Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s issue of Capitol Fax (Use all caps in password)
Next Post: Constitution, schmonstitution
Posted in:
The governor is all over the map on everything from whether he’d support more casinos to whether a state government shutdown is inevitable. He flip-flops so much that you need a scorecard to keep track.
Fortunately, John Patterson keeps his scorecard by his side at all times. Remember earlier this week when the governor said he has always supported the idea of citizen recall of elected officials?
“I think the concept and the idea of having people have the ability to recall their elected officials and put term limits on terms is a good idea and one I’ve supported since I’ve been in elected office,” Blagojevich, a former state legislator and congressman, said at an unrelated Chicago appearance.
Well, not really. From comments the governor made in 2003…
“You’ve got to love Pat Quinn. He believes in the power of referendum and the power of petition and a lot of the stuff that arguably has gotten California in the mess it’s in. Most of the time he and I agree. Some of the time we don’t,” Blagojevich told Capitol reporters in 2003. […]
“To his credit he (Quinn) believes in the things he believes in. I think the lesson from California is that it’s awfully hard to govern a big state like that with a big economy like that when you’re discretion is curtailed by different referendum the California constitution grants and allows.”
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Aug 8, 07 @ 9:06 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s issue of Capitol Fax (Use all caps in password)
Next Post: Constitution, schmonstitution
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
To give Blagojevich credit here, he only mentions referendum and petition. Maybe he’s against initiative and referendum but not recall? I don’t understand the petition part–if he’s against petition, how does he suggest that candidates get onto the ballot?
Comment by Squideshi Wednesday, Aug 8, 07 @ 9:21 am
Maybe he has taken Ralph Waldo Emerson to heart.
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Wednesday, Aug 8, 07 @ 9:31 am
What amazes me is how he can get away with such blatant lies and flip flops. If it was President Bush, the media would hound him and it would be headlined on most newspapers; there would be ads on television and the #1 issue of all talk/news programs. Why does he get away with it? Does everyone, media included, EXPECT this Governor to tell such blatant lies? Have we all been so dumbed-down that this becomes acceptable behavior in a Governor? Everything from $1500 check through the requirement for MOUs to “always” supporting recall to the silly story he was telling about Mayor Daley that changed wherever he went.
Comment by North of I-80 Wednesday, Aug 8, 07 @ 9:43 am
looking back, it turns out the CA recall that looked like a fiasco at the time ended up working out fine. The people of CA ended up with a Gov they apparently like. Perhaps its not such a bad idea.
That said pick a topic and Blago has taken any side you need to wuote him for on it.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Aug 8, 07 @ 9:49 am
Six degrees is hilarious. RB may not know who RWE is but certainly he does follow that philosophy. RB is an opportunist looking for any crumb to mold into PR spun success.
Comment by Smack-o-cratic Wednesday, Aug 8, 07 @ 9:50 am
Squideshi –
Um, the problem with your theory is that every recall proposal that I’ve ever heard of requires both a petition (to put the measure on the ballot) and a referendum (to decide the recall question).
Unless the Governor has some recall proposal in mind that involves flipping a coin, the two positions are irreconcilable.
BTW, Miller, GREAT HEADLINE.
I know it would be a task, but it would be a great public service if you’d run through those waffles for us.
My favorite is how the Governor has gone from adamantly opposing casino expansion to being willing to sign it if lawmakers twist his arm to hosting a meeting of legislative leaders at the Governor’s mansion to broker a deal.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Wednesday, Aug 8, 07 @ 11:47 am
“Um, the problem with your theory is that every recall proposal that I’ve ever heard of requires both a petition (to put the measure on the ballot) and a referendum (to decide the recall question).”
That’s true; but as unusual as it might be, it is still logically possible that Blagojevich supports some mechanism for recall which does not involve a petition (For example, maybe he supports a recall process initiated by the legislature.) I’m not saying that this is likely–only logically possible. I’m giving Blagojevich the benefit of the doubt here because he didn’t TECHNICALLY contradict himself.
In fact, to take that a step even further, technically, he never actually said that he was opposed to petition–only that QUINN “…believes in [(1)] the power of referendum and the [(2)] power of petition and [(3)] a lot of the stuff that arguably has gotten California in the mess it’s in.” Note that, while perhaps suggested, he does not even actually state that the power of referendum and petition are included in the “stuff that arguably has gotten California into the mess it’s in.”
He then goes on to say that sometimes Quinn and him agree, and sometimes they don’t; and that doesn’t give us any indication if he agrees or disagrees with Quinn on these particular issues.
Granted, he does state that “it’s awfully hard to govern a big state like that with a big economy like that when you’re discretion is curtailed by different referendum the California constitution grants and allows” but note that he doesn’t say that it SHOULDN’T be hard (Again, not likely, but maybe he’s fine with governing being hard.)
Last, he says that he has “supported” the ability to recall elected officials; but it’s not clear if he means actively supported–made statements or otherwise positively acted–or if he is simply saying that, secretly, known only to him, he has always (in his heart, etc.) “supported” it.
What am I getting at here? Essentially, what we have is yet another non-statement by Blagojevich which really doesn’t tell us anything. You can’t PROVE that he’s lying or has changed his position; so it’s going to be up to each and every one of us to determine if he is somehow being dishonest.
Comment by Squideshi Wednesday, Aug 8, 07 @ 2:21 pm