Kent Redfield, editor Table of Contents

Keeping Faith: the struggle for Democracy in America ...... 1 by Kent Redfield Illinois State Profile ...... 11 Democracy in Illinois: Problems and Prospects ...... 13 by Cynthia Canary Executive Summary ...... 13 Findings: Policy and Political Problems ...... 14 Policy: Advances, Recommendations and Status ...... 32 Michigan State Profile ...... 37 Democracy in Michigan: Problems and Prospects ...... 39 by Rich Robinson Introduction and Executive Summary ...... 39 Political Context ...... 40 Findings and Recommendations ...... 42 Minnesota State Profile ...... 63 Democracy in Minnesota: Problems and Prospects ...... 65 by C. Scott Cooper Introduction and Executive Summary ...... 65 Findings and Recommendations ...... 67 Ohio State Profile ...... 79 Democracy in Ohio: Problems and Prospects ...... 81 by Herbert Asher, Ann Henkener, Peg Rosenfield, Daniel Tokaji, and Catherine Turcer Executive Summary ...... 81 Findings: Policy and Political Problems and Recommendations ...... 83 Wisconsin State Profile ...... 111 Democracy in Wisconsin: Problems and Prospects ...... 113 by Mike McCabe Executive Summary ...... 113 Findings: Policy and Political Problems ...... 115 Accomplished and Recommended Reforms ...... 129 Appendix A: The Midwest Democracy Network ...... 135 Shared Democratic Values ...... 137 Appendix B: Author Profiles and Acknowledgements ...... 139 1 Keeping Faith: the struggle for Democracy in America

The idea of exporting American democracy to wide spread to ignore. The growing sense of crisis is other countries and helping them build democratic not limited to civic activists. Not long ago, the syn- institutions always carries a sense of irony for those dicated columnist Neal Peirce captured the mood who have toiled long and hard on political reform of many citizens when he observed that “American at the local, state and national level in the United democracy, once the wonder of the world, is work- States. The recipe for democratization in its most ing about as well as the levees around New simplistic form– take one constitution, a heavy dose Orleans.” of elections and a pinch of civil liberties and just add water — strikes those who through advocacy and grassroots activity have struggled to make A Mounting Crisis of democracy work here at home as naïve, misguided Confidence and sometimes even dangerous. These efforts also imply at some level that we have gotten everything Such alarms have traditionally been sounded right in the United States—that the current state by the good government and civic watchdog types of democracy in America, while not without minor who are routinely dismissed by their detractors as glitches, is the full and final realization of the values “goo goos,” misinformed and unsophisticated, and hopes of those who launched the American albeit well-intentioned civic busy bodies. But that experiment in representative democracy more than is no longer the case. Today, the ranks of those who two centuries ago. are concerned about the shortcomings of American Those of us who have come together under democracy include a growing number of prominent the auspices of the Midwest Democracy Network citizens—political practitioners, journalists, schol- to assess the state of democracy in five key states – ars, and private sector leaders whose partisan and Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Ohio, and Illi- ideological loyalties are as diverse as the American nois – know better. Democracy is not “set it and people’s. Their urgent calls for fundamental reform forget it.” An ongoing commitment is required to should not be quickly dismissed. guarantee a flourishing democracy both in our In his 1992 book, Who Will Tell the People, respective states and nationally. To thrive, our dem- journalist and author William Greider warned that ocratic institutions need constant reinforcement, “American democracy is in much deeper trouble careful stewardship, thoughtful debate and citizen than most people wish to acknowledge. Behind the involvement. reassuring façade, the regular election contests and It is right and proper to look outward, to strive so forth, the substantive meaning of self-govern- to aid those seeking to establish self-government ment has been hollowed out.” Representative gov- wherever they may be. But we should not avert our ernment, according to Greider, has become “a eyes from the growing crisis facing democratic insti- grotesque distortion of its original purpose,” in tutions and processes on the home front. Looking which “the power to decide things has … gravitated at democracy through the lens of the five state from the many to the few, just as ordinary citizens reports that follow, there are signs of trouble - of suspect.” Greider goes on to note that in the face of abuse, decay and neglect – that are too obvious and “promises made and never kept” and “laws enacted

by Kent Redfield 2 and never enforced” ordinary citizens often feel health and legitimacy of our shared political powerless to confront such deceptions, because they order.” are “too marginalized to make much difference.” In late 2000, delegations of judicial, legisla- Since the early 1990s, there have been other tive and civic leaders, led by the chief justices from such warnings. For example, the editors of Business the seventeen most populous states with judicial Week observed in June 2004 that “something is elections, gathered in Chicago for a National Sum- amiss in the land of Madison and Jefferson. In some mit on Improving Judicial Selection. After two days very basic ways, the delicate mechanism of our of deliberations, the participants issued their own democracy has come unsprung.” The editors argue Call to Action. “As currently conducted in many that “unless we want to continue on the path we’re states,” their statement declared, “judicial election treading—declining participation, permanent campaigns pose a substantial threat to judicial inde- incumbency, less competition for ideas, increased pendence and impartiality, and undermine public balkanization, and more big-money politics— trust in the judicial system.” The then recently reform isn’t an option. It is perhaps the most urgent completed Supreme Court election campaigns in priority facing the republic as it lurches into the Ohio and Michigan had just set new records for harsh light of a new century burdened by a politi- spending and ugliness, with much of the latter cal system that seems less democratic by the day.” delivered in the form of unregulated broadcast issue The editors’ bottom-line conclusion: “It is time to advertisements and independent expenditures by take an unblinking look at our political land- special interests; these practices, most summit par- scape—and assess the growing symptoms of dys- ticipants agreed, represented “a particularly grave function.” The magazine then offered up an and immediate threat.” The Call noted that judges ambitious reform agenda encompassing election were becoming, at least in the eyes of many voters, laws and administration, campaign finance, redis- increasingly indistinguishable from ordinary politi- tricting, and media policy. Three months later, cians. “Judicial campaigns are becoming more like Business Week was at it again, this time with warn- campaigns for other offices, not less,” and as a result ings about the real and growing threats to judicial judicial candidates were under growing pressure to independence. raise large sums of money, hire campaign consult- In late 2005, a panel of 19 distinguished ants, and either fend off or ally themselves with scholars organized by the American Political Sci- organized groups seeking to affect the final results. ence Association issued a sober warning after com- Although the summit issued 20 sensible recom- pleting a three-year examination of citizen mendations for improving state judicial elections participation in the United States: “American and safeguarding the courts’ independence, most democracy is at risk.” The panel opined, for exam- experts agree that the conduct of such elections has ple, that congressional elections are dull, because gone from worrisome, to bad, to worse in the few so few are competitive. Why? Because “our systems years since 2000. of redrawing district boundaries and financing The Committee for Economic Develop- campaigns…all work to the advantage of incum- ment—a non-partisan organization of more than bents—an advantage that has grown in recent 200 of the nation’s top business leaders and uni- years.” Moreover, gerrymandering tends to versity presidents—issued reports in 1999 and empower the parties’ ideological extremes, drive 2005 advocating fundamental changes in federal out moderates, and intensify party conflict. And campaign finance laws, including a ban on soft finally, if citizens don’t have choices, what incentive money contributions, tighter regulation of 527 do they have “to pay attention, become informed, committees, reform of the Federal Election Com- take part in the campaign, and vote in the elec- mission, and improving the presidential campaign tion.” While the authors of Democracy at Risk note finance system. According to Ed Kangas, former that Americans can and should take pride in the chairman of the Global Board of Directors of historical accomplishments of their constitutional Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu and co-chair of CED’s democracy, they also note that it is not what it subcommittee on campaign finance reform, “when should be and conclude that the risk is to “the government is too intertwined with money, Amer- 3 icans will view it, at the least, as suspect and, at information—were under assault in the region and worst, corrupt. Businesses shouldn’t have to pay a urgently in need of reinforcement and protection, toll to make their case or be heard in Washington.” especially against those forces for whom politics has Kangas went on to note at a press conference in simply become an instrument for promoting nar- early 2001 that “there are many times when CEOs row interests at the expense of the common good. feel like the pressure to contribute soft-money is Moreover, the affiliates saw the Network as a vehi- nothing less than a shakedown.” Even after the pas- cle for launching a genuine pro-democracy move- sage of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act in ment in the region by developing and promoting 2002, a CED-funded poll by Zogby International more comprehensive and integrated state reform revealed that nearly seven in 10 business leaders still agendas than in the past; by facilitating communi- felt pressured to make large political contributions. cations—information sharing, collective learning, Despite a concerted effort by some in Congress to and strategic planning—among the partners; by ridicule and muffle the voices of these corporate increasing collaboration on major region-wide pol- leaders, CED—much to its credit—did not blink icy research and development projects; by amplify- or retreat. ing the voice of reform advocates; and by enhancing Although more resilient than most other the partner-organization’s institutional capacities forms of government, the capacity of democracies and profiles. Today, nearly 30 organizations are to absorb and endure abuse is not unlimited. affiliated with the Midwest Democracy Network, Indeed, the aforementioned challenges are a fresh including a number of the nation’s leading aca- reminder of John Adams’ warning more than two demic and legal experts who are providing guidance centuries ago that “Democracy never lasts long. It in policy areas ranging from campaign finance and soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There redistricting reform to election laws and judicial never was a democracy that did not commit sui- independence. cide.” So like a well-tended garden, democracies The Midwest is the ideal setting for conduct- require regular doses of love and care. Neglect ing this ambitious experiment. Five factors account invariably opens the door to weeds, insects, and dis- for this. Factor 1: The five-state region is politically eases, all of which—which if left unchecked—can significant. It has been and will be a key battle- lead to lasting and irreversible damage. Democra- ground in the contest for the presidency and con- cies, as Mr. Adams foresaw, are no less vulnerable. trol of Congress. It is home to more than 40 million people and three of the nation’s 10 most populous states. In addition to some of the country’s largest The View from America’s cities, the region is a broad mix of mid-sized, Heartland sprawling suburbs and rural areas. So what happens in this region matters. It is against this backdrop that a handful of Factor 2: The region’s political systems are not state-based civic and public interest groups in the functioning anywhere near full effectiveness and Great Lakes region—all of which at the time were efficiency; in varying degrees, each is being grantees of the Joyce Foundation—came together weighted down by one or another combination of and agreed in late 2005 to establish the Midwest the following debilitating and well-documented Democracy Network, an informal and voluntary conditions: alliance of reform advocates dedicated to strength- • The explosive, and in some jurisdictions ening democratic institutions in Illinois, Michigan, largely unregulated, flood of special interest Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin. Underlying the money into the region’s politics, including dis- alliance’s creation was the affiliates’ shared convic- closed and undisclosed campaign contribu- tion that basic democratic values and principles— tions, lobbying expenditures, and gifts to especially those that speak to honesty, fairness, government officials. transparency, accountability, citizen participation, • The wholesale and often penalty-free viola- competition, respect for constitutional rights and tions of our states’ often weak and ineffectively the rule of law, and the public’s need for reliable enforced campaign finance, government 4 ethics, economic disclosure, and lobbying spectrum feel increasingly let down and left out. In laws. addition to the conditions described above, much • Deliberately gerrymandered election districts of the public’s discontent can be traced to the that effectively reduce electoral competition, extraordinary number of high-profile political scan- deprive voters of meaningful choices, heighten dals that have recently roiled America’s heartland. partisanship and undermine the representa- Since 2000, this epidemic has claimed literally tiveness of legislative bodies. scores of state and local elected officials, public • Serious breakdowns in the fair and efficient employees, lobbyists, contractors and other assorted administration of state and local elections. insiders and bad actors whose criminal offenses This is particularly true in low-income and have ranged from bribery, extortion, perjury, fraud, minority communities, which in some places and misuse of public funds to unlawful manipula- have experienced a spike in organized and par- tions of contract and hiring procedures. tisan efforts to suppress voting and are now Despite their many grievances, most citizens disproportionately bearing the brunt of new are not ready to throw in the towel and disown the legislative and administrative measures which, political system, and that’s good news. Midwest- in the name of fighting election fraud, will erners reject the idea that they are powerless to make voting needlessly more difficult. change government. According to the Belden Rus- • Growing threats to the independence and sonello & Stewart poll, 65 percent of the respon- impartiality of state courts and judges— dents disagreed with the statement that “corruption including escalating election costs, over-the- in government will always be a problem so trying to top rhetoric by judicial candidates, brazen fix it will not make much difference.” And a major- efforts by moneyed interest groups to influ- ity rejected the statement that money “will always ence judicial election outcomes, and success- influence government decisions so it is not worth ful legal assaults on our states’ once sensible trying to reduce the amount of money in politics.” and generally workable standards of judicial Factor 4: The Midwest is blessed with a grow- conduct and speech. ing and increasingly robust and sophisticated • Uneven compliance with and enforcement of reform community. It includes older, well-estab- laws designed to ensure transparency in gov- lished groups, such as the League of Women Voters, ernment, including state “freedom of infor- Common Cause and Ohio Citizen Action, and mation” and “open meetings” laws. more recent entries, such as the Illinois Campaign • The well-documented failure of the region’s for Political Reform, the Wisconsin Democracy news media, especially local television news, Campaign, the Michigan Campaign Finance Net- to nurture informed democratic participation work, and TakeAction Minnesota. Although these through ongoing, high-quality coverage of organizations are under-resourced, under-staffed, government, public affairs, elections, candi- and overworked, they bring a lot of assets to the dates, and issues. table, both individually and collectively. In addi- Factor 3: Midwesterners are ready, if not tion to their idealism and policy ideas, they are sea- impatient, for reform. Poll after poll, including a soned organizers and advocates, enjoy good 2006 survey of 2,000 Midwest voters conducted by relations with the news media, and have gained the Belden Russonello & Stewart, have consistently respect of many policymakers who seek their views found that voters are deeply concerned about the and guidance on a variety of issues. These groups influence of money in state politics, do not trust are not afraid to flex their muscles; they participate state government to do what is right most of the regularly in official proceedings, critique the reform time, and strongly support a number of the key views of candidates and officeholders, and, when reforms long championed by the region’s civic circumstances warrant, engage in litigation. The groups. The data confirm that anger, frustration state level reforms achieved in recent years across and disillusionment with government and politics the region, and there have been a number of impor- are on the rise across the region and that large num- tant breakthroughs, can be attributed in large part bers of voters across the partisan and ideological to the labors of these organizations. All of this 5 constitutes a solid foundation on which to build a as policy researchers and advocates—set out on region-wide, pro-democracy movement. what some people predicted would be an impossi- Factor 5: News media understanding of the ble, if not quixotic journey, namely, to reduce to importance of democracy issues within the region writing an animating vision of democracy sup- for political reform continues to grow. Most major ported by broad and state-specific political reform Midwest newspapers now regularly and loudly agendas. This report is the culmination of that long, encourage state lawmakers to do the right thing on sometimes rocky journey. Democratic Renewal: A campaign finance, government ethics, and redis- Call to Action from America’s Heartland describes tricting—and then just as regularly and loudly and documents in considerable detail the most seri- scold them for sitting on their hands or, worst, for ous threats facing each state’s political system; when doing the wrong thing. Thanks to an increasingly considered in their totality, the “findings” are sober- strong outcry from the media, reform advocates are ing and cause for alarm. The authors then offer up finding it easier to convince lawmakers to take their blueprints in the form of specific “recommenda- ideas seriously. tions” for addressing the most pressing problems they have identified and show how seemingly unre- lated issues often overlap and are connected. Their Charting a New Course for reform agendas have been heavily informed by the Democratic Renewal experiences and best practices of states both within and outside the region. Finally, as evidence that At a mid-2006 gathering of Midwest civic progress is possible, even in the region’s most groups in Evanston, Illinois, Colby College politi- reform-resistant political environments, the reports cal scientist Anthony Corrado suggested in pre- highlight the significant policy victories Midwest pared remarks that “it may be an appropriate time states have experienced in recent years, nearly none to start a conversation about how we are to assess of which was easily won. what we have accomplished and how we should Because each chapter reflects a state’s distinc- proceed. We have reached a point where it may be tive personality and its own political traditions and constructive to take a step back and take a more circumstances, no two chapters are the same in comprehensive or holistic view of the quality of terms of content, organization or style—all of democracy in the states—and engage in a collabo- which adds to their authenticity. A cookie-cutter rative effort to assess the problems and prospects.” approach would have obviously been inappropri- One method of undertaking this objective would ate. And yet each report, in its own way, seeks to be to start to think on both a statewide and regional deal with many of the same questions: How do we basis about the status of democratic governance— reduce the influence of money in politics? How do to think about what might be called a “democracy we preserve the independence and impartiality of audit.” At the Joyce Foundation’s request, the idea the judiciary? How do we ensure government open- of creating a new democratic systems analysis tool ness and transparency? How do we curb partisan- had been explored earlier in the year by Corrado ship in the drawing of legislative and congressional and the Brennan Center’s Deborah Goldberg. districts while protecting minority representation Due to high costs and the complexities sur- and increasing electoral competition? How do we rounding the development of standards and met- guarantee the reliability and integrity of elections? rics, the democracy audit idea never took flight. How do we promote ethics in government? And However, Corrado’s idea of “stepping back and tak- how can we encourage the news media to do a bet- ing a more comprehensive or holistic view of the ter job of informing citizens about government and quality of democracy in the states” spurred the for- politics? Each state report offers up a set of concrete mation of the Midwest Democracy Network and proposals and supporting arguments for these and was the impetus for this report. other pressing issues. In early 2006, several of the Network affiliates Underlying the authors’ insistence on devel- in Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wis- oping “packages of reforms” is a set of propositions consin—drawing on their many years of experience that will strike most people as self-evident. First and 6 most importantly, rules really matter in a democ- groups and individuals who contributed to this racy. They help define how political power is allo- report also acknowledge that neither they nor their cated, how it should be exercised, and for what state allies are in full agreement on all points. How- purposes by the three branches of government, by ever, there are few serious disagreements among multiple levels of government, and by a myriad of them about the outcomes they are seeking. competing interests. Second, when the rules of One thing that is absent from these reports is democracy are bent out of shape, violated or oth- any sense that the efforts of these civic and advo- erwise disregarded, as often occurs, public trust and cacy organizations are being matched in any of the participation in the political system suffers, and the five states by those institutions and individuals who causes citizens care most about—whether good arguably have a clearer responsibility, more influ- schools, job security, a clean environment or safe ence, and often the necessary legal authority to lead neighborhoods—become more difficult to achieve. the way on reform. By and large, elected officials, Third, there are no silver bullet solutions to the the policymaking community at-large, the legal political system’s numerous shortcomings, and to establishment, the academy, and elements of the suggest otherwise only deludes and disserves the news media have been, and unfortunately remain, public and makes it easier for policymakers to avoid missing in action. My direct experience over the responsibility for the system’s many deficiencies. past 15 years of working with political reform Effectively regulating campaign finance practices, groups in Illinois on campaign finance and ethics to cite one example, will not end partisan gerry- issues clearly confirms the lack of commitment and mandering, guarantee fair and reliable elections, or action by the most powerful and influential ele- slow down the revolving door between lawmaking ments of society. Until these stakeholders become and lobbying. more invested in reform, most of the long overdue An “ecosystem” approach to political reform changes our political systems require will not come also recognizes that reform advocates do not control easily or quickly. So I hope Democratic Renewal will the policymaking process. And because they can- open up new opportunities for reform advocates, not dictate a legislature’s agenda, priorities or lawmakers, interest group representatives, and timetable, reform advocates have to be nimble and opinion leaders across the region to engage each agile in order to capitalize fully on opportunities other more openly and honestly with an eye toward for improving the political system when those forging agreements on responsible and workable opportunities arise. ways of shoring up and strengthening our state As a political scientist who has studied, ana- democracies. lyzed, and written about government and politics for more than 30 years, I regard these state reports—whether one agrees entirely with the Why Democracy Matters authors’ diagnoses and prescriptions or not—as quite remarkable. I am not aware of any compara- While the authors of Democratic Renewal do bly ambitious effort by a group of civically engaged not discuss or explore the philosophical underpin- citizens at the state or regional level to assess the nings of democracy, their concerns and proposals overall health of our “democratic gardens,” and for are clearly rooted in several fundamental ideas that that reason these documents are ground-breaking. have endured the test of time. Most importantly, And to their credit, the authors who approached the essence of American democracy is self-govern- this immense task with a mixture of enthusiasm, ment. Explicit in the concept of self-government is understandable trepidation and humility regard the active, informed participation of citizens in gov- Democratic Renewal as very much a work in ernment. And explicit in the concept of citizen par- progress. It is not, in their view, the final word on ticipation is the existence of institutions and these matters, but rather a beginning, a point of processes that ensure and facilitate that participa- departure which, as political circumstances change tion. While well known, it is worth noting the soci- and the authors’ knowledge expands, will be peri- etal benefits of democratic institutions and the odically revisited and revised. And, of course, the dangers that arise when those institutions fail. The 7 benefits to society from democratic institutions are The Need for Comprehensive threefold. The first benefit is quality governance. Open, inclusive, and fair political processes which Reform encourage participation maximize the opportuni- ties for informed, reasoned policy decisions that Critics of political reform efforts often assert serve the public interest. The second benefit is that while problems may exist, the cure does not lie accountability. Open, inclusive and fair political in enacting more laws or placing new restrictions processes encourage public officials to be respon- on politics. Instead, they insist that all would be sive and effective. They also provide the opportu- fine if citizens would just exercise their right to par- nity for citizens to assess the performance of their ticipate, if we would just elect good people, if the government and their elected officials. The third legal system would just enforce existing laws, and if benefit is trust. If citizens believe the political we could just provide a little more sunshine on the process is open, inclusive and fair, then they will actions of government. We are mindful of the accept the outcome of elections and policy deci- shortcomings of basic civic education in our sions as legitimate, have confidence in their public schools. Improving it is a necessary, but not suffi- officials, and develop a sense of ownership of their cient condition for achieving the full potential of government. When democratic institutions fail, all our citizens and our democratic institutions. While of these benefits to society are at risk. Biased or there is no question that a more engaged citizenry uninformed policy decisions produce ineffective or and better public officials would strengthen Amer- inefficient governmental actions. Government offi- ican democracy, these assertions beg the questions cials with no fear of being held accountable for their of why citizens do not participate, why more good actions are less likely to act ethically or to be respon- people do not run for office, and why sometimes sive to the needs of the public. If citizens come to seemingly good people go bad once they are in believe that elections are fixed or bought and sold, office. Convicting corrupt public officials and that courts are biased, that the political system throwing them in jail does not solve the problems serves only the well off and the well connected, and of democracy in the long run if citizens believe that that all politicians are corrupt, then citizens will the underlying conditions that attract corrupt peo- stop participating in the political process and the ple to public office or corrupt good people will legitimacy of government for its citizens will be lost. never change. The same is true of politicians who So citizen engagement is essential to a healthy dem- believe that the major sin committed by their dis- ocratic process. graced colleagues was getting caught. Just as important as the benefits to society of On one level, the argument that sunshine citizen participation in democratic institutions are trumps reform is compelling. The logic is that if we the direct benefits citizens derive from their par- have complete transparency in campaign finance or ticipation. Political participation develops and conflicts of interest or decision making, then all empowers citizens. The lives of citizens are political behavior will be self-correcting. No one enriched and expanded by being engaged in civic will act in a way that will provide ammunition for society. Citizens who do not become civically an election opponent or will create a situation that engaged represent a loss of potential for both the the public official would not want his or her individual and the society. The consequences of mother to read about in the newspaper. In a per- citizens becoming disengaged because of the fail- fect world of attentive and engaged citizens, a vig- ures of democratic institutions are even more seri- ilant news media, and upright public officials, ous. Society suffers and individuals suffer when sunshine might be sufficient to assure the proper citizens lose faith in basic democratic institutions. functioning of the political process. But ours is not A loss of faith in institutions often becomes a self- a perfect world. And given human nature, even fulfilling prophecy as citizens withdraw from par- complete sunshine may not be sufficient. An ticipating in the only processes available to achieve elected official can publicly announce a conflict of change, thereby insuring that change does not interest before casting a vote and assure everyone occur. that he or she will act in the best interest of the 8 public, but that will not assure that citizens will “everybody does it.” Waiting for politicians and believe them. Voting for a policy that personally political actors with this mind-set to “do the right benefits an elected official may only present the thing” on their own is a waste of time. appearance of corruption. But the appearance of But shared democratic values do not mean corruption can and often is as corrosive to the legit- that people of goodwill will always agree on how to imacy of the political process as actual corruption. realize those values. Appeals to freedom of speech to As to the limits of deregulation and sunshine resist restrictions on “issue ads” or calls for requir- as a campaign finance reform strategy, there is no ing official government IDs at the voting booth in need to speculate about what would happen if we the name of ballot integrity may be interpreted by created a campaign finance system that combines some critics as a desperate attempt to preserve a cor- complete deregulation of contributions and expen- rupt status quo. But they can also be sincere expres- ditures with extensive reporting and electronic dis- sions by individuals who hold democratic values closure. That place exists, and it is called Illinois. dear and are struggling to strike what they see as Illinois has conducted a thirty-year experiment with the proper balance between legitimate but compet- no restrictions on who can contribute, how much ing values. they can contribute, or the purposes for which con- The Midwest Democracy Network’s statement tributions can be used. The development of the best of shared democratic values begins with an assertion system of electronic disclosure in the country over that a healthy democracy instills in its citizens a the past eight years has not altered Illinois’ well- sense that government belongs to them and that deserved reputation as the Wild West of campaign they have a central role in the democratic process. finance. No one who reads the report on the state The Network believes this is possible only when of democracy in Illinois that follows would seri- democratic institutions nurture certain bedrock val- ously consider Illinois’ campaign finance law to be ues, among them trust, fairness, choice, freedom and a model that promotes democratic values and pro- knowledge. In addition, the Network contends that tects democratic institutions. Open and transpar- the actualization of these values comes from an ent government is a key democratic value, but like open, accessible, and trustworthy democratic process other democratic values, it is a necessary, but not that rests on the political equality embodied in free sufficient condition for insuring the health of dem- and open elections and the principle of one person, ocratic institutions. one vote. Of equal importance is the building of trust through clean, transparent and accountable government. The principle of choice resides in the No Easy Fights—No Easy sovereignty of people (rather than money) and in Victories competition in elections. Freedom requires the right to speak, the ability to be heard, and the right and At one level, the battle for democratic reform means to participate in the political process. Finally, is a culture war. There are those who believe that insuring every citizen’s right to know and maintain- there is no public interest, only private interests. ing a free and competitive press provides the oppor- These people consider themselves realists – practi- tunity for knowledge to every citizen. tioners in the real world - and regard politics as a However, the Network’s diagnosis of the business reserved for professionals whose only obli- threats facing democracy and its embrace of the gations are to win at any cost and to serve those aforementioned values does not inevitably lead to who support them. The values of these “realists” are one, unanimously agreed upon set of political completely irreconcilable with basic democratic val- reform proposals. And the authors of Democratic ues. There is no basis for dialogue between those Renewal are keenly aware of this. They understand seeking to reform democratic institutions based on that thoughtful and equally concerned citizens can shared democratic values and those who have and often do disagree about how best to honor bought into a corrupt political culture and confi- democratic values. And they also recognize that the dently assert that “politics is a dirty business” where competing goals of reform, worthy as they all may “nothing gets done without a little grease” and be, can frequently lead to conflict and necessitate 9 tough choices. So while many reform advocates ernment ethics laws and regulations for personal yearn for less expensive and more competitive elec- gain. Similarly, when it comes to legislative redis- tions, it is quite possible under certain circum- tricting, there is wide-spread agreement that dis- stances for less expensive campaigns to actually tricts should be drawn to promote competition and reduce competition and for more competitive elec- avoid unfair partisan advantage. However, agreeing tions to actually raise campaign costs. Very low con- on the mechanisms for achieving competition and tribution limits without other measures for partisan fairness and getting them enacted into state mitigating the advantages of incumbency, for exam- constitutions has proven elusive. ple, can make it impossible for a challenger of lim- Ultimately, enacting comprehensive reform in ited means to beat a long-time officeholder. On the our most basic democratic institutions requires other hand, generous public financing for primary making trade-offs between democratic values. The elections without some type of qualifying mecha- dilemmas of how to strike the proper balance nism is likely to lead to much higher campaign between concepts like individual liberty and col- costs without appreciably increasing competition. lective security or free speech and an orderly society Designing and fine-tuning democratic institutions are rooted in the nature of these values. They pres- is not without its challenges, involving as it almost ent us with what Abraham Kaplan calls existential always does difficult tradeoffs. dilemmas. This kind of choice offers us no easy or The question of how to ensure judicial inde- prefect solution. These choices are what make pendence can present similar dilemmas. The prob- democracy a work in progress. We constantly strug- lems with electing judges may seem obvious to a gle with these trade-offs, but the absence of easy, political reformer looking at the nasty, divisive, $9 permanent solutions to the problems of American million state Supreme Court race in Illinois in 2004 democracy is no excuse for surrendering to an unac- which was funded largely by competing private ceptable status quo. interests with huge financial stakes in the outcome. But African-American voters in Chicago may be reluctant to give up electing local judges if the alter- The Stakes Are Too High to Stay native is appointment by a local political system Home they consider corrupt and unresponsive to the needs of their communities. The ultimate goal of During the 1964 presidential election cam- judicial independence is to ensure the legitimacy of paign, President Lyndon Johnson sought to instill the judicial system and its decisions in the eyes of a sense of urgency and empowerment in the minds citizens. Appointing rather than electing judges of voters by using the same tag line at the end of may ultimately be the best way of maintaining the his TV commercials. After recounting the dangers independence of the courts, but no political process of a Goldwater presidency (and occasionally tout- operates in a vacuum. ing Johnson’s own accomplishments and goals), The threats to democracy resulting from each commercial ended with a simple message: breakdowns in the other areas – including redis- “Vote on November 3. The stakes are too high to tricting, election administration, governmental stay home.” Neither the substance of the 1964 ethics, and lobbying regulation - are real and widely campaign nor the historical consequences of its out- acknowledged. But again opinions among thought- come detracts from the power of that message: cit- ful and informed people about how best to tackle izens have the power and the obligation to make these problems vary considerably. For example, in American democracy work. the area of governmental ethics, no one disagrees The stakes, as Democratic Renewal amply that laws against public officials and other political demonstrates, are too high to stay home. The time actors committing felonies should be as strong as has come to rebuild our democracies, reinforce possible and enforced as vigorously as possible. But their crumbling foundations, and remove the bar- the real challenge does not lie there, but in con- nacles that are seriously weighting them down. And vincing public officials and other political actors the Midwest is a good place to begin. These five that they should not exploit the “gray areas” in gov- state reports provide a useful backdrop and a com- 10 pelling rationale for our call to action. The picture based grassroots support. Inaction and continued emerging from these narratives is neither pretty nor neglect are not options. inspiring, especially when all the findings are At the conclusion of the Constitutional Con- weighed. We have a lot of work to do and not a lot vention in Philadelphia in 1787, Benjamin of time to waste. Franklin was asked what kind of government had Democratic renewal will not happen in this been created. His response was “A republic, if you region or anywhere else in the country without a can keep it.” That admonition has not lost any of lot of hard work, without strong leadership, and its power over the past 200 years. Our American without contributions from all quarters of society. democracy was founded on the consent of the gov- Recognition of the depth of the problems of dem- erned, but its survival and good health will require ocratic institutions and acknowledgement of their more than passive consent. Only an informed and stake in the successful resolution of those problems engaged citizenry can assure the system’s future must go beyond reform groups and active citizens. wellbeing. We live in the real world, and we know Elected officials and political leaders must sign on that the task before us is difficult and time may be to a comprehensive agenda for democratic reform. running out. Yet for all of the challenges facing this It will also take strong buy-in from leaders of busi- region’s democratic institutions, we remain hope- ness, labor, professional groups, social service ful, confident, and committed to making them organizations, religious institutions, education work as they were intended to work. In the end, institutions, not-for-profits, and issue-oriented this much is clear: we have a democracy, if we can interest groups. And ultimately it will take broad- keep it. J 11

Population: 12,713,634 State Ranking: 5th of 50

67.8 % White 14.9 % Black 12.3 % Hispanic Origin 3.4 % Asian 0.1 % Native Am. 1.2 % Two + races 0.1 % Other

Urban Population: 87.8% Rural Population: 12.2% Most populous cities: 1. Chicago; 2. Aurora; 3. Rockford; 4. Naperville; 5. Joliet

Governor: Rod Blagojevich (D)

State Legislature (2007-2008) House: 66 Democrats / 52 Republicans Senate: 37 Democrats / 22 Republicans

Congressional Delegation House: 10 Democrats / 9 Republicans Senate: Two Democrats

Registered Voters: 7,263,969 (2004)

Voting Age Population: 9,475,484 (2004)

General Election Turnout (% of VAP) 1998: 39% 2000: 54% 2002: 39% 2004: 56% 13 Democracy in Illinois: Problems and Prospects Executive Summary

Illinois is the Land of Lincoln and the home Illinoisans are acutely aware of what is occur- of ethical stalwarts, among them the late U.S. Sen- ring in their politics. An exit poll following the ators Paul H. Douglas and Paul Simon. But sharing 2006 general election revealed that 85 percent of equal billing with its ethical political legacy is the respondents were concerned or extremely con- “bad” Illinois symbolized by the Chicago political cerned about corruption in Illinois politics. A sec- machine of the late Mayor Richard J. Daley and the ond poll conducted by Belden, Russonello & more than $800,000 in cash found in shoeboxes in Stewart shortly before the election showed that Illi- the hotel room of Secretary of State Paul Powell noisans were not only concerned with the corrup- shortly after his death. Illinois has a legendary “any- tion but ranked it as a high concern alongside thing goes” political culture. The state’s history of healthcare, education, and taxes. The same survey political corruption has lowered the public’s expec- also found that not only do Illinoisans think hon- tations of elected officials’ ethical standards and has est and accountable government is attainable, but played a significant role in policymaking and cam- they also support many of the political reforms nec- paigning within the state. This is not just historical essary to achieve it. So even in Illinois there are rea- context; it is the reality of contemporary Illinois sons to hope that Illinois’ trademark political politics. Political scandals continue to be common- corruption will someday become a thing of the place, from the 2006 conviction of former Illinois past. Governor George Ryan on 22 counts of racketeer- This report seeks to analyze the numerous ing, tax and mail fraud to the ongoing federal inves- problems and issues facing Illinois’s political system tigations into the hiring practices of Governor Rod and offers up a range of recommendations for Blagojevich’s administration improving it. At the same time, it does not attempt There is no doubt that democracy in Illinois is to resolve all the serious and perplexing challenges being threatened by big money election campaigns plaguing Illinois state government. Its primary find- and its notorious pay-to-play political culture. Illi- ings include the following: nois continues to be plagued by corrupt policy- • Illinois campaign finance laws are extremely makers and low ethical standards, and neither weak and ineffective. The lack of restrictions Republicans nor Democrats can claim to be above on contributions to candidates has signifi- the taint. Illinois is drowning in political corrup- cantly contributed to the growing influence of tion and a crisis in public confidence. And none of large donors as well as the increasing costs of it is cost-free. Citizens have become disaffected and campaigns. Even with a strong system of elec- increasingly they are questioning both their ability tronic filing and disclosure in place, enforce- to impact public policy and the legitimacy of the ment of the campaign finance law is weak, processes that produce those policies – elections, and the fines incurred by political committees legislative and administrative decisions, and even are often forgiven or significantly reduced by the integrity and impartiality of the courts. the State Board of Elections.

by Cynthia Canary 14 • Illinois’s deserved reputation for political cor- their communities, Illinois’s commercial tele- ruption and pay-to-play politics is rooted in a vision stations are not honoring the public long tradition of weak laws and ineffective interest obligations they accept in exchange enforcement or total neglect in a host of crit- for their free use of the public airwaves. ical areas: campaign finance, ethics, govern- ment employment and patronage, and In response to these problems, we recommend governmental contracts. that Illinois take a number of long overdue steps to • The combined impact of partisan gerryman- strengthen its democracy, including the following: dering in redistricting and unrestricted cam- • Expand the State Board of Elections’ enforce- paign contributions has been a significant ment and investigative powers. reduction in the number of competitive leg- • Adopt limits on campaign contributions. islative elections. • Ban pay-to-play contractual practices. • The pattern of hugely expensive, highly parti- • Require lawmakers and other high-ranking san, issue-driven State Supreme and Appellate officials to observe a “cooling off” period Court elections has created a real threat to the before becoming lobbyists and strictly enforce public’s presumption of independent and the Lobbyist Registration Act. impartial judges. • Improve the public’s access to information on • Because Illinois’s weak lobbying laws are mod- campaign finance, state contracts, lobbyists’ els of vagueness and inconsistency, only lim- activities, and public officials. ited sunshine reaches this critical aspect of the • Reduce partisan considerations in the redis- political process. tricting process. • The ineffective administration of Illinois elec- • Reform the process of judicial selection, focus- tions and the biases in Illinois election laws ing initially on improving the oversight of against expanded participation represent a dis- judicial elections. aster waiting to happen. • Fully implement federal law on ballot access • By failing to provide citizens with the infor- and ballot security and improve the state’s mation necessary for informed participation electronic voter guide to better inform its cit- in the political process and the civic life of izens. J Findings: Policy and Political Problems

Illinois is in political crisis. Although scores of acutely aware of the cost of corrupt politics and public officials at all levels of government have been rank it on a par with concerns about healthcare, found guilty of acts of public corruption and sent education and taxes. The opinion poll also points to jail, there have been very few serious efforts to out that a solid majority of Illinois residents believe enact laws to stem the corrosive effects of money in that the influence of money in politics is prohibit- Illinois politics or establish and enforce more rig- ing their elected leaders from keeping their prom- orous ethical standards for public officials. The gen- ises on key policy issues. eral public’s impatience with this situation was More positively, the pollsters found that Illi- made clear in exit polling following the 2006 gen- noisans believe that an honest and accountable state eral election. Eighty-five percent of respondents government is attainable and that the majority of reported being either “concerned” or “extremely Illinoisans strongly support a political reform concerned” with corruption in Illinois politics. agenda that focuses on specific judicial, special However, according to a public opinion poll interest, and campaign finance initiatives. conducted by Belden, Russonello & Stewart dur- Not surprisingly, given the widespread abuse ing the summer of 2006, there is some reason for of the public trust, honesty is the most important optimism. The poll shows that Illinoisans are value Illinoisans want in their state government. 15 Seventy-five percent of residents stated that hon- fueled by public disgust with Illinois politics and esty was “extremely important,” rating it a “10” on Illinois politicians. It is also driving the growing a 1-10 scale. Accountability was not far behind. public support for a constitutional amendment that Sixty-eight percent of Illinois residents believe a would allow the recall of elected officials. state government that is “accountable to voters” is “extremely important.” FINDING: The poll demonstrated that Illinoisans were Despite the adoption in recent years of several not just aware of the state’s problems but had also important changes in Illinois’s campaign finance considered solutions, as follows: law, the statute remains one of the least restric- tive in the nation. • 73 percent of residents expressed the belief Illinois does not limit contributions to candi- that “Unless we limit the influence of money dates and parties and is only one of five states that in government, elected officials will not be permits direct donations (as opposed to donations able to keep their promises on issues that are by PACs) by labor unions and corporations. The important to people like me.” Forty-five per- political contributions of state contractors and reg- cent of Illinois citizens “strongly agreed;” ulated industries, such as gaming interests and util- ities are also unrestricted. In addition, fund • 61 percent of Illinois residents feel that pro- transfers among political committees are unre- hibiting judges from taking money from stricted, and there is no legal ceiling on aggregate interests that may have cases in their courts contributions by individuals or groups during an would make a big difference in making gov- election cycle. Permissible campaign expenditures ernment work better; are normally limited to fair market value and in most instances are barred for personal use, though • 61 percent of Illinois residents feel that requir- paying a candidate’s salary is allowed. The State ing lobbyists to fully report their activities Board of Elections has no independent auditing would make a big difference in making gov- authority and cannot conduct an investigation ernment work better; unless a complaint is filed with them. As a result, campaign expenditures generally escape scrutiny. • 60 percent of Illinois residents believe public State law requires political committees to dis- financing of campaigns would make a big dif- close all receipts and expenditures in excess of $150. ference in making government work better. Thanks largely to the reform community’s advo- cacy efforts, political committees that raise and Most importantly, the poll showed that citi- spend more than $10,000 per year must now elec- zens are engaged and unwilling to give up on the tronically file all financial reports with the Illinois ideal of honest, representative government. Sixty- State Board of Elections, including information eight percent of Illinois residents personally feel that about their donors’ occupations and employers. having a government that works better for all is Reports are filed semi-annually, with supplements “extremely important.” Sixty-four percent of Illi- during the 30 days before elections. The state’s dis- nois residents personally feel that restoring trust in closure law is written in broad terms; however, it government is “extremely important.” has been more narrowly interpreted in the rule At the end of 2007, Illinois state government making process. For example, unions and corpora- remained deadlocked over issues involving funding tions that use their own treasury money for politi- for mass transit and a capital construction bill. The cal contributions, but do not solicit outside funds state also continues to be mired in a seemingly for this purpose, are not required to form political intractable feud between the Governor and the leg- committees and file disclosure reports. islative leaders that with each passing day has In the last few election cycles, both Republi- become nastier. Current interests in the call for a can and Democratic groups have created quasi-shell state constitutional convention that is mandated to non-profit organizations, which have raised money appear on the 2008 general election ballot is being for political purposes and then transferred those 16 funds in a lump sum into a related PAC. While comes to trying to monitor the impact of contri- non-profit organizations are required to register as butions on policy. political committees and file disclosure reports The weaknesses of Illinois’s campaign finance when making contributions directly to candidates, laws are matched by the ineffectiveness of the State they may be exempt from doing so when their con- Board of Elections, the agency whose members— tributions go to political parties or other interme- evenly divided between Republicans and Democ- diaries. As a result, some non-profits have donated rats—are charged with enforcing those laws. Like large sums of money to parties or committees that its federal counterpart, the Federal Elections Com- is then channeled directly to candidates without the mission, the State Board is, in many ways, an public ever learning the original source of those agency that was destined to fail. For instance, con- funds. To date, this has primarily occurred in Illi- troversial matters often end in 4-4 partisan splits, nois’s hard-fought judicial races. The lack of laws resulting in inaction. Moreover, the culture of the regulating earmarking of funds further compounds board is to defer to powerful politicians, attorneys this problem, for groups can donate funds to polit- and legislators. The board also lacks the authority ical parties intended specifically for a certain can- to initiate its own investigations into possible viola- didate or purpose without disclosing such tions of the law; it can only look into and respond information. to complaints properly filed by outside parties; and Under the terms of legislation passed in 2003 in disposing of such matters, it enjoys a great deal of and supported by reform advocates, the sponsors latitude. For example, State Representative Calvin of “issue ads” that target candidates without calling Giles repeatedly, and over a period of almost two for their election or defeat are now subject to the years, failed to file any of the required campaign state’s disclosure requirements. However, in the finance reports with the State Board; and although wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision he accumulated $144,000 in fines in the process, it in Wisconsin Right to Life, it is unlikely that this was largely the complaints by outside groups, with statute is still enforceable. heat from the Chicago Tribune, that finally forced In 2006, Illinois, like many states, moved up Giles to file. Facing a statutory requirement that the its presidential primary date. Correspondingly, the board deny candidates a position on the ballot if dates for campaign disclosure were moved up. they had outstanding fines, the board finally cut a Candidate committees, party organizations, deal with Giles in early 2006; if he’d agree to pay a PACs, and associations are now required to file $25,000 fine (17% of what he owed), the board reports by July 20 and January 20 of each year. would clean the slate and allow Giles to appear on During an election year they must also file pre- the ballot. The editors of the Chicago Tribune election reports detailing contributions and reacted to this astonishing outcome by piling more expenditures between the end of the last report- abuse on the agency than on the hapless Giles: “The ing period and 30 days prior to the election. eight members of the Illinois State Board of Elec- Beginning 30 days before a general election and tions, combined, take home more than $250,000 a beginning January 1st before a primary election, year for meeting a little more than once a month candidates, party organizations and PACs must and pushing some paper around. They’re chosen, electronically report all contributions over $500 apparently, for their propensity to be pushovers. within 48 hours of receipt. The public can access They sure don’t show any backbone, particularly financial disclosure reports on the Board of Elec- when that might irk those who control the board’s tions website at www.elections.state.il.us. budget—state legislators.” While Illinois’s electronic disclosure system is a good one, the infrequency of reporting means FINDING: that it is difficult to track money in Illinois politics Illinois’s campaign finance laws have contributed on a close to real time basis, outside the context of significantly to skyrocketing campaign costs, the an election. Reports are linked to the election cycle growing role and influence of large individual rather than the legislative calendar. The infrequency and interest group donors in state elections, and of reporting is particularly problematic when it the marginalization of small donors. 17 At the close of the 2006 elections, fundraising Fifth District Supreme Court election, making it in judicial and legislative races set records up and the most costly judicial election in the nation’s his- down the state. In addition, 12 races – seven in the tory. Among judicial races in 2006, two stood out Senate and five in the House – exceeded the $1 mil- for their fundraising: the 5th District Appellate race lion mark that same year. Previous election cycles in southern Illinois and the race for the Kardis saw no more than 7 legislative races break the $1 vacancy in the 3rd Circuit, also in southern Illinois. million mark. Most of the funds that candidates in Both were reminiscent of the 2004 5th District hotly contested races relied upon came from leg- Supreme Court race: a proxy war between tort islative leaders, who, in turn, relied upon special reform advocates and trial lawyers. The race in this interests with specific legislative agendas: top Appellate Court district, which stretches from the donors include teachers unions, gaming interests, Metro East area to the Indiana border, broke the telecommunications companies, and electric utili- record for spending in a state Appellate Court con- ties. Personal injury plaintiffs, among Democrats, test with a total of more than $3.2 million. Most of and defendants, among Republicans, especially the money in the race came as in-kind donations dominated judicial races. of TV attack ads. Nearly $9.5 million was spent in 2004 in the

Contested Appellate Court Races – 2006 Election

5th Appellate Bruce Stewart (D) $1,061,693 Winner Stephen McGlynn (R) $2,241,761

3rd Appellate Wright, Vicki (D) $180,457 Winner Michael Powers (R) $319,137

The Circuit Court (trial) race in Madison and financial donors. With no guarantee that the win- Bond counties between Don Weber and David ner will even be assigned to hear personal injury Hylla surged past half a million to break a spending cases, both candidates in this race drew heavily record for Circuit Court races in Illinois. Circuit from personal injury interests; plaintiffs for the Court races rarely draw this kind of interest from Democrat and defendants for the Republican.

Third Circuit Race (Madison and Bond County) – 2006 Election

David Hylla (D) $273,000 Winner Don Weber (R) $509,000

Four of the most expensive House races in Illi- tic transfers from the legislative leaders, who raised nois history took place in 2006 including an all a combined $29.6 million during the 2005-06 time record of over $1,924,000 spent in the 107th election cycle. In contrast to the hyper-expensive, District race between the incumbent Democrat targeted contests, almost half of all House races Kurt Granberg and his Republican challenger, John were uncontested, meaning that voters had no Cavaletto. While none of the contests for the state choice at the polling booth. Many of those that senate broke the all-time record, the total of seven were contested were not seriously challenged, as Illi- State Senate races exceeding $1 million was a record nois’s legislative map, drawn by a partisan Com- as was the total of eleven legislative races where mission, discourages competition. The vast spending exceeded $1 million. What all of these majority of incumbent legislators were returned to expensive legislative races have in common is gigan- office with little or no opposition. 18

Million Dollar Legislative Races – 2006 Election (Spending 2005-2006) House 71 $1,524,588 Boland (D) (Inc) Won Haring (R) Lost House 91 $1,572,873 M. Smith (D) (Inc) Won Dagit (R) Lost House 92 $1,608,240 Schock (R) (Inc) Won Spears (D) Lost House 101 $1,257,254 Flider (D) (Inc) Won Cain (R) Lost House 107 $1,924,424 Granberg (D) (Inc) Won Cavaletto (R) Lost

Senate 22 $1,273,643 Noland (D) Won Roth (R) Lost Senate 31 $1,203,166 Bond (D) Won Simpson (R) Lost Senate 33 $1,449,658 Kotowski (D) Won Axley (R) (Inc) Lost Senate 34 $1,595,898 Syverson (R) (Inc) Won Lewandowski (D) Lost Senate 42 $1,191,403 Holmes (D) Won Wintermute (R) Lost Senate 49 $1,630,164 Demuzio (D) (Inc) Won Richey (R) Lost Senate 52 $2,259,411 Frerichs (D) Won Myers (R) Lost

In statewide races, Democrats continued their and Comptroller were not close, with the three financial dominance. Governor Rod Blagojevich, Democratic incumbents wining easily over woefully who won re-election in a three-way race with 49% under-funded Republican challengers. The open of the vote, again set a spending record. In 2002 seat for state Treasurer was won by a Democrat, Rod Blagojevich spent $23.3 million in his suc- Alexi Giannoulias, who outspent his opponent cessful race for Governor. In 2006, he exceeded that more than 4 to 1. The total spending for race of total by spending slightly less than $29 million. $6.7 million was a new record for the office, as was While his opponent spent less than $11 million, Giannoulias’ spending total of $5.5 million. the total spending of $39.7 million by the general Most of the money raised by statewide candi- election candidates for governor in 2006 exceed the dates has come in very large increments from 2002 total for the candidates for governor in the donors who gave more than $10,000. Contribu- general election. When you add in the spending by tions of this size are banned in most other states candidates for governor who lost in the primary, and for all federal candidates. Because Illinois law total spending by all candidates for Governor was a places no restrictions on giving, candidates in these record $61.7 million in 2006, an increase of $3.5 targeted and statewide contests have become reliant million over the record set in the 2002 election. on very large donors. The races for Secretary of State, Attorney General

Statewide Candidates 2006 Election (Spending 2005-2006) Governor Rod Blagojevich (D) $28,948,194 Winner Record Judy Barr Topinka (R) $10,746,506 Rich Whitney (G) $ 46,091 Secretary of State Jesse White (D) $2,756,622 Winner Dan Rutherford (R) $1,700,439 Attorney General Lisa Madigan $2,458,874 Winner Stewart Umholtz $ 148,588 Comptroller Dan Hynes $810,822 Winner Carole Pankau $359,982 Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias $5,522,002 Winner Record Christine Radogno $1,156,768 19 The 2006 election was also noteworthy in that qualified as an established party and may run a full there was not the typical lull between the primary slate of candidates in the 2008 elections. election and the traditional Labor Day kick-off for Of the more than $113 million donated in the the General Election. Incumbent Governor Rob 2003-04 election cycle to Illinois statewide, legisla- Blagojevich began running attack ads against his tive, and appellate judge candidates and to party Republican opponent, Judy Baar Topinka, almost and other political committees, only nine percent as soon as the primary was concluded. He spent came from contributors giving less than $150, a pat- about $3.5 million on broadcast advertising tern which is reflected in preliminary analysis of between the conclusion of the primary and July contribution patterns in the 2006 elections. 3rd. Citing Campaign Media Analysis Group Statewide candidates received most of their funds (CMAG) data, the Chicago Tribune reported shortly from fewer than five percent of their donors. Illi- after the March 2006 primary that “Blagojevich is nois is increasingly seeing contributions in the spending an astounding $800,000 a week on com- $200,000 to $500,000 range as well as a significant, mercials for a general election that won’t be held though largely unsuccessful, up turn in self-financ- until November 7.” This spending came at a time ing by candidates for statewide office. Self-financing when Topinka, who had a hard-fought primary at the statewide level was again prevalent in 2006, contest, had virtually empty campaign coffers. though it only proved to be effective for political While the continued onslaught of political adver- newcomer and now-Treasurer, Alexi Giannoulias. tising was almost universally decried, it proved to be Due to these trends, a small number of wealthy very effective in defining Treasurer Topinka’s weak- individuals and interest groups enjoy more access to nesses to the voters. When she was finally able to elected officials than ordinary citizens, and with that buy air time to respond, it proved to be too little access comes extraordinary opportunities to influ- too late. ence policy, state contracts, and hiring decisions. Another important factor to note in the 2006 Not only has the role of large donors in state contests was the rise of the Green party. Raising vir- elections increased dramatically, so have campaign tually no money and running no broadcast adver- costs. In 2004, for example, a single Senate race in tising, the party was able to win an astonishing far southern Illinois cost over $2.46 million, sur- 10% of the vote. Many have argued that the major- passing the $2.44 million record set in 2002. This ity of votes cast for the party were, in fact, protest record was not broken by the 2006 election, though votes from those who found they could support the 52nd Senate District in Champaign-Urbana neither Topinka nor Blagojevich. Nevertheless, cost $2.26 million, making it the most expensive their success at the polls means that they are now contest of 2006.

