Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Church and state
Next Post: This just in… Duckworth gets AFL-CIO nod
Posted in:
Looks like he one-upped Gidwitz.
From a press release:
In Chicago today, Democratic Candidate Edwin Eisendrath made a groundbreaking pledge to not raise one penny of political money if he is elected Governor of Illinois until 2010 or the passage of tough campaign finance and lobbyist control laws.
“I will not be at fund raisers. I will not be dialing for dollars. I will not be selling access to lobbyists and people doing business with the state, said Eisendrath. “I will work day and night finding ways to increase funding for our schools; I will work tirelessly to bring jobs to this state that allow us to compete in the global economy. I will spend my time getting our state’s finances back in order.’’
Eisendrath told reporters it was time to break the cycle of indictments and the addiction to raising campaign cash from the Governor’s office. Former Governor Ryan is on trial in federal court in Chicago on corruption charges. The U.S. Attorney is also investigating the Blagojevich administration’s fundraising practices.
Eisendrath said, “As Governor, George Ryan raised more than $5 _ million, and is on trial right now over that. Not to be outdone, Rod Blagojevich has raised—since becoming Governor–$16 million in the three years that’s been reported.’’
“Let me repeat that: $16 million in three years. That comes to $5.3 million every year.
More than $106,000 every work week. $21,000 every day. And $2,667 every hour of every work day he’s been Governor†[…]
Eisendrath also outlined a package of reforms that would finally put limits on campaign contributions and lobbying in Illinois. The Eisendrath legislation would:
Ban contributions from State Contractors
Ban contributions from Corporations, Unions and PACs
Limit on individual gifts
Create transfer restrictions between political funds
Require ongoing disclosure
Create real enforcement in state board of elections
Require competitive bidding of all state contracts regardless of the size
· It would also tighten control of lobbyists and make their work transparent by requiring:
Disclosure of ultimate clients
Disclosure of contract size
Reporting of specific bill or action that is the subject of lobbying activities
Improved enforcement mechanisms
Closing of the revolving door of government staffer to lobbyist and back again
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 12:34 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Church and state
Next Post: This just in… Duckworth gets AFL-CIO nod
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Perhaps he should go even further and take a one-term pledge so that he can say that he’ll be free from making decisions just because they’re the politically easy one to make.
That being said, it would be kind of weird for a guy in his 40’s to make a one-term pledge.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 12:41 pm
This is all fluff, no matter how many rules you make, dirty politicians will find ways around them. Too many fund raising restrictions means only millionairs willing to spend their own cash can run. The key is to elect a good person you can trust. The first step is to get away from the same old Chicago Politicians because they do not understand the concept government without insider contracts and kickbacks. Its not their fault, it is just all they have ever known.
Comment by the Patriot Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 12:55 pm
Gee didn’t we here that from another Democrat just a couple of years ago.
Comment by DOWNSTATE Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 12:57 pm
“The key is to elect a good person you can trust. The first step is to get away from the same old Chicago Politicians because they do not understand the concept government without insider contracts and kickbacks. ”
Yeah, gets some fresh scrubbed young go-getters from DuPage, like Scott Fawell. Or, an old time Downstate dollar wise do-gooder like Paul Powell.
Boy those Chicago politicians really thin my butter-milk.
Comment by Pat Hickey Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 1:10 pm
Both of their pledges seem far fetched from far out candidates. They have nothing to lose by making this pledge because they are not going to win the Mansion in 2006.
Now this, below, seems more logical. It’s Jim Oberweis’ latest email message:
“In April, I announced that as Governor I would not accept contributions from companies doing business with the state. I’m not alone in believing that this cycle of cash flowing from companies to politicians and back to companies in the form of lucrative state contracts is at the core of the problems facing state government. I want to applaud Ron Gidwitz for offering his own ideas and following the lead of the Oberweis campaign.
One idea that Ron unveiled was a pledge to do no fundraising during the first two years of a Gidwitz gubernatorial administration.
Because an Oberweis Administration will be a real reform administration, it will no doubt be met by the forces of obstruction in the General Assembly’s Democrat majority. As Governor, it will be my responsibility to make real progress on issues like financial accountability and school reform. To achieve lasting reforms, I know today that I will have to lead an effort to assist reform Republicans to secure a legislative majority in the 2008 campaign cycle. That campaign begins in early 2007, and I want to allow the grassroots citizens and small businesses of Illinois to invest in cleaning up the Illinois General Assembly.
The momentum we build in 2006 will be carried on right through 2007 in a sustained effort to provide reform Republicans with the resources necessary to gain control of the Illinois General Assembly. Our campaign will stay focused on reaching out to Illinois voters to invite them to fully engage in reclaiming state government from the lobbyists and the politicians who profit at the expense of Illinois families, taxpayers, seniors and school children.”
Comment by Jeff Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 1:26 pm
There is a difference between hearing this talk within a Democratic primary and hearing it during the general election. Four years ago, this message was supported by voters, especially within the Democratic Party, and it still resonates today.
I am pleased to see Eisendrath prepared to confront Blagojevich in this way. It says many things to voters:
1.) Blagojevich is out for himself.
