Code Talkers
Cross-posted from ICPR's blog, The Race is On:
Part of the packet of materials candidates file when they run for office is the Code of Fair Campaign Practices. The Code is a voluntary, non-binding pledge created by the state legislature and administered by the State Board of Elections. It gives candidates an opportunity to forswear negative campaigning and other unsavory practices; it allows candidates to declare that they intend to take the high road on the campaign trail.
But not many candidates signed on to the Code when they filed their petitions. Of 421 petitions filed yesterday, only 148, or about a third, came with the Code. We hope this doesn’t mean a nasty campaign season is in our future.
Who didn’t sign the Code? It’s easier to say who did. Of the Democratic statewide filers, only Paul Mangieri turned one in. Of the Republican statewide hopefuls, only state Sen. Bill Brady and Jeremy Cole filed the Code. Jeremy Cole, you say? Yes, Jeremy Cole, of Canton, Illinois, who’s running for Lt.. Gov.
Campaigns are supposed to be a dialogue about where the state should go, with an emphasis on voter education and finding common ground. All too often, though, they can become painful to watch, bringing out the worst in candidates and turning voters away from the process. One sitting state rep, who filed petitions but not a Code, told the Tribune, "This is the friendliest you'll see the candidates be for a few months. It's like a prefight weigh-in." We hope he’s wrong, and that those filers who did not sign the Code will reconsider. Signing the Code is one sign that candidates want to change the tone of state politics. We hope more of them will do so.
9 comments:
Where can you find who filed and who didn't
Duh!
Where do you think?
Here is an interesting item from
"The Code"
" (3) I will not use or permit any appeal to negative prejudice based on race, sex, sexual orientation, religion or national origin."
I suppose if the Tribune does that work for you it's protected by first amendment. They should have to file financial "in-kind" benefit forms with the Board of Elections though.
Does this mean that Brady won't attack JBT for her sexual orientation, whatever it may be?
Bravo, Extreme Wisdom.
I generally agree with ICPR about alot of things. This is not one of those things.
The problem with campaigns isn't that they are too "negative". If you can't think of something negative to say about your opponent that is relevant to voters, you shouldn't be running.
The problem with campaigns is that too often, politicians are light on the truth, and the media -- who are the natural arbitrators of the truth -- is too ignorant, lazy, or corrupt to do anything about it.
The ICPR would provide a real public service if they would establish a website for Illinois politics similar to FactCheck.org that simply sets the record straight. I frankly, don't care how nasty the ads get -- this is an adversarial process, just like a trial, and I expect folks to go after each other. I just don't want them lying on the witness stand.
Thanks for all the great comments. Anon 2:34: the list is available from the State Board of Elections. For the past three election cycles, we've published it on our website and we expect to do so again this time, but if you want it before we post it, shoot me an e-mail and I'll send it to you. YDD, there are ways of opposing your opponent without degrading the election and the office you are seeking. Voter surveys and exit polls show that most people don't like attack ads and innuendo, but do respond to truthful if critical ads. It goes more to the tone and tenor of the campaign. Many news media run fact check/adwatch-type stories; we don't have the staff to do all that in addition to the regular campaign finance monitoring we do. But thanks for the idea!
Yellow Dog, I think it might be better to say that campaigns aren't positive enough. What is the difference you say? Well, you may have a point that "if you can't think of something negative to say about your opponent that is relevant to voters, you shouldn't be running." But you should also be expected to say something positive about yourself as well, right? Given a choice between the two extremes, I'd much rather see a candidate ignore his or her opponents negatives than turn theirs into an "anybody but - " campaign.
I also would agree that often "the problem with campaigns is that too often, politicians are light on the truth, and the media -- who are the natural arbitrators of the truth -- is too ignorant, lazy, or corrupt to do anything about it."
I just hope you'd join me in admitting that this is hardly a partisan issue, or exlusive to any particular media outlet.
I have looked at the SBE website and can't find who filed and who didn't. Can someone answer where the information is?
Anon 1:18:
If you e-mail me at david @ ilcampaign.org, I will be happy to forward the list to you. I may not get to it until tomorrow, but I will get you the list.
-David
Post a Comment