“We’ve got to get all this special interest money out of politics,” Gov. JB Pritzker told reporters last month when asked about the unprecedented flood of super political action committee spending in the recent primary elections. “I’d like the system to change a whole lot.”

Many of us share his frustration. A recent Pew Research Center poll found that 72% of Americans view the role of money in politics as a “very big problem” — ranking it above any other issue including health care affordability and inflation.

Super PACs and other outside groups aligned with special interests pumped more than $50 million into congressional and state races during this primary. Big bucks came from crypto and artificial intelligence industry groups opposing state regulation such as crypto consumer protections and limits on AI in psychotherapy and elementary schools; from groups aligned with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC); and, in state legislative races, from DraftKings and other gambling interests intent on reining in state and local taxes on the exploding online gambling industry.

Special interest spending has soared since the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in the Citizens United case, which undid century-old restrictions on corporate and association political expenditures. And with every election it becomes clearer that the rationale for Citizens United — that spending by outside groups can’t be limited under the Constitution because it poses no threat of corruption — is faulty in the extreme.

Overturning Citizens United is a worthy long-term goal. But it would require either a constitutional amendment or a drastically different U.S. Supreme Court membership, both of which could take years to achieve.

In the meantime, there’s a lot we can do.

One important step is getting rid of dark money — campaign funds whose original source is hidden.

When campaigns are funded by unknown megadonors, it validates the perception of government as run by powerful puppet masters in shadowy rooms, beyond the reach of the public it leads. It fuels conspiracy theories and undermines the trust that is so vital to a healthy democracy.

The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly upheld campaign disclosure laws, and there is no excuse for our elected officials to continue allowing dark money to cloud our elections.

Congress must close the loophole that allows so-called “pop-up” federal super PACs to wait until after an election to disclose their donors. AIPAC used this tactic in March’s primary, but despite the hyperfocus on that group, it was not the first to do so, and it won’t be the last. In a sane world, this would be a no-brainer for all political parties.

The federal government and Illinois lawmakers should follow the lead of states such as California and Arizona and shine a light on dark money by requiring political committees to reveal where their largest contributions come from.

Michael J. Sacks: Why I support AIPAC and a big tent Democratic Party

Current law allows big donors to funnel money through shell groups — often with deceptive or meaningless names such as “America PAC” — to hide their identities. My organization, Reform for Illinois, worked with state Rep. Lindsey LaPointe, D-Chicago, to introduce legislation that would prevent that in state and local elections. House Bill 5154, would require campaign ads to list the top three donors that funded them so voters know who’s paying to influence them. It would also ban coordination between super PACs and candidate committees, a practice that threatens to eliminate one of the last safeguards separating candidates from unlimited political spending.

Lacking support from Springfield’s Democratic leadership, lawmakers have avoided advancing legislation that would expose dark money and regulate super PACs in our state. After this election, that has to change.

It’s noteworthy that this primary yielded mixed results for outside spending. In part, this reflects the importance of political organization and community support. In several races, however, it reflects the value of disclosure, as super PAC and dark money spending was exposed and became a major campaign issue. In some cases, such outside support turned out to be toxic.

There’s much more that Pritzker and our state and local leaders could do to boost voter trust in the electoral system. We could reform the State Board of Elections so important cases aren’t stymied by partisan deadlock and conflicts of interest, as happened when Illinois Senate President Don Harmon escaped penalties for alleged campaign finance violations.

We could tighten up restrictions on political spending by government contractors, which has led to classic pay-to-play scandals over the years.

And we could remove politicians’ need to rely on big donors, as numerous states and cities such as New York have done, with a voluntary small-donor matching system of public campaign financing. Ald. Matt Martin, 47th, is currently building support for such a program in Chicago, and Evanston passed its own version in 2024.

So far, however, most proposals to fix these problems at the state and local level have languished. Progressive politicians may talk tough about the evil of big money and endorse reforms during their campaigns, but once in office, they are often too invested in the system that won them their seat.

This primary should be a wake-up call. We should keep our eye on the big picture — overturning Citizens United and restoring sanity to our elections — while acting now when we can.

My organization and I urge Pritzker and other leaders to turn their talk into action and show the rest of the country what can be done to fix our democracy.

Alisa Kaplan is executive director of Reform for Illinois, a nonpartisan organization that tracks money in politics and advocates for reforms that create a more responsive and ethical democracy.  

Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.