Tightening ethics law a priority for 2010

from The SouthtownStar, August 30, 2008 THE ISSUE: Gov. Pat Quinn on Thursday, along with legislative leaders, vetoed a campaign finance bill the General Assembly approved this spring. WE SAY: It was the right move. But we'll be keeping tabs on the follow-through during October's veto session. Gov. Pat Quinn's veto of the state's most recent campaign finance bill was, in fact, the right move. We're quite sure former federal prosecutor and Quinn reform commission chairman Patrick Collins patted himself on the back twice. Maybe three times. Collins was among the most outspoken this spring dumping rain buckets on Quinn, House Speaker Michael Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton as they collectively heralded passage of House Bill 7. A key provision of the bill limits campaign contributions to $5,000 per candidate per year from individual donors and $10,000 per year from political action committees. Considering Illinois is one of few states with no limits, the cap was considered a gargantuan step forward. But Collins, who led a commission appointed by Quinn to study Illinois problematic campaign laws, was indignant about the bill's passage. When the bar from which you start is so low, like Illinois' unlimited campaign finance laws, you have to pass a few checkpoints to be considered worthwhile. Lawmakers didn't lift the bar nearly high enough. The Legislature had adopted only a fraction of the changes Collins' panel recommended. Democratic and Republican party leaders still could advance unlimited sums of money to select candidates through a loophole lawmakers left wide open, and a dozen or more overdue reforms were left on the chop block. Bottom line: Quinn and lawmakers didn't go far enough in House Bill 7. They left redistricting reform off the table - a matter of critical importance to one-party domination - and they didn't widen the net for recall provisions, among other matters. Quinn, Cullerton and Madigan took triangular blame for the weak bill through their appearance with Quinn on Thursday as he vetoed it. We fully expect they will fix the problems during the October veto session. Doing anything less will hurt them come 2010's February primary. In the meantime, we're not going to wring our hands over who shifted positions and why. The important point is they all agreed, publicly, to mix a little more potency into the bill - to stiffen up a watered-down drink. It's time to add a few more shots.