Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » Question of the day
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Question of the day

Wednesday, Aug 9, 2023 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Last night…


* From Gov. Pritzker’s press conference today

Q: Last night, voters in Ohio rejected a measure which would have made it more difficult for them to amend the constitution. You sent a tweet that it is a massive win for democracy. However, Ohio makes it a lot easier than Illinois does for citizens [scrambled audio about passing constitutional questions]. Would you support a change to the Illinois Constitution to make it more easy for Illinois citizens to make similar changes like they currently do in Ohio [simple majority]?

Pritzker: What went on in Ohio, leading up to the vote last night was solely an effort to stop pro-choice forces from passing an amendment to their constitution, that’s all it was about. That’s all it was about. It was masquerading as we need to make it harder or, you know, raise the bar for putting an amendment into our Constitution. But it only grew out of the fact that they had already put together the petitions to get it on the ballot, to change the constitution to make Ohio a pro-choice state. So entirely, that’s what that was about. And I’m proud to have supported the Vote No, that’s the side that supported choice. And it was a resounding victory, as you saw in 2022 in so many places around the country, a resounding victory for those of us who are pro-choice and for the people who live in those states who just want to preserve their reproductive freedom. So I was pleased with the outcome.

You’re asking about whether Illinois should change. We have a 60 percent threshold here. We’ve had amendments pass and fail in Illinois. And I think I wouldn’t change what we’re doing here in Illinois.

But I’m just saying what you saw last night was really about choice. That’s all it was. And you also heard Republicans who are backing that, saying last night that they intend to bring their referendum back, to make it hard for people to change the constitution. Maybe they will. But by that time, Ohio would have put into its constitution a restoration of a woman’s right to choose.

Please pardon all transcription errors.

The Illinois Constitution allows the General Assembly, with three-fifth majorities, to put constitutional amendments on the ballot. Those questions must be approved “by either three-fifths of those voting on the question or a majority of those voting in the election.”

* The Question: Should Illinois lower its constitutional amendment threshold to simple majorities of those who vote on the question? Make sure to explain your answer. We’re not going to tackle the legislative aspect of this today. So please just stick to the question at hand. Thanks.

       

21 Comments
  1. - fs - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:29 pm:

    No. It should be tougher to amend the Constitution than it is to pass a regular bill. While it might sound good when you have a majority….What feeds you today might bite you tomorrow. Protecting certain rights against potential tyranny from a small majority is kind of the whole point of enshrining rights in the Constitution.


  2. - Jibba - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:30 pm:

    I’m not a fan of citizen led constitutional amendments, so 60% is fine with me. I just don’t like changing the rules to create an outcome.


  3. - Google Is Your Friend - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:31 pm:

    No. I believe simple majorities are too swingy based on turnout, feelings of voters at a particular time, etc. Just look at how bad and confusing governance is in California, which admittedly has quite lax standards for getting initiatives and amendments on the ballot. If it was a simple majority for something like a statute (which we don’t have statewide in Illinois), I would favor that, but we only have the amendment process. Putting something in the constitution should have a certain seriousness and wider breadth of support from the public, in my view. Could we argue over 55%, 60%, 65%, or some other number? Certainly, but I believe it should be more than a simple majority for constitutional amendments.


  4. - Perrid - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:34 pm:

    I don’t like the legislature changing the rules last minute to keep specific changes in place, but in general it seems to me that it SHOULD be more difficult to change the Constitution. A society should be pretty sure it wants to alter the bedrock of the civilization they’ve made (you might say that’s dramatic, fine, but a constitution is the highest law in the land, the core principles everyone’s agreed to, however you want to describe it).


  5. - Benjamin - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:36 pm:

    Yes. I’m not really sure what the complexities of the current rule bring to the table. The fact that other states seem to get by fine with a simple majority–Ohio allows for majority rule with amendments, and still most proposed amendments have failed–suggests that the Illinois rules are trying to solve a problem that doesn’t need solving.


  6. - Demos - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:38 pm:

    Keep the threshold, but make it easier for citizens to get a question on the ballot in the first place.


  7. - jim - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:41 pm:

    of course not. 50 percent is for legislation, a change in the state’s government document that will last probably forever must have broad-based pubic support, unless you want to vote on the same amendment every year.


  8. - Joe Schmoe - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:46 pm:

    I don’t agree with many of Pritzker’s opinions, but I do agree that the Constitution is not something that should be changed on a whim.


