Veto session roundup

By Jamey Dunn

The Illinois General Assembly's fall veto session was scheduled to continue through tomorrow, but both chambers canceled their Thursday sessions and hit the road after little legislative action this week. Here’s a rundown of what did happen: 

Veto stands 
The House voted not to override Gov. Pat Quinn’s veto of House Bill 1200. The measure would have cut the number of free days museums are required to offer from 52 to 26. Rep. Joe Sosnowski argued that lawmakers should give museums a break because the state has not given them an operating subsidy in more than a decade. He said that low-income residents would still have plenty of opportunities to attend on free days or through school and library programs. Sosnowski said that by allowing museums to offer fewer free days, they would have more money to spend on education and outreach programs. “It will enhance and increase what museums can do.” The measure passed in the House in April with 79 “yes” votes and 36 “no” votes. Today, only 49 members voted in favor of an override, while 67 voted to uphold the governor’s veto.

Several legislators rose during debate to argue that the change would cut off opportunities for many families.  “The governor is correct. The purpose of a museum is to educate, to provide culture. And when we deny that, limit access, we really hurt all of us in this state,” said Chicago Democratic Rep. Monique Davis. Quinn reportedly lobbied aggressively for support of the veto. “It’s always important to ensure that our residents with modest incomes have equal access to our world-class museums and cultural institutions,” he said in a written statement. “I commend members of the House for their vote today. They did the right thing.”

Budget issues 
Today, committees continued to debate adding additional spending to the current fiscal year’s budget. Gov. Pat Quinn is seeking about $200 million in additional spending. The money would cover back wages for state employees, which a judge ordered the state to pay with interest, set-up costs for the state’s concealed carry licensing system and operational costs in the Department of Corrections. The money would come from revenues that Quinn’s budget office said will come in higher than originally estimated. Budget committees held hearings today and yesterday but have yet to vote on any of it. Lawmakers said they plan to continue considering the new spending over the next week while they are out of session.

Same-sex marriage opposition rally 
After thousands of supporters of same-sex marriage held a rally and march yesterday, their opponents packed the Capitol today. Republican Sen. Kirk Dillard, who is running for governor, was one of several speakers who addressed the crowd. “I have said that I would veto the gay marriage bill,” Dillard said. “I believe that government which governs least governs best. But there are times when government has a solemn duty to stand up and protect its citizens.” Dillard emphasized his belief that children need both a mother and a father to thrive. “Every child in this state deserves to have a mom and dad.” Republican Sen. Jim Oberweis also spoke. He was at the rally collecting signatures to challenge U.S. Sen. Richard Durbin. He said he plans to run against Durbin if he can get the signatures required to get onto the ballot.

State retiree health care
The state is shifting many retirees from traditional Medicare plans to privately managed Medicare Advantage plans. Some lawmakers are unhappy that one provider did not qualify for the bidding process. The Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability held a hearing on the issue today.  You can read all about it in this post.

The House officially voted in Western Springs Republican Jim Durkin as the new minority leader yesterday. Illinois Issues interviewed him before he was sworn in. You can read that story here.

Lawmakers are scheduled to return for three more days of veto session starting on November 5.

Quinn's veto on electricity rates overturned

By Jamey Dunn

Lawmakers overturned a veto from Gov. Pat Quinn on a bill related to oversight of the so-called smart grid law.

In 2011, lawmakers passed a bill that gives Commonwealth Edison and Ameren automatic rate increases. In return, the utilities must make upgrades to the state’s electrical grid, including changes meant to make service more efficient for customers. Quinn vetoed the plan, but lawmakers overrode his veto.

The Illinois Commerce Commission, which is tasked with regulating the smart grid rollout, has since made a ruling about rates connected to the bill. Utilities didn’t like the ruling because they say it will cost them millions, and lawmakers say it was wrong and missed the intent of their law. So they approved Senate Bill 9, which supporters say clarifies the original language. It would also allow the utilities to collect rates they lost under the ICC ruling, plus interest, from customers retroactively.

Quinn vetoed SB 9. “I cannot support legislation that puts the profits of big electric utilities ahead of the families and businesses of Illinois,” he said in a prepared statement when he issued the veto. “A strong economy that creates jobs requires stable energy costs, but this bill sends Illinois in the wrong direction. We cannot allow big utilities to force automatic rate hikes on the people of Illinois by going around oversight authorities each and every time they do not get the decision they want.”

