SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — The national embarrassment of a governor arrested in his home on federal corruption charges finally pushed Illinois lawmakers to consider significant government reforms this spring.
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. — The national embarrassment of a governor arrested in his home on federal corruption charges finally pushed Illinois lawmakers to consider significant government reforms this spring. Some ideas could drastically change the political climate in the aftermath of Democrat Rod Blagojevich’s December arrest and April indictment on influence-peddling allegations. Others aim for reform, but critics say they fall short. And not every proposal for making a difference got through. Here’s a status report on some of the ideas: ___ What: Limit the size of campaign donations, as a way to reduce the influence of contributors. How: Gov. Pat Quinn’s reform commission suggested setting the state’s first donation limits at $2,400 from individuals and $5,000 from political committees for each election. Many lawmakers wanted much higher limits or none at all. Outcome: The Legislature approved annual limits of $5,000 per individual, $10,000 per corporation, and $90,000 per political committee. The measure awaits the governor’s signature. ___ What: Tighten oversight of state contracting so that political insiders don’t have an unfair advantage. How: Appoint new procurement officers and monitors appointed by the Executive Ethics Commission to review state contracts and require greater disclosure of subcontractors. Outcome: Both House and Senate approved, awaiting governor’s signature. ___ What: Shorten the campaign season. How: Move the primary election to later in an election year. It’s now in February, nine months before the general election. Critics say that long election season makes campaigns more expensive and that holding the primary in winter reduces turnout and gives political leaders more influence over the outcome. Outcome: Democratic legislative leaders showed no interest, and the idea went nowhere. ___ What: Show the public that state government is investigating corruption. How: Give state inspectors general, posts created in a 2003 ethics law, the ability to investigate anonymous tips of alleged wrongdoing and allow them to publicly release reports on their findings. Outcome: Both House and Senate approved, awaiting governor’s signature. ___ What: Make it easier for taxpayers to get information about government actions. How: Strengthen the state Freedom of Information and Open Meetings Acts by allowing a "public access counselor" to make binding decisions on whether a government body should release information under FOIA and the attorney general to sue on behalf of a taxpayer. Shorten the deadline for governments to release records and make it easier for people who sue to recover legal fees. Outcome: Lawmakers approved a somewhat-weakened version of the attorney general’s original proposal. Awaiting governor’s signature. ___ What: Allow voters to remove officials from office. How: Give voters the power to recall corrupt or incompetent officials by petitioning for a special election. The House approved a version last year, but it was blocked in the state Senate. Outcome: The House approved a recall plan that would apply to the governor but no other officials. Launching a recall petition would require the support of at least 30 legislators. It’s pending in the Senate. ___ What: Limit legislative leaders’ power. How: Place term limits on legislative leaders. Chicago Democrat Michael Madigan, for example, has been House speaker for all but two of the past 26 years. Take away leaders’ authority to stall legislation without letting lawmakers take a "yes" or "no" position. Outcome: Legislative leaders ignored the reform commission’s idea. ___ What: Make legislative and congressional districts more competitive politically. How: Appoint a commission to determine where district lines should be to make them more compact, fair to constituents and competitive in elections, perhaps by using computer programs. Currently, if legislators deadlock on drawing districts, one of the parties is picked from a hat to win control of how political boundaries are drawn for a decade, until the next census. Outcome: Postponed. A Senate Redistricting Committee plans public hearings this summer and fall to take input on how to draft districts after the 2010 count. ___ What: Provide more information on how lobbyists operate in Springfield. How: Require lobbyists to disclose how much they’re making from clients, make governmental bodies acknowledge that they have hired lobbyists, and impose a "cooling off" period between when a government employee leaves his position and when he may begin lobbying former colleagues. Outcome: No action. ___ What: Force lawmakers to vote "yes" or "no" on their own pay raises. How: Get rid of an independent board that was set up years ago to impartially determine whether legislators and state officials should get pay raises and cost-of-living increases. The system has proven confusing and can be manipulated so that lawmakers vote against pay raises but end up collecting the money anyway. Outcome: The General Assembly voted to eliminate the board and require legislators to pass a law if they want to raise their pay. They also decided to skip a cost-of-living increase this year and take four unpaid days off, but salary adjustments for inflation would resume next year. ______ Copyright 2009 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
About Post Author
