Sometimes you just have to kill the alligators

by Charles N. Wheeler III

When perception becomes reality, you have to deal with the perception, real or not. That maxim is as applicable to public policy as it is to children's bedtime.

After a visit to the zoo many years ago, my son —just 3 or so at the time — was convinced there were alligators under his bed.

Believing ourselves enlightened parents, my wife and I attempted to dispel his fears with logic. "Alligators don't live this far north," I said. "Even if they did, they couldn't get into our house, or climb the stairs to your room. And if they could, they wouldn't want to be under your bed, cuz there's no water and no fish for them to eat."

But no amount of rational explanation could reassure him. He was convinced the alligators were there, and it made sleeping very difficult.

After a few days of troubled rest for all of us, it was clear that we needed a new approach. So that night I got a baseball bat, went into his room, pounded the area beneath his bed and announced matter-of-factly, "There. I've killed all the alligators, so you can go to sleep." Which he promptly did.

The lesson for me, of course, was that when perception becomes reality, you have to deal with the perception, real or not. That maxim is as applicable to public policy as it is to children's bedtime, a point worth remembering in the wake of the just-concluded federal fraud trial of a politically connected contractor. Management Services of Illinois Inc., and three of its top officials.

The facts in the case were not in dispute:

• State payments to MSI jumped to $11.5 million in 1994 from $409,000 in 1993, after a contract with the Public Aid Department was renegotiated to change the way in which the company was to be paid for identifying Medicaid recipients who might be covered by other insurance.

• MSI and its co-founders were major contributors of cash and computer services to Gov. Jim Edgar's two campaigns.

• The company gave gifts, trips and dinners to Public Aid officials involved in negotiating and overseeing the contract.

What conclusions could be drawn from these facts, however, was the focus of the eight-week trial.

Federal prosecutors alleged the contributions and gifts were intended to secure MSI a more favorable contract that enabled it to cheat Illinois taxpayers out of millions of dollars.

Defense attorneys argued that none of the company's largesse was illegal; the campaign donations were part of doing business with the state and the gifts were gestures of personal friendship, they asserted. Edgar himself took the witness stand to declare that contracts could not be bought with contributions.

Forced to decide which point of view corresponded to what really happened Jurors found the corporation and two officials guilty while acquitting the third. While the convictions may be appealed, the verdict reinforces the suspicion that if you want to do business with the state, clout and connections are as important as competence.

Defenders of the status quo, of course, say that's a mistaken notion. Campaign contributions have nothing to do with the awarding of state contracts or favorable treatment for special interest legislation. Nor do gifts to elected officials and state bureaucrats from contractors and lobbyists have any impact on public policy, they argue.

Such assertions may be true in many, if not most, cases. Even if there were no tainted exceptions, though, the public's natural inclination would be to assume a quid pro quo. And that perception is just as damaging to civic life as actual corruption, for it breeds cynicism and undermines people's faith in government.

So rather than attempting to convince people that what they sense intuitively is mistaken, perhaps a better approach to shoring up public confidence in government would be to eliminate some of the factors that nurture mistrust.

For example, why not limit campaign contributions from state contractors? The ceiling could be written into all contracts so that anyone signing a contract is also accepting the limit, suggests Jim Howard, executive director of Illinois Common Cause, a

38 / September 1997 Illinois Issues

For dealing with the alligators aroused by the just-concluded bribery and fraud trial, whether real or perceived, limiting campaign contributions and gift-giving is a good place to start.

citizens' group long active in governmental ethics reform.

Similarly, why not prohibit contractors, lobbyists and others doing business with the state from giving gifts to elected officials and top bureaucrats? Or, if an outright ban is too taxing on friendships, allow only gifts worth less than $25 or some other nominal sum? While such limits already apply to some agencies (Public Aid among them, ironically enough), a statute that would cover all sensitive positions would be preferable.

As a first step, legislation to limit gifts to legislators from lobbyists cleared the House this spring, but stalled in a Senate subcommittee. Also pending is a House-approved measure that would prohibit politicians from using campaign funds for personal purposes. The panel should hold hearings this fall on the proposals, relatively painless reforms that Howard says deserve approval.

To its credit, the General Assembly did send Edgar legislation intended to make campaign finance records more accessible to the public. The measure calls for contribution and spending reports to be put on the Internet and also eliminates the requirement that anyone wishing to examine the reports must fill out a form.

While it may be only "a baby step," Howard believes such small increments ultimately can add up to significant reform.

Whether fallout from the MSI trial will nudge lawmakers forward on the road to more stringent ethical standards remains to be seen.

But for those interested in dealing with the alligators aroused by the trial, whether real or perceived, limiting campaign contributions and gift-giving by state contractors seems a sensible approach. �

Charles N. Wheeler III is director of the Public Affairs Reporting program at the University of Illinois at Springfield.

38 / September 1997 Illinois Issues