Q&A With Outgoing LIG Carol Pope
Legislative Inspector General Carol Pope (left) testifies with predecessors Julie Porter and Tom Homer before the Joint Commission on Ethics and Lobbying Reform in Springfield last year.
NOTE: This story was originally posted for subscribers only. To receive subscriber-only newsletters and content, click here.
Legislative Inspector General Carol Pope made waves last week announcing she’s resigning in frustration about the ethics bill passed by the General Assembly this spring.
Judge Pope spoke with The Illinoize and had a lot to say about her frustrations in the job.
“It just seems kind of futile, in the end,” Pope said. “I get tired of tilting at windmills and I’d rather be effective at any job that I have. So, that’s basically the bottom line about why I decided to leave.”
These questions and some responses have been edited for brevity and clarity:
The Illinoize: What is the reason you’ve decided to resign?
Judge Carol Pope: Well, when I took the job, I had my eyes wide open. I had read the statute before I even applied for the job and I recognized that there were problems with the ability of the Legislative Inspector General to do the type of job that I think the public expects the LIG to do. What I did was say to myself “I’m going to try, from the inside, to get some of these provisions changed and explain the reasoning for it.” I started in March of 2019 and I’m still talking about making some of these changes in 2021. One goal I did get accomplished was for the ability for the independent Legislative Inspector General to be able to open an investigation without having to ask the permission of the Legislative Ethics Commission. The legislature did provide, in Senate Bill 539, that the LIG now has the ability to open an investigation without seeking permission of seven legislators and one prior legislator. But, everything else that I had worked toward did not make it in to any of the bills. In fact, there were provisions included in this new bill that really restrict the LIG more so than before. So, I just felt like I had done everything I can and I wasn’t successful in getting some of these improvements done, so it’s time for somebody else to take over and see what they can do.
The Illinoize: How involved were you in the discussions of the ethics bill that was passed this spring? Can you walk me through how your input was or wasn’t used?
Pope: On February 6, 2020, myself and the two prior LIG’s testified in front of a joint commission on ethics reform and I laid out multiple items that needed improvement in the statute. That commission was supposed to issue a report by the end of March 2020. They still haven’t issued their report. And there were many suggestions that I made and that the other two prior LIG’s made at that time. This Senate Bill, 539, dropped on the last day of session. I did not get to see that bill. That’s the other thing about the way the legislature works. Nobody sends me a bill that relates to my office. I’m online, I’m in the ILGA website to keep up on ethics bills that are coming down. I had one legislator who wanted to work with me on an improved ethics bill. But that was one person with a bill that, of course, never got called or even heard. Senate Bill 539 dropped late on the last day of session and nobody apprised me of it at all. I had testified in the spring on other ethics bills that were floating around. I testified in front of the House Ethics Committee and in front of the Senate Ethics Committee. I submitted written remarks to the joint commission on ethics reform and spoke with legislators individually by phone to explain how important some of these provisions were. It’s not like anyone reaches out to you as the LIG to discuss these matters with you. You know, you’re on your own trying to figure out what’s happening, who’s sponsoring bills, are the bills moving, that kind of thing. So, SB539 was never discussed by either [the House or Senate Ethics Committees]. I didn’t know anything about it until it dropped. And it contained language that I had never seen prior to the passage of 539. [Previously], the LIG could investigate allegations and it could be, in my opinion, discussed in the media where you might see an article that raises an allegation of an ethics violation. You could go ahead and start an investigation. That’s not gonna be true with this bill, in my opinion.
The Illinoize: What do you want? What would make the LIG not be a ‘paper tiger’ as you described it? What would you want to make the job more effective?
