Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Question of the day

Posted in:

Illinois

* I’m running behind today. Worked very late and then got up late. Oops. So, let’s do the QOTD while I’m collecting my thoughts on the rest of our posts. The setup is from David Broder…

As a fellow Illinoisan, I have to admit that this latest example of the Springfield Syndrome that has now tainted four recent governors is a signal that the ethics reforms Obama sponsored as a member of the Illinois Legislature did not go far enough to cleanse the pay-to-play culture.

Get out the scrub brushes.

* The Question: Will new ethics laws really do anything to clean up our system of government? Explain fully. And if you say “Yes,” then what law(s) would do the trick and why?

Also, this is not about Obama, so keep the national stuff out of it, please. Thanks.

posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:30 am

Comments

This inquiry is absurd and insulting. The activities of our corrupt Governor are already illegal. Ironically, he is the one who passed and supported a number of “ethics” law and then chose to act to circumvent those and many long-existed laws against extortion adn conspiracy. The ethics laws on the books and the behavior of bad people are unrelated.

Comment by Oh please... Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:35 am
No. There are already laws against what Rod did, and e did them anyway. A law does not stop someone from acting unethically.

The electorate needs to be willing to turn off the TV for a few hours each election year and read up on the candidates.

In 2006, it was clear to anyone who paid attention that Rod was a bad seed and that Topinka was a better alternative (at least ethically speaking). Yet, if you discuss this with good Republicans, they bought into Rod’s advertising onslaught. Apparently, no one thought to check, the ad refutations were bought hook, line, and sinker.

As long as the electorate behaves in this way, the unethical will be able to dominate the system.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:38 am
Oh, and one other thing….pay to play is not a culture - its an already illegal way of doing business which puts personal interests above the interests of the people of the state of Illinois.

Comment by Oh please... Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:38 am
First, let’s all recognize that the degree of blatant corruption revealed in the FBI affidavit could not be fixed by any law. Blagojevich is just in a different class than the kind of corruption that ethics reforms would fix.

Ethics reform would incrementally clean up government, but it won’t entirely take away government sleaze for two reasons. First, no matter what the reform, people will find loopholes because there’s a way to profit from political activity. Ethics reform is an ongoing process to close these loopholes. Secondly, cleaner government needs public officials who are committed to the public good. As long as entry into the political system is closely tied with jobs, salaries, and contracts, there will be abuse of public funds.

Having said that, thanks to reforms and public scrutiny Illinois politics are cleaner than they used to be, and I truly believe that they will continue to become cleaner. Changing the laws has an important role in this process.

Comment by the Other Anonymous Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:38 am
We need complete transparency that still allows for freedom of speech. Therefore, Illinois needs a law that requires 100 percent disclosure of political contributions. These contributions would not be capped.

Voters would be able to see who is contributing - whether its $1 or $100,000 - and then make their own decision at the ballot box.

Comment by 4% Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:38 am
No,

Hard donation limits per year to both candidates and parties (lets say 2K).

Instant reporting of any donation (via the intertubes)

Make it so no individual donor (or group)can make a financial difference.

Comment by OneMan Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:40 am
If a law is needed to act ethically, then no. There are laws making it a crime to shoplift, to murder, to involve children in pornography, to cross the street in the middle of the block, yet all these events happen despite the laws. Ethical behavior is certainly an ideal, but whose ethics are we going to use? Our, meaning Illinois’, system of government is based on politics being a business, that politics is a way to make money not public policy for the public good. Making laws is a business, a means to an end, and that end is a healthy paycheck. Unless that fundamental ethos is overthrown, any ethics legislation is doomed to be a name-only law that Illinois politicians will forever seek to circumvent.

Comment by Captain Flume Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:40 am
I think Lisa Madigan is on the right track by starting a precedent that any public official that is seen trading public monies/favors for personal enrichment is mentally unfit for government service.

Comment by Johnny USA Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:41 am
Once again Broder notes Madigan was the guy standing in opposition and warning people to stay clear of GRod.
He also points out the GOP penchant for putting up unelectable candidates —another RYAN and AccordianGal

Comment by Reddbyrd Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:43 am
No.

Corruption always finds a way. This is a culture problem, and it won’t go away until you break the mindset. Fitzgerald is off to a good start.

Besides, state laws require state enforcement, and how many State’s Attorney’s have you seen around these parts that takes on public corruption? Not many.

