Corruption has burdened Illinois since its earliest days. But change is possible. Here's how.
- Bias Rating
100% Very Conservative
- Reliability
65% ReliableFair
- Policy Leaning
100% Very Conservative
- Politician Portrayal
-47% Negative
Continue For Free
Create your free account to see the in-depth bias analytics and more.
Continue
Continue
By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Policy, and subscribe to email updates. Already a member: Log inBias Score Analysis
The A.I. bias rating includes policy and politician portrayal leanings based on the author’s tone found in the article using machine learning. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.
Sentiments
-19% Negative
- Conservative
Sentence | Sentiment | Bias |
---|---|---|
Unlock this feature by upgrading to the Pro plan. |
Reliability Score Analysis
Policy Leaning Analysis
Politician Portrayal Analysis
Bias Meter
Extremely
Liberal
Very
Liberal
Moderately
Liberal
Somewhat Liberal
Center
Somewhat Conservative
Moderately
Conservative
Very
Conservative
Extremely
Conservative
-100%
Liberal
100%
Conservative
Contributing sentiments towards policy:
49% : A decade ago, a Tribune investigation found that south suburban Harvey hadn't filed required reports for four years -- finally prompting state auditors, at the prodding of the Cook County sheriff, to demand to see the books.46% : Illinois could also give local elections officials the responsibility for deciding whether candidates' petitions met legal thresholds, instead of a process based on challenges filed by political rivals.
43% : Public funding of political campaigns, an idea that reform advocates often tout as a way to fight corruption, has had trouble gaining widespread acceptance in Illinois, though Evanston is trying a modest version that matches funds from small donors in that city's mayoral contest.
42% : That's why, in New York, Cohen could secretly record his discussion with Trump.
38% : State law allows local authorities to seek court-approved wiretaps in other types of cases, including those involving guns, drugs and gangs, but not for public corruption.
37% : When a Manhattan lawyer wanted proof Donald Trump would be covering a hush money payment sent to a former Playboy model, the lawyer secretly hit "record" on his phone, creating evidence that later helped convict the once and future president on 34 felony counts in a New York courtroom.
37% : The Quinn reform commission recommended making it harder to fire them to help avoid political retribution.
36% : One major reason: The Illinois General Assembly has made it tougher for local authorities to target public corruption.
35% : Massachusetts' courts ruled the lobbying ban did not apply to federal convictions, and efforts to expand the ban have been blocked so far in the legislature.
35% : Illinois officeholders who commit bribery and other forms of public corruption unquestionably draw more attention from federal authorities than from state and local law enforcement.
35% : "Investigating and prosecuting public corruption in the state of Illinois is a far more arduous, difficult endeavor than doing so in the United States District Court," said Daniel Kirk, a former first assistant in the Cook County state's attorney's office.
33% : The coziness is evident in Illinois law, which allows legislators who finish a federal prison sentence for public corruption to start lobbying their former colleagues in Springfield days later.
31% : But if Michael Cohen had done the same in Illinois, he'd be the one looking at a potential felony charge, for recording Trump without his permission.
30% : State lawmakers for decades have rejected calls to give the Illinois attorney general the power to empanel statewide grand juries to investigate public corruption.
24% : And it's doubtful the incriminating conversation Cohen recorded in 2016 would have been presented to an Illinois jury as evidence in a case against Trump.
*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.