From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

Ryan aide's conviction puts patronage politics in spotlight
By KEVIN MCDERMOTT Post-Dispatch
updated: 03/22/2003 05:27 PM

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. - In June 1998, George Ryan had collected more than $700,000 in campaign contributions from his employees in the Illinois secretary of state's office.

That isn't illegal in Illinois - then, or now - so long as there's no coercion involved. And Ryan's people insisted at the time that there wasn't.

"You're talking about people who want to contribute on a voluntary basis," Dave Urbanek, then Ryan's spokesman, told the Post-Dispatch. He expressed anger that anyone would imply otherwise. "No one is being coerced into supporting (Ryan's) political aspirations."

Almost five years later, a federal jury has come to a different conclusion.

Last week, the jury convicted Ryan's former campaign director, Scott Fawell, on 13 criminal counts stemming partly from allegations that he had directed a systemic misuse of state employees for campaign purposes.

Ryan, retired now after one scandal-wracked term as governor, hasn't been charged. But he was openly implicated by witnesses in the trial as being present during discussions about using state resources for political purposes and destroying documents.

Meanwhile, the state's political traditions are under a harsh new light.

"This will affect the future of politics not just in Illinois, but in other states as well," said Robert F. Rich, professor of law and political science at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana.

"The most far-reaching implications of this are about the way in which political campaigns are conducted, especially for incumbent candidates."

Among the allegations against Fawell was that upper-level Ryan employees were pressed to do campaign work on state time - which amounts to the campaign stealing from the taxpayers, prosecutors argued. Testimony also alleged that state workers were required to raise for the campaign the equivalent of 1 percent of their state salaries.

Politicians in both parties have been quick to condemn Fawell and others tied to the Ryan scandal as bad apples in an otherwise fine system. "It's a continuing story of an abuse of power" under Ryan, said state Sen. William Haine, D-Alton.

But others say the main difference between what Fawell was convicted of doing, and what happens in Illinois politics all the time, isn't so defined as it should be under Illinois law.

In fact, some of the activities that led to Fawell's conviction - including the practice of accepting political donations and campaign work from state employees - would have been perfectly legal under Illinois law had the circumstances been slightly different.

For example, it was (and still is) legal and common for elected officials to accept donations from their state employees, as long as it can't be shown that they were coerced.

State employees can - and routinely do - legally work on campaigns for their bosses, as long as they don't do it on state time (as Fawell quietly ordered people to do, according to testimony).

And elected officials aren't barred from giving state contracts and other official favors to big political donors, as long as they aren't doing it specifically in exchange for the donations.

In Fawell's case, it took luck- a detailed, computerized "favors list" falling into the hands of prosecutors - to show that the granting of state contracts and prestigious low-numbered license plates to contributors were illegal payoffs, and not merely coincidence.

In other parts of government, such favors happen all the time without leading to criminal convictions. One study in the early 1990s found that $1 of every $3 that the state spends on goods and services goes to political contributors who do business with the state.

"This has long been a state of patronage politics," from elected officials down to rank-and-file workers, said Kent Redfield, a political scientist and campaign finance expert at the University of Illinois at Springfield.

"These people were much more brazen about it, and there was an incredible arrogance and stupidity that somewhat distinguished them from other (Illinois) politicians. But it's a matter of degrees rather than a difference in kind."

After winning election as governor in 1998, Ryan - responding to criticism about his years-long practice of accepting donations from his own state employees - instituted an executive order that he wouldn't knowingly accept contributions from state workers.

That executive order is still in place under Gov. Rod Blagojevich. But nothing in Illinois law prevents an officeholder from accepting donations from the workers who depend on that officeholder for their salaries.

Several legislative measures are pending that would change that and would put other new restrictions on fund-raising activities.

"This is going to have some real ramifications," said Cindi Canari of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform, one of the groups pushing for more restrictions. "State employees have the right to participate (in politics), but they should be free from being hit up at the water cooler."

A change in attitude

The trial could also revive the movement for public financing in elections.

"Illinois, like Missouri, has had a tradition of politics that is less than savory," said former Sen. Paul Simon, D-Illinois. Now with the Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, Simon is one of the most prominent voices for public financing of elections as a means of eliminating the mad scramble for private donations.

"The greatest abuse today is about how our campaigns are financed," said Simon. "The verdict reinforces public cynicism. We simply have to recognize that we're going to have to operate in a different way than we did in the old days."

Others argued that the very outcome of the trial calls into question the need for more restrictions.

"The laws worked," said state Rep. Mike Bost, R-Murphysboro. "In any business, you're going to have people who don't do things the right way. But the laws were in place to deal with it."

Still, Bost, like others, said the verdict is likely to make him more cautious about how he raises money, with an out for anything that might later be misconstrued.

Redfield, the political science professor, said, "They're certainly going to be more careful, but I hope it's more than that. It really takes a change in the attitude toward politics. The standard ought to be, 'This is the people's business.' They should be held to a higher standard."

Fawell still is awaiting sentencing. He could face up to eight years in prison.

Reporter Kevin McDermott:
E-mail: kmcdermott@post-dispatch.com
Phone: 217-782-4912