Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax
Next Post: Ozinga continues to impress *** UPDATED x1 ***
Posted in:
* Carol Marin picks up on something that some of you noticed the other day…
What do Barack Obama, the legislative morass in Springfield, and a constitutional convention have in common? A lot, according to United Power for Action and Justice, a Chicago-based social action network of 300 religious, labor and civic organizations.
United Power’s Gregory Pierce fired off a letter to Sen. Obama Tuesday. The first paragraph says it all:
“Our nonpartisan organization . . . was surprised to learn that David Axelrod’s public relations firm has negotiated a contract of at least $2 million to lead a campaign against the state’s best chance for change in 20 years — the upcoming referendum on whether or not the citizens of Illinois should call a constitutional convention to deal with the mess in Springfield. While your campaign manager is heading a presidential effort whose slogan is “Change you can believe in,” his firm is running a local campaign whose slogan should read, “Change we must fear and undermine.”
Marin continues…
Whether you’re for it or agin’ it, the reality is that for the moment, a Con Con is a long shot because opponents have more money and clout.
But the one thing that gives United Power and other proponents a fighting chance is the spectacle we will witness today and tomorrow in the state capital. There, the pretense of lawmakers in a public discussion about Blagojevich’s budget and revenue proposals will be followed by members of the governor’s own party led by House Speaker Michael Madigan trouncing them. […]
Meanwhile, citizens, fed up with being bystanders in this car wreck of a government, are stuck with skyrocketing gas prices, a faltering economy and a growing fear for their and their children’s futures.
Amen, Carol. Amen.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 7:55 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax
Next Post: Ozinga continues to impress *** UPDATED x1 ***
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
The Axelrod thing is a big embarassment for Obama. He needs to come out and officialy support a con-con or risk some real bad press over this.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:01 am
Obama is going to win Illinois “Big”. If I was Obama I would not offer an opinion on Con-Con.
Comment by MOON Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:10 am
Yeah but he needs more then IL to win the prize. he is already catching a lot more heat then McCain for being inconsitant, and this Axelrod issue makes a nice sound bite. SUpporting a con-con flows from his message of change to show he is acting consitently and allows him to distance himself from axelrod. Taking no position will fester nationaly as yet another example of his message gone astray.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:13 am
This is a good one about David Axelrod.It really shows how Obama is a member in good standing of the status in Illinois politics.
Comment by Steve Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:22 am
I think Obama’s campaign style and his “charisma” while shed this kind of publicity as easily as the candidate-Governor did when a brouha was briefly made about his home being remodeled by non-union workers. The national press likes Obama too much to let this fester for long, if at all.
Comment by anon Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:24 am
I am surprised that McCain has not tried to pin Obama as a product of the Chicago political Machine. Perhaps it is coming, but still, that is his weakest point in his reformer/change shtick. (The man endorsed Todd Stroger, for goodness sakes!)
I would be willing to bet, if questioned, Obama will avoid as many questions about Cook County/State of Illinois as possible before the election. He doesn’t want to turn on his friends, but Illinois politicians are not necessarily an asset for him nationally.
Comment by South Side Mike Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:32 am
No one outside of Illinois could possibly care whether or not IL holds another con-con. And Obama has Illinois sewn up.
We can debate the merits or the ethics, but this will have zero effect on Obama’s presidential campaign.
Comment by ZC Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:36 am
SSM, didnt you know? McCain is secretly a member of the Combine.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:39 am
Marin is right about one thing. This week’s “special” session of the GA will be a farce. That right there is more than enough reason for chaning the system. But will the media pick up on that? Not very likely. The whole mess in Springfield makes good copy, so why bite the hand that feeds you?
Comment by Deep South Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:40 am
The Machine stuff is coming, Some Swift Boat group probably already has scowling black and white photos of our Merry Pranksters (Jones, Daley, Stroger, Rezko).
