Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: As expected, ARDC hearing board recommends Blagojevich be disbarred
Next Post: It’s just a bill
Posted in:
* From Carolyn Schofield…
The Illinois Legislative Inspector General, Carol Pope has substantiated recent ethics violation claims filed against Representative Allen Skillicorn charged with falsifying his attendance and voting record in Springfield while campaigning in Harvard, Illinois for another office on the same day;
“My investigation substantiated allegations that Representative Skillicorn was not present when the quorum roll call vote was taken at 12:15 p.m. on June 1, 2019, nor was he present for any of the votes that he was recorded as voting on prior to 3:00 p.m. Representative Skillicorn filed a letter to correct the record with the Clerk of the House.”
“I interviewed 11 people during the course of my investigation, including Clerk’s Office personnel, staff members, and several members of the General Assembly.”
“Apparently it is common practice for members to ask a seatmate or staffer to vote their switch if they need to step out and use the bathroom, or meet with leadership or talk to a constituent. It is not accepted practice for a member to ask someone to vote their switch when they are out of town, nor is it appropriate for a staffer or seatmate to take it upon themselves to vote another member’s switch when they are out of town and absent from the session.”
The LIG also indicated that no legislators were paid for the overtime session held on June 1st, 2019, at the direction of Speaker Mike Madigan. A suggestion will be made to Leadership that written protocol be put in place as some members, despite the existing set of Rules that govern the House, have not familiarized themselves with proper procedures.
Skillicorn is being challenged for his 66th District House seat by McHenry County Board Member Carolyn Schofield in the March primary.
I’ve reached out to Skillicorn for comment.
…Adding… The letter from LIG Pope…
Ms. Schofield—I wanted to update you on the status of my investigation into your complaint relating to Representative Skillicorn. My investigation substantiated your allegations that Representative Skillicorn was not present when the quorum roll call vote was taken at 12:15 p.m. on June 1, 2019, nor was he present for any of the votes that he was recorded as voting on prior to 3:00 p.m. Representative Skillicorn filed a letter to correct the record with the Clerk of the House. You can find it on pages 5-6 of the House Journal for June 1, 2019. Here is a link to the Journal:
http://www.ilga.gov/house/journals/101/2019/HJ101063R.pdfI found no evidence that Representative Skillicorn authorized anyone to operate his switch in his absence. I interviewed 11 people during the course of my investigation, including Clerk’s Office personnel, staff members, and several members of the General Assembly. Apparently it is common practice for members to ask a seatmate or staffer to vote their switch if they need to step out and use the bathroom, or meet with leadership or talk to a constituent. It is not accepted practice for a member to ask someone to vote their switch when they are out of town, nor is it appropriate for a staffer or seatmate to take it upon themselves to vote another member’s switch when they are out of town and absent from the session. I will be suggesting to Leadership that a written protocol be put together and given to members and staff so there is no question about the procedures to be followed when a member is going to be absent. There is a set of Rules that govern the House, however, I am not sure how many members have totally familiarized themselves with the particulars of those rules. Some members could relate to me the procedures that should be followed if they are going to be absent, but some members indicated they did not know what procedures to follow if absent.
I found no evidence of malicious intent with regard to the operation of Representative Skillicorn’s switch.
No per diem was paid to any member of the House for June 1, 2019, per order of the Speaker.
Thank you for bringing this situation to my attention. I am hopeful that a written protocol provided to every member and his or her staff will prevent such a situation from reoccurring. I have closed my investigation into this matter.
Sincerely,
Carol Pope
Legislative Inspector General
State of Illinois
*** UPDATE *** Rep. Skillicorn…
I agree with everything in Legislative Inspector General Carol Pope’s findings. Clearly, mistakes were made here. I corrected the official record of the House to reflect the fact that I was not present in the chamber on June 1, 2019 during the few initial votes that were taken that day.
I strongly support LIG Carol Pope’s recommendation for a written protocol to ensure that this does not happen again. As she noted, she “found no evidence of malicious intent with regard to the operation of Representative Skillicorn’s switch.”
Indeed, there was no malice. It was mistake and we as a legislative body should clearly define what the protocol should be so that the rules are clear and mistakes like this will not be made.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 2:42 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: As expected, ARDC hearing board recommends Blagojevich be disbarred
Next Post: It’s just a bill
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
When will people learn that there are cameras *everywhere* now?
Comment by jimbo Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 2:54 pm
He won’t resign, and likely won’t apologize to the people who elected him to perform that duty faithfully. Vote him out! There needs to be accountability to the job and the people who elected you to do it.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 2:54 pm
I guess Mr. Skillicorn isn’t at all that Magnificent after all.
Will it matter come March 17th?
Dunno.
Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 2:56 pm
I was in the gallery a few years ago and witnessed this practice. I strongly disagree with it. You should vote your own switch, and no one else’s. If you are not there for the vote, let it be noted in the record that you were absent for the vote.
Comment by Boat captain Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 2:57 pm
Skilly just think going to Milk Days might do you in. At lest we can now credit milk days with a worthwhile accomplishments
Comment by Annonin' Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 3:08 pm
“Apparently it is common practice for members to ask a seatmate or staffer to vote their switch if they need to step out and use the bathroom, or meet with leadership or talk to a constituent”
Skillicorn will wear the jacket on this issue - but as there is no penalty the damage is minimal. More of a case of him not having party cover as this practice was/is common.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 3:23 pm
===as this practice was/is common===
It is not common to vote someone as present when he is nowhere near present.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 3:28 pm
Wait… Shouldn’t the entire focus be on the person who voted in his place? Particularly so if it was found that he did not authorize anyone to do so?
That, to me, is where the ethical issue exists.
Comment by Right Field Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 3:46 pm
Right Field, maybe if Skillicorn hadn’t insisted that he did drive to Springfield and vote.
Comment by Grimlock Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 4:06 pm
Without a penalty for the person that DID use Skillcorn’s vote switch, what is the point of the rule? The vote should be switched to “absent” in these cases, and a criminal investigation should be initiated by the AG’s office. But this is Illinois, so….
Comment by revvedup Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 4:23 pm
=the damage is minimal=
But there is “damage” according to your post. Interesting that you are ok with that.
Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 5:12 pm
Isn’t Skillicorn always absent in a broader philosophical sense?
Comment by Rich Hill Tuesday, Mar 3, 20 @ 7:52 pm
“mistakes were made”
The original weasel-words.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 8:31 am
The bigger question is how many times has he or anyone else done it and would that impact whether bills actually passed. It raises questions regarding the entire process and if our laws are valid.
Comment by Unionman Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 8:32 am
=== The bigger question is…===
Probably not.
Important legislation or “close” legislation “usually” has a verification question or three by one side or another.
The brazen way Mr. Skillicorn is so flippant, that’s the real shame of this… I mean, outside the whole voting a switch while not present, other than that…
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 8:39 am
=== I once voted for a representative when they were off the floor===
That’s 1,000% different then not being in town.
===I suppose having a list ensures a paper trail of how they are voting in the cases that a vote is voted on incorrectly.===
Maybe or not, but at any time someone could’ve asked for verification, and that member would be sought if they were present to vote. Not present, that vote would’ve been stricken.
===But, like “Unionman” says, it does make you question the entire process.===
No.
No it actually doesn’t
What Mr. Skillicorn did was have his switch open while not in town, not “off the floor”
The verification process is in place for your “concern”, which is nothing like what your are saying.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Mar 4, 20 @ 9:17 pm