40 Comments - the Patriot - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:02 am: Shiela Simon is on the Commission. What does it say when our starting point for political reform starts with nepotism and the appointment of people who have never distinguished themselves apart from living off of their father’s legacy? - Been There - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:04 am: ===There is no constitutional way of barring family members from running for office=== That is true, but having a process where your kid is easily appointed, I think is what ticks off most voters. You have to have some way of picking for replacements but its usually too easy to hand it down to the next of kin. - Amuzing Myself - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:05 am: But, Rich, here’s the real meat of the issue: Ask - especially in the City of Chicago - those same voters if they would vote for a Republican for Mayor, Governor or County Board President, and see what the answer is. I think you’ll find a disconnect similar to how people hate Congress but love their own entrenched Congresscritter. BTW, are there geographic crosstabs on that poll? I haven’t checked their website yet. - Rich Miller - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:06 am: ===if they would vote for a Republican === What does that have to do with anything? - Amuzing Myself - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:07 am: Nevermind on the crosstabs….found ‘em - Carl Nyberg - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:08 am: Illinois should have a review process for various forms of litigation by taxing bodies, especially when employees are fired. My experience in Proviso Township showed me a number of cases where taxing bodies fired people for questionable or illegal reasons. The fired employee then litigates, which takes years. And the taxing body accumulates legal bills, often to connected law firms. These connected law firms in turn contribute money to allies of the politicians who terminated the employee illegally. Illinois should have a process for reviewing these cases before the legal bills accumulate. Taxing bodies should be forced to go to arbitration rather than spend a bunch of taxpayer money on litigation. - Juice - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:10 am: While I agree the amended legislation isn’t a loophole, I think the GA would have been wise to hold off until getting some kind of signal from the new administration on their views of the legality of the law. - Amuzing Myself - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:11 am: I guess I didn’t phrase that exactly right. My point is, they say they’re appalled by all of this corruption, but they continue to vote with the machine decade after decade, seemingly turning a blind eye to that dirty corruptions stuff as just “the way politics is.” I think that’s what Rauschenberger was getting at. I’m not a big fan of his, but that’s how I read what he said. - Carl Nyberg - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:15 am: I’m not a fan of recall, but having a recall process might make it harder for politicians to appoint their progeny when they retire. We could have an automatic recall election for candidates appointed to replace other candidates after the primary. If an individual is appointed to fill a position after the primary election, there will be a recall election on the first Saturday at least 90 days after the individual assumes office. While it would cost some money to implement this, I suspect fewer individuals would simply quit after the primary and appoint their child. - Just wondering - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:16 am: Who specifically in “the federal government” says a carve-out of our ethics law is needed for road builders? Give us a name. What exactly is the supposed conflict? Give us the cite. Absent some answers why should we fall for this line like a bunch of pollyannas? And even if there was some specific conflict in federal law (and no one I know has seen it), why doesn’t The Messiah just change it so Illinois can get a little reform? - Independent - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:17 am: I think Rauschenberger was getting at that, too. Illinois voters love to voice outrage but when elections come their votes are according to party, familiar names, or the one who promises the most goodies. Illinoisans knew well what Blagojevich was in ‘06 and still re-elected him. Illinoians’ “outrage” has been nothing but hot air. - Rich Miller - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:17 am: Just wondering, you must not read very often. Stories were posted here about the issue on several occasions. Your ignorance is not my problem, but at least try not to revel in it. - Chicago Cynic - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:27 am: Rich, It’s so nice to see how gingerly you deal with posters here and with such aplomb no less! - BannedForLife - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:28 am: I’m much impressed with Rev. Willis for agreeing to serve on this commission. No one could blame him for writing off Illinois government. Willis attracted the biggest media cloud when the meeting broke. His comment about the perception of Illinois government as a family business was just one of many diverse concerns expressed by commissioners and citizens. - Just wondering - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:28 am: I saw a bunch of “stories” that just blindly accepted a fishy premise, nothing more. Keep your head in the sand. That’s your right. Blago is the only dishonest player. I get it. - BannedForLife - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:29 am: In her opening remarks Simon cited among her qualifications having her babysitting income publicly disclosed. - Chicago Cynic - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:30 am: BTW, Rev. Willis’ comment this morning reinforces by concerns about the makeup of this commission. I understand the purpose of having disparate voices, but some of these are just angry people (legitimately so) with no real framework for how to deal with these problems. I really think you needed a Jay Stewart or a Cindy Canary actually on the commission. - Louis G. Atsaves - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:34 am: Redistricting issues may solve some “nepotism” complaints