2.) He is not doing his job.
3.) His focus is not on education.
4.) His campaign money is dirty.
5.) Blagojevich dials for dollars.
6.) He sells access for campaign money.
7.) He takes money from state contractors.
8.) I am above it and will not do it!
These are indeed groundbreaking statements, and these statements will catch on. Eisendrath breaking down Blagojevich’s campaign funding into money per hour is powerful and memorable. He is putting in words what so many Democrats and Independants have felt since May 2005 when Blagojevich pandered to election reform during his Testicular Virility press conference.
Edwin’s proving that he is no fluke.
As to Oberweis, well, hearing him say it is not news. He’s the oppositiion party, and voters stopped listening to him after his Senate run in 2004.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 1:51 pm
I find that Eisendrath sounds far more convincing talking about ending corruption than Blago did four years ago. It was pretty obvious last time that his promises to end business as usual were made with a wink on the side.
Comment by Bluefish Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 2:28 pm
E2(squared) sounds nearly as silly as RonnieG
Is the money any cleaner 36 months after election than 24.
The rest is rehash stuff that only a millionaire or someone with a millionaire mom and dad can spout.
Meanwhile GRod has found a very bright guy for ICC and formed a plan only the dumbest GOP (as in MOPE) can reject for roads and school construction
Can’t wait to see how Vandalia Frank and TC&the EmptySuits react to this one.
Comment by Reddbyrd Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 3:10 pm
As Blagojevich’s spokesman said, “Governor Blagojevich’s record speaks for itself.” Ouch! I thought this guy was on Blagojevich’s side?
As to Eisendrath being a Chicago politician and therefor, not to be trusted, I’m sorry. It isn’t his fault that he came from that area. That would be like saying that all Italians are not to be trusted because Alphonse Capone was from Italy. That argument doesn’t hold water.
Actually, I am a Republican and I like what I am hearing from Edwin Eisendrath, no matter where he comes from. Can we trust Eisendrath to be truthful in what he tells us he believes in and those things that he says he wants to change? I do not know. But, he has piqued my curiousity about him. I will probably look into his past political history to see what he has or has not accomplished. I would like to know more about Edwin Eisendrath the more that I hear about him.
Although I am a registered Republican, my vote always goes to the individual (whether it be Republican or Democrat) that I feel is best for our state of Illinois. My guess is that there are a large number of people out there that think like I do. Eisendrath may prove to be “this year’s election surprise”.
Comment by Beowulf Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 3:28 pm
Wow - I’ve heard those general pledges about avoiding money before, but they always were big on the idea and small on details, leaving all the wiggle room necessary for politicians to do the end-around and bring in the money (for favors, of course).
But that’s a pretty large and specific pledge from Eisendrath.
Maybe it is time for our elected officials to lead this way. Considering what is going on with Blagojevich’s smelly rewards program for his buddies, and with national power freaks like Tom DeLay demanding money for favors, it is great to see a candidate like Eisendrath send the message to voters that they deserve better — that the corrupt system of campaign dollors for favors can, and must end.
That’s quite a pledge, Eisendrath. Now, can you keep it?? Hope so!
Comment by BolderIllinois Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 4:07 pm
It seems sad that candidates find themselves trying to outbid each other on ethics, but since the days of Orville Hodge, Illinois voters seem to have largely ignored the problem. Either Gidwitz’ or Eisendrath’s offerings seem workable, although many of the comments here are on point, seemingly saying, “does it really make a difference?” From a practical point of view, it doesn’t matter when somebody rasies campaign money, the potential for problems exists whether one raises money daily, the last two years or last year of a four-year term.
For me, let me examine the candidates and their public records. Please, primary voters, give me a choice between two ethical people as candidates in November. Everything else is meaningless.
Comment by Common Sense in Illinois Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 6:08 pm
Eisenwho?
Comment by LaSalle Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 9:58 pm
LaSalle:
It is EdWIN! Hang on to your hat!
Comment by Paul Powell Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 11:21 pm
Eisendrath could win, especially if Tony Resko gets indicted before the election.
Eisendrath may be the best way for the Dems to maintain the state house.
Comment by Teddy Tuesday, Jan 10, 06 @ 11:51 pm
Why is it necessary to state the obvious. Of course Gidwitz and Eisendrath are proposing restrictions on fundraising, they both come from wealthy families and would love to limit their competition’s resources.
I don’t remember Eisendrath or Gidwitz proposing a voluntary limit on how much money wealthy people can spend on their own campaigns. I don’t remember seeing either restrict money or support from their wealthy friends and family. I don’t remember seeing them propose free television time for candidates which would decrease the amount of campaign funds required (although this is likely a federal issue.)
I have to say, I hear a lot in the media about the horrible state of fundraising. But I don’t see the media proposing free tv time or detailed reporting on true public policy issues. Maybe I’m a bit cynical but I see the media giving a lot of coverage to second rate candidates who no one believes have a serious chance of winning. But the media is receiving tons of paid advertising from these candidates. Isn’t that call pay for play?
Comment by objective dem Wednesday, Jan 11, 06 @ 6:45 pm