Comment by ILPundit Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:44 am
I agree with most of the previous posts. I’m for tough ethics laws, but If you’re a crook, all the laws in the world won’t stop you.

When you get down to it, it’s up to the electorate to become engaged, informed and insist on honest candidates. In a democracy, you get the government you deserve.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:45 am
Amen bretheren & sisteren. More laws are a smokescreen. If someone wants to break a law they will. It’s the climate of accepting this behavior that’s the problem.

Comment by robo Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:45 am
Whatever ethics legislation is passed, we need for the Illinois Senate to finally vote on the Recall proposal legislation Emil Jones let die. If, and when, another Governor acts like Blago did let the citizens of Illinois recall them. Politicians are like Doctors; they hardly ever penalize or reprimand their own.

Comment by Jechislo Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:45 am
A question for Rich (in 2 parts):

1. When you you think we will hear actual audio of the Governor’s wiretap tapes, and

2. When will you be able to convert them to ringtones for our cellphones?

Comment by ILPundit Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:46 am
To Oh Please — Pay to play is not a culture? You must not be from around here because in Illinois it certainly is. In Chicago, for example, it’s well-known that the best way to get a zoning variance is to make a campaign donation. Let’s be clear: this isn’t a democratic problem or a republican problem, a downstate problem or a Chicago problem — it’s a statewide, bipartisan problem.

What Blagojevich is accused of doing is only amazing because of the scope and his brazenness. Illinois has long been a cesspool of corruption. Ryan, Kerner, Walker, Powell, etc.

While I don’t think any law or series of law will change the culture in Illinois politics, I believe the most powerful change would be more stringent ethics laws with term limits. The reason why pols are so powerful is that they remain in office for years. And of course, once they’re in office, their main concern is staying in office first, which means peddling influence for campaign donations or other goodies. Term limits will not stop the problem, but it should stem the tide.

Comment by Cynic Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:47 am
No, There are no laws that will end the culture that is Illinois Politics. It is a culture that has been in part perpetrated by the Cellini family. It has been known amongst state workers for decades that if one aspires to upper level jobs, MC series and above, you have to make friends with the Cellini’s to be successful. There is an inside joke that when one’s appointment is up you have to go to Springfield and “kiss the ring”. This has been prevalent through administrations of both parties.
Laws do not stop this, as is evidenced by the current situation. The only thing that slows it is close scrutiny and a prosecuter like Fitzgerald who follows the money and does not care who it affects. President elect Obama should increase the budget of Fitzgerald’s office and give him more staff to move right through the State from one end to another.
It has been said and it is true that we deserve what we get in politacal leaders. As voters we need to be more aware and when a politician is found to be doing anything that is even slightly unseemly we ought to vote them out of office. We have to start thinking for ourselves and become informed, and not listen to spin, fear mongering, and all the other tactics that are used by politcal organizations to promote their candidates and attack their opponents.

Comment by Irish Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:48 am
Reducing corruption is simple. Increase transparency and decrease conflicts of interest.

Here’s a law that would help.

All internal investigations need to be posted online, as if requested by the FOIA. The public should know what agencies are being investigated and the date of the complaint. Completed investigations should be posted.

Fundraising from employees and vendors/contractors should be legal only under very narrow circumstances.

Law firms that do business with the government should not contribute to state and local politics. I see no reasonable way to ensure that bills aren’t being padded without violating attorney-client privilege. If the contributions can’t be scrutinized without violating privilege, they shouldn’t be allowed.

Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:48 am
It’s both - not just one or the other. As long as there are no limits - people will find ways to get the most they can. And, we have to stop expecting electeds to act this way. We should be shocked by much less than what we saw this week.

Comment by babs Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:49 am
The window dressing of ‘ethics tests’ and similar bark-but-don’t-bite policies do not stop the greedy people as they have no ethics. No law will help….they will just break that one too. Maybe require all elected officials to ‘wear a wire’ with everything streamed over the internet.

Comment by Vote Quimby! Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:50 am
SPRINGFIELD SYNDROME??? I take offense to this, the problems stem from the fact that EVERY elected executive, the Legislative leaders are ALL from North of I 80. I don’t think it is a Springfield syndrome, it is a “CHICAGO POLITICAL SYNDROME”. Don’t pin this garbage on Springfield, that is a crock.

Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:52 am
No. Way.

Years of arrogance, and not just by the Govs, have put us here today. I agree with the culture comment.