Political Money and Who Controls It Total Money* Raised** Spent** Who Controls It – Money Raised** 01-02 03-04 05-06 1995-1996 $91.6 $85.5 Governor Blagojevich 24.9 11.4 17.9 1997-1998*** $132.0 $130.0 House Speaker Madigan 11.0 10.7 7.7 1999-2000 $112.2 $107.7 Senate President Jones 5.0 7.2 8.5 2001-2002*** $186.6 $187.0 Attorney General Madigan 10.8 1.1 3.1 2003-2004 $113.6 $99.7 Senate Minority Leader Watson .9 6.2 6.5 2005-2006*** $173.5 $183.6 House Minority Leader Cross .4 5.1 6.9 $809.5 $793.5 (Watson and Cross became caucus leaders in 2003) *Contributions to incumbents & candidates for constitution office, legislative office, and Appellate & Supreme Court ** Amounts in millions *** Election of constitutional officers 20 Finally, the state’s weak campaign finance laws ment. Singlehandedly he is blocking reform legis- frequently embolden interest group donors whose lation. The silence from the Governor’s office on policy objectives are difficult to reconcile with the this important ethics issue is deafening. public interest. Efforts to regulate the payday loan industry began in 2000. In 2004, a set of modest FINDING: regulations were adopted. The pattern of campaign The state’s deserved reputation for official cor- contributions by the industry illustrates what has ruption and pay-to-play politics—which is alive become an all-too-common pattern in Illinois. and well today—can be largely traced to Illinois’ When the issue of regulation first gained visibility notoriously weak campaign finance, ethics, hir- in 2000, the industry began raising money and ing, leasing, and contracting laws and proce- making campaign contributions with the greatest dures as well as ineffective regulatory, focus on the legislative leaders. Contributions from investigative, and enforcement structures and the payday loan industry grew from less than processes. $10,000 in 1999 to over $160,000 in the 2000. In Illinois’s legendary “anything goes” political the 2001-02 election cycle the industry contributed culture is not cost-free. The price exacted by large $360,000. In the 2003-04 cycle the total increased scale and illegal influence peddling, political to $530,000. In 2005-06 contributions from the patronage, bribes, extortion, fraud, misappropria- payday loan industry again increased and totaled tion of funds, and vote fraud are inevitably borne $624,000. The message for the behavior of the pay- by law-abiding and tax-paying citizens. Unfortu- day loan industry is loud and clear: if you have nately, the state’s scandalous present is giving its issues before the legislature, you need money to infamous past a race for its money. As Chicago Trib- compete. une columnist, Dennis Byrne, observed in late In May 2005, Governor Rod Blagojevich 2005, “Every day, there’s another story—about new vowed to “rock the system” when he introduced a cases, in both political parties, of corruption, graft, package of campaign finance legislation modeled dishonesty, favoritism, abuse, cynicism, bossism on the federal Bipartisan Campaign Finance Act. and various felonious behaviors. More than school The Governor’s legislation was filed only days finance or a balanced budget, Illinois’s No. 1 issue before the close of the 2005 Spring Session. The is graft and corruption. It steals our money, creates Governor’s sincerity in dropping such a major leg- flawed public policy and puts the squeeze on wor- islative package so late in the session was scorned thy government programs. Only in this climate by members of both the General Assembly and the would the oxymoron of ‘honest graft’ be confused Press. It appears that the Governor’s critics were with wisdom.” correct. His administration has made no attempt In early 2007, even the Chicago Tribune, long to advance the legislation; to date the bill has not an opponent of campaign finance regulation, edi- had a single hearing, nor has the Governor worked torialized “This page dislikes limits on free speech. to identify sponsors. In February 2006, he told the But enough corruption is enough. Private-sector Chicago Tribune that the time wasn’t right, saying workers often accept as a condition of employment "You have to pick your fights at the right time to limits on what they may say. The limits in House get such legislation passed.” Despite running mil- Bill 1 (the bill banning pay-to-play) would fall on lions of dollars of campaign ads accusing his oppo- firms as a condition of doing business with the nent of ethical lapses, the Governor failed to even state. Fair enough.” mention ethics in his 2007 inaugural address. As A federal investigation (Operation Safe Road) 2007 draws to a close, a bill banning campaign con- into former Governor George Ryan’s eight-year tributions from those holding state contracts, which tenure as secretary of state resulted in the 2003 con- passed the House unanimously and has 46 of 59 viction of his campaign fund and his chief of staff senators as sponsors, sits in the state senate without on racketeering charges. Ryan was indicted in even a committee vote. The Senate president is the 2004. In April 2006, he and co-defendant, Larry one legislative leader who is allied with the Gover- Warner, were convicted on 22 counts of racketeer- nor in the ongoing budget impasse in state govern- ing, mail and tax fraud. The former Governor is 21 serving his sentence in a federal prison. To date, tration are the subject of at least 10 separate U.S. there have been 79 convictions or guilty pleas as a Department of Justice inquiries. Since assuming result of the Operation Safe Road investigation. office in 2003, the Governor has been dogged by An ongoing federal investigation into allegations of pay-to-play. Early questions about the Chicago’s corrupt “hired truck” program has, so far, administration’s practices centered on deals made in produced 49 indictments and 26 guilty pleas. And relation to the Illinois Toll Highway Authority. For now the city’s hiring and minority contracting prac- example, the owner of Wilton Partners gave Blago- tices are under investigation. In early 2006, City jevich $50,000 in campaign contributions just Clerk, James Laski, quit his post and was stripped weeks after the Governor announced that Wilton of his law license after admitting to bribe taking. Partners would oversee the $83 million toll way Laski, who pled guilty to accepting bribes, was sen- reconstruction project. Christopher Kelly, the Gov- tenced to two years in prison. In May 2006, fed- ernor’s chief fundraiser, recommended the appoint- eral prosecutors began the trial of Robert Sorich, ment of the Executive Director of the Illinois State Mayor Daley’s former patronage chief, on charges Toll Highway Authority. Kelly is also a business of hiring fraud. This trial offered a road map to the partner of Blagojevich fundraiser, Tony Rezko, who widening City Hall scandal, and the prosecution’s licenses several Panda Express restaurants from the line of questioning made it clear that they had the parent company, Panda Express, Inc., which the Mayor’s Office in their sights. Sorich was found Toll Authority contracted with for its oases restau- guilty on two counts of mail fraud and sentenced to rants. Rezko also is a business partner with Abdel- two years in jail. Three other public officials were hamid Chaib, who owns several Subway sandwich convicted in the same hiring scheme. The City shops. Chaib also got a concession at the oases. To patronage case was an outgrowth of a scandal over top it off, Rezko’s nephew, Rimon Rezko, was payoffs to city officials from trucking companies. named manager of the Tollway’s Panda Express and Forty-nine people have been charged so far, and 43 Subway restaurants. All of these dots seem easy to convicted; one has died. connect. These kinds of conflicts of interest invite Concurrent with the Sorich trial, the Blagoje- public cynicism, particularly toward politicians who vich administration faced explosive allegations run for office on a platform of ethical reform. about its hiring practices. The Attorney General Press reports also revealed that Tony Rezko took the unprecedented step of releasing a letter played an instrumental role in placing his associ- from U.S. Attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, in which he ates–former employees and investors–into state jobs wrote that his investigation of state hiring practices after Blagojevich won. Three of the members of “. . .has now implicated multiple state agencies and the Illinois Health Care Facility Planning Board are departments, and we have developed a number of Rezko associates. Two of the three resigned after credible witnesses.” In asking that the Attorney admitting that they had each made $25,000 dona- General’s investigation be collapsed into his own, tions to Blagojevich’s campaign in the weeks imme- he went on to write “(T)he most important con- diately prior to their appointment; the Board itself sideration for both of our offices is that the very was dissolved amid a corruption indictment by fed- serious allegations of endemic hiring fraud be thor- eral authorities in an extortion scheme. Former oughly and expeditiously investigated and, if appro- Rezko employee, Jack Lavin, ran the Department priate, prosecuted.” The Tribune also obtained a of Commerce and Economic Opportunity, which report written by former Inspector General, Z. also employs a host of other Rezko associates or Scott, in 2004, in which she said that the adminis- their children. At least two Rezko associates work tration’s hiring practices “. . . reflects not merely an with the state Department of Employment Secu- ignorance of the law, but complete and utter con- rity, while another two work for the Illinois Hous- tempt for the law.” It seems increasingly likely that ing Authority, and another with the Illinois Finance this quickly unfolding scandal will result in yet Authority; both the Director and the General another chain of indictments. Counsel of the Central Management Services Overall, the hiring, contracting, and campaign Agency–the state’s chief procurement office–are fundraising practices of the Blagojevich adminis- Rezko associates. 22 The controversy swirling around Tony Rezko Milan Petrovik, a top Blagojevich fundraiser. came to a head in October 2006 when U.S. Attor- Of all the scandal that the Governor’s Office ney, Patrick Fitzgerald, calling it a case of “pay-to- has encountered, none has caused the stir of a play on steroids,” indicted Rezko for collaborating reported $1,500 check which the Governor with long-time political operative, Stuart Levine, claims came from Michael Ascaridis, a close for plotting to defraud the state of millions of dol- friend, as a gift for his daughter’s christening, lars by steering bond sales to select vendors. Levine, despite Mrs. Ascaridis’ strange claims to the con- who cooperated with officials, pled guilty and was trary. As Eric Kroll explained in the Daily Herald, sentenced to 67 months in prison. Rezko is “The latest bombshell, though, is the $1,500 expected to go to trial in February, 2008. check Blagojevich accepted for his daughter’s col- There have also been questions about the lege fund from Michael Ascaridis soon after get- influence that well-connected lobbyists have had ting Ascaridis’ wife, Beverly, a $46,800-a-year job on the administration’s bonding and contracting with the Illinois Department of Natural decisions. For example, former Blagojevich staffer, Resources.” The job conveniently was transferred John Wyma, lobbied on behalf of Lehman Broth- from downstate to Bartlett – the type of transfer ers, assisting them in landing $4 billion in state that’s being looked at by U.S. Attorney Patrick bonding business and earning himself over Fitzgerald in his probe of “very serious allegations $400,000 in fees. Wyma also represents Harmony of endemic hiring fraud.” Members of the pub- Health Plan of Illinois, a subsidiary of WellCare, a lic, who may struggle to follow the intricate alle- Florida company that gave the governor’s campaign gations of corruption in the bonding activities of fund $100,000 in five separate $20,000 contribu- obscure state commissions, intuitively understood tions from different subsidiaries on the same day. the questions raised by the $1,500 check; their Subsequently, Harmony Health Plan secured a $75 children don’t receive such largesse and they ques- million state contract. Numerous press accounts tioned the motivations behind such a gift to the suggest that there is an ongoing pattern of transac- Governor’s daughter. tions which raise question about conflicts of inter- In the face of more and more questions about est. the federal investigation into the dealing of the The contractual success of Blagojevich cam- Governor’s office and various state agencies, the paign givers has provided plenty of fodder for Governor’s office has steadfastly refused to release newspaper editorialists, and presumably the U.S. the subpoenas it has received from the U.S. Attor- Attorney. For example, IGOR, the Watchdog ney’s Office. Media organizations and reform Corp, saw a state contract initially worth $150,000 groups have peppered the Governor’s Office with grow through non-competitive extensions to a $7 Freedom of Information Act requests, which the million deal even though its original bid was not Governor’s Office has refused to respond to. Last the lowest. The contract, to oversee distribution of fall, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan issued I-Pass transponders through Jewel grocery stores, an opinion that the subpoenas are covered under was awarded by the Tollway. IGOR owners gave FOIA and should be released by the Governor’s the governor’s campaign fund $76,000 directly and Office. Despite the opinion, the Governor’s Office hired John Wyma as their lobbyist. has continued to refuse to release the subpoenas. PWS Environmental got a $522,000 Illinois Early in 2007, the Better Government Association, Department of Transportation (IDOT) contract to a Chicago-based civic group, filed suit to obtain a power wash state buildings, including highway salt court order forcing the Governor to release sub- domes. The company gave $22,000 to the gover- poenas received during 2006. That legal action is nor’s campaign fund. PWS President, William pending. Absent additional information or formal Mologousis, is the brother-in-law of then-IDOT action by the federal prosecutor’s office, these sto- director, Robert J. Millette, who oversaw the deal ries slowly fall off the public’s radar screen. (and later resigned as a result of his failure to pub- Questions about “pay-to-play” politics have licly disclose his connections to PWS). Mologousis also arisen in the legislative arena. Gambling in Illi- is also a former business partner and neighbor of nois grew from a few horse racetracks and off-track 23 betting parlors in the early 1990s to a multi-billion sis on the Senate throughout the 2006 legislative dollar industry, including highly profitable river- session. In the summer of 2006, after the General boats by the turn of the century. Not surprisingly, Assembly had adjourned, the utilities began to the industry also provided a meteoric rise in cam- mend fences with House Speaker, Michael Madi- paign contributions, from less than $100,000 per gan. But on October 2, 2006, Speaker Madigan cycle to over $2 million per cycle. Now, the called for a special session, to be held before the inevitable budgetary crises that arise as the legisla- 2006 election, to consider a rate freeze. In the end, ture nears the end of its session also bring calls for all that was frozen were utility contributions to the expanded gambling as a revenue enhancement tool. Speaker and his caucus. The industry reverted to Deals involving additional boat licenses for casinos, its previous pattern of heavy giving in the Senate. expanded racing dates, or slot machines for tracks The Governor, eager for his own reasons to curry pop to the surface as the legislature tries to find the favor with Senate President Jones, declined to call revenue needed to pay for necessary programs. a special session. New rates took effect in January, Within the industry, though, tracks and boats are 2007, with hikes of 25% - 55%. This prompted a in a constant tug of war, sniping at each other’s huge public outcry and was one of the issues dom- expansion plans. In 2006, expansion plans col- inating the 2007 legislative session. lapsed, but the horse tracks, which have given more Like gambling, Illinois’s telecommunications to state candidates and significantly more to the industry has a long history of generous political Governor than the boats have, emerged as the win- donations and hardball infighting between com- ner, securing additional state tax subsidies funded peting providers. In 2001, the legislature re-wrote by a tax on the boats. During the 2007 legislative the state’s Telecommunication Act, revising the session, the General Assembly again looked to rules by which long distance providers can compete gambling expansion as a means of increasing rev- with local phone companies. That law was expected enue, and records are likely to show a surge in con- to stand for 10 years, but SBC, the largest local tributions from that industry. phone company in the state, was unhappy with the Energy deregulation in Illinois was enacted in results and immediately began an effort to re-open 1997, but the legislature took the highly unusual the Act. As the largest telecom giver in the state, move of delaying full implementation for nearly a SBC wielded considerable political influence; it also decade. The 1997 plan cut rates and froze them for added the new governor’s former Chief of Staff, seven years but also offered utilities the prospect of Wyma, to its stable of lobbyists. And in May of significant hikes at the end of the phase-in period. 2003, SBC succeeded in getting a more favorable The freeze was subsequently extended for three rewrite passed through both chambers and signed years, which made 2007 that target date for action into law in the space of three days: from filing on a on regulating electrical rates. Beginning in 2005, Tuesday through signing on Friday afternoon. That the electricity suppliers began to ramp up their giv- revision was challenged in court and ultimately ing, from $1 million during the election cycle when thrown out, but giving spiked again, with SBC deregulation passed to $2 million in 2005-06. leading the way. Before the issue was resolved leg- Their giving was carefully targeted to senators and islatively, SBC went on to acquire its main rival, especially the two legislative leaders in the Senate, AT&T, rendering the political discussion moot. who, working together, could guarantee that In 2007, the company won another major another reform bill would not pass. Indeed, the legislative victory, this time over its new rival, Senate President received over a quarter million Comcast. AT&T divested its cable holdings to from the industry, which hosted a lavish fundraiser Comcast before merging with SBC, but the com- in his honor at the home of Com Ed CEO, Frank pany continued to seek opportunities to enter the Clark. An early casualty of this infusion of cam- cable TV field. Legislation passed in 2007 gave paign cash was the nomination of Martin Cohen, AT&T the right to obtain a new state-issued license former head of the Citizens Utility Board, to head that would allow it to offer services in any munic- the state’s utility regulator, the Illinois Commerce ipality, even those that had previously granted Commission. The utilities continued their empha- Comcast a local monopoly. At the same time that 24 AT&T was fighting in the legislature with Com- many face only nominal opposition or no opposi- cast, it gave over $107,000 to the same legislators tion at all. who would decide the fate of its favored legisla- The authority to draw state legislative and tion, including $40,000 to PACs controlled by the congressional district lines after each decennial four legislative leaders. census rests with the General Assembly. If the leg- All these campaign finance shenanigans islature fails to reach an agreement, the task of played out against what has become Illinois’s stan- redistricting is turned over to a commission whose dard backdrop of corruption indictments and con- eight members are selected by the four Democratic victions. The year 2005 also saw the conviction of and Republican leaders of the House and Senate. a state legislator for election fraud; the indictment Should the commission become deadlocked, then of the chief of staff to a former House speaker on the Illinois Supreme Court nominates two people, public corruption charges; the indictment of a one from each party, and the Secretary of State board member of a state pension fund; and the randomly selects one of these two to serve as a par- conviction of two investment firm representatives tisan tie-breaker. In 1972 (the first round of redis- for a kickback scheme (including a former finance tricting after the adoption of the 1970 state director of the Democratic National Committee). Constitution), the commission came to an agree- Not surprisingly, the U.S. Department of Justice ment without a tie-breaker; however, since then currently has more active public corruption units the tie-breaker provision has been invoked three in the Northern District of Illinois than any other times (in 1981, 1991, and 2001), and on each jurisdiction in the country. However, the state’s occasion, the resulting map significantly advan- recent rash of scandals has not been confined to taged the party that drew it. the Statehouse or Chicago’s city hall. In East St. Although the state Constitution requires that Louis, for example, a federal investigation into election districts be compact, contiguous and sub- vote fraud and public corruption ended in 2005 stantially equal in population, the commission, with the conviction of one former city official and regardless of which party controls the process, seven precinct workers. And in December, East St. seeks to create as many “safe” seats for its party as Louis’s former police chief was convicted of polit- possible and as few “competitive” or “swing” dis- ical corruption and tax fraud. tricts as possible, and the results are plain to see. In 2002, for example, the winning candidates for FINDING: governor and attorney general beat their oppo- Over the past 20 years, the state’s campaign nents by seven and three percentage points respec- finance laws (which heavily favor incumbent tively; but in the same election, 102 of 118 House officeholders) and partisan redistricting proce- winners and 48 of 59 Senate winners defeated dures have combined to significantly reduce the their opponents by 20 percentage points or more. number of competitive elections for state This is not a new trend, of course. In the last five offices, especially for House and Senate seats. general elections, conducted with two different It is rare for an incumbent lawmaker not to legislative maps, the winners in 143 of 183 Senate raise and spend significantly more money than his races and 515 of 590 House races came away with challenger. In 2004, for example, House incum- more than 60 percent of the vote. And, as the bents on average outspent their general election chart below shows, nearly half of all legislative opponents by four-to-one and won 97 percent of seats were not contested at all. In 85 of 183 Sen- the time. Senate incumbents enjoyed a 3.5-to-one ate races and 278 of 590 House races between fundraising advantage over their challengers and 1998 and 2006, the winners garnered 99 percent won 94 percent of their races. In the last two elec- of the vote. tion cycles, the number of competitive contests, in Incumbents losing a primary election is also terms of money raised and spent and the closeness extremely rare. For senators, incumbents seeking of the vote, has averaged 10 in the House and six their party’s nomination to another term win more in the Senate. The fundraising advantages enjoyed than 95% of the time. For House members, the by incumbent legislators are so enormous that ratio is even better: almost 97% of incumbent rep- 25 resentatives seeking re-election are nominated for term is not a sure thing, but it’s about as close as another term. Securing nomination to another you can get.

Competitiveness of Illinois Elections

1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 State Within 10% pts. 3 of 41 2 of 22 5 of 59 2 of 23 7 of 38 Senate Winner with more than 99% 21 of 41 10 of 22 9 of 59 10 of 23 15 of 38

State Within 10% pts. 10 of 118 5 of 118 10 of 118 8 of 118 9 of 118 House Winner with more than 99% 58 of 118 60 of 118 40 of 118 58 of 118 62 of 118

In the 2006 primary election for the Illinois $153 million donated to state candidate, party, and Senate, 26 of 31 seats were uncontested; of the political committees in 2005-06—was the result remaining 5 seats, 3 incumbents won by more than of fund transfers among such committees, the 60%; and only one won with less than 60% of the most conspicuous of which are controlled by the vote. Senator Adeline Geo Karis was the only General Assembly’s four top legislative leaders. In incumbent to lose to her primary challenger. In 2003-04, the figures are similar - $28 million out the Illinois House, 94 of 116 incumbents who of a total of $113 million. In the last election cycle, sought another term were uncontested. Of the the leaders dispensed nearly $3.2 million into a remaining 22 races, incumbents won with more handful of targeted and competitive legislative dis- than 60% of the vote in 13 contests and with less tricts, the outcomes of which had the potential of then 60% of the vote in six contests. Three incum- shifting control of the General Assembly from one bents, Roger Jemisch, Calvin Giles and Linda party to the other. As illustrated in the table below, Chavez lost their primary bids. the disparity in spending between a legislative con- In fact, incumbents are more likely to retire test targeted by the legislative leaders and one that or seek nomination to a higher office than lose a is not is staggering. The leaders also poured mil- primary. In the Senate, nearly four times as many lions more into the state’s one state Supreme Court sitting members between 1998 and 2006 chose not race in 2004. The extraordinary financial power to seek nomination to another term as lost a pri- wielded by the “four tops” often forces rank-and- mary. The bulk of these came in 2002 after new file legislators in tight races to choose between rep- district boundaries were drawn, but in 1998, 2000, resenting the interests of their constituents or 2004, and 2006, more senators did not seek re- deferring to the policy wishes of their leaders. It is nomination than were turned out by the voters. In not unheard of for a legislative leader to strip an the House, roughly three times as many members intransigent member of office space, committee during the same period voluntarily gave up their assignments or staff. seats than lost in primary elections. FINDING: FINDING: Like Illinois’s porous campaign finance laws, the The state’s campaign finance laws have empow- state’s weak lobbyist laws are a model of vague- ered legislative leaders at the expense of rank- ness and inconsistency. and-file members whose political independence, The state’s 3,000 statehouse lobbyists (the policy judgments, and committee assignments equivalent of 15 for every state legislator) are are often circumscribed by their financial inde- required to register with the Secretary of State and pendence on those leaders. file biannual reports detailing their lobbying expen- Over $32 million—representing 21% of the ditures and gifts to officials. They are also required 26

Legislative Races Targeted and Not Targeted by Legislative Leaders Average Cost of Race 2004 Election House Targeted $1,137,000 (7 races) Not targeted $214,000 (109 races)

Senate Targeted $2,054,000 (4 races) Not Targeted $386,000 (18 races) 2006 Election House Targeted $1,120,000 (9 races) Not targeted $208,000 (107 races)

Senate Targeted $1,300,000 (10 races) Not Targeted $313,000 (32 races) to report the names and addresses of their clients. interests have two things in common: they have Since 2003 Illinois lobbyists have been banned high-paid lobbyists in Springfield and plenty of from serving on State boards or commissions which cash to shower on their “friends.” have any kind of binding authority. However, there Weak enforcement of the lobbying laws is no reporting of lobbyist contracts, no “revolving already on the books is also a serious problem. For door” provisions requiring a “cooling off” period example, the 2003 State Officials and Employees before former legislators and other top state offi- Ethics Act requires former state officials, legislators cials can register as lobbyists (the state does require and executive branch officers to observe a one-year a one year cooling off period for those who have “cooling off” period before registering as lobbyists, negotiated contracts with or regulated an industry; if they were involved in either contracting with or however, this is inapplicable to the legislature); no directly regulating the industry they wished to restrictions on lobbyists’ political contributions or lobby for. However, responsibility for ensuring that fundraising; and no mechanism in place for effec- the law’s revolving door provisions are enforced tively enforcing the state’s lobbyist laws. Moreover, remains a mystery, and as a result apparent viola- the state does not require disclosure of what lobby- tions are not being addressed by anybody—not by ists charge for their services or what issues they the Secretary of State (the office charged with reg- lobby for or against. According to the Center for istering lobbyists), not by the Ethics Commission, Public Integrity, Illinois lobbyists are among the not by the Executive Inspector General, nor by the least regulated in the country; only South Dakota, Attorney General. The former director of the Illi- New Hampshire, Wyoming, and Pennsylvania have nois Environmental Protection Agency and the for- fewer regulations. mer head of the Illinois Pollution Control Board Since there are no limits or prohibitions in Illi- began lobbying within the one-year window for nois on who can make political contributions, Ameren and Commonwealth Edison respectively major interest groups ranging from teacher unions after leaving their previous positions. The Execu- to gambling interests and the payday loan industry tive Inspector General initiated an investigation work hand-in-hand with their lobbyists in directing based on complaints filed by the Illinois Campaign contributions and providing other forms of cam- for Political Reform. However, there is so little dis- paign support to legislative candidates who either closure under the Act that the outcome of these support their policy objectives or are regarded as investigations may never be learned (though the open-minded and persuadable. (In early 2003, a Secretary of State’s office reported months after the lobbyist for one of the top gaming firms reportedly complaints were filed that both were still lobbying secured the appointment of the Gaming Board’s without interruption). The Secretary of State claims legislative liaison.) These and other high-powered it lacks the authority to withhold credentials from 27 lobbyists and does not want such authority—all of face the voters at the next general election to serve which raises a fundamental question: Why adopt a full ten-year term. By practice, the Court accepts sensible rules to protect the public interest if they’re the recommendation of the Justice from where the not enforced or are unenforceable? vacancy occurred. Most Justices use selection com- mittees, but it is not a transparent process and no FINDING: standard practice is followed. This recently rose to Fueled by huge interest group contributions, the fore as an issue with the announcement that increased partisanship, ideological considera- Appellate Justice, Anne Burke, wife of powerful tions, and hot button issues (such as tort Chicago Alderman Ed Burke, had been named by reform), recent judicial elections in Illinois, the court to replace retiring Justice, Mary Ann especially at the appellate level, have become dis- McMorrow. Burke will run for a full term in 2008, tressingly expensive, partisan, and uncivil—a and early indications are that despite a seeming lack trend which, if left unchecked, has the potential of opposition the race will be extremely expensive. of permanently undermining the independence Justices of the Supreme Court wishing to serve of the judiciary. beyond their initial ten-year term must stand for Almost all of Illinois’s more than 850 judges retention. stand for election at some point, though many ini- The costs of Illinois Supreme Court elections tially enter the system through appointment. Judi- have been drifting steadily upward for more than a cial candidates initially run on a partisan ballot. dozen years. In 1990, the candidates running in However, when they stand for retention, no parti- central Illinois’s Third District spent a combined san affiliation is noted. $763,000; the winning candidate, Republican All judicial candidates must abide by rules of James Heiple, loaned his campaign $459,000, conduct prescribed by the Illinois Supreme Court. which was a record for self-funding. The McMor- In Illinois, as elsewhere in the country, recent rul- row-Howlett Democratic primary race in the First ings by the U.S. Supreme Court have raised ques- District (Cook County) two years later cost tions about these rules of conduct, which have been $804,000; McMorrow won and faced no opponent a contributing factor in the increasing politicization in the general election. In 2000, there were three of judicial races. high court races, the costs of which exceeded by a Once elected, circuit court judges serve a six- significant margin anything the state had previously year term at the end of which they must face reten- experienced. The general election candidates in the tion in order to keep their seat. Judges standing for Third District (north central Illinois) spent retention appear on the General Election ballot. $1,373,000; the winner, Democrat Tom Kilbride, Illinois’s Appellate Court judges are elected from was the beneficiary late in the campaign of a huge five judicial districts. The Supreme Court fills contribution from the state party—almost vacancies due to death, resignation or retirement. $650,000. Meanwhile, in the largely suburban and Appointees, if they choose, face the voters in an heavily Republican Second District, the three open election to keep the seat. Once elected by the Republican primary contenders spent a total of voters, Appellate Court justices serve an initial ten- $3,245,000; the two losing candidates, Louis year term after which they may stand for retention Rathje and Bonnie Wheaton, spent more than $1.1 by appearing uncontested on the ballot and secur- million and $1.5 million respectively while ing approval from 3/5s of the voters. Wheaton’s $1.25 million loan to her own campaign The Illinois Supreme Court has seven mem- broke the self-funding record set by Justice Heiple bers, chosen from the five judicial districts. Appel- a decade earlier. The 2000 Democratic primary late Court judges are also selected from those five election in the First District featured four candi- districts. The First District, which is Cook County, dates who, between them, raised and spent elects three justices while the other four elect one $2,491,000. Candidate Morton Zwick’s loss to each. As it happens, Cook County has about 3/7ths Thomas Fitzgerald was memorable not only of the state’s population. When vacancies occur, the because he spent $1,165,000 but because he ran a remaining justices appoint a replacement who must TV ad blaming Thomas Fitzgerald for death 28 penalty convictions of innocent people, even 2004 cycle to legislative candidates and cau- though then-Judge Fitzgerald did not preside over cuses, state political parties, and Appellate and any of the cases in question. He was the presiding Supreme Court candidates. judge of the criminal division, but did not actually rule on any of the cases Zwick said were inappro- Reason 4: More than $6.8 million spent in the priately decided. The Chicago Bar Association said Fifth District campaign was used to pay for the ad demonstrated a lack of judicial temperament 7,500 television ads; only two states—Ohio and then withdrew its "qualified" rating of Zwick. and Alabama—with multiple statewide high And finally, the three primary and general court races in 2004 saw more ads than Illi- election candidates in the Fourth District (south nois’s Fifth. central Illinois) spent $2.1 million between them, with the winner, Republican Rita Garman, spend- Reason 5: From the standpoint of tone and ing more than $1 million. But, as events would civility, the Karmeier-Maag contest, despite soon prove, all of this was but a warm-up for things the well-intentioned interventions of the state yet to come. bar and civic groups, was worse than anything Business Week called the 2004 race between Illinois had experienced or endured in mod- Republican Lloyd Karmeier and Democrat Gordon ern times. In their advertising, each candidate Maag to represent the state’s sprawling and least accused the other of being “soft on crime,” and affluent Fifth District on the state Supreme Court misrepresented judicial decisions to under- “. . . one of the ugliest judicial races in U.S. his- score their point. Each campaign also accused tory.” The race was distinctive for five reasons. the other of being “in the pocket of special interests” and, thus, the voters’ were presented Reason 1: The $9.3 million spent in the cam- with a scenario where it looked like neither paign was more than seven times the previous candidate would impartially uphold the law. Illinois record and twice the previous national record. This was more, one group noted, than The controversies surrounding this race did all the money raised by U.S. Senate candidates not subside with Justice Karmeier’s victory. Three in 18 of 34 Senate races across the country in months after the November 2004 election, two 2004. groups—the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform and the Sunshine Project—filed complaints with Reason 2: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce the Illinois State Board of Elections, alleging that poured over $2 million into the election, most the Illinois Coalition for Jobs, Growth and Pros- of which was directed to the Illinois Republi- perity (Coalition) and the Justice for All Founda- can Party in support of Karmeier. Although tion (JFA) had failed, as legally required, to register the U.S. Chamber had not previously played as political committees and to disclose the sources of a conspicuous role in financing Illinois elec- the more than $800,000 they had poured into the tions, it edged out the Illinois Education Asso- Karmeier-Maag race. Both of the defending organ- ciation in 2004 for first place among interest izations claimed that as “non-profits” they were not group donors to state level elections. obligated to register as political committees or to disclose the sources of their funds. Moreover, the Reason 3: The Karmeier-Maag contest saw the Coalition and JFA argued that state law did not emergence of new organizations in the fight prevent them from transferring funds to their affil- over tort reform. On the business side, the iated PACs which, in turn, could contribute to Coalition for Jobs, Growth and Prosperity other registered political committees which were joined the Illinois Civil Justice League and the subject to the state’s disclosure requirements. Illinois Chamber of Commerce. On the other This unseemly maneuver—engineered by trial side the Justice for All PAC joined the trial lawyers on one side and by powerful business inter- lawyer groups and labor unions. These two ests on the other side (including the Illinois Busi- new groups became major contributors in the ness Roundtable, Illinois State Chamber of 29 Commerce, Illinois Manufacturers’ Association, on the Supreme Court in June, 2006. Illinois Civil Justice League, and the Chicagoland The problems seen in Illinois’s Supreme Court Chamber of Commerce)—was little more than a elections are increasingly finding their way into the deliberate and clumsy attempt to protect the iden- lower courts. Appellate court races are rapidly grow- tities of the groups’ financial backers. The fact that ing in expense and are taking on a far more politi- both “non-profits” were formed stealth-like in the cal tone. Candidates regularly signal where they 2004 election year added weight to the com- stand on issues by announcing the endorsement of plainants’ allegations. In the spring of 2005, the groups such as Planned Parenthood or the NRA. General Assembly responded to this gambit by In the 2006 general election, there were expensive approving legislation that explicitly forbids evasions and contentious races in Illinois’s Third and Fifth by non-profits of the state’s registration and disclo- Districts. The race in the Fifth was particularly sure requirements. And then in August of 2006, problematic, as it became a rematch between the Justice for All voluntarily disclosed the sources of pro-and anti-tort reform forces that slugged it out the $561,000 it had raised and later spent in the in the 2004 Supreme Court election. The candi- 5th District race as part of an agreement to settle dates for this seat raised in excess of $3.5 million, the complaint filed with the Elections Board. To with the bulk of it coming from the same sources date, the Coalition has not followed suit. The SBE, that were active in the 2004 5th District Supreme in a 4/4 partisan split, voted not to allow a public Court. hearing of the case against the Coalition. ICPR Elections for trial court raise a host of other recently filed an appeal of the SBE’s decision in Illi- issues. Long the province of local political bosses, a nois’s First Appellate Division. study conducted in Cook County found that party The Karmeier-Maag contest has also raised slating was by far the largest determinant of elec- alarms about how traditional due process safeguards tion. Slating occurs prior to the bar association eval- can be preserved for parties who come before the uation of candidates. Individuals win slating courts at a time when judicial election costs are sky- because they are loyal partisans, not necessarily rocketing and longstanding canons of judicial sound jurists. In 2005, Speaker Madigan drew new ethics have been significantly relaxed. Under what judicial subdistricts in Lake, Kane and Winnebago circumstances, for example, is recusal by a judge counties. While the Democrats claimed that this from a case required to protect the rights of the par- was designed to increase diversity on the bench, ties? That is the issue the U.S. Supreme Court was minority organizations were not consulted, and the asked to consider in early 2006 in the case of Avery map which was produced appeared to show that v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. Jus- the new subdistricts had more to do with politics tice Karmeier, who reportedly received over then diversity. Indeed, Hispanic groups complained $350,000 in contributions from State Farm that the map created two white Democratic seats employees, lawyers and others during his 2004 elec- where it could have created one Hispanic seat. tion campaign, declined to recuse himself from a Cook County voters face another problem in case in which he cast the decisive vote reversing a its retention election of judges. The retention bal- lower court’s breach of contract verdict of over lot contained upwards of 90 judges in November $450 million against State Farm. The high court 2006, more names than even the best-intentioned declined to review Avery—or to provide any guid- voter can address competently. The length of this ance about when recusal is appropriate and consti- ballot also poses technical problems. The County tutionally necessary. However, in light of current and City have purchased new optical scan voting judicial election trends in Illinois and elsewhere, the machines, as they were required to do under the failure to provide such guidance poses yet another Federal Help America Vote Act. However, no man- threat to guarantees of fair and impartial justice. ufacturer was able to provide equipment which The issue of recusal standards is expected to grow in could physically handle a ballot as long as Cook importance as a result of Justice Anne Burke, wife County’s. As a result, the ballot is lengthy, cramped of prominent Chicago Alderman Ed Burke, being and confusing. Voters in some parts of Cook sworn in to replace Justice Mary Ann McMorrow County received ballots split over two sheets, 30 increasing fears that voters will skip over judicial pal elections in Chicago with returns being posted contests. If the growth of the retention ballot per- in a complete and timely manner. Election legisla- sists, more voters can expect to vote on multiple tion to address these issues did not emerge in the pages in future elections. 2007 legislative session. Illinois’s restrictive ballot access laws and reg- Finding: ulations severely limit voter choices at the polls. Illi- Illinois’s election laws are designed to keep third nois’s election law sets a very high standard for party candidates off the ballot and despite candidates and parties seeking to petition their way improvement, still place undue restrictions on onto the ballot. Not only do new candidates for individuals seeking to register to vote. Addi- statewide office have to present 25,000 valid signa- tionally, many jurisdictions in Illinois failed to tures of registered voters, but a series of arcane rules fully prepare themselves for the 2006 imple- allow challenges to those signatures based on a mentation of the Help America Vote Act. series of intricate issues. Signatures can be chal- An omnibus elections bill was passed in 2005, lenged if they do not exactly match the voter card which introduced an electronic voter’s guide, short- on file, if the voter previously signed a petition for ened the voter registration period, developed stan- a candidate of another party, even if for another dards for early and provisional voting and provided office; if the petition passer, signature or status is clear definitions for voting and recount practices. questioned, and even if the binding on the collec- This legislation, which brought the state into com- tion of signatures is insufficient. This lawyers’ par- pliance with HAVA, also included provisions for adise often works against the clear intent of voters ensuring that electronic voting could be audited and to have more meaningful choices on the ballot on that the state owned the source code on all electronic Election Day. voting machines. This bill also addressed issues related to nonprofit disclosure. Legislation passed in FINDING: 2006 provided some additional tweaking of the bill. By failing to provide citizens with the informa- New election equipment was used in most tion necessary for informed participation in the jurisdictions for the 2006 primary. This was a low political process and the civic life of their com- turnout election, and outside of Chicago and Cook munities, Illinois’s commercial television sta- County few problems were experienced. However, tions are not fulfilling the public interest Chicago and Cook County found their judges ill obligations they accept in exchange for their trained and much of their equipment incompati- broadcast licenses. ble, which led to a delay in calling several elections According to an analysis conducted by the and complete returns were not posted for several Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) in the days. The problems seen in the primary in Chicago four weeks prior to the November 2004 election, and Cook County were repeated there in the fall Chicago’s five highest-rated commercial television 2006 General Election. At one point in the early stations devoted only 7.8 percent of total newscast morning after election night, the Republican can- time to election coverage. News about the presi- didate for Cook County Board President led a dential race accounted for 66 percent of that cov- march to the city and county building demanding erage while 12 percent focused on the state’s U.S. the votes be counted. A special study commission Senate race, which left eight percent of election found that election officials and equipment sup- reporting for all other Illinois contests. CMPA also plier, Sequoia, failed to prepare adequately for found that the “dominant frame” of the election implementing the new equipment. The situation coverage provided—in fact, one-third of the total— was further complicated by the fact that over 90 focused on campaign strategies and activities, with judicial retention candidates were on the fall 2006 18 percent devoted to “horse race” coverage. More- general election ballot in Chicago and Cook over, fully half of the news coverage did not address County. After two very public and embarrassing issues or other facts, which might assist viewers in disasters, Chicago City officials and Sequoia seem voting or deciding for whom to vote. And finally, in to have gotten it right for the spring 2007 munici- all too familiar patterns, only 15 percent of the elec- 31 tion coverage featured candidates speaking for Republican and Democratic candidates spent more themselves, and when they had a chance to do so, than $1 million each on political commercials, the average sound bite was only 10.2 seconds long. while no candidate spending less even came close Based on these findings, Chicago Media Action and to winning their party’s nomination. the Campaign Legal Center filed a petition in Media coverage of campaigns and elections November 2005 with the Federal Communications showed little improvement in 2006, according to a Commission challenging the license renewal appli- study conducted by the University of Wisconsin cations of Chicago’s leading TV stations. Andrew Newslab. Local TV newscasts in the Midwest Jay Schwartzman, president of the Media Access devoted 2.5 times as much air time to political ads Project and the lead attorney for the petitioners, as to election coverage in the 30 days preceding the noted that the study revealed “a fundamental mar- November general election. While there is no doubt ketplace failure in the coverage of what is arguably that local television stations have shirked their pub- the most important kind of programming in a lic interest obligations, candidates should also be modern democracy—coverage of local elections.” called to task as they increasingly opted out of In this instance, added Schwartzman, Chicago’s TV debates and other hard news formats, choosing stations failed to honor their public interest obliga- instead to control their messages through paid tions both singly and in combination. The license advertising. challenge was dismissed in June 2007. Although operating on a shoestring, the Illi- While their elections news coverage was ane- nois Channel is now offering more public affairs mic in 2004, the same Chicago television stations coverage week-in and-out than almost any com- continued to profit handsomely from sales of polit- mercial outlet in the state. The legislature should ical advertising. A study completed by the Illinois authorize live coverage of House and Senate pro- Campaign for Political Reform after the March ceedings—and appropriate funds for installing cam- 2004 primary election revealed that the stations had eras in the chambers. And either the state’s major sold nearly $9 million in commercial time to U.S. cable companies or its public television network Senate candidates in the final month leading up to should voluntarily step up and provide better dis- the election—which translated into more than tribution. Currently Illinois Channel programming 5,000 ads. ICPR also observed that the winning is available in 79 communities throughout the state.

