Awww, why the long faces?
There were two camps at City Hall on Wednesday as Chicago aldermen grudgingly approved broad, new ethics rules drafted by Mayor Richard Daley and council leaders.
There were the nine aldermen who voted against the new ethics rules, complaining that they are harsh and give too much power to the mayor. This camp apparently revels in the council’s reputation as a farm team for the federal prisons. This camp included Ald. Ray Frias (12th), who was indicted in May on bribery and extortion charges.
Then there were the 40 aldermen who voted for the ordinance but, by and large, grumbled about being forced to do it by the mayor and by public pressure. This camp included Ald. Jesse Evans (21st), who was convicted in June of bribery and extortion.
Given the council’s track record of sending an alderman a year to prison for the last two decades, and the only-in-Chicago notion of one indicted alderman and one convicted alderman taking part in a vote on ethics reform, it’s best to hold off on any grand predictions of a new era of cleanliness at City Hall.
All they’ve shown, so far, is that the aldermen can be pushed and prodded and shamed into taking a stand on ethics . . . for one day.
The ordinance has a lot to recommend it, even if it doesn’t measure up to its billing as the toughest ethics rules in the nation.
The city’s Board of Ethics has been granted subpoena power to investigate allegations of wrongdoing by council members. Aldermen will be required to disclose business relationships they have with anyone who has a matter before the council. The aldermen will have to keep and certify attendance records for all of their employees, a rule that should finally put to rest the practice of “ghost payrollers.” Cash campaign contributions of more than $250 will be prohibited.
All that would be more admirable if the council hadn’t squeezed in an amendment that could neuter the ethics process: Whistleblowers will be required to identify themselves. This ban on anonymous complaints is the first thing the council will have to revisit–say, after a few more aldermen go to jail.
Even with that glaring shortcoming, the new law is an achievement. A surprising one, considering that no one in the council or in the mayor’s office was talking about ethics reform just five months ago. But still, an achievement.
The real breakthrough, though, will come not by getting 40 aldermen to vote for ethics rules but in getting all 50 aldermen to live by them.