I just caught up on Boston Legal. I agree with Shirley Schmidt: before long, there will be no America. Communists will take over our country. New world order. She’s right, they own us already.

What is happening right now is not the America our framers envisioned over 200 years ago.

Sorry if you blinded by the tin-foil. I’m just sayin…

Comment by BandCamp Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:52 am
No.

The only way to clean up Illinois politics (which has its filthy roots deeply embedded in the old Chicago political machine), is to amend the Constitution to require term limits of all state elected public officials. Term limits would not eliminate the problem, of course. But those who still thrive on patronage in the post-Rutan age would get much less benefit from giving jobs to the highest bidder.

Comment by Cowgirl Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:54 am
Probably not, but everyone will be clamoring for new ethics laws.

The problem is many Illinoisians turn their backs on the problem. You can’t legislate honesty or ethical behavior but you can vote people with improper behaviors out. This rarely happens in this state.

Comment by Downstate Dem Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:55 am
If only there was a way we could address the changes needed in this state with one fell swoop….

Comment by Vote Quimby! Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:56 am
And auditing the ARDC with an eye toward looking for cover-ups of misconduct by political law firms would smoke out a whole bunch of corruption.

Comment by Carl Nyberg Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:57 am
“Corruption always finds a way” — so does water leaking into boats. That’s why we have caulk and bilge pumps. Because sinking is bad. And Illinois governance is sinking.

As noted by others, IL needs strict campaign contributions limits, and instant disclosure. I’d substitute public financing of all campaigns if I thought anyone would listen. And I mean ALL — every city council and judge and commission seat everywhere in the state. Add to that serious financial disclosure laws for gov’t officials — covering spouses, children, and in-laws. Harsh nepotism rules that keep spouses, kids and in-laws from doing business with anyone who has business with the State. And step up enforcement of Shakman — send people to jail for breaking the rules. Make internal investigations into state, county and local government the role of a non-partisan, non-elected inspector general appointed by with subpoena power. Give him/her a big budget. Patrick Fitzgerald can’t be everywhere, and stopping small-time corruption will help change the environment.

And floggings. More floggings.

I’m usually a live and let live guy, but this just reeks. It’s bringing out my inner Savannarola.

Comment by Muskrat Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 9:58 am
Sure it could.

Increased criminal penalties for lobbyists and politicians and staff + changes to procurement policy increasing transparency and making no-bid awards more difficult + support for recall of any state official + campaign finance limits.

Plus, it’s all we’ve got. I’d rather try reform than throw up our hands and be doomed to another generation of corrupt “leaders.”

Comment by Joshua Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:01 am
No, but that is how new laws clutter up our system.

Legislators need to look like they are doing something useful. so they craft a piece of legislation that makes them look awake and concerned.

The reality is that nothing ever seems to change

Comment by Plutocrat03 Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:01 am
“If only there was a way we could address the changes needed in this state with one fell swoop….

Aye, Quimby! But ConCon was “too expensive” for the state, and so we have to wait 20 years for another chance! Instead, we may have a special election. That will be MUCH CHEAPER, right? And we won’t be able to get any meaningful amendments to the Constitution, because we have to get the foxes guarding the hen-house to do something meaningful about their raiding.

Yes, I’m bitter. I’m disgusted with politicians in Illinois and with our entire system of entrenched corruption.

Comment by Cowgirl Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:05 am
The only ethics laws that would be worth the paper they are written on need to be written by Patrick Fitzgerald.

Comment by Dan S, a Voter and Cubs Fan Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:06 am
I don’t think ethics laws help- although that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be in place. I think what will help most is a new generation of elected officials, which we are slowly getting.

Comment by Anon Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:08 am
No. Laws have loopholes. Any ethics law the GA creates will have them, and they will be exploited. There are processes in place to stem the number of ethical violations, and enforcement of the law should punish those convicted.

===He also points out the GOP penchant for putting up unelectable candidates —another RYAN and AccordianGal===

If by “electable” Broder means “flashy, glib, photogenic, and selling pie-in-the-sky,” then Jim Ryan was not electable. However, if by “electable Broder means “solid, dependable, honest, and fiscally conservative,” then he certainly was.

Electability is determined more by the values of the voters than by the values of the candidate.

Comment by Fan of the Game Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:08 am
Here’s the one I’d pass: a law barring anyone from office who has had a spouse, parent, or sibling hold office within the last 20 years.

