CapitolFax.com - Latest Comments in The reality of contribution caps

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Sick of All of Them — Thu, 14 May 2009 03:20:14 -0000

Fumigate even more of them, please! There are lots of people that should be on the list that aren't. State government is rife with lazy, arrogant game-playing hacks. Most of them couldn't qualify to work anywhere else. They folow whatever leader "matters" at the time like lemmings. We all know it. Get rid of them! I am enjoying this very much!

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Anon — Wed, 13 May 2009 21:04:08 -0000

To clean up politics/government - Limit what campaign funds can be spent on, narrowly defining what constitutes legitimate campaign expenditures.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

jake — Wed, 13 May 2009 20:23:40 -0000

Re "Sheâ€™s also an expert in running as a reformer and being bashed by the local media as a Democratic Machine tool"

I am reminded that Sheila Simon's father was successfully branded as a Democratic Machine tool by the "reformer" running against him for the Democratic nomination for Governor in 1972. The "reformer" of course was Dan Walker who, like other recent Governors, wound up in jail.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

DuPage Dave — Wed, 13 May 2009 19:56:29 -0000

Cassandra- I am one of the names on that list. I've been a state employee for 22 years. I was promoted to SPSA under Edgar. Like lots of people we suffered under Blagojevich's policy and was happy to see him go. I'd be happy to talk with you at your convenience about my experiences working for a rather large state agency. But you tar everyone with the same brush.

So please stop with the "fumigating" talk. That's offensive. I am not a cockroach. Nor did I ever serve as Blagojevich's campaign chair. Nor as his Lieutenant Governor. Yet the fumigating starts with me and not them?

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Bird Dog — Wed, 13 May 2009 19:54:12 -0000

Gee, what do you think the feds would do if a whole bunch of federally-funded employees were fired based upon some perceived political affiliation? Never mind - I already know.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

David Starrett — Wed, 13 May 2009 19:31:18 -0000

See the forest.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

David Starrett — Wed, 13 May 2009 19:20:09 -0000

LOL! I'm told that the AG is already circulating lists (and some of the people on them.) What are you people thinking?

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Anonymous — Wed, 13 May 2009 16:56:41 -0000

I assume that's why Madigan is giving him a push.
Not to say Madigan will be able to resist the deluge of calls from mostly Dem legislators asking that their spouses, relatives, and campaign contributors be spared.

I see this bill, if it flies, as being a huge benefit to those trying to set the state right.
Incoming directors can pick their own staff. And
directors who keep their jobs can evaluate existing staff and replace them as they see fit.
Many are likely saddled with at least a few nonperformers or superfluous staff and this is an opportunity to replace them as part of an overall reorganization, without appearing to single anyone out, and backed by the legislature. Maybe they'll actually consolidate some units in some of the agencies overstaffed with administrators.

Or maybe not.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

steve schnorf — Wed, 13 May 2009 16:32:23 -0000

Cassandra, the Governor already controls the Directors and Associate Directors, and roughly 600 Rutan-exempt, and there haven't been many changes so far

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Cassandra — Wed, 13 May 2009 15:34:08 -0000

If the fumigation bill requires the top 3000
(that is, 5%) of serving Ill. government employees...that is, the highest level double exempt and term (four year) employees, all highly paid...to reapply for their jobs, then it should not be changed.

The indivduals who replace high level Blago appointees (should that ever happen to any significant extent....still uncertain) then the new brooms need to have the freedom to select their own staff. It is unfair to ask a chief executive to make major reforms (and major reforms are needed in virtually all state of Illinois agencies) without the support of employees they respect and trust. High level state jobs are not supposed to be sinecures--they are supposed to be places for the best and the brightest. Currently, to a significant extent, they are not.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Hank — Wed, 13 May 2009 14:39:38 -0000

has anyone put a price tag on what it would cost the state to fire these people associated with that HB? Long term people probably have payable time on the books. Would bet it will cost millions!!

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Ghost — Wed, 13 May 2009 14:23:09 -0000

SJ-R just released a blurb that the executive comitte has decided not to vote on the bil today terminating the 3000+ State workers. http://www.sj-r.com/breakin...

