Barbara Flynn Currie.

2 June 2009

News from Springfield..................by State Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie (D-25)

This was the year for reform in Illinois state government, and in many areas the legislature did a lot better than most analysts reported.

The stickiest issue was the adoption of limits on campaign contributions. Reform advocacy groups, arguing that the measure was neither tough enough nor tight enough, were highly critical of the legislature’s work in this area. They certainly have a point. But even here the final legislation represents an improvement over the status quo.

Campaign limits are new territory for Illinois. The state gets high marks on its laws requiring disclosure of campaign contributions—reports must be made more frequently than in many other states and they are easily accessible. But there have never been contribution limits in Illinois.

Most reform groups identified the limits in federal law—$2,400 from an individual and $5,000 from a corporation, union or association per candidate per election cycle—as the model Illinois should emulate. But the maximum contribution set by House Bill 7, passed by both the House and Senate, is $5,000 for individuals and $10,000 for the others.

Across the states limits vary considerably; the federal limit itself changes with changes in the cost of living. I would have happily voted for the lower limit, but mine was not the majority view of the legislature. There is some evidence that lower limits favor incumbents and, for all candidates, the lower the limit the more campaign time is spent dialing for dollars.

Advocates would have liked the limitation to apply to each part of the election cycle—for individuals a $5,000 limit in the primary and another $5,000 in the general. Tying the limits to the election cycle makes contributions easier to follow. Instead the Illinois limits are tied to the calendar year, which means the maximum contribution applies each year to each candidate, whether running for a two-year or a four-year term.

Perhaps the biggest controversy has to do with limits on transfers from one political account to another. The advocacy groups would like to limit transfers, tracking the federal model, to $30,000 per election cycle. They zero in particularly on the ability of legislative leaders to fund candidate campaigns. They were, not surprisingly, dismissive of the $90,000 cap set by HB 7.

While this is certainly a high limit, it’s worth noting that many states place no restrictions on transfers from one political party committee to another. As well, House Bill 7 limits contributions to Political Action Committees (PACs), which may put the brakes on the ability of special interests to dominate election outcomes.

Other features of the bill include even more frequent reports of campaign contributions. Instead of filing twice a year, candidates and incumbents will be required to file quarterly and contributions above $500 will be subject to immediate reporting within the 60 rather than the 30 days before an election. As well, large contributions received during the final days of a legislative session will also be reported within two business days.

In no way does our final product satisfy everyone. It doesn’t fully satisfy me. But the bill does offer a starting point. It accepts the proposition, for the first time in Illinois, that campaign contribution limits are legitimate. House Bill 7 is not the final word on campaign finance reform. And the ball is back in our court: it’s up to us to track the new system to identify shortcomings—and then work together for improvements.

To that end, we’ll be holding a town hall meeting focusing on ethics reform in the coming weeks. Keep your eyes peeled and ears perked for an announcement of the time and place—and put on your thinking caps in the meantime.