And not to be argumentative, but this IS about Obama– when you look at the caliber of people he’s supported here in Illinois, he’s one of the people who’s gotten us where we are today. Blagojevich over Vallas, Stroger over Claypool– it makes you wonder how long before Alexi Giannoulias implodes, too.

Comment by Fred Unfriendly Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:08 am
Indeed Vote Quimby, but that was going to be too expensive! $80M? In this state? No way, we don’t have that kind of money!

On an unrelated note, we NEED to have a special election. I don’t care how much it costs, $50M, whatever. We will find a way. This is not, I repeat NOT an unnecessary move that is being talked about just to get some headlines!

Comment by Price Tag Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:08 am
Term limits are the only way. Term limits for individual offices, PLUS a 2 or 4 year period BETWEEN different offices.

Comment by Pat collins Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:11 am
Does anyone know if the ILGA can retract Blagojevich’s salary? Maybe L-Mad could through an injunction. Maybe Alexi could say he’s going to stop cutting the check.

Comment by Joshua Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:11 am
I wonder what the Chicago Ministers Alliance will do now that therir man is facing the oust

Comment by BONES Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:17 am
The problem we have in Illinois goes beyond laws. More laws could help, but what is wrong is clearly wrong in most cases. Defendants, along with their lawyers, hide within the cracks of legality in efforts to demonstrate that although an action taken by a defendant was wrong, it wasn’t illegal. So while using a legal standard, and passing laws is important - our problem has been allowing lawyers and the people they defend to define what is good behavior and what is right.

This legal standard is not high enough as we clearly see this morning. It does not halt criminal behavior, but instead, allows criminal behavior to have legal justifications to prevent wrongdoers from facing charges and jail. Defendants have good stories to tell juries about how what was obviously wrong behavior wasn’t illegal behavior. So writing new laws in an attempt to address these escape routes for criminal behavior isn’t an adequate answer, but it doesn’t hurt.

We are talking about government failure. Failure within this Administration to be self-cleaning. Failure within this state government to take action against wrongdoing. Failure within the Illinois political parties to nominate ethical candidates. Failure among Illinois’ leaders to lead or believe enough in voters to risk demanding accountability among themselves.

We depend upon one another to fight crime. Good neighbors share concerns among themselves regarding odd activities and goings-on within their communities. When things get out of hand, an alarm goes off and the law is contacted. This didn’t happen at the highest levels of Illinois government!

Political competition also grinds against administrations to keep them in check. Illinois has become a one-party state without this important brake. No GOP leader stood up and demanded accountability from Blagojevich and made it stick. The Governor had no political governor to slow him down in this one-party state.

So laws are a placebo in a state with a culture of corruption, a majority party interested in only nominating “winners” regardless of qualifications, a non-existent and ineffective minority party, a scandal-riddled Chicago administration, corrupted Cook County governance, silent collaborators in high offices, spineless careerists in the General Assembly, and everyone covering their tracks with lawyers spouting justification for criminal behavior.

Illinois is corrupt because the people in power are corrupt.

Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:17 am
We RE-ELECTED the worst (or second worst after Len Small) governor in our states history! Same for the Prez. And the list goes on and on. Paul Douglas, Dirkson, Simon, Lane Evans and others rose to the top because they were cream. Others float to the top as excrement. We need to recognize the difference.

Comment by Obamalac Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:18 am
It would be a brilliant political move if Alexi Giannoulias would stop signing Rod Blagojevich’s paychecks.

Just a thought

Comment by Joshua Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:19 am
The only way I see to avoid much of this is an all-out ban on contributions from anyone employed by the state, any contractor of any kind bidding on or doing work for the state, any entity regulated by a said GA member’s committee and immediate family members of those. Such a system would be so cumbersome and so ridiculously tedious to monitor and keep up with that I think it would take several cycles to implement - implemented by people with a financial interest in seeing it NOT happen. Besides that, there’s the constitutionality of such a wide-ranging ban. But short of that, it’s going to be really difficult to keep officials from elevating friends and contributors.

I still believe the only way to reform this state is a non-partisan map and term limits on caucus leaders in the GA. I’ll have faith in the system again when I see both.

God help us if Patrick Fitzgerald decides to leave us anytime soon - simply from the fatique of wading in this cesspool for so long.

Comment by Amuzing Myself Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:19 am
Or perhaps it’s the comptroller who signs the checks, not sure on that point..

