Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Quinn contradicts lt. governor on school consolidation
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* A Chicago News Cooperative story goes beyond the fact that Sen. Mike Jacobs sponsored the so-called “smart grid bill” despite the fact that Jacobs’ father Denny lobbies for ComEd…
In 2007, Denny Jacobs received $9,000 from the Illinois Recovery Association, which represents auto-repossession businesses, to lobby for a bill that would regulate the industry more tightly, according to Rick Constantine, who led the association’s lobbying effort at the time. Senator Jacobs introduced the bill, which died in committee.
Denny Jacobs registered last year as a lobbyist for the Rock Island Boatworks, which owns the casino in that city. Senator Jacobs had sponsored a bill narrowly tailored to give the casino a tax break.
At the time Denny Jacobs was lobbying for the smart-grid bill last year, Senator Jacobs took to the floor of the Senate and invited colleagues to a reception of “appetizers” and “liquid libations” hosted by ComEd. State records show that the company spent $3,818 on the reception and an additional $5,690 taking lawmakers to dinner that night.
During hearings before the Senate Energy Committee he oversees, Senator Jacobs allowed less than 15 minutes of testimony before adjourning, sending the measure to the Senate floor.
The move denied Scott Musser, the associate state director of the AARP, the opportunity to express his opposition. “It was very suspect, especially on such a huge and controversial issue,” Musser said.
That smart grid bill sponsorship clearly crossed a line. I won’t say it was illegal, but Senate leadership never should’ve allowed it to happen. There’s just no defending it.
* The CNC also looked at some loopholes in the state’s lobbyist registration laws…
Both lobbyists and their clients are required to disclose their lobbyist-client relationships. In 242 instances, records show, lobbyists reported working for a client but there was no corresponding registration by the client.
Lobbyists also do not have to detail all of the money they spend lobbying public officials. Most lunches or other entertainment are reported, but other outlays are not required to be disclosed. The nonpartisan watchdog group Common Cause Illinois compared Illinois’ filings to those in Pennsylvania and found that Pennsylvania lobbyists reported $470 million in expenditures in 2009, compared to only $1.3 million reported by Illinois lobbyists that year.
When lobbyists work as subcontractors to other lobbyists, as often happens, they are not required to identify the ultimate beneficiary of their efforts. They are required to report only the name of the lobbyist who hired them.
Lobbyists have long pushed back against disclosing what their paid and how they spend their money beyond food and entertainment. But federal lobbyists have to report those things and the time may be near for Illinois as well.
Discuss.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 10:15 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Quinn contradicts lt. governor on school consolidation
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
It’d be nice if we could ever get back to the words in Lincoln’s Gettysburg address: ‘…of the people, by the people, for the people…’
No likely in my lifetime. Every $ going to ‘educate’ legislators on issues needs to be fully reported publicly and timely.
“…but Senate leadership never should’ve allowed it to happen.” It’d be nice if each legislator actually knew the difference between right and wrong and took it to heart?
Comment by sal-says Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 10:26 am
–That smart grid bill sponsorship clearly crossed a line. I won’t say it was illegal, but Senate leadership never should’ve allowed it to happen. There’s just no defending it.–
I’m glad they allowed it. Should have been quite an eye-opener for anyone who cared to pay attention, as were the expensive schmoozing, campaign contributions and overwhelming popularity of the bill on both sides of the aisle.
It’s not a bad bet, though, that most people don’t care to pay attention to the GA.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 10:31 am
The good news is Sen Jacobs will have a job after the election…Jacobs & Jacobs Consulting.
Comment by MeAgain Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 10:41 am
And yet Mike gets upset when he is called out on this! The sad part is that his district will continue to re-elect him.
Comment by Kerfuffle Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 10:42 am
As a registered lobbyist, I believe Illinois desperately needs to reform lobbyist disclosure and registration. We focus on stupid stuff (like biweekly reporting even during months with no activity) but ignore things like revolving doors, bundling and junkets. Some pretty dramatic reforms are needed to get at some of the real problems.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 10:53 am
Chicago Cynic @10:53: agreed!
Examples like the Jacobs situation are very troubling. The unapologetic defense of such things make it even worse.
Can only imagine what was said unofficially (after the back & forth about D. Jacobs) during “fight night” on the Senate floor a few months back, in the seconds leading up to the fisticuffs-pushing-whateveritwas.