But legislators who pushed for an override say Quinn has it all wrong. “All this bill says is that the Commerce Commission ought to follow the law that we originally passed. I know when the governor vetoed this bill he did it very emphatically. Some of you may have seen that on the news, and he said that the General Assembly should not get in the way of the Commerce Commission,” said Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang, sponsor of SB 9. “But I have a different story to tell. The story is that the Commerce Commission does not make public policy in this state. The Illinois General Assembly makes public policy, and they ought to follow the policy we set.”

The House approved the override today, 71-41, with five members voting present. The Senate passed the bill on Tuesday.

The utilities said that without the change, they would have to delay implementing the grid upgrades. But now that they bill is law, they say that work will return to normal. “We are starting immediately to accelerate smart meter installation and other work to improve reliability, provide new ways to save energy and money, and serve as a shot in the arm to our state’s economy,” Anne Pramaggiore, president and chief executive officer of ComEd, said in a prepared statement.

Opponents say the override shows that the utilities will come to lawmakers when they do not like the decisions made by regulators. “I think that SB 9 is very telling that they don’t want the commission to be anything more than a rubber stamp,” said Scott Musser, a lobbyist with the AARP. He said that it seems that lawmakers are not willing to back the ICC in such conflicts. “They have now made the commission their punching bag. They’ve beaten them up pretty successfully.”

Despite vetoes, gaming supporters still hope for compromise

By Jamey Dunn

As expected, Gov. Pat Quinn today vetoed a gaming expansion bill that was sent to his desk more than a year and a half after the measure passed.

The Senate approved Senate Bill 744 on the last day of the spring legislative session in 2011. The proposal called for five new casino licenses, along with slot machines at horse racing tracks and the Illinois State Fairgrounds. Senate President John Cullerton put a procedural hold on the bill because Quinn had made his distaste for the plan public, calling it "top heavy." Quinn voiced a particular disdain for allowing slot machines at the fairgrounds. Cullerton and supporters of the plan had hoped to work out a compromise with the governor. But Quinn called for them to send the bill and let him rewrite it with his veto power. Instead, proponents of a gaming expansion backed away from SB 744 and threw support behind another bill that they viewed as a compromise. Legislators approved SB 1849 on the last day of the regular spring session of 2012. Quinn vetoed that bill, and lawmakers did not take a vote to override his veto.

“Everybody, including us, knew that he was going to veto [SB 744]. It was just when he was going to veto it,” said Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, who sponsored both bills. Quinn’s complaints about SB 744 and SB 1849 are similar. Quinn said in today’s veto message that he would not sign off on any gaming plan without “strong ethical standards, comprehensive oversight and dedicated resources for education.” According to the message, Quinn liked SB 744 even less than the gaming plan he previously vetoed. “Senate Bill 744 is even more significantly flawed than SB 1849. Senate Bill 744’s most glaring deficiency is the total absence of comprehensive ethical standards and regulatory oversight. The bill also lacks a ban on campaign contributions by gaming licensees and casino managers, which is essential to keeping corruption out of the gaming industry.”

Link said he plans to propose new legislation that he believes will meet Quinn’s requirements. “We will be introducing a bill that we feel that answers most of the governor’s requests or desires.” However, Link said he and other supporters have been trying all along to get a plan approved that Quinn could accept. “When the goal line keeps moving every time, it’s kind of hard to get to the goal line.”

SB 744 was kicked to Quinn when the 97th General Assembly ended in January. Because the two-year legislative session of the 97th General Assembly is over, lawmakers have no opportunity to try to override today’s veto.

Quinn vetoes gambling expansion, citing ethics concerns

By Jamey Dunn
Gov. Pat Quinn shot down a gambling expansion bill today, but supporters hope to revisit the issue after the general election.

The move from Quinn today came as no shock to the bill’s sponsor. Quinn has kept quiet on what he intended to do, but he has been publicly critical of the bill. “The actions of the governor are disappointing, but they’re certainly not surprising,” said Skokie Democratic Rep. Lou Lang.

Senate Bill 1849 would have created licenses for five new casinos statewide: in Chicago, Park City, Danville, Rockford and in the south suburbs of Chicago. The location of the fifth casino would have been up to Illinois Gaming Board. The bill includes slot machines at horse racing tracks and would allow individual casinos to increase their gaming positions from the current limit of 1,200 to 1,600.