Comment by Joshua Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:21 am
Well the new ethics legislation may not go far enough but it sure pushed this governor over the edge now, didn’t it? It caused him to panic to the point of almost total meltdown in trying to stash the cash in his campaign fund before December 31. I’d say it scared the bejezes out of him. So did it go far enough? My opinion is thus far, it’s a success as far as Elvis is concerned. Do we need more, you bet and I can’t wait to see the calamaty that scricter ethics legislation would cause. Bring it on.

Comment by Little Egypt Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:22 am
===I don’t think it is a Springfield syndrome, it is a “CHICAGO POLITICAL SYNDROME”===

Two words: George Ryan.

Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:23 am
I heard a good one liner:

In Illinois our Governors typically spend 2 terms in the Governors Mansion and one term in the federal penetentiary.

Comment by Joshua Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:25 am
The quid pro woe aspect to this scandal is both disappointing and illegal. There surely are less venal ways for a governor to “get” something “out of” this sort of appointment. There is no way that Gov. Paterson or the Delaware governor aren’t going to be taken care of in some way for appointing the right “chosen one”. That, however is a long way from the heinous stuff we’ve been reading from the wiretap evidence.

Comment by chiatty Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:28 am
What was the trigger for the “corruption crime spree” Why it was the new ethics law. Piecemeal or partial reform may be worse than no reform. I think the reform community needs to be more forceful and insist on a much more comprehensive set of laws (and not just more regulation), get the SBE to do its job, and actually push for honest redistricting. All the efforts to date seem to have made things worse, not better.

Comment by Doubting T Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:28 am
Douglas Schoen on forbes.com articulated my clumsily stated thoughts much better:

Politicians do not hand out jobs or favors without some reasonable expectation that they will get something in return. Contributors do not give large gifts to politicians, especially those who they have limited personal relationships with, without some reasonable expectation that their undertakings will be, at the very least, taken into account when policy decisions and appointments are made. And while the vast majority of these typically tacit understandings are not criminal, to assume that merit is the basis for most, if not all, political hiring or policy decisions would be illusory at best.

http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/12/10/blagojevich-politics-behavior-oped-cx_des_1210schoen.html

Comment by chiatty Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:36 am
–Two words: George Ryan.–

Two more: Paul Powell.

Come on guys, let’s get real. Corruption stems from lack of character, not geography.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:43 am
Of course laws make a difference. The very urgency Blago was under was due to the new ethics reform laws set to take place January 1st. Now the existing ones didn’t stop him, and I’m sure he would have tried to find loopholes and other ways to continue his shady deals, but the laws were influencing his behavior. They were working on some marginal level. Better laws might do a better job of reigning him, and future govs, in.

Comment by Don't get Rodomized Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:44 am
The current pay to play ban that starts Jan 1 is obviously a good start. This is proven by the fact that Blago entered into this “crime spree” because the clock was ticking according to Fitz. He had limited time to sell his power and he knew it. More needs to be done but the advocates of the play to play ban should be proud of their success on this front. Only a start, but a good one.

Comment by 2for2 Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:50 am
–The current pay to play ban that starts Jan 1 is obviously a good start. This is proven by the fact that Blago entered into this “crime spree” because the clock was ticking according to Fitz.–

In a funny way then (strange funny, not ha-ha funny), the new ethics law prompted a crime spree. Whoops.

Seriously, Blago’s not the smartest crook to ever serve in office. A smarter one would have found a different way to break the law. Let’s just stop electing crooks.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:54 am
NO the ethics laws will not help and everyone elses suggestions are way off!

100% Publically Funded Elections and a ban on all private campaign contributions is the only answer!
As long as we have privately funded elections and money is equated to free speech we will never have a functioning Democracy, just a hollowed out shell of one!

Comment by Philo-King Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:54 am
Isn’t it ironic how the appointment of Obama’s Senate seat is the issue that finally brings the whole world on board with what all of us have known for 5 years? That being that Blagojevich is a deranged, mentally deficient, arrogant crook. Ethics laws will not be the catalyst that stops people like Blagojevich from ruining Illinois. It will be the people of Illinois finally not voting these type of people in office. And, we need a way of recalling the bad apples.

Comment by Jechislo Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 10:56 am
NO - in my 30 plus years I saw them either (a) figure out how to go around the laws or (b) the legislature deliberately left a loophole somewhere that could be squeezed through. The only way new ethics legislation might work is if the State procurement rules allow absolutely zero discretion in both the specification and evaluation process … and I don’t see how that would work in practice. The only thing that MIGHT work would be a 100% ban on any kind of contribution to a politician or his family … but that would violate first amendment rights and be ruled illegal.

