* My syndicated newspaper column isn’t posted yet over at the SouthtownStar, probably because I was sick on Friday and didn’t get it finished until early Saturday morning. Oops.
But, since I also just happen to have a copy we can look at it anyway…
A poll taken earlier this year for the University of Illinois’ Institute of Government and Public Affairs and released last week shows overwhelming public support for legislative term limits and recall of elected state officials.
The poll of about 1,000 Illinois residents taken in January found that 70 percent support both term limits and recall. The numbers are close to a Glengariff Group poll taken late last year which showed 65 percent favored recall. Glengariff did not ask about term limits.
Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s astounding unpopularity was measured by a different poll released this month. According to the highly respected Ipsos firm, the governor has a 13 percent job approval rating, with 54 percent disapproving and 33 percent reporting mixed feelings.
* There was another aspect to that Institute poll…
Every twenty years, Illinoisans vote on whether to call a constitutional convention and add, subtract or rewrite our state’s founding document. Another vote is scheduled for this November and the Institute’s poll found just 18 percent of respondents were opposed (8 percent strongly opposed) to the coming convention proposal, while 39 percent supported it. The rest were undecided.
The last time voters had a chance to decide whether to hold a constitutional convention, in 1988, both political parties, plus just about all business groups and labor unions teamed up to defeat it. Only 19 percent voted in favor of a “con-con,” while 58 percent opposed it and about 23 percent skipped over the question.
According to the latest poll, the weakest support for a con-con came from Republican voters and independents. About 30 percent of self-identified Republicans, “strong” Republicans and independents favored the idea, while over 40 percent of all Democrats backed the plan. Republican attitudes may change because some prominent GOP figures are said to be preparing to come out in strong support of the convention vote.
There are a whole lot of undecideds in this issue. According to the poll, 43 percent of all respondents said they didn’t know how they’d vote on the con-con. A convention has to be approved by either three-fifths of those voting on the question or a simple majority of all who cast ballots in the election, so both sides have their work cut out for them.
* Con-Con arguments, both pro and, um, con, were tested…
Some arguments against holding the convention tested pretty well with the poll’s respondents, with 60 percent or more saying the “anti” arguments that special interests and incumbent politicians would control the con-con are good reasons to vote against calling a convention.
Some arguments in favor of the con-con seemed to work well with the respondents as well. Arguments that scored in the mid to high 50s included, “State government is not working well at present, and only fundamental constitutional change can fix it,” and “There are a few major reforms that would improve government in the state but that cannot be passed except by having a convention,” and “Conventions are the only way to give ordinary people a say in how Illinois state government is run.”
* And the big finish…
Besides your vote for president, the con-con could be the most important issue you face this November. Take a good, long look, and try not to be swayed by fear. We’ll talk more about this as November approaches.
* More on the poll here and here.
* Related stories…
* Edgar says problems in state government close to insurmountable
* Student tries his hand at politics
* Con-Con debate heats up
* City Desk: Push to Recall Gov
* Change to popular vote in right way
* Recalling Pat Quinn’s rise in politics
* Will Governor Be Indicted Eventually?
* Illinois isn’t alone: House Won’t Vote On Ethics Bill Senate Passed
- Ghost - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 9:20 am:
If the current budget negotiations go anything like last year, look for more support for a con-con as we edge closer to Novemebr.
On a side comment, I never understood why people want term limits on the general assembly. The idea that we want to deprive ourselves of the most experienced people in favor of the unexperienced seems to be a bad idea. The process of lawmaking is complex, as is the art of putting together deals etc. I prefer to be represented by somone with exp, not somone who has had the least amount of time in the job. When was the last time somone went in for surgery and asked to get the newest doctor available? Or wanted to go into court with the newsest attorney? or wanted their investments handled by somone with little to no experience with financial markets? In life we seem to try and seek out the most experienced in their field, offeten paying premiums to get seasoned professionals, but when it comes to the General Assembly we demand only those who have the least idea what they are doing? Nose I must remove you so that I can get reap control of my face.
- He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 9:35 am:
Your Points against a con con is valid, however we cannot expect the Legislators or elected officials to follow the wishes of the voters, namely Term Limits and Recall.
- plutocrat03 - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 9:39 am:
While the desire for experience is a good one, we also have to be pragmatic.