Quinn threatened to veto a similar expansion, SB 744, last year, calling it a “massive" gambling expansion. Senate President John Cullerton used a procedural move to block the measure from making it to Quinn’s desk. Quinn has also voiced opposition to allowing slot machines at horse racing tracks. The governor said in today’s veto message that he saw some positive changes in SB 1849, such as reductions in the scale of the gambling expansion from what was proposed in SB 744. However, he said that the newer bill did not have strong enough ethical standards. “The most glaring deficiency of Senate Bill 1849 is the absence of strict ethical standards and comprehensive regulatory oversight. Illinois should never settle for a gaming bill that includes loopholes for mobsters,” he wrote.

 “We don’t have any corruption in Illinois gaming. Where is his evidence that there is any mafia in Illinois gaming today? There isn’t any,” Lang said.

Quinn made several suggestions in his veto message for improving the measure, such as banning campaign contributions from gaming licensees and casino managers. Lang said he was willing to include any of the governor’s requested ethics measures and asked Quinn to provide him any provisions he wanted included before the legislation was called for a floor vote. “He wouldn’t give me any language, and so we proceeded and passed a bill,” Lang said. He said that Quinn had another opportunity to add in the ethics measures he wanted with his veto pen but opted not to. “The fact that he vetoed the bill instead of amendatory vetoed the bill tells you everything you need to know.”

 Lang added, “I have to draw the conclusion that he was never interested in gaming.”

When asked why he did not make his own changes to the bill, Quinn said: “It just has too many defects. It’s one thing if you had to make some technical changes here and there, but this bill just falls way short of what the people of Illinois need when it comes to ethics in government.” He said he planned to work with lawmakers to craft “a better bill,” which he described as “one that can meet all the requirements of integrity and also make sure the money goes to schools and education.”

However, Lang said that he thinks it is possible to  rally enough support for an override in the legislature's November veto session, despite a comment from House Speaker Michael Madigan to the contrary. “Speaker Madigan was only making a prediction,” Lang said.

“I’m very saddened,” said Waukegan Democratic Sen. Terry Link, who also sponsored the bill. “This is just ridiculous. Again, we have done everything possible to make this work, and again, the goal line has changed.”

An override would have to start in the Senate, and Link said he has not yet made up his mind. He said he plans to decide in the time between the general election and veto session. “We’ve got a three-week window in there, and we’ll be doing a lot of phone calling then,” He said. “People will be either comfortable or happy or sad or whatever they are.”

Link admitted, “It will be in the back of my mind for the next two months.”

Quinn used his veto message to again urge lawmakers to take up the issue of pension reform. A recent special session on pensions produced no substantial results. “Illinois cannot gamble its way out of our fiscal challenges. Even a casino on every street corner cannot repair the state’s $83 billion unfunded pension liability. I urge the members of the Illinois House and Senate to address the most pressing issue of our time — comprehensive public pension reform.”

Quinn's veto could snuff out plans for coal-to-gas plant

By Jamey Dunn

Gov. Pat Quinn rejected legislation that would have cleared the way for a coal and petroleum coke gasification plant on the southeast side of Chicago.

Last summer, Quinn approved a plan to build the plant, which would be owned by Leucadia National Corp. Construction and built on a polluted brownfield site on the southeast side of Chicago. The project was scheduled to begin in 2015, but Quinn’s veto of Senate Bill 3766 puts the future of the plant in question.

Two utility companies that originally signed onto the project, Peoples Gas and North Shore Gas, bowed out. The two remaining utilities, Ameren and Nicor Gas, have argued that they would be stuck with too large of a share of the cost of construction. Both utilities would be required to buy gas from the plant, but they do not want to cover the construction expenses that the two utilities that left the project would have paid. The Illinois Commerce Commission sided with Ameren and Nicor and rejected contracts that would have locked the utilities into a 30-year deal with the Leucadia plant, which has been dubbed the Chicago Clean Energy project. Senate Bill 3766 would have overridden the ICC’s ruling, but Quinn vetoed the bill this afternoon. Leucadia representatives have said that the project would not move forward without approval of the bill.

Business organizations and consumer advocates argued that the project would increase natural gas rates for customers across the state. ‘We’re not universally opposed to projects like these. However, Leucadia forced suburban and downstate to pay more than their fair share, and that’s unacceptable for consumers,” Bryan McDaniel, director of government affairs for Citizens Utility Board, said in a written statement. “CUB applauds Gov. Quinn’s continued leadership on behalf of consumers across Illinois.”

