Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: *** UPDATED x2 *** Anti-fracking “Day of action” appears to have fizzled
Posted in:
* The State Board of Elections formally ruled that Bruce Rauner’s term limits constitutional amendment has enough signatures to qualify for the ballot. In other news…
Another group that wants to alter political mapmaking was given more time to validate signatures. “Yes for Independent Maps” asked the panel to let it submit about 4,000 signatures for evidence. That was after local election authorities were asked for the names but didn’t receive them before a deadline. Some election officials were reluctant to approve more time because the group hasn’t met deadlines.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 1:47 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: *** UPDATED x2 *** Anti-fracking “Day of action” appears to have fizzled
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Where is Pat Quinn on this issue? He always ends his speeches with the statement “The will of the people should be the law of the land”.
Comment by Cassiopeia Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 1:55 pm
this is a dumb and cynical idea but that goes to the heart of your niche theory from yesterday.
Comment by shore Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 1:56 pm
I think you meant signatures, not votes.
Comment by Spliff Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 1:56 pm
Any word on how the lawsuits are going against these?
Comment by Been There Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 2:00 pm
Cass:
Quinn pushed for the original term limits amendment that was overturned by the court that leads Zorn and others to believe this one will get tossed too.
Quinn still supports term limits.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 2:06 pm
We know all about Quinn on this issue, but he had let it molder long enough for someone in the Rauner camp to snag it to help portray Bruce as a populist too.
Sometimes we do get a bipartisan agreement on something. Rauner ended up getting kudos on this instead of Quinn.
This happens sometimes. There is a lot of agreement between these guys and whoever wants to stake out that bipartisan ground first and do it the right way, get electoral support for it, even though they agree on the issue and solution to the issue.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 2:12 pm
I’m not sure I’m too keen with giving them more time. If they couldn’t get the signatures right to begin with then too bad. There was a process to follow and they failed.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 2:15 pm
I support the right for the people to put these things on the ballots, and for the authorities to use their discretions regarding how well they meet the criteria of the rules that are set up by people who don’t always support that right.
I favor erring on the part of the people, not the process.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 2:30 pm
From what I understand, they challenged the rejections in the sample and didn’t get the voter data back from some election authorities until after the first deadline since they had to FOIA it.
If you are going to centralize the review process (which I understand is a change this time around) it seems you should make it somewhat easier to challenge the review by having the data available.
Comment by OneMan Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 2:45 pm
@OneMan:
Thanks for the info. If that’s the case then the extension was more than justified.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 3:07 pm
Demoralized
That info was from the pro folks, so it may have a bit of a bias on it, but it also seems like Illinois ballot logic as it were…
Comment by OneMan Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 3:12 pm
Here’s an interesting take on the situation–
http://www.pantagraph.com/news/opinion/columns/vogel/vogel-i-m-just-following-election-board-rules-says-smart/article_e77b068f-0215-57f0-b9af-6e806f69348f.html
Comment by Nearly Normal Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 3:31 pm
OneMan - the sample the Board analyzed was randomly selected by computer. Think how small the odds are that one examiner received a 14% valid selection and another received an 83% valid. Clearly this judging was an arbitrary process. Again, let’s let the media look at some of these ballots and give us an objective take.
Comment by lake county democrat Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 4:03 pm
=== Think how small the odds are that one examiner received a 14% valid selection and another received an 83% valid. ===
You’re falling for the spin of incomplete data.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 4:08 pm
In no way is blaming the ref going to work.
A proper job of getting sufficient signatures, and then checking signatures prior to submission, would already have received approval.
I agree that they should be given more time to try to plug the holes, only because of delays in receiving FOIA’d local information.
Comment by walker Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 4:45 pm
===A proper job of getting sufficient signatures, and then checking signatures prior to submission, would already have received approval.===
Exactly right. And I just got the breakdown on what the problems were. Subscribers will be told more tomorrow.
Put it this way: The media has been completely spun by the remap group when it comes to readable or matchable signatures being the issue here. They’re not. Not even close. At all.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 4:52 pm
Precisely the wrong way around. How predictable. Does this mean the parties will now get to pick their electorates instead of the politicians individually?
Comment by Angry Chicagoan Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 5:35 pm
The Rauner crew followed the rules and got it done no problem.
The remap people came in with what they said were valid signatures “above 60%.”
They knew they were in trouble from the start and now they’re spinning in hopes that their money people will blame the “arbitrary process” if their “above 60%” doesn’t hold up.
They raised and spent a lot of money to come in with “above 60%.”
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 6:14 pm
One, if by land, and two, if by sea,….Term Limits are coming…..Term Limits are coming….One if by Land…Two if by sea….place the lanterns in the Illinois Capitol Dome….my gosh they are coming….Well boys, you better get used to it…they are coming…
Comment by me Tuesday, Jun 17, 14 @ 9:03 pm