And it’s unfair. Because Dick Mell yelled, everyone seems to be jumping about the Governor’s including a provision to force divestiture of holdings by family members of Illinois Government officials.
First, is that a horrible standard? Here’s the selected text
(415 ILCS 5/22.52 new)
25 Sec. 22.52. Conflict of interest. Effective 30 days after
26 the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 94th General
27 Assembly, none of the following persons shall have a direct
28 financial interest in or receive a personal financial benefit
29 from any waste-disposal operation or any clean construction or
30 demolition debris fill operation that requires a permit or
31 interim authorization under this Act, or any corporate entity
32 related to any such waste-disposal operation or clean
33 construction or demolition debris fill operation:09400SB0431sam001 – 15 – LRB094 09305 RSP 44857 a
1 (i) the Governor of the State of Illinois;
2 (ii) the Attorney General of the State of Illinois;
3 (iii) the Director of the Illinois Environmental
4 Protection Agency;
5 (iv) the Chairman of the Illinois Pollution Control
6 Board;
7 (v) the members of the Illinois Pollution Control
8 Board;
9 (vi) the staff of any person listed in items (i)
10 through (v) of this Section who makes a regulatory or
11 licensing decision that directly applies to any
12 waste-disposal operation or any clean construction or
13 demolition debris fill operation; and
14 (vii) a relative of any person listed in items (i)
15 through (vi) of this Section.
16 The prohibitions of this Section shall apply during the
17 person’s term of State employment and shall continue for 5
18 years after the person’s termination of State employment. The
19 prohibition of this Section shall not apply to any person whose
20 State employment terminates prior to 30 days after the
21 effective date of this Amendatory Act of the 94th General
22 Assembly.
23 For the purposes of this Section:
24 (a) The terms “direct financial interest” and
25 “personal financial benefit” do not include the ownership
26 of publicly traded stock.
27 (b) The term “relative” means father, mother, son,
28 daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, husband, wife,
29 fatherin-law, or mother-in-law.
I can think of one time I’d like to have seen a similar rule. Remember when Dan Carlisle was charged with the largest manure spill ever? And his sister was Becky Doyle–head of Illinois’ Department of Agriculture?
The Post-Dispatch takes on the Governor for his most recent dust-up with his father-in-law, but forgets that Mell was the one who made a stink.
I’m no stranger to criticizing the Governor, but this is a good bill and bitching at G-Rod for doing the right thing because Mell has a thin skin helps no one.
I’ll admit that instituting such a rule might cause problems in places like Ag, but it isn’t as absurd as everyone is making it out to be.
Now, y’all need to stop it because I’m feeling awfully weird defending the guy over this.
Minor Point: Rich Miller says the following in this weeks column:
There’s no problem with the law if a member of the governor’s family owns stock in a regulated monopoly like ComEd or SBC. A family member could be a state licensed cosmetologist, real estate agent, or even a horseshoer.
If a relative listed above only owned stock in a landfill, the prohibition wouldn’t apply. In this case it’s set up that the ownership has to be direct–and that, to me, makes it far different.
I can imagine significant problems in Agriculture if this was applied because families usually farm that have a member on Ag–that said, direct regulation like a mega-hog farm like Carlisle’s is a far different standard and under far more direct regulation. The rule may need to be tweaked, but why wouldn’t expanding it be a good thing?