 The controversy put Quinn in an awkward position. He supported the plant and the jobs it would bring to an economically depressed area of the state. However, he founded CUB and has presented himself as a consumer advocate for decades.

 In his veto message, Quinn said he still supports the project but that it must be revamped. “In September of 2011, two of the gas utilities opted out of procuring the synthetic gas, leaving the remaining two utilities with far greater purchase obligations. In response, the developers argued before the Illinois Commerce Commission that Ameren and Nicor customers should be paying for 95 percent of the costs of the facility, while only receiving 84 percent of its output. That is not a fair deal for ratepayers. We can do better,” Quinn’s message stated. “In addition, our country is in the midst of a natural gas boom, which is coupled with dramatically decreasing demand. As a result, current natural gas prices are at historic lows, and many indicators suggest prices will remain low for years to come. These new facts require further scrutiny, and a revisiting of the economics of this 30-year project. I support the Chicago Clean Energy project, but it must be implemented in a way that protects the consumers of Illinois.”

Proponents say there are no guarantees that natural gas prices will stay as low as they are now. They say having a consistent source of natural gas in the state for the next 30 years would help protect customers from volatility. “Prices fluctuate — gas station prices — and so do natural gas prices, as well,” Chicago Democratic Sen. Donne Trotter, who sponsored the legislation enabling the project, said in July. Hoyt Hudson, project manager of Chicago Clean Energy, wrote in guest column published in the State Journal-Register, “The Chicago Clean Energy project guarantees a predictable price in one of the nation’s most volatile commodity markets — natural gas — while creating thousands of jobs and providing consumers with clean energy.”

“After earning strong, bi-partisan support for this bill from the Illinois House and Senate, and having enjoyed support from communities throughout Illinois, we are deeply disappointed in the governor's decision,” said a prepared statement from Chicago Clean Energy. “We know that this $3 billion investment in Illinois was good for the state's economy, its environment, its workers and its consumers. While we find the governor's decision unfortunate, we look forward to continuing our work at our other facilities throughout the country."

 Trotter and Hudson could not be reached for comment.

Quinn uses veto pen to revisit his budget plan

By Jamey Dunn 

Gov. Pat Quinn released his changes to the state budget late this evening. His reductions reiterate components of his original budget plan that lawmakers did not approve.

Quinn proposes to reduce the general revenue budget approved by the legislature by $376 million. The largest reduction is a $276 million cut to Medicaid funding for hospitals. The legislature approved about $2.3 billion in such funding. Quinn Budget Director David Vaught said that the reduction is meant to bring hospitals to the table to negotiate cutting their rates. In his original proposal, Quinn called for cuts to Medicaid rates that he said would save the state an estimated $550 million in the first fiscal year.

Without a change to the rates, hospitals will continue to be paid the same amount, and Quinn’s reduction would mean that the money would run out before the end of the fiscal year. “We hope that it helps convince the interested parties on this, which would be hospitals, to come to the table,” Vaught said. “We have a rate system in Illinois that’s been in effect for many years. It’s not been changed for many years. …We’re dealing with a very fast-growing industry that is growing more quickly than we can afford.” He acknowledged that some hospitals and nursing homes felt they got the short end of the stick in recently approved nursing home legislation and a workers’ compensation reform package, and that may complicate negotiations.

During the budgeting process, hospital representatives said the industry would prefer waiting longer for payments than see a  drastic reduction in the rates they are paid. “They kind of like getting 1 percent interest a month on their money, too,” Vaught said. In prepared explanations that Quinn released with his reductions, he said he was concerned about the approved budget pushing $1.2 billion of Medicaid bills from Fiscal Year 2012 into FY 2013. “Neglecting our bills today only creates a bigger problem for tomorrow — an ill-advised strategy that, together with the poor fiscal discipline exercised by previous administrations, has created and will exacerbate the staggering backlog of unpaid bills we face today.”

Quinn also eliminated the funding for the salaries of regional superintendents. He proposed eliminating regional offices of education in his budget plan but met objections from school districts and legislators. Vaught reiterated the administration’s position that local school districts can cough up the money if they want their own regional superintendent. “This is not a proposal to say get rid of their regional superintendents,” he said.

Quinn also wants to reduce transportation funding back to FY 2011 levels, which would mean an $89 million reduction. Transportation funding was cut drastically in FY 2011 and Quinn proposed another big cut for FY 2012, but the legislature did not go along.