What we need are better elected officials, people like we used to have, such as Paul Simon, Adlai Stevenson and Richard Ogilvie … people who stood for something and did what was right for the citizens. But the only way to get these people is to have informed and involved voters … I’ll let you draw your own conclusions about the typical Illinois voter.

Comment by retired non-union state guy Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 11:00 am
You know, in most circumstances I am completely opposed to term limits, but as a former resident of Illinois who now resides in a state with term limits (Colorado), it seems to me that the fine citizens of Illinois might want to take a look at them. Senators limited to two terms; house members limited to three; executive officers limited to two terms. (Limiting mayors and city council members would be a good idea as well)

Limit campaign contributions to $200 per campaign (primary and general–with full disclosure down to the penny); require transparency for independent expenditure groups and their contributions (all contributors listed on their wesite and the website included in all ads); and finally no governement employee or elected official allowed to be employed as a lobbyist for a period of 5 years following their leaving public service.

Comment by Mountain Man Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 11:00 am
Paul Powell, OK, but George Ryan was pushed on us by the Chi-town folks.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 11:02 am
–Paul Powell, OK, but George Ryan was pushed on us by the Chi-town folks.–

Jane Addams? Enrico Fermi? Mike Ditka? Who were these terrible people and how did they push him on you? I admit I voted for Rod the first time. Not the second.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 11:05 am
Come on, George is a Chicago Area guy. Edgar might have a little dirt on his hands, but nothing like George or Rod.

I think there needs to be stricter ethics laws than what was passed

1. $1000 Coporate limit per year per candidate.
2. $250 Personal limit per year per candidate.
3. TERM LIMITS 8 years per office, (if it is good enough for the President of the US, it should be good enough for EVERY other office.
4. More checks and balances, take some of the power out of the Governor, and Legislative leaders.

STRICT oversite on Large Contracts.

Most of all, RECALL could perhaps make officials do the will of the people. They don’t police themselves, so give the voters more power to do so.

Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 11:22 am
George Ryan was pushed upon us by the right wing downstaters who voted for Glenn Poshard in the primary.

Comment by Bill Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 11:22 am
==George Ryan was pushed upon us by the right wing downstaters who voted for Glenn Poshard in the primary.==

I don’t know about that. Poshard was a real contender and by the time of the primary, looked even better. Ryan just looked more stable on Election Day. Poshard had too many of you people sniping at him to keep his traction. I think voters like you killed off Poshard’s chance.

Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 11:28 am
I also think that the mainstream media has fumbled the ball on many occasions. I remember as a young adult and in my history lessons that investigative journalists and TV reporters conducted many investigations that brought many politicians to their political demise. When was the last time one of the mainstream media in Illinois conducted any investigation of a public figure and brought them down? I recall many instances in Blago’s governorship when something would be brought up and then it would disappear. Example: the $1500.00 check given to one his daughters for their birthday from an individual seeking a state job for their spouse. When I heard that I thought wow they got him. He was asked about it on live news and he faltered several times trying to answer. I thought again wow they got him. Then nothing. This same scenerio was repeated on several different issues this Governor was involved in. Why don’t these main stream news organizations follow up on these stories and run them to ground?

Comment by Irish Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 11:39 am
That crooks can and do evade laws is not a reason not to institute them. What it does mean is there is an upper limit to the effectiveness of laws designed to restrict or prohibit certain activities. Beyond that limit, the cost of enforcement exceeds its utility. Does that mean the optimal level of corruption is greater than zero. Yes. But considering we currently have no limits on campaign contributions for individuals, PACs and corporations (unless one is bidding/holding a state contract in excess of $50K), we’ve got a heck of a long way to go before we have to worry ourselves with the upper limits.

Comment by Suzanne Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 11:44 am
Poshard got absolutely hammered by the Tribune because he had the temerity to suggest that George Ryan was corrupt and that his corrupt leadership was in some way related to the Willis tragedy. The Tribune pushed George Ryan over the top in a big way. They made Poshard look like a ghoul. At that time, the U.S. attorney’s office was taking their sweet time with the Safe Roads investigation and the Tribune pushed the Republican and pummeled the Democrat.

Comment by chiatty Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 11:46 am
I’ve a bit about the QOTD reading some analysis of the Blagojevich scandal. It occured to me that much, if not all, of the emphasis is on making it difficult for politicians to act unethically.

