Pay-to-Play Bill Sent to Governor

After a few weeks of talk and predictions, the Governor now has HB 824 on his desk. He has 60 days to take action -- until Friday, August 29. Among his options: he can sign it, he could veto it, he could amend it, or he could allow it to become law without his signature. The bill, percolating for years, finally took shape after weeks of intensive negotiations -- during which time the Governor declined to take part. Despite the bill's passage with nary a dissenting vote, any effort to change the scope of this reform is likely to kill the measure. For that reason, reformers of all stripes have called on the Governor to sign the bill as it is. We at ICPR are happy to talk with the Governor about other, broader reforms once this one is put on the books, but the Governor must demonstrate that he is sincere about enacting reform, not just talking about it. To that end, he should sign this bill as it is. To lend your voice to this discussion, why not send the Governor an e-mail?

Illinoisans Trust Reform is Possible

A poll commissioned by the Midwest Democracy Network of voters in five Midwestern states found great distrust in state government and an urgent demand for reform. Over half of Illinois voters (55%) said that Gov. Blagojevich is doing a "poor" job in office. Just under a third (31%) said he's doing a "fair" job, while 13% said he's doing a "good job." The General Assembly fared only slightly better: 26% said it was doing a "poor" job while a majority (52%) said the General Assembly is doing "fair" and 17% ranked its performance as "good." Voters ranked "corruption in state government" as their second biggest concern, after high gasoline prices. But the survey also found that reform is possible: by a 2:1 margin, voters disagree that "corruption in government will always be a problem." The results of the survey, including rankings of 15 possible reforms, are posted on ICPR's website. .

ICPR Statement on the Conviction of Tony Rezko

The Rezko convictions come after years and years of other trials and other headlines about corruption in state government, including jobs, contracts and favors sold in exchange for campaign contributions and bribes.

Everyone in government - from the governor on down - must come to grips with the damage being done. Not only has the public been deprived of fair value for its tax dollars, but their confidence in the integrity of government--and public servants--has been severely eroded.

Our leaders need to get serious about cleaning up state government. This trial has shown that "business as usual" has flourished under this governor. He came into office promising better government, but that promise rings hollow today. After signing the pay-to-play prohibitions into law without changes, the governor should work with legislative leaders and make further campaign finance and lobbying reforms a top priority.

Who is he kidding?

In interviews after the legislature gave final approval to a bill banning pay-to-play in state contracting, Gov. Blagojevich and his spokespeople have been doing all they can to muddy up the issue. The pay-to-play bill passed without a single "no" vote; it has 118 sponsors in the House and 42 in the Senate. They say they're looking forward to adding in additional language, that they are disappointed that the legislature didn't embrace larger reforms. But who is he kidding?

His interest in larger reforms is news to the reform community. We have been working consistently for the past decade to improve Illinois' political climate. Gov. Blagojevich talks about reform only when it looks like we're making progress, and only in ways that threaten to derail that progress.

In this legislative session, we've been hard at work and the governor has been consistently silent. He now says he wants to see changes to Illinois' campaign finance laws, perhaps that cover the legislature? We've been working on legislation that does just that, HB 3497, for over a year and a half, without any help from his office. He now wants to look at lobbyist regulation? We've been working on legislation that does just that, HB 8, for over a year and a half, without any help from his office. He now thinks the pay-to-play bill doesn't go far enough? His office knew all along where the bill was and what was in it; if he wanted to offer suggestions, there was a time for that. But on this vehicle, the time for comments, suggestions, and changes has passed.

We're still open to talking about broader reforms. If the Governor wants to engage on these issues, we're eager to engage with him. There are plenty of other areas that need improvement, and other bills to get us there. But he needs to get serious, stop the name calling, and sign the bill. If Gov. Blagojevich respects the deliberative process, he will sign HB 824 as it is and join with us in working toward other, future reform bills.

REFORM ADVOCATES CALL ON GOV. BLAGOJEVICH TO STOP ACCEPTING CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FROM STATE CONTRACTORS

The leaders of seven Illinois government reform organizations urged Gov. Rod Blagojevich to sign House Bill 824, which would limit pay-to-play opportunities in state contracting and called on Blagojevich to stop soliciting and accepting contributions from state contractors.

The House passed the legislation Saturday by a vote of 114 to 0. The Senate earlier approved the bill on a vote of 56 to 0.

"Illinois taxpayers are fed up with corruption in state government and the high cost of pay-to-play contracting," said Cynthia Canary, Director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform. "Passage of this bill signals legislators are coming to grips with the damage that has been done to public confidence in the fairness of state government. If Gov. Blagojevich really does believe in ending 'business as usual,' he will sign this bill and direct his campaign committee - immediately - to stop soliciting and accepting contributions from state contractors."

In a letter to Blagojevich, the reform advocates noted that the five other statewide officeholders have policies against accepting contributions from contractors doing business with their offices. If signed into law, HB 824 would take effect January 1, 2009, but Blagojevich should put the policy into effect for his campaign organization immediately, according to the advocates.

The letter was signed by the Better Government Association, Common Cause Illinois, Illinois PIRG, the Sunshine Project, the Citizen Advocacy Center, the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform and Protestants for the Common Good.

A copy of the letter is attached. More information about HB 824 is available at www.ilcampaign.org.

CampaignReformLetterMay31-08.doc

The slow but steady march of reform

HB 824, to address pay-to-play, is waiting its turn in the House for a concurrence vote, but in the meantime, the House did send to the governor two smaller reform measures. SB 2190 redefines "political committees" under the Election Code to make clear that groups supporting or opposing the placement of public questions on the ballot are covered by Illinois' disclosure requirements. SB 2191 addresses the pre-election period, forbidding committees to avoid disclosure by making a series of smaller donations to participating candidates. Neither of these, in themselves, is as significant as the pay-to-play measure, but these two are certainly part of the on-going effort to improve campaigns in Illinois. ICPR supported these bills in committee, and we urge the Governor to sign them into law.

Con Con Considerations: Presentation

The November ballot will ask voters whether Illinois should have a Constitutional Convention. A Constitutional Convention would be authorized to review any portion of Illinois' Constitution they wanted to -- and to propose an entirely new document, amendments to existing provisions, or additions of new materials.

But the Constitution also leaves much to the General Assembly to determine. Others have taken a position on whether or not there should be a Convention, and even on what issues a Convention should address if it is called. This page is less interested in what a Convention might accomplish as in how it might work.

Last in a series

The 1970 constitution provides that, at the conclusion of a Convention, "any proposed revision or amendments approved by a majority of the delegates shall be submitted to the electors [ie, voters] in such manner as the Convention determines, at an election designated or called by the Convention occurring not less than two nor more than six months after the Convention's adjournment." In theory, the delegates could approve a series of amendment or revisions, but not adjourn until the timing of an election. Moreover, the vote on their findings must be no sooner than two months after the end of the Convention, nor more than six months after the end, meaning that the Convention will likely determine whether the results are voted upon at a Special Election or a Regular Election. How should the final product be presented? As a single up or down vote, as a series of changes, or, as in 1970, a combination of the two: a totally new Constitution and a few separate votes on more controversial components?

How, and When, Should the Convention Present its Findings?