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:42 am
Still never heard anyone explain what combination of events is going to lead a con-con to adopt something (whatever that might be) that would “fix” the current political morass? If you read a lot of national news, you find that scenarios such as ours are not uncommon. I think it has more to do with how bad economics affects tax revenues affects the politicians lust to promise things they can’t pay for. Con-Con can’t fix that even theoretically, and as actually implemented surely won’t.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:43 am
And Rod, too, of course. How could I forget.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:44 am
ZC,
It isn’t whether Obama has IL sewn up or whether others in the US care.
It allows the McCain camp just one more more small to medium-sized story on how much of a fraud Obama is re: “hope & change” rhetoric.
You can’t run around the country and blather about empowering citizens while your top strategists takes cash from powerful & protected interests to squelch a convention that will re-empower citizens in your home state.
If Obama doesn’t “offer an opinion” on such a big issue in his home state, what does that say about “leadership”?
The guy’s on deck for the most powerful position in the world, and he’s too much of a coward to offer an opinion on the convention vote??!!!
Interesting how such a “small issue” exposes people for what they are.
Comment by Bruno Behrend Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:48 am
Talk about “Inside Baseball.” What percentage of people in MO, VA, NC, OH, PA, FL have even heard of David Axelrod? What percent know/care about the state of IL politics. “Chicago Machine” may have some traction, but all of this other stuff, only the geekiest political geeks care about it (read non-swing voters).
Comment by Red Ranger Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 8:51 am
I’ve generally been against the idea of the con-con because of what I would perceive as the process and the ability for fringe special interest groups steering things.
However, given the group that is assembling to fight the con-con idea, it is making me doubt my stance. The old adage “follow the money”. In this case, the bread crumb trail isn’t leading to a very good place.
Comment by trafficmatt Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:01 am
OK, we now what an Obama supporter does not want changed, now could anyone please tell me SPECIFICALLY what will Obama change and HOW will he do it?
Comment by Dan S, a voter and Cubs Fan Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:05 am
Dan S
Obama is seeking to change those items that need change. He hopes for changing those hopefully things that he can hopefully change. I mean change is a powerful thing that can give hope to those that are wanting to change into a more hopeful change.
What is unclear about that?? LMAO
Comment by trafficmatt Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:09 am
Anon 8:43 wrote: Still never heard anyone explain what combination of events is going to lead a con-con to adopt something (whatever that might be) that would “fix” the current political morass? I think it has more to do with how bad economics affects tax revenues affects the politicians lust to promise things they can’t pay for. Con-Con can’t fix that even theoretically, and as actually implemented surely won’t.
Not only is this wrong, but the argument the ONLY a Con-Con can fix Illinois is probably much closer to the truth.
Specifically, the way to ‘fix’ Illinois is to disempower the political class and re-empower citizens through better ballot access, ballot initiative, spending caps (inflation + population growth), recall, term limits, and legislative reforms.
It is easy to sit on the sidelines and anonymously opine that “nothing good can happen” or make the numerous other weak an ineffective arguments against a convention.
As we’ve gone across the state presenting and debating on this issue, the people generally move in our direction at every event.
No one can guarantee that a convention will “fix” anything in Illinois. But there are two points that we always win on.
1. There is nothing wrong with putting 118 mostly new and fresh faces in a room to look at positive changes for a state (particularly one as poorly led as Illinois)
2. After an open and debate on the situation, it becomes clear that there is NO OTHER scenario for improvement. The quality of Illinois leadership is so low, and the current Constitution so dramatically limits any opportunities for other avenues of change, that a ConCon is the only way things can improve.
I’ll be debating my colleague Al Salvi in a live, on-air, on-line forum up in Lake County on July 29th at 6 PM.
Live Audience Q&A and Call ins will be welcome. Take your best shot.
There is no intellectually sound reason to vote “no.”
Comment by Bruno Behrend Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:10 am
Obama is all about ‘change’ because ‘reform and renewal’ was already taken.