But what about the lobbyists and contractors who are the “pay” part of “pay to play”? If, for example, we increased penalties and/or enforcement against the people who make political contributions for profit, wouldn’t the market for graft dry up?

I’m not suggesting that we stop scrutinizing public officials, but only that Blagojevich could get away with his brazen corruption because there were people willing to make contributions in exchange for public benefits. you’ve got fix that problem as well.

Comment by the Other Anonymous Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 12:07 pm
Laws are good. But vigorous enforcement is more important. I think an important take away from this is that who sits in the US Attorney’s office is important in IL, and to always make sure we get a good one. We may not be able to prosecute the way out of this, but it’s not a bad start.

Another idea? Perhaps a good way for government to get cleaned up is to preemptively tap all the legislators’ phones and offices on the grounds that there is a persistent pattern of crime involved with IL governance and that as long as that’s the case then there is no expectation of privacy on the part of the members of the government.

I voted once for G. Ryan (Poshard seemed a bit too anti-gay for my taste), and 3 times for Blago (1 primary, 2 generals–I was bitter toward the GOP after the 2000 election and vowed never to vote GOP again. I’ve stuck with it, though I’ll admit to a write-in and a few Green party candidates since then). So you may want to take my viewpoint with a grain of salt, as I seem to be an enabler.

Comment by cermak_rd Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 12:43 pm
== Corruption stems from lack of character, not geography. ==

I totally agree. But I often wonder if Rod Blagojevich wasn’t sincere in his promise so many years ago to change the way things are done in state government. Maybe I’m naive, but I think he was. That is until the likes of Tony Rezko got his claws into him. And Bill Cellini, too, I guess. And probably others. Maybe even his wife. They had their own agenda and found a way to force it on the governor. Blagojevich changed for the worse. And then there was no going back.

Well, maybe I’m just deceiving myself into thinking that Rod did have character at one point. That way I don’t have to feel so bad that he betrayed us all.

Comment by Cheswick Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 12:47 pm
Have to look at the role of the appointed too. The staff folk around people like Ryan and Blago get a taste for the upper class living and are driven financially to be accomplices in these nefarious schemes. They’ll do just about anything to enable the reelection of their tainted heads.

This touches on an aspect of the Blago drama that has not been talked about much: his family financial stress. Is this real stress or the stress of wanting higher social status as measured by affluent lifestyles and the symbols of wealth and not having the means of attaining it? Some who have drifted into this territory have gotten off lightly by being able to claim an error in judgment, e.g. Senator Obama and the house deal. The associations between politicians and rich, famous and powerful seem to be driving the politicians to be seeking higher office as a means of attaining wealth and elite status in society.

Also on the list of enablers we need to look at the power of the house and senate leaders and how they exercise their power with the purse. This is obviously a very flawed feature of our state leadership that needs fixing.

And finally the quid pro quo. Almost universally, legislators of all stripes tell us that there is no connection between campaign donations and votes. Does anyone really believe this? So, the high cost of elections, the power of incumbency, the gerrymandering of legislative districts, etc. are all contributing to the problem, not just in corruption but in making the public much more cynical and distrustful of their elected officials. Much of the problem is systemic. It just ain’t the people but the system which enables the mess and muddle and all of the wheeling and dealing of cronic corruption.

Comment by vole Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 12:49 pm
We have seen examples of Mr. Posahrd’s ethics in his doctoral thesis and in the manner in which that was handled. Chicago may be the most famous home of Illinois political behavior but is by no means the only nest fostering it. Southern Illinois is a hotbed of local kingfish that given more population power would certainly give Chicago a run for the money (literally).