Local Media Coverage of Campaigns and Elections during Election Periods

Category Five State Average Chicago Springfield Total Advertising 9 min 46 sec 9 min 16 sec 10 min 15 sec Political Advertising 4 min 24 sec 3 min 57 sec NA Average number of Political Ads 8.81 7.89 NA Sports & Weather 6 min 58 sec 6 min 6 sec 7 min 19 sec Crime 2 min 20 sec 2 min 7 sec 1 min 39 sec Other 2 min 13 sec 2 min 29 sec 1 min 39 sec Local Interest 1 min 54 sec 2 min 10 sec 2 min 29 sec Teasers, bumpers & intros 1 min 51 sec 2 min 7 sec 1 min 58 sec Election Coverage 1 min 43 sec 2 min 2 sec 1 min Non-campaign Government News 1 min 2 sec 1 min 7 sec 1 min 26 sec Business, Economy 47 sec 42 sec 50 sec Health 45 sec 54 sec 58 sec Foreign Policy 27 sec 4 sec 23 sec Unintentional Injury 14 Sec 26 sec 5 sec

Source: University of Wisconsin Newslab 32 Policy: Advances, Recommendations and Status

Political Reform in Illinois usually occurs in Campaign Finance waves. Significant political scandals are often fol- lowed by a flurry of activity which occasionally Disclosure and Administration results in change. The pace by which reform pro- Policy Advances: posals made it on to the public agenda increased • The basic law governing campaign finance in during the early 1990s after decades of inaction. Illinois was enacted in 1976 and was not Illinois reformers have been able to achieve a modified in any significant way until a shift number of legislative victories in recent years. from annual to semi-annual reports in 1992. These reforms have made significant improve- • In 1998 the electronic filing of campaign ments to Illinois’s disclosure system and have out- finance reports and their posting on-line were lawed the most egregious ethical violations mandated. However, for the most part they have not directly • In 1998 campaign finance reports were addressed Illinois’s problems with an often cor- required to list occupation and employer rupt political culture which rewards money and information for individual donors of more power, discourages participation and oversight than $500. and weakens the legitimacy of state and local gov- • In 2003 groups that run ads that mention the ernment in the eyes of its citizens. name of a candidate in the weeks before an Political reform of any kind is no small election were required to disclose the source accomplishment in Illinois. If you mark the start of funds that paid for the communication. of the modern political reform era as post-Water- • In 2003 groups that pay for political commu- gate and the federal campaign finance law enacted nications (mailings, telephone calls, websites, in 1974, then Illinois followed up on the passage and other messages) must acknowledge in the of a modest disclosure only state campaign ad that they paid for the communication. finance law in 1976 with almost twenty years of • In 2003 not-for-profit corporations that make inactivity. Modest lobbyist registration and contributions to political committees were reporting requirements were not put into place required to disclose the source of the funds until 1994. It wasn’t until 1998 that a significant given to PACs. ethics law and major changes in campaign finance regulation were adopted. Another round of ethics Recommendations: legislation was signed into law in 2003 and • Require State Board of Elections to provide another in 2005. But nothing of substance hap- written opinions in support of their decisions pened in 2006 and the prospects for 2007 are not and make these decisions available electronically. bright. Reform legislation which would signifi- • Tighten reporting requirements to capture the cantly alter the rules of politics in Illinois in terms original source of contributions. of campaign contributions’ limits and prohibi- • Increase the frequency of campaign finance tions, lobbying, ethics, conflicts of interest, reporting (from two to four times annually). election administration and participation, trans- • Create a system of rolling A1’s throughout the parency, open government and judicial inde- year, so that contributions in excess of $1,000 pendence still waits for leaders with the political are reported electronically within 48 hours of will and citizen action with the force necessary to receipt. successfully challenge the status quo. • Expand the State Board of Elections’ enforce- ment and investigative authority. 33 Status: No legislation impacting campaign finance dis- Status: closure or the administration of the state election law Legislation establishing contribution limits by the State Board of Elections was enacted in 2007. received an informational hearing in a House com- mittee in the spring of 2007. Regulating Campaign Contributions Legislation establishing public financing for Policy Advances: State Supreme Court elections passed the Senate in • The campaign finance law adopted in 1974 the spring of 2007 but was not heard in the House. contained no prohibitions on who or what A bill (HB 1) prohibiting campaign contri- could contribute to a political campaign and butions from entities or individuals with state gov- no limits on how much can be contributed. ernment contracts passed the House with a • In 2003 the ban on soliciting or receiving con- unanimous vote in the spring of 2007. In spite of tributions on state property was adopted. having 46 of the 59 state senators as sponsors, HB • In 2003 a ban on candidates holding political 1 remains in a Senate committee at the end of fundraisers in Sangamon County (where state 2007, and its future for 2008 is uncertain. capitol is located) on days when the Legisla- ture is in session was adopted for the time Ethics period of February 1 through the adjourn- Policy Advances: ment of the spring session. • In 1998 a ban on the personal use of cam- paign funds by candidates was adopted. The Recommendations: law was clarified in 2003. • Introduce legislation outlawing political con- • In 1998 a gift ban law was enacted that pro- tributions from corporations, associations, or hibited gifts from contractors and others to individuals who have contracts with state or public officials and employees. The law also local government – “Pay to Play.” placed limits on gifts and meals from lobbyists • Establish reasonable and differentiated limits to public officials and employees. This law was on contributions to candidates by individuals, strengthened in 2003. political committees, and parties. • In 2003 bipartisan ethics commissions were • Limit contributions (and fund transfers) by created to rule on ethics disputes within the individuals and political committees to state executive branch and the constitutional party and other political committees. offices. • Ban corporate and labor union contributions • In 2003 offices of Inspector General were cre- (except through PACs)—or in lieu of a com- ated within state agencies and constitutional prehensive ban, restrict contributions by busi- offices to provide independent investigations nesses that have state contracts or are regulated of claims with issues of official misconduct by the state (such as utilities and gaming inter- and disputes over ethics. ests). • In 2003 annual ethics training was mandated • Place a ceiling on aggregate contributions for all state employees. from an individual to all state candidates dur- • In 2003 the law prohibiting public employees ing a two-year election cycle. from doing political work on taxpayer time • Introduce a system of voluntary public financ- was clarified and extended to local govern- ing for Appellate and Supreme Court candi- ments. dates. • In 2003 the law prohibiting candidates for • Limit spending of campaign funds to pur- public office from offering and promising any poses directly related to elections or con- state action in connection with the solicitation stituent services. of campaign contributions was clarified. • Limit contributions (and fund transfers) by • In 2005 the Secretary of State was required to individuals and political committees to state post the Statements of Economic Interest filed party and other political committees. by public officials and state employees on-line 34 using PDF files. A searchable database was not • In 1998 the electronic filing of campaign required. finance reports and their posting on-line were mandated. Recommendations: • In 2003 the Secretary of State was required to • Introduce legislation outlawing political con- post lobbyist registrations in an on-line, tributions from corporations, associations, or searchable database. individuals who have contracts with state or • In 2005 the Secretary of State was required to local government – “Pay to Play.” post the Statements of Economic Interest filed • Publicly disclose the investigative findings by public officials and state employees on-line reached by the Illinois Executive Ethics Com- using PDF files. A searchable database was not mission and the Illinois Executive Inspector required. General. • Require a “cooling off” period before legisla- Recommendations: tors and state employees can become lobby- • Increase transparency, so that contractor, cam- ists. paign finance and lobbyist databases interface. • Reform the state’s pension, investment, and • Require elected and appointed officials to file purchasing procedures. more detailed and frequent statements of eco- Status: nomic interests. Legislation providing public access to the • Improve public access to information on cam- investigative processes of the Illinois Executive paign finance, state contracts, lobbyist activi- Ethics Commission and the Illinois Executive ties, and the personal economic interests of Inspector General was introduced in 2007, public officials through the development of but did not advance beyond the committee interlocking, online databases. stage. • Strengthen the state’s FOIA and Open Meet- Legislation reforming state purchasing ings laws: processes and pension fund investment pro- ° The Public Access Coordinator in the cedures passed the senate in 2007 but did not Attorney General’s Office should have advance beyond the committee stage in the enforcement authority. Currently, h/she House. can recommend specific actions but can- A bill (HB 1) prohibiting campaign con- not compel a governmental body to pro- tributions from entities or individuals who duce a document. The PAC position has have state government contracts passed the become a paper tiger and does not deliver House with a unanimous vote in the spring of what it promised. 2007. In spite of having 46 of the 59 state sen- ° Open Meetings Act enforcement needs ators as sponsors, HB 1 remains in a Senate improvement, especially at the local level, committee at the end of 2007, and its future where it’s not unheard of to see all of the for 2008 is uncertain. members of a public body communicate with each other by e-mail before a meeting, while not inviting the public to contribute Transparency and Open to the discussion at that point. Government ° Complex FOIA requests should have a Policy Advances: non-judicial resolution process, something • Illinois’s Open Meetings Act was enacted in like Alternative Dispute Resolution, to 1957. Only minor modifications in the law speed the release of documents, or to have been enacted. sooner let the public know what’s out of • Illinois’s Freedom of Information law was bounds. enacted in 1984. Most modifications in the ° The state has no clear policy for retention law since its adoption have been to provide for of electronic communications. The state exemptions. archives apparently accepts electronic doc- 35 uments, then prints them out and destroys away, no sustained effort has ever gained traction. the electronic version. Regulating Lobbying ° Fees related to FOIA requests are unregu- lated and vary wildly. Some local bodies Policy Advances: charge fees based not only on their copy- • The basic law requiring lobbyist registration ing costs but also on the staff time needed and reporting was enacted in 1970. to collect and prepare the documents. • In 1993 lobbyist registration and the required These costs can be prohibitive for ordinary reporting of lobbying expenses were signifi- citizens. cantly strengthened. • In 2003 the Secretary of State was required to Status: post lobbyist registrations in an on-line, No legislation addressing these issues searchable database. advanced beyond the committee stage in the cham- • In 2004 the law barring lobbyist from work- ber of origin in 2007. ing on a contingency basis for legislative lob- bying was extended to apply to lobbying on Redistricting executive and administrative actions. Policy Advances: • The 1970 state constitution only requires leg- Recommendations: islative districts to be compact and contigu- • Require a “cooling off” period before legisla- ous. It is silent on congressional redistricting. tors and state employees can become lobby- • The redistricting process for legislative dis- ists. tricts provides for the breaking of a deadlock • Tighten up the state’s lobbyist disclosure on producing a new map by the drawing of requirements and enforcement of the Lobby- lots. In three of the four redistricting processes ist Registration Act. since 1970, a name drawn out of a hat has ° Require lobbyists to disclose the terms of given one political party complete control their contracts with clients, including their over the drawing of the new legislative map. fees and who, exactly, they lobby. • No changes in the redistricting process have ° Clearly define who must register as a lob- been adopted since the 1970 constitution byist. took effect. ° Broaden the lobbyist requirements to cover those seeking to influence the deci- Recommendations: sions of state boards, agencies and com- • Establish an independent, bi-partisan com- missions. mission to oversee the redistricting process. • Establish a redistricting process that reduces Status: partisan considerations in drawing bound- No legislation addressing these issues aries, promotes election competition, and advanced beyond the committee stage in the cham- respects minority-voting rights. ber of origin in 2007. • Mandate that redistricting occur only once a decade. Judicial Elections and Judicial Status: Independence No constitutional amendments addressing Policy Advances: redistricting were introduced in the legislature in None. 2007. Every decade since the adoption of the 1970 Since the adoption of the 1970 Illinois State Illinois State Constitution, the results of legislative Constitution, judges who stand for election operate redistricting has triggered a flurry of activity that under the same wide-open, unrestricted campaign seeks to change the way Illinois conducts redis- finance system that governs statewide, legislative tricting. But with the next redistricting ten years and local elections. 36 Recommendations: • Improve election day training for judges of • Institute a voluntary public financing system elections and other front-line personnel. for state Supreme Court elections. • Consider developing a master election judge • Institute contribution limits for all judicial program. candidates. • Standardize the implementation of early and • Replace retention elections for incumbent provisional voting. Cook County judges with a new system of • Expand the state’s electronic voters’ guide to performance based retention. include legislative and judicial candidates. • Establish a transparent and standardized process for filling judicial vacancies through Status: commission-based recommendations. No legislation dealing with these issues • Broaden the State’s fledgling electronic voters’ advanced past the committee stage in the house of guide to include appellate and circuit court origin in 2007. judicial candidates. Media Status: Policy Advances: Legislation establishing public financing for None. State Supreme Court elections passed the Senate in the spring of 2007 but was not heard in the House. Recommendations: • Establish minimum air time requirements on Election Participation and television and radio stations for candidate- Administration centered and issue-centered programming Policy Advances: prior to primary and general elections. • In 2005 the State Board of Elections was • Create a voucher system for the purchase of required to a post a voters’ guide for statewide commercial broadcast air time for political and appellate judicial candidates on the internet. advertisements, financed by an annual spec- trum-use fee on all broadcast license holders. Recommendations: • Revise and expand the lowest unit cost provi- • Adopt election-day voter registration. sion applicable to political campaign adver- • Strengthen the technical capacity and over- tisements. sight of election jurisdictions. • Clarify and enforce the public interest obliga- • Remove excessive ballot access barriers for tions of broadcasters, especially as they relate third party candidates, by reducing the num- to coverage of state and local elections. ber of signatures required. • Streamline the license renewal process by • Clarify and streamline the formal require- requiring broadcasters, among other things, ments for petitions, stating in plain language to document how they have fulfilled their what minimum standards will qualify a peti- public interest obligations. tion for acceptance. • Provide a state subsidy for the operation and • Broaden the state’s fledgling electronic voters’ expansion of the Illinois Channel. guide to include all general assembly candidates. • Allocate additional resources for the training Status: of election judges and institute the practice of These remain largely federal issues with no master judges. immediate prospect of Congressional action. J 371

Population: 10,095,643 (2006 est.); 8th of 50 states

Racial/ethnic composition: White - 81.3%; Black – 14.3%; Hispanic – 3.8%; Native American – 0.6%; Asian – 2.2%; Arab American – 1.5%; Multiracial – 1.5%

Urban population: 74.7% Rural population : 25.3% Most populous cities: 1. Detroit 2. Grand Rapids 3. Warren 4. Sterling Heights Registered Voters: 7,180,778 (Oct. 2006) 5. Flint Voting Age Population: 7,587,706 Governor: General Election Turnout (% of VAP) Jennifer Granholm (D) 2000: 58.2% 2002: 43.5% State Legislature: 2004: 64.7% 2006: 50.8% House: 58 Democrats / 52 Republicans Senate: 17 Democrats / 21 Republicans Congressional delegation: House: 6 Democrats / 9 Republicans Senate: 2 Democrats 39 Democracy in Michigan: Problems and Prospects Introduction and Executive Summary

Michigan is a closely divided state in terms of sized role of money in state politics and the need partisan politics. It is perennially a presidential bat- for political reform. The divided legislature assures tleground state. It has alternated between Demo- that neither side can bully the other in the name of cratic and Republican governors for the past 30 reform to pursue partisan advantage. years. For the past ten years the major parties’ aggre- In this context the Michigan Campaign gate legislative vote totals have ranged within two Finance Network offers a broad analysis of the percentage points of 50 percent, until 2006 when many problems that challenge democracy in Michi- Democratic vote totals hit 54 percent in a strongly gan and proposes a menu of common-sense reforms Democratic year. that are designed to make government more While Michigan has not experienced major responsive to the citizens of Michigan and the ethical scandals of the type that have unfolded in broad public interest. This assessment is a work in Ohio, Wisconsin and Illinois, money plays a large progress that includes items of different levels of and growing role in state politics. Spending in state importance. Nonetheless, some things stand out: political campaigns surpassed $190 million in • Michigan’s campaign finance system must be 2006, including a record $80 million gubernatorial reinforced to restore functional contribution campaign. Receipts among the top 150 state polit- limits and accountability in political cam- ical action committees were nearly $52 million in paigns. the 2006 election cycle – up by 55 percent com- • More information is needed from lobbyists so pared to the 2004 cycle. Annual lobbying expendi- the people and the press can know the nature tures have reached $30 million – 25 percent more and extent of lobbyists’ activity. than just three years ago. Term limits have left a • Ethics law should be extended to cover the deficit of experience and institutional memory that legislative and judicial branches of govern- is being filled by the fourth branch of government: ment. the lobbyists. • Redistricting for partisan advantage makes For the first time since term limits began to representation impervious to changing voter cut short the careers of state elected officials in sentiment. Competitiveness should be a val- 1998, Michigan has a divided legislature with ued attribute in future redistricting plans. Democrats having a majority in the House and • Barriers to voting should be removed and par- Republicans holding their majority in the Senate. ticipation in elections should be encouraged. The need to compromise will test bipartisanship • The state should establish a system of volun- and inter-party relationships as they have not been tary full public funding for Michigan tested before in the term-limits era. Supreme Court campaigns so voters have the The divided legislature brings an opportunity. opportunity to support candidates who Key legislators from both parties in both chambers demonstrably have no financial connection to of the legislature are openly talking about the over- interest groups that subsequently become

by Rich Robinson 40 litigants before the Court. Michiganians will invest their time and attention • Term limits should be scrapped. in a public discussion of the health of our own At a time in American history when hundreds democracy and how we can nurture it. To the of billions of dollars have been spent and thousands world, America’s greatest treasure is its democracy. of lives have been lost in the name of democracy in It is past time for a check-up and maintenance. J the Middle East, it is our sincere hope that all Political Context

Michigan is a closely divided state in terms of • The top 150 state political action committees partisan politics. The governorship has alternated had total receipts of $52 million for the 2006 from Republican to Democrat to Republican to election cycle. That is 55 percent more than Democrat over the past thirty years. Democratic the comparable list for the 2004 election Governor Jennifer Granholm is the fifth successive cycle. governor since the 1963 Constitution to be re-elected • The overall cost of selecting a governor has to successive four-year terms. Over the past five elec- increased from $18 million in 1998 to $40 tions from 1998 through 2006, neither major party’s million in 2002 to $80 million in 2006. share of the aggregate vote for Michigan House, Michigan’s gubernatorial public funding sys- Michigan Senate or U.S. House has risen above 54.5 tem is broken. percent; and until 2006, neither party had exceeded • Reported lobbying expenditures reached $30 52.3 percent. Michigan’s two United States Senators, million in 2006, 25 percent more than the Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow, are Democrats, total just three years before. while Attorney General Mike Cox and Secretary of • Since 2000, more than $40 million worth of State Terri Lynn Land are Republicans. candidate-focused television issue advertise- The Michigan Senate has had Republican ments have run in Michigan’s most competi- majorities since 1983, when two Democratic sena- tive statewide campaigns – frequently tors who had supported an “emergency” income tax overshadowing the candidates’ own cam- increase were recalled and replaced in special elec- paigns. These shadow campaigns that define tions by Republicans. That experience has given tax the candidates without making reference to increases the connotation of the proverbial third- voting or the election are not subject to con- rail in Michigan politics. The Michigan House had tribution limits, restrictions as to source or Republican majorities from 1999, subsequent to disclosure. the first class of state representatives being forced In May 1999, the Legislature passed, and out of office by term limits, through 2006. Democ- then-Governor John Engler signed into law, a per- rats won a 58-52 majority in the House in the sonal income tax cut from 4.4 percent to 3.9 per- November 2006 election. cent to be phased-in over five years. At the same While Michigan has not experienced major time, a phased elimination of the state’s Single Busi- ethical scandals of the type that have unfolded in ness Tax was passed and begun. The biggest tax cuts Wisconsin, Illinois and Ohio, money has a large in state history went from being introduced in and growing role in state politics. committee to being signed into law in two days. • Ninety-five percent of electoral winners have Those tax cuts have dominated governance in greater financial backing than their opponent. Michigan since they were passed. According to the The costs of winning legislative campaigns are nonpartisan Citizen’s Research Council, Michigan increasing: million-dollar campaigns for state is in a state of structural deficit, unable to keep pace House districts representing 90,000 people, with rising costs of Medicaid, corrections, employee and $2 million state Senate campaigns dotted health care and general inflationary factors. The the state in 2006. State has long-since exhausted its financial reserves, 41 and each year it is faced with a new round of bil- As a ballot initiative state, Michigan has seen lion-dollar budget cuts. its share of flashpoint issues driven by ballot com- The State’s lagging economy dominates polit- mittees in recent years: school vouchers in 2000; a ical discourse. The diminished market share and constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage and restructuring of Ford, General Motors and Chrysler gay-partner employee benefits from public employ- has rippled through suppliers and related service ers in 2004; control of gambling franchises in 2004; sectors. Michigan’s unemployment rate is stuck a ban on affirmative action in State institutions in among the highest in the nation, hovering close to 2006; and a near-miss at putting constitutional seven percent. A number of the Big Three’s buyouts spending restrictions on the ballot in 2006. and cutbacks and the related losses for suppliers are Characteristically, each of these cases involved a only beginning to have impact in 2007. narrow-base of deep-pocketed, financial sponsors In this context, the State’s Single Business Tax driving the issue: became a key issue in 2006 when it was painted as • The Prince-DeVos family and the late John a disincentive to business investment and jobs cre- Walton put more than $7.9 million into the ation. The Republican Legislature voted to acceler- 2000 school voucher campaign. ate the elimination of the Single Business Tax, and • The issue of gaming franchises was a face-off Gov. Granholm vetoed the action. Subsequently, between the established Michigan casino petitions were circulated to put the matter to a vote industry ($19.6 million) and horse-racetrack of the people, which made the question veto-proof, operators who wanted slot machines ($7.9 and on its second try, the Legislature eliminated the million). SBT – without corresponding budget cuts or off- • The Catholic dioceses of Michigan ($1 mil- setting revenue increases. The Single Business Tax lion), the D.C.-based Family Research Coun- finally was replaced with an apparently revenue- cil ($190,000), the Prince-DeVos family neutral business tax in early 2007, but there ($125,000) and the Colorado-based Focus on remains an estimated $1 billion shortfall for the $9 the Family ($74,000) drove the gay-marriage billion general fund budget for FY 2008. ban. In his unprecedented campaign for the gover- • Ward Connerly ($445,000), his American norship in 2006, Republican challenger Dick Civil Rights Coalition ($728,000) and the DeVos plowed more than $35 million of his own Center for Individual Rights ($218,000) were money into his $42 million campaign. DeVos spent the major money sources for the so-called more than $27 million for statewide television Michigan Civil Rights Initiative that bans advertising that ran continuously from mid-Febru- affirmative action in State institutions. ary to Election Day, all with the theme that he, not • The proposed constitutional amendment to Granholm, was the candidate who could lead an restrict spending (which failed to qualify for economic recovery in Michigan. The electorate did- the ballot) received 99 percent of its funds n’t buy it and stuck with Granholm, 56 percent of from two nonprofits directed by New York the vote to 42 percent. real estate mogul Howie Rich ($933,000) and For the first time since term limits took effect, the National Taxpayers Union ($155,000). Michigan has a divided Legislature. The economy These ballot committees are an ironic devel- is weak with no prospects for quick recovery. On its opment. The initiative process was designed to give better days, the Legislature speaks with one voice citizens a grass-roots mechanism for direct and and acknowledges that the State’s public universities democratic lawmaking. What they have become is must be the engines of economic transformation. a mechanism for ideologues and the extraordinar- But excepting a small bump in funding for higher ily wealthy to engage in social engineering around education in 2006, the overall trend for the past four the country and in our own state. By using paid years has been to cut funding for higher education petition circulators and mass media, these astroturf as part of the program of shared austerity. Michigan campaigns are challenging and changing the con- lags behind more economically dynamic states in stitutional and statutory norms of Michigan. Their the number of its citizens with college degrees. power derives from the wealth of a very few. 42 Political challenges abound in Michigan in makers, Republicans and Democrats in both cham- 2007. The State’s economy probably has not hit bers of the Legislature, have noted Michigan’s most bottom, and citizens are looking to the state gov- expensive elections in history with some dismay. In ernment to play a constructive role in recovery. private, many share the observation that few will While greater numbers of citizens fall into circum- make publicly: money has an oversized role in driv- stances of need, State resources to help are dimin- ing the public policy agenda in Michigan in ways ishing. The State’s general fund remains in a state of that are difficult to square with any conventional structural deficit. A state that lags in educational notion of democracy. These concerns reflect oppor- attainment must invest in improvement or face tunities to intervene and nurture democracy. long-term consequences of falling further behind. Following are statements of circumstances and With a divided Legislature it is reasonable to recommendations for policy reform in the areas of expect that compromise will be necessary, politics campaign finances, lobbying, ethics, election and lawmaking will be driven to the center and ide- administration, redistricting, term limits and judi- ologues will be marginalized. A number of law- cial independence. Findings and Recommendations Campaign Finance actions and legislative reactions. With deficiencies in regulating limits and disclosure, Michigan’s cam- Finding: paign finance system fails to protect citizens from a Michigan’s campaign finance law has major defi- government of special interests, by special interests ciencies that undermine the system of limits and and for special interests. accountability in political campaigns. A campaign finance regulatory system should Contribution Limits accomplish two things: establish the limits of what Michigan’s campaign finance law has a partial persons and interest groups can contribute to polit- system of contribution limits. Individuals’ contri- ical campaigns; and establish requirements for thor- butions to candidates’ campaign committees are ough and timely disclosure of who is giving what to limited -- for a state representative: $500; state sen- whom. ator: $1,000; statewide candidate: $3,400. Michigan’s campaign finance system has Contributions from political action commit- major deficiencies in regulating contribution limits tees (PACs) and political parties to candidates are and disclosure. Those deficiencies are widely rec- limited, too. Independent PACs and party com- ognized and easily exploited. This has created an mittees can give ten-times the individual limit; and environment where relatively few persons and inter- state parties can give statewide candidates 20-times est groups are able to dominate political campaigns the individual limit. financially, and frequently, they do so anonymously. However, there are no limits on contributions This is important because it is a statistical truth that to PACs and political parties. Unlimited contribu- 95 percent of Michigan’s electoral winners have tions to PACs and parties are commonly converted more money behind them than their opponents. into unlimited independent expenditures, thereby Perhaps more importantly, there is the eco- effectively circumventing the limits on contribu- nomic reality that campaign contributions are tions directly to candidates. investments by individuals or interest groups who There are numerous examples of individuals are seeking a policy return on investment. Beyond making unlimited contributions to PACs and par- that, it is the way in which money in politics steers ties that were subsequently converted into unlim- public policy that should concern a state’s citizens. ited independent expenditures. And unlike federal Contribution limits are a restraint against irra- campaign finance law, where an independent tionally exuberant reciprocity for campaign sup- spender is prohibited from coordinating with a can- port. Full and timely disclosure is the key to didate’s campaign committee, Michigan law speci- identifying connections between interest groups’ fies only that the independent spender cannot be 43 under the control of the candidate committee. two-year election cycle. Those standards have not Coordination is allowed. Here are some examples: prevented federal campaigns from raising record • In the 2000 Supreme Court campaign, amounts of money, even though they have limited Thomas Monaghan gave $650,000 to the the influence exerted by any one contributor. Ann Arbor PAC, which, in turn, made more than $200,000 in independent expenditures Recommendations: and gave $34,000 each to incumbent Justices In order to prevent the wealthy few from exer- Stephen Markman, Clifford Taylor and cising extraordinary influence in determining the Robert Young, Jr. outcome of elections, and introducing an extraor- • In the 2002 Democratic gubernatorial pri- dinary incentive to shape public policy in ways that mary campaign, Greektown entrepreneurs Jim do not reflect democracy: Papas and Ted Gatzaros each contributed • Michigan campaign finance law should limit $450,000 to a PAC called Citizens for contributions to PACs to $5,000 per year Responsible Leadership, which, in turn, made from any source. over $1 million in independent expenditures • Michigan campaign finance law should limit supporting former Governor Jim Blanchard. individual contributions to state political par- • In the 2002 secretary of state campaign, Paul ties to $50,000 in a two-year election cycle. Land contributed $550,000 to a PAC called • Michigan campaign finance law should limit West Michigan Leadership Caucus, which, in aggregate contributions from any individual turn, made $420,000 in independent expen- to all state candidates, PACs and political par- ditures supporting Paul Land’s daughter, Terri ties to $100,000 for a two-year election cycle. Lynn Land. • In 2004, Richard DeVos, Sr., and the late Jay Millionaire Amendment Van Andel contributed $1 million each to the The 2006 gubernatorial campaign raised to Michigan Republican Party, which, in turn, prominence the issue of self-funding of political made more than $3 million in independent campaigns. Unsuccessful Republican challenger expenditures supporting the gubernatorial Dick DeVos contributed $35.5 million to his own campaign of former Lt. Gov. Dick Posthu- campaign, a fact that gave him an overwhelming mus. campaign finance advantage. Under federal cam- • In 2006, Jon and Pat Stryker gave $5 million paign finance law, any self-funding that exceeds to a new PAC called Coalition for Progress, $350,000 for an election cycle triggers the “Mil- which, in turn, spent over $3 million for inde- lionaire Amendment,” under which the self-funded pendent expenditures supporting Governor candidate’s opponent(s) can accept contributions up Granholm and a number of Democratic leg- to three-times the normal limit. This provision lev- islative candidates. els the financial playing field to some extent, and makes it more difficult for an independently wealthy In these cases the major contributors were candidate to buy the outcome of an election. confined to giving no more than $3,400 directly to any candidate. In each case, the named major con- Recommendation: tributor(s) gave the recipient committee most of the In order to maintain an element of fairness for money it had in the election cycle. a candidate facing an opponent of extraordinary Under federal campaign finance law, no indi- wealth, and to protect the viability of candidates vidual can give more than $2,300 to any candidate who are not independently wealthy: for any election. No individual can give more than • Self-funding of a candidate’s campaign should $5,000 to any PAC in a calendar year. No individ- trigger a state Millionaire Amendment, ual can give more than $28,500 to any federal party wherein the self-funded candidate’s opponent committee in a calendar year. And no individual is allowed to raise contributions of up to can give more than $108,200 to all federal candi- three-times the normal limit. The threshold dates, PACs and party committees combined in a that activates the Millionaire Amendment 44 should vary, depending on the office and the because the people and the press have no abil- population of the constituency served by the ity to observe correlations between campaign office. contributions and legislative actions until long after the fact. Lame Duck Limits • Political action committees file only three When Michigan law was amended to elimi- reports each year. Each year there are six- nate officeholder expense accounts, a provision was month gaps between consecutive PAC reports, made to allow officeholders to use their campaign again, defying oversight by the people and the accounts for expenses incidental to holding office. press of the correlations between campaign However, certain term-limited legislators have con- contributions and legislative action. tinued to raise campaign funds at a pace that has • Ballot initiative committees are required to file exceeded that of many of their colleagues who still annual campaign finance reports, and they need their campaign funds to run for office, a fact must file reports when their question is qual- that stretches the bounds of reasonableness. Former ified for the ballot. Beyond those reports, only Senate Majority Leader Ken Sikkema, who raised pre- and post-election reports are required. more than $250,000 as a lame duck, is the most This is particularly troublesome because it has extreme example of such fundraising. become a pattern for out-of-state interest The need to raise funds for a run for some groups and individuals to come into Michi- other office is not a legitimate excuse since the gan and use paid petition circulators to qual- prospective candidate is free to establish a new cam- ify for the ballot, and then finance an initiative paign committee for that office. As a contrasting campaign on a narrow, deep-pocketed base. example of institutional restraint, Michigan judi- In 2006, the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative cial candidates are allowed to raise money for less and the Stop Over-Spending initiative (which than nine months during the year in which they failed to qualify for the ballot) were examples stand for election, and they must empty their of ballot committees that did not file a report accounts at the conclusion of the campaign. until days before Election Day. The fact that both committees received most of their funds Recommendation: from a small group of out-of-state persons and In order to limit officeholder campaign interest groups was a fact that should have fundraising to that which is relevant to running for been known to the people of Michigan during office or that which is truly necessary to fulfill the the course of the campaign. requirements of holding office: • Term-limited officeholders’ campaign com- Recommendations: mittee fundraising should be limited each year In order to provide meaningful public over- and cumulatively. sight of the movement of money in Michigan pol- itics: Scheduled Reporting • All committees - candidates, PACs, parties Michigan’s campaign finance system is a and ballot committees - should file quarterly patchwork of varying reporting requirements: campaign finance reports every year. For quar- • In a year during which a candidate is on the ters in which there is a pre- or post-election ballot, that candidate must file pre- and post- report, that report can satisfy the quarterly election campaign finance reports for the pri- reporting requirement. mary and general elections. • Candidate committees should file supplemen- • In a year when an officeholder is not on the tal contribution reports, analogous to the late- ballot, she or he must file only one campaign contribution reports that are filed between finance report for that year, no matter how pre-election reports and Election Day, each many fundraisers the candidate held and no time $500 of accumulated new contributions matter how much money she or he has raised. are received between scheduled reports. This long gap between reports is an issue 45 Late Independent Expenditures voter would differentiate between a communica- If a PAC or political party makes an inde- tion that legally must be considered a campaign pendent expenditure between its last scheduled pre- expenditure and one that is an issue ad. Technically, election campaign finance report and the election it a message – whether broadcast, printed or tele- seeks to affect, it must report the independent phonic – is not a campaign expenditure “if the expenditure within 48-hours – if the election is a communication does not support or oppose a bal- special election. If the election is a regularly sched- lot question or candidate by name or clear infer- uled election, the independent expenditure does ence” (MCL 169.206(2)). not have to be reported until the committee files The operational interpretation of this law its next regularly scheduled campaign finance derives from the “magic words” of the U.S. report – months after the election it was made to Supreme Court’s 1976 Buckley v. Valejo decision. affect. This anomaly stands in contrast to federal That is, there must be explicit reference to voting campaign finance law where all late independent using words such as “vote for,” “oppose,” “support,” expenditures must be reported within 24 hours, “defeat,” or the like. and it keeps voters from being able to evaluate One reason this distinction is lost on the over- political messages in light of their source. whelming majority of voters is the fact that con- Individuals’ independent expenditures must temporary candidates’ own ads seldom bother to be reported within 10 days and they are reported make reference to voting. Modern selling of the to the county clerk where the independent candidate is about defining the candidate or the spender lives, regardless of where the political opponent. Clearly, candidates are elevated or office being sought is located. The 2004 case impugned very effectively without making refer- where Geoffrey Fieger sponsored television adver- ence to voting. tisements attacking incumbent Supreme Court Acknowledgment of this marketing reality Justice Stephen Markman illustrates how this lax led the Congress to pass the McCain-Feingold fed- requirement allowed an independent expenditure eral campaign finance reforms (officially, the of $450,000 to legally remain undisclosed until Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, or after the election it sought to influence. The case BCRA). Under BCRA, any targeted broadcast had other complexities; nonetheless, a major information product within 30 days of a primary advertising campaign legally avoided disclosure election or 60 days of a general election is an elec- until after the election, leaving viewers and voters tioneering communication. The sponsors and no opportunity to evaluate the message in light of financing of electioneering communications must its source. be disclosed. The fact that Michigan campaign finance law Recommendations: does not recognize such third-party advertisements In order to provide timely disclosure of all as electioneering communications creates an enor- financial efforts to affect all State elections: mous campaign finance loophole. While Michigan • Any independent expenditures that are made campaign finance law prohibits corporations and subsequent to a committee’s last scheduled unions from contributing money from their treas- report before any election should be reported uries to political candidates and political action within 48 hours. committees, they are free to provide funds to polit- • Any independent expenditures sponsored by ical parties and interest groups for campaign ads individuals should be reported within 48 masquerading as issue ads. Furthermore, such soft- hours, and those that concern candidates for money contributions and the advertisements they state office should be reported to the Depart- support never have to be reported. ment of State. Since 2000, undisclosed issue ads have become a major feature of Michigan’s most con- Issue Advocacy tested statewide campaigns. Here are some exam- It is highly unlikely that any typical Michigan ples of spending for television issue ads, as compiled 46 by visits to broadcasters’ public files and other political reform for the states. In some states, such research methods: as Illinois, electioneering-communication commit- • In the 2000 Supreme Court campaign, the tees must report what they spend, but not who political parties and the Michigan Chamber gives them their money. In the state of Washing- of Commerce sponsored over $7 million ton, electioneering-communication committees worth of issue ads. report their spending and their contributors. • In the 2002 Democratic gubernatorial pri- Recommendations: mary campaign, the St. Clair Democratic In order to close a loophole that has repeat- Party sponsored more than $2 million worth edly shown itself to be bigger than candidates’ own of issue ads supporting former U.S. Rep. campaigns: David Bonior and opposing now-Gov. Jen- • All electioneering communications – broad- nifer Granholm and former Gov. Jim Blan- cast, printed and telephonic – that feature the chard. name or image of a candidate for public office • In the 2002 gubernatorial general election within 30 days of a primary election or 60 campaign, the Michigan Democratic Party days of a general election should be consid- sponsored more than $7 million worth of ered campaign expenditures and should be issue ads and the Michigan Republican Party regulated accordingly. Contributions to com- sponsored more than $1 million worth. mittees making such expenditures should be • Over the 2002 and 2004 Supreme Court limited; all receipts and expenditures should campaigns, the Michigan Chamber of Com- be reported in accordance with the same merce sponsored over $2 million worth of schedule as political action committees. issue ads supporting incumbent Republican • Robo-calls that name a candidate for public nominees for the Court. office within the window for electioneering • In the 2006 gubernatorial campaign, the communications should be required to Michigan Democratic Party sponsored nearly include a disclaimer naming the sponsor of $13 million in issue ads supporting Gov. Jen- the call. nifer Granholm and opposing Dick DeVos. Various groups spent more than $5 million for Legislative status issue ads supporting DeVos and opposing The 94th Michigan Legislature has not passed Granholm. any campaign finance reform law as of October 31, In these cases, “sponsor” is a term used loosely. 2007. The closest the House and Senate have come The television advertisements showed disclaimers to concurrence is on requiring a disclaimer for new naming these sponsors, but the contributors to the media campaign messages, particularly robo-calls. sponsors were not disclosed in any campaign The Senate passed SB 3, which would require a dis- finance report. Over $40 million worth of anony- claimer for telephonic campaign communications mous influence has been injected into Michigan’s that “expressly advocate” for or against a candidate most critical election campaigns in the last six years. or ballot question. The House passed the more Over the last four years, this same disclosure gap aggressive HB 4239, which would require a dis- also has concealed the true identity of the money claimer for any telephonic or Internet-based com- behind a new and reviled campaign irritant: the munication that “relates to a candidate.” The robo-call. Robo-calls are not required to carry a dis- House and Senate have not made a move to recon- claimer, so the hectored citizen can’t begin to iden- cile the two bills. tify who is responsible for the communication. And The House has passed an Omnibus Cam- because robo-calls normally don’t bother to men- paign Finance bill, HB 4628, to address several tion voting while defining the candidates, they are areas and reverse restrictions enacted against union not campaign expenditures, anyway, and are operated political action committees. HB 4628 unlikely to be disclosed. would: Addressing the question of issue advocacy is • Require quarterly campaign finance reporting proving to be one of the most difficult challenges of for all political and ballot committees; 47 • Require disclaimers for new-media advertise- broken in the same way as the presidential system: ments; • At least one candidate has opted out of at least • Prohibit campaign committees from paying one phase of the system in each of the last wages to candidates; three gubernatorial campaigns; • Extend prohibition against paying honoraria to • Issue ad campaigns and independent expen- all state elected officials, not legislators alone; ditures have overshadowed several candidate • Prohibit soliciting or receiving campaign con- campaigns; tributions in a state facility; • A major-party candidate has self-funded in • Raise the threshold for reporting itemized two of the last three campaign cycles; contributions from $0.01 to $20; • The spending limit of $2 million is impracti- • Move enforcement of the Campaign Finance cally low for a viable future gubernatorial cam- Act to the Director of Elections; paign; • Eliminate the requirement for annual reau- • The state campaign fund is not sufficiently thorization of PAC payroll deduction; funded from present tax-return check-offs to • Specifically articulate that it is legal for public fund significantly larger campaigns. employers to operate payroll deduction pro- The non-partisan Campaign Finance Institute cedures for contributions to public employee has recommended reforms to the presidential sys- PACs. tem that would translate well to Michigan’s guber- The prospects for favorable action on HB natorial system: 4628 in the Senate are poor. It is uncertain whether • The check-off designation of personal income other constructive campaign finance bills will move taxes should be increased; this session. • The public match for qualifying contributions should be increased to four-to-one; Finding: • Spending limits must be increased. Michigan’s gubernatorial public funding system However, in the wake of the $80 million 2006 is broken and it should be evaluated for future gubernatorial campaign, it is not certain those viability, along with the possibility of public reforms would fix what’s wrong with the guberna- funding for appellate judicial campaigns and torial public financing system. Costs appear to have legislative campaigns. escalated beyond the system’s ability to keep up. Public Financing of Gubernatorial Public Financing of Supreme Court Campaigns Campaigns Michigan’s gubernatorial public financing is Since the Supreme Court campaigns of 2000, patterned after presidential public financing. By when the six major-party nominees to fill three providing a two-to-one public match for qualify- seats raised $6.8 million and the parties and inter- ing private contributions up to $100 during the est groups spent over $7 million more on issue ads, primary election period, the system is designed to millions of dollars worth of independent expendi- make small contributors more attractive to candi- tures and issue ads have become regular features of dates, and to make candidates less dependent on Michigan Supreme Court campaigns. Since 2000, big-money contributors and interest groups. The each of the seven incumbent justices has been $1.125 million candidate grant for the general elec- elected or re-elected at least once (nine winners, tion period, again, is designed to diminish candi- overall) with support of $16 million - $6 million dates’ dependency on interest groups and big of which was spent by anonymous contributors for contributors. The condition for receiving public issue ad campaigns. financing is that the candidate must limit spending The disturbing aspect of this is that many to $2 million for each the primary and general elec- contributors become involved in cases that are tion campaigns. heard by the justices whose campaigns they have Like the presidential public financing system, supported. A study by the Institute of Money in Michigan’s gubernatorial system is broken, and it is State Politics found that 86 percent of the cases 48 heard by the Michigan Supreme Court in the While there are direct taxpayer costs for hav- 1990s involved at least one contributor to at least ing a system of full public financing for political one justice. Sometimes these contributions are campaigns, there are also costs to taxpayers and small and seemingly inconsequential, but some- consumers from laws, policies, contracts and times the contributions are very large. And with budget priorities that favor special interests over the more than one-third of the contributions coming public good. from anonymous sources, there is no way to evalu- Recommendation: ate the nature or the scale of the financial connec- To evaluate the costs and benefits to citizen- tion between the justice and the judged. taxpayers and elected officials: Invariably judges and justices say that cam- • Michigan should establish a commission to paign contributions do not affect their decisions. evaluate the merits of a system of voluntary But, one can imagine having a day in court and full public funding for all State election cam- knowing that your opponent has invested hundreds paigns. of thousands of dollars in selecting the judges. There would be little comfort in the fact that such invest- Legislative status ing may have been done anonymously through an SB 128, which would provide for voluntary issue ad campaign. Such investments undermine full public funding of Michigan Supreme Court trust and confidence in judicial impartiality. campaigns, has been introduced but not given a While Michigan’s public campaign fund committee hearing in the Senate. The House Judi- appears to be inadequate to sustain future guberna- ciary Committee has been holding hearings on torial campaigns, it should be sufficient to sustain judicial independence and recusal and it may con- Michigan’s contemporary Supreme Court cam- sider a public financing bill yet in 2007. Prospects paigns. Providing full public funding for Supreme are likely to be better in the House than the Senate Court campaigns would allow Michigan voters to for such a bill. select candidates who demonstrably have no finan- In resolving the general fund budget deficit cial connection to litigants whose cases they judge. for the current fiscal year, a new hardship for pub- That would be a major step to improve the appear- lic financing has been introduced: $7 million from ance and the reality of judicial impartiality. the state campaign fund has been re-appropriated to address a portion of the $800 million deficit in Recommendation: FY 2007 general fund budget. This action was In order to provide Michigan voters the taken in defiance of more than two million taxpay- opportunity to vote for candidates for Michigan ers who checked a box on their state income tax Supreme Court who demonstrably have no finan- returns, directing $3 of their tax liability to the state cial ties to the litigants who argue cases before campaign fund. them: • Michigan should establish a voluntary system of full public financing for Michigan Supreme Lobbying Court campaigns. Finding: Public Financing for All State Campaigns Michigan’s lobbying and ethics laws fail to The most compelling arguments for a com- require sufficient disclosure of lobbying activity plete system of full public financing are those from and public officials’ personal financial interests; elected officials in Maine and Arizona – the states and they are inadequate in defining and requir- that have established records with such systems. ing ethical conduct for public officials and Liberal, centrist and conservative lawmakers cite the employees. fact that they don’t have to owe anything to lobby- ists and special interests as a liberating factor that Disclosure allows them to act boldly and vote more faithfully Michigan’s system for disclosure of lobbying for the interests of their constituents. activity has a few strengths and a number of impor- 49 tant deficiencies. Since it is the responsibility of lob- have to be disclosed. Lobbyists cannot give byists to represent specific interests in decision- lobbyable officials items whose value exceeds making on public policy issues, it is incumbent $53 in a month. upon them to provide comprehensive disclosure of In addition to the shortcomings in disclosure lobbying activity. Their important role and overall because beneficiaries of lobbying expenditures impact is an essential part of state government. below the reporting thresholds are not identified, In 2006, 1,200 Michigan lobbyists reported there are major shortcomings in regard to what lob- lobbying expenditures of $30 million – a level of byists report about their activities. Lobbyists do not spending that is up by more than 25 percent from have to report what issues, bills, regulations or pub- just three years before. This amount includes lic contracts they are trying to influence as they do $500,000 for food and beverage expenditures, an their work. Lobbyists only have to report whoever amount that would be sufficient to provide every has hired their services at any point in time, but member of the Legislature a $30 lunch for each ses- there is no requirement to relate lobbying expendi- sion day in Lansing. tures in a given reporting period to the issues on Lobbyists (interest groups and multi-client which the lobbyist worked during the same period. firms) and lobbyist agents (persons who work for That contrasts with federal lobbying regulation, lobbyists) file semi-annual reports in January and where each report must list the issues or bills on August of each year. The Department of State stores which the lobbyist is working; or lobbying disclo- those reports in a searchable database so public offi- sure in Wisconsin, where the lobbyist must file a cials, journalists and concerned citizens can find public report of interest in an issue or bill before it information about a particular lobbyist, or generate can begin to work on the issue. In Wisconsin, lob- lists of all lobbyists’ expenditures for a given report- byists also file a semi-annual report that discloses ing period or the life of the database (beginning in billable hours and expenditures for each issue on 2001). Individual lobbyists’ reports identify the which they work. lobbyist’s employees and those who have employed the lobbyist. Recommendations: Lobbyists report gross expenditures for lobby- In order to make a complete public record of ing activity, but there are various reporting thresh- the extent and nature of lobbying activity to influ- olds for specific expenditures made to benefit ence public policy: directly a lobbyable official (elected officeholder or • All expenditures to benefit lobbyable officials high administration official): that exceed a low, uniform dollar threshold • Lobbyists must identify beneficiaries of food should be reported by the lobbyists who make and beverage expenditures only if they reach them. $53 in a month, or if those food and bever- • The issues, bills, regulations and public con- age expenditures reach $325 for a calendar tracts that a lobbyist is seeking to influence year. during any reporting period should be identi- • Lobbyists must identify the beneficiaries of fied in that report. travel expenditures, or reimbursement for travel and lodging expenses for a lobbyable Revolving Door official on “public business” (such as going to The “revolving door” refers to movement from a resort to brief an association meeting on leg- government to lobbying without interruption. islative prospects) only when they reach $700. Stated plainly, the concern about the revolving door • Financial transactions (purchases, sales, loans, is that the elected officeholder or administration exchanges) between lobbyists and lobbyable official will work on behalf of a special interest officials must be reported only when they rather than for the broader public interest in order reach a threshold of $1,075. to enhance his or her post-government employment • Lobbyists can give lobbyable officials items prospects. A mandatory interval, or “cooling off” (such as tickets for entertainment) whose period, is meant to be a prophylactic against the value is less than $53 and those items do not temptation to sell-out the public interest. 50 Michigan law does not allow an officeholder Ethics to resign from office and begin lobbying within the period for which the officeholder was elected. Fed- Michigan’s framework of ethics for public offi- eral law prohibits officeholders from lobbying for- cials is marked by a degree of asymmetry. The Stan- mer peers within one year. Twenty-five states have dards of Conduct for Public Officers and cooling-off periods of at least one year, including Employees (P.A. 196 of 1973) applies to the exec- six states that block the revolving door for two utive branch but not the legislative branch or the years. judicial branch. On the other hand, legislators are This issue is particularly important in Michi- specifically prohibited from accepting honoraria gan’s term-limited environment. The majority of while other officeholders are not. The State frame- new state representatives will have a legislative work of ethics should cover all officeholders and career of six years or less. For those who find ful- employees to preclude unethical conduct that fillment in the world of public policy but face lim- enriches the public official or injures the State or ited electoral possibilities, lobbying presents the its citizens. chance for a highly rewarding career. To cite one example of the complexities of the Conduct revolving door situation, consider former Speaker The Standards of Conduct for Public Officers of the House Rick Johnson. During the four years and Employees prescribe that public officials: that Johnson was Speaker, he raised $280,000 in • Shall not divulge confidential information his candidate campaign account, $592,000 in his acquired in the course of employment in two leadership PACs and $816,000 for two 501 (c) advance of the time prescribed for its author- (4) organizations – and he controlled the legislative ized release to the public; calendar for the Michigan House. Johnson went • Shall not represent his or her personal opinion immediately from his speakership to a lobbying as that of an agency; career. In this case, there is no concrete evidence to • Shall use personnel resources, property, and suggest that Johnson pursued a legislative agenda funds judiciously and solely in accordance that paved the way to his lobbying position, but is with prescribed constitutional, statutory, and not hard to see how the opportunity could lure a regulatory procedures and not for personal lesser person to do so. gain or benefit; Recommendations: • Shall not solicit or accept a gift or loan of In order to limit the temptation for an office- money, goods, services, or other thing of value holder or a high administration official to serve a for the benefit of a person or organization, special interest at the expense of the public interest other than the State, which tends to influence to enhance the individual’s prospects for a lobby- the manner in which the public officer or ing career: employee or another public officer or • An elected officeholder should be subject to a employee performs official duties; mandatory one-year cooling off period before • Shall not engage in a business transaction in he/she can become a registered lobbyist. which the public officer or employee may • Top appointed administration officials should profit from his or her official position or be subject to a mandatory one-year cooling off authority or benefit financially from confi- period before they can become registered lob- dential information which the public officer byists. or employee has obtained or may obtain by reason of that position or authority; Legislative status • Shall not engage in or accept employment or The House passed a one-year moratorium on render services for a private or public interest lobbying for former legislators, elected executives and when that employment or service is incom- top administration appointees by a vote of 99-6. patible or in conflict with the discharge of the Neither HB 4313 nor any other lobbying reform bill officer or employee’s official duties or when has been given a committee hearing in the Senate. that employment may tend to impair his or 51 her independence of judgment or action in who have organized legal defense funds to dis- the performance of official duties; close the finances of his or her committee. • Shall not participate in the negotiation or exe- HB 4001 passed the House unanimously, cution of contracts, making of loans, granting 107-0. of subsidies, fixing of rates, issuance of per- • HB 4315 would prohibit legislators from vot- mits or certificates, or other regulation or ing on matters in which they have a substan- supervision relating to a business entity in tial conflict of interest. The bill passed the which the public officer or employee has a House on a vote of 101-6. personal or financial interest. • HB 4285 would require State officeholders and candidates for public office to file state- Recommendations: ments of personal financial interest. The bill In order to provide a meaningful framework passed the House on a vote of 89-19. of ethical conduct for all governmental actors: • The State Standards of Conduct for Public Redistricting Officers and Employees should be made to apply to the legislative and judicial branches of Finding: government. Michigan’s redistricting system fails to function • All State officeholders and top appointees without judicial intervention unless there is sin- should be prohibited from accepting honoraria. gle-party control of state government; and it fails to mandate competitive districts that are respon- Personal Financial Disclosure sive to movement in voter sentiment. Michigan is one of only three states that do not require public officials to file a statement of per- Recent History sonal financial circumstances. As with public offi- The 1963 Michigan Constitution established cials in 47 states, federal officeholders and judges a bipartisan Commission on Legislative Appor- must file personal financial statements. tionment comprising four Democrats and four While there is some degree of intrusion on the Republicans that was given responsibility for draw- public official’s private life inherent in personal ing Michigan legislative districts. In its first delib- financial disclosure, the tradeoff is transparency that erations in 1963, the Commission deadlocked at allows the people and the press to see that the pub- four votes each in considering competing plans. lic official is not using his or her office as a means The Michigan Supreme Court selected from to personal enrichment. between the plans one that gave partial considera- tion to area representation for the state Senate. Such Recommendation: plans were declared unconstitutional by the 1964 In order to allow public oversight of whether U.S. Supreme Court decision in Reynolds v. Sims, a public official’s actions avoid ethical transgressions which required both houses of state legislatures to for personal enrichment: be apportioned in accordance with the principle of • Michigan should require elected officials one person-one vote. including judges and top administrative The Commission on Legislative Apportion- appointees to file periodic reports of their real ment deadlocked again in deliberations for the property holdings, assets, outside income and 1972 and 1982 redistricting. In 1982, the Michigan creditors; and material transactions that Supreme Court unanimously ruled the Commis- change their financial circumstances. sion on Legislative Apportionment unconstitutional because the provisions of the Constitution of 1963, Legislative status which the Commission was created to implement, Although the Senate has failed to take action had been held to be unconstitutional by the U.S. on any ethics reform legislation, the House has Supreme Court in Reynolds v. Sims. The Court passed three notable bills so far this session: established Guidelines for Reapportionment that • HB 4001 would require any elected officials included acceptable population variances among 52 districts, a preference for compact and contiguous cratic governor. Both United States senators are districts, and a mandate to minimize the breaking of Democrats, but the secretary of state and attorney city, township and county jurisdictional boundaries general are Republicans. Michigan has voted for in forming legislative districts. Retired Director of Democratic presidential candidates in the last four Elections Bernard Apol administered the regula- elections, but the state is perennially considered a tions as the Court’s Reapportionment Agent and battleground and draws intense presidential cam- developed a redistricting plan that withstood legal paigning. challenge. Similarly, aggregate votes for legislative offices With a Republican Senate and Democratic are closely divided. These data are a key in evaluat- House in 1991, the parties bypassed the legislative ing the fairness of Michigan’s redistricting process. process and filed suits in two different federal dis- State House trict courts regarding Congressional redistricting. •In 1998, aggregate votes for state representa- The cases were consolidated, and the 6th Federal tives were split 49.79% for Republicans and District Court of Appeals established a three-judge 49.17% for Democrats. That year Republi- panel to handle the case. The panel rejected plans cans captured 58 of 110 seats, or 52.73% of submitted by the political parties and instructed House seats. Comparing percentage of seats Eric Swanson of the Department of Management to percentage of votes, the Republicans had a and Budget to draw a plan to comport with its differential of 2.97%. guidelines. In parallel, responding to a suit in state •In 2000, Democrats captured 50.63% of the court, the Michigan Supreme Court established a votes for state representative and the Republi- three-judge panel of state judges to act as Special cans drew 48.19%. Republicans, however, Masters for a state legislative redistricting process. held their 58-52 majority, so the differential After considering plans submitted by the political between their seats and their votes grew to parties, the Special Masters recommended a plan to 4.54%. the Michigan Supreme Court that was adopted and •In 2002, the first election subsequent to the subsequently withstood a challenge in federal court 2001 redistricting that was completely con- by the NAACP under the Voting Rights Act. trolled by Republicans, Republican House In 1996, the redistricting standards, popularly candidates won 50.02% of the votes com- known as the Apol Standards, were written into pared to the Democrats’ 49.31%, and in the statute in P.A. 463 of 1996. The law also gave the process they built their majority in the House Michigan Supreme Court original jurisdiction to to 63-47. In this case, the differential between review a plan enacted by the legislature and the Republican seats and votes grew to 7.25%. authority to develop its own plan if the legislature •In 2004, Democrats again won the majority fails to act by November 1st of the year following a of votes cast for state representatives, out- decennial census. polling the Republicans 51.03% to 48.16%. In 2002, Republicans held majorities in the The Republicans’ majority in the House state House and Senate, as well as the governor’s shrank to 58-52, and the differential between office and a majority on the nominally nonpartisan their percentage of seats and votes diminished Supreme Court. Redistricting for the state legisla- to 4.57%. ture was enacted and not subjected to legal chal- •In 2006, the Democratic candidates for state lenge. The Congressional plan was enacted and House took 54.51% of the popular votes withstood a challenge based on claims of partisan compared to the Republicans’ 44.74%. While gerrymandering and violation of the Voting Rights the Democrats took the majority of House Act. seats, 58-52, the Republicans still had a posi- tive differential in comparing percentage of Outcomes seats to percentage of votes: 2.53%. Michigan is a closely divided state in partisan State Senate political terms. After a three-term Republican gov- •In 1998, Republican candidates for state Sen- ernor, the State has elected and re-elected a Demo- ate won 52.33% of the vote, compared to 53 46.68% for Democrats. The Republicans won voters may have a jaundiced view of a legislative 24 of the 38 Senate seats, or 63.16% of the body as a whole, but they tend to view their own total. The Republican differential between incumbent representative more favorably than the seats and votes was 10.83%. body as a whole. This factor combined with the •In 2002, after the Republican-controlled nearly universal incumbent advantage in campaign redistricting, the Republicans took 50.07% of finances suggests that incumbents will run more the popular vote compared to the Democrats’ strongly than a generic candidate of the incum- 49.24%. The Republicans won a 22-16 bent’s party in an open seat. Thus, incumbents can majority and their seat-to-vote differential was be expected to outpoll their party’s base vote and 7.8%. overstate partisan support for their party, at least •In 2006, the Democrats won 53.79% of the nominally. vote compared to the Republicans’ 45.01%, And thirdly, voters with Republican or Dem- yet the Republicans still maintained a 21-17 ocratic inclinations are not uniformly distributed majority in seats. The Republicans’ seat-to- across the state. Notably, there are large majorities vote differential grew to 10.25%. of Democratic voters in urban areas, particularly U.S. House Detroit. And there are Republican majorities across •In 1998, Democrats took 49.21% of the pop- large bands of western and northern Michigan and ular vote compared to the Republicans’ rural eastern Michigan. This means that the most 48.18%. The Democrats won 10 of the 16 scrupulously drawn districts will not necessarily seats in the Michigan delegation, for a differ- yield legislative delegations that precisely match ential of 13.29% of Democratic seats to votes. partisan voter percentages. •In 2000, Democrats captured 52.03% of U.S. Despite these limitations, two important House votes while the Republicans took trends are discernible in these data. First, one can 43.91%. The Democrats won nine of 16 readily see that the smallest districts, those of the seats, or 56.25% of the seats in the delegation. Michigan House, are most responsive to aggregate The Democrats’ seat-to-vote differential was movements of voter sentiment. Throughout the 4.22%. five elections, the percentage differential between • After the Republican controlled redistricting seats and votes remained in a range from 2.53% to of 2002, Republicans took 47.95% of the 7.25% for House seats. The more populous dis- popular vote compared to the Democrats tricts are less likely to respond to swings in the 49.32%. However, the Republicans took nine aggregate vote percentage, with U.S. House districts of 15 seats, or 60% of the delegation, for a less likely than state Senate districts. The Apol Stan- seat-to-vote differential of 12.05%. dards provide a significant measure of insulation •In 2004, Republicans won 49.32% of the against a partisan gerrymander at the level of popular vote compared to the Democrats’ smaller districts, but the 2006 election shows evi- 47.97%. The Republicans held their nine dence that the larger districts as they are drawn are seats for a seat-to-vote differential of 10.68%. highly impervious to flipping from one party to the •In 2006, Democrats won 52.72% of the U.S. other, even when there are significant swings House votes compared to the Republicans’ between the parties in the percentage of votes cast. 44.54%. However, Republicans still held their The second important point in these data is nine seats for a seat-to-vote differential of that the differential between percentage of seats and 15.46%. percentage of votes moved uniformly in favor of There are certain limitations on the utility of Republicans after the Republican-controlled redis- this analysis. First, voters are voting for individual tricting of 2002. That is a predictable result because candidates, not necessarily parties, so aggregate that is the intent of a partisan-controlled redistrict- counts for parties across legislative districts can ing process: to give the greatest possible return on introduce some distortion of aggregate voter senti- the votes that are cast by one’s own party. This ment. result is achieved by conceding a minimum number Secondly, numerous polls have indicated that of districts to the opposition, and drawing bound- 54 aries that maximize the number of the opposition Service Bureau is responsible for drawing party’s voters in those districts. decennial redistricting plans that incorporate These trends invite a question: How is democ- the Apol Standards, value competition and racy served by giving a once-in-a-decade electoral accommodate minority representation. Those victor the next decade’s worth of political spoils? nonpartisan plans would have to be approved Why should one party be allowed to defy move- by the legislature and governor; and if the ments in voter sentiment for a decade because it nonpartisan body is unable to create a plan won the election prior to the publication of the that gains approval, the process would be decennial census? And how effective is a redistrict- turned over to the courts. ing system that ends up in the courts unless there is a partisan sweep in the election before the census? Legislative status There is a better way. In Iowa the nonpartisan Senate Joint Resolution D would amend the Legislative Service Bureau draws the redistricting Michigan Constitution and establish an independ- plans. The Iowa legislature and governor must ent commission to drawn state and federal legisla- approve those plans in order for them to take effect. tive districts following the decennial census. SJR D If the Service Bureau is unable to create a plan that has been referred to the Committee on Govern- meets approval after three attempts, the process is ment Operations and Reform, where it has not then turned over to the courts. However, in the last been given a hearing. three redistricting cycles, the plans have been adopted without intervention by the courts. Redistricting in Michigan is more compli- Term Limits cated than Iowa because Michigan is more demo- Finding: graphically diverse than Iowa. This means that Term limits have diminished knowledge, expe- greater attention must be given to the Voting Rights rience and institutional memory in the legisla- Act and representation for minority voters. ture and ceded power from the legislature to the In addition, Iowa’s redistricting mapmakers fourth branch of government: the lobbyists. take a position of neutrality on the issue of com- Michigan law has limited State officeholders’ petitiveness. They draw district lines without refer- terms in office since 1992. Michigan allows three ence to partisan registration or past partisan voting two-year terms for State representatives, and two patterns. This practice neglects the opportunity to four-year terms for State senators and elected exec- build into the design a preference for competition. utives. Michigan is one of 21 states that enacted Competitive elections are better for democracy term limits in the early 1990s. than noncompetitive ones. They are more engag- In acknowledging the term-limit movement ing for voters who have genuine reason to believe in his 1991 State of the Union address, President that their vote matters. Competition can be George H.W. Bush noted that, “the American peo- enhanced in voting districts by acknowledging vot- ple are increasingly concerned about big-money ers’ party preferences and balancing partisan distri- influence in politics.” If limiting the influence of bution, as long as this preference doesn’t introduce money in politics was genuinely a driving motiva- unacceptable distortions to other considerations, tion for term limits, it has not produced the desired such as minimizing divisions of local jurisdictions effect. In a valedictory appearance on Michigan and keeping districts contiguous and compact. Public Television’s “Off the Record,” outgoing Sen- ate Majority Leader Ken Sikkema stated that the Recommendation: impact has been the opposite: campaigns have In order to have legislative representation that grown ever more expensive, and the pressure on leg- accurately reflects voter sentiment, is responsive to islative leaders to raise money is relentless. Statis- changes in voter sentiment, values competition and tics support Sikkema’s assertion. There has been a respects minority representation: steady increase in the median cost of legislative • Michigan should institute a system wherein a campaigns, and 2006 saw numerous legislative nonpartisan entity such as the Legislative campaigns that cost over $1 million. Annual lob- 55 bying expenditures in Michigan now exceed $30 than seats that are being defended by an incum- million. bent, but there is less competition among incum- Term limit advocates said restricting officials’ bent-defended seats, evidence of an apparent tenure would bring to Lansing a class of “citizen strategy to wait out the incumbent until he or she lawmakers” who would be less responsive to the must leave office. Overall, it is questionable influence of special interests. The increasing flow of whether the competitiveness of an election is more money into political campaigns and lobbying casts a function of term limits or other factors such as great doubt on that assumption. Legislators may redistricting and a party or caucus’s capacity to raise contend that campaign contributions and lobby- money. ists’ goodies don’t sway votes, but viewed from the The argument that term limits ends political perspective of interest groups who are rational eco- careerism, also, is not borne out by experience. Sar- nomic actors, campaign contributions and lobbying baugh-Thompson, et al., show that more legislators perquisites are investments by the groups that are now come to Lansing with experience as elected seeking a return on investment – a policy return. officials than prior to the era of term limits. Many Interest groups also benefit from an advantage run for mayor, county commission or the other leg- in information and institutional memory that lob- islative chamber upon being termed-out of office. byists hold over inexperienced legislators. A telling Frequently, an immediate family member succeeds example was the occasion in November 2005 when the term-limited officeholder. Rather than ending the House passed a rewrite of the Michigan political careerism, term limits has stimulated an Telecommunications Act. House Energy and Tech- era of political musical chairs. nology Chairman Mike Nofs noted the daunting After the first representatives left the House technical task his committee had faced, and he because of term limits at the end of 1998, both observed that their knowledge deficit could only be chambers of the Legislature had a Republican overcome with the able assistance of lobbyists for majority for the next eight years. Throughout this the telecommunications industry. That testimony period of single-party domination, bipartisanship should have been ominous to citizen-consumers, was not necessary and, by most accounts, it was not and a warning that term limits have resulted in the cultivated. Sen. Sikkema, again commenting on ceding of power from the Legislature to the fourth “Off the Record,” noted that legislators simply do branch of government, the lobbyists. not have enough time to develop trusting relation- In fact, the danger of the knowledge and expe- ships that allow them to solve tough problems and rience deficit is present throughout the lawmaking to work effectively “across the aisle.” With a divided process. Three speakers of the House had only one Legislature beginning in January 2007 and the first term in the body before they assumed control of real requirement for inter-party compromise since the calendar. A chairman of the Appropriations term limits have taken effect, the compressed inter- Committee was appointed who had never been on personal relationships will be tested as they have not the committee – and he was responsible for writ- been up to this point. ing one side of a $40 billion budget. Chairs of all Overall, term limits have been a failed exper- committees are expected to learn on the job, but iment. The State’s structural budget deficit is a there are no seasoned mentors from whom they can robust example of a bold, ideological tax-cutting learn. initiative that was not coupled with a bold pro- Other reasons that were offered as rationale gram-cutting initiative. The consequences of a for term limits included greater voter interest and political dunk-shot were left for a successor Legis- more competitive elections. In the 2004 book, The lature to clean up – and so far that still hasn’t hap- Political and Institutional Effects of Term Limits, pened. Accountability is lacking because actors can Marjorie Sarbaugh-Thompson, et al., consider move on and let their successors inherit the heavy those points in detail and show them to be false lifting of legislating. promises. Voter turnout has not increased as a func- Restricting the power of citizens to elect tion of term limits. Open seats occur more fre- whomever they choose does not enhance our quently, and they generally are more competitive democracy. 56 Recommendation: tion. Some issues are straightforward and simple, In order to give voters the best possible choices while other opportunities require more ambitious of whom to elect; to accommodate more knowl- thinking. edgeable officeholders; and to elevate accountabil- ity in governing: No-excuse absentee ballots • Michigan’s term limits should be eliminated. Michigan voters are eligible for absentee voter ballots if they meet one of six criteria: over age 60; Legislative status disabled; observing a religious consideration; absent Many legislators are outspokenly critical of from the area on Election Day; incarcerated and term limits but they are unwilling to address the awaiting trial; or working in another precinct on repeal or modification of them because of an unwill- Election Day. Personal convenience is not consid- ingness to appear self-serving. The consensus posi- ered an acceptable reason for being able to vote tion of legislators appears to be that if term limits absentee. In addition, one is not eligible to vote by are to be amended, it will have to be a citizen driven mail for the first time if he or she registered by mail, initiative. While nearly all Lansing insiders agree that a condition that can be particularly troublesome for term limits have had a seriously negative effect on college students. the Legislature, polling has revealed that the broad Legislation to remove the limiting require- electorate is unmoved. A broad cross-section of ments has been introduced in several legislative ses- interest groups would like to take the issue on, but sions by Republicans and Democrats, but never by it appears to be a losing proposition at this point. both at once.

