Gov. Rod Blagojevich has named former Deputy Governor Sheila Nix to the Chicago Transit Authority Board.
The 46-year-old Oak Park resident left the Blagojevich administration in June, saying she wanted to spend more time with her family.
Nix served as deputy governor from December 2006 to June 2008. […]
The governor appoints three of the seven Chicago Transit Board members. The appointees are subject to the approval of Mayor Daley and the State Senate.
The governor said recently he plans to shake up the CTA board.
Nix, who left her $135,000-a-year post with the administration in June, will replace Nicholas Zagotta, who was appointed by Blagojevich in 2004 to complete a term that ended in 2007. The board consists of seven members, with three appointed by the governor, and four by the mayor.
* 1:18 pm - Mayor Daley will abandon plan to extend TIF district’s life…
Facing apparent opposition from Gov. Rod Blagojevich, the Daley administration is abandoning efforts to extend the legal life of the massive Central Loop tax increment financing district, which covers a wide swath of Chicago’s commercial heart.
The decision means the district automatically will sunset on Dec. 31 — and it means that the more than $111 million it has been throwing off each year for development projects instead will return to the regular property tax pool. […]
As recently as late spring, the city was talking to legislators in Springfield about passing a bill to give the district another 12 years of life, an action that potentially could have helped the mayor raise cash needed to host the 2016 Olympics.
But, says Mr. Arnold, “the environment in Springfield is not conducive. So we made a decision to let the Central Loop TIF expire.”
Translation: Getting needed support from Mr. Blagojevich would have come with a political price tag, which Mr. Daley wasn’t willing to pay.
I’ll bet.
* 1:36 pm - Ameren customers need to brace themselves…
The Illinois Commerce Commission today approved a rate hike for most customers of the Ameren Illinois utilities by a 5-0 vote.
ICC officials were still working on the details of exactly how much the increase would be, but it is believed to be similar to a staff proposal that called for an overall $163.6 million delivery rate increase.
* AARP response…
“For older adults and working families already struggling with the soaring costs of basic necessities – this new rate increase adds on to their piling financial concerns,” said Bob Gallo, AARP Illinois State Director. “Ameren’s CEO makes $2 million a year. That’s not a company that is struggling and certainly they do not need to increase their rates on the backs of older residents and families.” […]
“AARP is very disappointed in the ICC’s decision to put the interests of Ameren above the needs of consumers,” added Gallo. “Once more, the ICC has ignored the people of Illinois.”
Sporting an Obama or McCain button? Driving a car with one of the campaigns’ bumper stickers? You might need to be careful on University of Illinois campuses.
The university system’s ethics office sent a notice to all employees, including faculty members, telling them that they could not wear political buttons on campus or feature bumper stickers on cars parked in campus lots unless the messages on those buttons and stickers were strictly nonpartisan. In addition, professors were told that they could not attend political rallies on campuses if those rallies express support for a candidate or political party. […]
Nelson and other professors are circulating a draft statement outlining their objections to the ethics rules. “Although these rules are not at present being enforced, the AAUP deplores their chilling effect on speech, their interference with the educational process, and their implicit castigation of normal practice during political campaigns,” the draft says. […]
Lillich, the system spokesman, said he knew of no controversies over inappropriate political activity that might have prompted the rules.
[Police Chief Steve Settingsgaard] said even though it was no secret Bush was in Peoria for a political stop on behalf of Schock, it is still his department’s duty to protect the president.
[At-large Councilman Gary Sandberg] then cited a portion of city ordinance defining “prohibited political activity” as anything “preparing for, organizing or participating in any political meeting,” rally, demonstration or other political event.
“If we do not abide by our ordinance and bill the person who this fundraiser was for, we are violating the ordinance in that we allowed compensated employees to partake in a political event,” Sandberg said. […]
But Sandberg said since the federal government is being reimbursed by the Schock campaign for the use of Air Force One on its trip to Peoria, then the city should be reimbursed as well.
Schock’s campaign manager last week said the federal government will be reimbursed for the use of Air Force One according to a governmental formula that has been in place since the 1980s. The manager also said that no campaign has ever had to pay for local police protection requested by the Secret Service whenever the president visits.
* The question: Should political candidates reimburse local governments for expenses in situations like this? Explain fully, please.
* It’s intensely amusing to me to watch this debate play out over John McCain’s TV ad that claims Barack Obama was born of the Chicago Machine…
ANNCR: Barack Obama. Born of the corrupt Chicago political machine.
BARACK OBAMA: In terms of my toughness, look, first of all, I come from Chicago.
ANNCR: His economic adviser, William Daley. Lobbyist. Mayor’s brother.
His money man, Tony Rezko. Client. Patron. Convicted Felon.
His “political godfather.” Emil Jones. Under ethical cloud.
His governor, Rod Blagojevich. A legacy of federal and state investigations.
