#metoo springfield. an email from my rep, kelly cassidy.
Neighbors,
Over the last few days, you may have seen news about my coming forward about having been retaliated against by members of the Speaker Michael Madigan's operation for speaking out against his handling of sexual harassment claims.
If you haven't heard, you can see some of the coverage here, here, and here. In short, the Speaker's chief of staff and a state representative loyal to him made very clear that they intended to hold my part-time job with the Cook County Sheriff's office over my head as a point of leverage.
My mother didn't raise me to take treatment like this lightly, so I came forward. I wanted you, my friends and neighbors, to hear about it from me directly. Below you can see two statements I've sent out in the last 24 hours, summarizing the situation and demanding a total overhaul of the Legislative Inspector General's office.
5/22 Statement: My Initial Reaction
In February, I first spoke publicly about the inadequate response to allegations of sexual harassment within Speaker Madigan's operation. On two occasions since that time, someone loyal to Speaker Madigan has attempted to intimidate me and my part-time employer. After the second occurrence, I knew it wouldn't stop, and I knew that the only way to ensure that these retaliation efforts cease is to place a spotlight on them.
Having spent my entire adult life advocating for those without power, I have advocated for stronger responses to discrimination at all levels as well as in the private sector. I know that my role in the House affords me a greater degree of safety than many who have long complained about the ways women are treated in Springfield. Since coming forward yesterday, I have been stopped by more women (and men) than I can count, thanking me for speaking up because they don't feel safe speaking out about their own experiences of intimidation, retaliation, and harassment.
As this story now turns to the inevitable he said/she said and denials, I remain firmly committed to being a steadfast voice for justice and equality, just as I have worked against harassment and discrimination throughout my career. I stand by my story. I did not want to leave the work and the team I loved being a part of, and I certainly did not want to spend the waning days of this session focused on anything other than passing my bills and getting a budget completed.
I am encouraged to see the call for an investigation by the Legislative Inspector General from both the Illinois State Senate Women's Caucus and Speaker Madigan. Based on the widely reported concerns about the ability of the LIG to operate with true independence, I stand by my original call for a truly independent and outside investigation into this culture that appears to pervade the organizations led by Speaker Madigan.
I am committed to speaking out against retaliation and intimidation, and to doing what I can to change this abusive culture. We can and must do better for all of us.
5/23 Statement: Overhaul of the LIG
It has been a tumultuous year in the Capitol as concerns about sexual harassment allegations under the dome have swirled, sometimes boiling over as they did this week.
The issues are complex and very easy to glaze over. What is very clear is that we have not solved this problem, nor have we repaired the lack of faith in the system or the process for handling complaints.
Tuesday, Speaker Madigan reversed course from his earlier denials over the concerns I raised about retaliation and requested an investigation by the Legislative Inspector General. While I applaud his openness to an inquiry, I continue to have very real concerns about the venue he's selected.
The Office of Legislative Inspector General made headlines late last year after it was revealed that the position of LIG had remained vacant for 3 years, a situation many in the Capitol were completely unaware of, in spite of the early discussions about problems with harassment in our Capitol. During the time the office was vacant, a number of complaints piled up unaddressed and we had to pass emergency legislation to extend the statute of limitations on cases that had died of neglect during that time. Some members of the General Assembly, myself included, suggested that the statute empowering the LIG be overhauled at the same time to better equip a new LIG to truly operate independently, but the changes made were limited to the timeline extension at that time.
While the reasons for the lengthy vacancy in the office of Legislative Inspector General were never publicly reported, news reports at the time suggest that the issue related to a situation where the LIG found cause to launch an investigation and was denied permission to open an investigation by the partisan leadership appointees to the Legislative Ethics Commission. It bears repeating here - the Inspector General can not proceed with an investigation unless a panel of members of the body they are charged with overseeing grants them the permission to do so. The flaws in the process don't stop there though, it is riddled with trap doors, blind alleys and loopholes designed to allow political consideration to bury any complaint that is politically inconvenient. In addition to the lack of true independence in choosing whether to proceed to the investigative phase, other problems include:
Neither the LIG nor the Ethics commission are required to publicly share any information about complaints, investigations or findings by the LIG, which is the mechanism that allows the partisan nature of the Ethics Commission to keep facts from the public.
The Legislative Ethics Commission, the group of General Assembly members appointed by legislative leadership (4 Democrats and 4 Republicans), has the power to reject any findings of an Inspector General.
A simple majority vote is required to move an action forward and no provision exists for breaking the tie vote, so anything serious could die for the lack of one vote. As a result, party line voting on the commission all but guarantees no serious consequences exist.
The minutes of the meetings of the Legislative Ethics Commission are not required to be publicly disclosed.
There are a couple of pieces of legislation moving through the Senate now, where members are working together in a bipartisan fashion to find workable solutions to the problems in both the Legislative Inspector General's office and the Department of Human Rights. The proposed changes to the Ethics Act are pretty simple and straightforward and I stand ready to support these changes when the bill comes over to the House.
The proposed changes to the Ethics Act, carried by Sens. Cristina Castro and Karen McConnaghy, include:
Most importantly, the bill will remove the outrageous barrier to investigative independence by removing the provisions requiring the Legislative Inspector General to seek the permission of the Ethics Commission before opening an investigation. As mentioned above, Illinois is the ONLY state in the country with such a provision in their Ethics Act.
The bill will bring desperately needed transparency and accountability to the Office and the Commission, requiring publication of case summaries in instances where a violation has been found as well as mandating public release of meeting minutes. A supermajority, which by the design of the Ethics Commission would require bipartisan cooperation, will be required to quash the release of any case summary.
Critically important for restoring faith in the process, the Ethics Commission would be expanded by four members of the public.
Ethics Commission members involved in cases would be required to recuse themselves and be temporarily replaced on the commission.
Finally, the bill sets out a process for the timely replacement of the Legislative Inspector General in the case of a vacancy.
Each chamber has other pieces of legislation on the topic, but progress has been limited. Just as I suggested last fall when this all began, it would be ideal if we could have started this process with the creation of a bipartisan, bicameral task force seeking real solutions to improve the workplace we all share.