Recommendations: Election Administration In order to remove barriers to voting for citi- Finding: zens: Michigan has a legacy of leadership in election • Voters should be granted absentee ballots administration but it retains unwarranted bar- upon request without having to specify a rea- riers to voting that should be eliminated; and son. there are anomalies that undermine the func- • Mail-in registration should accommodate a tioning of democracy. witnessing signature by any sworn election Of the eight states that administer elections official or a certified notary public, and first- on the local level, Michigan is the largest state in time voters who have registered by mail terms of population and geography. Michigan’s should be allowed to vote absentee ballot. election system is administered by 83 county clerks, 274 city clerks and 1,242 township clerks, making Registration before voting it the most decentralized elections system in the Michigan law requires voters to be registered nation. 30 days prior to Election Day. This barrier to vot- Michigan’s history in election administration ing is unnecessary in the era of the Qualified Voter is marked by notable achievements in early adop- File and it translates to lower voter turnout than in tion of some election reforms. Michigan first gave states that allow same-day registration. its citizens the opportunity to register to vote at Department of State branch offices in 1975, 18 Recommendation: years before “motor voter” became a federal stan- In order to diminish a needless barrier to voting: dard. Michigan also was a leader in adopting a • Adopt a deadline for voter registration that is statewide voter registry (the Qualified Voter File) less than the current deadline of 30 days prior in the late 1990s. Michigan does not allow felons to to an election. vote while they are incarcerated, but voting rights are restored after release from prison. Candidate Order on the Ballot Michigan is now in a position where new Michigan ballots list the candidates for each reforms are necessary to encourage voter participa- office beginning with the candidate who is of the 57 party of the incumbent secretary of state. Through has been noted that Green candidates may be the the long tenure of Secretary of State Richard reason that Republican Senators Roger Kahn and Austin, Democrats were listed first. The year 2007 Tom George were able to pull out plurality wins, marks the thirteenth consecutive year of listing which was a difference that was sufficient to keep Republicans first. Democrats from taking control of the Senate. Stanford Professor Jon A. Krosnick has con- Instant Run-off Voting (IRV) offers a solution ducted research on the significance of the order in to the problem of plurality winners. IRV voters are which names are presented to voters and found that allowed to make a second choice selection so that if being placed first is generally worth two percentage no candidate pulls a majority of votes, the sup- points – enough to turn a 49-51 loss to a 51-49 porters of the candidate(s) who polled least will win. In about half the elections Krosnick studied, have their second choice count, until one candidate the advantage of being listed first was even greater. does have the support of a majority of those who Krosnick identifies Ohio’s system as the model have voted. This has the effect of selecting the can- of fairness in regard to order of presentation of can- didate who genuinely best suits the majority of vot- didates. There, candidates are rotated precinct by ers, and it removes the stigma from voting for a precinct, so each candidate will be listed first an minor party candidate. This could allow minor par- equal number of times. ties an opportunity to grow.

Recommendation: Recommendation: In order to neutralize the advantage of being In order to elect officials who best suit the the first name the voters see: majority of voters: • The order in which candidates’ names are pre- • Michigan should implement a system of sented to voters should be rotated precinct by Instant Run-off Voting. precinct, so candidates will be listed first an equal number of times in the aggregate. Reforming the Initiative/Referendum Process Majority Winners – Instant Run-off Ballot questions in 2006, particularly the Voting Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, have drawn atten- Electoral winners who pull a plurality of votes tion to serious weaknesses in the voter initiative rather than a majority frequently raise a level of dis- process. In particular, hundreds of persons appeared satisfaction among voters. Supporters of President before the State Board of Canvassers and the Michi- George H. W. Bush felt that Ross Perot was a gan Civil Rights Commission to state that they had spoiler who made Bill Clinton a plurality winner. been duped into signing a petition to put the Similarly, supporters of Al Gore felt that Ralph MCRI on the State ballot. In the testimony of Nader had been a spoiler who made George W. many, including a state judge, there were charges Bush a plurality winner. that petition circulators had misrepresented by 180 In Michigan minor party candidates some- degrees the intent of the MCRI. A federal judge times draw enough votes to make the difference agreed that fraud had probably occurred, but he between a majority winner and a plurality winner. had no remedy for the situation. Minor party candidates are loath to view themselves In the Campaign Finance section of this doc- as “spoilers,” but that is precisely how they are seen ument, there is a narrative on the degree to which by large numbers of the public. And this is a prob- several recent initiative campaigns have been lem that cuts both ways with both major parties advanced by a few well-heeled out-of-state persons enduring losses due to a minor party spoiler effect. or interest groups. The MCRI is an example where Current Representatives Kathleen Law (D-Gibral- paid petition circulators, largely funded by Ward tor) and David Robertson (R-Grand Blanc) may Connerly and his California-based American Civil well owe their initial winning margin to voters Rights Coalition, were able to get an issue to the pulled away from their major party opponent by a ballot and ultimately win the vote. The proposed Libertarian and a Green, respectively. In 2006, it constitutional amendment to restrict State spend- 58 ing known as Stop Over-Spending (which failed to a task force on reforming the ballot initiative reach the ballot) was another astroturf campaign process. Among the task force’s key recommenda- that was 99 percent financed by out-of-state organ- tions are: require petition circulators to be paid izations. In both these cases, the public’s right to hourly, not per signature; and a requirement that know who is supporting these initiatives would each congressional district be represented in the sig- have been better served if all State political com- nature gathering process. Bills have not yet been mittees were required to report their campaign introduced. finances quarterly. In order to address the complaint of fraudu- Judicial Independence lent misrepresentation of the intent of a ballot ini- tiative in petition gathering, the overall process can Finding: be re-ordered so that the request for ballot language Michigan’s proclivity for multi-million dollar and hearings on the ballot language precede peti- Supreme Court campaigns undermines the tions going into the field. This would mean that appearance and the reality of judicial independ- petitions would carry the precise 100-word descrip- ence and impartiality. tion of the question that would ultimately appear on the ballot. Election Campaigns As noted in the Campaign Finance section of Recommendations: this document, Michigan Supreme Court election In order to build integrity in the ballot initia- campaigns have routinely become multi-million- tive process: dollar endeavors. Since 2000, the seven current jus- • Fraud in the ballot initiative process should be tices of the Michigan Supreme Court have each prohibited by law. faced the electorate – two of them twice – and they • Ballot committees should be required to file have been supported in those successful campaigns quarterly campaign finance reports. by more than $10 million in reported contributions • Ballot language should be settled and dis- and independent expenditures. In addition, Justices played on petitions that are circulated. Markman, Taylor, Weaver and Young have been backed by more than $6 million worth of issue Legislative status advertising sponsored by the Michigan Chamber of HB 4048, which would allow no-excuse Commerce that defined the candidates in their absentee voting, has passed the House Ethics and respective races without making explicit reference Elections Committee, and it has a good probability to voting. None of the contributors to the Cham- for passage in the full House. SB 12, substantively ber’s issue campaigns is disclosed in any campaign the same as HB 4048, has not been given a com- finance report. mittee hearing in the Senate. The hazard of highly expensive judicial elec- SB 13 and HB 4910 would end the require- tion campaigns is that they create financial con- ment to register 30 days in advance of Election Day nections between campaign contributors and and provide for Election Day registration. To date, justices who frequently sit in judgment of those neither bill has gotten a committee hearing. same contributors. A study by the Institute on A 1997 bill requiring photo identification to Money in State Politics showed that 86 percent of vote (with a provision for the voter to sign an affi- cases that were heard by the Michigan Supreme davit and get a waiver from the requirement) had Court in the decade of the 1990s involved at least been ruled unconstitutional by former attorney one contributor to at least one justice. In some cases general Frank Kelley. At the close of its 2006-07 these contributions were small and relatively incon- session, the Michigan Supreme Court reversed that sequential, in other cases the amounts were in the ruling, so photo identification or an affidavit stat- tens-of-thousands of dollars. ing that someone requesting a ballot is who she says she is will be required in elections going forward. Recommendation: Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land has chaired In order to provide Michigan voters the 59 opportunity to vote for candidates for the Michigan Michigan Chamber of Commerce in its $3 million Supreme Court who demonstrably have no finan- television issue campaign supporting Justices Mark- cial ties to the litigants who argue cases before man, Taylor and Young in their 2000 election. them: Subsequent to the 2000 campaign, Justices Corri- • Michigan should establish a voluntary system gan, Markman, Taylor and Young voted to over- of full public financing for Michigan Supreme turn an eight-figure damage judgment against Court campaigns. DaimlerChrysler. Because of the stealthy bookkeeping involved Recusal in so-called issue campaigns, it is not possible to Recusal refers to a judge or justice removing ascertain whether DaimlerChrysler’s million-dollar him- or herself from involvement with a case contribution to the U.S. Chamber was earmarked because of an apparent conflict of interest which to come back to Michigan and support Justices would compromise the judge or justice’s impartial- Markman, Taylor and Young. Nor can the possi- ity. A report by the American Judicature Society bility be dismissed. Is an anonymous $1 million notes that Michigan is unique in having no pub- expenditure more benign than $45,000 given lished recusal standards for justices of its Supreme directly to a candidate’s campaign committee? Are Court. the beneficiaries of such largesse sufficiently impar- Recusal has become a matter of some public tial to sit in judgment and ultimately overturn a discussion because celebrity trial attorney Geoffrey case against their supporter? Who else gave the Fieger has requested Justices Corrigan, Markman, Michigan Chamber money for its $6 million, Taylor and Young to recuse themselves from cases multi-year campaign to define Michigan Supreme in which he is involved, because, he says, they have Court candidates, and what business have those made untoward comments directed at him. Fieger contributors had before the Court? had faced reprimand for making churlish and Recusal for the Michigan Supreme Court is a insulting comments directed at three Court of different matter than recusal for the U.S. Supreme Appeals judges. Court precisely because millions of dollars are spent There is a greater issue than gratuitous insults by parties, some of whom will have interests before that should be part of the recusal discussion: the the Court, to select the justices. As long as huge money spent by interest groups – disclosed and sums of private interests’ money are involved in the undisclosed – that helped to elect sitting justices. judicial selection process, the Court should be Does this money compromise the impartiality of attentive to the fact that political money compro- the justices who are sitting in judgment of a former mises the appearance, if not the reality, of its judi- campaign contributor? If it’s legal, can it be wrong? cial impartiality. Does it matter, as long as the justices “get it right” in their decisions? Recommendation: The circumstances surrounding the financial In order to protect the appearance and reality involvement of the DaimlerChrysler Corporation of judicial impartiality: illustrate the complex issues of political spending • The Michigan Supreme Court should develop in Supreme Court campaigns. DaimlerChrsyler’s standards for recusal in cases involving indi- PAC and employees contributed amounts ranging viduals and interest groups who have substan- from $13,000 to $44,000 to Justices Corrigan, tial financial ties, whether personal or Markman, Taylor and Young during campaigns in political, to any justices. 1998 and 2000, for a total of more than $98,000. In addition, DaimlerChrysler gave $1 million to Legislative status the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in 2000 for its As noted in the section of this report on pub- multi- million dollar issue advocacy work that lic financing of campaigns, SB 128 would provide focused on state Supreme Court campaigns in for voluntary full public funding of state Supreme Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Mississippi and Ala- Court campaigns. However, the bill has not gotten bama. In turn, the U.S. Chamber supported the a committee hearing and the state campaign fund 60 has been raided to balance this year’s general fund voting public. In the fall campaign of 2001, the budget. Burton Leland Leadership Fund raised $216,000 – The House Judiciary Committee has con- more than 99 percent of which came from Greek- ducted a series of hearings on judicial independence town entrepreneurs Jim Papas and Ted Gatzaros and recusal, and the process is likely to result in bills and attorneys Alan Ackerman and Geoffrey Fieger being introduced later in the current legislative ses- – and the committee made in-kind and independ- sion. ent expenditures of more than $200,000 support- ing then-City Councilman Gil Hill’s mayoral campaign. Rather than reporting the transactions Enforcement in October, as required by law, the committee Finding: waited until more than a month after Election Day. Having enforcement of campaign finance, lob- Accountability for the spending was kept out of the bying and election laws reside in a department newspapers until after the election, so voters were that is led by a partisan elected official under- not able to consider the messages in view of their mines impartial enforcement of those laws. ultimate source, and the committee paid the max- Penalties for violations are too inconsequential imum fine: $1,000, or, effectively, a surtax of 0.5% to motivate compliance with the law. on the money supporting the Hill campaign. Responsibility for enforcement of the State’s In the fall of 2005, it was Detroit Mayor campaign finance law resides in the Department of Kwame Kilpatrick’s leadership political action com- State. Enforcement of the State’s campaign finance mittee, Generations PAC, that delayed its pre-elec- law is weak. To some degree that is the product of tion reporting and concealed potentially the posture of the law: apparent violations are embarrassing campaign finance information. Gen- flagged by the Department with Error and Omis- erations PAC raised $270,000 and passed over sions notices, to which the violator is asked to $180,000 of that amount to Kilpatrick’s mayoral respond with corrective action. If violations are campaign committee, mostly in the name of loan identified in a complaint and they appear to be sub- repayment. As was the case for Kilpatrick’s oppo- stantiated “…the secretary of state shall endeavor nent four years earlier, his PAC paid the maximum to correct the violation or prevent a further viola- fine of $1,000. When Generations PAC reported tion by using informal methods such as conference, its activity more than two months after the elec- conciliation or persuasion, and may enter into a tion, it revealed that the sources of the money it conciliation agreement with the person involved. raised included leading businessmen such as Com- Unless violated, a conciliation agreement is a com- puware’s Peter Karmanos, and PVS Chemical’s Jim plete bar to any further action with respect to mat- Nicholson. This was an ironic development since ters covered in the conciliation agreement.” (MCL an anonymous supporter of Kilpatrick’s had earlier 169.216(10)). run a full-page ad in The Michigan Chronicle claim- It is not surprising that those who would run ing that Kilpatrick was the target of a media afoul of this law would write it so that consequences “lynching” and his opponent, Freman Hendrix, for violations are minimal. Penalties for violations wanted to help “Suburban Raiders” steal the “City’s are anachronistically small, often amounting to lit- Jewels.” tle more than a minor cost of doing business. And The disparate handling of campaign finance because the prerogative for enforcement resides violations has been evident in cases involving com- within a department that is directed by a partisan plaints filed by the Michigan Campaign Finance elected official, it is not surprising that cases are Network. In one such case, Baxter Machine & Tool handled disparately, depending on the party affili- Company of Jackson made an illegal $25,000 cor- ation of the actors involved. porate contribution to a committee called Greater Two successive Detroit mayoral campaigns Detroit Leadership PAC, which subsequently gave illustrate the way in which penalties amount to a $5,000 to the campaign of House candidate Rick minor price to be paid for concealing relevant cam- Baxter, the son of Baxter Machine & Tool’s owner; paign finance information from the press and the $5,000 to the Michigan Republican Party; and 61 $5,000 to Attorney General Mike Cox’s leadership assets, $18,238, to the State as a fine. PAC. The courier who delivered the corporate The inexplicable difference in the handling of check was Brian Pierce, a former special assistant to these cases illustrates the hazard of placing the Cox at the Department of the Attorney General enforcement authority under a partisan director. and a consultant to the Baxter campaign. Pierce was Furthermore, Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land, paid a commission by the Greater Detroit Leader- like her more famous counterparts, Katherine Har- ship PAC for his fundraising, and Cox gave Baxter ris of Florida and Kenneth Blackwell of Ohio, a rare pre-primary endorsement. served as both her state’s chief election officer and In March 2005, more than six months after the partisan campaign chair for the state presidential the complaint had been filed, The Department of campaign of George W. Bush. These are conflicts State’s Legal and Regulatory Affairs Division dis- that can and should be avoided by placing enforce- missed the complaint against Baxter Machine and ment authority for campaign finance, lobbying and Tool, accepting its explanation that “mistakes were ethics violations under a nonpartisan commission. made.” Legal and Regulatory Affairs ordered Greater Detroit Leadership PAC to repay the illegal Recommendations: $25,000 contribution, but GDL PAC ultimately In order to provide a greater incentive for repaid only half the money and entered into a con- compliance with campaign finance law: ciliation agreement with the Department wherein it • Fines for violations should be increased sub- paid a $1,000 fine. Pierce, who had been fired by stantially; consideration should be given to the Baxter campaign for dishonesty, was hired as basing fines on a percentage of the amount of executive director of the Kent County Republican money that is the subject of the violation. Party, the home base of Secretary of State Terri In order to assure fair and impartial handling Lynn Land. of campaign finance, lobbying and ethics viola- Contrasting with the case of Baxter Machine tions: and Tool and Greater Detroit Leadership is the case • An independent, nonpartisan commission of Vision 05. Vision 05 began raising money as a should be established to investigate apparent political action committee in May 2004. It did not campaign finance, lobbying and ethics viola- file a statement of organization until October 2004 tions; and this commission should have and it did not file any campaign finance reports until authority for imposing penalties for verified September 2005, by which time it was four reports violations. in arrears. Notably, by the time the PAC filed its first reports, it had given $24,500 to the campaign of Legislative status Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, which was HB 4628 would move the enforcement func- $21,100 more than the committee was qualified to tion for campaign finance, lobbying and ethics vio- give; and it had accepted corporate contributions of lations away from the Department of State’s Legal $2,000 each from four different contributors. and Regulatory Services division and put them In the Vision 05 case, Legal and Regulatory under the supervision of the director of elections. Services made the Kilpatrick campaign repay the Prospects for HB 4628 in the Senate are dim to $21,000 excess contribution to Vision 05; it made nonexistent. the PAC repay the $8,000 in corporate money to Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land has pro- the respective contributors; and the conciliation posed that she be given subpoena power for enforce- agreement between Legal and Regulatory Services ment. At this point, no legislator has stepped and Vision 05 had Vision 05 pay all its remaining forward to introduce a bill to that effect. J 63

Population: 5,167,101 (2006 estimate) State Ranking: 21st of 50 Race (2005 estimate) Caucasian: 86.3% Urban vs. Rural Population: African-American: 4.3% Minneapolis/St. Paul metro area: 60.3% Hispanic: 3.6% Rest of state: 39.7% Asian: 3.5% Native American: 1.2% Most populous cities (2005) 2 or more races: 1.4% 1. Minneapolis; 2. St. Paul; 3. Rochester; 4. Duluth; Governor: Tim Pawlenty (R) 5. Bloomington State Legislature House: 85 Democratic-Farmer-Labor (DFL), 49 Republican - Senate: 44 DFL, 23 Republican Congressional Delegation House: 5 DFL, 3 Republican Senate: DFL, 1 Republican Registered Voters (prior to Election Day 2006): 3,118,398 Voting-age Population (2006 estimate): 3,895,492 General Election Turnout (% of VAP) 1998: 60.97% 2000: 69.82% 2002: 63.59% 2004: 77.72% 2006: 59.50% 65 Democracy in Minnesota: Problems and Prospects Introduction and Executive Summary

Among the five Midwestern states examined mented, such as the prohibition on corporate con- here, Minnesota is the state least wracked by politi- tributions to candidates, PACs or political parties, cal scandal. Its long history of populist politics, an and limitations on the size of contributions indi- outgrowth of its agricultural and labor history, has viduals, PACs, parties, and legislative caucuses left it with a reputation for an engaged citizenry and could make. However, even with these reforms, the an ethical government. Despite this reputation and analysis of leading reformers over the past several the highest level of voter turnout in the nation, Min- years has shown that the fundamental flaw in Min- nesota’s citizens share the lack of faith in government nesota’s system is that it still retains private contri- that can be found among the citizens of neighboring butions at its core. Candidates still spend more time states, and their declining confidence is not com- raising money than educating potential voters. pletely unjustified. Like other states in the region, Because political parties can receive unlimited con- Minnesota faces a number of serious challenges to tributions from individuals and PACs, this has led its democracy, including excessive dependence on to a rapid growth in their use of independent big private money in elections, a partisan and rela- expenditures. tively unregulated system for electing judges, and a The stress on Minnesota’s democracy, how- set of election and campaign finance laws that is fail- ever, doesn’t end with its campaign finance system. ing to keep up with the needs of voters. While Minnesota’s profile as a “swing state” has The 2006 survey commissioned by the Joyce risen, so has the heat around key elections. During Foundation found that Minnesotans have little the 2004 presidential election, for instance, Min- faith in their state government. Only 36 percent of nesota saw an influx of party-appointed challengers Minnesotans felt that they could trust the govern- who targeted polling places around the state in ment to do what was right almost all or most of the precincts with high minority representation. time. Seventy-one percent said that “unless we limit Numerous reports of voter intimidation occurred, the influence of money, elected officials will not and in at least one case, a challenger was removed keep their promises to people like me.” Like the rest forcibly from a polling place by the police. Reform of the country, in the wake of the many political advocates formed the Voting Rights Coalition in an scandals of the past few years, Minnesotans feel that attempt to address many of these issues legislatively their elected officials are more accountable to their in the following and successive legislative sessions. big donors than to them. While the Coalition has since seen significant suc- Minnesota first began reform of its campaign cess in passing legislation to expand voting rights, finance system in the post-Watergate era of the the political environment in Minnesota remains mid-70s. It implemented a system of partial public focused on the myth of “fraud” and hostile to the financing of elections, which legislators continued enfranchisement of new voters. to tinker with over the next two decades. Most As a result of this environment, the Coalition recently, in 1993, major new reforms were imple- has been forced to focus more on fending off pro-

by C. Scott Cooper 66 posals to restrict voting rights than on removing the In the remainder of this report, we aim to final remaining barriers to voting. For instance, in summarize the attempts that have been made to 2006, Minnesota Governor, Tim Pawlenty, called strengthen Minnesota’s democracy and outline for a new law requiring photo identification at the what we believe are the best options to pursue, polls. “Evidence has recently been discovered sug- given the current political landscape. This report gesting that non-citizens are registering and voting will examine the key challenges for Minnesota in: in Minnesota elections,” he stated, citing 32 possi- a) voting rights, b) money in politics, and c) judi- ble cases of non-citizen registration since 2004. cial independence, lay out our recommendations "These cases highlight a threat to the legitimacy of for reform, and report on the outcomes of various our democracy and the need for change.” Then Sec- recent reform efforts. retary of State, Mary Kiffmeyer, added that Min- Minnesota is developing a broad and com- nesota’s “lax” voter identification laws invite fraud. prehensive approach to democracy reform. Organ- Meanwhile, voting rights advocates have countered izations across the state, including TakeAction these claims, raising concerns that photo identifi- Minnesota, the Minnesota League of Women Vot- cation would disenfranchise many voters. ers and the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits Similarly, Minnesota has recently seen threats believe that the issues of campaign finance, judicial to judicial independence, despite a tradition of fairly independence, and voting rights are all driven by a open, clean and non-controversial judicial elections. common set of values and should be integrated into Currently, judges for the state Supreme, Appeals and a single set of coordinated policy proposals and District Courts are elected in Minnesota. For the campaigns. most part, those elections have been non-events, and This report seeks to summarize the concerns judges very often run unopposed. Until recently, of Minnesota’s democratic reform community and judicial candidates have been barred from discussing propose a path by which we can address these con- political issues, affiliating with political parties, or cerns. We will expand on proposals for the follow- directly soliciting campaign contributions. There are ing major reforms: no contribution limits on what can be given to • Minnesota should adopt a system of merit judges, but they are prohibited from knowing who appointment for judges, with a subsequent has contributed to their campaign. While this has retention-only election system. led to relatively low-key judicial campaigns, it often • Minnesota should move toward a system of leaves the average voter with little or no informa- full public financing for statewide and legisla- tion with which to make an informed vote. tive offices. A relatively recent Circuit Court decision has • State law should continue to be changed to set off alarms in many Minnesota communities, remove any remaining barriers to voting, par- however, about the future of judicial elections and ticularly among those most disenfranchised, judicial independence. Because of the U.S. Supreme while maintaining the integrity of our elec- Court’s decision in The Republican Party of Min- tions. nesota v. White, Minnesota judicial candidates are • Additionally, reform advocates propose to now able to announce their positions on issues and work to evaluate the need for reforms in the affiliate with political parties. While candidates are areas of redistricting, media reform, civics still barred from knowing who contributes to their education, and government ethics. campaign (although this information is readily As the Joyce-commissioned survey found, available on the web) or soliciting contributions Minnesotans recognize that there are problems directly from individuals, they will be allowed to with their democracy and their government, but solicit contributions from groups of people. Judi- they have not given up. The problems existing in cial candidates will be allowed to affiliate with polit- Minnesota today can be fixed, and when corrup- ical parties, receive their endorsements, and discuss tion and big money are taken out of politics, they their thinking about issues that may come before will be better able to provide good health care, the court. As a result of the White decision, judicial great education, clean air and water, and living elections are expected to change dramatically. wages. J 67 Findings and Recommendations

Money In Politics without any public knowledge that this rela- tionship exists. Overview • Candidates who agree to voluntary spending Minnesota’s campaign finance system, while limits can be drowned out by independent better than those of many states, continues to place expenditures, creating a disincentive for can- an inordinate emphasis on raising funds as the stan- didates to agree to spending limits. dard for who runs for office and who wins. It pro- While major reforms were implemented in vides big money contributors with undue access Minnesota in 1993, the analysis of reformer advo- and influence to policymakers, at the expense of the cates over the past several years has shown that the public good. For the past decade, reformers from a fundamental flaw in the system is that it still retains broad coalition of organizations have worked to private contributions at its core. Money spent on reform the current system. elections has not only shifted to adjust to the new Among the problems with Minnesota’s exist- rules but continues to grow at a rapid rate. ing system are the following: • Candidates, especially those for state-wide Campaign Finance Reform History office who do not have access to large con- Minnesota has a rich history of campaign tributors (or large networks of smaller con- finance reform that began in the post-Watergate era tributors), spend too much time raising of the mid-1970s when the first system of partial money, at the expense of educating voters on public financing was implemented. Over the past relevant issues. twenty-five years, reformers made several attempts • PACs and individuals can make unlimited to further fix a system that retains private financing contributions to political parties and their leg- of campaigns at its core. The most recent of these islative caucuses, which has led political par- was in 1993 when major reforms were imple- ties and their legislative caucuses to raise and mented. Some of those were subsequently thrown spend more in each successive election cycle; out by the courts, but many of them remain in it’s worth noting that several current and for- place. mer elected officials have indicated that the Major features of the reforms currently in growing role of the political parties’ legislative place are the following: caucuses may be the most corrupting outcome • Disclosure of contributions over 100 dollars, of past reforms. including the employer or occupation of the • The 1999 Montgomery court decision, which donor, to candidates, PACs, political parties said that political parties may make unlimited and their legislative caucuses; a voluntary sys- independent expenditures even after a partic- tem of electronic disclosure was recently put ular party’s candidate is chosen in the primary in place; election, has created a situation where candi- • Corporations are prohibited from contribut- dates can easily be drowned out by the politi- ing corporate funds directly to candidates, cal parties. In some races, the political parties PACs, or political parties and their legislative outspend the candidates, usually with nega- caucuses; tive ads, by more than five to one. • Limits on the size of contributions that PACs, • Conduit funds allow corporate employees to individuals, political parties, and their legisla- make “bundled” contributions directly to can- tive caucuses may make to candidates; didates with no disclosure, as long as individ- • Partial public financing for candidates who ual contributions from any one employee to qualify by raising a set amount in 50 dollars or any one candidate is 100 dollars or less. This less contributions and who agree to abide by allows corporations to get credit for hundreds voluntary spending limits (about 20% of the or even thousands of dollars of contributions, money spent by participating candidates is 68 from public financing --current participation legislative session for the first time saw a majority of is over 95%); members of both bodies having signed a pledge to • The state provides refunds for political con- support a full public financing system. tributions to state legislative and constitu- Support for Fair And Clean Elections has also tional candidates, and authorized continued to grow outside the capitol. The FACE politicalparties of up to $50 for individuals coalition grew to over seventy members by 2006, and 100 dollars for couples. including the Minnesota AFL-CIO, the League of TakeAction Minnesota and its predecessor, the Rural Voters, the Minnesota Senior Federation, Minnesota Alliance for Progressive Action (MAPA), Clean Water Action, and the Minnesota Trial has served as the state leader in campaign finance Lawyers Association. reform for the past decade. The Money in Politics Project began at a time when the influx of large con- Minnesota’s Climate for Reform tributions to candidates and parties led to the Many of the barriers we face in Minnesota are impression that only big money interests could no different than those in other states, and, because make it into the public arena. Issues and policies of our history of reforms, we have some that are impacting poor, working, and middle-class people unique to our situation. The major barriers we see to became relegated to the margins, as elected officials enacting reform are described here in relative order began breaking away from their constituencies and of importance. siding with corporate interests that often were in direct conflict with those of their constituents. Resistance by legislators Hence, the Money in Politics Project was born – an As in many states, legislators – and caucus educational and research campaign developed by leadership in particular - are loath to change a sys- MAPA member organizations to illustrate the links tem that works to their advantage. This is especially between campaign contributions and the issues at true for the House, where Republicans took control the forefront at the state legislature. in 1998 due, in part, to the large expenditures of The initial stage of the Money in Politics Project their political party units and the House Republi- involved public education and raising awareness of can Caucus, and where the DFL Party took control corruption in the campaign system as a key reason back in 2006 due, in part, to their own large inde- why the voices of the people were being ignored. A pendent expenditures. series of workshops, such as “Elections, Not Auc- In addition, some opponents of public funding tions” were created and marketed.Secondly, MAPA have taken the opportunities presented by Min- joined together with the Minnesota League of nesota’s current budget crises since 2003 to propose Women Voters and Minnesota Common Cause to cuts in the current system of partial public funding. build a coalition of nonprofit, labor and advocacy We have seen legislation proposed to eliminate the organizations. Together, this coalition designed a pro- standing appropriation that provides funds for the posal, called the Fair And Clean Elections (FACE) candidates’ subsidy, get rid of the Political Contri- bill in 2000. Making a direct legislative change bution Refund (PCR) and reduce reporting require- became increasingly important as political campaigns ments to “reduce paperwork.” started accumulating record dollars mainly funneled into massive negative media campaigns. Opposition by players who benefit under the Since its introduction in 2001, FACE legisla- current system tion has been heard and passed by several legislative The one vocal group opposed to Clean Elec- committees, and support has continued to grow tions reforms is Minnesota Citizens Concerned for over time. After reformers raised campaign finance Life, Minnesota’s leading pro-life organization. as an important issue in the 2002, 2004, and since MCCL opposes all forms of campaign finance TakeAction Minnesota was formed by joining reform and is a politically potent group in the state, together MAPA and the grassroots advocacy group, with influence extending well beyond the issue of Progressive Minnesota in 2006 legislative candidates abortion. However, some of their most supportive began taking stands on the subject. and the 2007 legislators bucked them in the past few election 69 cycles to sign a support statement for Fair And greed nationally and the attention to campaign Clean Elections. This is a testament to the many finance issues in the media recently have increased other endorsing organizations that have included the awareness of the need for reform. questions about FACE in their screenings and ques- tionnaires. Court decisions The court decision on the Maine Clean Lack of public understanding of campaign Money system has helped us make the case that finance reform issues there are constitutionally acceptable reforms we While the public is increasingly frustrated by can enact. In addition, court decisions eroding the the influence of big money at the state and national reforms we already have in place provide us the level, they often do not know what can be done opportunity to make the case that we need to about it and/or have a different understanding of replace our current system. Specifically, the Min- the problem and thus the solutions. An example of nesota law limiting the extent to which parties can this is the belief by many that PACs are the prob- directly support candidates was overturned and lem, even though large individual donors out-give resulted in record-breaking expenditures by parties PACs. and caucuses. In one legislative race, over $300,000 was spent when the candidates’ spending limit was Cynical media $25,000! These legal decisions, as well as their The major media have been increasingly will- effects, are helping us reinvigorate our coalition ing to write about the problems of our current sys- and raise public awareness about the need for tem but are only slowly coming to believe that reform. change can be made. This, of course, feeds the pub- lic’s cynicism. Issue Connections Our work over the past several years to create A legislative process that can yield public policy a database of political contributions with coded of the lowest common denominator economic interests of the donors is giving us the Unlike states that are able to enact reform opportunity to make the links for people between through initiative and referendum, we will need to the issues they care about and the need for cam- maneuver our bill through the usual rounds of paign finance reform. We are beginning to see the committee hearings and attempts to amend it. payoff for this work as individuals and organiza- Many of our current and potential allies are very tions talk about Fair And Clean Elections as part of concerned that we could initiate a process that their public education on whatever issue they are yields something worse than what we have. The working on (prescription drugs, ATM fees, corpo- FACE Coalition has taken the position that we will rate agriculture, etc.). This is creating an environ- continue to support our proposal as it undergoes ment in which campaign finance reformers are not changes in the legislative process, as long as it con- the only ones calling for change. tinues to address the four principles laid out at the formation of our coalition. There are also some very Growing Legislative Support promising opportunities that we can make use of As the FACE coalition continues to grow and as we move forward. add key constituencies, we have also seen growth in our legislative support. During the 2007 session, National picture Clean Elections advocates enjoyed the support of Certainly, one of the most promising devel- the House Speaker and Majority Leader, and the opments in campaign finance reform is the success Senate Majority Leader and Minority Leader. Sup- of several states in passing major reforms and keep- port in each caucus of the legislature reached an all- ing them in place despite challenges. This is help- time high, and for the first time ever, reform ing us get past the “there is nothing we can do” supporters constituted a majority of both Repre- attitude of people in the media, the legislature, and sentatives and Senators. even in some allied organizations. Also, the level of 70 Goals and Objectives judges. The Minneapolis Star Tribune editorialized Leading Minnesota political reformers want that "Minnesota’s court system stands among the to make our political system more accountable to most admired in the nation," and calls the period voters, the crux of a democratic society. The values since 1979 when then-Governor Quie launched connected to our objectives are: 1) civic engage- Minnesota’s first merit selection process for ment – people should have access to elected offi- appointing judges “the golden age of Minnesota cials because they vote, not because they pay; 2) justice.” But, the editors continue, "every Camelot public accountability – candidates need to cam- eventually crumbles, and court watchers … now paign around issues that reflect the concerns of have new cause to worry that the golden age of their constituents and not just to raise money; and Minnesota justice may soon be under siege" (March 3) democratic representation -- the strength of par- 6, 2007). ties, candidates, and interest groups should come As is well known, in 2002 the U. S. Supreme from numbers of supporters, not numbers of dol- Court ruled 5-4, on the basis of the right to free- lars. dom of speech, that candidates for judge must not Minnesota political reformers believe that the be prohibited from announcing their positions on best way to do this is to replace Minnesota’s current disputed legal or political issues (Republican Party of campaign finance system with a Fair And Clean Minnesota v. White). In 2005 the Eighth Circuit Elections system, which would: Court of Appeals concluded, following the • Provide all candidates with the option of full Supreme Court’s reasoning, that most of Min- public financing if they agree to forego nearly nesota’s restrictions on partisan activities and fund all private contributions. solicitation for judicial candidates should also be • Limit the size of contributions individuals and struck down. Appeals on both rulings, including PACs can give to political parties and legisla- one in January 2006, were unsuccessful. The effect tive caucuses. has been to destabilize the culture of judicial selec- • Reduce unfair advantages caused by inde- tion in Minnesota, and to open the door for parti- pendent expenditures. san judicial elections. • Encourage grassroots participation in the These court rulings did not have a major political process. effect on the 2006 election, when incumbents won seven out of eight contested seats. However, in some districts the Republican Party held endorsing Judicial Independence conventions, and the names of some endorsed can- didates appeared on the party’s sample ballots. Fur- Overview ther, there was some increase in the number of Minnesota has had an election system for contested races. So, although the 2006 elections judges since the state was established in 1858; these were relatively quiet, clouds are on the horizon. It elections were made nonpartisan in 1912. For a seems inevitable that we will see a major shift away long time, however, Minnesota’s judicial election from judicial independence: judicial races will more system has, in practice, resembled something closer closely resemble legislative ones, where candidates to an appointment system. This is because the are identified with and play to a particular con- majority of judges retire before their term is up, and stituency such as a political party or a special inter- their seats are filled by gubernatorial appointment est group, and spend a lot of time raising money – until the next election, by which time they are and campaigning. identified on the ballot as incumbents and are usu- The evidence from other states is not encour- ally readily elected. In 2003 91% of Minnesota’s aging. Justice At Stake Campaign’s New Politics of judges were initially appointed; in 2004 nearly 80% Judicial Elections chronicles the stunning increase of Minnesota’s judicial elections were uncontested. in the use of television ads, skyrocketing spend- This hybrid system is widely considered to ing—much of it from special interests—and the have served Minnesota well; our state has been injection of political parties into court campaigns in known for the quality and independence of our contested races across the country. There is no 71 reason to think that Minnesota will be unaffected. majority of all the electors voting at the election As Minnesota Judge, James Hoolihan, said, “We vote to ratify an amendment, it becomes part of the run the risk of having partisanship and big money Constitution. come in and do the things in this state that they’ve The 2008 legislative session will be the plat- done in other states, and I think we’re kidding our- form for judicial reform bills to be put forward; any selves if we think Minnesota Nice will prevail” proposed amendment passed by the legislature (Minnesota Public Radio, September 19, 2006). would be on the ballot for voters to consider the following November. Minnesota’s Climate for Reform There stands to be considerable opposition to There is broad bipartisan interest in keeping the merit retention system recommended by the Minnesota courts impartial and judicial elections Quie commission. The two primary opponents of from becoming politicized. In February of 2006 reform are Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life former Governor Quie assembled a panel (on (MCCL) and the Republican Party of Minnesota, which the League of Women Voters was repre- both of which were active in bringing the White sented), the Citizens Commission on the Preserva- lawsuit. And there is some reluctance on the part tion of an Impartial Judiciary, in order to study the of the Minnesota District Judges Association to best means of selecting and retaining judges. The support retention elections because of the percep- report, issued in March 2007 made the following tion that it is harder to run a campaign without a recommendations: “real” opponent, and the fear that a last-minute sur- • Merit Nominations: Nomination of qualified prise attack may prevent any legitimate opportu- candidates for judicial vacancies by a merit nity for response. The District Judges Association is selection commission; at the moment reviewing its position on retention • Gubernatorial Appointment: Appointment of elections. Meanwhile, the Minneapolis Star Tribune judges by the governor, from a list of candi- has thrown its support behind the Quie recom- dates provided by merit selection commission, mendations: "The plan’s wisdom is evident in its for an initial term of approximately 4 years, simplicity... The independence of Minnesota’s judi- and, if retained by the voters, for subsequent ciary is one of the state’s uncounted blessings. It will terms of eight years; be missed once it’s gone. The Quie Commission— • Performance Evaluation: The creation of a 30- empowered only by its own good sense—can pre- member performance evaluation commission, serve the gift" (March 6, 2007). a majority of whom would be non-lawyers, in Lots of eyes are watching Minnesota. Cer- order to assist voters in evaluating the perform- tainly passing reform legislation and gaining voter ance of judges standing for election, facilitate approval for a constitutional amendment will take the self-improvement of all judges, promote the an enormous effort. As many have said, the hope is public accountability of the judiciary, provide to reform the system before it is too late. voter education and accommodate considerable Two final notes: public input and transparency; First, we can expect general attacks on the • Retention Elections: Voters will be advised on court system. For example, the Board on Judicial the ballot as to whether the performance eval- Standards is now being targeted by organizations uation commission finds the judge qualified such as Judge Our Courts and by well-known or not qualified and will be given an oppor- lawyer, Greg Wersal, who brought the case that led tunity to vote to retain the judges. to the White decision. A bill currently before the Any change in the way Minnesota’s judges are Legislature would turn the Board of Judicial Stan- selected would require a constitutional amendment. dards over to citizens and legislators who would be According to the law, a majority of the members able to remove judges from office directly. "Judicial elected to each branch of the legislature may pro- tyranny is eroding the rights of the citizens," said pose amendments to the Constitution. Proposed Representative Dan Severson... " …we need to get amendments are submitted to the people for their the power back to the legislature and the people" approval or rejection in a general election. If a (Minneapolis Star Tribune, April 12, 2007). 72 Second, there is currently no interest in pub- that it is open to fraud. However, consultation with lic financing for judicial campaigns, and it seems elections officials and law enforcement agencies clear that we are not going to get meaningful cam- alike demonstrate the simple fact that fraud is paign finance reform in the next few years. How- almost completely nonexistent, and that any ever, the Minnesota legislature seems poised to attempts to commit fraud are sure to be detected approve capped contributions to judicial cam- under the current system. Efforts to make voting paigns, which, heretofore, have been unlimited. more difficult in Minnesota due to these “security” arguments have therefore failed. Recently, reform advocates, policymakers and Voting Rights And Election elections officials have turned from defending the Administration current system against these attacks and have focused more on removing the remaining barriers Election Administration and Voting to voting, making the system even more accessible Rights using 21st century technology. Some of the improvements under discussion are detailed below, Overview including: • Automatic registration; Minnesota has historically seen very high • No-excuse absentee voting; voter turnout – often the highest in the nation. This • Improved re-enfranchisement of ex-felons; high level of participation by voters stems, in part, • Creation of a voters’ guide by the Secretary of from the very easily accessible registration and vot- State; ing procedures in Minnesota, and, in part, from the • Translation of voting materials into other lan- high degree of confidence Minnesotans have had guages by the Secretary of State; in the integrity of their election systems. While • Expanding Election Day registration; both these considerations have come into question • Improved voting systems for Americans in the past few years, it is still true that Minnesota abroad; has a very user-friendly system, and one that is • Instant run-off voting. highly trustworthy. In fact, reform advocates, poli- cymakers and elections officials have recently Minnesota’s Reform History engaged in a vigorous debate about how to make The elections of 2004 were the first in which the system even more accessible and have put on Minnesota’s traditionally fair, open and nonparti- the table some very creative and potentially ground- san election administration system was called into breaking innovations. question. Some legislators proposed restrictions on Minnesota’s current system is designed to registration and voting, seeking to change the sys- make it as easy as possible to vote: 1) there is no tem itself in an effort to more tightly control the identification requirement for pre-registered voters; communities that would be able to turn out to vote. 2) there is a same-day registration process; and 3) Among these were bills that: restrict the eligibility of there are multiple ways to demonstrate both your students to vote where they attend school, limit the identity and your residence in the precinct. Min- ability of groups to do voter registration drives by nesota’s optical scanner voting machines are also requiring them to attend a Secretary of State train- highly trusted by elections officials and voters alike, ing, require new registrants to provide proof of cit- and are subject by law to a mandatory random sam- izenship, and another to allow people to inspect ple recount or “audit” to demonstrate the reliabil- polling place rosters. Some even proposed elimi- ity of the system. This innovation is just one of the nating the same-day registration process altogether. many reasons why Minnesotans trust that their Elections officials and reform advocates joined votes are being counted, and that their votes count. together to defend Minnesota’s election system and Over the past few years Minnesota’s accessible to prevent the erosion of the system’s traditional system for registering and voting has come under accessibility and openness. MAPA, now TakeAction attack from some who criticize it on the grounds Minnesota, along with groups like the Minnesota 73 Council of Nonprofits and the League of Women maintaining the best parts of the system that have Voters formed a loose collaboration called the Min- worked so well in our state for many years. The nesota Voting Rights Coalition, which continues to following are some of the current proposals under operate in the interests of protecting accessible vot- consideration: ing rights. These same players joined together with a bipartisan list of legislators to propose improve- Automatic Registration ments to the system, many of which arose in Despite the relative ease of registration and response to unfortunate experiences with voter voting in Minnesota, there are still thousands of intimidation in the 2004 elections. Minnesotans who are eligible to vote but are not Due to Minnesota’s new-found status as a registered. Some of these individuals will make use presidential swing state in 2004, parties and cam- of the same-day registration system, but this places paigns put unprecedented effort into manipulat- an additional burden on the elections officials on ing the process itself to influence the outcome of their busiest day. Reform advocates argue that the elections. One of the most glaring examples of many of these unregistered individuals may be this manipulation was the abuse of the “chal- interested in voting; they simply have not found lenger” provision, which was designed to allow the time to jump through unnecessary hoops that political parties to appoint observers who would government puts in place that hinder their partic- watch the activities in the polling place and chal- ipation. A prime example is preregistration. Many lenge anyone voting who should not. This has tra- would argue that preregistration is a relic from the ditionally been used as a provision to allow parties days before databases made comparison and to send someone to monitor how many people are updates a nearly instantaneous event. Minnesota’s turning out, and in which precincts. In 2004, current Secretary of State, Mark Ritchie, has pro- however, one political party hired challengers from posed a system whereby all eligible Minnesotans out of the state to challenge and intimidate voters who have a driver’s license or Minnesota ID would in certain areas, with no apparent grounds. The automatically be registered to vote, unless they result was that some voters left the polling place choose to opt out of the system. This new model without voting, and others simply left because the has the added benefit of ensuring regular and sys- line was moving so slowly, or because they saw the tematic updates of the voter file by comparing treatment that those ahead of them in line databases from the U.S. Postal Service change of received. address system with those from Minnesota state The stories of those who experienced this agencies dealing with drivers’ licenses, felony con- intimidation were so compelling that legislators victions, and citizenship. Secretary of State Ritchie changed the law in 2005, restricting challengers to argues that this improvement to the system would those eligible to vote in Minnesota and requiring both increase accessibility and improve security. that they only issue a challenge when they are will- This proposal received the support of the legisla- ing to swear an oath that they have personal ture in 2007, but funding for the system was knowledge of an individual’s ineligibility to vote. vetoed by the Governor. As a result of these changes, there were virtually no abuses of the challenger statute in the 2005 and No-excuse absentee voting 2006 elections. Currently, Minnesotans who wish to vote by TakeAction Minnesota continues to convene mail via an absentee ballot must swear that they the Minnesota Voting Rights Coalition today. will be out of the precinct on Election Day. This restriction is ignored and/or abused by some who Goals and Objectives simply use the system for their convenience; it is Reform advocates, policymakers and elec- adhered to by others who would clearly benefit tions officials have developed strong working rela- from being able to vote by mail. Some frail, elderly tionships over the past few years. Together, they or disabled voters may well be at home on Elec- have taken a thoughtful and proactive approach tion Day but are unwilling to venture out into to improving Minnesota’s elections system while Minnesota’s often-inclement November weather. 74 Technically, they are not able to vote by mail sim- written. An example is a satellite television bill. In ply to ensure that their vote gets cast, whatever the contrast, cable bills are currently accepted. Reform weather. Reform advocates have proposed that advocates and election officials have proposed absentee ballots be used to cover these individu- allowing the use of these additional forms of ID, als, as well as for those whose occupations regu- especially if the proposed system for automatic reg- larly call them away from home unexpectedly. The istration is not adopted. The legislature approved legislature passed this change in 2007, but it was these changes in 2007, but the Governor vetoed the vetoed by the Governor. bill.

