Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Select react to the State of the State address
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
Posted in:
* From the governor’s SOTS address…
Honest members of the General Assembly from both sides of the aisle have some good ideas, and so do I.
It’s time to end the practice of legislators serving as paid lobbyists. In fact it’s time to end the for-profit influence peddling among all elected officials at every level of government in Illinois. Disclosure of conflicts of interest and punishment for breaching them must be included in any ethics package for us to truly clean up government. Most states have a revolving door provision for legislators, and it’s time for Illinois to join them. Elected officials shouldn’t be allowed to retire and immediately start lobbying their former colleagues. It’s wrong, and it’s got to stop.
* The Question: Your thoughts on these specific proposals?
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 2:43 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Select react to the State of the State address
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Agree with all and I spent some time as a contract lobbyist.
Comment by DownStateGrl Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 2:49 pm
It’s about time.
Comment by Conway All Day Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:01 pm
Case in point: Lou Lang. Got elected to another term, then resigns before even being seated to join a lobbying firm.
Comment by Unionman Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:04 pm
Something to consider. Drug companies report funds given to higher education MDs for drug research, drug tests, etc. Above a certain $ amount, the MDs also have to report drug companies $. About 10 years ago Iowa Senator Grassley outed numerous MDs for failure to report.
How about people who hire lobbyists AND lobbyists both having to report, which makes it harder for either to under / non-report?
Comment by Anyone Remember Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:11 pm
In some states, just serving as staff prevents you from lobbying for a set number of years after your employment is over. Illinois really needs to catch up on this issue.
Comment by SpfdNewb Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:14 pm
I get the argument, but what about people like Elaine Nekritz? She works as a lobbyist…for the good guys. And for prisoners. And for the environment… and for good government.
Any bill that would ban her from doing the good work she does I would oppose. Her reputation for honesty and fair play is why she is so effective helping the people she does. Sandoval demonstrates the problem. Elaine demonstrates the problem with banning all lobbying by former members.
Comment by Lobo Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:24 pm
Agree with all … can’t help but wonder how many years former legislators will need to be out of state government before going to work as lobbyists. Other states have what … 1-3 years?
Also (not in the excerpt, but closely related): I was impressed by his statement that he’s not about to sign an energy bill written by the utility companies. Boy that sent a message to somebody.
Comment by dbk Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:24 pm
@Lobo - Your “good guys” is another persons “bad guys.” And who is the decider? And if the argument is that the revolving door is unethical/corrupt — why wouldn’t it be the same for the “good guys?”
Comment by Just Observing Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:26 pm
all talk. not going to blink to any bit of real reform actually occurs.
Comment by Iggy Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:28 pm
If it didn’t happen after they impeached Blago, it’s not gonna happen now.
Comment by Rabbit Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:32 pm
If a revolving door were in place for legislators tell me what act of corruption being discussed would have been prevented? I can’t think of one. Stopping elected officials from lobbying other units of government certainly should be considered.
Comment by Nagidam Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:35 pm
===what act of corruption being discussed would have been prevented===
There are several examples of legislators “interviewing” for lobbyists jobs by voting a certain way or sponsoring certain bills/amendments.
Comment by Just Me 2 Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:41 pm
All for the ban on active legislators lobbying. Good move. Don’t like the ban on immediately becoming a lobbyist. I don’t want to stop someone from making a living or marketing their most saleable asset.
Comment by Lt Guv Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 3:54 pm
“Honest members of the General Assembly from both sides of the aisle have some good ideas”
What ideas did the dishonest members come up with?
Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 4:03 pm
Revolving door provisions apply to State employees but not to State legislators. Simply wrong. ALL ethical rules that apply to employees, must apply to their superiors/leaders.
Comment by R A T Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 4:06 pm
I think there is a general issue of elected members of one unit of government engaging in actions involving or influencing another unit of government.
That includes aldermen that lobby in springifle.d and legislators that lobby their towns and cities.
It includes influencing tax appeals, or working on contracts for other government bodies (particularly when they benefit from your state action).
Harmon did the right thing stepping down from his law firm that was doing bond work for governments that benefit from actions he took as a senator.
But, he should have done that before when he was just rank-and-file and then when he became in leadership.
Madigan shouldn’t be allowed to represent clients going to a property tax appeals board.
You can have a career. You can make money on the outside. But maybe try to do it without having governments you impact as clients.
I am sure Wisconsin needs bond lawyers and property tax appeals lawyers, too.
Comment by Ok Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 4:12 pm
Marlow, Kevin, AJ. All great arguments for a revolving door prohibition. Far too easy to shepherd a bill for a big interest then leave on a Thursday to return the following Monday as their lobbyist. Enough’s enough. Great job JB.
Comment by Southern Skeptic Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 4:24 pm
But, what kind of remuneration is the Governor going to propose to make up for the lost income for the legislators?
Someone has to think about the children. /s
Comment by Bruce( no not him) Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 4:49 pm
@ Just Me Too
My question was about corruption that we have heard and read and if a revolving door would have prevented anything we know about. I do not think a legislator is being investigated for voting a certain way and then being rewarded with a job.
Comment by Nagidam Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 4:52 pm
And can someone please define influence peddling? If speaker Madigan calls a building owner and asks to represent them as a property tax attorney is that influence peddling? IS his position as speaker influence peddling on its own? What about a simple mere legislator doing his/her job selling cars or real estate. Is there position as a legislator influence peddling? Same with a mayor or county board member. This is not as simple as people want it to be.
Comment by Nagidam Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 4:56 pm
The revolving door ban for state employees is a joke. IDOT regularly gives exemptions to the law to upper management. They walk out the door into high paying consulting positions.
Comment by Huh? Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 5:04 pm
@Huh: there are a couple of revolving door bans in the ethics act and the procurement code, and none of them have waivers. If you see something, call the OEIG
Comment by DIstant watcher Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 5:10 pm
OEIG is just as corrupt
Comment by Generic Drone Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 5:55 pm
Thank you house republicans for introducing these bills. It’s nice to see one Democrat come out in favor of them. It’s going to take a lot more than just one though.
Comment by Silencio por favor Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 6:00 pm
The state employee revolving door prohibitions are limited. If you take a consulting job with a company that you’ve not worked with as a state employee, the OEIG has no authority to prevent you from taking the job. If you awarded that company a $2 million project before you left, it is another story.
Comment by Pelonski Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 6:04 pm
Any discussion that doesn’t include, at minimum, a cooking off period, is a joke.
Comment by Token Conservative Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 6:54 pm
Anyone Remember - this is already the law
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jan 30, 20 @ 2:18 am
Would love to see this issue addressed. It would help restore faith in Illinois government. Over the years I gradually got a closer look at how things work in Springfield, which increasingly eroded my faith in the process.
Comment by Illinoised Thursday, Jan 30, 20 @ 7:29 am
I would go further and make it apply to spouses and family members of Illinois Legislators from being paid lobbyist. Inherently wrong on many levels. hats off to Pritzker. Exemptions could be in place if the lobbying is on behalf of a not-for profit NON-business related entity.
Comment by truthteller Thursday, Jan 30, 20 @ 8:44 am
=== - Huh? - Wednesday, Jan 29, 20 @ 5:04 pm:
The revolving door ban for state employees is a joke. IDOT regularly gives exemptions to the law to upper management. They walk out the door into high paying consulting position ===
Yep. I can only think of a couple that were not given an exemption.
Comment by Birdseed Thursday, Jan 30, 20 @ 8:45 am