The existing non-functioning government is a result of all the political dinosaurs who seem to have a permanent hold on their respective seats. Via the blatant abuse of political power and the illegal patronage system, it is impossible to get independent people elected because the incumbents have so much power paid for by the taxpayers.
I am sure that even if we were to have term limits, the machine would be able to circumvent the intent of the law.
It would at least be fun to watch them work harder.
- anon - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 9:53 am:
I think term limits is such a hot button is that entrenched politicians seem to function outside the best interests of the people who elect them. For example, it speaks volumes that statewide Illinois ethics reform, if that is not too euphemistic a word, legislation is being held up by one man who is NOT elected to a statewide office. That kind of power cannot be wrested away by the electorate without a significant revolution in the complacency of voters. All politics may be local, but power is a network, and until a competing network matures to challenge the status quo, what you see is what you get.
- Cassandra - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 10:04 am:
It would be interesting to know the primary reasons why those polled disapprove of Blago.
Is it ethics/corruption? That seems unlikely. Illinoisians have been tolerating heavy duty corruption in government for decades.
The cost of government? Illinois’ income tax is among the lower ones nationally. And despite wealthy Democratic liberals’ nonstop efforts to raise taxes on the middle class, Blago has held firm on no higher income taxes so far.
Personality? He’s the same Blago as when he started running. Nothing new there?
The one-party state problem? It’s getting harder and harder to blame the disappearing Illinois Republicans for anything…who’s to blame? And as time goes by, it gets harder to blame past Republican activities in govt. But our Blago is
a sitting duck, especially as he clearly plans to stay on for a third term.
Blago and the Dems could soon be wishing for a
charismatic, but not too charismatic, Republican
to take a little of the pressure off.
Not going to happen. Dems wanted all the power.
They got it.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 10:07 am:
On the “City Desk” Recall video:
It was made clear that the recall amendment was supported by a majority of senators. It was also made clear that Senate Majority Leader Halvorson played politics with it. When the Rules Committee was requested to avoid the Recall bill from being hijacked, it was denied by Halvorson. By voting “no”, she killed it.
This conflicts with her earlier claim that she would have voted to support the recall if it was put before the committee. She knew that by voting “no” earlier, she killed it earlier, so that she could make that claim.
So lets be clear here! Debbie Halvorson was instrumental in killing the Recall bill although she claims she supported it. Now that she is running for Congress, she wants voters to believe that she is on their side on this issue. 70% as a matter of fact, support the recall. Halvorson’s political deed must be exposed in this election.
Debbie is a nice lady, but she isn’t being straight on this issue, is she?
- DeepFriedOnAStick - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 10:21 am:
Roeser’s column on a possibly impending Blago indictment is particularly thoughtful and well researched for, well, a Roeser column.
I think his point that Blago likely would insist on staying in office following an indictment is an excellent one. I’d fully expect Blago to act as delusional about an indictment as he acts about everything else that’s not quite right in his world — pretend reality is something other than what it is.
Still, I think it’s nuts for Roeser to suggest that Blago could possibly be on trial by this fall. If Blago were indicted this afternoon, I’d bet it’s at least a year - probably longer - before trial begins.
- Anonymous - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 10:25 am:
To keep a balance between the need to have experienced officials/legislators and keeping them from becoming too entrenched, I would favor term limits that are fairly long — say, 8 years (2 terms) for governor, 12 years (three terms) for other constitutionals and 20 years for GA members. Or perhaps legislative term limits should be on legislative leadership positions rather than the seat itself — two terms for Speaker or Senate President, three for committee chairs.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 10:25 am:
I agree fully about a trial date this fall. No way.
- Cal Skinner - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 11:28 am:
Ah, term limits for leaders.
Haven’t I heard that somewhere before.
- wordslinger - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 11:40 am:
Recall and Term Limits are seductive, but I think they promise more then they can deliver. The idea seems to be that we’ve been tricked into supporting the people that we have for these offices and need to take them back. I suspect we get the government we deserve.
I am wary of exercises in direct democracy, as were Jay, Hamilton and Madison. If you put the Bill of Rights to a direct vote, I fear Amendments I, II, IV, V, VI, VII and VIII would be in serious jeopardy at some time or another.
I prefer a Con-Con where sufficient time and thought can go into the consideration of a broad range of topics. The current Constitution’s provisions for Con-Con seem to me to be a reasonable blending of the republican and democratic (both lower-case) traditions. If recall and term-limits make the cut there, I’m comfortable that it was because of reason and not just passion.