Improved re-enfranchisement of ex-felons Americans voting overseas Minnesota currently suspends the voting Americans living abroad, especially those sta- rights of persons who are convicted of a felony, and tioned with the military overseas, face some partic- the felons are so informed. The felon’s voting priv- ularly difficult logistical problems when voting. ilege is automatically reinstated once the entire sen- Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie worked tence is completed, including any probation or closely with policymakers and with the U.S. mili- parole period. However, the felons are never offi- tary to create new systems that would make it eas- cially notified that their voting rights have been ier for military personnel overseas to vote in state restored. Reform advocates have been working for and local elections. One proposed change would several years to find either a legislative or an admin- allow elections officials to transmit ballots elec- istrative solution to this problem, requiring that tronically, while continuing to require the com- notification be given to ex-felons. Some reform pleted ballot to be returned by mail. Though not advocates have also proposed that voting rights be ideal, this system would cut in half the mail time reinstated upon a person’s release from custody, currently involved. Current mailing time effectively which would then further clarify whether one could disenfranchises many military voters. Another pro- or could not vote. posal would allow Americans living abroad to return their completed ballots without having to Creation of additional elections materials by the have their ballot notarized or witnessed by another Office of the Secretary of State Minnesota voter. If the voter does not have access Reform advocates have proposed that election to a U.S. notary or another voter from Minnesota, information, including materials in languages other then they are unable to participate in the election. than English and materials with information about Yet another proposal would allow for the creation of candidates running for office, should be paid for a more advanced version of the current “submarine” and produced by the Secretary of State. Currently, ballot, which is used to allow Americans to vote many of these services are provided by nonprofit even if they are not available to obtain a new ballot organizations, or are simply not available. in between the primary and the general election (for instance, if they are stationed on a submarine). Expanding Election Day registration The proposed system would allow individuals to There are currently many forms of identifica- cast a vote for the candidates they would like, in tion that one can use to register to vote on Election rank order of preference, with the actual vote going Day in Minnesota. Some documents can be used to the candidate highest on the list who is actually to establish identity, for example, a passport; and on the general election ballot. These proposals were others to establish residence (a copy of a current passed by the Minnesota legislature in 2007, but utility bill), while a few (a current driver’s license) were vetoed by the Governor. can do both. Reform advocates have identified sev- eral forms of ID that prospective voters commonly Instant run-off voting bring to the polls that currently are not allowed. Voters in Minneapolis passed a referendum in These include: current driver’s licenses from other 2006 directing the city to begin using a system of states, leases, and some utility bills that are com- instant run-off voting (IRV) in its elections. Reform mon now but were not common when the law was advocates working on this issue expect that the first 75 election to be held under this system may not actu- related actual travel, lodging, or subsistence ally take place until 2010, for logistical reasons. expenses, but honoraria are prohibited. While there Meanwhile, efforts to advocate for a statewide IRV have been bills to change this law, this issue has not system appear, for all practical purposes, to be on been raised as a particular concern in the reform hold until the Minneapolis system can be tested. community. There is no specific law against nepo- Other municipalities are considering following in tism in Minnesota; its prohibition falls under the Minneapolis’ footsteps including St. Paul, where same general rules governing conflict of interest. voters will likely have the opportunity to decide the There have not been any recent attempts to address issue in November of 2008. Secretary of State, this issue directly. Mark Ritchie, has also convened a task force to look One element of conflict of interest law that is into IRV and the experiences that other jurisdic- being examined is the financial disclosure of fam- tions have had with it in recent years. ily members. Bills have recently been introduced to require the disclosure of the financial interests of immediate family members and “certain other Ethics contracts and other specific arrangements,” in order to eliminate some of the gray areas around Overview disclosure. Minnesota is generally viewed as having high standards and clean government, but reform advo- Lobbying cates note many shortcomings with the current sys- In the broadest sense, lobbying activity tem that could be addressed fairly simply. The attempts to influence legislative action, adminis- current system of oversight consists of three bod- trative action, or official actions of a governmental ies: the ethics committees within the House and entity. According to the Minnesota Campaign Senate, and the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Finance and Disclosure Board, there are four crite- Public Disclosure Board. The CFPD Board was ria, any one of which qualifies a person as a lobby- established by the state legislature in 1974 as a ist in Minnesota; they are: 1) an individual who requirement under the Ethics in Government Act. communicates with public or local officials or urges The Board’s four major programs are campaign others to do so; 2) being paid more than $3,000 in finance registration and disclosure, public subsidy a given year from any and all sources for lobbying administration, lobbyist registration and disclosure, activity; 3) spending more than $250 on lobbying and economic interest disclosure by public officials. activity, or; 4) spending more than 50 hours The Board has six members, appointed by the Gov- engaged in lobbying activity in any month while ernor on a bipartisan basis for staggered four-year not in the capacity of an elected official or as an terms. The appointments must be confirmed by a employee of a political subdivision. An individual three-fifths vote of the members of each chamber of who meets any of these criteria has five days to reg- the legislature. ister with the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Disclosure Board. Conflict of Interest In the past few years, a few changes have been According to the National Conference of State made to the definition of “lobbyist.” One change Legislatures, “Conflicts of interest typically arise expanded the definition to cover more people, when a legislator or staff member has the potential while another restricted the definition to cover to receive a personal benefit based on his or her fewer people. More people will have to register as a public position. Often, the personal benefit is a lobbyist as a result of the new requirement that any- financial one.” Some potential areas of concern one paid more than $3,000 in a year for lobbying related to conflicts of interest are: honoraria, nepo- to register, allowing for greater transparency con- tism and disclosure of financial interest. cerning the influence of paid lobbyists in Min- The CFPD Board and the Ethics in Govern- nesota. In the same year, the component of the ment Act address these issues in several ways. Cur- definition based on time spent lobbying, was rently, reimbursement is allowed for reasonable and increased from five to fifty hours. Proponents of 76 lowering the requirement claim that it was too bur- • Initiate an “anti-revolving door” policy which densome on volunteer lobbyists. regulates the time between leaving a public Reporting requirements for Minnesota lobby- policymaking position in government and ists include providing information on funds spent beginning private employment in situations on publications, media, travel, entertainment, etc. which create conflicts of interest. The amount, nature, recipient and date of each • Require donation reporting by lobbyists and expenditure over five dollars must be reported, as government contractors, and expand all must the original source of any money in excess of reporting to include spouses. 500 dollars in any year used for the purpose of lob- bying. However, reporting on how much a lobby- Media Reform ist is paid by each source is not required. Registered lobbyists must file periodic reports in compliance Overview with Minnesota’s gift ban restrictions. In 2005, the The Minnesota governmental community gift ban was loosened, but only very slightly. An does not currently have a comprehensive media exception was added to the ban on gifts from lob- reform agenda. However, as a key supplier of pub- byists to public officials for “a trinket or memento lic information and ideas, particularly around can- costing 5 dollars or less.” didates and issues, the media warrant examination According to the Center for Ethics in by Minnesota’s democratic reform community. Government, there is a need for a suitable length of time between holding public office and becom- Minnesota’s Media Reform History ing a lobbyist. The goal is to avoid situations where The League of Women Voters of Minnesota a public official makes a decision which favors a undertook, in 1995, to lead the examination of company or organization and then take employ- Minnesota’s media reform issues. Based on research, ment with them shortly after leaving governmen- recommendations, and proposals by scholars, jour- tal service. Or situations where a former nalists, candidates and citizens, the Minnesota Com- government official uses knowledge or contacts to pact was begun as an experiment “to raise the level give their private sector employer an unfair advan- of political discourse in Minnesota elections.” The tage when dealing with government. These “revolv- Compact was organized around four basic planks, ing door” situations constitute conflicts of interest designed by sub-groups of the original designers. which invite corruption or create the appearance of Its proposals were presented to candidates, the corruption. A 2007 proposal would have prohib- media and citizens during the election season in ited “former legislators, constitutional officers, 1996, 1998 and 2000. agency heads, and certain legislative employees” The Minnesota Compact advocated voluntary from lobbying for one year after leaving office. standards “to raise the level of political discussion Notably, this legislation failed to pass the Min- among Minnesota candidates, their campaigns, the nesota State Senate on a tie vote of 33 to 33. media and the voters themselves.” Its four planks were: 1) candidate debates; 2) campaign advertis- Goals and Objectives ing; 3) media coverage; and 4) citizen participation. Minnesota enjoys a relatively high standard of Specifically, the third plank asked news organiza- ethics in government and elections. This is due to tions to commit to covering the substance of polit- a well-thought-out and integrated system of regu- ical campaigns, not character attacks and needless lations and regulatory bodies. There are, however, controversy. some significant holes in these worthy ethical stan- Compact organizers encouraged the news dards that need to be addressed. Minnesota’s ethics media to voluntarily make use of the proposed stan- law could be improved by adopting the following dards in their general coverage and ad critiques and changes: urge the public to use these standards in holding • Implement improved cronyism and nepotism candidates, parties, and interest groups accountable laws and a tighter system of financial interest for their campaign discourse. Candidates were also disclosure; encouraged to use the standards to challenge one 77 another in maintaining a better level of campaign After the FCC sought to loosen rules on media communication. ownership in 2005, people fought back. Nation- The Minnesota Compact specifically asked the ally, about three million people contacted them to media to: oppose any deregulation of the media. In Min- • Identify issues of concern to voters based on nesota, in mid-December 2005, a forum was held data from polls or other methods and then at Hamline University in Saint Paul with two FCC emphasize those issues during campaign cov- Commissioners and two panels discussing Media erage by providing in-depth, informative Concentration and Localism. Over five hundred reports on the issues and covering the candi- people came out to testify to the FCC and express dates’ positions and proposals for dealing with their opinions on how the media does not meet them; their public interest needs. Despite the rumblings • Expanding daily coverage of substantive cam- of public concern, there is not currently a local paign issues as the election approaches; campaign dealing exclusively or comprehensively • Place less emphasis on campaign strategy and with media reform. predictions about the outcome of the election; • Review campaign ads for accuracy and fair Goals and Objectives play. Point out statements and tactics that are Minnesota’s democratic reform community misleading and/or untrue; has a vested interest in making sure our media is • Promote, broadcast, and follow up candidate publicly accountable and financially accessible to a debates and responses to questionnaires; range of candidates and issue campaigns. • Encourage participation in elections; Though legislative solutions to the problems • Describe the news organization’s decision- of our current news media industry are by nature making process for when and how to cover federal, it is important for local reform advocates controversial and/or ethically challenging news to take state-based and community-based about the candidates or campaigns. approaches to these issues. Such campaigns should There is anecdotal evidence that this approach include direct conversation and negotiation with may have had an impact. In the 1998 gubernatorial the broadcasters, public education about the election, Minnesota elected third party gubernato- nature and extent of the problem, and public pres- rial candidate Jesse Ventura. In the months prior to sure on broadcasters and advertisers to set higher the election, the gubernatorial candidates debated standards than are strictly required by today’s FCC. four times during the primary election campaign The research conducted by the Midwest and ten times during the general election campaign. News Index provides an opportunity for reform For a statewide race in Minnesota, these debates advocates to initiate just such a public dialogue received unprecedented television coverage: five of with owners and managers of the major broadcast these debates were televised and one debate was media outlets. The results of the MNI research shown on eleven stations at the same time. This pro- make it clear that there is a public need that is sim- vided Ventura an extraordinary opportunity to com- ply not being met by the broadcast news pro- municate to voters about where he stood on the gramming available today, despite the clear federal issues. Arranged by the Minnesota Broadcasters mandate that broadcasters provide this important Association (one of the Minnesota Compact backers public service. and planners), the debate series was intended to Dialogue with broadcasters should aim to show how “fierce competitors can join together in address the issues raised in the Minnesota Com- an effort to help Minnesotans learn what they need pact, including the creation of standards for to know about the candidates and their views.” improved public affairs coverage, for improved election coverage that focuses on issues rather than Minnesota’s Climate for Reform simple horse-race factors, and for increased afford- More and more groups in Minnesota are able access to the airwaves for candidates, includ- beginning to recognize the need for media reform. ing increased air time for debates. J 79

Population: 11,478,006 (2006 estimate) State Ranking: 7th of 50 Urban population: 80.5% Rural Population: 19.5% (2006) 85.1 % White 83.1 % White non-Hispanic Most populous cities: 11.9 % Black 1. Columbus; 2. Cleveland; 3. Cincinnati 2.3 % Hispanic origin 4. Toledo; 5. Akron 1.4 % Asian 1.3 % Two or more races 0.2 % American Indian & Alaska Native (2005) Governor: Ted Strickland (D) State Legislature 127th General Assembly Congressional Delegation 110th Congress House: 46 Democrats/ 53 Republicans House: 7 Democrats/ 11 Republicans Senate: 12 Democrats/ 21 Republicans Senate: 1 Democrat/ 1 Republican Registered Voters: 7,860,052 (2006) Voting Age Population: 8,708,985 (2006) General Election Turnout of Registered Voters 2000: 59.2% 2002: 43.6% 2004: 66.0% 2006: 48.0% 81 Democracy in Ohio: Problems and Prospects Executive Summary

The face of Ohio politics has changed dra- In the area of redistricting, the state has an matically in the past year—2007. Ohio has a Dem- unfortunate tradition of carving districts to benefit ocratic governor for the first time since 1991, and the party that controls the process at the time of Democrats fill three other statewide offices—attor- reapportionment. In March 2007, a Columbus Dis- ney general, secretary of state, and treasurer. Ohio’s patch poll found that only 11 percent of Ohioans pay-to-play political culture, the subject of nation- support the current method of redistricting. How- wide attention, helped fuel the public disgust that ever, both Democrats and Republicans continue to carried Democrats into office. resist reform. Just days after the 2006 general election Tom The rapidly rising costs of judicial elections in Noe, the poster boy for Ohio’s pay-to-play politics, Ohio, along with well-funded efforts by interest was found guilty of an array of charges: theft, groups to influence the outcomes of these races, money laundering, and the central charge— his raise serious concerns about the judiciary’s inde- corrupt mismanagement of Ohio’s $50 million pendence and impartiality. An October 2006 exam- rare-coin fund investment with the Bureau of ination of the Ohio Supreme Court by the New Workers’ Compensation. Noe was a rare-coin York Times found that Ohio justices routinely heard dealer whose lavish campaign contributions were cases after receiving campaign contributions from rewarded with appointments to public office and a the parties involved or groups that filed supporting lucrative investment contract. In December 2006, briefs. On average, the justices voted in favor of calls for reform, coupled with the state’s changing contributors 70 percent of the time. political landscape, led the Republican-dominated Systemic problems with the state’s adminis- Ohio General Assembly to pass strict campaign tration of elections came to the fore in the 2004 contribution limits on those seeking or awarded election season. Most troubling among these is the contracts with the state. fact that elections are run by partisan officials with However, there can be little doubt that Ohio’s a direct stake in their outcome. democracy continues to face enormous challenges. Collectively, these issues have a made a dent Campaign cash still plays a significant role. Our in public confidence in state government. An new stricter campaign contribution limits apply August 2006 survey commissioned by the Joyce only to those seeking contracts with the state. The Foundation found that 54 percent of Ohioans legislation, which has been challenged in court, is believed the state was “on the wrong track,” and missing key enforcement provisions. Wealthy indi- that 43 percent were “extremely concerned” by the viduals attempting to influence public policy are influence of money on politics. Yet there is also con- still permitted to contribute more than $10,000 per siderable hope among Ohioans that things can be election cycle to statewide and legislative candi- made better. Most people surveyed believe that dates, and this amount is doubled if the candidate reforms such as limits on judicial fundraising, bet- faces a challenger in the primary. ter reporting requirements for lobbyists, and

by Herbert Asher, Ann Henkener, Peg Rosenfield, Daniel Tokaji, and Catherine Turcer 82 public financing of campaigns could make a posi- In each of these areas, we have attempted to tive difference. engage in diagnosis and prescription. Our pro- The purpose of this report is to provide a posed reforms include the following: broad-ranging overview of the problems that have • Redistricting should be done by an inde- emerged in recent years with Ohio’s democratic pendent nonpartisan or bipartisan commis- process and to propose some measures that could sion, with competitiveness among the criteria improve matters. We do not purport to provide an considered in drawing district lines. in-depth analysis of the various issues addressed. • State law should be amended to remove That would take several hundred pages to accom- unnecessary barriers to voter registration and plish adequately. Nor does this report contain any participation, and to transfer authority for new empirical or legal research on the challenges running state elections to an independent facing Ohio’s democracy. Finally, it is not our pur- official or entity, so as to ensure evenhanded pose here to lay blame on any political party or administration of elections. individuals for the development of these problems. • Ohio’s contribution limits should be tight- What we do attempt to do is to summarize the ened and transparency improved through a challenges that Ohio’s democracy faces in 2007, centralized database, with major donors and and to suggest how we Ohioans might collectively registered lobbyists prohibited from serving confront those challenges. on state boards or commissions. The report consists of seven major parts. First, • Better information about lobbying activities to provide context, we offer a brief historical and potential ethics violations should be overview of Ohio’s political culture. Second, we dis- made available to the public, with enforce- cuss the state’s redistricting process, which has ment of existing ethics rules improved allowed the dominant party to gerrymander district through stiffer penalties. lines to advance its own incumbents’ interests, con- • The state should move to full public financ- tributing to the polarization of legislative bodies. ing of judicial campaigns or, failing that, Third, we survey the state’s system of election should implement better reporting and administration, including the rules governing reg- recusal rules to dispel the impression that jus- istration and voting, as well as the need for non- tice is for sale. partisanship among those charged with running the • Ohio’s public records and open meetings laws state’s elections. Fourth, we examine the state’s sys- should be made more easily enforceable, with tem of campaign finance, tracing the enormous role training provided to local officials on what is that money has played in shaping policy and dis- and is not permitted, and the transparency of cussing the pay-to-play system for which the state the state legislative process should be has now become infamous. Fifth, we address the improved. ethical violations that have plagued Ohio govern- There is certainly room for disagreement on ment in recent years, including the inadequate the magnitude of the problems identified in this enforcement of currently existing ethics rules. Sixth, report, and these recommendations should be con- we describe the issues that have emerged in Ohio’s sidered a work in progress, to be refined through judicial elections, including the infusion of money further research, analysis and dialogue. We never- into the process by entities with a direct interest in theless hope that this report will lead to a serious the outcome of cases decided in the courts. Seventh conversation among Ohioans of all political stripes and finally, we discuss the weaknesses in the state’s about practical and commonsense steps that can be public open records and open meeting laws, which taken to ensure that our political system works bet- have contributed to a lack of transparency. ter for every citizen. J 83 Findings: Policy and Political Problems and Recommendations

Political Culture and Context byist Jack Abramoff and his activities. On January 19, 2007, Ney was sentenced to thirty months in FINDING: prison for conspiracy to defraud the United States Ohio’s democracy and state government face and a charge of falsifying financial disclosure forms. serious challenges, including public corruption, All of these specific misdeeds have unfolded a flagging economy, and relatively low levels of in a state in which the ethical climate is often educational attainment. labeled as “pay-to-play.” The most general defini- Prior to the 2006 statewide elections, the tion of pay-to-play is that the best way to secure Republican Party enjoyed a position of total dom- state contracts, appointments, favorable regula- inance in state politics in Ohio. Governor Taft com- tions, and the like is to contribute financially to the pleted his second four-year term in January, 2007, party in power. While such contributions may not extending GOP control of the Governor’s office to be illegal, they raise concerns that state decisions sixteen consecutive years. All of the other statewide are swayed by the flow of money. administrative offices were held by Republicans: Adding to the sour mood of many Ohioans is Auditor Betty Montgomery, Secretary of State Ken a state economy that lags behind the national econ- Blackwell, Attorney General Jim Petro, and Treas- omy in job creation and wage growth. As a major urer Jennette Bradley. Indeed, Republicans held all manufacturing state, Ohio has suffered job loss due of these offices from 1995 through 2006. Up to foreign competition and globalization, resulting through 2006, Republicans also controlled both in a greatly diminished steel industry and an auto- chambers of the state legislature by comfortable mobile industry facing severe challenges. At a time margins—the House by 60 to 38 and the Senate when enhanced educational opportunity and 22 to 11. Their control of both chambers dated achievement are seen as the best response to global back to 1995. The Ohio Supreme Court in 2006 challenges and the best path to a productive life and was composed of six Republicans and one Democ- career, Ohio has experienced problems in the fund- rat, while both United States Senators and 12 of the ing of both lower and higher education. Multiple 18 Ohioans in the U.S. House of Representatives decisions of the Ohio Supreme Court have declared were also Republicans. the funding system for primary and secondary edu- As is often the case with one-party control cation unconstitutional, in part because of its exces- over an extended time period, allegations of scandal sive reliance on the property tax. Meanwhile, and corruption become widespread, and in Ohio’s tuition at Ohio’s public universities is among the case, touched officeholders such as the Governor, a highest in the nation. former state Treasurer, a former Speaker of the These funding problems serve as a backdrop House, and the Attorney General. In 2005, the to another problem: Ohio is an undereducated Governor pleaded guilty to four charges of failing state, with the educational attainments of its 25- to report gifts, and other officeholders were alleged and-over population consistently below the to have engaged in improper, heavy-handed national averages, no matter how one measures fundraising practices. educational achievement. One reason for this gap is Probably the most serious scandals sur- that when well-paying manufacturing jobs were rounded Tom Noe, a well-connected Republican plentiful, Ohioans did not need a college degree or businessman, who ran afoul of both federal and in many cases even a high school diploma to get state law, as described more fully below in the these jobs. But as these jobs disappeared, many “Campaign Finance” section of this report. Yet Ohioans found themselves unprepared for the new another Ohio scandal involved U.S. Representative economy. Bob Ney, the first target in the investigation of lob- The task of addressing these major challenges 84 is even more daunting due to the adoption of eight- respect and recognized that neither side could win year term limits in 1992, which had their first on all issues. impact in 2000. The conventional wisdom about the impact of term limits is that they tend to FINDING: strengthen the executive branch at the expense of Ohio’s tradition of regionalism impedes the state the legislature, mainly because of the loss of legisla- government’s ability to address the state’s press- tive expertise and institutional memory. It appears ing needs, including development of a compre- that the conventional wisdom was correct in most hensive urban agenda. states, but not in Ohio where most observers Policymaking and governance in Ohio are believe that the Governor was the loser because of complicated by the state’s longstanding regional- term limits. This outcome may be a function of the ism. More than 50 years ago, Ohio was the only political skills (or lack thereof) of Governor Taft state in the nation to have eight cities with popula- and the political abilities of the first House Speaker tions in excess of 100,000 — Cleveland, Colum- (Larry Householder) of the term limits era. What- bus, Cincinnati, Toledo, Akron, Dayton, ever the reason, it meant that strong gubernatorial Youngstown, and Canton. Located in various parts leadership had been absent, leading to a rural-ori- of the state, these cities were known as the “eight ented legislature dominating policy discussions on that made the state great.” many issues. Today many of these cities, with the major Given the major scandals plaguing the GOP, exception of Columbus, have lost ground in pop- the poor state of Ohio’s economy, a controversial ulation and economic growth, but they still anchor Republican nominee for Governor, and a strong distinct regions of the state. Surrounding these Democratic ticket, the Democrats made a major cities are first ring suburbs, some of which are comeback in the 2006 election. Democrats won doing well, others less so. Surrounding these older all of the statewide offices except Auditor. Their suburbs are some rapidly growing exurban com- gubernatorial nominee, Ted Strickland, won in a munities and outlying counties. Ohio has very dis- landslide. Democrats also picked up a U.S. Senate tinctive rural areas, some reasonably prosperous in seat when Congressman Sherrod Brown defeated western Ohio and others quite poor in the incumbent U.S. Senator Mike DeWine by 12 per- Appalachian region of southeastern Ohio. In this centage points. The Democrats picked up the U.S. respect, Ohio politics is more complicated than House seat formerly held by convicted Republican that of a state like Illinois, divided between the Representative, Bob Ney, and gained seven seats in Chicago/Cook County area and downstate areas, the Ohio House of Representatives to narrow their or a state like New York, divided between New deficit to 53-46. Of relevance to our later discus- York City and upstate areas. In Ohio, every region sion of redistricting is that Democrats won con- has its own interests, distinct from those of every trol of the Reapportionment Board by winning the other area. contests for Governor and Secretary of State. The regionalism of the state has many conse- Thus, as 2007 began, Ohio had once again quences. For example, it is difficult to create a com- become a two-party state government. A Demo- mon urban agenda since the composition and cratic governor faced a Republican-controlled leg- interests of the cities themselves are so diverse. islature with the GOP margin in the Ohio House Columbus is a prosperous white-collar community, being relatively narrow. It was hard to anticipate while Youngstown is a declining manufacturing how well divided government would work, espe- city. Cleveland’s ethnic and racial tapestry resem- cially with the need to pass a biennial operating bles many of the older cities of the East Coast, budget by June 30, 2007. It turned out that the while Cincinnati has more of a southern influence. budget process was far more bipartisan than Running for statewide office in Ohio is difficult expected, with most major votes on the budget because of the state’s complexity. If one wants to being unanimous. Credit for this outcome was blanket the entire state with television ads, it may given to both the Governor and the legislative be necessary to buy air time in as many as six media leaders who treated each other with civility and markets including one in West Virginia. A maxim 85 of Ohio politics is that the first time a candidate The State of Ohio faced major challenges runs for statewide office, he or she is likely to lose when it elected its new leadership team in 2006. because of the difficulty in mastering the diversity Whoever was elected would have to face the long- of the state. After learning how complex the state is, term reality of how business has traditionally been the candidate may be more successful the second conducted in state politics. Governance has focused time around. largely on the spoils of victory, how to reward one’s Policymaking is also more challenging in friends, and how to stay in office, rather than on Ohio, since each region wants its piece of the pie overarching policy debates. States with such indi- and the legislative delegations from these regions vidualistic politics are more likely to experience often fight hard for their share. Even higher educa- graft and corruption, partly because the dominant tion can be viewed as part of the pork barrel. There party sometimes overreaches—especially if it con- are six publicly funded medical schools in Ohio — trols all branches of governments and has enjoyed an almost unheard of total for a state of Ohio’s size control for a long period of time. Victorious par- — in the northwest, northeast, central, southeast, ties and their supporters are rewarded with tangible southwest, and west central areas of the state. When benefits, such as jobs, contracts, and favorable pub- proposals were made to eliminate duplicative Ph.D. lic policies, while the interests of ordinary citizens programs at Ohio’s thirteen publicly funded four- may be disregarded. year universities, regional warfare broke out. The In the electoral arena, this political culture broader issue of the allocation of state resources led leads the major parties to undermine minor parties the Toledo Blade to head-up a movement called and independent candidates. For example, Ohio “The Other Ohio” in the 1990s. Its aim was to made it more difficult than most states for inde- unite the rest of Ohio against the three C’s — pendent candidates to get on the ballot. Back in Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati — on the 1968, George Wallace and his American Inde- grounds that the three C’s got the bulk of the state pendent Party successfully challenged Ohio’s signa- dollars while the other areas received mere crumbs. ture requirements in the United States Supreme Regionalism’s finger reaches into how media Court. Even today, it is more difficult for inde- news does and does not get disseminated, another pendent candidates to gain access to the ballot in reason a statewide agenda is problematic to Ohio’s Ohio than in other states. And of course the major solidarity. Each of the regions and major cities has its parties also attempt to enhance their competitive own significant daily newspaper. But these newspa- position with respect to each other, through redis- pers are not read widely outside of their own major tricting and other means discussed later in this circulation areas. When one newspaper has a major report. investigative series on some problems in state gov- In Ohio, it is not considered surprising when ernment, the other newspapers may ignore these elected judges decide cases in favor of the political stories or perhaps run short wire service stories. One and economic interests of the political parties with exception to this pattern occurred in 2005 and which they are affiliated. In fact, there is more likely 2006. After the Toledo Blade took the lead in inves- to be an outcry when a judge does not decide a case tigating and exposing corruption in Ohio, other in his/her own party’s interest. For example, two newspapers, especially the Columbus Dispatch, Republican judges (Andy Douglas and Paul Pfeifer) Cleveland Plain Dealer, and Dayton Daily News, on the seven-member Ohio Supreme Court were acknowledged the work of the Blade and added their attacked as traitors by their fellow Republicans and own investigation and coverage. This had the effect the business community when they voted to declare of making ethics and corruption a more serious con- the funding of primary and secondary education to cern than would otherwise have been the case. be unconstitutional and to overturn Republican- passed legislation dealing with tort reform and FINDING: workers compensation. Likewise, no one is shocked A hallmark of Ohio’s political culture is the when the Secretary of State breaks two-two ties on major political parties’ success in using public county boards of elections in favor of his or her own offices to serve their own partisan interests. political party. 86 The composition of many state boards and five members: the Governor, the Secretary of State, commissions is statutorily defined as being from the the Auditor of State, one legislative Democrat, and major parties. The Ohio Ethics Commission has one legislative Republican. Thus, whichever party three Democrats and three Republicans, with no wins two of the three statewide offices controls the independents or unaffiliated Ohioans. Each of the redistricting process for state legislative seats. public universities has a board of trustees appointed The redrawing of U.S. House district bound- by the Governor. It is taken as a given that the Gov- aries is done by an act of the state legislature subject ernor will typically appoint members from his own to the approval of the Governor. If one party con- political party, often ones who have supported the trols the Ohio House, the Ohio Senate, and the Governor’s election campaigns. In the past, governorship, it can maximize the number of seats Ohioans renewed their driver’s licenses and auto- drawn so as to favor the dominant party. When mobile plates through registrars who were political there is split control, the two parties must neces- appointees—and kicked back some income to the sarily limit their aspirations and arrive at some sort dominant political party. of compromise in congressional redistricting. One can add endless examples of how the major political parties look out for their own inter- FINDING: ests and, in particular, how the dominant party tries Partisan redistricting in Ohio has negative con- to game the political system to its advantage. There sequences, including a growing number of is probably no better example than the issue of leg- uncompetitive legislative elections, overrepresen- islative redistricting, the topic to which we now tation of the dominant party in the legislature, turn. and greater polarization in state government. From the outset, the Ohio Reapportionment Board has acted in a very partisan fashion. Redistricting Whichever party controls the Board seeks to max- FINDING: imize the number of seats it can win. It does this The process for drawing legislative district by creating a large number of seats that are reason- boundaries in Ohio allows the party in control ably safe for the majority party and a smaller num- of redistricting, be it Republicans or Democrats, ber of districts extremely safe for the minority party. to draw those lines in ways that protect its The process results in most state legislative districts incumbent officeholders and advance its own being solidly held by one party and uncompetitive interests. in the general election—an outcome that occurs in Prior to the 1960s, many states had not most states that employ partisan redistricting meth- redrawn their state legislative district boundaries for ods. The meaningful election, thus, is the primary many years, resulting in rural areas being overrep- and not the general election. resented and urban and suburban areas being This process has negative consequences for underrepresented. A series of Supreme Court deci- Ohio and, more broadly, for American politics. For sions in the 1960s mandated decennial redrawing example, many voters do not have a meaningful of state legislative district boundaries and required choice in November, the election outcome having that representation in both houses of the state leg- been foreordained by partisan redistricting and by islature be based on population. the electoral advantages that incumbent office- After these rulings, Ohio established a 99- holders possess. In addition, the ultimate distribu- member State House of Representatives with two- tion of seats in the state legislature may not reflect year terms and a 33-member State Senate with the overall popular vote totals in legislative elec- staggered four-year terms, with both chambers’ rep- tions. resentation based on population. Ohio also adopted For example, in the 2004 Ohio elections, a new mechanism—the Reapportionment Board— Republican candidates for the Ohio House received to redraw the boundaries of the state legislative dis- just 50.8% of the overall popular vote, but still won tricts after each decennial census. almost 60% of the seats. How did this happen? The The Reapportionment Board is composed of Republican-controlled Reapportionment Board in 87 2001 drew many overwhelmingly Democratic dis- It is very difficult to reform a partisan redis- tricts such that the Democrats won these districts tricting process. The party that currently controls with very large margins, thereby “wasting” many and benefits by the process will typically oppose Democratic votes. Likewise, in 2004 U.S. House reform. Even the party that is currently disadvan- races, Republican candidates received 51.1% of the taged may be unenthusiastic about reform, at least popular vote but still won two-thirds of the 18 when that party believes it has a good chance to House seats. This was the result of the Republican regain control over the redistricting process. legislature having drawn a pro-Republican con- Due to the concerns set forth above, there have gressional redistricting map in 2001, which was been numerous efforts in the last 25 years to reform approved by the Republican governor. the redistricting process in Ohio. All of these efforts When Democrats controlled the redistricting have failed. Typically, though not consistently, the process, they acted in much the same way. For party that controlled the process saw no need for example, in the 1970 statewide elections, Democ- change, while the other major party was more likely rats won control of the Reapportionment Board to support reform. In 1981, a constitutional and redrew the state legislative districts the follow- amendment was placed on the Ohio ballot to ing year. Although the Democrats increased their change the method of redistricting to a more for- share of the Ohio House popular vote by only one mulaic, mathematical approach that favored com- percent between 1970 and 1972, they increased pact districts. This amendment was supported by their number of seats in the Ohio House of Repre- good government organizations such as the League sentative from 45 to 59. As computer programs and of Women Voters as well as by the Ohio Republi- elections data have become more sophisticated, can Party. It was opposed by the Democrats and control of the redistricting process is even more their allies, who at that time controlled the redis- important. tricting process and saw no need to change it. The Another undesirable outcome of the current amendment was soundly rejected by the voters. redistricting process is that it contributes to legisla- Throughout the 1980s and the 1990s, the tive polarization at the state and national levels. League and its allies tried to keep redistricting on When the outcome of the general election is a fore- the front burner. When Democrats lost control of gone conclusion, the important battle is the Repub- the Reapportionment Board in 1990, they became lican or Democratic primary. To win the Republican more sympathetic to changing the system, but primary, candidates often move to the right because unsurprisingly, Republicans had lost their enthusi- that is where the political activists and primary vot- asm for change. The Republicans held on to the ers tend to be. By the same token, to win the Dem- Reapportionment Board, the legislature, and the ocratic primary, candidates typically move to the Governor’s office through the 2000 elections and left. In a district that is heavily Republican or heav- thus saw no need to change the system for the post- ily Democratic, the winner of the dominant party’s 2000 redistricting. primary has no reason to move to the center in the In 2005, a coalition of individuals and organ- general election. The consequence is the election of izations came together under the rubric of Reform Republicans who are more conservative than the Ohio Now (RON) to promote a package of four average rank-and-file Republican, and Democrats constitutional amendments, one of which dealt who are more liberal than the average rank-and-file with redistricting. The RON redistricting amend- Democrat. It is little wonder that legislative bodies ment took a formulaic, mathematical approach, are so polarized—and that many citizens feel that only this time the number one criterion was com- the choices offered to them are so inadequate. petitiveness. Among a set of qualifying plans, the one that was to be selected was the one that created FINDING: the greatest number of competitive districts. Because the parties have strong incentives to RON included academics, good government maintain the present redistricting system, reform organizations, labor unions, and some Democrats— in this area will require a sustained and long- but very few Republicans. Ultimately, the Ohio term public education campaign. Republican Party and many prominent Republicans 88 opposed the RON amendments. The Ohio Dem- process in 2011. The Democratic Party believes it ocratic Party did not endorse the amendments. will go into the 2010 election in an advantageous Some county Democratic Party organizations position since it presumably will have an incum- endorsed the amendments, while some Democrats bent Governor and an incumbent Secretary of State opposed the amendments, including the chairman seeking re-election. of the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party. Ohio, thus, still has a partisan system of redis- The RON amendments were overwhelmingly tricting in place. At this stage, the political and par- rejected by the voters. The Republican opposition tisan climate in Ohio does not bode well for was not surprising since the GOP controlled the legislative redistricting reform. At the beginning of existing process, but the tepid Democratic organi- this legislative session, Representative Kevin zational support was. One explanation given for the DeWine re-introduced his redistricting proposal, weak Democratic support was the expectation of House Joint Resolution 1, but HJR 1 has not made many Democrats that they would sweep the 2006 any legislative progress beyond introduction. It is elections and thus control the post-2010 redistrict- unlikely to gain bipartisan support because Repre- ing process. On this line of thinking, there was no sentative DeWine was elected on April 20, 2007, reason to change the process, when they might be to become the Deputy Chair of the Ohio Republi- in position to do to the Republicans what the GOP can Party, putting him in line to be the Chair of the had done to them in previous redistricting plans. Ohio Republican Party in 2009. Reform groups The year 2006 saw another effort to enact continue to keep the issue of redistricting alive and redistricting reform, this one led by Republicans. a number of policymakers and community leaders During the debate over the RON redistricting have continued to research and discuss redistrict- amendment in 2005, its leading Republican oppo- ing options. However, there does not appear to be nents—House Speaker Jon Husted and Represen- great passion on the part of the political parties to tative Kevin DeWine—acknowledged that the change the system. current system of redistricting was flawed. While arguing that the RON amendment was not the Reform Proposals solution, they pledged to take up the issue of redis- Any reforms to be considered in future years tricting reform in 2006 if RON was defeated. must, of course, take into account such traditional Speaker Husted and Representative DeWine factors as the equal population requirement, minor- kept their word and sought input from various ity voting rights, contiguity, and compactness. But reform groups and some Democrats. Their pro- ideally, competitiveness should also be a factor in posal would have placed Ohio in a national leader- drawing a redistricting plan. Increasing the num- ship position, since it explicitly included ber of competitive districts would reduce the num- competition as a criterion in choosing a redistrict- ber of extremely safe districts and lessen the ing plan, while balancing competitiveness with polarization that arises from heavily one-party dis- other criteria such as compactness. When the time tricts. It would also be desirable to have an inde- came for a legislative vote to approve an amend- pendent bipartisan or nonpartisan redistricting ment for the ballot, only one Democrat supported commission that has some limited discretion to the proposal and it failed. While the reasons for this oversee the process and insure that the selected plan result are complex, it appears that Democrats did is a sound one. Additionally, any individual or not trust the Republicans, did not want the Repub- group should be permitted to submit its own plan, licans to get credit for political reform, and—per- a proposal that the League of Women Voters has haps most importantly—believed that there was no consistently supported. In general, the process need to change a system that might soon benefit should be characterized by transparency and public them. The results of the 2006 election justified the participation. This, in turn, would require that the Democrats’ political calculations as the party won State of Ohio provide the necessary election infor- a majority of the seats on the Reapportionment mation so that various entities—including mem- Board. However, it is the 2010 elections that will bers of the public and nonpartisan groups—can determine which party controls the redistricting construct their own plans. 89 Finally, it would be a good idea to require as a • voter identification requirements matter of law that redistricting may occur just once • provisional ballots a decade, after each decennial census. This would • challenges to voter eligibility head off the political games that we have witnessed • long lines at the polling place in other states, as political control changed hands • recounts and contests and “re-redistricting” occurred in mid-decade. At While it is difficult to estimate with precision present, it appears unlikely that Congress will take the number of votes lost due to these problems, over responsibility for redistricting from the states, they have caused some to question the result of the or take action to forbid mid-decade redistricting. election, despite the final tally showing that Presi- While redistricting cases will inevitably make their dent Bush defeated Senator Kerry by approximately way to the U.S. Supreme Court, it is not likely that 119,000 votes. the Court will impose limits on partisan gerry- It is clear that the serious problems that mandering any time soon. That is particularly true emerged in the 2004 election have yet to be resolved. after its recent decision in LULAC v. Perry, which In 2005, the League of Women Voters of Ohio and upheld the constitutionality of Texas’ 2003 re-redis- more than a dozen Ohio citizens sued Secretary of tricting plan. State Blackwell and other state officials for failing to It, thus, appears likely that the states will be protect the rights of Ohio voters, as required under left with responsibility for reforming their own the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the redistricting systems. In an ideal world, the states U.S. Constitution, and the Help America Vote Act would indeed be laboratories of democracy where of 2002 (HAVA). The League’s complaint chroni- different states would test different solutions and cled deficiencies stretching over three decades, one could observe what worked and did not work including widespread problems with the voter reg- in various settings. Unfortunately, Ohio does not istration system, the absentee and provisional ballot appear poised to participate in such experimenta- processes, the training of poll workers, the organi- tion. It will probably take a good deal of public zation of polling places and precincts, and the allo- education for citizens to understand the problems cation of voting machines. The complaint alleged, in the current system and for the political will for for example, that thousands of Ohioans were unable real redistricting reform to develop. to vote in November 2004 or just gave up because lines at many of their precincts were more than two Election Administration hours, and in some cases, up to nine hours long. The case remains pending. FINDING: In 2006, the Ohio legislature passed a massive There are systemic problems with Ohio’s elec- bill (Substitute House Bill 3, or “H.B. 3”) over- tion system, which recent legislative “reforms” hauling the state’s system of election administra- have exacerbated rather than ameliorated. tion. In many respects, as described more fully Since the 2000 election, election administra- below, this new legislation threatens to make things tion has emerged as an area in need of serious worse rather than better. reform. Like never before, the public spotlight has There are also significant concerns about the focused on the “nuts and bolts” of elections. Ohio implementation of new voting technology. Partic- has been the subject of particularly intense scrutiny, ularly troubling is the experience of Cuyahoga given its pivotal role in the 2004 presidential elec- County in the 2006 primary, which has already tion and decisions of the state’s chief election offi- been the subject of two detailed reports setting cial, Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell—a forth an array of problems in that county’s admin- Republican and President Bush’s Ohio campaign istration of elections. Because similarly compre- co-chair—which attracted severe criticism. Among hensive analyses of other counties have not been the subjects of controversy were: done, we simply cannot say for sure whether the • the equipment used to cast and count votes problems found to exist in Cuyahoga County are • voter registration requirements and proce- isolated to that county, or if they exist elsewhere in dures the state as well. 90 A comprehensive analysis of election admin- state’s massive overhaul of its election system. istration issues facing Ohio is well beyond the scope Under H.B. 3, newly registered voters’ names may of this report. What follows instead is a description have their names “marked” on the registration list of some of the most pressing election administra- if a postcard mailed by election officials to the voter tion issues confronting the state and its voters. This is returned by the post office. Voters whose names includes discussion of problems that emerged in the are so marked can be required to cast provisional 2004 election, along with some of the important ballots that may or may not be counted. changes made by the Ohio legislature since then. The second issue has to do with the new statewide registration lists that are required by the FINDING: Help America Vote Act of 2002. The idea behind Ohio’s restrictive voter registration rules threaten this requirement is to make voting lists more accu- to impede eligible citizens from participating in rate, by making it easier for counties to exchange the democratic process. information. While the idea is a worthy one, it is Among the major issues of contention during not at all clear whether Ohio’s implementation of the 2004 election season were the rules governing this requirement will improve the accuracy of voter the registration of voters. Particularly controversial registration lists. Very little information about was a directive from Ohio Secretary of State, Ken Ohio’s statewide registration list has been made Blackwell, that registration forms had to be on at public, and the state did not respond to inquiries least 80-pound paper in order to be accepted. This from the Brennan Center for Justice regarding the directive was ultimately modified under pressure standards and processes for matching voter infor- from voting rights groups, but significant contro- mation against other lists. This is a critical question versies over voter registration remained, including because an overly stringent matching requirement the treatment of registration forms on which cer- could result in eligible voters wrongly being stricken tain information was missing or omitted. from voting lists. The lack of transparency with Another issue that emerged in the 2004 elec- Ohio’s statewide voter registration list is very trou- tion was phony registration forms allegedly sub- bling. mitted by some groups, containing fictitious voters A third voter registration issue in Ohio has to such as Dick Tracy, Mary Poppins, and Jive Turkey, do with the rules governing nonpartisan groups Sr. It has not been shown that anyone actually engaged in voter registration efforts. Reacting to attempted to vote fraudulently under these false allegations of the registration of nonexistent voters names. To the contrary, a joint report by the League in 2004, the state enacted more onerous require- of Women Voters of Ohio and the Coalition on ments applying to groups like ACORN and Housing and Homelessness in Ohio found inci- NAACP, who focus heavily on voter registration. dents of fraud to be minimal—just four reported Voting rights advocates are also concerned by a rule cases out of more than nine million voters in the promulgated by Secretary of State Blackwell, which 2002 and 2004 elections combined. requires every person helping voters register to A more serious registration issue that emerged return every registration form he or she collects in 2004 had to do with ex-felons, who under Ohio within ten days, either in person or by mail, to the law are allowed to vote after they are no longer county board of elections or the Secretary of State’s incarcerated. Voting rights advocates alleged that office. In some circumstances, those who fail to election officials were providing false information comply with the new registration requirements to former felons who, in fact, were eligible to re- could be charged with a felony. register and participate in the 2004 election. Ohio’s These new rules have led to a lawsuit (Project controversies over voter registration have not sub- Vote v. Blackwell), alleging that Ohio’s restrictions sided since 2004. If anything, they have become on voter registration drives violate the constitu- more intense. Three voter registration issues of par- tional rights of voters and the groups seeking to ticular concern have emerged in 2006. help them register. On September 1, 2006, a federal The first concerns a new provision of Ohio judge in Cleveland issued a court order preventing law, enacted January 31, 2006, as a part of the these rules from going into effect. 91 FINDING: ballot. But the voters’ obligations don’t end there. Ohio has failed to take sufficient steps to reduce Along with the completed absentee ballot, voters lines on Election Day, and the confusing require- are again required to provide identifying informa- ments for mail-in absentee voting may result in tion. It can be expected that a significant number of disenfranchisement. voters will fail to comply with these rules, resulting In 2005, the Ohio legislature enacted legisla- in their not receiving an absentee ballot or in hav- tion (House Bill 234) to institute “no fault” absen- ing their absentee ballot rejected. tee voting throughout the state. Before then, Ohio In late 2006, voting rights advocates brought voters wishing to vote absentee were required to suit to challenge the implementation of these ID provide a reason for not being able to go to the polls requirements (Northeast Ohio Coalition for the on Election Day, such as disability, military service, Homeless v. Blackwell). U.S. District Judge Alger- absence from the county, or a religious observance. non Marbley issued a temporary restraining order No-fault absentee voting holds the promise of mak- against application of the ID requirements to ing voting more convenient, and many believe that absentee voters. Although the Sixth Circuit later it will increase voter turnout. It may also reduce the stayed this court order, the parties negotiated an long lines that bedeviled the state in the 2004 elec- order a few days before the election to ensure that– tion, particularly in urban areas of Columbus and in at least for the time being–most absentee voters Knox County, home of Kenyon College, where would have their votes counted. some voters waited until the wee hours of the morn- What happens if voters request but don’t ing after Election Day to cast their votes. receive an absentee ballot? Those voters are still per- Another possibility for reducing lines is to mitted to go to the polls and vote. They will, how- institute sample ballots, which are used in other ever, have to cast a provisional ballot. During the states to let voters know before Election Day which 2004 election, the Ohio Secretary of State’s office candidates and issues will appear on the ballot. By erroneously provided guidance that voters would facilitating voters’ ability to make choices before they not be allowed to cast provisional ballots if they step into the voting booth, sample ballots might claimed to have requested but not received or cast reduce the time it takes each person to vote and, in an absentee ballot. This led to a court order requir- the aggregate, make a dent on lines at the polls. ing that such voters be allowed to cast provisional Unfortunately, Ohio’s liberalized absentee vot- ballots. Under HAVA and current Ohio law, voters ing rule comes with an identification requirement. do have a right to cast a provisional ballot under This requirement is sure to prove confusing to many these circumstances. The problem is that those cast- voters, resulting in some people not receiving absen- ing provisional ballots cannot be certain that their tee ballots or, worse still, not having them counted. votes will be counted. In order to obtain an absentee ballot, a voter must submit a written request to his or her county board FINDING: of elections. With that request, the voter is required New laws on voter ID, challenges to voter eligi- to provide identifying information. Those who have bility, and provisional ballots are likely to frus- a driver’s license may provide that number, and trate voters and poll workers, while creating those who have a Social Security number may pro- greater uncertainty in close elections. vide the last four digits. Those who don’t have either Polling place operations proved to be a seri- of these identifiers, however, are required to provide ous impediment to equal voting in 2004, and the a copy of an identifying document containing their problems have only worsened with the changes to name and current address. Examples of acceptable Ohio law contained in H.B. 3. HAVA imple- documents include a current utility bill, bank state- mented a nationwide identification requirement, ment, government check, paycheck, or other gov- but it applied only to first-time voters who regis- ernment document—but not an election notice tered by mail. Under HAVA, those voters were from the board of elections. required to produce some sort of identifying infor- Once the director of elections receives this mation at the polls. information, the voter should be sent an absentee Despite the absence of evidence showing vot- 92 ing fraud to be a serious problem, the Ohio legisla- made at the discretion of poll workers, who are ture enacted a more stringent voter ID require- appointed on a party basis. Even worse, H.B. 3 ment, effective in the 2006 general election. In added new language that discriminates on its face order to cast a regular ballot at the polling place, all against voters who are naturalized citizens. Under voters will be required to produce some form of the new law, poll workers challenging a voter’s citi- identifying document. Specifically, voters will have zenship may demand that the voter produce docu- to show poll workers one of the following: ments proving citizenship. If a naturalized voter’s • A current Ohio driver’s license or photo ID. If eligibility is challenged, then that voter will be the address is not current, the voter may be required to produce a certificate of naturalization at asked to provide his or her driver’s license the polls in order to cast a regular ballot. Not many number. voters routinely take this documentation with them • Other current photo ID issued by the federal when they go to vote. Imagine, for example, a 75- or state government showing the voter’s name year old grandmother who emigrated from China, and current address. became a citizen three decades ago, and has been • A military ID with the voter’s name and cur- voting regularly since then. If that voter is chal- rent address. lenged and she does not produce her certificate of • A utility bill, bank statement, government naturalization for inspection, then she will be check, paycheck, or other government denied a regular ballot. This discriminatory chal- document that shows the voter’s name and lenge law was enjoined by a federal court (Boustani current address. (A mailed registration v. Blackwell) though the risk of discrimination notice from the board of elections will not suf- remains.* fice.) The changes to Ohio’s voter ID and challenge Voters who do not present one of these iden- rules will put additional pressure on the state’s tifying documents are required to cast a provisional already troubled provisional voting system. Voters ballot. will be required to cast provisional ballots instead Ohio’s ID requirements caused major confu- of regular ones, if they lack an acceptable form of sion on the part of both voters and election officials ID or if their eligibility is challenged at the polls and in the 2006 general election. As noted above, they they cannot produce acceptable documentation. A led to a lawsuit claiming that the new requirements provisional ballot, as the name suggests, is a condi- violate voters’ constitutional rights. This case is still tional one—to be counted only if the voter’s eligi- pending. bility can be established after Election Day. To make Another change in Ohio law, effective in matters worse, H.B. 3 provides that a voter’s provi- 2006, has to do with challenges to voter eligibility sional ballot will only count if it is cast in the cor- at the polling place. This, too, was an issue that pro- rect precinct. This is especially problematic for those voked controversy in 2004, with voting rights advo- who vote at polling places with multiple precincts. cates concerned that the Republican Party would A voter can very easily appear at the wrong table by use the challenge process to intimidate eligible vot- mistake and wind up having his or her vote rejected. ers, particularly in minority communities. Ohio’s Ohio’s new rules regarding voter ID, chal- challenge process resulted in no fewer than four law- lenges to eligibility, and provisional ballots can also suits before the November 2004 election, with four be expected to create problems for those who are different judges issuing orders that limited or responsible for running elections—namely, poll stopped those challenges. All of these orders were workers and county election officials. Not only will ultimately reversed on appeal, one of them on the more voters be directed into the provisional ballot afternoon of Election Day. pathway, but the rules for determining who must The good news is that Ohio has eliminated cast a provisional ballot have been made exception- designated partisan challengers at the polls. The bad ally complicated by H.B. 3. If a voter is required to news is that challenges to eligibility may still be cast a provisional ballot, then he or she has 10 days