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Deep South — Wed, 13 May 2009 14:19:51 -0000

Maybe it is a bad example. Toss is out. But I stand by everything that came before that. And that was the point of my post. This may be a better example: Have you read anything in the Trib about the devastating storm that hit down here? Tens of thousands of people without power for days...homes destroyed. The dollar amount, if it can compiled, is gonna unbelieveable. It may have to be north of I-64 for the Trib to even raise an eyebrow.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Rich Miller — Wed, 13 May 2009 14:00:12 -0000

===The fact that the Trib refers to ANYTHING outside of Cook County as â€œDownstateâ€ is a good example of what Iâ€™m talking about. ===

That's just silly. Show us where they did that, please.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Deep South — Wed, 13 May 2009 13:53:46 -0000

Southern Illinois, its people and its candidates rarely get a fair shake from the Chicago Tribune. The Trib, and its writers, are too far away from us, geographically and culturally. It would seem they generally don't understand anything south of Joliet. Most people in Southern Illinois know that and often joke about it, so it is really nothing new. The fact that the Trib refers to ANYTHING outside of Cook County as "Downstate" is a good example of what I'm talking about.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Vote Quimby! — Wed, 13 May 2009 13:12:30 -0000

I gave Sheila Simon my $50 (and still have the t-shirt) but wasn't surprised when she lost. Some friends said the party did not want to lose that seat, and I wasn't aware of the amount of Repub cash and "volunteers" flowing into that race until it was too late.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Leave a light on George — Wed, 13 May 2009 13:05:12 -0000

I too searched the data base of my agency to see who is among the 3000. If it is accurate, very interesting reading. Saw lots of hard working clerical folks on the list. They are only there because management used improved job titles as a way to increase their pay for good work after they topped out on step 7 under the AFSCME contract (gaming the system in a good way?).

Out of a group of regional managers, only saw one listed amoung the 3000. All, on paper anyway, do the exact same job. (gaming the system or inaccurate list?)

Then I saw folks on the list who are named in federal subpeonas and not because they are concerned whistle blowers. How the heck are these people still employed by the taxpayer?
Don't know if they are guilty of crimes but it is no doubt they are part of the problem that needs fumigating.

Thenk went back to the list and saw the people brought on by the people Blago foisted on us. Some are nice folks. A few even competent. Most however don't or can't make a decision without considering the political ramifications above anything else.

Folks in the previous two paragraphs of this rant need to be gone - yesterday.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

publius — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:35:00 -0000

i tire of the holier than thou stance of most media reporters and editorialists---the major driver behind political fundraising is the need to buy ads---particularly tv time---let's talk about limiting the number or costs of ads and see how they feel about reform

Re: The reality of contribution caps

MOON — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:32:26 -0000

The reality of limits on campaign spending caps or contribution caps is that the wealthy and incumbents will have a distinct advantage!!

Re: The reality of contribution caps

George — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:25:16 -0000

A couple points on '06:

- You put in contribution caps and ban contractor contributions, its a lot closer.

- If its closer, maybe Topinka does get that $5 million she was allegedly promised from national republicans.

- And maybe you have a more viable primary challenger in '06, since Rod can't rely on the fear of state contractors to pad his campaign fund.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Bird Dog — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:25:05 -0000

The State Journal-Register has a searchable database of employees purportedly affected by HB4450. Unfortunately, it is grossly inaccurate because the start dates of many of the people do not fall within the 1999 - 2009 time frame in the bill.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

George — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:21:38 -0000

To be frank, though, he wasn't charged with anything in relation to that. And to be frank even more, a downstate party chairman probably has a good shot at some state board regardless who is in there.

Yes, he could have switched to bundling, and then you have a DC-type system where the bundlers get all the influence. And I am sure he was bundling already.

But bundling doesn't accomplish numbers 1 & 3 above. And those appear to be the core of the case against him.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

wordslinger — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:15:49 -0000

I'm sure all candidates, especially incumbents, would love to see limits on spending. But if you can't do that, how can you limit fundraising?

Maybe in the future when "we're all riding rocket ships and talking with our minds," as John Prine said, it will be easier to get money out of politics.

Until then, in statewide races, candidates need lots of money for tv and radio, print, postage, travel, etc., just to get their messages out. And like they teach in Marketing 101, for the message to be effective it needs to be repeated over and over. Otherwise, candidates will find themselves "wearing turquoise jewelry and standing in soup lines."

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Tollway Joe — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:29 -0000

I think they same laws restricting Federal employees from participating in elections should be applied to State and County employees.

Many of those folks knocking on your door at election time are doing it following orders from above (i.e. where they got their job) , and not because they have a personal interest in a particular position or candidate.

Re: The reality of contribution caps

Rich Miller — Wed, 13 May 2009 12:12:44 -0000

George, RRB could've gotten around caps in various ways, including bundling contributions. One downstate party chairman, for instance, threw a funder for Blagojevich which raised $25K and then that person was put on a state board. Also, the Tribune broke down his last race against Topinka and found that he would've drastically outraised her if caps had been in place.