  9. - Proud Papa Bear - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:52 pm:

    No. The State Constitution is far too important to amend with a simple majority. An amendment needs to be something that’s overwhelmingly supported, not just something that’s slightly more popular today.


  10. - West Sider - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:58 pm:

    The goal in Ohio was to make citizen driven constitutional reform practicality impossible. There were additional requirements regarding petition signatures from every county in order to make the ballot, as well. Illinois is doing just fine.


  11. - John Lopez - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:58 pm:

    No. The current outright threshold of 60% voting in favor on the question is appropriate, and the backdoor approval of 50%+1 of all ballots cast protects democracy.

    We saw the backdoor approval come into play with Amendment 1 last fall, where it failed to have 60% to win approval outright, but the backdoor approval ensured passage.


  12. - DuPage Saint - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 1:59 pm:

    no leave it as it is. especially because we have option of voting on a new constitutional convention at least every 20 years


  13. - ArchPundit - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 2:01 pm:

    I think 50%+1 is fine for state Constitutional Amendments. First, they have to be proposed and pass both houses with 3/5 so the fear of amendment cycling is way overblown here. Second, we already have a simple majority for those voting in the election. The reality is that with the drop off to the amendments it’s often 3/5 as a practical number. I just don’t see the need for the super majority from the voting population when you already have it for the legislature. If we aren’t going to do Con-Cons, we should make amendments easier to pass even if it’s just a little easier.


  14. - Lurker - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 2:03 pm:

    Make it 95% so the GOP has some say in something in this State. /s


  15. - ArchPundit - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 2:03 pm:

    —-Just look at how bad and confusing governance is in California,

    But those don’t require 3/5 of the legislature to approve it first. We already have a fairly solid way to avoid amendment cycling. I’m generally not a fan of initiatives for laws, but when we move to amendments, there’s just no evidence that we would be in danger of cycling.


  16. - ChicagoBars - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 2:04 pm:

    Nope, and definitely not before redistricting is delegated to a independent commission (which it probably never will be). 50% + 1 to amend constitution and hyper partisan redistricting would just be a disaster.


  17. - cermak_rd - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 2:37 pm:

    I would not change it. The consitution is a fundamental document whose change, depending on what it is, can make people have to move out of the state to keep their rights. It ought to require pretty solid, broad support for any change.


  18. - lake county democrat - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 3:13 pm:

    No, and I HATE gerrymandering and what the Illinois SCOTUS did to kill the referrendum (or more precisely, how they refused to rule on all grounds of the challenge, saving a rubber bullet and creating an ambiguity meant - yes meant - to discourage future attempts). The Ohio GOP doesn’t care about 50% or 60% - if they did, they’d have made the effective date after the abortion referrendum. In fact, if the abortion referrendum passes, they would likely fight the same 60% initiative as now it would stand in their way.


  19. - The Captain - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 3:20 pm:

    I don’t have a strong opinion on what the threshold should be (50%, 60%, 66%, etc.), but I don’t care for having two different metrics for deciding if the measure passed or not. I’d rather have a single measurement, rather than the two, and I favor the simpler version of those voting on the question, rather than the more complicated version of those voting in the election, that also includes adding undervotes into the calculation.


  20. - Dunwich Snorer - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 3:38 pm:

    No. If it’s too easy to change the constitution, you end up with something like the Texas constitution, which now runs over some 200 pages.


  21. - anon2 - Wednesday, Aug 9, 23 @ 5:11 pm:

    The legislature won’t reform itself, so keepiing the high barrier to amending the constitution protects the status quo. Gerrymandering won’t be outlawed. Neither will the revolving door between the legislature and lobbying. Neither will electing judges in the county of Cook.


Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.


* Reader comments closed for the holiday weekend
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Update to today’s edition (Updated)
* Uber’s Local Partnership = Stress-Free Travel For Paratransit Riders
* IEA releases member poll, with eye on major pension upgrade
* Finally, a CTU fiscal proposal that doesn't involve magic beans
* Go read the rest
* As lawsuits and strike threats fly, Pritzker calls on Stellantis to live up to its commitments on Belvidere plant
* Today's quotable: George McCaskey
* Buried nugget and magic beans
* Open thread
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition and some campaign stuff
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Live coverage
* Selected press releases (Live updates)
* 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
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
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