Vote 'yes' on Illinois constitutional convention
Friday October 24, 2008
The opponents of a constitutional convention in Illinois have collected more than $1.2 million for a campaign to persuade Illinoisans that there's nothing wrong with Illinois government that elections won't fix. But that's part of the problem. The special interests opposed to a convention are the same interests that bankroll and control the Legislature and state government today. How satisfied are you with that mess?
Once every 20 years the Illinois Constitution gives voters the opportunity to call a convention to examine whether Illinois' constitution needs revision. Thankfully this year – a time when the Legislature is spending more than it is taking in, when the governor is clearly exceeding his authority on spending issues and when the courts and others have permitted the actual wording of the con con referendum question to go on the ballot with outrageously biased terms – is that year. These events and much more provide ample evidence that there are fundamental problems with Illinois government that only a constitutional convention could fix.
News-Gazette Archive
The full story is available in our paid story archive.
Find this article at:
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/opinions/editorials/2008/10/24/vote_yes_on_illinois_constitutional
Comments
"The special interests opposed to a convention are the same interests that bankroll and control the Legislature and state government today. How satisfied are you with that mess?"
So says the paper that bends over for its corporate allies. Until recently, every story about health care featured some hospital fatcat claiming: "Well, if the people just wouldn't get sick, then there wouldn't be a problem!"
"The huge disparity in public school funding among different parts of the state and the ambiguous wording in the current constitution that has allowed state funding of education to decline."
Fixing that problem would be great. The current Urbana mayor, among others, had a chance to address the problem and chose to ignore it. Sad. Very sad.
However, correcting state education funding still wouldn't block the buffoonery of the last decade in Unit 4. Or the Urbana school district's continuing quest to pile up lawsuits.
But instead of anyone taking responsibility for their own actions, let's spend millions of dollars on this convention! It'll solve EVERYTHING!
Posted by Wenalway on October 24, 2008 at 9:44 AM Suggest Removal
The very wording of the ballot told me everything.
The legislature and Rod are trying to derail this thing, therefore I am fully supportive of a Constitutional convention.
Posted by on October 24, 2008 at 3:02 PM Suggest Removal
The problem with a new Constitutional Convention is that it would be "owned" by the Chicago/Cook County area delegates.
The number of delegates are chosen by the population size. Chicago and Cook County have the greatest number of 'citizens' and therefor would have the greater number of delegates.
The delegates of downstate IL would be outvoted by the delegates of the "People's Republik of Chicago" and "Crook County".
Since most of the delegates from Chicago/Cook County would be influenced by the whole "Daily Machine" crowd, we could conceivably lose even more of our Constitutional RIGHTS than we have already lost.
If each county could send two delegates each, our interests would be more fairly addressed. But, that's not how it works. Delegates would be chosen based on population. And since the population of Chicago/Cook County is greater than the total of downstate IL, our voices would not be heard. In fact, the voices of even the Chicago/Cook County citizens might not even be heard - if they are even informed of what is going on. Information contrary of that which the "governing body" of the "Daily Machine" generally is not dissiminated or may be suppressed.
If there was a chance that our current Constitutiion could be cleaned up and all the anti-rights laws could be removed (and none added), then I would favor a new Constitutional Convention. (But, that is, in my opinion, NOT why the "powers that be" want a new Con Con. I believe they want to deny and/or restrict more of our rights.)
Posted by on October 25, 2008 at 4:30 PM Suggest Removal
Yes, there is the risk of the Chicago/Cook county area having too much influence. They did the last time too. Still, I'd like to see some changes including recalls and ballot initiatives.
Posted by BillD on October 26, 2008 at 7:19 AM Suggest Removal
Yes, its easy to throw rocks at Cook/Crook County, and the Daley (not DAILY) machine (which existed long before Richard J and will probably exist after Richard M. leaves office). But people need to remember who put Rod B into office: the Chicago area was carried by Paul Vallas in the Democratic primary right after Ryan declined to run. Downstaters were calling in victorious vote totals for a candidate who's name they couldn't pronounce: Rod B. And if we want to talk about an area of the state nobody can be proud of we need to mention Madison County. No area of the state has a monopoly on honesty, and corruption does not stop at a city, state or county border. The downstate house is made of glass when the argument turns to ethics.
Throwing around hyperbole like "Crook County" simply muddies the water. The real issue is whether or not we NEED a new constitution in Illinois, and the answer is yes. Anyone who thinks the current system is working needs to see people like Rod B and Emil Jones Jr. for who they are. And by the way, how many downstate Senators voted to elect Emil President of the Senate?
Here's the key point of the editorial: "... Illinois government is such an embarrassment that this extraordinary step is needed." It IS an embarrasment. Sitting around and feeling good that you don't live in "Crook County" won't do anything to help.
Posted by on October 28, 2008 at 1:03 PM Suggest Removal
