© 2024 NPR Illinois
The Capital's Community & News Service
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations
Illinois Issues
Archive2001-Present: Scroll Down or Use Search1975-2001: Click Here

Editor's Note: Righteous Talk After Blagojevich's Arrest Leads Nowhere

Dana Heupel
NPR Illinois

If not now, when? 

The answer: Never.

With one former governor under indictment for allegedly auctioning off state government for campaign contributions, another in prison for shaking down state employees for campaign cash, and a United States senator who may have tried to barter for his appointment by offering to raise campaign money for the governor who would select him, if Illinois couldn’t enact meaningful campaign finance reform this year, it never will.

And it couldn’t.

Sure, there was a lot of righteous talk after then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich was arrested. 

“I look forward to working with Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike in the next session to strengthen our ethics laws and put an end to ‘pay-to-play’ politics,” Republican Sen. Dale Righter stated after Blagojevich’s arrest in early December.

“It’s our duty to clean up the mess and stop the freak show that’s become Illinois government,’’ Democratic Rep. Jack Franks said immediately before the House vote on impeachment later that month.

“We’re going to start to fumigate state government from top to bottom to make sure it has no corruption,” Gov. Pat Quinn pledged in January on his second day in office.

“You want desperately just to climb out of this hole, this ethics garbage dump we have,” House Republican Leader Tom Cross told the New York Times after Blagojevich’s indictment in April.

“I think it’s very, very important that we the people confront this crisis, enact the reforms that will solve the problems and make sure they never happen again,’’ Quinn said after the indictment.

It seemed — for a short while, at least — that the air in the Capitol was fragrant with the spirit of government ethics. But always-quotable Republican Rep. Bill Black sensed what the end product would be midway through the process, when he declared: “Ladies and gentlemen, the smell of reform ... or wait a minute. Maybe it’s the smell of reform decomposing.”

At least in the area of campaign finance — the single unifying thread that knits together ethics allegations against Blagojevich, former Gov. George Ryan and U.S. Sen. Roland Burris — what emerged from the legislature wasn’t reform; it was refusal.

Thumps could be heard for miles as supporters of House Bill 7 in both legislative chambers — all of whom were Democrats — patted themselves on the back for passing what they crowed was the state’s first-ever limits on campaign contributions. But the supposed restrictions aren’t limits; they’re simply license to continue the same pay-to-play practices that have stained Illinois government for decades.

“‘Better than nothing’ doesn’t sit very well with the voters at home,” Democratic Rep. Kathleen Ryg said after her “present” vote in the House.

“This is the height of perverted government in the guise of reform,” said Republican Sen. Dan Cronin when HB 7 passed that chamber. “Aren’t we ethical people trying to fumigate government when it’s really about gaining more power?”

And that’s exactly what HB 7 does. It maintains — and arguably enhances — the already entrenched fundraising power of incumbents and House and Senate leaders.

To Quinn’s credit, immediately after he took office, he created the Illinois Reform Commission to advise him and legislators on ways to clear the air of the corruption that permeates state government. After eight public hearings and seven town hall meetings, the commission issued its report. Among many other recommendations, it urged that Illinois campaign contribution limits should be patterned after those enforced in federal elections: For each election — primary and general — donations to a candidate could not exceed $2,400 from individuals; $5,000 from corpora-tions, labor unions or political action committees; and $30,000 from legislative leaders’ PACs.

HB 7 blasts those caps sky-high: Each year, contributions would be limited to $5,000 from individuals; $10,000 from corporations, unions and associations; and $90,000 from transfers between political committees. It places no restrictions on “in-kind contributions,” such as paying for advertisements for a candidate, recruiting campaign workers and sending out mailers.

Many wise and experienced Statehouse watchers believe that caps on campaign contributions won’t eliminate the corrupting influence of money in politics. Ann Lousin, a distinguished professor at John Marshall Law School and longtime friend and supporter of Illinois Issues, argued in a letter to the editor published in March that more visible disclosure requirements, which she termed “sunshine,” are a much better solution because no matter how tough the legal restrictions, creative, crooked politicians will find a way around them, and limits would eventually be eroded by inflation. Our columnist Charles N. Wheeler III, who covered the Statehouse for many years for the Chicago Sun-Times and now mentors prospective journalists at the University of Illinois at Springfield, reaches a similar conclusion elsewhere in this month’s issue.

They may well be correct. Nearly two decades of closely observing Illinois politicians in action has only heightened my awe of the ability of some of them to construct imaginative schemes to skirt the law. But in response, even if I know that installing a lock on my front door won’t keep out criminals who really want to burglarize my house, I figure it just might slow them down a bit.

Strictly limiting campaign contributions is at least an attempt — even if only symbolic — to combat the fact that for years, pay-to-play has been the ticket for entry into Illinois’ public policy arena. HB 7 doesn’t even go that far. It’s what happens when those who reap the benefits from a shady system are the only ones who can change it: a cynical move to expand fundraising clout instead of a sincere effort to try to restrain it.

Rejecting his own advisory commission’s recommendations, and against the advice of other reform groups, Quinn — whose political chops rely on his reputation as a maverick — testified at the Capitol in support of HB 7. “I think this is the best we can do at this time,” he told the Senate Executive Committee.

Rest assured that the word “incremental” was bandied about freely during closed-door negotiations on the bill. It’s been uttered for years by those at the Capitol who want to stall real campaign-finance reform or who seek to justify less-than-adequate results. But regarding the General Assembly’s accomplishments toward that end during the recent legislative session, the more apt term would be “insincere.”

 

UPDATE:

On August 27, Gov. Pat Quinn vetoed House Bill 7 with the support of legislative leaders. The governor and leaders said they will work on stronger campaign finance reforms, with the intent to vote on the revised legislation during the General Assembly's October veto session.

 

Dana Heupel can be reached at heupel.dana@uis.edu.

Illinois Issues, July/August 2009

Related Stories