Foxes Guarding the Hen House

Since the arrest of former Gov Blagojevich 2 months ago, editorial boards across Illinois have been ablaze with cries for rigorous ethics reform.

Blago’s arrest revealed, in the most obvious of ways, the depth of corruption that permeated IL politics. The public has awoken -for now - and in their outrage they have demanded action from elected officials.

Happily, this surge of support for reform has not fallen on deaf ears in the General Assembly. President Cullerton and Speaker Madigan teamed up yesterday to announce the creation of a joint legislative committee to consider ethics reform proposals. The new priority of ethics reform is clearly the product of the public malaise toward corruption. From the Chicago Tribune editorial board:

Cullerton, speaking to the Chicago Tribune editorial board, said it was "important to send the right signal because of our recent publicity. We've been so embarrassed by [Blagojevich's] actions."

The motivation is not entirely explicit, but clearly much of the recent legislative support for ethics reform is a the result of Legislator’s desire -or even a need- for good PR.

Such a situation is the ‘perfect storm’ of opportunity for good government interest groups, such as the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform (ICPR), to mobilize their reform efforts. (In the Interest of full disclosure, I must admit that I worked for the ICPR last summer as their Paul Simon Intern, so while I may be biased toward the policies advanced by such ‘goo-goo’, that bias does not alter the opinion I offer here)

My experiences at ICPR gave me a first-hand look at the difficulty of campaign finance reform. The current policy window presented to groups like ICPR allows for a large, meaningful step forward in the fight against IL corruption. Such progress would be a welcomed retreat from the status quo of a slow but constant grind towards incremental reform.

Given my policy bias, one would think that I would be optimistic that the Blago fiasco will cause significant, lasting reform. I doubt such will occur

Surely, the public outcry for reform will produce legislation that will hamper corruption, but It is not the short run that worries me. I must be a realist –or perhaps a cynic- and predict that thinks money will win out over reform at the end of the day.

The fundamental problem with campaign finance reform is that the public is largely apathetic toward ethics reform and is often ignorant regarding policy outcomes as well as the actions of their legislators. Given the importance of money in the U.S. political system, it is the voters, and not reform efforts, that ultimately have the most influence on holding our elected representatives accountable.

Based on the reporting of CBS, money will not be leaving IL politics anytime soon:

But the pair [Madigan and Cullerton] did not endorse more stringent rules on current practices, such as limits on campaign contributions, perhaps the top priority for government-reform groups. Illinois has no limit on the amount of money someone may donate to a politician.

It is clear the General Assembly will not place limits on campaign finance contributions. Rather its goals, as described by speaker Madigan , will be to “improve oversight and disclosure requirements to increase transparency and permit citizens, watchdog groups and the press to better monitor government operations,"

So while the legislation resulting from Blago’s downfall may fix some current forms and causes of corruption, such as a ‘revolving door’ relationship between industry and a regulatory agency, it will not absolve the public of their responsibility.

Ethics reform is a worthy effort, but it treats the symptoms and instead of the cause of the disease. The seeds of corruption are sown in the hearts of legislators -in other words- corruption does not exist due to a lack of regulation. Surly, there will be legislators who betray the public trust for personal gain. Ethics reform is used to counter the temptations presented by corruption, but temptations can adapt to new legislation much faster than new legislation can be implemented to deal with new forms of corruption.

My point is that voters get the level of corruption they deserve. If we let a foxes guard the hen house we should not be surprised to find the chickens gone. When unaccountable for their actions, people –including public officials- are more likely to discard morals and ethics in the name personal gain.

Reform is a useful tool, but its shelf-life is only as good as the longevity of its enacting coalition. In 6 months form now, after some reform has been passed and the public eye has wondered elsewhere, the overwhelming roar for good governance will be replaced by the familiar whimper of the dedicated minority. Corruption is not weeded out through laws, but rather through the sustained engagement and participation of the public. Next time corruption engulfs IL state politics, the public outrage should be directed in the mirror.