Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » Report: Workers’ Rights Amendment has more than enough votes to pass
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      Mobile Version     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Report: Workers’ Rights Amendment has more than enough votes to pass

Monday, Nov 14, 2022 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Tweet…


Spreadsheet with the data is here.

…Adding… Election results from the Vote Yes for Workers’ Rights folks are here.

       

38 Comments »
  1. - Hot Taeks - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:05 am:

    I’m confused, when do amendments have to get only 50%+1 v. 60% +1 in order to pass?


  2. - Trap - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:09 am:

    Illinoisans hold on to your ever shrinking wallets.


  3. - Aaron B - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:11 am:

    @Hot Taeks

    Amendments need to meet either threshold to pass. If amendment 1 had gotten 60% + 1 yes votes it would have passed. It is looking like it will get passed based on the 50% + 1 of all votes cast though.


  4. - GC - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:13 am:

    “A proposed amendment shall become effective as the amendment provides if approved by either (i) three-fifths of those voting on the question *OR* (ii) a majority of those voting in the election.” (emphasis and numerals added)

    There’s some nuance here, but I think the simplest way to view it (in my view) is that not casting a vote on the amendment is equivalent to voting “No” on the amendment by default.


  5. - Techie - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:14 am:

    @Trap

    Isn’t it funny that those opposed to the amendment simultaneously said that the amendment wouldn’t grant unions any powers they don’t already have while also falsely claiming it will cost us $2,100+ a year in property taxes?

    Scare tactics are a thing.


  6. - Arsenal - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:15 am:

    ==Illinoisans hold on to your ever shrinking wallets.==

    Someone lied to you and is laughing at you. All this does is guarantee every worker- including you- the right to collectively bargain. You could even use that right to ensure yourself a raise. But it’s going to have no effect on your taxes, because public sector workers *Already have* a right to collectively bargain.


  7. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:16 am:

    - Trap -

    LOL, it won.

    Get over it. The argument lost, so voters decided they wanted it.

    “Get over it”… as was said after the Fair Tax failed…

    Either voting matters, or it “doesn’t”

    Voters spoke.


  8. - JustAThought - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:20 am:

    Why are they not counting the 300,000 ballots cast where the vote on the amendment was left blank? Those are still ballots cast, even if they don’t include a vote on this initiative. It should be take up against 1.8 million, not 1.5 million.


  9. - Cool Papa Bell - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:21 am:

    I voted no.

    Time to move on but not to move out.


  10. - Hannibal Lecter - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:21 am:

    JustAThought:

    They did. Look for carefully at the numbers included on the tweet.


  11. - Rich Miller - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:22 am:

    ===Why are they not counting the 300,000 ballots cast where the vote on the amendment was left blank?===

    He did. Try reading.


  12. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:22 am:

    === It should be take up against 1.8 million, not 1.5 million.===

    Explain the parameters to passage first.

    Thanks.


  13. - Anonymusings - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:26 am:

    ==Why are they not counting the 300,000 ballots cast where the vote on the amendment was left blank?

    They are. There were 3,9895,089 total votes cast, including 1.8 million no/not cast. It received 2.17 million yes votes which is 54.5%, as shown in the lower left of the graphic above.


  14. - Grandson of Man - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:29 am:

    Read that the remaining ballots to count (mail-in) are overwhelmingly from pro-union areas like Chicago. According to one article, it’s not being called yet because of the nearly-impossible chance that the mail-in’s will mostly/all be blank or no on the question votes.

    WGN called it. Ironic.

    https://wgntv.com/news/workers-wages-on-the-ballot-heres-what-happened/amp/


  15. - CT Guy - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:30 am:

    While voting I ran into a few people who had trouble looking for this item to Vote in favor of it.

    Even though it was specifically shaded differently to highlight it, it made them think it was just part of the instructions and they looked past it.


  16. - Norseman - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:35 am:

    It looks like IPI’s property tax bogeyman campaign failed. [Crying crocodile tears.]

    Now to see what the next issue is that they will contort to become a “property tax” raiser.


  17. - Juice - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:41 am:

    Kind of amazing that lack of drop-off in votes cast compared to most other amendments in the past.

    I think this is the first time that an amendment has surpassed the 50% of ballots cast without also getting the 60% threshold on votes on the question.

    Kudos to the organizers.


  18. - Vader - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:41 am:

    This amendment passing is another stunning failure for the far right. If not for the extreme blitz of ads and emails from IPI and the like, this probably would have failed. I know many people who voted in favor only because IPI was so strongly against it.


  19. - AlfondoGonz - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 10:56 am:

    Do we think this will have any effect on the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office, which was infamously barred from unionizing some 30 years ago?


  20. - Honeybear - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 11:01 am:

    This is such a great thing. I am so so happy for my Afscme siblings who work for counties and municipalities. Now they can’t have their right to collectively bargain taken away by any unit of government. This almost happened in Madison County last year.
    I just love my state. Illinois for life.


  21. - Etown - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 11:10 am:

    Getting 2 chances to pass a thing like this seems shady especially since it fell well short of 60% threshold


  22. - Demoralized - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 11:17 am:

    Heads must be exploding at the IPI.