as it concerns legislators. Draw up legislative districts fairly using population and county boundary lines. Is it “ethical” to gerrymander districts? That may be a topic for this group to try to tackle. If they want more open government, then stop gerrymandering and more contested races will occur. - VanillaMan - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:34 am: …changing the attitudes of the people of the state of Illinois… I continually hear pundits, read bloggers and columnists, who want to spread responsibility around regarding Illinois corruption to include voters. With every campaign and election we hear losing candidates claims that their message wasn’t understood by voters. How many times do we hear how voters are stupid? This claim is a cop-out and doesn’t begin to solve anything. The problem isn’t stupid voters. Even if we want to believe it is, then what could you possibly do to solve the problems you claim are due to stupid voters? Voter preferences and beliefs are conditions that we all have to accept and work with without whining. That is the deal. So recognizing the fact that voters can end up supporting a Stroger, a Blagojevich, a Ryan, and other corrupted elected officians - and putting it aside because it is a condition we must accept under a democracy - what can we do about people like this? We have political parties that are supposed to offer voters candidates they deem exceptional enough to raise money for, to publically support, and to help elect. Before we spread blame around to voters for choosing a Blagojevich, lets investigate what could be done to prevent a Blagojevich from being nominated in the first place. When political parties become corrupted and stray from providing competent and honest candidates, you can’t blame voters, can you? You want to know why there is nepotism? Because our political parties have become so corrupted that the nominations they hand out to politicians have become increasingly meaningless to voters. When a Blagojevich is re-nominated by a party fully aware of his corruption and incompetence, then that party should be held accountable for the damages caused by that re-nominated crook. Or, what good is a party nomination to voters? Nepotism occurs when voters depend more upon a family than upon a political party. That shouldn’t be the case. Both of the political parties in Illinois are corrupted and have strayed from proving Illinoians solid, credible candidates for offices. Knowing that their parties do not insist on honesty, competence, and intelligence for nominations has resulted in good people accepting corruption as part of the cost in being a public office holder. So money is not the root of corruption within our political parties. The root of corruption within our political parties is the acceptance of a “win at any cost” attitude fostered by our current groups of leaders within our political parties. It is a willingness to sacrifice ethics, principles and competence in exchange for the chance to win a seat that is at the root of the corruption within Illinois. The money harvested is used by both political parties in order to attain that goal. Cutting down on available money, does not end the corruption, as we have clearly seen over the past forty years. Political parties are not controlled by state government - yet, state government is controlled by political parties. Normally a losing political party is self cleaning. We see today in Illinois that this is not happening. As long as the corruption in state government has it’s source in the amoral world in our political parties, our state government will be corrupt. - The Doc - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:41 am: I agree with Louis, in that the redistricting process allows for the entrenched pols to continue holding power while not truly representing the makeup and will of their constituents. AM, that’s a major reason why the Machine continues to roll along. - Rich Miller - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 11:47 am: Amuzing Myself and others, here’s what Rauschenberger said… ==“I don’t hear outrage in Elgin (over the current crisis),” he said. “They just want you to get the goofy guy (Blagojevich) offstage.=== The poll clearly shows that the public supports far more things than getting RRB offstage. Rauschenberger wasn’t quoted in the story talking about anything else mentioned above. So, what I wrote above stands. Just wondering, the state got a letter from the feds notifying it that it would lose federal money if it didn’t change the law. Also, this isn’t the first time a state has received such a warning. What more do you want? Blood? - robo - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 12:02 pm: Most if not all the activities over the last 6 years were prohibited by federal and state statutes. Until enforcement and the attitudes of those around the officeholders and utimately the voters change this will continue. - wordslinger - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 12:12 pm: I’m part of the microwave generation, too, but these folks just got started. Give them a chance. They’ll make recommendations. It will be up to the media and voters to hold the GA and next governor’s feet to the fire. - Just wondering - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 12:25 pm: Rich, can you get a copy of that letter from the Feds? If anyone can, it’s you. I just think it would be interesting to see who signed it from D.C. I hadn’t heard of a letter, but if there is one, I’ll stand corrected. All I heard made it sound like it was just some vague verbal warning from parties unidentified specifically. I’m really not trying to be an ass here. That ethics carve-out for “road builders” of all people just strikes me as fishy and a tad too convenient. - Bill Baar - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 12:53 pm: It’s worth noting Fitz makes a pitch similar to Rauschenberger’s; at least to my ears. I can go google quotes but I’m pretty sure Fitz lays this ultimately on votes acceptance of corruption as status quo for Illinois. The real solution is getting all the facts out thee for people which Fitz by nature of the legal process is slow to do. A political trial though shouldn’t suffer such limitations and that means bringing in a bunch of people to testify under oath and Democrats are loath to do that… because Bill was right… it’s the system that’s