Editorial Roundup: Illinois

Chicago Sun-Times. January 27, 2022.

Editorial: Get to bottom of ethics probe on Rep. Marie Newman before June election

At issue is whether Newman offered a federal job to a potential 2020 primary challenger in exchange for him agreeing not to run against her.

With the Illinois primary election fast approaching, the U.S. House Committee on Ethics should quickly let voters know whether U.S. Rep. Marie Newman, D-Ill., essentially paid an alleged political bribe.

The Office of Congressional Ethics, which is separate from the House Committee on Ethics, has already unanimously concluded there is 'œsubstantial reason'ť to believe Newman offered a federal job to Iymen Chehade - now a foreign policy adviser to her 2022 congressional campaign - in exchange for him agreeing not to run against her in the 2020 Democratic primary.

Newman, a first-term member of Congress from La Grange, is challenging fellow Democrat U.S. Rep. Sean Casten of Downers Grove in the west and southwest suburban 6th Congressional District, rather than run in the 4th Congressional District, into which she was re-mapped, though candidates do not have to live in the district where they run. Chehade, a Palestinian American adjunct professor, is running for a seat in the 3rd District - where he does not live - which is currently represented by Newman.

Voters making a choice between Newman and Casten in the June 28 primary deserve to know what light the Ethics Committee can shed on the allegation against Newman. They ought to know at least before expanded early voting starts on June 13, and preferably sooner since people can start requesting mail-in ballots on March 30. The committee doesn't like to announce any findings less than 60 days before an election, which would be April 29. That's a short turnaround for the usually lumbering committee, but in a potentially hotly contested race, it's important for the committee to provide some answers.

The Office of Congressional Ethics, which only makes recommendations, said Chehade sued Newman to enforce a contract he signed promising him a job on her congressional staff. Chehade said his decision not to run in 2020 was based on the promise of a job. In a draft contract, Chehade said he would not 'œannounce or submit his candidacy'ť in exchange for a job as Newman's chief foreign policy adviser during the 2020 campaign and then as a district or legislative director once she took office. Newman unseated former U.S. Rep. Dan Lipinski in the 2020 primary.

Candidates dropping out of the running for elected seats to clear the way for someone else and then turning up with political or government jobs is a longtime, if unsavory, Illinois tradition. But it is not ethical to give away a government job as part of a specific quid pro quo for political advantage.

Newman has denied any wrongdoing. Her lawyer admitted the contract, in theory, violated House employment and federal contracting rules, but argued those rules did not apply to Newman because she was not a federal employee before her election. The lawsuit Chehade filed after he did not get the job has been settled, with undisclosed terms.

The Ethics Committee, which has the power to punish a lawmaker for wrongdoing, has said it will investigate. It should finish that investigation in time to help voters make an informed decision.

___

Champaign News-Gazette. January 30, 2022.

Editorial: Judicial election dispute raises serious questions

Plans by the governor and state legislators to politicize the state's judicial branch have run into a legal challenge.

Gov. J.B. Pritzker and supermajority Democrats performed some nifty partisan handiwork over the past year by redrawing judicial districts to make it easier for members of their party to win elections.

First, feeling the need to reconfigure appellate and Illinois Supreme Court districts for the first time since the early 1960s, they gerrymandered four of the state's five districts with the goal of maintaining their current 4-3 majority on the high court.

Cook County, which elected three justices, comprises the state's First District. The state's other 101 counties are allocated to 23 circuits spread across Districts 2-5.

That task completed, the governor and legislators focused on local judicial races by eliminating 'œat-large'ť elections in which judicial candidates run in each county of their multi-county circuits. (Champaign County is part of the six-county Sixth Judicial Circuit.) They also created multiple sub-circuits in some circuits.

Their stated goal was to make it easier for members of minority groups to be elected as judges. But the real motive is to guarantee the election of Democratic judges from areas not necessarily inclined to do so.

Most of the changes do not take immediate effect. But for a variety of reasons, Pritzker & Co. overreached by trying to undermine a judicial election already underway in Madison County.

A Sangamon County judge last week issued a temporary restraining order that blocks the planned manipulation of that judicial election.

Circuit Judges Amy Sholar and Christopher Threlkeld are seeking election by running in Madison County. But the new law divides Madison County into three sub-circuits.

Under the new law, both candidates will not only have to run in a sub-circuit drawn to elect a Democrat but also change residences to do so.

State's Attorney Tom Haine sought an injunction to block the legislation that he charges illegally changes the rules in the middle of the game.

He argued that not only will voters be adversely affected if the rule changes stand, but the power of the judiciary as a separate and co-equal branch of state government will also be undermined.

'œIf the General Assembly can unashamedly gerrymander judicial districts for partisan reasons, what authority does the judiciary have left?'ť Haine argued.

The judge said Haine's legal filing 'œdemonstrated (plaintiffs) will suffer irreparable harm'ť if Pritzker and his fellow defendants are allowed to proceed.

He cited as problematic the fact that 'œvoters in a majority of Madison County would be precluded from voting in the election of a sub-circuit judge, the creation of a circuit exclusively comprised of sub-circuits with no at-large circuit judgeships may be unconstitutional, and the county would be burdened with significant expense in re-configuring voter cards and other confusion caused by'ť the new law.

As the policy-making branch of state government, the General Assembly has much to say about almost everything. For example, no one has challenged the authority of the Legislature to redraw the state's four Supreme Court/appellate court districts, no matter what their reason for doing so.

But vast authority is not unlimited authority, and it will be interesting to see how the judiciary responds to the effects of this micro-management that senior court officials already have characterized as having a disastrous impact on the state's judiciary.

But there is far more to this issue than politics and legalities. The courts exist to resolve disputes based solely on the legal merits. Manipulating what is supposed to be a non-political branch of government solely for political reasons opens the door to a wider misbehavior totally inconsistent with the rule of law.

___

Bloomington Pantagraph. January 29, 2022.

Editorial: Oversight needed in Springfield

The ethics reform proposal put forth by Illinois Senate Republicans is a step in the right direction to address desperately needed change in state government.

Senate Bill 363 would ban state lawmakers, a spouse or an immediate family member from lobbying during his or her tenure in the legislature. General Assembly members also wouldn't be able to secure work in a lobbying firm until they leave office if the firm lobbies the General Assembly. And they couldn't have a lobbyist serve as an officer on his or her campaign committee.

If you're surprised these rules aren't already in place - especially in corruption-prone Illinois - you're not alone.

Closing loopholes and improving transparency continually fail to gain traction in the Statehouse. That was especially true under powerful House Speaker Mike Madigan, D-Chicago, who controlled state politics for decades.

Measures that did break through were tepid at best. Earlier this month, Legislative Inspector General Carol Pope, who served as a watchdog of state lawmakers, resigned.

Senate Republicans are pushing to give that position more power and provide more tools for investigations.

An existing six-month ban on General Assembly members working for a lobbying firm would expand to 12 months under Senate Bill 363. The proposal would also expand state laws on bribery and legislative misconduct.

Such oversight is badly needed.

Case in point: The Better Government Association this month reported that lawmakers inserted $4 billion of pork-barrel projects into the $45 billion Rebuild Illinois infrastructure initiative. The itemized projects were selected by lawmakers (and in some cases, the governor's office) and added without any public input. Four of the projects were secured by Madigan.

That doesn't mean anything unethical was happening per se. But it could, and there need to be safeguards. At the federal level, lawmakers have to disclose earmarks on their websites, a step that should be applied at the state level, too.

Senate Bill 363 faces an uphill climb. But comprehensive ethics reform is commonsense - and long overdue in Springfield.

END