I think Obama should come out on the con-con question…. he is still ‘representing’ Illinois and his opinion would matter to his home-state voters.
Comment by Vote Quimby! Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:13 am
Change for change sake is not a slogan it is a recipe for disaster. It would be nice if this blog would be a little more impartial and at least try to see that a con-con is not the answer to everyones prayers.
Comment by Las Vegas Kid Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:18 am
==”Most of the problems in Springfield,” said Netsch by phone Tuesday, “are not constitutional. It’s political. It’s ego. It’s power. It’s how much they all hate the governor and one another. They’re all a bunch of spoiled brats.”==
Is this a bit too much mother hen-ish? When are DCN and Quinn debating the con-con issue on tv?
Comment by Vote Quimby! Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:19 am
“…he is still “representing” Illinois…”
What a joke.
Comment by Ta Da Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:19 am
[…] Rich Miller has a great post highlighting Carol Marin’s article on the Illinois Constitutional Convention. But this debate over convening a constitutional convention, something voters will get to say yea or nay to on the November ballot, is simmering. And maybe it will boil, depending on the raging discontent of the citizens of this state. […]
Pingback by Carol Marin on Obama and the Convention Vote | Extreme Wisdom Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:24 am
Red,
I agree with you. I grew up in Georgia, and the Chicago machine was one of the first things people mentioned when I said I was moving up there for college. If Obama gets labeled as a product of the Chicago machine, that could resonate with some voters. And in some states, even a thousand person swing could decide the race.
General Illinois and Cook County politics won’t matter to swing voters (even if they are related to the Machine), but I still don’t see Obama burning bridges by criticizing leading Dems. Yet, if he expressedly endorses the current fiasco, I could see some reporter at a Washington Post or an LA Times (if any are left) writing a feature on his political background and ties to a state in utter disarray. Thus, I expect him to avoid IL questions as much as possible.
Comment by South Side Mike Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:26 am
Considering that Bruno Behrend’s answer to education reform is abolish school districts, replace all public schools with charters, give all school children vouchers, and eliminate all school “mandates” (e.g., teach certain subjects, provide phys. ed., etc.) - see http://illinipundit.com/extrawise - it’s not surprising that he can convince himself that the actual CON-CON, as opposed to the theoretical CON-CON conjured up in his mind - will bring 118 people together to propose “disempowering” the poltical class. Ain’t gonna happen. Netsch is absolutely correct.
Comment by Anonymous @ 8:43 am: Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:31 am
Fellas, it’s naive in the extreme to think that a Presidential candidate’s campaign manager and his private business dealings can’t (and shouldn’t) become campaign issues.
Whether or not folks in Bumfudge, Ohio know or care about IL’s ConCon or BHO’s position on it is one thing, but if they learn that his campaign chief is making millions on the “anti-change” side of an issue back home, that’s another thing.
Actually, AA has been waiting for Axelgrease’s other job to become an issue for some time. Kudos to Carol for finally taking on the Messiah.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:33 am
trafficmatt, OK it’s all very clear now. Since it’s all very clear am I now legally blind?
Comment by Dan S, a voter and Cubs Fan Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:37 am
- Ta Da - Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:19 am:
“…he is still “representing” Illinois…”
What a joke.
AMEN to that, all he has done since he was elected to the Senate is campaign for President.
Comment by Dan S, a voter and Cubs Fan Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:41 am
No matter how well-funded the campaign against the con-con will be, they’re going to have a really tough time finding a good enough argument to make the average voter - especially if there are a bunch of “Obama for Change” type voters showing up - see the con-con as more of a threat than a last-ditch effort to do something to reign in Springfield, whether it really can effectively do that or not.
Comment by Amuzing Myself Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:45 am
Dan S.
No, you’re not legally blind, but I think most in the mainstream press are.
Comment by trafficmatt Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 10:05 am
Anonymous,
Nice of you to help me promote my school reform ideas, where I propose we equally fund each child, dramatically and permanently reduce property taxes across the state, increase revenues to the state, and put parents and locally run schools back in charge of educating our kids instead of a bloated, corrupt, wasteful, and insulated “Administrative Bureaucracy.”
I’ll be happy to debate that policy with any one AFTER we get a convention, a more open political environment, and a class of politicians that AREN’T purchased shills of either the Education Bureaucracy or some bloated and fat business interests.
I have no idea whether a ConCon will work, or whether IL and the US will ever throw out it’s overpriced and ineffective education system, but I’m willing to put the ideas on record, and then promote them.
The education plan is here and you can buy our book (Illinois Deserves Better) here.
Why not come out of your Anon rabbit hole, invite me anywhere in Illinois for a debate. Bring Mays, Preckwinkle, Martire, Netsch, Nancy Kazak or Dan Proft.
The audience will come away enlightened in any circumstance.
Comment by Bruno Behrend Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 10:06 am
I don’t think Carol Marin does say it all. She talks about a recall initiative as something that might come out of a con-con. I would put that one way down, on the list of important subjects!
Much higher, I would argue, would be Section 5 of Article XIII: “Membership in any pension or retirement system of the State, any unit of local government or school district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, shall be an enforceable contractual relationship, the benefits of which
shall not be diminished or impaired.”
I would go so far as to nominate that as THE single most important sentence, in the IL Constitution, that could be under threat of revision in a con-con. Other nominations?
Comment by ZC Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 10:13 am
ZC—it’s certainly the one that will get the most publicity….unions will be firing up their members (in fact, its already started in my wife’s IFT magazine) threatening them with it…
Comment by Vote Quimby! Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 10:35 am
Quimby,
It is no threat, it is real and if you do not thnk it would be the primary target of buss grps who have raced toward the bottom on pension benes then you need to talk to someone from Enron.
Comment by Las Vegas Kid Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 10:43 am
If we could recall any elected official, we would probably have lower tax rates. Within the past 18 months, Gov. Blagojevich, Cook Co. President Stroger, and Mayor Daley proposed tax rate increases. They probably think that, when they run for re-election, in 2010 or ‘11, the voters will forget what they did in 2008. If they could be recalled, they would know that, as soon as they did something unpopular, they could be voted out of office.
Comment by PhilCollins Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 10:45 am
Barack Obama is still an Illinois senator and I voted him into that office. I expected him to lead a change in how government functions. I expected him to empower citizens and reform this state. I expected him to speak out and support action against the inaction we see in Springfield.
His silence makes me believe he is an utter fake with no interest other than himself.
Even if he loses and runs for re-election, he better hope that Alan Keyes or another nutjob is his opponent because I am not voting for Obama again. He has zero accomplishments in office.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 10:53 am
ZC-
This is the section I think will go first.
Article IX, Section 3
“(a) A tax on or measured by income shall be at a non-graduated rate. At any one time there may be no more than one such tax imposed by the State for State purposes on individuals and one such tax so imposed on corporations. In any such tax imposed upon corporations the rate shall not exceed the rate imposed on individuals by more than a ratio of 8 to 5.”
The Dems in charge will get rid of the flat tax and the corporate ratio, guaranteed! I am generally for the Con-Con, but I don’t want to see this section changed, so I might not support the Con-Con when it comes up simply because it will be a liberal constitution that is developed. I would rather take my chances with the current document rather than turn it over to the clowns in charge right now.
Comment by Bud Man Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 10:56 am
LVK—I know it’s a real threat….and I don’t have to visit some long-gone company employees. Just look at Social Security and see the trillions of dollars in paper IOUs that will be coming due soon.
My point is unions are using that as a means to scare people away from a con-con despite many valid issues that need to be addressed.
Also, please don’t forget IF a con-con is approved AND delegates approve one ALL Illinois voters will get to vote on a new version…
Comment by Vote Quimby! Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 10:59 am
Anything that Netsch says has to be take with a grain of salt.
She was involved in the last revision of the Constitution and in previous interviews seems to view the concept of a con-con as a personal assault.