Comment by Captain Flume Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 12:56 pm
No, because our elected officials are not answerable to non-government employed citizens at election time. My theory follows. The Dept of Labor not too long ago stated that Illinois has 800,000 government employees. I suspect that most are in the Chicago-Cook County area. I also suspect that most are state, county, municipal or other local government employees. Most are probably unionized, have almost ironclad job security and enjoy a salary exceeding what is available for similar work in the private sector. Most are eligible for a pension which is unheard of in the private sector (eg, retirement at 80 to 90% of salary with full medical at 50 or so). Now add in current retirees enjoying this taxpayer sponsored golden parachute and spouses and dependents of active and retired employees. Add to this the contractors and their employees who want to do business with Illinois government entities and their spouses and dependents. What you have is a pool of people probably reaching over 1.5 million, who will donate money (individually or through unions and trade organizations), who will do campaign work and will vote for satan if instructed to do so, as long as that contract or that secure, well paid, fully health insured retirement in AZ, FL or wherever is at the end of the line while the rest of us have ten years left till social security and medicare. Stir in a lttle voter apathy, especially in off presidential year elections, and you have a monolithic, one issue constituency which can carry an election and only awaits instruction. If my theory is correct, the only solution is to abolish public employee pensions, which the state constitution prohibits.
But there is hope. Goldman Sachs is rumored to be advising clients to purchase Credit Default Swaps (essentially insurance) against the default of bond debt issued by eleven states, including Illinois. Both Cook County and Illinois require more bond sales to prop up their pension plans. If the bonds fail to sell due to prohibitively high rates and pension plans fail in the near future, the public employee coalition supporting corruption may unwind.

Comment by Cook County Commoner Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 1:01 pm
Illinois has more governments than any other state, although 24 states are larger, in area, and four states have more people. Illinois has 8,655 governments, including the state, 102 counties, 1,034 townships, many towns, school districts, library boards, and park districts.

Comment by Phil Collins Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 1:33 pm
Of course the answer is “Yes.”

Two words: Term limits. By eliminating the ability to remain in office, you eliminate the temptation to be on the take to stay there.

Sure, that won’t cure everything, as another poster noted, corruption will find a way, but term limits will kill a lot of it.

Comment by TroubleMaker Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 1:54 pm
You can not remove all coruption with laws.

The law can help make it harder for criminal or innappropriate activity and thus there is merit in placing more strictures in place. or example, a large part of the illegal shakedows were facilitated by a lack of limitations on donations from those doing business with the State. Prohibiting donations from those who have a potential fro finincial game would have cut off a significant source of the shakedowns. Such a law does not make the already illegal shakedowns illega, it makes it difficult to carry out the shakedonw or get the money.

We need increased stritures on who can donate, when and under what circumstanes to dry up much of the access to funding which can drive corruption.

You will not end all corruption, but you can make a big dent in it. Just as we can not end all crime, bt we can reduce crime rates.

On a side note, more ethics laws etc are meaningless without meaningful enforcement. We do not reduce crim with laws alone, we do it with laws and an active police force enforcing those laws. Who is watching over ethics in the Govenors office currently in IL? The Ethics investigator appointed by the Gov, beholden to to the Gov.

Comment by Ghost Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 1:55 pm
I agree that Illinois needs term limits. Since the con. con. didn’t pass, we should try to petition, to get reform referendums, on the Nov. 2010 ballot. The state constitution, in Article XIV, Section 3, Constitution Initiative for Legislative Article, states that amendments to the constitution may be proposed by a petition signed by at least 8% of the people who voted in the last governor election. About 3,500,000 people voted, in the 2006 governor election, so 8% is 280,000. We should pass amendments for term limits, recall elections, and fairer petition signature requirements, for all political parties.

Comment by Phil Collins Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 2:45 pm
No. Its analagous to saying we have a good building fire code so we don’t need a fire department. So, if we had real good ethics laws, we wouldn’t need inspectors general and the US Attorney would be out of work to do? To me, its an almost laughable assumption. Pay some attention to politics and government and elect better people and even then, keep the fire department.

Comment by steve schnorf Thursday, Dec 11, 08 @ 5:14 pm
1. Term limits. Maximum of 8 years in the House and 12 years in the Senate. The best politicians get move up, the hacks don’t.
2. Contribution limits of $500 in primary and $500 in general election.
3. Require 100 percent discolosure via the Internet within 72 hours of all donations.
4. No donations from anyone doing or seeking business from the state.
5. Make legislators full-time and bar them from receiving any type of other income. This would require a salary boost so we could attract quality candidates, but this small investment would payoff in less graft. If someone wants to serve, they should have to be willing to only take one salary. They should be serving the people, afterall, and not themselves.
6. No government paid jobs or contracts for spouses of elected officials.
7. Limit the number of political committees that one individual can create to one.
8. Pass recall bill to give voters the ability to remove corrupt hacks.
9. Enable easier process for ballot initiaitves so the people can take back their government when those feeding from the trough can’t or won’t.
10. Give US Attorneys a larger staff and budget to fight public coruption.

Comment by Fly Boy Friday, Dec 12, 08 @ 12:28 am