Vaught said Quinn would prefer to see such cuts so the state could increase general state aid to schools. He said that since general aid can be spent on anything, it would allow schools to use money at their own discretion. He called it “the best fairest way to distribute state aid for schools.” Since Quinn cannot restore any funding to the legislature’s budget, Vaught said he will be lobbying lawmakers to put money back into general state aid for schools, among other areas of spending. He said Quinn’s reduction and line item vetoes are just part of the governor’s long-term vision for the state budget. “Today is the reduction part.”

Quinn made other cuts that he said reduced bureaucratic costs and eliminated redundancies in the budget.

The legislature must approve all of Quinn’s budget reductions. Quinn has been scarcely involved in the budgeting process this year, and he is pushing some of the original pieces of his proposal that did not go over well with the legislature the first time around. “In spite of the fact that he’s going to be governor for four years that he was elected, he certainly has not been able to assert the power within the office and his role in the process,” said Kent Redfield, an emeritus political science professor at the University of Illinois Springfield. Time will tell if legislators will warm to budget policy they have already rejected and welcome a governor into the process who has been a less than active player so far.

Quinn shoots down scholarship reforms

By Rachel Wells


Reforms aren't enough, Gov. Pat Quinn said today in a message vetoing changes to the General Assembly's scholarship program, which some lawmakers allegedly have used to reward political supporters.

The program, which cost state universities roughly $13.5 million last year, allows each lawmaker to award two four-year tuition waivers every year to students in his or her district.

Senate Bill 365 would have allowed lawmakers to continue awarding the waivers, but would limit them from giving them to anyone whose family members had contributed to the lawmaker’s campaign within five years of the award, among other changes.

Quinn said he would like the legislature to instead look at House Bill 4685, which would eliminate the program. Opponents of the waivers also complain that they place more strain on already underfunded university budgets.

“This bill fails to adopt the fundamental reforms that are necessary to bring transparency, competition and fairness to the General Assembly scholarship program,” Quinn said in a veto statement. “A program that relies on the favor of a legislator rather than the merit of an applicant is not a program I can endorse.”

Rikeesha Phelon, spokeswoman for the bill’s sponsor, Senate President John Cullerton, said Cullerton would discuss the issue with his caucus before the legislature's fall veto session. “Right now the focus needs to stay on the budget,” she said. In passing the measure this spring, Cullerton’s position was that “there’s no need to throw the student out with the bathwater,” Phelon said.

Reform do-over

By Bethany Jaeger

In an unusual move, the Illinois legislative leaders asked the governor to veto a bill that Democratic members sent to his desk in May. Gov. Pat Quinn obliged, saying he would work with members of both political parties, as well as government reform advocates, to start from scratch — and get it done by October 14 — to tighten up the rules for the funding of political campaigns.

Quinn vetoed House Bill 7, which would have established contributions limits of $5,000 for individuals, $10,000 for businesses and labor unions and $90,000 for transfers from statewide political parties. Quinn said since he received the bill, he’s gotten a lot of feedback from individuals, reform advocates and newspaper editorials that the bill was flawed and could have unintended consequences, as well as risked turning voters away from a system that maintains the status quo. In turn, Illinois remains one of only a handful of states with no limits on the amount individuals, businesses or interest groups can donate to political candidates.

“I’d rather take more time to get it right and have public consensus behind it than hastily do something that might have happened in the spring,” Quinn said during a news conference with all four legislative leaders. They were joined by reform advocates from Change Illinois, a coalition of about 50 organizations seeking campaign contribution limits, among other things.

George Ranney, president and chief executive officer of Chicago Metropolis 2020, as well as a co-chair of the reform group Change Illinois, said the governor and the legislative leaders agreeing to work out a compromise before the General Assembly returns for its annual fall veto session was a “major step in the right direction.” Next, he said, “even more so, at this point, we think there is an opportunity to do the right thing for this state, to enact a bill that has strong limits, that has the right kind of committee structure and, importantly, has a real set of provisions for enforcement.”

It was "not perfect"
Quinn’s veto comes after he testified in favor of HB 7 in late May. Sitting next to House Speaker Michael Madigan, the governor said then that the bill was not perfect, but it was a “significant step forward” and that it was the “best we can do at this time.”

His testimony contradicted the recommendations of his own Illinois Reform Commission, which wanted more stringent contribution limits and other enforcement reforms.

