42 am:
If I were them? Yes. Stop. Just stop.
The way to stop contributions from the tainted is stop taking contributions from the tainted.
But, the question is to ComEd, not legislators, so I’d say stop.
If now they can’t win their arguments without a contribution, maybe they need better arguments?
I know it doesn’t work out that way, it was fun typing for the Pollyanna in this, and snarky to the raw politics to it simultaneously.
- Amalia - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 11:45 am:
if there is someone they think they can work with, they should stop contributing to her. Also, kind of just want you to go away for a while, ComEd.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 11:47 am:
===I think the bigger question is should companies regulated by the state even give political donations to begin with?===
Illinois tried that with medical cannabis. The judiciary overturned the law.
- Flat Bed Ford - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 11:50 am:
This is just the checks that have been cashed. How many members of the House and Senate are sitting on checks for a while or just not willing to cash them?
- Nagidam - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 12:10 pm:
I think this should be more about legislators cashing the checks. Do they want their name attached to a company, any company, that is named in a federal warrant or indictment? If they are named there is the potential of something bad coming out and now you as a legislator have to answer uneasy questions on why you took the money knowing there were problems on the horizon.
As for the post, ComEd would be wise to lay low. I’m sure they could convey the new approach to legislators through their lobbyists. I’m sure anyone that understands Springfield understands Exelon/ComEd aren’t going anywhere.
- Just Me - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 12:15 pm:
The better question is whether or not legislators should be depositing the checks.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 12:16 pm:
===whether or not legislators should be depositing the checks===
Best practice is to always deposit checks and then refund if need be.
- Former Downstater - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 12:18 pm:
There is nothing that says anyone has to deposit a check just because they receive it, and the date on it is before all heck broke loose. I know of one pol who recently returned a check to ComEd. It’s not hard.
- Pelonski - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 12:19 pm:
“I think the bigger question is should companies regulated by the state even give political donations to begin with?”
Every company and individual is regulated by the State in some way. Even if the courts would allow such restrictions, defining the level of regulation that would lead to the prohibition would be extremely difficult.
- A guy - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 12:22 pm:
==Best practice is to always deposit checks and then refund if need be.==
Quite true. But I believe that many legislators have been advised to do the former and hold onto them for the time being, or send them back.
- City Zen - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 12:22 pm:
No. In a state where the Laborers PAC just contributed a whopping $425,000 to Mike Madigan last week, $1,000 checks don’t buy you much.
- Bertrum Cates - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 12:35 pm:
It is OK to accept and cash checks from a regulated business whose lobbying practices are the subject of at least one Federal investigation? I find it difficult to believe no one knew something was up when the checks were written. It would be impossible to deny it when they were cashed.
If you need to distance yourself from ComEd PAC, using Pramaggiore’s retirement is not an option. That is just a weak attempt at justifying the relationship.
To the post: Yes, ComEd needs to lie low for the sake of everyone involved. Whether they were involved or knew about the practices under investigation or not, no one can deny not knowing about them anymore. The brand is toxic right now, and there is a good chance some bystanders might get hurt even as it is.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 12:39 pm:
===using Pramaggiore’s retirement is not an option===
Daniels made that assertion first. They responded to his assertion. Take a breath.
- anon - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 12:48 pm:
I think the bigger question is should the stae be regulating these companies at all.
- WQ - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 1:28 pm:
== How they redirect the loot to worthy cause? ==
Oh, don’t worry. ComEd already makes a lot of “charitable donations” to worthy causes. As it just so happens, often those causes are championed by legislators. And they don’t have to disclose those donations as campaign contributions. I trust the feds are looking into this.
- Telly - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 2:01 pm:
Not sure why Daniels chose the Pramaggiore resignation as the line of demarcation on this. It was clear ComEd was in deep doo doo well before that. News of the McClain and Zalewski raids, the Quinn consulting checks, and the Sandoval raid should have been clear warning signs that something is rotten in Denmark.
- Lawman - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 2:10 pm:
It is amazing how generous this company can be with funds ultimately generated by rate payers.
Donate to the legislators to get a rate increase on the consumers who then pay higher rates so there are more funds to donate to the legislators. What a vicious circle.
- otherwise - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 3:24 pm:
Some people are saying that Sen. Lightford is not good at raising money. To that I would say, you’re wrong - look here she got a check from ComEd.
- Shytown - Wednesday, Nov 27, 19 @ 3:36 pm:
== look here she got a check from ComEd ==
I’m pretty sure that a hell of a lot of members of the GA did as well. #Fact