Thursday, May 04, 2006
Of Pork and U.S. Attorneys
“What’s wrong with that?” a Republican stalwart might have asked prior to the Tristano indictment. Perhaps the following Election Interference Act might hint at an answer:
(10 ILCS 5/9-25.1) Sec. 9-25.1. Election interference. (a) As used in this Section, "public funds" means any funds appropriated by the Illinois General Assembly or by any political subdivision of the State of Illinois. (b) No public funds shall be used to urge any elector to vote for or against any candidate or proposition, or be appropriated for political or campaign purposes to any candidate or political organization. This Section shall not prohibit the use of public funds for dissemination of factual information relative to any proposition appearing on an election ballot, or for dissemination of information and arguments published and distributed under law in connection with a proposition to amend the Constitution of the State of Illinois. (c) The first time any person violates any provision of this Section, that person shall be guilty of a Class B misdemeanor. Upon the second or any subsequent violation of any provision of this Section, the person violating any provision of this Section shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. (Emphasis added.)
Whether or not the Election Interference Act was violated by the dispensing of pork to help elect non-incumbent Republican candidates, the type of Federal criminal charges of which Secretary of State chief of staff Scott Fawell and the Citizens for George Ryan were convicted could also end up in play in the U.S. Attorney’s investigation of former House GOP Leader Lee Daniels. The same law would be violated if employees worked on campaigns while on the state payroll.
Of course, it is not unusual for pork to be used to help re-elect incumbents. That certainly is a major reason any number of Democrats were induced to vote for this year’s budget.
But what House Republicans did in the 2000 campaign may have been an innovation in Illinois politics.
Approximately $1 million in so-called “member initiatives” was appropriated by the General Assembly for each House member.
Instead of spreading it evenly among the GOP incumbents, a significant amount was diverted to advance the campaigns of favored Republican challengers like Jankowski.
“Obviously, the sitting state representative and senators put the word out that there was money available…That’s one of the things I ran into while I was down there campaigning,” Jankowski told me three years ago.
“Anywhere I went, everybody’d tell me, ‘I got this from Dan (Reitz, the Democrat incumbent),’” explained the GOP challenger. “A lot of it wasn’t appropriated yet. It was promised.
“Everybody’s talking about it and you become aware of different needs out there and you pass that up the line to campaign people and such,” he continued. “My understanding is that those leaders had a pot of money that they were divvying up among their members and they had the controlling interest of where it went.”
So, what did Jankowski get to help his insurgent campaign in Monroe, Randoph, St. Clair and Washington Counties?
Here’s how House Republicans allocated most of the public dollars spent on the Nashville county board member’s campaign:
But that figure does not count the taxpayer-financed pork spent by both sides.
To return to McHenry County Blog, click here.
(10 ILCS 5/9-25.1) Sec. 9-25.1. Election interference. (a) As used in this Section, "public funds" means any funds appropriated by the Illinois General Assembly or by any political subdivision of the State of Illinois. (b) No public funds shall be used to urge any elector to vote for or against any candidate or proposition, or be appropriated for political or campaign purposes to any candidate or political organization. This Section shall not prohibit the use of public funds for dissemination of factual information relative to any proposition appearing on an election ballot, or for dissemination of information and arguments published and distributed under law in connection with a proposition to amend the Constitution of the State of Illinois. (c) The first time any person violates any provision of this Section, that person shall be guilty of a Class B misdemeanor. Upon the second or any subsequent violation of any provision of this Section, the person violating any provision of this Section shall be guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. (Emphasis added.)
Whether or not the Election Interference Act was violated by the dispensing of pork to help elect non-incumbent Republican candidates, the type of Federal criminal charges of which Secretary of State chief of staff Scott Fawell and the Citizens for George Ryan were convicted could also end up in play in the U.S. Attorney’s investigation of former House GOP Leader Lee Daniels. The same law would be violated if employees worked on campaigns while on the state payroll.
Of course, it is not unusual for pork to be used to help re-elect incumbents. That certainly is a major reason any number of Democrats were induced to vote for this year’s budget.
But what House Republicans did in the 2000 campaign may have been an innovation in Illinois politics.
Approximately $1 million in so-called “member initiatives” was appropriated by the General Assembly for each House member.
Instead of spreading it evenly among the GOP incumbents, a significant amount was diverted to advance the campaigns of favored Republican challengers like Jankowski.
“Obviously, the sitting state representative and senators put the word out that there was money available…That’s one of the things I ran into while I was down there campaigning,” Jankowski told me three years ago.
“Anywhere I went, everybody’d tell me, ‘I got this from Dan (Reitz, the Democrat incumbent),’” explained the GOP challenger. “A lot of it wasn’t appropriated yet. It was promised.
“Everybody’s talking about it and you become aware of different needs out there and you pass that up the line to campaign people and such,” he continued. “My understanding is that those leaders had a pot of money that they were divvying up among their members and they had the controlling interest of where it went.”
So, what did Jankowski get to help his insurgent campaign in Monroe, Randoph, St. Clair and Washington Counties?
Here’s how House Republicans allocated most of the public dollars spent on the Nashville county board member’s campaign:
$175,00 of taxpayer money was spent to entice votes for Jankowski in Monroe County. The Monroe County Fair Association received $125,000 for land acquisition and improvements to the fairgrounds. Another $50,000 went to improve Bolm Schuhkraft Park in the City of Columbia. Lee Daniels even came down to Monroe County for a press conference.Reitz won the election 28,210 to 18,336. According to the Board of Elections, Reitz spent $30.23 per vote, while Jankowski spent $28.43.
Randolph County received $75,000 in public largess. The Village of Evansville got $25,000 for equipment and/or improvements, while the Kankaskia Regional Port District got $50,000 for engineering of a rail spur at Baldwin dock.
In St. Clair County, the Village of Millstadt received $50,000 worth of sidewalks and curb replacements.
Jankowski’s political base of Washington County received $95,000 worth of “re-enforcement.” The City of Nashville was able to purchase a new 20 cubic foot garbage packer truck with its $50,000. The Village of Okawville got $25,000 to purchase a new police car and equipment for police cars. The Okawville Youth Association spent $20,000 on improvements to its ballpark.
But that figure does not count the taxpayer-financed pork spent by both sides.
To return to McHenry County Blog, click here.
# posted by Cal Skinner : 11:30 AM