* One of the co-authors of this report, Daniel Takaji; is an attorney for the plaintiffs in this case. 93 within which to produce any required information. been accused of partisanship. In California, for County election officials will then have to deter- example, Democratic Secretary of State, Kevin mine whether or not those provisional ballots will Shelley, was forced to resign under a cloud of be counted, in a short period of time. alleged improprieties, including accusations that he The greater number of provisional ballots misused HAVA funds to benefit his own party. means more opportunities for parties and candi- dates to fight over the results after the election. At Policy Proposals the same time, the compressed period for deter- In short, the need for nonpartisan election mining whether to count provisional ballots is administration is an issue that ought to transcend likely to result in more mistakes being made—and party boundaries. There are at least two possible unfortunately, some voters’ votes being improperly reforms that warrant consideration. One possibility rejected. This can only diminish public confidence is to transfer authority for supervising elections in the ultimate result. To make matters worse, H.B. from the Secretary of State to a bipartisan board. 3 eliminated the option of contesting federal elec- Such a reform was included in Reform Ohio Now, tions in state courts. For example, the losing can- which Ohio voters rejected in 2005, but it is possi- didate in a close U.S. House race is prohibited from ble that a different type of body might ultimately filing an election contest under state law, even if prove more acceptable to the electorate. Another election officials wrongly rejected or included bal- possibility is for the state’s chief election official to lots that would have made a difference in the race. be appointed instead of elected, with a super- This raises a very real possibility of the wrong per- majority of the legislature—perhaps 75 percent— son being elected to office—in the worst-case sce- required to confirm the appointment, as Professor nario, even the U.S. President—without that Rick Hasen of Loyola Law School has suggested. person’s opponent having any legal recourse. Such a reform would increase the likelihood that the state’s chief election official will avoid partisan- FINDING: ship in his or her decisions and, hopefully, enhance Partisan election administration is a serious public confidence in the integrity of the state’s elec- problem in Ohio, one that demands reform. toral system as a whole. Ohio’s former Secretary of State, Ken Black- State law should be amended to remove well, played a controversial role in the 2004 elec- unnecessary barriers to registration and participa- tion. Several of his decisions received intense tion. The legislature should repeal H.B. 3’s discrim- criticism, particularly those having to do with pro- inatory challenge provision and ID requirement, visional ballots, challenges to voter eligibility, and both of which raise the specter of racial and ethnic the weight of the paper on which registration forms profiling at the polls. It should also consider adop- were printed. It did not escape notice that Black- tion of statewide in-person early voting and sample well was an active supporter of President Bush’s re- ballots, to relieve Election Day pressure on polling election, and some accused the Secretary of State’s places and the long lines that come with it. office of making decisions designed to benefit his The transparency of the state’s registration party. database should be increased, so that citizens and While it is easy to personalize such conflicts, their advocates can ensure that eligible voters are it is important to recognize the important systemic not wrongfully removed from the rolls. issues that go beyond individual personalities. Like most states, Ohio’s chief election official is elected Campaign Finance on a party basis. Whenever a chief election official is elected as a representative of his or her party, it FINDING: raises the specter that the official will tilt the rules The prominent role played by private money in of the game to the advantage of his or her side. This Ohio politics has had two well-documented and was true of Blackwell in 2004 and of Florida’s Sec- negative effects: making it increasingly difficult retary of State, Katherine Harris in 2000, but it is for many candidates and would-be candidates of not only Republican secretaries of state who have modest means to compete for public office, and 94 helping to reinforce the state’s notorious pay-to- opponents, and nearly 96% of Ohio legislative can- play political culture. didates—including 100% of Ohio Senate candi- By any measure, campaign cash plays a signif- dates—who raised more money than their icant role in Ohio elections. The correlation opponents won. In fact, in 2006 in the midst of between raising money and electoral success is strong anti-incumbent sentiment, every incumbent undeniable. In 2006, winning Ohio House and Ohio Senator won re-election. Senate candidates raised 4.2 times more than their

2005-2006 Contributions Winning vs. Losing Ohio Legislative Candidates Total Average Raised Ohio House Winning Candidates $18,171,372 $183,549.21 Ohio House Losing Candidates $5,645,230 $62,035.49 Ohio Senate Winning Candidates $9,350,953 $550,056.04 Ohio Senate Losing Candidates $1,267,678 $79,229.88

Totals include both monetary and in-kind contributions. Campaign contribution information is available on the Secretary of State’s website at www.sos.state.oh.us

Large campaign coffers do not necessarily candidates for Ohio House and Senate races who reflect a close race or the need for campaign dollars. did not face opponents in the 2006 general election In 2006, Speaker of the Ohio House Jon Husted raised a combined total of $3,656,792. (R-Kettering) raised $1,964,642. He was unop- Incumbency, naturally, plays an important role posed in both the primary and general elections. in fundraising in Ohio elections. Ohio House Just over 70% of these contributions ($1,385,000) incumbents raised 5.5 times more than their chal- were given by Husted to his caucus, the Ohio lengers during the 2005-06 election cycle. The House Republican Campaign Committee, which comparison below demonstrates the power of could then disburse it to other candidates. The 12 incumbency and campaign cash.

2006 Candidates for the Ohio General Assembly Total Average Raised Incumbents $22,792,602 $268,148.26 Challengers $4,143,656 $53,123.80 Open Seats $7,498,975 $124,982.91

Totals include both monetary and in-kind contributions.

During 2005, Ohio’s term-limited Governor, rent Governor Ted Strickland served only 3 months Bob Taft, despite an all-time low approval rating of of his 4-year term before hiring a fundraising con- 15% and an ethics scandal, raised $117,319. Cur- sultant to begin raising money for his re-election. 95 Comparison of Gubernatorial Candidates from 1994-2006 Election Cycles Election Cycle Candidate Contributions 1993-1994 George Voinovich-R (winner) $6,801,420 Robert Burch-D $467,743 1995-1996 George Voinovich-R $43,288 1997-1998 Bob Taft-R (winner) $9,393,556 Lee Fisher-D $10,614,387 1999-2000 Bob Taft-R $2,409,006 2001-2002 Bob Taft-R (winner) $10,564,977 Tim Hagan-D $1,736,681 2003-2004 Bob Taft-R $283,316 2005-2006 Ken Blackwell-R $11,894,483 Ted Strickland-D (winner) $16,796,479

Totals include both monetary and in-kind contributions.

FINDING: were completely secret. These operating accounts Ohio has experienced several high profile polit- were used for basic operating expenses (such as elec- ical scandals in recent years, most of which can tricity) and party building (promotion of the polit- be traced to the state’s casual regulation of cam- ical party, but not candidates). The Team Ohio paign finance practices and the failure to ensure controversy prompted prominent Republicans a high level of government transparency. including Governor Bob Taft and Secretary of State A poll conducted in November 2005 for the Ken Blackwell to call for improved disclosure of George Gund Foundation by Belden Russonello & party money. Stewart found that political corruption was the top Other scandals also prompted Ohioans to call concern of Ohio voters—higher than jobs, schools, for reform of the campaign finance system. In crime, and high taxes. Moreover, 57% of the 2004, two of former Ohio Treasurer Joe Deters’ respondents said Ohio was on the wrong track, aides were charged in connection with a pay-to-play while 71% said they had “little confidence” in state scheme that allegedly steered state investment con- government. In light of a series of disquieting and tracts to sometimes unqualified political donors. highly publicized developments in recent years, Deters’ campaign solicited a $50,000 contribution these results are not surprising. from Cleveland broker Frank Gruttadauria, who is In April 2000, the Columbus Dispatch currently serving time for bank fraud, securities reported on a September 10, 1999 letter, in which fraud, and identity theft. Deters’ former chief of Governor Bob Taft requested donations for the staff and one of his fundraisers pleaded guilty to Ohio Republican Party’s operating account. Gov- lesser charges in July 2004. The lobbyist who ernor Taft asked donors to give between $25,000 helped facilitate the relationship between Deters and $50,000 to become part of “Team Ohio.” Perks and Gruttadauria also pleaded guilty to misde- of membership in Team Ohio included a reception meanor charges. at the Governor’s residence and a seat in the gover- Although Joe Deters never faced criminal nor’s box at an Ohio State football game. Ohio law charges, he ultimately admitted that he steered con- did not then require disclosure of contributions to tributors to the Hamilton County Republican the political party operating accounts, so the donors Party and that these contributions were then given 96 to his campaign. This use of a county political party candidates; allowed the Deters campaign to circumvent contri- (2) the use of secret party “operating accounts” bution limits. Republican county political chairs in to advance the interests of particular candi- Hamilton and Cuyahoga counties admitted that dates; and they had established a policy that money raised by (3) the use of issue advocacy groups to cir- candidate committees for the county party would cumvent Ohio’s prohibitions on corporate later be given back to the candidate committees. contributions to individual candidates. They created this policy to avoid the “earmarking” Although it has been alleged that Householder of campaign contributions, which is prohibited by and some of his top aides accepted kickbacks from campaign finance law. campaign vendors, he has denied those allegations Ohio political parties play a fundamental role and has faced no criminal charges. in moving money from candidate to candidate. There are no limits on candidate-to-candidate or FINDING: candidate-to-political party giving and there are no Ohio’s recent overhaul of campaign finance law limits on in-kind contributions from the political (House Bill 1 of the 125th General Assembly party committees to candidates. This means that it special session) has left the system even more is very easy for candidates to avoid contribution vulnerable to corruption. limits. Although earmarking is illegal, vendors for In December 2004, Governor Bob Taft called the state of Ohio may avoid stricter contribution the Ohio legislature into a special session to address limits by supporting the political party with a tacit the problem of loopholes in campaign finance reg- understanding that their contribution also supports ulations that the “Team Ohio,” Deters, and House- the candidate that bestows contracts. It can be very holder controversies revealed. The Ohio Senate and difficult to track the source of contributions. Dur- House proceeded to rush House Bill 1 (H.B. 1) ing the 2006 election cycle, statewide and legislative through the legislative process. candidates raised $72,267,617. During 2005-06, House Bill 1 made the campaign finance sys- these candidates gave $13,682,817 to Ohio politi- tem in Ohio much more complicated. It created cal party committees and an additional $148,218 some limitations on the mobility of campaign cash, to party clubs like the Young Republicans and but did not effectively address the need to stop the Young Democrats. These candidates also gave over legal funneling of contributions between and $1 million to other candidates. The more entities among candidates and political party committees. these monies pass through before they reach their There are still no limits on candidate-to-candidate final destination, the more difficult it is for the pub- or candidate-to-political party giving, and there are lic to find the source. no limits on in-kind contributions from the polit- In the spring of 2004, a series of reports sur- ical party committees to candidates. This effectively faced claiming that political consultants with close means that there are still no limits on transferring ties to the former Speaker of the Ohio House, Larry funds between and among candidates and party Householder, were encouraging their clients to use committees, which allows candidates to circumvent political party accounts to raise large amounts of contribution limits. For the political parties, this money. The clients were allegedly encouraged to has another upside—candidates and officeholders fund ostensible “issue advocacy” campaigns that who are good fundraisers can help candidates in would, in reality, be used to help particular candi- more competitive races. dates. Although the consultants were never offi- In some respects, H.B. 1 took a dramatic step cially charged with wrongdoing, their efforts to backwards. Campaign contribution limits were dra- skirt campaign finance law drew attention to loop- matically increased in H.B. 1 and, for the first time holes in Ohio’s campaign finance system. Three since 1908, direct corporate and union contribu- types of loopholes received the greatest attention: tions were permitted to flow to political parties for (1) the use of county party “state candidate restricted uses. H.B. 1 did not address contribu- funds” to obscure donor identity and funnel tions from those seeking contracts with the State of impermissibly large contributions to specific Ohio and did little to address the pay-to-play 97 culture in state politics. What H.B. 1 did attempt campaign money can be spent, but personal or was to improve transparency through disclosure. business use is prohibited. The Ohio Elections Although its effort to create more stringent disclo- Commission has permitted candidates’ expansive sure was a step in the right direction, it simultane- use of campaign funds. ously quadrupled contribution limits to $10,000 The Dispatch found that state candidates per election cycle (five times more than the contri- spent nearly $45,000 for tickets for OSU football bution limits for individual donors to federal can- games and more than $67,000 for dues or mem- didates). In 2006, 353 individuals contributed berships to organizations like the Athletic Club, bar $10,000 or more to the five winners of Ohio’s associations, and chambers of commerce. Former statewide offices. H.B. 1’s increases in contribution State Senator and current Chancellor of the Board limits threaten to exacerbate both corruption and of Regents, Eric Fingerhut (D-University Heights), the appearance of corruption in state government. who was prevented by term limits from running for The contribution limits defined in H.B. 1 are set to re-election, spent $561 to replace an aide’s wind- increase as the cost of living increases. Individuals shield. are now permitted to give $10,670 per election In May 2007, Representative and Ohio Dem- cycle. The primary is considered an election cycle if ocratic Party Chair, Chris Redfern (D-Catabawa the candidate faces an opponent. This means that Island), used campaign funds to pay his fiancée, during a two-year cycle a candidate may receive as and now current wife Kim Kahlert Redfern, $4,500 much as $21,340 from one wealthy contributor. A for the cost of living with her earlier in the year. chart of the campaign contribution limits as of Feb- Redfern used another $12,800 in campaign funds ruary 2007 can be found in Appendix A at the end to pay rent and utilities for an apartment in the of this report. Columbus Brewery District throughout 2006. In November 2005, Ohioans voted on a cam- paign finance ballot initiative, Issue 3, that was part Finding: of the Reform Ohio Now package. Issue 3 included Ohio’s pay-to-play political climate encourages lower contribution limits, improved disclosure, and abuse and corruption. restrictions on candidate-to-candidate giving. Issue Since the passage of House Bill 1, the holes in 3 failed overwhelmingly (66.86 to 33.14 percent). the state’s system of campaign finance regulation In arguments favoring Issue 3 for the Secretary of have become even clearer. As noted above, the State’s official Issue Report, Reform Ohio Now Toledo Blade has engaged in an ongoing investiga- stated “Vote yes to restore confidence, level the tion into investments managed for the Bureau of playing field, and reduce the influence of big Workers’ Compensation by Thomas Noe—an money contributors in politics by significantly lim- investor, coin dealer, and high-profile political iting campaign contributions…” Those opposed donor. The investigation revealed that a state invest- stated “The proposed amendment would change ment in gold coins, valued at upwards of $300,000, how Ohio political campaigns are funded to bene- was missing. This discovery and further investiga- fit the wealthy and labor unions, to the disadvan- tion by the Blade and federal and local authorities tage of all other Ohioans.” In these circumstances, led to an acknowledgement by Noe’s lawyers that at it may have been difficult for some voters to dis- least $12 million in investment assets could not be tinguish fact from fiction. accounted for. As these investigations unfolded, it Questionable activities have continued became clear that Noe’s investment contracts and through 2006 and into 2007. A Columbus Dispatch appointments to state boards, such as the Turnpike analysis of campaign finance reports found that Commission, were more the result of generous con- state candidates spent more than $70 million from tributions to Republican candidates over the years their campaign funds on everything from the nec- than his competence or integrity. essary to the extravagant, some even after losing re- Noe, a college drop-out, was appointed first election bids or announcing their retirement. These to the Bowling Green State University Board of campaign coffers can become slush funds for many Trustees and then to the Ohio Board of Regents in everyday items. State law is not explicit about how 1995. In 1997, the Ohio Bureau of Workers’ 98 Compensation started an “emerging managers” to the tune of almost $5 million, between 1997 and program, which allowed the Bureau to experiment 2004. In August 2005, the Plain Dealer reported in alternative investment strategies, other than tra- that the Securities and Exchange Commission ditional stocks and bonds. Noe created the Capital (SEC) warned the state that its fund for injured Coin Fund to buy and sell coins. Under his con- workers was paying too much in brokerage fees. tract with the Bureau, 80% of the profits from the Surprisingly, the SEC received no response. There fund were supposed to go to the state workers’ com- have also been incidents outside the bureau, where pensation fund, with the remainder going to Noe’s big-money contributors received lucrative con- business. Noe was given the authority to invest $50 tracts. The Noe scandal is just one example of a million of the Bureau’s money. Noe’s contract also pay-to-play system that is alive and well in Ohio. allowed him to invest in a variety of collectibles, In two cases in 2007, both the General including political memorabilia, comic books, and Assembly and Governor Strickland have cultivated Beanie Babies. at least the appearance of an exchange of legislation In August 2005, the Toledo Blade reported for campaign contributions. that Noe used his American Express corporate The telecommunications industry, which credit card to contribute $10,000 to California pushed a bill to rewrite state cable franchising law, Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger. The Blade later contributed more than half a million dollars to the reported that just prior to Election 2004, there was campaign coffers of lawmakers, statewide office- an elaborate plot by the then-head of the Bureau of holders, and political parties over the past two years. Workers’ Compensation, Jim Conrad, to keep the Telecom interests, led by giant AT&T, have poured loss of $215 million under wraps until after the $374,581 into lawmakers’ campaign accounts, election. donated $69,365 to Governor Ted Strickland, Noe was one of President George W. Bush’s another $30,188 to the other four statewide office- “Pioneers" because he raised at least $100,000 in holders, and $84,210 to Democratic and Republi- campaign contributions to the President. On Sep- can Party accounts. The contributions totaled tember 12, 2006, Noe was sentenced to 27 months $558,344 in 2005 and 2006. On June 25, 2007, in prison and a fine of more than $136,000 for ille- the Governor signed this bill into law. Unfortu- gally funneling contributions to the 2004 Bush re- nately, the bill does not include some important election campaign. Four prominent GOP consumer protections like strong anti-abandonment politicians from Toledo have also been convicted language to protect lower income communities. on ethics charges related to Tom Noe’s scheme to Governor Strickland has received strong sup- funnel $45,400 illegally to the re-election cam- port from the coal industry over the years. When he paign. On June 28, 2006, Lucas County Commis- ran for United States Congress (1996-2004) he sioner Maggie Thurber, Toledo City received $159,606 from coal interests, and in 2006 Councilwoman Betty Shultz, former Toledo Mayor he received $654,455 to support his run for gover- Donna Owens, and Sally Perz, ex-chairman of the nor. The 2007 fiscal budget included an amend- Republican Party’s Lucas County organization, lob- ment that made it easier for a proposed coke plant, byist, and former state representative, were con- which would purify coal for use in steel production, victed of failing to file state ethics forms disclosing to navigate its way past the environmental appeals money that Noe had given them, which then was process. This plant is controversial because the cok- forwarded illegally to the Bush campaign. ing process is associated with high levels of mercury The Noe coin scandal reveals systemic prob- emissions, which can cause neurological and devel- lems in the state’s system of campaign finance reg- opmental damage to humans. The Strickland ulation. It has been a common practice to award administration pushed this rider to the state’s investment contracts to those who contribute large budget, giving Ohio EPA directors the authority to sums to political campaigns. The Cleveland Plain modify permits while they are under appeal. Gov- Dealer has reported that two-thirds of the over 200 ernor Strickland signed the budget on June 30, investment managers hired by the Bureau of Work- 2007. ers’ Compensation gave to Republican candidates, The Cafaro Company was Attorney General 99 Marc Dann’s top organizational contributor during Bill 694 also reduced political contributions from 2005-06, contributing $45,116. When Dann was unions engaged in collective bargaining at the state elected to statewide office, Capri Cafaro was or local level to an aggregate of $2,000. Because appointed to replace him in the Ohio Senate. One- of this provision, the status of the new law was third of the attorneys who were awarded state con- challenged in court (UAW Local 1112 v. Brunner). tracts by Attorney General Dann contributed to his On December 5, 2007, this new pay-to-play law campaign. Among those awarded contracts are was overturned due to a technicality. The wrong Democratic political insiders, including David version of the bill was singed by Robert Taft, the Leland, former chair of the Ohio Democratic Party, former governor. This decision could be appealed Socrates Space, father of Congressman Zach Space by the state. The need to rein in pay-to-play has not (Democrat-Dover) and Otto Beatty, former Dem- diminished, and the legislature should tackle this ocratic state representative. The Attorney General important issue in the 2008 session. also received $7,750 from gambling interests at a fundraiser held by Castle King, a firm involved in FINDING: an ongoing lawsuit with the state over games of The Ohio Elections Commission lacks the chance. resources, structure, and authority needed to effectively investigate allegations of campaign Finding: finance improprieties. Ohio passed a “pay-to-play” statute in late 2006. The Ohio Elections Commission was created The law was overturned by the courts due to a in 1974 in response to the Watergate scandal in the technicality. This is a flawed piece of legislation early 1970s. Like the Federal Election Commission, that needs to be rewritten. the Ohio Commission was created to enforce the In the lame duck session after Election 2006, state’s campaign finance and fair campaign practices the Ohio General Assembly tackled “pay-to-play” laws. The Ohio Elections Commission has seven with House Bill 694. H.B. 694 was sponsored by members. Six members (three from each major Representative Kevin DeWine (R-Fairborn) and political party in Ohio) are appointed by the Gov- put much stricter campaign contribution limits on ernor upon recommendation by the Democratic entities seeking and awarded contracts with state or and Republican caucuses of the General Assembly. local government. House Bill 694 was amended in The seventh member may not be affiliated with the Ohio Senate to include bid, as well as unbid, either major political party and is appointed by the contracts, and an aggregate contribution limit of six partisan members of the Commission. $2,000 was set for all principals of an entity seek- The Ohio Elections Commission provides ing or awarded a contract. This aggregate limit cov- advice on Ohio election laws, but it does not have ers principals of contractors’ partners, corporate investigative powers. It functions like a court, adju- officers, and spouses and children from ages 7 dicating complaints from the Ohio Secretary of (when minors are first permitted to give contribu- State, the county Boards of Elections, or members tions) to 18. Substitute House Bill 694 established of the public. The vast majority of its cases deal pay-to-play laws for local government for the first with candidates, campaign committees, political time, including county commissioners, city coun- action committees (PACs), or corporations that cil members, township trustees, school board mem- either file required campaign finance reports late or bers and other local boards, commissions, task fail to file them at all. The remainder of the cases forces, and other authorities. concern alleged failures to include disclaimers on On January 2, 2007, then-Ohio Governor political literature, corporate activities in the polit- Taft signed into law Substitute House Bill 694. ical arena, or the inclusion of false statements in Unfortunately, this bill was passed with a poison campaign materials. pill. It did not include adequate tools for effective According to the Ohio Elections Commission enforcement, such as the creation of a database of website (http://elc.ohio.gov/) individuals may file affected principals or a comprehensive database of a complaint only if they have direct knowledge of all contracts awarded by the state. Substitute House an election or campaign finance misdeed. This 100 makes enforcement of campaign finance and elec- Ethics tion laws extremely difficult. In 2004, for instance, the Ohio Elections Commission dismissed a com- FINDING: plaint filed by Democrat Larry McCartney against Ethical violations, often intertwined with cam- former Speaker of the Ohio House, Larry House- paign finance violations, have become com- holder. McCartney accused Householder and monplace in Ohio politics. other Republicans of using three county parties to The Noe scandal, which primarily revolved launder contributions to avoid contribution lim- around campaign finance and pay-to-play mis- its. McCartney’s complaint was based on “follow- deeds, also triggered a closer examination of ethics ing the money” and newspaper reports, but he did filings and the workings of the Bureau of Workers’ not have personal knowledge. The Ohio Elections Compensation. At the beginning of the Toledo Commission dismissed the case and refused to Blade investigation of Noe in April 2005, Gover- probe further. nor Bob Taft staunchly defended the state’s invest- Ohio’s campaign finance law is complicated ment in rare coins, but within a short period of and the Ohio Elections Commission offers advi- time it became clear that there were problems with sory opinions for political actors but does not post the investment. these advisories in a timely fashion. In the face of increased public scrutiny, Gov- ernor Taft sent a letter to the Ohio Ethics Com- Policy Proposals mission on June 14, 2005, stating that it had “recently come to my attention … that financial Ohio’s contribution limits should be tight- disclosure forms filed annually with the Ohio Ethics ened. State law should be amended to impose Commission failed to include golf outings in which lower limits on contributions from individual I participated.” The Commission began an investi- donors to candidates, from candidates to other gation and determined that, over a four-year period, candidates, and between candidates and party the Governor had failed to disclose golf outings and committees. There should be a ban on corporate other events paid for by lobbyists and business lead- contributions to candidates and parties, as there is ers in Ohio, including Noe. At least 52 undisclosed in most other states. gifts were found, and the case was referred for pros- The Ohio General Assembly should address ecution. On August 19, 2005, Taft pleaded no con- pay-to-play legislation again. In order to create a test to four ethics violations (one violation per stronger law than the legislation passed in 2006, annual ethics filing). He was ordered to pay a fine the state should create a centralized database of of $4,000 and issued a public apology. Before the campaign contributions, registered lobbyists, sentencing, Taft apologized for what he described ethics/ financial disclosure statements of public as "errors and omissions" on his statements. officials, and bid/no-bid contractors. It should also Former aides to Governor Taft have also been create a General Accountability Office to review found guilty of ethical violations. On July 29, bid/no-bid contract selection and create a central- 2005, Brian Hicks, former Chief of Staff to Gover- ized database of the principals of entities who have nor Taft, and Cherie Carroll, Hicks’ executive assis- contracts with the state to address the gaps in the tant, admitted that they took gifts from Noe. Hicks enforcement of campaign finance laws. pleaded no contest to knowingly failing to disclose Major donors and registered lobbyists should that he and his family stayed at Noe’s $1.3 million be prohibited from serving on state boards or com- house in Florida in 2002 and 2003. Carroll pleaded missions. no contest to a misdemeanor, accepting meals from Regulations defining appropriate campaign Noe valued at over $500. fund expenditures should be clear, limited to cam- In February 2006, the Commission referred paign-related expenses, and backed by sufficient two more former Taft aides for prosecution: H. enforcement measures. Douglas Talbott and J. Douglas Moorman. Talbott was referred for prosecution based on a complaint that he funneled Noe campaign contributions to 101 three Ohio Supreme Court Justices and that he did misdemeanor charges for receiving gifts from state not report the gift from Noe on his ethics filings. contractors, including a golfing trip to Scotland The Commission also referred Talbott to prosecu- and a trip to see The Ohio State University foot- tors for failing to disclose a $39,000 loan and meals ball team play in the 2002 National Champi- from Noe. J. Douglas Moorman was referred to onship. He also filed false ethics financial disclosure prosecutors because he failed to report a $5,000 forms. In August 2005, Harker was ordered to pay loan from Noe. On February 24, 2006, Talbott a $2,000 fine as part of a plea agreement. received a $4,000 fine for breaking ethics and elec- In 2001, Arnold Tompkin, the former direc- tion laws and Moorman received a lesser fine of tor of the Ohio Department of Human Services $1,000. pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges for improp- In May 2007, Terry Gasper, the former chief erly steering $60 million in mostly unbid contracts. financial officer of the Bureau of Workers’ Com- He was sentenced to 300 hours of community serv- pensation, was sentenced to 64 months for federal ice. The Consumers’ Counsel (utility watchdog), racketeering counts of extortion for trading Bureau the manager of the state fair, and the director of the investment business. Gasper acknowledged that he Ohio Turnpike Commission all resigned, after it accepted stays at a Florida condominium and was found that each accepted improper freebies tuition for his son in exchange for business deals from lobbyists or vendors. with the Bureau. Prosecutors allege that Gasper accepted $25,000 from Noe, in exchange for a con- FINDING: tract to manage Bureau monies. So far, more than Current enforcement of ethics violations in 20 people have been convicted of various crimes in Ohio is woefully inadequate. relation to the Bureau investigation. George L. This series of ethical violations spotlight the Forbes, a powerful Cleveland Democrat who had need for better disclosure. The Ohio Ethics Com- been a 15-year member of the Cleveland City mission has jurisdiction over the executive branch Council. He had been appointed to the Bureau of and all public employees and public officials at the Workers’ Compensation Oversight Commission in state and local level, except for judges and state leg- 1995 by then-governor, George Voinovich. Forbes islators. Annual financial disclosure statements are failed to report meals, entertainment, private filed with the Ethics Commission, but they are not flights, and gifts from a marketer and a broker who available online. Ohio law also does not require sought and received millions of dollars in business financial disclosure statements from village and from the Bureau. Forbes was sentenced to $6,000 township trustees who make many important zon- in fines, a $6,000 payment to the Bureau of Work- ing/development decisions in Ohio. ers’ Compensation, and 60 hours of community Ethical inquiries are long and intensive, but service. Mark D. Lay, chief executive of MDL Cap- they seldom result in more than light fines or com- ital Management was convicted of several fraud munity service. Cases that are referred to the Ohio charges. MDL Capital Management had handled Ethics Commission are not revealed to the public. money for the Bureau. Lay lied to the Bureau about Enforcement is difficult because prosecutors are not the investment risks he was taking and ended up obliged to pursue cases that the Ohio Ethics Com- losing $216 million dollars of taxpayer money. mission refers to them. Voters remain unaware of Altogether, more than $300 million dollars were these investigations and referrals unless the prose- lost by various Coingate actors. cutors make them public. Unfortunately, ethics violations are not lim- The Joint Legislative Ethics Committee ited to public officials associated with Tom Noe and (JLEC) is comprised of twelve members of the the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation. In the fall General Assembly, six from each legislative cham- of 2003, chairman of the Ohio Police and Fire Pen- ber, half Republicans and half Democrats. Both sion Board, David Harker, resigned from the board chamber leaders, Senate President and House after the state’s largest police organization called on Speaker, are automatically appointed. The ten addi- him and two other trustees to step down. In June tional members from the House and Senate are 2005, Harker pleaded guilty to four first-degree appointed by the House Speaker and Senate Presi- 102 dent. JLEC was established to monitor the legisla- becoming aware of the situation, Bledsoe insisted tive branch’s compliance with Ohio’s ethics law and that the legislators reimburse CSX for the trip to to administer Ohio’s lobbying laws. The Office of prevent any other ethics violations. All legislators the Legislative Inspector General (OLIG) is did so in a timely manner. CSX was referred to the accountable to the Joint Legislative Ethics Com- Attorney General’s office, and the AG referred the mittee and is responsible for implementing the matter to the Franklin County Prosecutor. ethics and lobbying laws. In effect, this means that the Ohio General Assembly is policing itself. FINDING: During early 2005, JLEC investigated veteran At a time when the number of lobbyists and State Senator Ray Miller (D-Columbus) for “theft expenditures for lobbying continue to rise, in office,” a fourth-degree felony. JLEC conducted Ohio’s public disclosure requirements are not an inquiry and determined that there was evidence adequate to shed light on the impact of lobbying that Senator Miller used both his Senate staffers and on elections and policymaking. government equipment to work on his private non- Although ranked 11th-best in the nation by profit get-out-the-vote campaign called “Reclaim the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity, Our Democracy.” Senator Miller received a salary Ohio’s lobbying laws are stronger on paper than in from this nonprofit. On March 28, 2005, JLEC practice. Legislative Inspector General Bledsoe sent a letter to the Franklin County Prosecutor summed this up in February 2006 when he noted indicating that there was substantial evidence of that Blockbuster rental stores have more power to theft in office. The prosecutor decided not to press enforce their late-return policies than he does to charges. Senator Ray Miller made a public apology enforce some lobbying laws. in December 2005 and reimbursed the state For example, two companies that employ lob- $936.35 for “improper utilization of State assets.” byists did not file the required forms detailing lob- JLEC eventually accepted Senator Miller’s apology bying activities in 2005, but they were able to and ordered him to complete one hour of ethics register and continue lobbying at the beginning of training. 2006. In March 2007, the Legislative Inspector On October 25, 2004, prominent lobbyist, General began cracking down on lobbyists who Richard Colby, invited six Republican lawmakers chronically fail to file their required lobbyist from Cincinnati to dinner and a Cincinnati Ben- updates. In January of 2007, 660 lobbyists failed to gals game in a luxury box, but five legislators did file disclosure of their lobbying activities. In May, not report these gifts. The tickets cost $300 apiece Bledsoe referred 11 lobbyists and organizations to and the total cost for the evening surpassed $5000. the attorney general’s office, recommending prose- JLEC decided not to impose any fines for this inci- cution because they continued to avoid these dent; instead it required those involved to attend required reports. In July, he referred six additional one hour of ethics training. JLEC sent the Ohio lobbyists. Despite pushing lobbyists to file these Attorney General information about their investi- important disclosure requirements, 247 lobbyists gation of lobbyist Richard Colby’s omissions on the failed to meet May filing requirements. lobbyist disclosure statements, and the Attorney It is difficult to enforce ethics laws because leg- General referred the matter to the Franklin County islators and lobbyists are required to submit finan- Prosecutor. Colby was found guilty and was fined cial disclosure forms at different times. Because $250. these forms are filed on different schedules, it is dif- In early 2005, the Legislative Inspector Gen- ficult to compare and corroborate disclosure of eral, Tony Bledsoe, investigated transportation activities. Legislators file financial disclosure state- giant CSX for failing to report that it had paid for ments annually; lobbyists file statements three times a fishing trip and conference about state tax laws per year. Some also find the reporting requirements held in Jacksonville, Florida. Legislators who confusing because disclosure for meals begins at attended this retreat included Speaker of the House $50, while disclosure for gifts begins at $25. Jon Husted, Rep. Bill Seitz, former Speaker Larry There are three different types of lobbyists in Householder, and Rep. Chuck Blasdel. After Ohio: legislative lobbyists, executive lobbyists, and 103 retirement system lobbyists. Most lobbyists attempt increase in legislative lobbyist spending. While the to affect both legislative and executive decision- number of lobbyists remained relatively steady, making. In 2006, there were ten lobbyists for every spending per lobbyist increased by 525%, while legislator (1401 to 132). In the executive branch, lobbyist spending per legislator rose by a whopping where there are five executive branch officials and 584%. During 2006 when “the culture of corrup- 24 cabinet level agencies, and a total of 201 boards tion” was a major focus of elections, the number of and commissions, there were nearly five times as legislative lobbyists increased, but the spending on many lobbyists per decision-making entity (942 to policymakers declined significantly to just below 201). From 2002 to 2005, there was a dramatic 2004 levels.

