24 Comments - Anon - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 10:20 am: Do retirees vote? - Punley Deter Finn - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 10:27 am: I think we should consider the consequences of the Cutback Amendment and the merits of a 177 member unicameral legislature elected in the same manner as the House was elected before the Cutback Amendment. - Anon - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 10:40 am: We should readdress the state version of the 2d Amendment as well. - Anon - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 10:42 am: Convention would be great: Think of the issues, which could be, in general terms, subject to the voters rather than the politicos. Schools on income or sales not property taxes. Number of Seats in the House of Representatives Supreme Court re-alignment . . . etc. etc. - Your Neighbor - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 10:46 am: Would the Constitutional Convention decide on what date we have the statewide election? It seems that we should have the statewide elections held on the same day as the national election every four years. Elections aren’t cheap — I don’t understand why we would insist on doing the statewide seperate of the national. - bardo - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 10:55 am: I think it’s time for a con-con. Among other things, I would like to see a real effort made to reform our campaign finance laws here in Illinois. - Anon - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 11:04 am: The con con should also look at fixing gerrymandered legislative districts, both at the state and federal level. - HoosierDaddy - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 11:15 am: I’d like to see: 1. Abolish office of LG. 2. Recall for state officials. I also think it would be interesting to propose a “State of Chicago”. That would be a wild discussion! - Horace Mann - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 11:22 am: Does this illustrate the utter cluelessness of the school boards or at least their association or what? This association staff is full of double-dipping ex-school superintendents who apparently don’t realize that “school funding reform” could equal “bye-bye fat pension” for their homies. Amazing. - Anon 12:27 - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 12:28 pm: The thing about a Con Con is that it produces one document — a new proposed consttitution– and voters then vote if they want it or not. Whatever the delegates to the Con Con want to put before voters is what voters see — a mismash of conservative and liberal christmas trees that put false choices on the ballot. Would liberals trade school funding reform for a ban on gay marriage? Would conservatives? Those issues deserve their own votes, not the kind of horse trading that a Con Con will produce - Anon - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 12:29 pm: A prospect of another con-con requires careful thought. It is a large expense at a time when money is short and just as the con-con in 1970 didn’t solve all the problems of government, neither would another one. We also face the prospect that a new group would be more likely to discard some of the views that older folks cherish. - anon - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 1:05 pm: Could you provide some specifics about ” where some people are getting ridiculously generous pensions ” Whatever benefit structure that is devised it will also have problems if it is not funded. I did not think that 1.67 percent per year of employment was such a generous benefit that would bankrupt the state. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 1:08 pm: People, it only takes half a second to come up with a nickname. It makes it much easier for the rest of us to follow the conversation. Please, take a moment and be a little creative. Thanks. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 2:42 pm: Abolish multiple forms of overlapping government, like townships, overlapping school districts, mosquito abatement districts and other oddities that pop up on our ballots. We have more forms of various governments than any other state in the nation! More sunset provisions for some State agencies, boards and commissions. Depoliticize appointments to Boards and Commissions. Increase the size of the legislature so that individuals represent fewer constituents, rather than more of them. No more gerrymandering of legislative districts. District lines to be drawn by political science professors of the U. of I or something as opposed being drawn up by elected officials. For the House, a return to the old system of three elected representatives per district. Add a recall provision for statewide officers, senators and representatives. You know, a return to representative democracy? Shortening of the election season. Merit selection of judges vs. elections. Circulate petitions in March and April. Primary in June/July. General election in November? Sunset provision for abolishing the tollway by a certain date. Elimination of “shell bills” in both chambers. Percentage of State Income Tax to be applied to schools and grammar schools as State funding. Consolidate comptroller and treasurer offices. Add more responsibilities to the Lt. Gov. office. More later? Louis G. Atsaves - Chocoloco - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 2:59 pm: How about getting rid of the state corporate income tax and instead raising the rate on top earners to cover for it. It would be a lot more convenient for businesses to not have to deal with the myriad of state taxes and deductions on top of the Federal tax code, and would thus make IL one of the most business friendly states in the nation. Also, it would be more progressive, as the tax on top income earners would only be on the well-off, while the corporate tax is spread over employees, stockholders, and consumers, and therefore effects the rich and poor. - Team Sleep - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 3:08 pm: A con-con in 2008 or whenever needs to accomplish the following: 1. Enforce a complete reform of the state’s campaign finance issue. Make campaign finance in Illinois more strict than McCain-Feingold. Contribution (in-kind and direct) limits can be determined later. 2. Take gerrymandering of all offices, from state rep districts to judicial districts, and place it in the hands of a five-person panel. A Schwarzenegger-like proposal sounds good. 3. Put term limits on state reps and senators but not constitutional officers. Limit the House speaker’s tenure to 4 years. 4. Get rid of the stupid 4-4-2, 4-2-4 and 2-4-4 system of electing state senators. 5. Guarantee state funding for schools but make sure that schools are performing to set standards and make sure tenured teachers are also meeting set standards. Too much money gets pumped into failing schools and tenured teachers should not be allowed to continue educating our youth if they don’t live up to certain standards. 6. Allow for the recall of elected officials. 