A CONVERSATION WITH OUR READERS

Everyone seems to hate negative campaigning. Despite the apparent backlash against some presidential candidates for negative ads this year, attack ads and vicious direct mail must be effective because they're utilized over and over again in Illinois.

As early as last year, state representatives and senators in districts that would be hotly contested in 1996 were victimized by direct-mail pieces that contained distortions if not falsehoods about their votes or positions.

This spring's primary season produced a number of negative ads around the state — perhaps most notably in the Kustra-Salvi race for the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate. I wouldn't be surprised if the negativity becomes more vitriolic this fall in state legislative races, because this is a pivotal year for Democrats and Republicans seeking control of the legislature.

"So what's new?" the cynic might ask. "You do what you have to do to win. What good is it to stay noble and positive — and lose?"

The problem is, going negative can make an already uneasy electorate feel more disgusted, and that does harm to a democratic form of government. So I have a favor to ask of readers:

Send me samples of negative ads, be they TV, radio or print. Send me samples of direct-mail pieces that have distorted or lied about an official's votes or positions. I'd like to document these practices as widely as I can.

Include last year, when the negative direct mail started showing up in targeted districts. Send the evidence to: Ed Wojcicki, Illinois Issues, UIS, Springfield, IL 62794-9243. Thanks in advance for participating in this exercise. I'll report later on what turns up.

I think our readers will appreciate learning to what extent negative campaigns are a way of life in Illinois.

In February we asked in our Question of the Month about Gov. Jim Edgar's proposal to reorganize seven state agencies into a new Department of Human Services.

By a 2-1 margin, readers who responded like Edgar's idea. They believe it would reduce bureaucracy and provide better service to Illinoisans, and many believe it would result in an overall reduction in state employees. "Social services are too fragmented," a Fox Valley reader said.

On the other hand, some readers said a mega-agency would be too large to manage efficiently. "It would be a bureaucratic jungle," a Chicago reader wrote. "Seven constituencies would be competing for scarce dollars."

Now it's up to Edgar and the legislature, where either the House or the Senate could kill a formally submitted plan by majority vote.

Illinois Issues April 1996 ¦ 3