Ohio Lobbyists & their Expenditures

Number of Total Spent Amount Spent per Amount Spent Year Legislative Lobbyists by Legislative Lobbyists Legislative Lobbyist per Legislator 2002 1249 $100,326 $80 $760 2003 1316 $144,610 $110 $1,095 2004 1280 $382,363 $299 $2,896 2005 1388 $585,566 $422 $4,436 2006 1402 $336,686 $240 $2,551

Source: www.jlec-olig.state.oh.us

In the wake of term limits, some Ohio legis- Lobbyists are required to disclose gifts and meals lators have become powerful lobbyists. Twenty- that they give to policy makers, but they are subject seven former members of the Ohio General to the same rules as the general public for campaign Assembly now serve as lobbyists, including former contributions to these same officials. They are not Ohio Senate Presidents Stanley Aronoff and required to report campaign contributions on their Richard Finan, and former Speaker of the Ohio disclosure statements and are not required to report House, Jo Ann Davidson. Largely because of this fundraising activities. revolving door between lobbyists and legislators, All of these events have adversely affected lobbyists enjoy unusually close and continuous Ohioans’ faith in the government. A November access to lawmakers and are required to disclose 2005 poll conducted for the George Gund Foun- their lobbying activities. Ohio does have a statute dation by Belden, Russonello & Stewart found that that prevents elected officials from becoming lob- 71% of Ohio voters said that they had “little con- byists for two years and requires disclosure of fidence” in state government. This polling mirrors income for the 24-month period after public serv- research by the American National Elections Stud- ice. The spirit of the statute is sometimes skirted ies. According to their biennial poll, citizen confi- when former officials become “consultants,” rather dence and public trust declined from more than than lobbyists during this “revolving-door” period. 60% in the early 1960s to less than 30% by the year Lobbyists must file separate reports for each 2000. employer, while employers are required to file one report that lists all agents in their employ. The Policy Proposals forms require the name, business address, and occu- All Ohio public officials, including township pation of the lobbyist, the name and business trustees, should be required to file ethics/financial address of the employer and the party whose inter- disclosure statements more frequently (four times ests are being represented, and a brief description a year rather than once a year), and this information of the type of legislation expected to be affected. should be made available online in an easily search- 104 able format. In addition, the state should take steps selection for appellate judges by a two-to-one mar- to provide the public with more complete and gin. Recent polling demonstrates Ohio voters’ con- timely information about the investigations into tinuing commitment to electing judges. For better and disposition of actual, suspected, or potential or worse, judicial elections seem likely to remain a ethics violations. part of Ohio government for the foreseeable future. Ohio’s regulation of lobbying should be The Supreme Court of Ohio establishes the strengthened by requiring registered lobbyists to: (1) rules governing judicial conduct, campaign prac- report their campaign contributions when they file tices, and campaign contributions. Currently, an their financial/gift disclosure form, and (2) report individual donor can give up to $3,000 to a whether they were proponents, opponents, or inter- Supreme Court candidate in a contested primary ested parties on the legislative measures they lob- election and an additional $3,000 in the general bied. Such information should be available to the election. Organizations, such as Political Action public online in a searchable format that would per- Committees (PACs), are limited to $5,500 in a con- mit citizens to enter a bill number and find out tested primary, then another $5,500 in the general which lobbyists are being paid to advocate for or election. Party contributions to a candidate are lim- against the legislation. . ited to $150,000 in a contested primary election Enforcement of Ohio’s ethics laws and regu- and $275,000 in the general election. lations, including current restrictions on former The financing of judicial campaigns raises government officials becoming lobbyists, should be legitimate concerns about the impartiality of our strengthened through increased funding for moni- court system. Judicial candidates typically receive toring and enforcement activities and stiffer penal- many of their contributions from attorneys who ties for violations. appear in their courts and the clients they represent. Lobbyists should be prohibited from actively Clients who expect to have litigation pending on a working on candidate campaigns, acting as treas- regular basis have an obvious incentive to seek influ- urers of associated political action committees, and ence over judicial candidates. Judges, as the third from fundraising for political parties. branch of government, are supposed to provide independent, unbiased, and fair decisions—not to Judicial Elections be swayed by financial support. However noble this idea may be in theory, it is difficult to square with FINDING: the reality of judicial campaigns. The rapidly rising costs of Ohio judicial elec- The 2000 election was a watershed for judi- tions, along with the well-funded efforts by cial elections in Ohio. In August of 1999, the Ohio interest groups to influence the outcomes of Supreme Court declared the state’s tort reform law these races, raise serious concerns about the unconstitutional. Almost immediately the Ohio judiciary’s independence and impartiality. Chamber of Commerce created an affiliate called The Supreme Court of Ohio has seven mem- Citizens for a Strong Ohio to “educate” voters about bers: a chief justice and six associate justices. All Jus- judicial elections and the need for a more business- tices serve six-year terms. All seats on the court are friendly court. elected at large in staggered biennial elections. Ohio Citizens for a Strong Ohio, the U.S. Chamber Supreme Court elections are officially nonpartisan. of Commerce, and other tort reform advocates However, candidates for the court are nominated launched an expensive and unseemly campaign to by the political parties and participate in party pri- unseat incumbent Supreme Court Justice Alice mary elections. After the primary, the candidates are Robie Resnick, who had authored the Court’s deci- nominally unaffiliated and their party designations sion. As a result, Ohio suddenly became the are left off the ballot. national poster child for out-of-control judicial elec- Despite the inherent problems associated with tion campaigns—and the precursor of a growing an elected judiciary, Ohio has a longstanding tradi- and troubling national trend. During 2000, Citi- tion of electing judges. In 1987, voters rejected a zens for a Strong Ohio raised over $4.2 million and ballot initiative that would have adopted merit ran ads targeting Justice Resnick. 105 The most infamous ad produced and paid for participate in the current campaign finance system by Citizens for a Strong Ohio depicted Lady Jus- using “No money from nobody” as a campaign slo- tice peeking out from behind her blindfold as piles gan. He ran his campaign with $18,750 of his own of money (presumably provided by trial lawyers and money. However, the other three candidates still other “anti-business” interests) unbalanced the managed to raise almost $2.5 million collectively. scales of justice. “Is justice for sale?” the ad asked Ohio also enjoys the distinction of being the ominously. The state bar, editorial writers, and oth- state most saturated with high court TV ads; ers publicly denounced the ads as deceptive, and between 2000 and 2006, 44,914 such ads were Justice Resnick won re-election. aired by Supreme Court candidates, political par- Despite numerous inquiries and daily penal- ties, and interest groups. ties, the Ohio Chamber of Commerce and Citizens An examination of the Ohio Supreme Court for a Strong Ohio adamantly refused to reveal the byThe New York Times in 2006 found that Ohio sources of the $4.2 million raised and spent on the justices routinely sat on cases after receiving cam- anti-Resnick ads. The group’s attorneys claimed paign contributions from the parties involved or that the “issue ads” in question—because they did groups that filed supporting briefs. On average, not explicitly call for her defeat—were protected they voted in favor of contributors 70% percent of speech under the First Amendment and therefore the time. Justice Terrence O’Donnell voted for his exempt from regulation and disclosure. Neverthe- contributors 91% of the time. In the 12 years that less, the Alliance for Democracy and Common The New York Times examined Ohio Supreme Cause/Ohio filed a complaint with the Ohio Elec- Court justices recused themselves only 9 times in tions Commission. 215 cases with the most direct conflicts of interest. In August of 2003, the Ohio Elections Com- Ohio’s Chief Justice, Thomas J. Moyer, a mission agreed with the petitioners that Citizens Republican, described the problem with the current for a Strong Ohio had acted as a political action system to National Public Radio this way, “Human committee (PAC) and was established to affect the nature is that we help people if they help us.” Jus- election. They ordered the Chamber to disclose the tice Paul Pfeiffer described fundraising this way to donors to Citizens for a Strong Ohio, a decision The New York Times, “I never felt so much like a that was subsequently upheld on appeal by two hooker down by the bus station in any race I’ve state courts. been in as I did in a judicial race. Everyone inter- Finally, in January of 2005, the Ohio Cham- ested in contributing has very specific interests.” ber identified Citizens for a Strong Ohio’s The deterioration in the tone of judicial elec- donors–which, not surprisingly, included a collec- tions prompted Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer, the tion of the state’s corporate giants. Bliss Institute at the University of Akron, the John Five years after the anti-Resnick ads ran, on Glenn Institute at the Ohio State University, the November 10, 2005, the Ohio Elections Commis- League of Women Voters of Ohio, and the Ohio sion ruled that Citizens for a Strong Ohio had vio- Bar Association to convene a cross section of law- lated Ohio election law by making false statements makers, party officials, scholars, businesspeople, about Resnick and using corporate money in a labor officials, and civic leaders for the purpose of campaign opposing a candidate. considering a range of reforms. Among the issues Although Ohio has thus far avoided a repeat considered were judicial qualifications, selection, of the 2000 spectacle, the amount of money being tenure, salaries, campaign conduct, disclosure, and raised and spent on judicial campaign television ads public education. A day-long conference was fol- continues to climb. The $6.3 million donated to lowed by the creation of several working groups Ohio Supreme Court candidates in 2004 set a new that were charged with examining various reform record for combined judicial candidate fundraising; options more closely and developing policy recom- moreover, Ohio was one of only two states in which mendations. Unfortunately, this well-intentioned three high court candidates raised over $1 million effort quietly expired before producing anything of each. In 2006, one of the candidates for two significant value, owing to a lack of support among Supreme Court seats, William O’Neill, declined to lawmakers and the legal establishment. 106 In 1999, the American Bar Association (ABA) Chief Justice denied a motion that he recuse him- revised its Model Code of Judicial Conduct to self due to a possible conflict of interest. include a requirement that judges disqualify them- Situations like these inevitably raise questions selves if they received campaign contributions of a about the fairness and impartiality of the courts, certain amount from a party or its lawyer. Unfor- and in today’s fundraising climate such situations tunately, no states adopted the code. In February are only going to occur with greater frequency. Giv- 2007, ABA again recommended that each state ing campaign contributions to judges is like giving establish firm recusal standards so judges do not sit money to the umpire in the middle of the game. If on cases that involve their campaign contributors. Ohio voters wish to continue electing judges, then In May 2007, Chief Justice Moyer established a public financing for judicial campaigns makes good task force to study the model code and recusal stan- sense. Whether there is actual corruption or only dards. the appearance of corruption, eliminating fundrais- Why does any of this really matter? Perhaps ing from judicial campaigns would restore voter the most serious consequence is a loss of public confidence and create a more independent judici- faith in the integrity of the judicial process. A 2002 ary. League of Women Voters survey showed that 83% of Ohio voters feel that campaign contributions at FINDING: least “somewhat” influence judges and judicial can- The Ohio legislature’s recently enacted regula- didates. Since that time, it is unlikely that voters’ tions for broadcast political advertising–partic- attitudes towards the court have improved. ularly so-called “issue ads”–are poorly drawn, On a brighter note, a majority of Ohio judges will be difficult to enforce, and are of dubious initially reach the bench through appointment by constitutionality. the Governor. On January 29, 2007, Governor Ted When the Ohio legislature addressed the reg- Strickland announced that he was going to forego ulation of political ads like the ones produced by the method of selecting judicial appointees for mid- Citizens for a Strong Ohio, it created a convoluted term vacancies that his predecessors used. Many law that flipped the definition of “electioneering former governors, including Bob Taft, appointed communication” on its head. “Electioneering com- judges recommended by county political party munication” in federal law, and as it is traditionally chairs. Strickland established the Ohio Judicial understood, is a political advertisement, on televi- Appointments Recommendation Panel. This panel, sion or radio, that is intended to affect the outcome consisting of five at-large members, screens appli- of an election. In a special session in December cants when a vacancy arises, evaluates potential 2004, the Ohio General Assembly passed a cam- nominees, and recommends its top choices to the paign finance bill (House Bill 1) that defined Governor. The Governor selected members of the “electioneering communication” as not intended to legal establishment and the League of Women Vot- influence elections. Ohio’s convoluted definition ers of Ohio. One member is a Republican. For each was the consequence of a compromise among leg- vacancy, the Governor will appoint regional mem- islative leaders and the Ohio Chamber of Com- bers from the area affected to help with the process. merce and its affiliate, Citizens for a Strong Ohio. Voter skepticism about whether Ohio’s courts The Chamber did not want a ban on direct corpo- can continue to provide fair and impartial justice rate funding for political advertisements. has likely been further eroded by recent develop- House Bill 1 expanded disclosure of television ments. In August 2004, just days after it became and radio advertisements by requiring disclosure of clear that a legal challenge to FirstEnergy’s proposed sources of funding for ads featuring statewide and rate-increase would be heard by the state Supreme local candidates from the time that candidates file Court, the corporation’s CEO hosted a fundraiser for office. There are no restrictions on the sources for several high court candidates, including Chief of the funds for these “electioneering communica- Justice Moyer. The event generated over $40,000, tion” ads, but they are prohibited during the 30 a portion of which went to the Chief Justice’s cam- days prior to primary and general elections in Ohio. paign. When the rate case was finally argued, the Only “direct advocacy” communications are per- 107 mitted right before elections, and they may not be Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO) met funded directly by corporations and unions. to decide on a list of four nominees to present to Ohio’s new law has been difficult to imple- Governor Strickland to fill a vacancy in the Com- ment because it is counterintuitive. There is also a mission. The purpose of the PUCO is to regulate risk that the definition of “electioneering commu- utility services for the benefit of Ohio consumers. nication” may run afoul of the Constitution, When Ohio Citizen Action requested the because it extends for nearly one year and might minutes of the meetings at which the nominees had capture advertisements that are truly issue ads and been decided upon, the office of the Attorney Gen- are not related to upcoming elections. eral responded by denying that a meeting had occurred, even though newspaper accounts sug- Policy Proposals gested otherwise. Unfortunately, the notes from Ohio should adopt a voluntary full public another meeting of the PUCO nominating council financing system for judicial elections, thereby revealed that the committee "voted to destroy the eliminating the need for candidates to fundraise ballots" on which they had voted for nominees to and reducing the growing perception that justice is send to the governor. It became very clear that the for sale. Such a program should be financed nominees had been selected in closed sessions and through a combination of attorney and court filing that the records associated with meetings had been fees, a voluntary tax check-off program, and state destroyed. appropriations. These were clear violations of Ohio’s open In the absence of public funding, attorneys meetings law, which requires that public bodies should be required to disclose their contributions take official action and conduct deliberations on to judicial candidates; in turn, the political com- official business only in meetings open to the pub- mittees established by judges should be required to lic. This includes meetings of any agency, board, identify the attorneys and law firms that have con- commission, committee, or similar decision-mak- tributed to their campaigns and appeared before ing body at the state, county, township, or munic- them in court within the past year. The state ipal level, and nonprofit corporations when Supreme Court or the legislature should develop expending public monies. recusal rules for cases involving lawyers and litigants It was soon revealed that not only had the who contributed funds to the campaigns of judges nominations process for the current vacancy been before whom they appear, in excess of a clearly- performed illegally, but also that the nominating defined amount. council had followed the same process of closed H.B. 1 should be amended to bring the defi- meetings and records for each of the current mem- nition of “electioneering communication” into con- bers of the PUCO. Attorney General Marc Dann formity with the federal definition. Specifically, declared that the members of the Public Utilities state law should be amended to require disclosure Commission of Ohio had been appointed to their of major funding sources and sponsors of such ads posts illegally and ordered the commissioners to during the 30-day period before a primary election resign so that the nominating process could be done and the 60-day period prior to a general election, legally. One of the commissioners was allowed to with appropriate restrictions on sources of funding remain on the PUCO because the statute of limi- for these ads. tations had expired on his illegal appointment. This was an opportunity for the public to be Open Government involved in a process that they had been shut out of for years, but rather than have a new, public debate, FINDING: Governor Ted Strickland decided to reappoint the Public officials sometimes violate the tenets of same commissioners to the PUCO. With the open government. Even when Ohio officials exception of the substitution of one name on one of meet the letter of the law on open meetings, they the lists, the nominating council sent the Governor often miss the spirit of open government. the exact same four lists that they had previously In early 2007, the nominating council of the sent. There were no deliberations, and the public 108 was permitted to witness nothing more than they cussion of public business in e-mail and by requir- had when the appointments were first made. ing that e-mails that meet public records require- Similarly, in August 2007, officials from the ments be preserved as such. This bill was assigned Pataskala City Council, Etna Township, and two to committee in late November 2006 but did not school boards planned several meetings to discuss a move any further. Senator Schuring has not rein- proposed development. The meetings were troduced the legislation thus far in the 127th Gen- designed so that none of the four public bodies eral Assembly. would have a quorum, enabling them to be closed Deliberations of the Ohio General Assembly to the public. Nothing could be approved at these are regulated by Article II, Section 13 of the Ohio meetings, but it was hardly an “open” process when Constitution, which requires that proceedings of the substantive deliberation was done behind closed the legislature be public, except in cases that require doors, leaving only the official conclusions open to secrecy in the opinion of two-thirds of those pres- the public. ent. Actions of committees relating to a bill or res- The Ohio Open Meetings Act permits citizens olution must be taken in an open meeting of the of Ohio to observe the operations of their govern- committee. Actions that are not taken in open ment. The law may be enforced by requesting that meetings are invalid. Many public legislative meet- a court enjoin decision-making and deliberations ings break "for caucusing" or deliberating on bills that are not conducted in public meetings. Covered with members of their own political party. This bodies are permitted to conduct some proceedings means that the public often misses the detailed in non-public executive sessions. Executive sessions deliberation over legislation and is simply permitted are allowed only to discuss certain specified matters to witness the public giving recommendations and such as personnel issues, purchasing property, legislative committee members listening and ask- pending litigation, collective bargaining security ing a few questions. In many circumstances, arrangements, trade secrets, and other matters omnibus changes are introduced and voted out of specifically required to be kept confidential by state legislative committees in the same day, circum- or federal law. Some courts have found that a gath- venting the opportunity for the public to comment ering of the members of a public body where they or participate in the process. Legislative minutes act only as passive observers in a ministerial fact- and journals are very brief, and it is difficult to fol- gathering capacity or informational session is not a low the deliberative process that leads to legislation. meeting that is required to be open to the public. From time to time, accusations are made that FINDING: members of public bodies have communicated by Ohio’s open records law, as currently applied, e-mail or by “round robin” discussions as a substi- often fails to provide the public the prompt tute for open meetings. This happened recently in access to public records that the legislature orig- central Ohio. In August 2006, an issue arose when inally intended. the Pickerington, Ohio, city council used e-mail A public record is something that documents exchanges to have conversations which excluded the organization, policies, functions, decisions, pro- not only the public, but also some of their own cedures, or other activities of a public office. This members. The issue came to a head when some includes records kept by the state, counties, cities, council members became aware that one of their villages, townships, school districts, and other enti- peers had negotiated an economic agreement with ties that perform a public service and are supported a neighboring township on his own. Some of the by public funds. In addition, nonprofit agencies are council members had been kept informed through required to keep and disclose records of expendi- forwarded e-mails, while others were left out of the tures they make in providing services with govern- loop completely. Of course, the public had no mental monies. knowledge of the agreement. A major problem with access to public records Senator Kirk Schuring (R-Canton) said in in Ohio is that, in the absence of adequate enforce- November 2006 that he planned to introduce leg- ment or stiff penalties, it is very easy for public enti- islation to close this loophole by prohibiting dis- ties to evade the purpose of the open records law 109 by simply not complying. In 2004, the Ohio Coali- certain identifying information in a public-health tion for Open Government conducted a survey of investigation, and names of concealed-weapon per- all of Ohio’s 88 counties. More than 90 people mit holders from public view, though in certain from newspapers, radio stations, the University of instances these records are open to members of the Dayton, and Ohio University tried to obtain a vari- media. In 1993, the Ohio Supreme Court added a ety of records. Among the records sought were “judicial mental process privilege” protecting county commission meeting minutes, an expense judges from being forced to disclose their notes report of a county executive, police chief pay, police taken during a case. In April of 2006, the Court incident reports, superintendent compensation, determined that the Governor could withhold cer- and a school treasurer’s telephone bill from officials tain weekly reports sent by his cabinet members in each county—all of which are indisputably cov- because of executive privilege, despite the fact that ered by the public records law. In over 30% of in 203 years, executive privilege had never been cases, access to the records was denied. In over extended to the governor’s office. 17%, records were obtained only after complying One area in which the public’s access to with conditions that are not required by law, such records is particularly important is in the case of as demanding that the request be in writing, or private entities that spend taxpayer money to pro- requiring proof of the requester’s identity. When vide public services. Ohio, like many other states, records were denied, officials often claimed the has been privatizing governmental services, and the document requested was not a public record, set Ohio Supreme Court in 2006 decided two impor- long waiting periods, or said they were too busy to tant cases addressing the public’s right to know respond. information about private entities providing serv- Despite what the Ohio Coalition for Open ices for public entities. It determined that Nova Government encountered, Ohio’s open records law Behavioral Health, Inc., was not a public entity for is fairly broad in what it purports to cover. It states purposes of public records even though it received that “all public records shall be promptly prepared 92% of its funding from Stark County. The other and made available for inspection to any person at case involved Oriana House, a community-based all reasonable times during regular business hours.” correctional facility. In a case brought by the state The public has the right to copies within a reason- Auditor, the Court decided Oriana House was not able period of time. The public office can charge subject to the public records act even though 88% no more than its cost for copying the documents, of its revenues came from government sources, and not including the time used in locating, preparing, it received 100% of Summit County’s allocation and copying the documents. There are a number from the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and of discrete exceptions set out in the law, covering Corrections to operate such a program. such things as medical records, trial preparation Clearly, open records regulations are moving records, certain law enforcement investigatory in the wrong direction. The problems with access records, and security and infrastructure records. In to public records have not gone unrecognized. The addition, any record that is confidential under state Marion Brechner Citizen Access Project sponsored or federal law cannot be released. by the University of Florida’s College of Journal- Both the Ohio General Assembly and the ism and Communications ranks open records laws Ohio Supreme Court have weakened Ohio’s open in all 50 states. In 2005, Ohio placed 46th in the records regulations repeatedly. In 1990, the Ohio ranking. Areas in which Ohio trailed other states Supreme Court ruled that work papers of private were timeliness in providing records, requirements auditors hired by the Ohio Auditor to audit pub- to create new records, providing at least a mini- lic entities were subject to disclosure. The Ohio leg- mum number of copies without charge, and per- islature quickly reversed this, leaving Ohioans mitting requesters to copy records themselves. without access to work papers if the audit was Attempts to address these issues have not been suc- assigned to a private auditing firm. More recently, cessful. the Ohio legislature removed the home addresses In January 2005, a bill was introduced in the of firefighters and emergency medical technicians, House of Representatives (H.B. 9) that required 110 the Attorney General to provide training and restrict, broad access to public records.” Another develop a model public records policy. The bill was legislative study committee, the Local Government amended to create a Public Access Counselor Public Notice Task Force, is studying public notice housed in the Court of Claims to assist the public requirements and alternative ways of meeting them. and to help resolve disputes, and mandated more Its report is due in May of 2008. severe penalties for non-compliance. The bill passed the House of Representatives with an Policy Proposals amendment that required public disclosure of work Ohio’s public records law should be made papers stemming from audits by private audit firms more easily enforceable. One possibility is to return working on behalf of the State Auditor. By the time to the idea of a public access coordinator, which the bill passed the Ohio Senate and was enacted, other states have used to resolve disputes without many of the provisions designed to help citizens having to resort to litigation. To be effective, the access information about their government had public access coordinator must have adequate been removed, notably the provision of a Public enforcement authority, such as monetary penalties Access Counselor and the requirements regarding for failure to comply. the work papers of private auditors working for the Local officials must receive better training on State Auditor. A provision for statutory damages of compliance with the public records law, so that $100 per day was added, but the damages do not requested records are made available as soon as is begin until after an action in mandamus is filed, feasible. The state should increase the penalties on and are capped at $1,000. Substantial time was public agencies and officials who fail to provide spent determining exactly what access the public requested public records in a timely manner. The should have to information about individuals state needs clear statutes and training for local offi- obtaining a permit to carry a concealed weapon. As cials concerning open meetings, clarifying that enacted, the bill denies the public the ability to find “round robin” discussions and the use of electronic out who has a concealed carry permit, and pecu- communications such as e-mail to avoid public liarly permits members of the media to view, but deliberation are a violation of public records law. It not copy, the list. Amended Substitute House Bill should also be made clear that information-gather- 9 did make some modest improvements by estab- ing sessions are public meetings that should be open. lishing mandatory training for custodians and The transparency of the state legislative elected officials and placed some new responsibili- process should be improved, to better enable citi- ties on the custodian to help the requester. How- zens to monitor the legislative process, including ever, what began as an effort to redress legitimate committee hearings and the drafting process. An problems with public access to public records pri- additional hearing should be required to allow pub- marily at the county and local levels became lic comment when significant new amendments to another win for the pro-gun lobby, and for county legislation are proposed. and local officials who wanted limited sanctions for Ohio should offer a limited amount of copies non-compliance with public records laws. for free, or take into consideration special circum- On October 25, 2007, members of the Pri- stances of a requestor. Ohio should also address vacy/Public Records Access Study Committee, issues brought up while considering Amended Sub- which included both lawmakers and stakeholders, stitute H.B. 9 but left unaddressed, such as execu- released fairly general open records recommenda- tive privilege, and the ability of the State Auditor to tions. The primary recommendation was that ‘Gov- obtain records of non-profit entities providing serv- ernment agencies should seek to maintain, and not ices for the government. J 111

Population: 5,556,506 (2006 estimate) State Ranking: 20th of 50 86.0 % White 6.0 % Black 4.5 % Hispanic origin Urban population: 68.3% 2.0 % Asian Rural Population: 31.7% 0.9 % Native American 1.0 % Two+ races Most populous cities: 0.1 % Other (2005) 1. Milwaukee; 2. Madison; 3. Green Bay; 4. Kenosha; 5. Racine Governor: Jim Doyle (D) State Legislature Assembly: 47 Democrats/ 52 Republicans Senate: 18 Democrats/ 15 Republicans

Congressional Delegation House: 5 Democrats/ 3 Republicans Senate: 2 Democrats Registered Voters: N/A Voting Age Population: 4,245,233 (2006) General Election Turnout of Registered Voters 1998: 45% 2000: 65% 2002: 43% 2004: 71% 2006: 51% 113 Democracy in Wisconsin: Problems and Prospects Executive Summary

Wisconsin was once known for clean, open ernment work better. and progressive government. Those days are gone. Following up on this survey research, The This is something state residents know in their Joyce Foundation commissioned this top-to- hearts. It is also something that has been confirmed bottom review of Wisconsin’s political culture and by a landmark five-state public opinion survey con- possible remedies for what ails the state’s demo- ducted in 2006 by the independent research firm cratic process. Belden, Russonello & Stewart. That poll found that Among the findings: Wisconsinites’ concerns about money and corrup- • Public confidence in the integrity of Wis- tion in state government are on a par with worries consin politics and government has reached about jobs and schools. a new and alarming low. Despite the frustration with the current polit- • Wisconsin is being battered by the worst ical landscape, Wisconsin residents, according to political corruption scandal in its history, a the research firm’s survey, are not giving up hope. calamity that is rooted primarily in the cam- As a matter of fact, 65 percent of Wisconsin resi- paign money chase that is central to the dents disagree with the statement that “corruption emergence of a pay-to-play culture in state in government will always be a problem, so trying government. to fix it will not make much difference.” • Wisconsin’s once-effective and highly While people in Wisconsin are deeply con- regarded partial public financing system has cerned about political corruption and are disturbed collapsed. by how state government is operating, it is also clear • The advent in 1996 of interest group- that they are eager for change. Wisconsinites funded “issue ads” – unregulated and strongly support reforms that have been put for- undisclosed spending on election commu- ward, and they believe that these reforms will make nications designed to influence election out- a big difference. comes without explicitly calling for the The five-state survey found that 62 percent of election or defeat of candidates – has effec- Wisconsin residents feel that judges must not take tively rendered Wisconsin’s campaign con- money from interests that may have cases in their tribution limits, campaign disclosure courts. Prohibiting them from doing so would requirements and ban on corporate dona- make a big difference toward reforming the way tions irrelevant. their government works. Fifty-eight percent of state • The breakdown of the Wisconsin’s quarter residents believe public financing of campaigns century-old campaign finance system has would be a step forward to better government. unleashed an unprecedented and Fifty-five percent of residents also feel that requir- unchecked campaign fundraising arms race. ing lobbyists to fully report their activities would • Wisconsin’s dysfunctional campaign finance make an appreciable difference in making their gov- system and partisan gerrymandering have,

by Mike McCabe 114 in combination, significantly reduced elec- islation was enacted in early 2007. It steps up toral competition, especially for state enforcement of the state’s ethics code and election Assembly and Senate seats. campaign and lobbying laws by replacing the state • In the face of serious violations of state cam- Elections Board and Ethics Board with a politically paign finance and ethics laws, Wisconsin’s independent agency answering to a nonpartisan Board of Elections and Board of Ethics repeat- board of retired judges and possessing an unlimited edly failed to fulfill their most basic responsi- budget for investigations. And further progress can bilities. A recently created and hopefully more be made, as well-developed reforms enjoying broad politically independent enforcement agency public support are ready to be put in place. Among has its work cut out to make amends for those these are: past failures. • Campaign finance reforms that would repair • The appearance of conflicts of interest stem- Wisconsin’s broken system of partial public ming from the political associations of non- financing of state election campaigns, require partisan judges, partisan state lawmakers and full disclosure of all electioneering communi- major interest groups is becoming much more cations, and place new restrictions on cam- pronounced in Wisconsin, threatening to paign fundraising. undermine public trust in the fairness and • Lobbying reform that would tighten up the impartiality of state judges and the independ- state’s “revolving door” policy by requiring a ence of the state’s courts. one-year “cooling off” period before former • Wisconsin’s Legislature has evolved from one legislators and key administrative officials can of the nation’s most decentralized to one of become registered lobbyists as well as require the most centrally controlled. Along with this disclosure of attempts to influence decisions change has come more rabid partisanship, the on state contracts. professionalization of state politics and a caste • Election reforms that rebuild public confi- system of interest groups. dence in the process of voting and permit • Money appears to be distorting state govern- experimentation with alternative voting pro- ment decisions in Wisconsin – from the cedures such as rank-order voting – also com- enactment of legislation to administrative monly known as instant runoff voting – to oversight and rulemaking to government con- enhance voter choice, address concerns about tracting. “wasted votes” or “spoiler candidates” and • Despite the many challenges facing Wiscon- thereby stimulate greater interest in partici- sin’s political system, very few public officials pating in elections. or prominent private sector leaders have been • Measures promoting judicial independence willing to stand up and provide the political in Wisconsin, including the establishment of and moral leadership the state desperately a public funding system for election cam- needs and deserves. paigns of state Supreme Court and other state • The quality of news coverage of state elections, appellate judges. government and public affairs – and especially • Changes in the way voting districts are the coverage provided by Wisconsin’s com- drawn that make electoral competitiveness a mercial television stations – is declining, con- legal or constitutional standard that must be tributing to an increasingly uninformed, applied by the Legislature and the courts in disengaged and cynical electorate. establishing district boundaries, and the estab- • The public’s faith in the integrity of elections lishment of an independent commission or in Wisconsin has been shaken, with poten- authority to handle the task of redrawing leg- tially serious consequences for participation in islative and congressional districts after each the democratic process. census. As large as these problems are, some inroads • Media reforms such as the creation of a sys- already have been made toward solving them. For tem of free air time for Wisconsin candidates example, landmark government ethics reform leg- by requiring the state’s public broadcast 115 stations and public access channels to set aside ally take responsibility for the content of the time for this purpose, and a state “stand by ads they sponsor. J your ad” law requiring candidates to person-

Findings: Policy and Political Problems

FINDING: the most power over state spending decisions, 81 Public confidence in the integrity of Wisconsin percent said lobbyists had more influence than vot- politics and government has reached a new and ers (12 percent), and 73 percent indicated that alarming low. campaign contributors were more powerful than According to St. Norbert College poll results voters (17 percent). released in early 2006, government ethics ranked A five-state survey conducted by Belden, Rus- fifth among state residents as the biggest problem sonello & Stewart, an independent research firm facing the state of Wisconsin. The findings mir- in Washington, D.C., and released in September rored an earlier St. Norbert’s poll done in late 2005, 2006, showed concern among Wisconsin residents which had state residents ranking political corrup- about corruption in state government and the tion as one of Wisconsin’s most pressing problems influence of money in state politics is on a par with – ahead of health care, crime, poverty and the envi- worries about bread-and-butter issues such as the ronment and on a par with gas prices. Government economy and education. Nearly three-quarters of ethics had not registered at all as a citizen concern Wisconsin residents surveyed believe that elected on annual surveys St. Norbert conducted each fall officials will not be able to keep their promises on from 1994 through 2000. The survey center first issues important to people like them unless the started detecting concern about the state’s political influence of money in government is limited. Over culture in a March 2002 poll. The percentage of 60 percent of state residents feel that candidates survey respondents identifying government ethics who could represent them do not run for office as Wisconsin’s biggest problem in 2006 was more because they do not have the money to win. than triple the April 2005 numbers. A Wisconsin Policy Research Institute FINDING: (WPRI) survey released in late 2005 revealed that Wisconsin is being battered by the worst polit- a mere six percent of state residents believe elected ical corruption scandal in its history, a calamity officials act in the best interest of voters. The vast that is rooted primarily in the campaign money majority of respondents say their elected represen- chase that is central to the emergence of a pay- tatives either act to advance their own political to-play culture in state government. careers or do the bidding of wealthy special inter- In May 2001, a Wisconsin State Journal inves- ests. The results of another WPRI survey con- tigation involving hundreds of records and more ducted in mid-June 2006 shed further light on the than 70 interviews revealed that state employees in public’s increasingly sour mood. For example, the four partisan legislative caucus offices operated percentage of respondents who believe the ethical these public agencies as secret campaign machines standards of state government have gotten worse for legislative candidates, especially during the elec- over the last ten years jumped from 31 percent in tion season. The theoretical mission of the caucuses 1991 to 51 percent, while the proportion of those was to assist lawmakers with researching legislation, saying the ethics of state legislators have worsened drafting news releases, and printing newsletters, at has more than doubled during the same period – an annual cost of nearly $4 million. Although Wis- from 25 percent in 1991 to 52 percent in mid- consin’s ethics laws prohibit public officials and 2006. When respondents were asked who exercises state employees from using state government 116 resources for their own benefit, including cam- In 2004, former Democratic state Senator paigning on state time and in state facilities, a Gary George, once the co-chairman of the power- dozen former caucus staffers told the State Journal ful Joint Finance Committee, was convicted of a that at certain times of the year campaign work was felony for his role in a kickback scheme and sen- their major and required duty. The newspaper con- tenced to four years in federal prison. In late 2005, cluded that “the state caucus offices serve as cam- former Democratic state Senator Brian Burke, once paign central for many legislative races, performing the odds-on favorite to be elected state Attorney a variety of campaign functions in their govern- General, and former Democratic Senate Majority ment offices including coordinating advertising, Leader Chuck Chvala, pleaded guilty to charges of providing lists of registered voters, designing felony misconduct in office. Both received jail sen- brochures and giving out advice.” The caucuses tences and were fined. In early 2006, former were controlled by the Legislature’s top leaders, Republican Assembly Majority Leader Steve Foti, including Republican Assembly Speaker Scott who was charged with a single felony count, Jensen and Democratic Senate Majority Leader pleaded guilty to a reduced misdemeanor charge of Chuck Chvala, all of whom denied any wrongdo- misconduct in office in exchange for his agreement ing or knowledge of wrongdoing. to testify against former Republican Assembly In response to these revelations, the state Speaker Scott Jensen. Ethics Board and Elections Board were asked to Jensen went to trial and was convicted of launch investigations of their own. In October felony misconduct in office in March 2006. He 2001 – five months after the State Journal stories was sentenced in May 2006 to 15 months in broke – the two boards reached an agreement with prison. Judge Steven Ebert used the occasion to top legislative leaders that abolished the caucus both sternly scold Jensen and reflect more broadly offices while foreclosing any further investigation on the lamentable state of Wisconsin politics. After by the boards. Moreover, the regulatory agencies weighing many days of testimony, he wondered agreed not to seek penalties against any legislator or “whether this trial illustrated the ethical standards staffer for using state resources for campaign pur- of the Legislature and the corrupting influence of poses prior to July 2001. In defense of the settle- money and power. And I have to conclude that yes, ment, the Ethics Board argued that the agreement it did. Painfully so, it reflected that.” Ebert went would help speed up the process of achieving fun- on to observe that “there was a time when many of damental reforms, and that further inquiries into us can remember taking pride in Wisconsin’s rep- past wrongdoing would be better left to the dis- utation for good government. Unfortunately, that’s trict attorneys of Dane and Milwaukee counties. no longer the case.” He then accused the former The fact that neither the Ethics Board nor the Speaker of putting personal ambition and greed Elections Board ever initiated a serious investiga- above his oath of office, leading an “elite cabal” that tion into these matters – no witnesses were ever engaged in “chicanery and deception,” and under- interviewed and no subpoenas issued – did not mining democracy for “private and venal” pur- become publicly known until August 2002, and poses. Jensen’s illegal activities amounted to “little only then as a result of a suit filed by the State Jour- more than common thievery elevated to a higher nal and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel to obtain plane,” and worse yet, Ebert said, “You knew what pertinent documents under the state’s open records you were doing. You knew it was illegal.” In the law. end the legislative process was perverted; Jensen’s Wisconsin’s Capitol corruption scandal even- “idea of representative government,” as Ebert saw tually produced nearly four dozen state and federal it, was “if you’ve got the money, you’re repre- felony charges – ranging from extortion and money sented.” laundering to kickbacks and bid rigging – against Jensen appealed the court’s ruling, and on five top state lawmakers and a high-ranking leg- November 8, 2007, a Wisconsin Court of Appeals islative staff member as well as misdemeanor overturned Jensen’s conviction and granted him a charges against another lawmaker and several other new trial because of an improper jury instruction staffers. by the trial court. 117 WISCONSIN’S HALL OF SHAME Name Former Position Charges Outcome Sentence Chuck Chvala Senate Majority 20 felony counts – Pleaded guilty to 9 months in jail Leader extortion, miscon- two felonies – mis- with work release duct in office, conduct in office privileges, two years illegal campaign and arranging probation, fines contributions illegal contributions and restitution

Scott Jensen Assembly Speaker Three felony counts Convicted by jury Five years, includ- of misconduct in on all counts, but ing 15 months in public office and granted a new trial prison and 45 one misdemeanor by an appeals months in super- for misuse of public courts because of vised release, plus position for private an improper jury five-year ban from gain instruction the Capitol, fines and restitution

Steve Foti Assembly Majority One felony count Pleaded guilty to 60 days in jail with Leader of misconduct in misdemeanor work release privi- public office charge of miscon- leges, two years duct in office probation, 240 hours of commu- nity service, fines and restitution

Brian Burke Senate co-chairman 18 felony counts – Pleaded guilty to Six months in jail, of the Joint Finance misconduct in one felony charge served in home Committee office, fraudulently of misconduct in confinement with concealing public office work release privi- records, withhold- leges, fines and ing a subpoenaed restitution document and alteration of sub- poenaed documents

Gary George One-time Senate Five-count federal Pleaded guilty to Four years in co-chairman of the indictment – con- one count of federal prison, fines Joint Finance spiracy, soliciting criminal conspiracy Committee and receiving kick- backs, bid rigging

Bonnie Ladwig Assistant Assembly One misdemeanor Pleaded guilty to 30 days on elec- Majority Leader count for misuse of misdemeanor tronic monitoring, a public position fines and restitution for private gain