While a Con-Con has its risks, we already know we have structural difficulties and the convention may be an excellent way to solve some of our problems.
Comment by Plutocrat03 Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 11:00 am
== I voted him into that office==
VanMan, I think that Barack will do ok even without your vote.
Comment by Bill Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 11:13 am
With due respect to the zealots, David Axelrod’s business is more than 1 person and 1 client. Many PR firms, especially the larger and more reputabl companies, represent a variety of different clients, issues, etc.
So, the question should be: Is David Axelrod personally running the Con Con issue? I would suggest that it is unlikely because I can’t imagine that he has the time given his other client - Obama.
Comment by 4% Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 11:34 am
VanillaMan, about a month ago, I sent a letter to the editor of the Chicago Tribune, which states,
“I heard Sen. Obama say that the 2008 elections should cause change, and I agree. We can change the government by electing more Republicans. Democrats control the U.S. Senate, U.S. House, Illinois Senate and Illinois House. If Illinois voters want to change the government, we’ll ensure that Republicans regain control of those four houses. If that happens, those politicians will decrease tax rates, decrease spending, defend us from terrorists and discourage illegal immigration.” The letter was printed on June 12.
Comment by PhilCollins Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 11:34 am
Q, I understand the process, but do you really think voters would reject a Con that does not have the pension protection in it? They will approve it because their buss has probably ripped them off. We should be protecting private sector workers instead of ripping off public employees too.
Comment by Las Vegas Kid Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 11:36 am
While I am not against a Con-con I also have to agree with Anonymous that we should not believe that a Con-con will automatically give us better government. Those among the “118 fresh faces” will still have their agendas and will have their allegiances to their “friends”. Groups will promote their ideas and apply pressure to get them to be a part of the new constitution, whether those ideas are what the taxpayers want.
A perfect example is Mr. Behrend’s ideas on school reform. I was an a local school board for 16 years and do not agree with some of his ideas. The present system is not perfect and needs improvement, but you don’t through the baby out with the bath water and start from scratch. Administrating a school district is a daunting task. The planning and preparation that goes into getting ready for a school year starts before the previous school year ends. And that is when you have a pretty good idea where a majority of the returning kids will attend. With vouchers and the decision of which school to attend is up to the parent how do you plan? If 50 students decide to attend a particular school that they would not normally go to, how do you come up with a classroom and a teacher in a building that is already at it’s max? Actually according to education guidelines you would have to come up with two teachers and two classrooms.
Even after a Con-con you will still have many of the same players with the same agendas. They will find a way to accomplish what they want. Spend the energy you will spend on the Con-con to get rid of the problem players and we will be better off. The real problem is not that we could not get a recall amendment proposed. The problem is that we will never get that amendment, or the process even if the amendment were already in place, past the Senate President.
Comment by Irish Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 11:53 am
Bud man,
The “Dems” (along with help from some of the ILL GOP) can (and just tried) to get rid of that provision in the Constitution anyway.
Anything you think you are saving can be taken from you anyway.
From a policy perspective, it makes much more sense for a Constitution to have a REAL balanced budget clause coupled with a Spending Limitation on every IL gov. entity.
Cap the growth, give the citizens referendum rights to break the cap if they want to (and to roll back taxes if they want to), and let the legislature decide the mix of taxes.
Any ‘right of center’ voter who wouldn’t trade a flat tax for a hard permanent spending cap has been spending too much time in 3-martini ‘business lobby luncheons listening to presentations by the firm of Mays, Baise, and Whitley - the 3 horsemen of the ILL GOP apocolypse.
Comment by Bruno Behrend Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 11:53 am
“4%”, whether or not Axelrod is personally “running the Con Con issue” is irrelevant. He’s cashing the fat checks from his private clients at the same time he is the main mouthpiece for Mr. “Change We Can Believe In.”
