Human Rights
Volume 25
Number 1
Winter 1998
Clean Elections in Illinois Next?
By John OtrompkeIn the wake of a recent scandal involving the criminal conviction of an executive of Management Services Inc., an Illinois corporation which received a public aid contract after contributing to the campaign of Gov. Jim Edgar, a number of new campaign finance reform proposals are being considered by a task force of the Illinois Senate. Such proposals have passed the Illinois legislature in years passed, such as the ones passed by former gubernatorial candidate and law professor Dawn Clark Netsch, but were always vetoed by the governor of the period.
The task force will consider the proposals over the next 2 months, including one proposal modeled on legislation adopted by the legislature in Maine and by Constitutional referendum in Vermont.
But some of those who are advocating for reform say that the possibility of success is questionable, given their belief that the task force isn't really willing to adopt reform, and the possibility that some of whatever proposal may ultimately be adopted might ultimately be found unconstitutional anyway.
The Illinois Clean Elections Bill, H 866, which has been introduced in the House, was advocated before the task force, which held its first hearing on November 4th. The law the proposal is modeled on, has been challenged in court by the Maine Civil Liberties Union.
The Maine Clean Elections law provides for a system of voluntary public financing for political candidates who raise a certain minimum number of $5 contributions to show their seriousness as a candidate. Although such a candidate need not accept the public financing, once he or she does, the candidate is forbidden from accepting any more private donations.
Several aspects of the plan are unconstitutional, according to Sally Sutton, the executive director of the Maine Civil Liberties Union. "There are a number of people who will never be certified" as clean elections candidates, said Sutton. "One of our plaintiffs, the Libertarian Party, is opposed to public financing, so they will never be certified. Sutton said that other plaintiffs in the suit include House and Senate Democrats.
One of the problems is the rule announced by the U.S. High Court over 20 years ago in Buckley v Valeo, 424 U.S. 1; 96 S. Ct. 612; 1976 U.S. LEXIS 16; 46 L. Ed. 2d 659 (1976). In that landmark case, the High Court held that limits on campaign contributions and private expenditures violate the First Amendment, because "money equals speech," according to the Court. On the other hand, the Court okayed certain limits on contributions over a certain level, reasoning that a donor has a First Amendment right to associate with the candidate of his or her choice by donating money, but that the association right is not coextensive with the right to give a contribution of any given monetary denomination.
The Maine Civil Liberties Union, however, recently argued that even the contribution limit in the Maine Clean Elections Bill is unconstitutional. "For governor, the maximum contribution is $500, even if the candidate did not accept public financing," said Sutton. "In Buckley, the limit they found acceptable was $1000, and that was 20 years ago." Essentially, the Maine CLU was arguing not that contribution limits themselves are a violation of the First Amendment, but that Maine's contribution limits are too low.
Judge Brach Hornby of the First U.S. District Court found that the suit was not yet ripe, because the limits are not to take effect for several years. The Maine CLU has decided not to appeal that decision.
Supporters of Clean Elections reform in Illinois say they are not concerned about Constitutional challenges to the proposed law.
"This has been very controversial, even within the ACLU," said John Cameron, state director for Citizen Action of Illinois, a grassroots group that goes door-to-door canvassing for campaign reform. "And we have a strong relationship with the ACLU, because they once took a case to the U.S. Supreme Court to guarantee our right to go door to door and canvas."
Cameron said he expects the Maine case to be decided before public financing ever arrives in Illinois. "Its not a big concern of ours right now," he said.
On the other hand, getting the Clean Elections Package, or any other reform, through the Illinois Senate may be another matter, according to Cameron. "This task force is going to be reluctant to adopt anything as comprehensive as Clean Elections reform. The task force was supposed to report to the Senate on November 1st, and they just held their first hearing on November 4th. They're talking about not reporting until March. Their hope is that something else will come up in the mean-time" to distract the public and the press from the issue, he said. Cameron also noted that the AFL-CIO recently adopted a resolution in favor of Clean Elections reform.
Cameron said that part of the problem is the chair of the task force, Sen. Ed Petka, a Republican based in Plainfield, Illinois.
But Sen. Petka said his hope is to report back to the Senate with his findings ahead of schedule. "We have a mandate to finish our work by January 31st, and we hope to finish even before then,' he said.
Petka noted that at first hearing there was some criticism of the High Court's approach in Buckley. "We have a problem with some Supreme Court decisions in this area," he said. "There was a cry to get that decision reversed. We don't want to enact legislation like Congress did, which made it very hard for people to run for office," by restricting the funds private candidates can raise and allowing wealthy candidates to spend as much of their own money as they want, Petka said. "You're gonna have a financial aristocracy govern us that way," Petka said.
John Otrompke is a freelance writer and a law student in Chicago.