- Legal Eagle - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 12:20 pm:
Ghost nailed it- term limits are a very bad idea. Staff would end up running the place. There is great turnover now. Blago indictment? Yes. Conviction during his term? No way. G. is a about a year away from indictment; trial would be probably two years thereafter.
- cermak_rd - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 12:33 pm:
It’s been my experience that people who want term limits want to get rid of legislators from other districts who they oppose (think conservatives and Ted Kennedy or liberals and Strom Thurmond ).
- RMW Stanford - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 12:53 pm:
I have never been a support of term limits, if their is a bad politician in office, one that has run out ideas, ect, then the voters should do their job and vote him out of office not really on term limits to remove him from office for them. The citizens of Illinois have the power to make government better here, they just have to choose to exercise it.
- fed up - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 1:29 pm:
Halvorson will block any attempt to recall Blago or pass ethics reform. She is a huge part of the problem in springfield acting under the direction of her master E. Jones.
- Trapped In The Metro East - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 3:47 pm:
I think the Con-Con vote is the MOST important vote this fall…. assuming Obama wins it doesn’t matter a whit–he will carry Illinois. I’m assuming McCain has written the state off already….
- Snidely Whiplash - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 4:39 pm:
Corrections due to careless typing;
Moe, Larry and Curley have been screwing up this state for over 5 years now. Larry and Curley right now are teaming up to give some abuse back to Moe. The scarey thing is that a con-con would be controlled by either Larry and Curley, or Larry and Moe, should Larry decide its more in his interests to be with Moe on this one. Scarier still, Moe, Larry and Curley work together to really stick it to the rest of us. Of course, if Curley gets indicted, Shemp may enter into the scene. What monkeyshines would happen then is anybody’s guess …
- PPHS - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 4:52 pm:
I would gladly swap Blago for GHR, any day, any time, any where.
- southern illinoisan - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 5:32 pm:
I disagree that Term Limits are a bad idea. The argument that we need the most experienced leaders to represent us is silly. Government does require a certain amount of expertise and general knowledge. But let’s be honest, the current structure in Illinois is broken. Look at Emil Jones, he is the posterboy for term limits. And you say, if they are bad vote them out. We can’t! Jones has a strangle hold on his district and won’t be voted out. Am I saying that his constituents are bad people? No. But they are making a poor choice by re-electing him. There is no way Jones would have the power he has today if it were not for his seniority. Same goes for Mike Madigan. There could be a reasonable structure to stagger term limits so that we would have experienced legislators in office. Just not the same ones for over 25 years. Power corrupts and that is exactly what has happened in Illinois today.
Recall is an emotionally charged subject. Yes, it is aimed at Blagojevich because he is such a poor governor. Is it necessary? No. But so what? If the voters want it. Then give it to them. If politicians are so scared of getting fired, then they should do a better job. I guarantee you if Rod was the CEO of any major corporation he would have been canned a long time ago. Give the voters this option and hopefully it won’t be necessary to use it.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 9:59 pm:
So IL-
I guess we’d have Emil Jones and his wife rotating terms in the state senate, just like former AL governor George Wallace and his wife Lurleen rotating terms under the state’s one-term limit law (which was incidentally repealed). Where there is a powerful political machine, they can run the real deal as a candidate, or a figurehead who is a surrogate for the real deal. It would be extremely hard to legislate against this.
- steve schnorf - Monday, Apr 21, 08 @ 10:08 pm:
As to recalling those that we re-elect and then blaming then for it, remember the great Pogo.
- anon - Tuesday, Apr 22, 08 @ 12:14 pm:
Rich or anyone with an answer….is Henry Paulson really considered a Guv candidate in 2010?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Apr 22, 08 @ 12:15 pm:
Who?
- anon - Tuesday, Apr 22, 08 @ 12:39 pm:
The Sec of Treasury…I saw his name floated around in the Chicago Daily Observer yesterday…
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Apr 22, 08 @ 12:43 pm:
Yeah, that’ll work.
- anon - Tuesday, Apr 22, 08 @ 12:43 pm:
From this article: Will Governor Be Indicted Eventually?
- anon - Tuesday, Apr 22, 08 @ 12:46 pm:
haha okay just checking.