  23. - H-W - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 11:19 am:

    @Trap

    I suppose it never occurred to you that allowing employees to negotiate with employers can be a win-win. It appears as if you believe employers have no obligations to their employees, even though employees produce profits.


  24. - Rich Miller - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 11:21 am:

    ===Getting 2 chances to pass a thing like this seems shady===

    It’s been in the constitution since the constitution was drafted. Some of us argued strongly for a constitutional convention. Only a tiny fraction agreed with that viewpoint. So, the whole thing easily survived a popular referendum.


  25. - CH - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 11:28 am:

    So many news outlets were so focused on the 60% passing requirement, and completely failed or downplayed the other way to pass an amendment. And for all those crying shady/foul play… these methods of passing amendments has been in the state constitution since it was drafted. There’s two ways to pass an amendment because the number of people voting vs. the number of people who vote on the specific question is never the same. You are not required to fill out your entire ballot or vote on every position. And many people don’t. Which is where “50% of ALL BALLOTS CAST” comes into play.


  26. - CH - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 11:29 am:

    *edit to comment above* “failed to mention or downplayed the other way to pass an amendment”


  27. - Grandson of Man - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 11:29 am:

    It’s not about unions, it’s about workers’ rights. /s

    The messaging was excellent in the ads. There were zero TV ads against this CA but plenty of favorable ads (shown many times). The “no” campaign was lousy from that perspective, the opposite of the anti-Fair Tax campaign.


  28. - cermak_rd - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 11:33 am:

    Juice,
    I wonder if the machines made the drop off less likely? I voted early (so by machine) and the amendment was offered early in the voting process (either just before or just after the statewides). So less likely to be skipped due to voting fatigue.


  29. - Anyone Remember - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 11:43 am:

    GOP Sangamon County voted for Amendment 1. Hmmm … possibly they worked for a Right to Work apostle?


  30. - Steve - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 12:03 pm:

    This isn’t the end of the this subject. Given the supremacy clause in the U.S. Constitution : is this fully consistent with the language in the Wagner Act, Taft-Hartley, and the contracts clause of the U.S. Constitution? Given the new spirit of the recent U.S. Supreme Court?


  31. - Cornfield Cowboy - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 12:22 pm:

    Isn’t con-con always on the ballot every 10 years, was just on 20’s ballot???


  32. - JoanP - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 12:38 pm:

    = Do we think this will have any effect on the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office =

    Good question. The reason that assistant state’s attorneys were not permitted to form a union is that the Illinois Supreme Court ruled that they were managerial employees as defined by the Illinois Pubic Labor Relations Act, and therefore were not subject to the collective-bargaining provisions of the Act. (There are a slew of exclusions under the Act.)

    The WRA simply uses the word “employees”, so I expect the issue of whether ASAs are “employees” or “management” is likely to crop again.

    (I would note that this argument has also prevented assistant appellate defenders and assistant public defenders in counties other than Cook from unionizing. (”other than Cook” because at the time of the ruling they had a union already and nobody was about to move to de-certify it.)


  33. - Kayak - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 12:53 pm:

    I voted yes and I am happy that it passed. Maybe we can get fireworks enshrined next time.


  34. - Norseman - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 1:07 pm:

    === Maybe we can get fireworks enshrined next time. ===

    IPI’s response to this latest irresponsible requirement. Such an amendment would raise property taxes on the beleaguered taxpayers. How you say? By forcing local government to hire more firefighters to put out fires caused by the increased use of fireworks. More police would be required to respond to the deluge of noise complaints. IPI say vote no on fireworks, the property tax raiser.


  35. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 1:13 pm:

    === Maybe we can get fireworks enshrined next time.===

    Fireworks are illegal in Illinois.

    You get those petitions signed, lemme know how that works out for you.

    Meanwhile, meanwhile the question about a Con-Con …and even IPI folks should have wanted one


  36. - cermak_rd - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 2:10 pm:

    Kayak, I don’t think life in Berwyn would change whether they were illegal or not. The peace officers don’t bother to enforce unless there is a specific noise complaint and then they show up with lights and sirens blaring to give fair warning to the miscreants to skedaddle. Fortunately the community seems to have some handle on how to use them so there haven’t been (to my knowledge) any fires yet. I think the plan of shoot fireworks first, then drink, is working.


  37. - Thomas Paine - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 4:26 pm:

    I think it was a mistake for the GOP candiTes to be so closely aligned to the opposition to amendment one.


  38. - Norseman - Monday, Nov 14, 22 @ 5:03 pm:

    Elon, it was a joke.


TrackBack URI

This is not Facebook, so uncivil comments, profanity of any kind, rumors and anonymous commenters will not be tolerated and will likely result in banishment.



* Reader comments closed for the Thanksgiving break
* You may get a chance to meet these three new House Speakers next year
* Afternoon roundup
* Question of the day
* It's just a union questionnaire... so far
* Oscar is 10 today
* It's time for the US Attorney's office to step back in
* Welch optimistic, but won't definitively say an assault weapons ban will be approved in January
* The elephant in the room
* Open thread
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Live coverage
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller