Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Fundraiser list
Next Post: Caption contest!
Posted in:
* Back in 2009, after Gov. Rod Blagojevich was impeached and removed, the Illinois Reform Commission published several recommended legal changes, including…
At this juncture in the State’s history, establishing a well-rounded campaign finance regulatory framework has never been more important. Accordingly, we recommend:
1) requiring year-round, real-time submission of campaign disclosure filings;
2) requiring disclosure of campaign contribution “bundlers;”
3) requiring greater disclosure of those making independent expenditures on behalf of a campaign;
4) imposing limits on contributions to political campaigns from all sources;
5) banning campaign contributions from lobbyists and trusts, and extending bans on contributions from state employees, entities seeking state contracts and entities engaged in regulated industries;
6) holding primary elections in June;
7) enacting a pilot project for public financing of judicial elections in 2010, with an eye toward expanding the program to elections of statewide legislative officials and Constitutional posts;
8) enhancing powers of the Illinois State Board of Elections; and
9) creating more robust discovery and enforcement mechanisms.
Some contribution limits were put in place. More disclosures were required. But not much else.
* The Question: What campaign and government reforms should the state implement? Make sure to explain your response.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 1:36 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Fundraiser list
Next Post: Caption contest!
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I think you have to ban outside income. If you want to be an elected official, you acknowledge you have a fiduciary duty to the state. A second job will always undermine that duty. Always.
It’s the people who go into public service as a means of making money that end up in jail. It’s about sacrifice and public service, not money.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 1:41 pm
Ban elected officials and their immediate family members from lobbying of an government entity.
Ban elected officials from legally representing private entities in disputes with government entities, such as tax appeals, licensing, zoning, lawsuits, etc.
Comment by CookR Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 1:45 pm
the flip side of 47th Ward’s point would be to allow outside income but no salary for elected officials, just per diem while legislators are in session.
Comment by Ravenswood Right Winger Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 1:47 pm
Banning elected officials from having an interest in a lobbying firm. I am sympathetic to the argument that it is a part time legislature and there is some good in legislators having a real job. But, Burke’s and Madigan’s law firms are pretty much the textbook example of a conflict of interest. Maybe banning elected officials from advocating for a client in front of another public body besides the courts.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 1:49 pm
===banning campaign contributions from lobbyists===
What are they trying to do here? Lower the bar bill for when they have fundraisers?
Comment by Been There Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 1:50 pm
Much lower caps on PACs and party contributions for a primary https://www.elections.il.gov/downloads/campaigndisclosure/pdf/contributionsummary.pdf
Something should be done to stop candidates or PAC’s from running dummy candidates. Hard to square with First Amendment but maybe could be done through disclosures - any group or candidate providing manpower or money or anything of value to more than one candidate?
Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 1:58 pm
Ban lobbyists from paying for meals and gifts.
No fundraisers during the legislative session.
Comment by Moe Berg Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 1:59 pm
Prohibit those with any link to the alcohol, gaming, tobacco, and vaping industry from making any political contributions.
Comment by Al Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 2:00 pm
Hm. Thinking about what’s likely to hold up in court post-Citizens United–and knowing both these have flaws–ranked voting (NYC currently considering) and open primary ala CA. Anything that hurts king/queen makers should help.
Comment by Anon For Now Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 2:00 pm
I have always thought the General Assembly should be subject to the Open Meetings Act. Secret meetings of City Councils would be unforgivable at the local government level, but is somehow perfectly normal at the State level.
I also think it is time for the General Assembly to be a full-time job with a salary that is commiserate with their job responsibilities. That is the biggest hardship in recruiting good candidates, and is the reason so many Members are looking for other sources of income that get them in trouble.
Comment by Just Me Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 2:05 pm
Some of you commenting may be unfamiliar with these pesky things called the U.S. Constitution, the First Amendment, and the Illinois Constitution. I’m also at a loss for what problem you’re actually trying to solve.
It would require a constitutional amendment to ban legislators from outside income, and you’d need to substantially increase the salary and benefits to attract quality people. Otherwise you’re left with the rich and the hacks. Before you claim “that’s what we have now”, how does your proposal change that?
Comment by southsider Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 2:08 pm
“6) holding primary elections in June;”
Actually, hold primaries in September the week after Labor Day. New York State has primaries, except for the presidency, in September.
Comment by Anyone Remember Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 2:11 pm
Any increase in state taxes is only applicable to the extent that an Illinois tax is applied to income previously “parked” in Caribbean trust accounts. In other words, if a tax is “fair” enough for the people, it should be fair enough to billionaire politicians.
Comment by PlsSenSorMe Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 2:14 pm
== I have always thought the General Assembly should be subject to the Open Meetings Act. Secret meetings of City Councils would be unforgivable at the local government level, but is somehow perfectly normal at the State level. ==
The IL Constitution imposes open meeting requirements on the GA that go beyond OMA.
Comment by southsider Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 2:17 pm
Stiffer penalties for violations of campaign and finance laws. Candidates need to be removed from the ballot more frequently and consistently for violations.
Comment by NIref Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 2:23 pm
Completely government funded elections to qualified candidates with limit from government funds only …. no more wealthy self-funded millionaires and billionaires, they should be limited too. Level the playing field an make candidates go to THE PEOPLE for their votes and not use money to buy media and seats or offices. It is the only real answer, all other attempts will be subverted - by the way, huge penalties for violators of this limit, including incarceration
Comment by Elliott Ness Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 3:01 pm
Southsider- the open meetings act only applies to committees and certain hearings when the decisions have already been determined …how about applying FOIA to ALL interactions, phone calls and caucus discussions!
Comment by Elliott Ness Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 3:03 pm
Full disclosure of outside income, I am ok with you state it is within a range, but narrow ranges.
I made between 20,000 and 30,000 in 2019 from OneMan & Associates Law firm.
Disclosure of all income made representing any entity to a government entity.
Comment by OneMan Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 3:05 pm
=banning campaign contributions from lobbyists and trusts, and extending bans on contributions from state employees, entities seeking state contracts and entities engaged in regulated industries;=
Might want to check the cannabis lawsuit and make sure any prohibition on contributions doesn’t violate First Amendment.
https://www.illinoispolicy.org/press-releases/district-court-ruling-declares-illinois-ban-on-medical-marijuana-campaign-donations-unconstitutional/
Comment by {Sigh} Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 3:09 pm
Concur with banning fundraising during session. Revolving door for legislators similar to that imposed on state government officials. Additional cooling off for certain committee chairs. To clarify, Chairman of Public Utilities could not leave to lobby for ComEd. Legislators can not lobby while in office.
Comment by Howard Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 3:33 pm
ALL OF THEM. Plus term limits and better ballot-access measures for 3rd party candidates so there are no longer unopposed elections.
Comment by downstate-libertarian Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 3:40 pm
Since I’ve come to understand that many if not most people go into state/local politics for these sorts of off the books financial opportunities and connections I fear the problem is nearly intractable. The number of political families in the business of practicing inter-generational politics and exerting power in this state exacerbates the problem. Following are the two on the list that might most help:
5) banning campaign contributions from lobbyists and trusts, and extending bans on contributions from state employees, entities seeking state contracts and entities engaged in regulated industries;
6) holding primary elections in June;
Comment by Responsa Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 3:41 pm
==Prohibit those with any link to the alcohol, gaming, tobacco, and vaping industry from making any political contributions.==
But ComEd would be okay right?
Comment by Anon Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 3:49 pm
Ban all contributions from corporations, PACs, and Super PACs. If they can’t vote, they can’t contribute.
Comment by Nameless Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 4:21 pm
===Full disclosure of outside income===
This seem pretty toothless. Luis Arroyo disclosed his lobbying relationship and fees with VIS Inc to the Chicago Board of Ethics. It didn’t stop him from, allegedly, trying to bribe a state senator.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 4:28 pm
Serious term limits
Comment by Cheryl44 Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 4:32 pm
Term limits for all state offices, and serving in one house of the legislature should make you ineligible to ever sit in the other.
I think holding primaries later would simply result in the same amount of money being spent in a shorter time
Comment by PrairieDog Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 4:37 pm
Nothing comes close to making legislators disclose outside earned income. Yes campaign contributions can influence legislators but no where near as much as direct income.
Highly paid federal employees have to disclose outside income.
Secondly, this should be a foregone conclusion but in light of what our infamous Auditor General did, all campaign fund records and state legislative office records need to be preserved for 5 years with a huge personal penalty both criminal and civil against the officeholder who fails to oversee the preservation of their records.
Comment by Insightful Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 5:30 pm
Enacting a pilot project for public financing for all state offices.
Comment by ETown60120 Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 5:39 pm
Keep an elected Senate, but transform the House into a truly representative body using sortition.
Comment by thechampaignlife Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 8:24 pm
southsider - then how is it okay that the entire Senate and the Governor can have a secret meeting to plan their budget votes?
Comment by Just Me Monday, Nov 4, 19 @ 11:18 pm