Quinn Vetoes Campaign Finance Reform

The last month has been filled with numerous bill signings as Governor Quinn officially put his signature on a number of new laws, mostly good but some bad.  Last week brought a change of pace with the Governor breaking out his veto pen and as with the new laws, some of those decisions were good and some bad.

One of the better choices made by Quinn was the veto he issued on the loophole filled campaign finance reform legislation.  House Bill 7 (which gave the false impression of real campaign contribution caps) would allow for an individual donation to be capped at $5,000, a PAC, corporation or union would be limited to $10,000, and transfers between candidate and leadership committees (such as state parties) would be topped at $90,000 on a yearly basis.  Meaning during a full gubernatorial term, the chief executive could collect four $10,000 donations from a single business, while a challenger would be greatly hampered because they likely would not start fundraising until two years prior to the election, thus giving the incumbent candidate a 2-1 fundraising advantage.  This legislation would have also put even more power into the hands of legislative leaders, further tightening their iron fisted control over the respective chambers by giving them the power to dole out large campaign donations and unlimited resources.

Although Quinn made the correct decision in his veto, the real question that needs to be answered is why he gave the same exact bill a glowing endorsement during his very own committee testimony.  Governor Quinn actually said, “I think this is the best we can do at this time,” about the legislation during the committee hearing.  He further went on to refer to the proposed caps as “landmark” ethics reforms.  The only thing “landmark” about any of this is the hypocrisy involved and the fact that the same system so greatly abused by Blagojevich is still in place.

All year long proposals that would have created real campaign finance reform were pushed to the side, and instead the only legislation which was supported by the Speaker and Senate President was HB7.  So what was the final outcome of all the ethics commissions and suggestions to remove the taint of money from Illinois government?  Absolutely nothing, we have the same exact campaign finance system in place that we had the day Rod Blagojevich was impeached.  Like I said it was a good decision to veto the fictional campaign finance reform, what’s sad is that we are once again left with the same status quo.

Only in Chicago

As is normal practice for most elected officials, they have an expense account that is used to pay for such things as rented office space, supplies and other costs associated with running their constituent headquarters.  Of course, as we all know not things go differently up north in the windy city.  Last week it was brought to the attention of the media that Chicago Alderman George Cardenas was using his expense account (funded with tax dollars) to rent an office in a building which he actually has part ownership.  He paid over $17,000 in rent just last year for the office space that he owns with his relatives.  This appears to be a direct violation, as city ordinance prohibits “the direct monetary benefit of any alderman or any of his or her relatives.”  The alderman later said he will sell his portion of the building, but what about all that taxpayer funded rent that has already found its way into the pockets of family and friends.