Chris Lauzen State Senator

Comments

Comments: Senator Chris Lauzen's Live Blog Monday at 5pm!

Tonight's subject for discussion:

Public Campaign Funding

Welcome, the role that money plays in Federal, State and Local Government is way out of control. It's my understanding that at the Federal level, with a $2.7 Trillion Budget, lobbyists are allowed to take "contingency contracts" where their pay is based on how much they can get pumped into the federal budget for a client (supposedly illegal in Illinois). In Illinois, the corruption trials are so numerous that they are legend. Now, even our County government is thinkng about placing lobbyists hired with property tax money between themselves and their elected representatives in Springfield.

However, this whole problem starts with the role that campaign contributions play in getting executive, judicial, and legislative members elected. I would have never thought that I would seriously consider public funding of campaigns...but this has become systematically corrupting.

Please allow me to "think out loud" as we discuss alternatives to the status quo.

Why did you not include Judy Barr Topinka in your comparison? I think that she is much too much like Richard III. I cannot share your enthusiasm for Ron Gidawicz. He is not pro-life; however, I would still rather see him elected than Topinka.

Posted by: Susan Smith Lindell on Mar 13, 2006 at 14:51 PM

Thank you to all who have participated this evening. Talk with you again next Monday night at 5:00 p.m.

Posted by: Senator Chris Lauzen on Feb 13, 2006 at 17:03 PM

Dr. Willey, Would you either call me at 630-892-7037 or could you give us the number where you are now.

Posted by: Senator Chris Lauzen on Feb 13, 2006 at 17:02 PM

Dear Terry, You're certainly right about the expression. Is it a hopeless cause to end the corruption of pay-to-play and outrageously bloated budgets? What do you think might work?

Posted by: Senator Chris Lauzen on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:57 PM

Jerry, Good question that illustrates the fundamental problem with the concept. On the one hand, we want people to be free to spend their money, even on campaigns. On the other hand, you don't want the taxpayers to have to compete with the spending of private fortunes to win public office. I think that an essential part of a workable proposal would involve limiting spending and giving a set amount of perhaps public television airtime focused on the issues rather than mud-slinging.

Posted by: Senator Chris Lauzen on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:55 PM

Dear Senator you will raise money no matter what you do .Anyone who needs something from you is going to contribute.Thats where the corruption comes in.We have to stop that

Posted by: Terry Fanning on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:54 PM

Jeff, Yes. I raised and spent an enormous $350,000 in the general election (a lot of money in anyone's budget), but the machine raised and spent $3,200,000 for the general election. Unfortunately, we have experienced over the last six years a disaster in Illinois budget finance, but what would we expect when money can buy the services of a person who would not be qualified in the private sector to interview for a bookkeeper position in an accounting practice? However, that's ancient history compared to Steve Rauschenberger's experience more recently which is much more on my mind these days. Gentlemen who have five million to spend in a primary (Jack Ryan, U. S. Senate), $3.2 million (Jim Oberweis, U. S. Senate), ? (Ron Gidwitz, Governor), ? (Jim Oberwies, Governor), et al seem to be able to elbow aside highly experienced and proven candidates like Rauschenberger.

Posted by: Senator Chris Lauzen on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:50 PM

Dear Senator The expression is money talks and the rest walk.This will never change no matter how a campaign is funded.

Posted by: Terry Fanning on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:47 PM

Do candidates have a choice to participate or can they do it on their own and pay for their campaigns their own way?

Posted by: Jerry on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:44 PM

Jerry - Both federal and state for federal and state campaigns. It naturally fits at the federal level but I am aware of states like Arizona that are experimenting with "distant cousins" of this general idea. However, the problem is proposals that I've read merely inflate the campaign process by subsidizing campaigns with taxpayer money. Not a solution. I am aware of no proposal like this in Illinois. -Chris

Posted by: Senator Chris Lauzen on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:39 PM

Chris, I understand that you ran for comptroller in 1998 and were vastly outspent by the Chicago Machine. Did that experience make you think harder about public financing of campaigns?

Posted by: Jeff Hunn on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:34 PM

Hi Chris, Would this be a federal or state issue? Who's sponsoring this or is it you.

Posted by: Jerry on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:32 PM

Mary Kay, I trust that the Founding Fathers would be so upset that we have soiled the checks and balances that they built into the Constitution that they would take action. I realize that challenges will be to not restrict free expression (i.e. contributions), etc. Probably the biggest obstacle to overcome will come from the media that receives the campaign advertising dollars. I believe that they intended that there be a level playing field for those seeking to work for us.

Posted by: Senator Chris Lauzen on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:31 PM

Chris, Hello? Where is everyone? Anyone out there? Chris, what would our founders have to say about this?

Posted by: Mary Kay on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:21 PM

I guess that a good place to start is with a rough definition of what I mean by public campaign finance. I do not mean allowing everyone to spend what they want to spend with taxpayers footing the bill. Somehow, we have get back to where candidates present their ideas "from the stump" and citizens decide. Currently it seems like in Illinois politics you either have to be connected to the establishment with its call on money or independently wealthy in order to run for statewide office. This invites the current climate of "pay-to-play."

Posted by: Senator Chris Lauzen on Feb 13, 2006 at 16:12 PM