Comment by Shock & Awww(e) Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 11:10 am
And the House sponsor becomes a utility lobbyist? State employees have resolving door restrictions but legislators don’t? Ethics reform is a joke in Illinois. Who is the real problem in Illinois? Legislators or Lobbyist?
Comment by Ed Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 11:32 am
Not only do the feds require disclosure of spending on lobbying, but Cook County and Chicago do as well. Illinois is really an outlier on this.
Comment by Elo Kiddies Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 11:38 am
As long as newspapers and Capitol Fax both report their income as well!!!!!!! Both influence public policy and often times have more clout that lobbyists!!!!
Comment by 1776 Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 11:49 am
Jacobs did get called out on the floor for this. There should have been more outrage from his colleagues. At a bare minimum it didn’t LOOK good. The media could have made a bigger deal of it at the time, maybe the public would have been more outraged
Comment by Cam McAndrews Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 12:01 pm
Funny that that kind of collusion is not illegal, but the Government can jail people like Martha Stewart for offenses less significant.
With apologies to George Orwell….”All people (animals)are equal, but politicians(some)are more equal than others.
Comment by Plutocrat03 Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 12:32 pm
The Jacobs story feeds public cynicism about politics. Jacobs helps makes the term “legislative ethics” an oxymoron. If this doesn’t constitute an appearance of impropriety, then I can’t imagine what it would take.
Conflict of interest? Not if your name is Berrios or Jacobs. Not in the Land of Lincoln.
Comment by reformer Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 2:07 pm
I’m glad Cap Fax and Ed pointed out the issues with the House Sponsor becoming a Com Ed lobbyist. Too bad that didn’t make the story too. The shameless actions Jacobs took deserve outrage but there was one degree less seperation in McCarthy’s case.
Comment by Dave V Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 2:08 pm
Jacobs, “I’m with ComEd and I’m with Ameren on this bill,” which is interesting since a mjority of his district gets their electricity not from ComEd and Ameren - but Mid-American (Warren Buffet’s utility out of Iowa) which is not even covered under the bill.
Comment by SportShoz Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 2:50 pm
After this passed, ComEd threw a steak dinner for the GA during veto session. I talked to one rep and asked if he went to it, and he said “xxxx no. Those steak dinners are being purchased by some grandmother in Illinois who is going to get her lights turned off while she’s forced to eat dog food. I’m not eating steak with that kind of blood money.”
What’s ironic is that of all the people for Jacobs to be in a primary against, it’s Mike Boland, one of the founders of CUB (Citizens Utility Board). March 20 will be an interesting one.
Comment by northernIL Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 4:08 pm
===March 20 will be an interesting one. ===
Only if Boland can raise money. He’s never been able to do that.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 4:10 pm
Will that count as profanity?
Comment by northernIL Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 4:10 pm
=== Only if Boland can raise money. He’s never been able to do that. ===
Touche.
But he’s been door knocking that entire Senate district (his old House district, and Verschoore’s House district) for decades now. I’m not going to pretend money isn’t a big factor, but Jacobs isn’t a door knocker, and it’s going to have to be a pretty nice commercial and darn good mailers to be able to reverse the unpopularity Jacobs is seeing right now. I don’t know Jacobs can kiss enough babies to look like a good guy again.
When it comes to deciding the winner, I’ll bet my money on articles like this to do damage and a candidate who has met most of the district, as opposed the one who just puts up commercials and calls it a day anytime.
Comment by northernIL Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 4:18 pm
And how long will it take our latest House resigner to establish himself as a lobbyist? Why else resign in early January… Currently, legislators are not included with legislative staff and agency heads in the six month or longer ban on lobbying after their public service career ends.
Comment by Capital View Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 4:27 pm
@northernIL - you’re right according to ComEd’s lobbying expenditure report they spent over $1,400 on 25 elected officials at HG Steakhouse in Springfield on November 9th.
Comment by SportShoz Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 4:47 pm
There’s no shame in Springfield. Probably never was any, but it seems worse than a few years back.
The Jacobs thing rankles on two levels. One in that it’s such a direct link between money and getting the bill introduced. The second is that it’s a second generation pol doing this on behalf of and in conjunction with the “retired” first generation pol.
Comment by DuPage Dave Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 7:34 pm
Can you imagine throwing all of those people under the bus? And for what? A steak dinner?
The Rep who made that previously mentioned statement about grandma paying for the steak dinner was LaShawn Ford. He did the right thing.
Comment by northernIL Monday, Jan 9, 12 @ 10:29 pm