Reformers jilt stunned GOP

A few weeks ago, I asked a top Republican what his party’s plan was in the ongoing war over campaign finance reform.

“We are not for some sham ethics bill,” the official said, then added with tongue slightly in cheek, “We stand with the reformers, until they capitulate, then I’m not sure where we stand, but I’ll let you know.”

The Republicans are badly outnumbered in both the Illinois House and Senate, they don’t raise as much money as the Democrats, and their party has been on the outs with voters since Gov. George Ryan went down in flames and President George W. Bush alienated most of the state.

So the Republicans did the politically smart thing and eagerly professed their undying love for reform and pledged their never-ending loyalty to those plucky reformers – all the while using the reform issue and the reform groups as a partisan sledgehammer against the Democrats. It was a smart political play.

The assault started when Gov. Pat Quinn’s reform commission issued its report. Several of the commission’s recommendations were unworkable, and even some commissioners admitted that there were flaws in their report, but the Republicans demanded a vote on that document as it was, without changes. They were denied by the Democrats, and the media immediately picked up their howls of outrage. Coverage always follows conflict, and the Republicans used that hard rule of the universe to their advantage at every opportunity.

After the governor’s commission disbanded, the Republicans latched on to a coalition of reformers called Change Illinois.

“Any proposal not fully endorsed by Change Illinois will not have my support,” House Republican Leader Tom Cross defiantly declared last week.

Well, “capitulation” came just a few days after Cross’ declaration of alliance, and he and the rest of the Republican Party were left in the dust.

Change Illinois agreed to a provision that allowed legislative leaders and party committees to contribute money to candidates without any limitations during general elections, but capped those contributions in primaries. The proposal had been almost universally slammed by the state’s major newspaper editorial pages as worse than no reform at all, and had been flatly rejected by the Republicans for potentially concentrating even more power into the hands of legislative leaders.