Most “large and reputable” PR firms’ CEO’s don’t try to wear those two hats at the same time, because they would be barred from doing so as a condition of employment due to the obvious potential for conflicts of interest.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 12:10 pm
Irish,
The “baby” is the education of our kids.
The “bathwater” is the useless “school district.” We’ve been funding the bathwater and drowning the baby in it for decades, and it’s time to change the paradigm.
Further, converting every public school to an independent charter school is hardly “starting from scratch.” It is merely re-allocating resources so that money follows children (not bureaucrats), and schools operate according the wishes of their customers.
You seem to be a thinking and concerned person. You should run for delegate to a convention and quit falling for all the fear-mongering.
No one is going to “hijack” any convention and impose their agendas. It will be a room full of mostly decent, thinking, concerned citizens engaging in necessary and healthy debate.
In closing, let me point out that to accomplish even your small (but very worthy) goal of getting something “past the Senate President,” you will need a convention to do so.
Sure, in theory, things can change with out a convention, but in reality, you should be able to see that the ground rules are such that the option is having a convention that changes the ground rules.
Comment by Bruno Behrend Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 12:10 pm
It is disconcerting that Senator Obama has seemingly become uninvolved in state-level concerns. You cannot push for national change and ideas if you are not legitimately concerned about the issues at home. Since Barack has risen to national prominence, he has made little noise about our frequent budget impasses, endorsed a terrible candidate in Todd Stroger and now one of his top advisors is pushing against a tide of “change”. Good grief. If he follows this code for back home, what will he do if elected president?!
Comment by Team Sleep Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 1:00 pm
TS,
Help shovel a ton of federal money back home?
Comment by ZC Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 1:10 pm
If our “leaders”–especially the governor–were to act like leaders, there would be little need for a con-con. They haven’t, however, and the fallout is that we are almost forced to create more stringent rules because the governor and others cannot be in the least bit statesman-like.
Comment by Fan of the Game Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 1:56 pm
Carol Continues To Demonstrate Week in and Week out why fewer and fewer people read newspapers and those shrinking numbers who do pay less and less attention to the drivel being printed.
Comment by DumberThanYou Think Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 2:00 pm
2 things about a Con-Con -
1. Any proposed constitution would need to be approved by the voters. If something wacky comes out of it, it won’t get approved.
2. It’s the only way we’ll ever have a chance to get the power to pick Cook County judges away from ward committeemen and Speaker Madigan, where it currently resides, and through a selection panel. It won’t solve all of the world problems, but it should screen out the many bad apples and make the courts fairer for individuals and businesses.
Comment by Old lawyer Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 2:09 pm
Let’s elect Barack and see how well one-party rule works on the federal level. It works pretty good in Chicago, Cook County and the State of Illinois, don’t you think?
Comment by The Mad Hatter Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 2:37 pm
Bruno,
What makes you so sure that 118 new people will be any different than the 177 we have now? Who are the only people that know how to run campaigns in these dist? Ah the leaders that you like to demaonize. If you are so sure only fair minded impartial people will run for a con con why dont you prove it and run for state rep or state sen yourself and lets see how far you get..
Comment by Las Vegas Kid Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 2:51 pm
The pension threat is a cheap scare tactic. Unions will get enough of their delegates elected to protect pensions.
One would think the IFT would welcome a Con-Con as their best chance to implement a graduated income tax and guarantee more state funding for eduction, which they’ve pushed unsuccessfully for years.
Comment by Sango Dem Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 3:33 pm
[…] Barack Obama is ignoring Illinois’ problems Published in July 9th, 2008 Posted by Rob DePublic in Change, Civil Rights, Corruption, Democracy Marin says it all - Capitol Fax Blog […]
Pingback by » Barack Obama is ignoring Illinois’ problems Obama`s Illinois Legacy: What if America was governed just like Illinois? Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 4:45 pm
Bruno, your idea that there will be “118 fresh faces” as delegates to a con con is dangerously naive.
The same interests who have guaranteed near one-party rule in Illinois, will also be electing the delegates.