Pope: There’s a couple of things. One is the ability to issue a subpoena without having to ask for approval from the legislators who sit on the Legislative Ethics Commission. There was [a pundit] who called it a “stunning” demand that I made. The truth is, the Legislative Inspector General in the state of Illinois is the only Inspector General who needs to get approval from the group they are charged with investigating. It’s crazy. The Executive Inspector General [doesn’t] have to ask anybody to issue a subpoena. The City of Chicago Inspector General doesn’t ask anybody, they have that authority. Why is it only the Legislative Inspector General who does not have the authority to issue a subpoena? You issue a subpoena to get records and documents that assist you and further your investigation. I cannot explain why they think they need a check and a balance on the Legislative Inspector General. I always thought it was the job of the LIG to be the check and the balance on ethical violations in the legislature. I would love to hear their explanation as to why it’s only the LIG who has to ask for permission before they can issue a subpoena.
The other, there is no mandated publication of a founded summary report on a legislator. The Legislative Ethics Commission has absolute discretion as to whether to release a founded report on a legislator. If it’s a legislative employee and they’re suspended for a minimum of three days or terminated, it’s mandated that it be published. But, you can’t suspend a legislator. You can’t terminate a legislator, so that mandatory publication does not apply to legislators. I also wanted a non-partisan ninth member of the Legislative Ethics Commission so that you would not have partisan votes that split 4-4 and nothing be done. That was never even considered, as far as I know.
The Illinoize: Is this a Democrats trying to avoid someone uncovering corruption issue, or is it a bipartisan culture of the legislature problem?
Pope: I’m not saying it’s a partisan issue. That’s for somebody else to determine. I have no idea. But, my guess is that it’s a more cultural issue. I know there are some people in the legislature who are serious about ethics reform, but it’s not the majority. You can see with the bill this year. There’s nothing really substantive in there that has improved, at least, the way my office works.
The Illinoize: What can you tell me about your investigation into former Speaker Michael Madigan?
Pope: I’m not really permitted to discuss whether I opened an investigation or not. That type of work is confidential. The only thing that can be public is that if a founded summary report is published by the Legislative Ethics Commission. So, I can’t even comment on whether I had an investigation into any case or not.
The Illinoize: Ok, let me make this hypothetical. Say an influential member of the legislature, a leader or committee chair, is accused of wrongdoing. Is a subpoena your biggest issue? Do members of the LEC try to protect their colleague?
Pope: I wouldn’t necessarily say so. I rarely even asked for a subpoena. There have been cases where I did, but not very many. The problem with having to ask legislators for the subpoena is that I have to give them an idea of what I’m looking for and they can probably discern who is involved and what agency and records I’m looking for. Pretty soon, you have two dozen people who are seeing the requests I’m making, including for subpoenas. My investigations are supposed to be confidential, but, in our Capitol, it’s pretty well known that nothing stays confidential for very long. My office has never leaked anything. We don’t leak. I have never called you before today. And I or my staff don’t leak. But, there are people who do. That’s the problem with subpoenas, in my opinion. They’re getting a road map into what you are investigating. Nobody should know what I’m investigating. Many times, people may be innocent. Why should they suffer in the press or with other people knowing they’re being looked at if there’s nothing to it? If there’s something to it, it’ll be [officially] published.
The Illinoize: Obviously, you were elected a State’s Attorney and a Judge as a Republican, but aren’t a politician, per se. What do you take away from all this?
Pope: When you spend 26 years on the bench, as I did, it’s a luxury because you have friends in the judiciary across the state which I had no idea what their politics are. I don’t even know if they’re a Republican or a Democrat. It never mattered to me. When you work in that arena for 26 years, you become more of a non-partisan, for sure. To me, ethics is a non-partisan issue. Both sides should be fully behind ethics reform. We just can’t seem to get the ball rolling in that direction.
The Illinoize: What’s next for you?
Pope: I am not even thinking about what’s next. I am going to retire again. I retired in 2017 from the bench and then ended up in this position. So, I am just going to retire again and I have no plans to work anymore in any type of professional position. I’m going to enjoy my home and my grandchildren and my husband and my kids.
The Illnoize: There is a potentially open Supreme Court seat next year.
Pope: (laughs) You’re funny. Very funny. No, I’m not running for the Supreme Court, trust me.
