-
Website
http://capitolfax.com/ -
Original page
http://capitolfax.com/2008/12/11/question-of-the-day-651/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
wordslinger
96 comments · 42 points
-
Rich Miller
147 comments · 56 points
-
LoopLady
16 comments · 6 points
-
theoriginallynns
16 comments · 2 points
-
dupage dan
28 comments · 2 points
-
-
Popular Threads
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.
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.
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.
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.
He also points out the GOP penchant for putting up unelectable candidates ---another RYAN and AccordianGal
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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."
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
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.
===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.
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.
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!
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.
Just a thought :)
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.
Two words: George Ryan.
In Illinois our Governors typically spend 2 terms in the Governors Mansion and one term in the federal penetentiary.
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/blago...
Two more: Paul Powell.
Come on guys, let's get real. Corruption stems from lack of character, not geography.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.