Let’s see, 2 delegates from each state senate district. A big majority of those districts are Dem. Gee, I wonder what kind of delegates we will get?
Bruno, the same teachers union interests that keep kicking your butt on school reform issues will kick your butt on this convention. How could it be otherwise? Do you really expect to compete with your little blog?
The GOP is dead Bruno and I haven’t see you doing much about it. You can’t just expect to dive into a con con and expect to prevail now.
I’ll have to mostly agree with Dawn Clark Netsch for once. A new document is meaningless if the political will isn’t there.
This idea that things can’t get worse is a bunch of crap. Things can (and probably will) get a lot worse for Republicans in this state. A con con would be like playing Russian Roulette for Republicans, with 5 bullets in the chamber.
Comment by be afraid, be very very afraid of a con con Wednesday, Jul 9, 08 @ 9:48 pm
Very Afraid,
1. You pick a good name for an anti-concon person, because fear is all you have to offer.
2. If the teachers unions were so sure of controlling the convention, they’d be for it. They control everything now, and a Convention offers the only chance of changing that.
3. Why should I give a damn about the ILL GOP? The party leadership is brain dead, and the so-called “conservative movement” can’t stop eating their own members. Both are bordering on irrelevancy, and don’t accept any “help” save money for the same tired pack of poor candidates.
4. I would rather be “dangerously naive” than clinging to the even more absurd notion that the ILL GOP is worth any effort or worth saving or “fixing.” It will either fix itself or it won’t.
The party is a microcosm of what is wrong with the state.
5. Your comment about my “little blog” is a good one. How could such a big project be undertaken by a few of nobodies? Why, only big and well-funded interests should undertake such things, right?
How true. Gidwitz or Oberweis have enough $$ to fund a decent information campaign. The ILL GOP has enough connected donors and corporate interests that could make a case for changes to the constitution.
Ask yourself why these interests are essentially doing NOTHING, and the case for a convention becomes more and more clear.
The so-called “right” has become so fat and lazy that they can’t even envision the benefits this type of campaign could offer.
All they can do is run rich, unelectable candidates, fund policy studies no one reads, and throw nice 501(c)3 anniversary dinners.
Yeah, that’s worked well for them.
____
Afraid, your arguments sound solid to a great many people, but they are easily exposed as dangerously conventional thinking.
There is a reason that IBM didn’t “invent” the personal computer or that the small rolling suitcase was invented by pilots and flight attendants and not by the giants of the luggage industry.
Conservatives and Republicans apparently can’t conceive of any way to improve, so they cower in their board rooms, joining greedy public employee unions in arguing to keep Illinois broken, corrupt, poorly lead, and taxed into poverty.
Compared to that, being “dangerously naive” on my “little blog” is fine with me.
Comment by Bruno Behrend Thursday, Jul 10, 08 @ 11:02 am
Las Vegas,
Thanks for your question, as it (once agains) proves my point. In gerrymandered River Forest, I couldn’t elected to anything save maybe wasting my time on a school board being the lone vote against wasteful spending.
I COULD however, have a shot at delegate (I plan to try if there is yes vote) in either a non-partisan or even partisan delegate race.
Again, I suppose you too could call me “dangerously naive.” OTOH, it seem just as naive to think that there is any other scenario by which Illinois improves.
Pick your favorite idea for fixing Illinois, and ask yourself what chance it has.
See.
Vote “Yes”
Comment by Bruno Behrend Thursday, Jul 10, 08 @ 12:04 pm
[…] One excellent place for debate is the blogosphere, and few do that sphere as well as Rich Miller. He has a large commentariat, and they raise just about every issue under the sun regarding Constitutional Convention. We’ve maintained a pretty good presence there, and if you want to read some good debates, you can go here (59 comments), and here (70 comments). […]
Pingback by Debating the Constitutional Convention - A Primer Thursday, Jul 10, 08 @ 5:09 pm