Quinn said today that he seriously considered altering the bill or adding to it, which would have sent it back to the legislature. But he said it dawned on him that it was better to totally veto it and make a stronger bill. He added that he would seek the commission’s input on a new version. “Sometimes when you have to alter your course to make things better, you do that. I’d rather make it better than to not do it right.”

Senate President John Cullerton said in Quinn’s defense that a new negotiated bill wasn’t ready by the time Quinn had to act on HB 7 (he faced a Friday deadline). “We asked the governor to veto this bill. We asked him — the sponsors of the bill — asked him to veto it. Because if he signed it, there are people here who think it could be much better, and that would be interpreted as accepting something that had flaws. We didn’t want to do that,” Cullerton said. “He’s not flip- flopping. He’s doing what we’ve asked.”

Cullerton added that the general areas they intend to work on include the level of contribution limits and the ability of officials to enforce the new rules.

Cynthia Canary, who previously described HB 7 as “phony reform,” today defended Quinn. “We often slam our elected officials for not having a backbone, for not listening to us, for flip-flopping. What could be braver than listening to the people coming to the table and saying, ‘We hear you. We’re going to try to do things differently.’”

Republicans, who argued they were cut out of the negotiating process, deemed the bill “seriously flawed” and urged the governor to reject it in totality and start over. Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno today commended Quinn for “courage” in not signing HB 7 just to have something on the books. “As desperate as our state is for reform, and that includes campaign finance reform, there was tremendous pressure on the governor to go ahead and enact a bill that really would have maintained the status quo or even made it worse.”

During the spring legislative session, Radogno sponsored multiple versions of campaign finance limits. One version matched recommendations by the Illinois Reform Commission and Change Illinois. It would have established contribution limits similar to those set at the federal level: $2,400 for individuals, $5,000 for political committees, businesses and unions, and $30,000 for legislative leadership. Her new bill eventually will appear in Senate Bill 2464 (the link won't be available for a while).

House Republicans also supported a Democratic-sponsored bill, HB 24, that would have mirrored federal limits.

House Minority Leader Tom Cross said today that agreeing to start over on campaign finance was a good beginning, but there’s more on the agenda. He said Republicans also want to address the idea of moving back the primary election date (now held in early February), allowing voters to recall elected officials, instituting special elections to fill vacant seats and reforming the redistricting process.

House Bill 7, as approved
HB 7 as approved by the Illinois General Assembly would not have taken effect until January 2011, after the next general election.

One point of contention among reform groups and legislators is that the bill set a pseudo limit on statewide political party transfers. While the dollar amount of transfers would be limited, the Democratic Party of Illinois, for instance, could offer unlimited in-kind contributions. That could include anything from support for advertisements, yard signs, mailers to manpower to knock on doors.

Anther debated provision would create a new type of fund for legislators to pay for maintaining their offices and assisting people in their legislative districts. Contributions to those funds would be capped at $5,000. The money could not be used for campaigns. Critics said the new so-called “constituent services” funds could be used as a loophole for politicians to throw political events.

And contrary to the wishes of the governor’s reform commission, HB 7 as approved would have only required real-time disclosure during the month of May, when state budget negotiations tend to peak. Other than that, political campaigns would have to file financial reports four times a year. The Illinois Reform Commission wanted politicians to immediately report contributions throughout the entire year. They currently only have to file major disclosure reports twice a year. The bill does include a provision to allow the Illinois State Board of Elections to audit candidates and committees if they missed two consecutive reporting deadlines.

House and Senate Republicans issued the following list of “flaws,” in addition to the points made above:

• “Limits are based on an annual cycle, not election cycles” — Annual cycles could benefit incumbents who could raise money year-round, while challengers would struggle to gain name recognition and financial support.
• “Too many possibilities for candidate committees” — It could spur the creation of even more political finance committees because each official and candidate would be able to have up to three separate committees, all with different contribution limits. House Minority Leader Tom Cross said that would cause a “diffusion of contributions, not a limitation on them.”
• “No comprehensive enforcement mechanism” — The Illinois State Board of Elections would gain little power and financial support to enforce the new rules, although it would be able to audit campaigns if they missed two consecutive reporting deadlines.
• “Doesn’t take effect until 2011” — That’s after the next general elections, which House Speaker Michael Madigan has said would make it fairer because candidates who started fundraising under the old rules would have an advantage over those who started under the new ones.