7. Allow for one state rep per 100,000 people and one state senator for 200,000 people. This would keep the number of elected officials at a reasonable number while adding more people to the equation. 8. Force the General Assembly to start working on the budget in late January or early February. I know that legislators claim they start that early, but there is too much of a rush at the end of session. - Common Sense in Illinois - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 3:16 pm: Considering a Con-Con has as many pros as it has cons. Too many finge groups on both ends of the political spectrum would see it as an opportunity to add their own branding to the framework against which the validity of all statutes are tested. I’m not convinced our present state constitution is so flawed that total rewriting is necessary. Yes, I’d like to see a recall provision, and perhaps an initiative provision as well. To change our legislative branch to a unicameral form of government is something which I would have to really hear some good arguments. Are we simply trying to save money by not funding a second chamber, or is there really some benefit to moving away from a bicameral system. As far as the courts go, proponents on both sides of the question of an elected judiciary versus an appointed one have good arguments. Nope, I can’t think of a single thing that would lead me to conclude we need a Con-Con right now. Try me again in ten years…that’s about how often this question comes up. - Randall Sherman - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 3:28 pm: I support a convention. If the resulting convention produces a document that panders to either extreme in our society, I suspect the proposal would be soundly rejected (as was the case with the proposed state constitution of the early 1920s). But reforms are needed here in this state, and needed badly. The very concept of seismic change might force the powers-that-be to make changes in advance of a convention, simply to avoid being completely swept out by a new constitution. - Lt. Guv - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 4:19 pm: The posts so far are a fine example of why there shouldn’t be a convention. There are many things I’d love to see addressed like the income tax ratio, school funding and the like. But as good as election recall and other “reform” issues sound to some, they’re a recipe to end up with political chaos ala California. No thanks. To anyone who has ever read the CA constitution, it’s an instrument that has made the state ungovernable. We don’t need that here. I’ll keep the devil I know. - reddbyrd - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 5:08 pm: Now that the workforce is headed for the cheap bucket nites we can consider the following 1. Chocoloco - corporate income tax is pretty ner zero now. With the breaks they get from prop. tax caps, the biz community is nearly off the hook in paying to train their future work force. 2. Gerrymandered maps? the federal courts have signed off on the last three remap plans 3. If you elected one rep per 100k theree will be at least SIX MORE REPS! 4. The budget is introduced by the Governor Perhaps the Blogmob needs a civic lesson - 6 Degrees of Separation - Tuesday, Dec 6, 05 @ 8:08 pm: As far as state pension rollbacks go, this would set a very dangerous precedent. Once the idea sets in that a long-term promise to a worker is subject to the whim of the moment, it will be everyone for themselves. Social Security busting the budget? Let’s cut it back. Medicare too expensive for the taxpayer? Let’s cut benefits and encourage euthanasia for the most defenseless and “least productive” of society. No thanks to your Brave New World. If pensions are too expensive now, cut the benefits for future workers so they know what the deal is going in, and do restructuring and buyouts of existing pensions to minimize the exposure of taxpayers. No ConCon or amendment needed. - Dan Johnson-Weinberger - Wednesday, Dec 7, 05 @ 1:47 pm: The 1969-70 Con-Con put four separate proposals on the ballot as well as the entire document (I think they were cumulative voting in 3-seat districts which was retained, home rule authority which was approved, merit selection of judges which was rejected and … I can’t remember the fourth). So there isn’t a real risk of getting one big document with all sorts of different proposals mixed in together, as the Con-Con can simply put controversial proposals on the ballot directly. I wouldn’t say that cutting back on some of the municipal, county or state pensions that award 80% of salary after 20 years of work — even when that salary is based on the last year of work — is the same thing as ‘encouraging euthanasia” as 6 Degrees infers. Do keep in mind that the state constitution limits the ability of local governments to fix the mistakes of prior governments in creating far too generous pensions. I do wonder, 6 Degrees, what you mean by ‘restructuring and buyouts’ of existing pensions without running afoul of the state constitution. Seems potentially promising. - 6 Degrees of Separation - Wednesday, Dec 7, 05 @ 9:42 pm: Dan, The euthanasia thing is just an admittedly extreme example of the slippery slope of not keeping our commitments and promoting the general welfare. To me, the government should minimize the promises collectively made, but stand behind every promise made. We aren’t much of a society if our laws and promises can be ignored or interpreted to the whim of the day. The pensioners and the state made a mutual agreement for the terms that were binding during their term of employment. If the state or the employee seem to have struck a bad deal in retrospect, the correct course of action (IMHO)is to learn from one’s mistakes and fix things for the future. And, for the record, I do not agree with some of the pension shenanigans that have been going on in the private sector, either. A handful of well-placed people made off with a lot of money and golden parachutes while Joe Sixpack got screwed. I do not think this is the standard government should aspire to. As far as restructuring/buyouts, some of this has already been done by this admin, to their credit. The debt restructuring ($10- bil bond issue) and the voluntary pension buyouts where workers could receive 2x their pension contributions in a lump sum by separating from state service and forfeiting their future benefits, is a money saver in the long run. Early retirement incentives could be tried again, if structured properly and enrollment controlled to avoid the fiasco of 2002. It has to be a long term strategy to work, though. Each administation and GA seems to come up with some kind of loophole to avoid sticking to the plan. I think changing the pension concept to defined contribution for all new state workers & teachers is a good way to at least stop the 500 lb. gorilla from gaining any more weight. - T Mobile Prepaid Cell Phone - Wednesday, Jun 6, 07 @ 6:28 am: best site look my - T Mobile Prepaid Cell Phone Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.