corrupt. It’s far bigger than the Guv and no one wants to follow the trials or connect the dots. Let the mad man go for it than. It’s the voice of tenacious fighting insanity that will blow the cover on all of them. Get him on the radio over and over… - Amy - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 1:11 pm: the comments from Willis mirror those from average citizens…..government in the hands of a few families. actually, someone should make a political version of a great rock poster I saw some years ago. it was a tree with branches, oh, say for the Yardbirds and from that came Cream (clapton), Led Zep (jimmy p). it’s cool to see how all those things evolve and relate. in the case of Illinois politics, it would be a handy guide to the insiders, the Degnans, the Darts from lobbyist to elected, the Carrothers family, the family Stroger, Madigan land, Daley shire, Hynes ville, Ginger Rugai and her contract lobbyist husband and on and on across the city, families through the generations, through the contracts, through the corruption trials (anyone a second generation convicted yet?). it’s a company town and in a high percentage of instances, it’s all about someone’s family. cheers to Willis for putting it out there. - MOON - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 1:16 pm: This group formed by Quinn is just another one of his wacky ideas. Once again he is grandstanding. If he thought this was so important why didn’t he act several years ago? Quinns motives are obvious to anyone with a brain……he is already running for Gov. - Capitol View - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 1:16 pm: Just wondering — the federal IDOT has a requirement tht the lowest qualified bid get the contract. This is their one fiscal standard. They don’t care who or who did not make a political contribution, so state legislative language forbidding bids being accepted by PAC donors is anathema to the feds in this instance. - Rich Miller - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 1:18 pm: ===Quinns motives are obvious to anyone with a brain……he is already running for Gov. === You say that as though it’s some sort of crime. Take a breath, please. - vole - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 1:19 pm: Just wondering: You ain’t alone in your questioning. Why would the source of funding impact the road builders any differently than any other industry doing business in IL? A limit on contributions should affect everyone equally regardless of their source of funding. Why did the state legislature cave so fast without some kind of court fight? This only casts more doubt over the financial relations between the road building industry and state government including the legislature. The explanations for this including those from this blog are highly unsatisfactory. - Capitol View - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 1:22 pm: On nepotism in politics — President John Quincy Adams was the people’s choice, and not too bad an early president. Our own Sen. Adlai Stevenson II was the son of an earlier vice president, among other offices. I would not have barred Caroline Kennedy from being appointed US Senator from New York, simply because she was JFK’s daughter. Nepotism bans are like term limits - the principle denies qualified public servants from being able to serve. That’s stupid. Let the best rise to the top and be noticed by the public. Sure, some get a head start, but so did Michael Douglas in Hollywood among others. - MOON - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 1:35 pm: RICH Running for Gov. is not a crime. Misleading the public under the guise of good government when your real motive is to further your political career is devious. - Anonymous45 - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 1:36 pm: we the people, can put a stop to elected political dynasties with these things called e-l-e-c-t-i-o-n-s… - Rich Miller - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 1:41 pm: ===Misleading the public under the guise of good government when your real motive is to further your political career is devious.=== You’re kidding, right? Politics and elected officials are inextricable. If pushing a decent ethics bill gets somebody elected or reelected, then that’s how we reward them. Again, take a breath. - MOON - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 1:54 pm: RICH I will take your advice, and take a breath! In fact I take about 60 breaths per minute. LOL - Nearly Normal - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 2:08 pm: Senator Adlai Stevenson III was the son of twice-defeated presidential candidate Adlai II. Adlai I, the vice-prez, was II’s grandfather. Ahh, political genealogy. - David Ormsby - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 2:09 pm: Just Wondering–the letter came from the federal government. All your wondering will not alter that fact. - Just wondering - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 4:10 pm: Capitol View, thanks for the input. But shouldn’t this be simple? Let’s assume for the sake of argument there is such federal language about bidders (and I’m still not convinced it’s as clear cut as some want to say). Then I guess a bidder wouldn’t be “qualified” if they were running afoul of a state’s ethics laws. Simple. Or at least that’s the way it should be. That’s a stand that’s at least worth fighting for if this state’s lawmakers really cared an iota about reform. Again, let’s see exactly what the General Assembly supposedly got from the Feds. Let’s simply see what they based their votes on to water down their own brand new ethics law. The more stonewalling we get, the more I wonder if the “warning” came from a lobbyist or trade group, as opposed to the Feds. You don’t need tinfoil on your head to smell that something’s rotten in Denmark on this one. - steve schnorf - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 6:25 pm: Remember, these same people as the poll respondents bought the statement that JBT was “George Ryan’s treasurer”. I’m not sure how much credence to give them on any issue. - Rich Miller - Friday, Jan 23, 09 @ 10:32 pm: ===The more stonewalling we get, the more I wonder if the “warning” came from a lobbyist or trade group, as opposed to the Feds.=== Are you mental? Read the above comments. Your questions have been answered. Enough. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.