This month, we report on two issues that should make us ashamed as Illinoisans. 

One article illustrates a situation we have a moral obligation to remedy; the other points to a practice that time and again has proved to be irresponsible — and too often criminal. 

On page 16, Statehouse bureau chief Bethany Jaeger writes about how human services always end up last in line for state funding, especially during tight budget years. And on page 24, my Q&A with political scientist Kent Redfield focuses on Illinois' anything-goes system of financing election campaigns. 

I freely admit strong opinions about the two subjects and that I've had some personal involvement with both. As a Statehouse reporter and editor for the past 10 years, I've written or assigned numerous stories about state government turning a deaf ear to the cries of those among us who are the most vulnerable. I've also covered or coordinated countless reports about Illinois officials who use the power that voters entrusted them with to reward those who contribute to their political campaigns. 

One story in the human services area that stands out in my mind was about people whose nursing home costs are covered by Medicaid and who get to keep only $30 a month for all personal expenses: haircuts, sodas, clothing, shoes — any incidental purchases. That rate, called the “personal needs allowance,” was last increased in 1988. 

And I spent years working on stories about former Gov. George Ryan's indictment, conviction and imprisonment after it came to light that workers in driver services offices were taking bribes because they were under pressure to contribute to his campaign fund. 

Of course, other media outlets and various reform advocates have pointed out the same problems for years, as well. 

But little seems to change. That's because politicians don't get their names and photographs in newspapers or on television for responding to the needs of those in nursing homes, or those who are developmentally disabled or mentally ill or victims of domestic violence. 

They get publicity for cutting ribbons at new bridges or fire stations or community centers. They think that's the only way that voters will believe they're doing a good job for their constituents. And, sadly, they may be right. 

And serious campaign finance reform hasn't occurred simply because those who make the rules are the same legislators or elected officials who benefit by the current system. 

So we blithely go on, year after year, while those who need our help suffer and some of those who hold public office reward their campaign contributors instead of doing what's best for their constituents. 

As Jaeger's story points out, the waiting list for developmental disability services contains more than 11,000 names. More than 7,500 people await treatment for alcohol or substance abuse. “Staff are leaving in droves,” says the executive director of one community agency, and most agencies across Illinois are in severe financial trouble because the state doesn't pay its bills on time and didn't pay for mandates such as increases in the minimum wage. 

The federal government is investigating allegations of civil rights violations at developmental centers in Tinley Park in northern Illinois and Anna in the southern part of the state. And a University of Colorado study ranked Illinois 51st among the states and the District of Columbia in supporting people with disabilities in communities with a low number of clients. 

The issue of helping the most vulnerable Illinoisans isn't partisan; it's far larger than that. One Democratic lawmaker indicates in Jaeger's story that the state's entire human services support system may collapse if more money isn't found soon. 

A Republican argues with her colleagues who say that increasing funding would just be throwing good money after bad because there are so many inefficiencies in the current system. They would believe differently if they knew what's really happening, she says. 

Are there abuses of the system? Yes. Is there waste and inefficiency? In selected cases, no doubt. But for anyone to believe, as Gov. Rod Blagojevich indicated in his 2004 budget speech, that for years, “social service providers [have been] getting blank checks, with no questions asked” is ridiculous and uninformed. Yet his administration's policies toward funding for human services in the ensuing four years seem to reflect Blagojevich's demagoguery in that speech. 

Social service providers are struggling all across Illinois. I know it from covering them as a newspaper journalist. And in the interest of full disclosure, I know it because my wife is an administrator at one in Springfield. [My then-editors were well aware of that fact, and I didn't write about my wife's agency.] I've heard it discussed at length at her office gatherings, among friends who work at other community agencies and across the dinner table on many, many evenings. Those conversations echoed the serious concerns recounted in Jaeger's story. 

Invoking Blagojevich's name above makes a fitting segue into the issue of campaign finance reform. In recent weeks, Ali Ata, a former high-level state administrator, testified in federal court as part of a plea bargain that the governor promised him a state job after he gave Blagojevich two $25,000 campaign contributions. A spokeswoman for Blagojevich has repeatedly said the administration does not exchange jobs or favors for campaign contributions. 

Nonetheless, allegations about campaign-finance shenanigans have circled around Blagojevich ever since he first took office as a reformer, pledging to clean up state government after Ryan's ethical mess. Although the governor has not been formally charged with any wrongdoing, his administration is under federal investigation of its hiring practices. And after promising to “rock the system” with a campaign reform package, he never pushed for its passage. 

As this issue goes to press, the House and Senate have each passed separate bills to increase the personal needs allowance for nursing home residents on Medicaid from $30 to $50, using money from the state's court settlement with tobacco companies. That proposal, however, has not been unified under one bill, and it's not clear whether it will make it into a final budget. Nor is it clear how much — if any — new money will be devoted to human services in a final spending plan. 

Regarding campaign finance reform, the House already has passed legislation banning those with state contracts worth at least $50,000 from contributing to the campaigns of constitutional officers who award the contracts. As we go to press, the Senate is scheduled to take up the issue. But even if that “pay-to-play” ban makes it to the governor's desk, he has not indicated whether he would sign it. 

If the past is any predictor of the future, when all the legislative heat has cooled this year, human services will once again remain wilted on the vine with too little money to truly help vulnerable Illinoisans. And true campaign finance reform will once again have gone up in smoke. 

Let's hope that doesn't happen. Let's hope we're no longer ashamed of our state government. 

Dana Heupel can be reached at heupel.dana@uis.edu.

Illinois Issues, June 2008