The fundraising activities of Governor Jim contributed $10,000 each to the Doyle re-election Doyle’s administration also came under scrutiny by campaign eventually led to the federal indictment state and federal authorities. An investigation in of a state Department of Administration purchas- early 2006 by the state Justice Department and ing officer on two felony charges. While the U.S. Attorney’s office into the circumstances sur- accused mid-level bureaucrat was convicted by a rounding the awarding of a $750,000 state contract jury, a federal appeals court overturned the verdict to a travel agency after two top company officials in April 2007 and ordered her released from prison. 118 While the travel contract saga was playing out, FINDING: the governor’s top campaign donor, Kenosha busi- Wisconsin’s once-effective and highly regarded nessman Dennis Troha, who had spearheaded a pro- partial public financing system has collapsed. posed $800 million casino project, was charged in a After the Watergate scandal three decades March 2007 federal indictment with illegally fun- ago, Wisconsin adopted a voluntary system of par- neling $100,000 in contributions through his chil- tial public financing of state election campaigns dren to Doyle’s campaign and other political funds which is funded entirely from the proceeds of a and then lying about it to the FBI. In July 2007, $1 state income tax check off. The 1977 law also Troha pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor federal imposed contribution limits – $500 for Assembly campaign law violations for making illegal donations races, $1,000 for Senate and $10,000 for in 2002 through family members to the state Dem- statewide races such as governor. Under the pub- ocratic Party – believing they would help Doyle – lic funding system, candidates who agree to as well as illegal donations through family members spending limits – no more than $17,250 in to President George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election cam- Assembly races, $34,500 for Senate and just over paign. In September 2007, a Troha associate and $1 million for governor – are eligible for public Doyle donor – Kenosha businessman John Erick- grants equal to 45 percent of the spending limits. son – also was indicted and pleaded guilty to federal However, the state has neglected since 1977 to charges relating to his role in a money laundering adjust the $1 check off for inflation and an accom- scheme that was used to funnel campaign contribu- panying steady decline in taxpayer participation tions to candidates for federal, state and local office. in the check off over the years has seriously In the wake of the Capitol corruption investi- depleted the public financing fund. Taxpayer par- gations that ended up yielding the convictions of the ticipation peaked in 1979, generating $561,038 six legislative leaders but before the continuing crim- for the election campaign fund. It bottomed out inal investigations started implicating people close in 2002, when less than 5 percent of taxpayers to the governor, three of Wisconsin’s most senior contributed $191,729 to the fund. Democratic leaders – former Governor Tony Earl, Milwaukee County District Attorney E. Michael In addition, the campaign spending limits McCann, and former gubernatorial candidate Ed candidates must agree to in order to receive pub- Garvey – publicly appealed to Governor Doyle in lic grants have not been adjusted since 1986. The June 2006 to call a special session of the legislature fund’s depletion and outdated spending limits for the sole purpose of enacting needed political have, in combination, led to a wholesale aban- reforms. They warned Doyle that restoring public donment of the system by candidates. Few candi- confidence in state government had to be “addressed dates now apply for public grants, and virtually on an urgent basis.” The veteran Democrats’ state- no candidates in competitive races do. In 1986, ment stressed that “it is not enough to promise that 140 candidates for state office – nearly three-quar- things will get better in the future.” Lifting the “fog ters of those running – accepted public grants and of corruption [that] hangs over our state” requires abided by the accompanying spending limits. By “the full attention of the governor and the Legisla- contrast, candidates in only five legislative races ture.” At the time, Doyle demurred, saying he saw accepted public grants in 2004, and none of the no point in calling Republican lawmakers back in contests was competitive. session in order to take up proposals they had repeat- In a report issued in February 2007, the edly opposed. Brennan Center for Justice at New York Univer- He later thought better of his resistance to sity School of Law called Wisconsin’s campaign using his power to convene the Legislature in special finance system in “dire need of updating.” The session and summoned legislators to a special ses- report noted that “one of the country’s most inno- sion on ethics in January 2007. That session culmi- vative campaign finance laws has been allowed to nated with the passage of a landmark ethics reform slide into a state of decay” and called the public bill that the governor signed into law on February 2, financing system “inadequately funded, useless 2007. and unused.” 119 FINDING: of-state receptacles like the Kansas Democratic The advent in 1996 of interest group-funded Party and the Washington, D.C.-based Democratic “issue ads” – the unregulated and undisclosed Legislative Campaign Committee. In 2004, All spending on election communications designed Children Matter, Americans for a Brighter Tomor- to influence election outcomes without explic- row, Citizens for Wisconsin’s Future, and the itly calling for the election or defeat of candi- Greater Wisconsin Committee weighed in heavily dates – has effectively rendered Wisconsin’s on behalf of their special interest patrons. In 2006, campaign contribution limits, campaign disclo- All Children Matter and the Greater Wisconsin sure requirements and ban on corporate dona- Committee again figured prominently in the cam- tions irrelevant. paign ad wars, as did the Coalition for America’s Millions of dollars in unlimited and anony- Families. mous donations are now being raised and spent in Notwithstanding the high-minded sounding Wisconsin campaigns on electioneering disguised names lending an appearance of grassroots initia- as “issue advocacy.” The first such ads appeared in tives operating above the political fray, each of these 1996, at an estimated cost of $229,000. By 2002, front groups has been run by seasoned campaign approximately $4 million in special interest dona- operatives and has had a partisan or ideological tions went unaccounted for in campaign finance agenda. For example, the right-wing All Children disclosure reports because advocacy groups relied Matter – underwritten almost entirely by multi- on anonymous and unlimited “soft money” dona- millionaire and 2006 Republican candidate for tions to pay for so-called “issue ads” supporting or Michigan governor Dick DeVos – backed Repub- opposing candidates for state office, thereby skirt- licans in 2004 and again in 2006, with particular ing disclosure requirements. In 2006, special inter- emphasis on candidates who support private school ests spent an estimated $15 million on undisclosed voucher programs. On the other hand, Americans and unregulated electioneering communications, for a Brighter Future – a Democratic group – ran including more than $9 million in the governor’s ads attacking several Republican candidates in race alone. 2004, including a radio spot that called one Assem- This money is being spent not only by well- bly candidate a “right wing zombie.” The executive known interest groups like the big business lobby, director of another Democratic front group active Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce, and in 2004 and again in 2006, the Greater Wisconsin anti-abortion advocate, Wisconsin Right to Life, Committee, not only once worked for former Sen- but also by surrogates of the candidates or political ate Majority Leader Chvala but was granted immu- parties operating under the guise of citizen groups nity by prosecutors in exchange for information with wholesome or even patriotic-sounding names. about the caucus scandal. These front groups first started making a signifi- Such groups’ sponsors perform a semantic cant impact on Wisconsin elections in 2000. That dance to circumvent Wisconsin’s disclosure require- year, they operated under names like the Alliance ments and campaign contribution restrictions by for a Working Wisconsin, People for Wisconsin’s carefully avoiding the use of words like “vote for” or Future, Project Vote Informed, and Wisconsin “vote against” in their television and radio ads Voter Education Fund. In 2002, Citizens for Clean which are usually corporate-funded. And yet their and Responsible Government, the Coalition for impact on election outcomes is unmistakable. In its America‘s Families, the Coalition to Keep America 2003 ruling in the case of McConnell v. FEC, the Working and Working Families of Wisconsin U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the old dis- joined the fray. The most notorious of the front tinction between regulated “express advocacy” and groups, Independent Citizens for Democracy, unregulated “issue advocacy” had become “func- played a major role in influencing 2000 and 2002 tionally meaningless.” Although in McConnell the legislative races. That was former Senate Majority Court upheld as constitutional those provisions of Leader and now convicted felon Chuck Chvala’s the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) reg- group, which specialized in laundering corporate ulating and requiring disclosure of such issue ads, donations that are illegal in Wisconsin through out- Wisconsin lawmakers and the state Elections 120 Board, unlike their counterparts in Illinois and sev- governor’s race, pumped close to $500,000 into the eral other states, resisted bringing state law into 2002 race, and reportedly budgeted $7.2 million conformity with current federal law and jurispru- for 2006 election year expenses. dence. The legal uncertainty created by the 2007 While runaway campaign spending initially ruling in the Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC case reared its head in races for governor and the Legis- involving the electioneering communications pro- lature, the phenomenon spread in 2006 and 2007. visions of BCRA surely will be used by opponents Candidates and outside special interests spent more of issue ad disclosure in an effort to ward off any than $8.3 million in the 2006 attorney general race reform. – five times more than the $1.65 million spent dur- The emergence of issue ads as a campaign ing the last race in 2002. And total spending in the weapon has made candidates who face the prospect spring 2007 state Supreme Court race approached of being financially overwhelmed and drowned out $6 million, more than four times the previous by hostile special interest groups more reluctant record for a high court race in Wisconsin. than ever to participate in the state’s public financ- The driving force behind this money chase is ing system and abide by the accompanying limits the cost of television advertising. In 2006, with the on their own campaign spending. Moreover, in its cost of electing a governor in Wisconsin exceeding February 2007 report, the Brennan Center for Jus- $30 million, well over $10 million was spent by tice observed that “sham issue ads – advertisements candidates and their support groups on ads aired masquerading as issue advocacy that plainly sup- just in the state’s three largest television markets – port the election or defeat of a candidate – are cre- Milwaukee, Green Bay and Madison. ating massive opportunities for special interest groups to corrupt Wisconsin’s political process.” FINDING: The report went on to say the ads are “making a Wisconsin’s dysfunctional campaign finance mockery of Wisconsin’s campaign finance sys- system and partisan gerrymandering have, in tem….” combination, significantly reduced electoral competition, especially for state Assembly and FINDING: Senate seats. The breakdown of the Wisconsin’s quarter cen- Wisconsin has suffered in recent years from an tury-old campaign finance system has unleashed epidemic of uncontested legislative races. More than an unprecedented and unchecked campaign 2 million Wisconsin voters had no choice in Senate fundraising arms race. and Assembly races in 2004, because only one name Due to rapidly rising campaign costs, Wis- for these offices appeared on their ballots – the cur- consin’s voluntary spending limits look quaint and rent officeholder’s. Even when incumbents face strangely out of place. Million-dollar state Senate opposition, it is hardly a fair fight. Heading into the races have become commonplace in competitive stretch drive of the 2004 election campaign, leg- districts; in 2000, one such contest topped the $3 islative incumbents had raised $9 for every $1 raised million mark. Total spending in the 2006 gover- by challengers. At the same point in the 2006 cam- nor’s race topped $32 million, up sharply from the paign, incumbent state legislators had a $6-to-$1 $23.5 million that was spent in 2002, which itself cash advantage over their challengers. was nearly triple the $8 million spent four years ear- Legislative redistricting that favors incumbent lier. Between 2002 and 2004, campaign fundraising officeholders also clearly plays a role in undermin- by state legislative candidates jumped 55 percent. ing electoral competition. In recent years, there New records for legislative spending were set again have been competitive elections – that is, margins in 2006. Governor Jim Doyle raised well over $10 of victory for the winner of 10 percent or less – in million for his 2006 re-election campaign – dou- only six or seven of the 33 state Senate districts. ble his 2002 fundraising take. And, of course, mon- Competitiveness in the Assembly has been even eyed interests eagerly lined up to supply cash to worse. Elections in only 10 to 12 of the 99 Assem- candidates and their surrogates alike, including a bly districts are now routinely being decided by single Indian tribe which spent nothing in the 1998 margins of 10 percent or less. 121 Against this backdrop, the outcome of 2006 in 2002 who received more than 10 percent of the state legislative elections was truly remarkable. Vot- statewide vote). Because of its highly political com- ers overcame the aforementioned institutional position and orientation, the Elections Board was obstacles to change and delivered a mandate for reluctant to vigorously enforce the state’s political reform to the Capitol. A strong throw-the-bums- finance laws, as the following vignettes illustrate: out impulse produced a much larger turnover than Electronic Campaign Finance Disclosure: anyone had predicted. Democrats won all four state In 1998, the Legislature enacted a “Citizens Right Senate seats considered truly up for grabs to seize an to Know” law requiring the Elections Board to cre- 18-15 majority, and also gained eights seats in the ate, by July 1999, a new electronic filing system for Assembly to narrow a once-commanding Republi- campaign finance reports. For nearly four years, the can majority to a 52-47 margin. Elections Board neglected to implement the law. Large numbers of uncontested state legislative Finally, in response to a threatened lawsuit by civic races and small numbers of truly competitive con- groups seeking court-ordered compliance, the tests are a relatively recent phenomenon in Wis- Board finally adopted an emergency rule directing consin. In 1970, for example, there were no candidates to submit their reports in an electronic uncontested races for Assembly and Senate seats, format, starting with campaign reports filed in July and as recently as the mid-1980s, only one in seven 2002. legislative races was uncontested. Unfortunately, Issue Ad Disclosure: A 1999 state Supreme declining electoral competition and limited voter Court decision invited the Elections Board to choices have driven down political accountability require disclosure of “issue ads” sponsors and fun- in the state, as evidenced by an unprecedented spike ders, and instead the board chose to punt. Rather in political corruption cases in Wisconsin. than embracing transparency – by alerting the pub- lic about who is spending money on issue ads and FINDING: thereby sidestepping the state’s longstanding con- In the face of serious violations of state cam- tribution limits and disclosure requirements – the paign finance and ethics laws, Wisconsin’s Board board adopted a rule formalizing the loophole for of Elections and Board of Ethics repeatedly interest groups. And then in 2001, the board com- failed to fulfill their most basic responsibilities. pounded its error by extending the same privileges A recently created and hopefully more politically to the state’s political parties. Efforts by civic groups independent enforcement agency has its work to persuade the board to adopt “truth-in- cut out to make amends for those past failures. campaigning” disclosure rules were repeatedly rebuffed, often with the encouragement of high- Elections and Campaign ranking state officials. Caucus Scandal: The Elections Board Finance dropped a 2001 investigation into allegations of Under the provisions of the ethics reform leg- illegal campaign contributions and misuse of tax- islation enacted in February 2007, a new Govern- payer-funded state offices and legislative staff with- ment Accountability Board is to be established by out ever contacting and confronting the individuals September 1, 2007, to replace the state Elections implicated in the scandal. Instead of launching a Board and Ethics Board. Enforcement of Wiscon- rigorous investigation, the Elections Board entered sin’s campaign finance laws has been vested in the into an agreement with the state Ethics Board and nine-member Elections Board. Its members were legislative leaders to eliminate the discredited leg- appointed by the state’s top political leaders. The islative caucuses while increasing the size of the four governor, the Legislature’s four leaders, and the state leaders’ staffs. The arrangement demanded no per- Democratic and Republican parties made one sonal accountability by those who had misused tax- appointment each while the two remaining mem- payer money and violated state laws and bers were named by the chief justice of the state regulations. Supreme Court and the Libertarian Party of Wis- Voter Registration: The Elections Board’s consin (which briefly was able to appoint a mem- director entered into a contract in November 2004 ber because the party had a candidate for governor with the global outsourcing firm, Accenture, to 122 develop, as required under the federal Help Amer- Integrity has ranked the state’s lobbying and per- ica Vote Act, a centralized statewide voter registra- sonal financial disclosure laws the sixth best in the tion list. The contract called for Accenture to be country, they are hardly problem-free. Wisconsin’s paid $13.9 million for computer software develop- “revolving door” policies are weak; there is no ment and maintenance. A citizen lawsuit sought mandatory “cooling off period” between the time a cancellation of the contract on the grounds that legislator leaves office and can begin lobbying. The Elections Board director Kevin Kennedy lacked Ethics Board also gave its blessing when two for- legal authority to sign the Accenture contract. The mer lawmakers convicted of political corruption – Elections Board neither approved the contract Brian Burke and Steve Foti – sought to become lob- before it was signed nor authorized a Request for byists. The prohibition on state officials accepting Proposals soliciting bids from private vendors. “anything of value” from lobbyists or lobbying A circuit court judge ruled in June 2005 that organizations does not apply to campaign contri- Kennedy did not have the authority to enter into butions. Although lobbyists are not allowed to the agreement with Accenture; still the judge make campaign donations when the Legislature is upheld the contract on the grounds that the board in session, their clients may give at any time. This retroactively ratified the contract on January 27, omission is a holdover from an era when election 2005 – more than a month after the contract was campaigns were inexpensive and fundraising com- legally challenged. A Justice Department investiga- manded much less time of a candidate than is now tion into whether the awarded contract violated the case. Another shortcoming in the law is that state laws was eventually settled when Accenture while any citizen has the right to inspect the finan- agreed to provide access to its proprietary software, cial and economic interest statements filed by pub- not to copy or sell confidential voter information, lic officials, those wishing to access this information and surrender control of the source code written to are required to complete a form identifying them- program computers used to register voters. Under selves and explaining the purpose of their inquiry, the original contract, this computer code was a copy of which is then sent to the officials in ques- Accenture’s private property and not subject to tion. This procedural hurdle can have a chilling inspection by state officials. effect on citizens – including journalists, scholars, In addition to the $13.9 million payment to reform advocates, and others – who may have an Accenture, the board set aside at least $4.1 million interest in exploring, among other things, public to pay another private firm, Deloitte Consulting, officials’ existing or potential conflicts of interest. for project management and $10.2 million for In addition to these faults, the Ethics Board Elections Board staff oversight, hardware and data suffered from four institutional weaknesses. First, entry, bringing the total cost of the project to at its members were appointed by the governor with least $28.2 million. In contrast, Minnesota relied the consent of the Senate which, fairly or not, raised on state employees to develop its statewide voter serious questions about the board’s independence list and completed the work at a cost of $5.3 mil- and reinforced the impression that the fox was lion. Despite Wisconsin’s huge investment, it still guarding the chicken coop. Second, when the missed the January 1, 2006, deadline for comple- Ethics Board decided an investigation into possible tion of its federally-mandated computerized wrongdoing was warranted, it had to seek supple- statewide voter registration system. mental funding from the Legislature’s Joint Finance Committee to cover the inquiry’s costs. This Ethics requirement, like the appointment process itself, Wisconsin has a strong, though somewhat was awkward, to say the least. When the state’s cau- outdated, state ethics code. For example, all state cus scandal erupted in 2001, one of Joint Finance’s officials must periodically file personal financial and co-chairs was Senator Brian Burke, who was subse- economic interest statements. Lobbyists are not quently implicated in the scandal, convicted of only required to register and be licensed by the felony misconduct, and sentenced to six months in Ethics Board, they also must file reports detailing jail. A third and related problem was that the board their activities. Although the Center for Public lacked the legal authority to prosecute whatever 123 wrongdoing it may subsequently uncover. Instead, state Supreme Court followed, and the state’s high- the decision to prosecute rested entirely with local est court agreed to hear them despite being mired district attorneys, who are public officials elected on in conflicts of interest because of political ties to the a partisan basis. And finally, the state’s principal legislators and their attorneys. The seven-member ethics enforcement agency was powerless to police Supreme Court barely had a quorum as it decided the single largest cause for the political system’s tum- to hear the cases. Three justices had conflicts of bling ethical standards, namely the endless chase for interest serious enough to compel them to recuse campaign money. Although the Ethics Board had themselves. The court could not have heard the no authority to oversee campaign finance practices, cases if a fourth – Justice Patrick Crooks – also had the quest for political money is the common thread recused himself. Crooks heard the cases despite running through most of the political scandals that close political connections to former Assembly have recently rocked the state, a reality that helped Speaker Scott Jensen. Jensen served as Crooks’ cam- persuade many observers that a new approach to paign manager in 1995 and 1996, and Crooks also ethics enforcement in Wisconsin was needed. With received thousands of dollars in campaign contri- the enactment of the ethics enforcement reform leg- butions from Jensen’s campaign committees. In islation in the January 2007 special session creating addition, the justice’s campaign finance reports a new Government Accountability Board, that new listed payments of nearly $27,000 to a firm run by approach to enforcement of both the state ethics Jensen’s wife for campaign work. Ultimately, pros- code and elections and campaign finance laws is ecutors were allowed to proceed with their cases, becoming a reality. but only because the four justices deadlocked 2-2 on whether to dismiss the charges. FINDING: Another stark example of the politicization of The appearance of conflicts of interest stemming the courts was the late-1990s’ scheme to illegally from the political associations of nonpartisan funnel money from a pro-school voucher group judges, partisan state lawmakers and major known as the Wisconsin Coalition for Voter Par- interest groups is becoming much more pro- ticipation into the re-election campaign of Supreme nounced in Wisconsin, threatening to under- Court Justice Jon Wilcox. Wilcox’s campaign man- mine public trust in the fairness and impartiality ager, Mark Block, a Republican campaign opera- of state judges and the independence of the tive, illegally coordinated activities with the group, state’s courts. leading to the largest fine ever handed down by the Questions about the impartiality and objec- state Elections Board – a total forfeiture of $60,000 tivity of the state’s courts started to come into sharp including $10,000 levied against Wilcox himself focus when criminally charged state lawmakers and $15,000 from Block. were given the rare privilege of having pre-trial The increasingly politically-charged nature of appeals of their charges heard by a string of judges. judicial elections nearly took another turn for the One prominent defense attorney told the media worse when Freedom Works, a national Republi- that during his lengthy career, he had asked an can front group run by former Republican House appeals court to hear a case before trial in “maybe Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas announced 1 percent of cases.” And he said the number of pre- in August 2005 its intention to spend $2 million trial appeals actually heard by higher courts is to unseat Justice Crooks, who had angered right- “infinitesimal.” Yet all of the indicted legislators had wing interests with rulings on medical malpractice their appeals heard and successfully stalled the dis- and product liability cases. In July 2005, the busi- position of their cases for over three years. ness lobby, Wisconsin Manufacturers and Com- In fact, after a circuit court ruled in early 2003 merce (WMC), started a campaign to defeat that the charges were valid and the prosecution Crooks, and for a time was soliciting corporate con- could proceed, the state Court of Appeals agreed to tributions from member companies for a “Job hear the cases. The appeals court reviewed the lower Defense Fund” it planned to use to pay for anti- court rulings for well over a year before finally rul- Crooks electioneering. WMC’s effort, as well as ing that the charges should stand. Appeals to the that of Armey’s group eventually fizzled out as 124 establishment Republicans and independents ral- sin, a group that backs Democratic candidates. lied behind Crooks. Because of the pathologies that were so evi- While the 2005 effort to politicize state dent in the race, Wisconsin was left with a cloud Supreme Court elections failed to catch fire, it hanging over the state’s highest court and especially hardly discouraged groups like WMC. Two years its newest member, Annette Ziegler. A few weeks later, WMC and other special interests returned after the election, the cloud over Ziegler thickened. with a vengeance to the task of influencing judicial A day before former U.S. Supreme Court Justice politics in Wisconsin. The result was the most Sandra Day O’Connor decried how judicial elec- expensive and nastiest Supreme Court race in state tions are becoming “political prizefights,” Ziegler history. The candidates who survived the February admitted that she broke state ethics laws and agreed 2007 primary election to become finalists in the to pay a $5,000 fine plus another $12,000 to cover April general election – conservative circuit court the costs of state investigations into her financial judge Annette Ziegler and liberal attorney Linda conflicts of interest. Clifford – both raised and spent well over $1 mil- Ziegler took the actions to settle a complaint lion on their campaigns, a new record by a wide filed against her by the state Ethics Board alleging margin for Supreme Court candidates. Ziegler she violated state ethics laws prohibiting public offi- alone spent more – $1.45 million – than the previ- cials from acting on matters in which they have a ous record for total spending in a high court race by financial interest. In the settlement, Ziegler all candidates and interest groups combined. acknowledged she violated the ethics code while Yet Clifford and Ziegler were outspent by the serving as a Washington County circuit court judge special interest groups. In fact, a single interest by handling five cases involving West Bend Savings group – WMC – was responsible for more than a Bank, where her husband was being paid about third of all spending in the race. In a race costing $20,000 a year as a member of the board of direc- nearly $6 million, slightly more than $2.8 million tors. The bank also was renting office space owned was disclosed on campaign finance reports filed by Ziegler’s husband, and the Zieglers received a with the Elections Board. Put another way, the ori- multi-million dollar loan from the bank. gins of more than half the money used to influence By settling, Ziegler avoided a hearing that the outcome of the election were concealed from could have seen her called to the witness stand. But public view. her action did not clear the air, because she Disclosure of who sponsored the electioneer- remained under investigation by the state Judicial ing activity was not the only casualty in the race. Commission, acting on a complaint by the Wis- The supposedly nonpartisan nature of state consin Democracy Campaign alleging that Ziegler Supreme Court elections in Wisconsin also was failed to comply with the state judicial code of con- exposed as a farce. A Wisconsin Democracy Cam- duct’s requirement that judges disclose financial paign review of the campaign contributors and out- interests and recuse themselves from cases when side special interest groups backing the candidates they have conflicts of interest. WDC’s complaint showed the money fueling the campaigns came cited 16 cases where Ziegler failed to do either, almost exclusively from diehard partisans, with including nine involving businesses in which Clifford getting support from traditional backers of Ziegler owned $50,000 or more worth of stock and Democratic candidates and Ziegler drawing tradi- seven others involving the West Bend Savings Bank. tional Republican support. The candidates’ cam- The Judicial Commission ruled in early Sep- paigns also were managed by operatives with tember 2007 that Ziegler engaged in judicial mis- partisan resumes. Ziegler’s campaign manager, conduct. The commission recommended she be Mark Graul, was Wisconsin campaign director for reprimanded and filed a formal complaint with the President George W. Bush’s 2004 re-election effort state Supreme Court, which has the final say on dis- and managed Republican Mark Green’s unsuccess- ciplinary action. A three-judge Judicial Conduct ful 2006 campaign for governor. Clifford’s cam- Panel was then formed to review the commission’s paign was directed by Nicholl Caruso, former work before sending it along to the Supreme Court political director of Progressive Majority Wiscon- and issued an order in late September that ex- 125 panded the scope of the Ziegler probe and ques- the Senate majority leader – both were legislative tioned the factual basis of the Judicial Commission’s aides in the Capitol before being elected to the Leg- recommended punishment. islature in their own right. Those two leadership After reviewing the commission’s findings and posts changed hands after the 2006 election; its recommendation, the Judicial Conduct Panel another former legislative assistant became Assem- makes a recommendation of its own to the state bly speaker for the 2007-08 session while a former Supreme Court. The court is empowered to take nurse became the new Senate majority leader. disciplinary action to enforce the judicial ethics A related development is the rising partisan code, ranging from reprimand or formal censure to animosity that is apparent in state government. The suspension or even removal from the bench. professionalization of the political process is likely one important contributing factor to the poison- FINDING: ous partisanship that has grown increasingly Wisconsin’s Legislature has evolved from one of evident, as is the costly, high-stakes nature of cam- the nation’s most decentralized to one of the paigning for state offices. Another less-recognized most centrally controlled. Along with this cause is the effect of partisan gerrymandering of change has come more rabid partisanship, the state legislative districts. Lopsided districts favoring professionalization of state politics and a caste one party or the other is not only contributing system of interest groups. mightily to the epidemic of uncontested state leg- An enduring legacy of convicted ex-lawmak- islative races but also to the polarization of politics ers and the now-defunct legislative caucus opera- in Wisconsin. If most voters in a district are tions is the consolidation of power in the hands of Democrats, candidates will concentrate solely on a few legislative leaders. In their heyday, the leader- appealing to Democrats; vice versa in districts ship-controlled caucuses spent $4 million a year where Republicans dominate. Squeezed out are and featured a small army of more than 60 staffers candidates with more moderate leanings who might who illegally campaigned for state candidates. The appeal to independents or voters of either party. In assistance of the caucus offices was steered to this way, one-sided districts promote partisan incumbent officeholders and contenders who were extremism, producing a Legislature heavy on ideo- loyal to the leaders. Leadership-controlled cam- logues and light on pragmatists. The result is more paign committees worked hand-in-hand with the demagoguery and partisan gridlock, and less com- caucuses to give anointed candidates a big financial promise or problem solving. advantage over their rivals. Control over both these In a political world where red means Repub- illegal campaign headquarters and legal campaign lican and blue stands for Democrat, the Milwaukee purse strings fueled the consolidation of power in Journal Sentinel summed up America’s Dairyland leaders’ hands and undermined the independence well when it said in a March 2007 editorial, “Wis- of rank-and-file lawmakers. The maverick spirit consin is a purple state. Not rabidly red and not that once was a hallmark of the Wisconsin Legisla- balistically blue. Pragmatically purple.” But the ture was gradually extinguished. newspaper observed, “you might not be able to tell Accompanying the centralization of control in that, given how intensely partisan the voters’ repre- the Legislature has been the professionalization of sentatives often are on a variety of important issues. state politics. Election campaigns have become It is as if they represent a state driven into implaca- more sophisticated and much more costly. State ble, ideological camps. The result has been a state lawmakers are less likely to be citizen legislators and Legislature unable to move the dial on various vital more likely to fall into the category of career politi- issues….” cian. It is less likely to see legislators today in Wis- Another pronounced change in Wisconsin consin who previously held local office, and more politics is the consolidation of power among com- likely to see former Capitol aides holding some of peting interest groups. A small number of big- the most powerful positions in the Legislature. money interests – most notably corporate interests Notably, the two top legislative leaders in the 2005- including manufacturers, road builders, real estate 06 legislative session – the Assembly speaker and developers and other businesses, the state teachers’ 126 union and Native American tribes – have seen their cer on bid rigging charges. The conviction was clout magnified while the voices of hundreds of eventually overturned by an appeals court. other advocacy groups have gradually become effec- The criminal investigations and prosecutions tively muted. What has emerged in Wisconsin is, stemming from Wisconsin’s legislative caucus scan- in essence, a caste system of lobby groups – a dal also revealed how quickly and how far the state’s favored few that play a major role in bankrolling still relatively new “pay-to-play” culture had spread. campaigns and a large number of outcastes that do The extortion charges against former Senate Dem- not have well-heeled memberships or large PACs. ocratic Leader Chuck Chvala laid out in excruciat- ing detail how campaign contributions were FINDING: exchanged for policy favors. For example, the crim- Money appears to be distorting state govern- inal complaint against Chvala detailed how he ment decisions in Wisconsin – from the enact- advised a lobbyist for Midwest Express, a Wisconsin- ment of legislation to administrative oversight based airline, that for a $10,000 contribution a tax and rulemaking to government contracting. break the corporation wanted would be restored. A 2004 Wisconsin Democracy Campaign Midwest paid up, and it got the tax break. Simi- analysis of votes on bills in the Legislature showed larly, the charges filed against Chvala say he asked that lawmakers who sided with powerful special the Wisconsin Energy Corporation to donate interests on the proposals received more than four $100,000 to Independent Citizens for Democracy, times more campaign contributions on average a group Chvala ran when he was majority leader, from those interests than legislators who did not in exchange for his support of legislation favoring vote with them. A 2005 WDC review of more than the utility. Although the company contributed only 5,100 state Commerce Department grants, loans $50,000, it was enough to ensure passage of the and tax credits found that recipients of state aid pro-utility legislation. These, and similar revela- who did not make campaign contributions received tions, have shocked many veterans of Wisconsin awards averaging less than $130,000 while those politics. Longtime Milwaukee County District who made contributions received awards averaging Attorney E. Michael McCann, who served in this more than $1 million. This finding mirrored a post for nearly four decades and prosecuted fellow 2003 University of Michigan study identifying a Democrat Chvala, admitted later that he had “no strong connection between campaign donations by idea what was going on,” and that his investigation construction and road-building contractors and into Capitol misconduct was like “lifting the lid off major state contracts awarded in Wisconsin. That a garbage can.” research showed that contracts awarded to donors of former Governor Tommy Thompson’s campaign FINDING: averaged $20 million while the average value of Despite the many challenges facing Wisconsin’s contracts awarded to non-contributors was political system, very few public officials or $870,000. prominent private sector leaders have been will- More recently, the state Public Service Com- ing to stand up and provide the political and mission first denied, then reopened and approved moral leadership the state desperately needs and the controversial sale of a Green Bay-area nuclear deserves. power plant after more than $40,000 in campaign To an extent that would have been unthink- contributions were made to Governor Jim Doyle, able just a few years ago, many of Wisconsin’s pres- who appointed two of the three commissioners. ent day political leaders, in a relentless quest for This came on the heels of a similar controversy that partisan advantage and power, have lost sight of erupted when the top-ranked bidder for a state their most fundamental responsibilities, perhaps travel contract was passed over in favor of another summarized best by Henry Clay in 1829: “Gov- contractor whose executives made $20,000 in ernment is a trust, and the officers of the govern- donations to Governor Doyle’s campaign just ment are trustees; and both the trust and the before and just after landing the contract. The inci- trustees are created for the benefit of the people.” In dent led to the conviction of a state purchasing offi- his January 2003 inaugural address, Governor 127 Doyle acknowledged the growing threats to Wis- and majority Republicans lost eight seats in the consin’s once-enviable reputation for clean and 2006 elections, Huebsch ascended to the role of open politics. “At a time when too many Americans Assembly speaker and rushed his colleagues into a are feeling more and more disillusioned with gov- special legislative session on ethics to pass ethics ernment, their elected leaders and public service” reform legislation virtually identical to the bill Doyle observed, “I am sad to say that perhaps no Huebsch and his allies had conspired to kill nine state has fallen farther, fallen faster than Wiscon- months earlier. sin.” Unfortunately, the governor – often with the There have been a few public officials who have blessing of other elected and party officials as well needed no coaxing to step into the leadership vac- as prominent corporate, labor, and other interest uum and press for change. Two Democratic district group leaders – did precious little in his first term attorneys – Dane County DA Brian Blanchard and to rescue the state from the ethical swamp into Milwaukee County’s McCann – stepped forward to which it has descended. investigate Capitol corruption and prosecute state Doyle’s absence from the fight to clean up lawmakers implicated in the scandal. And legislators Wisconsin government in his first term as governor like Senator Mike Ellis, a Neenah Republican and was conspicuous, but hardly isolated. His Republi- an outspoken critic of the ethical trespasses of some can predecessors in the governor’s office – Scott of his legislative colleagues, have publicly and per- McCallum and Tommy Thompson – also worked sistently pushed campaign finance reform and ethics to keep reform at bay. Equal numbers of Demo- reform legislation. The ethics enforcement reform cratic and Republican lawmakers were criminally bill authored and promoted by Ellis became the charged and ultimately convicted of political cor- framework of the ethics legislation that was enacted ruption. And elected officials from both parties into law in the January 2007 special session. have played roles in sabotaging reform efforts. In 2002, legislative leaders of both parties, amid great FINDING: fanfare, struck an agreement on a campaign finance The quality of news coverage of state elections, reform plan that was inserted into a budget repair government and public affairs – and especially bill. They also knowingly inserted a flagrantly the coverage provided by Wisconsin’s commer- unconstitutional provision requiring 30 days cial television stations – is declining, contribut- advance notice of planned electioneering activity ing to an increasingly uninformed, disengaged by advocacy groups as well as a clause that the entire and cynical electorate. package would be null and void if any part of it was In November 2005, an alliance of advocacy ruled unconstitutional. In late 2002, the provision groups calling itself the Milwaukee Public Interest that had been cynically inserted as a poison pill was Media Coalition (which includes, among other indeed struck down in court, dooming the entire groups, the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, campaign reform package. Common Cause in Wisconsin, the League of In the final days of the 2005-06 legislative ses- Women Voters of Wisconsin, and the Wisconsin sion, Republicans who control the state Assembly State AFL-CIO) filed a petition with the Federal refused to allow ethics reform legislation passed by Communications Commission challenging the the state Senate on a bipartisan 28-5 vote to be license renewal applications of all the commercial debated and voted on in the lower house. GOP TV stations in the Milwaukee media market. Based leaders went behind closed doors to convince their on data collected and analyzed by the Center for colleagues to join them in stonewalling the ethics Media and Public Affairs, the petitioners pointed bill, even persuading four sponsors and supporters out that in the final four weeks before the Novem- of the legislation to agree to kill their own bill. ber 2004 election less than 1 percent of newscast Arguing that the ethics bill was unneeded, time was devoted to state-level elections, about 2 then-Assembly Majority Leader Mike Huebsch told percent to ballot issues, and about 1 percent to his colleagues: “In Wisconsin, we can be proud of other local races, and for this reason, they asserted, our ethical traditions and ethical standards.” After renewing the licenses of these stations would not government ethics became a major campaign issue serve the public interest. 128 FCC staff rejected the petition in June 2007, revealed that during the typical early- and late- and the coalition filed an appeal of the staff ruling evening 30-minute broadcast, nearly four and shortly thereafter. Although the FCC is unlikely to a half minutes of paid political ads aired com- take the requested action, the CMPA study results pared with an average of one minute and 43 dramatized the extent to which commercial seconds of actual election news coverage. licensees have retreated, with little or no fear of • During the first quarter of 2007, stations ded- penalty, from their responsibilities (which the FCC icated just one minute and 35 seconds to gov- once called “a non-delegable duty”) to provide cit- ernment news during a typical early- and izens with public affairs news and programming. late-evening 30-minute news broadcast. In For example, the analysis revealed that only 5.2 per- contrast, five times more airtime was spent on cent of the regularly-scheduled news and public “sports and weather.” “Teasers, bumpers, and affairs programming carried by Milwaukee’s five intros” also trumped government coverage at highest-rated commercials stations was devoted to nearly 2 minutes. election coverage, and of that total 77 percent was This scarcity of meaningful public affairs pro- focused on the presidential and U.S. Senate races. gramming on local TV news is set against a back- All other Wisconsin elections and ballot referenda drop of Pew Center for the People & the Press together accounted for approximately 4 percent of surveys showing that almost six in ten Americans the total election news carried by the five stations. (59 percent) watch local news regularly, and more While half the coverage did not address issues or than three in four (76 percent) say that television provide information to help viewers in voting or in news is their chief source of election information. deciding for whom to vote, over one-third focused Furthermore, a 2006 poll conducted by the on campaign strategy, activities, and “horse race” national survey research firm Belden, Russonello & stories. And to make matters worse, only 13 per- Stewart found that 88 percent of Midwest voters cent of the election news coverage permitted can- felt that if they had more information about how didates to speak for themselves – and when they government works, they could keep it more did speak, the average sound bite was 10.7 seconds accountable. long. The CMPA study was followed by a series of FINDING: analyses of local evening news programming done The public’s faith in the integrity of elections in by the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Wisconsin has been shaken, with potentially NewsLab. The UW NewsLab’s findings showed serious consequences for participation in the that, if anything, the situation is worsening. This democratic process. research found that: Long lines at many inadequately staffed • Between the traditional Labor Day kickoff of polling places, ill-prepared election officials and the 2006 election season and October 6, tele- poorly supported poll workers produced height- vision stations devoted an average of only 36 ened citizen aggravation in more than a few Wis- seconds to election coverage during the typi- consin communities in recent elections. Coupled cal early- and late-evening 30-minute local with lingering questions prompted by national con- news broadcast. In coverage of elections, strat- troversies over vote counting and the security and egy and horse race stories vastly outweighed reliability of voting equipment, the recent experi- substantive issue coverage by a margin of ences of many Wisconsin voters have led to wide- almost three to one. spread uneasiness about the integrity of elections. • During the final month leading up to last Intensifying this anxiety has been the lack of a uni- November‘s elections (October 7-November form statewide voter registration procedure and the 6), local television news viewers received con- controversy over the outsourcing of the develop- siderably more information about campaigns ment of a state voter registration system to a pri- from paid political advertisements than from vate company that used to be a division of the actual news coverage. An analysis of local scandal-wracked accounting firm, Arthur Ander- newscasts in seven of the nine markets sen. The firm, Accenture LLP, had a hand in 129 purging African Americans from voting lists in identity fraud to illegally vote. Concerns over sus- Florida before the 2004 elections and also has come pected election fraud have even led some state law- under investigation by the U.S. Securities and makers to suggest that Wisconsin should repeal its Exchange Commission for possible violations of the law allowing election-day voter registration. Such a Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the federal law ban- response would have dire implications for voter ning bribery of foreign officials. turnout, considering that Wisconsin ranked second Allegations of election fraud have fueled only to Minnesota in turnout in 2004 when 71 per- efforts to require voters to produce photo IDs in cent of state voters cast a ballot, and states allow- order to vote, even though investigations of elec- ing election-day registration averaged 69 percent tion irregularities in Wisconsin have yet to produce turnout compared to an average of 51 percent for any prosecutions of individuals who engaged in states where same-day registration is not permitted. Accomplished and Recommended Reforms

Campaign Finance circumstances the new law (2005 Wisconsin Act 176) was not incorporated into the state Policy Advances statutes, and subsequent legislation (2007 • In 1998, the Legislature passed the “Citizens Senate Bill 160) had to be introduced to start Right to Know” law which requires electronic the process of re-enacting the law. filing of campaign finance reports. However, • Rules that took effect in January 2007 prevent the new law was not implemented until 2002 state candidates from transferring funds from – and only after reform groups hired a law a federal campaign account to a state account firm, threatened to seek a court order com- to finance a run for state office. Former Con- pelling the Elections Board compliance with gressman Mark Green transferred $1.3 mil- the law, and drafted an emergency rule (which lion in funds raised by his congressional was subsequently adopted by the Board) campaign committee to a state account he directing candidates to submit their campaign used to run for governor in 2006. Green’s reports in an electronic format beginning in transfer gave him a substantial financial July 2002. advantage over his rival for the Republican • In August 2003, the Legislature passed and nomination, Milwaukee County Executive the governor signed a “pay to play” ban that Scott Walker. Walker ultimately withdrew makes it a felony for lawmakers to trade votes from the race, depriving Republican primary for campaign contributions. Before final pas- voters of a choice in the race. Well after sage, the bill was amended to ensure that the Walker already had left the race, the Elections ban applied to all public officials and candi- Board ordered Green to dispose of $468,000 dates for state and local office, not just state of his transferred funds that came from polit- legislators. ical action committees based in Washington, • Legislation (2005 Assembly Bill 65) requiring D.C. A circuit court judge upheld the Elec- out-of-state political committees to comply tions Board ruling, and the state Supreme with the same campaign finance disclosure Court declined to take up the case, allowing requirements as in-state committees was the order to stand. passed by the Legislature and signed into law by the governor in March 2006. This change Policy Proposals in state law addresses the laundering of cam- • Revitalize Wisconsin’s voluntary partial public paign contributions through out-of-state financing system by: committees to skirt state restrictions on the ° Setting reasonable, voluntary spending source of donations. However, amid curious limits as a threshold condition for receiv- 130 ing public funds and for reducing cam- financing equal to 35 percent of voluntary spend- paign costs in the most competitive races ing limits for candidates who agree to limit their (for example, no more than $75,000 for spending, and supplemental public “rescue funds” Assembly candidates, $150,000 for Senate for participating candidates who face high-spend- candidates and $4 million for gubernato- ing opponents or special-interest campaigning rial candidates). against them. The bill also calls for disclosure of ° Providing candidates who voluntarily issue ad spending as well as the source of money agree to limit their spending with public used to finance issue ads. And it provides sufficient grants equal to at least 35 to 45 percent of funding for public financing grants through an the legally established spending limits for appropriation from the state’s general fund. AB the offices they seek. 182/SB 355 is based on the campaign finance mod- ° Requiring full disclosure of spending on els in place in Arizona and Maine and recently all electioneering communications and the enacted in Connecticut. It calls for full public fundraising by interest-group sponsors to financing of state election campaigns, paid for with finance such communications. general state revenues, as well as disclosure of the ° Offering supplemental public grants to spending and income sources of issue ad groups. candidates who are targeted by interest Legislation similar to SB 12 was approved by group spending or are opposed by candi- a Senate committee in the 2005-06 session but was dates who do not agree to limit their rejected by the full Senate in March 2005 on a 20- spending. 13 vote. A companion bill was approved by an ° Providing a reliable funding source suffi- Assembly committee in February 2006, and in cient to cover the full cost of public grants March the committee also approved legislation to candidates. (2005 Assembly Bill 1058) authorizing the use of • Prohibit campaign fundraising during the general state tax money to guarantee adequate state budget process and ban contributions by funding for public grants candidates would be eli- anyone bidding for a state contract. gible to receive. Neither bill was acted upon by the • Eliminate leadership-controlled legislative full Assembly, however. campaign committees. Separate legislation banning campaign • Limit contributions from special interest con- fundraising during the state budget process has duits. been introduced in the 2007-08 legislative session • Ban the pooling of special interest political as Assembly Bill 61 (and its companion, Senate Bill action committee money to create so-called 25). An Assembly committee considered similar “SuperPACS.” legislation in the 2005-06 session, amending the bill in committee to extend the fund-raising restric- Status: tion for the governor and lieutenant governor to Legislation calling for full disclosure and reg- include the period immediately after the general ulation of interest-group “issue ads” – advertise- election when they are involved in drafting the gov- ments masquerading as issue advocacy that plainly ernor’s proposed budget and to apply the ban to all support the election or defeat of a candidate – was registered campaign committees, challengers and introduced in the Legislature’s 2007-08 session as incumbent officeholders. The committee voted 3- Senate Bill 77. A companion bill was introduced in 3 in May 2005, and the bill was sent to the full the lower house of the Legislature as Assembly Bill Assembly without committee approval. The full 272. The Senate passed SB 77 in early May 2007 Assembly took no further action on the bill. on a 26-7 vote. Two comprehensive reform proposals have Government Ethics been introduced during the 2007-08 legislative ses- sion – Senate Bill 12 and Assembly Bill 182 (and its Policy Advances companion, Senate Bill 355). • Ethics enforcement reform legislation intro- SB 12 provides for a basic level of public duced as 2007 Special Session Senate Bill 1 131 was passed unanimously in the Senate in Jan- byists must disclose actions aimed at influ- uary 2007 and was approved on a 97-2 vote in encing legislation or administrative rules, but the Assembly before being signed into law by not contracts.) the governor as 2007 Wisconsin Act 1 on Feb- ruary 2. The legislation replaces the state Elec- Status: tions Board and Ethics Board with a Legislation addressing the revolving door politically independent enforcement agency between lawmaking and lobbying by creating a 12- under the direction of a nonpartisan Govern- month “cooling off” period before legislators who ment Accountability Board made up of six leave office can become registered lobbyists was retired judges. The law gives the new board introduced in the 2007-08 legislative session as expanded enforcement authority and an Senate Bill 23 (and companion legislation Assembly unlimited budget for investigations. Bill 74). In early May 2007, the Senate passed SB • The Contract Sunshine Act of 2005 directed 23 on a 30-3 vote. the Wisconsin Ethics Board to create and Another bill relating to lobbying, Senate Bill maintain a Website at which anyone can 22, was introduced in the early days of the 2007-08 access information about every state contract, session. SB 22 prohibits members of the Public purchase, and solicitation of bids or propos- Service Commission and certain PSC staff from als that involves an annual expenditure of serving as lobbyists for a year after they leave their $10,000 or more. The board unveiled the new PSC posts. The PSC regulates public utilities and, Website in June 2006. to varying degrees, non-utilities that provide cer- • On June 27, 2006, the Wisconsin Ethics tain telecommunications services. Current state law Board inaugurated a new online index enti- only prohibits a commissioner from having a finan- tled “Eye on Financial Relationships.” The cial interest in a public utility while serving on the index, whose development was underwritten PSC. substantially by The Joyce Foundation, is intended to provide journalists, civic groups, and interested citizens with ready access to Election Laws and information about the reported financial Administration interests of state government officials. The annual reports filed with the board include Policy Advances information about officials’ employers, credi- • In January 2006, a “paper trail” bill (2005 tors, investments, real estate, and businesses Assembly Bill 627) requiring any electronic with which they are associated as officers, voting equipment used in Wisconsin to pro- directors, or representatives. duce a verifiable paper record was signed into law as 2005 Wisconsin Act 92. Lobbying Reform • Comprehensive legislation (SB 612) reflecting the recommendations of the Legislative Coun- Policy Advances cil’s Special Committee on Election Law No significant changes to lobby laws or prac- Review was enacted into law and took effect tices have been recently put in place in Wisconsin. July 1, 2006. The law seeks to make voter reg- istration and voting procedures uniform Policy Proposals across the state, and improves and requires • Tighten up the state’s “revolving door” policy training for poll workers and election officials. by requiring at least a one-year “cooling off” period before former legislators and key Policy Proposals administrative officials can become registered • Complete and fully implement a computer- lobbyists. ized statewide voter registration system as • Require disclosure of attempts to influence required under the federal Help America Vote decisions on state contracts. (Currently lob- Act of 2002. 132 • Permit experimentation with alternative vot- May 2007 and approved the legislation a week later. ing procedures such as preferential or rank- Another legislative proposal aimed at pro- order voting – also commonly known as moting judicial integrity – the “Judicial Right to instant run-off voting – to enhance voter Know” bill – was introduced as Senate Bill 170 dur- choice, address concerns about “wasted votes” ing the 2007-08 legislative session. SB 170 aims to or “spoiler candidates” and thereby stimulate make sure that all parties involved in court cases are greater interest in participating in elections. notified of judges’ economic interests as well as rules regarding conflicts of interest and judicial Status: recusal. A Senate committee approved the legisla- Wisconsin missed the January 1, 2006, fed- tion on May 8, 2007, and it went to the full Sen- eral deadline for completion of a statewide voter ate where it passed May 9 on a 19-14 vote. registration list and other elements of the Statewide Voter Registration System (SVRS) project. The computerized SVRS, being developed by the global Redistricting outsourcing firm Accenture, has been plagued by cost overruns and technical glitches and was not Policy Advances fully functional for either the fall 2006 elections or No changes to the process used to redraw leg- the spring 2007 elections. As a result, Wisconsin is islative and congressional districts in Wisconsin not yet fully HAVA compliant. have been made. Legislation allowing preferential voting sys- tems or instant run-off voting (IRV) to be used for Policy Proposals local nonpartisan races was introduced during the • Make electoral competitiveness a legal or con- 2005-06 legislative session as 2005 Assembly Bill stitutional standard that must be applied by 689. The bill received a public hearing in an Assem- the Legislature and the courts in establishing bly committee in October 2005. No further action district boundaries. was taken on the proposal. Such legislation has not • Establish an independent commission or yet been reintroduced during the Legislature’s authority to handle the task of redrawing leg- 2007-08 session. islative and congressional districts after each census.

Judicial Independence Status: In the 2007-08 legislative session, a proposed Policy Advances constitutional amendment has been introduced as No significant changes aimed at promoting Assembly Joint Resolution 63 calling for the cre- judicial independence have been recently made in ation of a state redistricting board made up four Wisconsin. state constitutional officers and a member appointed by the state Supreme Court. The pro- Policy Proposals posal calls for a state Legislative Technology Services • Establish a voluntary full public funding sys- Bureau to submit to the board three redistricting tem for election campaigns of state Supreme plans following established criteria encouraging Court and other state appellate judges. electoral competition. The board would be empow- ered to select one. Status: During the 2005-06 session, a proposal call- Legislation known as the Impartial Justice bill ing for a study and recommended legislation pro- calling for the creation of a system of full public viding for congressional and legislative redistricting financing of state Supreme Court elections was by an independent citizen commission was intro- introduced in the 2007-08 legislative session as duced during the 2005-06 legislative session as Senate Bill 171 and Assembly Bill 250. A Senate 2005 Assembly Joint Resolution 22. AJR 22 directed committee held a public hearing on SB 171 in early the Joint Legislative Council to consider the 133 systems in Arizona, Iowa, New Jersey and any other Policy Proposals states that have successfully redistricted using inde- • Create a system of free airtime for Wisconsin pendent citizen commissions or similar structures. candidates by requiring the state’s public A proposed constitutional amendment establishing broadcast stations and public access channels standards for state legislative redistricting that to set aside a certain amount of time for this include a requirement that Assembly and Senate purpose. districts be as politically competitive as possible was • Enact a state “stand by your ad” law requiring introduced as 2005 Assembly Joint Resolution 41. candidates to appear in and personally state Both resolutions were given public hearings in an their responsibility for the content of the ads Assembly committee, but took no further action on they sponsor. either AJR 22 or AJR 41. Neither proposal has been reintroduced in the 2007-08 session. Status: The free airtime provision in the invalidated Media 2002 state law has not been included in more recent campaign finance reform proposals introduced in Policy Advances the Legislature, nor has it been introduced as sepa- • A comprehensive campaign finance law was rate legislation. Federal legislation creating a system enacted in July 2002 that included a provision of free airtime for federal candidates and political requiring public broadcasting television sta- parties was introduced in the 107th Congress as the tions and public access channels in Wisconsin Our Democracy, Our Airwaves Act, S. 1497. Con- to provide free airtime to candidates for state gress did not act on S. 1497. office. However, as previously noted, the court State legislation creating a “stand by your ad” struck down the entire law, because it disclosure requirement modeled after the federal included an unrelated and unconstitutional Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 was intro- provision requiring advance notice of planned duced as Assembly Bill 435 during the 2005-06 leg- electioneering activity by advocacy groups. islative session. AB 435 received a public hearing in Legislation was enacted during the 2005-06 September 2005, but no further action was taken on legislative session removing remnants of that the bill. The proposal has not been reintroduced in court-invalidated law from the state statutes. the 2007-08 legislative session. J 135 Appendix A The Midwest Democracy Network

Why we need a regional network

In recent years, the demands on state-based reform organizations for policy, technical and legal assistance have steadily mounted, and the leaders of these groups have found themselves increasingly reaching out to, communicating with, and sharing policy and strategic ideas with their counterparts in neighboring states. As a result, a growing sense of community among Midwest reformers developed over time, and eventually led to discussions about Who we are the need, feasibility and potential benefits of creat- ing a regional forum or clearinghouse. The Mid- The Midwest Democracy Network is an west Democracy Network was created to meet this alliance of political reform advocates committed need and by a desire to: to improving democratic institutions in Illinois, • Create an amplified collective voice for Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin. democracy reform across the Great Lakes Some partners are state-based advocacy organiza- region, thereby diminishing the extent to tions, and some are national research and policy which any member group is considered a institutions; some focus on a specific reform issue, “voice in the wilderness” and capitalizing on while others work on a broader agenda. Yet all par- the notion that there is strength in numbers. ticipants in the Network share the belief that our • Establish a regional focus on consistent fundamental democratic values and principles – reform themes, demonstrating how the prob- especially those that speak to honesty, fairness, lems plaguing our democracy at the state and transparency, accountability, citizen participation, local level cross state boundaries and identify- competition, respect for constitutional rights and ing some common solutions while maintain- the rule of law, and the public’s need for reliable ing the autonomy of state-based groups to information – must be continuously reinforced and develop remedies uniquely suited to the chal- jealously protected against those who see politics as lenges facing their states. This structure allows a means to promote narrow interests rather than state-based groups to use examples of progress the common good. or reform breakthroughs in one state in the Toward these ends, participating organizations region to create momentum that can inspire seek to reduce the influence of money in politics, policymakers to action in their own states. keep our courts fair and impartial, promote open • Facilitate communication and collabora- and transparent government, create fair processes tion among reform groups across state for drawing congressional and legislative districts, lines. There is much member groups can learn guarantee the integrity of our election systems, pro- from each other by sharing both policy ideas mote ethical government and lobbying practices, and strategic approaches, but ready opportu- and democratize the media. nities for such exchange are woefully lacking. 136 • Create economies of scale permitting practical, politically sensible, and effective groups to do work collectively and region- reform proposals; highlights best practices ally that none of them could likely do alone within and outside the region; and celebrates in their respective states. There are many and seeks to capitalize on the momentum cre- examples of critically important work – from ated by significant reform breakthroughs in public opinion polling to large-scale research Midwest states. projects on redistricting or monitoring of local • Promoting communication among part- television programming – that no one state- ners and with national organizations. Facil- based group can consistently muster the finan- itate information sharing, collective learning, cial and human resources to take on. But strategic planning, and program evaluation working together through the Midwest among member organizations through quar- Democracy Network, it is possible to do such terly meetings, regularly scheduled telephone work for the benefit of member groups and and online conferences, a website, and Net- the constituencies they serve throughout the work-sponsored policy forums and capacity- region. building workshops. • Developing opportunities for regional col- How we do our work laboration. Provide member organizations with opportunities to help: 1) design and exe- The mix of activities and strategies employed cute large scale, region-wide policy research by Network members and their partners varies and development projects which aim to within and among the five states, but virtually all of inform the content of their reform proposals them engage in policy research and development, and influence the policy decisions of lawmak- data collection and analysis, public and policy- ers, administrative agencies and the courts; maker education, community organizing and coali- and 2) disseminate, publicize and interpret tion building, news media outreach, communica- project findings and recommendations in tions, and advocacy. Years of experience have shown ways that most effectively advance each state’s that unless reform advocates cover all these bases, reform agenda. success is likely to remain elusive. Working • Diversifying and expanding the reform together through the Network, participating organ- movement. Take steps to broaden and diver- izations advance their own work by improving sify the region’s reform community, including communications among state-based advocates; the Network itself, by aggressively and cre- identifying shared policy goals and benchmarks for atively reaching out to and involving people measuring progress; encouraging, when appropri- of color, students, the legal community, schol- ate, coordination and collaboration on selected ars, business and labor leaders, journalists, the projects and activities; and strengthening the policy Midwest’s burgeoning immigrant community, research, development and advocacy skills of mem- and political practitioners, including reform- ber groups as well as their institutional capabilities. minded current and former elected officials In 2007-08, the Midwest Democracy Net- and judges. work will focus on achieving these programmatic • Building the capacity of our partners. Sys- goals through: tematically identify the most pressing needs of • Setting a common agenda for democracy the Network’s member organizations and help reform. Develop, publicize and actively pro- provide the evaluative, planning and techni- mote a new and promising vision of demo- cal assistance needed to enhance their institu- cratic renewal for the Midwest – a vision that tional capacities (particularly in the areas of is comprehensive in scope and urgent in tone; strategic planning, fundraising, and staff and reflects and supports the member organiza- board development) and programmatic capac- tions’ shared democratic values; identifies and ities (particularly in the areas of research, com- documents the political dysfunctions peculiar munications, message development, coalition to each state and common to all; advances building, and advocacy techniques). J 137 Midwest Democracy Conference Shared Democratic Values

While we live in states with very different but also are an irreplaceable firewall protecting the political cultures, we share core democratic values civil rights of all citizens, especially those of minori- and aspirations for authentic citizen participation ties who may be injured by the will of the majority. in the governance of our states and our nation. Creating a democracy that inspires trust and In a healthy democracy, there is a sense of promotes fairness, choice and freedom also belonging. All citizens must have reason to feel depends on the sovereignty of people, not money. their government belongs to them, and they must Social and political conditions under which the feel there is a place for them in the democratic views of those with the most money are dispropor- process. Creating that sense of belonging depends tionately heard and the spectrum of political ideas on the careful nurturing of bedrock democratic val- is thereby narrowed are not compatible with ues. Among these are trust, fairness, choice, free- democracy. We share a commitment to making sure dom and knowledge. people without great financial means are not priced Trust and fairness flow from an open, acces- out of the political marketplace and effectively sible and trustworthy democratic process. We fenced out of the public square. share a desire for political equality as embodied in We believe citizens can meaningfully exercise the principle of one person, one vote. This desire choice only if there are competitive elections. Con- extends to ensuring ballot access to all citizens tested races for public offices must be the norm. In regardless of circumstance or station as well as mak- a democracy, elected officials serve the public best ing voting easier to promote high voter turnout. when they serve in fear of what might happen in Our shared affection for political equality leads us the next election. Without electoral competition, to the ultimate goal of universal suffrage. Guaran- that fear factor is lost. While contested races are teeing and protecting the right to vote is not necessary, they are not sufficient to create the enough, however. Public trust in the democratic accountability essential to a healthy democracy. Far process and confidence in the legitimacy of election too many voters are forced to hold their noses and results hinge on steps to ensure that every vote is choose between what they consider to be the lesser counted and every vote matters. And it hinges on of evils. The ballot needs to reflect the diversity of the principle that in a democracy voters choose the voting population, and candidates reflecting their representatives, not the other way around. that diversity must have the capacity to get their Building trust and promoting public confi- message out to voters. dence in government and the democratic process In a healthy democracy, freedom must be also depend on clean, transparent and account- cherished, protected and celebrated. We believe in able government. This belief speaks to the need for the freedom to speak and the ability to be heard. diligent watchdogs, safeguards against political We share concern about creeping commercializa- corruption and meaningful checks and balances tion of the First Amendment, the transformation against abuses of political power. It speaks to the of free speech into increasingly expensive paid critical importance of free access to government speech. Speech must remain a right in a democratic records, government meetings and decision-making society, not a commodity that must be purchased. processes. It also speaks to the indispensability of an Freedoms essential to a healthy democracy also independent judiciary to a well-functioning democ- include the freedom to participate in the demo- racy. Impartial and nonpartisan courts not only are cratic process without fear of reprisal or injury, a critically important check against abuses of power freedom from tyranny and freedom from unmet by the partisan legislative and executive branches, basic needs. 138 Finally, democracy is the promise that power ter where they live and regardless of their economic rests in the hands of all the people, that every citi- status. A well-informed citizenry also depends on zen matters and that no citizen is more or less access to a wide diversity of viewpoints. We share important than another. Knowledge is power. So concern over the growing polarization of American in a democracy, knowledge must be the possession society and share the belief that a media industry of every citizen. We believe in every citizen’s right that allows and even encourages citizens to only to know. A healthy democracy requires an consume news, information and commentary that informed and engaged citizenry. The creation of reinforces their views and values is a root cause of such a citizenry is not possible without a society- this polarization. A democratic society that ceases to wide appreciation of and commitment to civic edu- nurture a marketplace of ideas that is a safe place cation. for diverse, controversial and even objectionable Participation in the democratic process also views is a society at serious risk. A democratic soci- depends on all citizens having access to credible ety that neglects ongoing citizenship education is news and information about government no mat- similarly at risk. J 139 Appendix B Author Profiles and Acknowledgements

Democratic Renewal Voters - Ohio, Daniel Tokaji is an assistant profes- A Call to Action from America’s Heartland sor of Law at the Ohio State University’s Moritz Editor: Kent Redfield College of Law*, and Catherine Turcer is the Cam- The editor wishes to acknowledge the invalu- paign Finance Reform Director for the Ohio Citi- able contributions to this report of Patty Sullivan, zen Action Education Fund. graphic designer, Campus Services, University of Illinois at Springfield and Lorrie Farrington, Publi- Michigan Chapter cations Editor, Center for State Policy and Leader- Author: Rich Robinson ship, University of Illinois at Springfield. Rich Robinson is the Executive Director of the Michigan Campaign Finance Network. The author Minnesota Chapter wishes to acknowledge the contributions to the Author: C. Scott Cooper project of Patricia Donath, Special Projects Coor- C. Scott Cooper is the Education Fund Direc- dinator, League of Women Voters of Michigan. tor for TakeAction Minnesota. The author wishes Wisconsin Chapter to acknowledge the following for their significant contributions to the project: Helen Palmer, Min- Author: Mike McCabe nesota League of Women Voters, Dan McGrath, Mike McCabe is the Executive Director of the Executive Director, TakeAction Minnesota, Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. The author Jonathan Maurer-Jones, TakeAction Minnesota, wishes to acknowledge the assistance of Jay Heck, and Taina Maki, TakeAction Minnesota. Executive Director, Common Cause in Wisconsin and Andrea Kaminski, Executive Director, League Illinois Chapter of Women Voters of Wisconsin. Author: Cynthia Canary Democracy Essay Cynthia Canary is the Director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform. The author would Author: Kent Redfield like to thank the following for reviewing and com- Kent Redfield is professor of political studies menting on the chapter: Jay Stewart, Better Gov- and public policy at the University of Illinois at ernment Association, Terry Pastika, Citizen Springfield with a joint appointment in the Center Advocacy Center, Brian Imus, Illinois PIRG, Paula for State Policy and Leadership. The Author would Lawson, League of Women Voters, Al Sharp, Protes- like to thank the following for reviewing and com- tants for the Common Good, Todd Dietterle, Com- menting on the chapter: Lawrence N. Hansen, Vice mon Cause Illinois and Dawn Clark Netsch, President, The Joyce Foundation, Dan McGrath, professor emeritus, Northwestern University. Executive Director, TakeAction Minnesota, Cynthia Canary, Director, Illinois Campaign for Political Ohio Chapter Reform, Peg Rosenthal, League of Women Voters – Authors: Herbert Asher, Ann Henkener, Ohio, Daniel Tokaji, assistant professor of Law, The Peg Rosenfield, Daniel Tokaji, and Ohio State University Moritz College of Law. Catherine Turcer Catherine Turcer, Campaign Finance Reform Hebert Asher is a Professor Emeritus of Polit- Director, Ohio Citizen Action Education Fund, ical Science at the Ohio State University*, Ann Rich Robinson, Executive Director, Michigan Cam- Henkener is on the Board of Directors of the paign Finance Network, and Mike McCabe, Exec- League of Women Voters – Ohio, Peg Rosenthal is utive Director, Wisconsin Democracy Campaign. an elections specialist with the League of Women *affiliation for identification purposes only