With friends like that, Obama is not ready to lead.
* This argument goes way back in Illinois. Does endorsement by and work with Machine leaders mean a candidate can’t be taken seriously as a reformer? As “Objective Dem” noted in comments yesterday…
This issue reminds me of when then Lt. Gov. Paul Simon obtained Mayor Daley’s endorsement for Governor. People thought it was awful and he must not be a true reformer. So they voted for Dan Walker, the true “reformer”
I figure if Paul Simon can work with Richard J. Daley in 1972, it doesn’t bother me that Barack is working with Richard M. Daley now.
In the 1972 primary, to their surprise and regret, meddling Republicans provided the margin by which Walker scored his big victory over Mayor Richard J. Daley. The United States Supreme Court had legalized crossover voting and countless Republicans, wanting to reduce the margin by which they were certain that Paul Simon, Daley’s candidate, would be nominated, went into the Democratic primary.
Always ambitious, the young Simon twice sought party endorsement for the U. S. Senate but settled instead, in 1968, for slating as Lieutenant Governor and won his race though Republican Richard Ogilvie took the governorship. From that often inert post Simon energetically functioned as an ombudsman and helped defuse racial tensions in downstate Cairo. Derailed by a narrow loss in the 1972 primary for governor when the resolutely independent Simon could not fend off criticism for accepting Mayor Richard J. Daley’s blessing that year, he rebounded to win election to the U. S. House of Representatives from southern Illinois in 1974. A decade later, Simon beat his party’s endorsed candidate in the Senate primary and then upset three-term Republican incumbent Charles Percy, a national figure, in the Reagan landslide.
Explaining Simon’s success as a reformer in a machine-politics state and as an unabashed liberal in a mostly conservative era draws attention to his principled defense of controversial stands, his “can-do” pragmatism, his moral earnestness leavened with gentle humor, and his generosity to opponents. Simon is, in a phrase he often uses to describe others, “a class act,” able to rally such bitter foes as Chicago Alderman Edward Vrdolyak and Mayor Harold Washington when he needed both to unseat Charles Percy in 1984. Although he has kind words here for many, including Senator Jesse Helms, columnist Robert Novak, and the first (though not the second) Mayor Daley, Simon can be quite critical and is willing to name names, as he famously did in a 1964 Harper’s article, “The Illinois Legislature: A Study in Corruption.” Simon regrets allowing himself to believe that Illinois Secretary of State Paul Powell had left his bribe-taking days behind, observes that Richard J. Daley only dealt with those who had something to offer him, records U. S. Rep. William Lipinski’s double-cross after endorsing Simon in the 1984 primary, deplores Democratic Senate leader Tom Daschle’s position– changing deference to Robert Byrd over the Balanced Budget Amendment, and laments that Judiciary Committee chair Orrin Hatch is dominated by his staff.
* There are more recent examples, of course. Judy Baar Topinka was one of the most honest, decent politicians I’ve ever met, yet she was made to look like a horrid George Ryan clone in the 2006 governor’s race. Guilt by association.
* Obama did not start out as a Machine guy. He ran for US Senate against Dan Hynes, the organization’s guy, and Blair Hull, the governor’s guy.
The real question is whether Obama has sold his soul over being endorsed by the organization, and endorsing some Machine candidates. To many people, as with Paul Simon in 1972 and JBT in 2006, that’s a deal-breaker. But it completely ignores Illinois political realities. Everybody has to swim in the same tank with the sharks here. The object is to avoid being eaten alive while maintaining their own principles. That ain’t easy. Simon did it. Topinka, I believe, did it. Both paid a heavy price, however.
Whether Obama maintained his principles should be the subject of the debate, not this extraneous stuff like who endorsed whom. It tells us nothing. Is there any doubt whatsoever that Paul Simon would’ve been a much better governor than Dan Walker?
* As you already know, the Senate approved the House-passed funds sweep bill and a supplemental appropriations bill yesterday…
Illinois lawmakers voted to restore hundreds of millions of dollars to the state budget Tuesday, aiming to save more than 300 state jobs and keep open state parks and historic sites.
Most of the $231 million the Senate approved would come from “surpluses” in special state funds. The money would prevent the layoffs of human services caseworkers and the closure of places associated with Abraham Lincoln on the eve of the 16th president’s 200th birthday.
Almost immediately, though, the governor’s office signaled that the Senate action may not save all of the parks, sites and jobs. Blagojevich must act on the budget restorations for them to take effect.
“We still have to look at particulars of the bill and the language before deciding what to do,” said Blagojevich spokesman Lucio Guerrero in an e-mailed statement. “We will spend what we can afford to spend in the areas of the greatest need.”
Guerrero cited a report issued by the administration Tuesday that state revenues may fall $200 million short of projections by June 30, 2009, the end of the fiscal year. The budget bill approved by the Senate contained $220 million in spending.
* Here’s one of the reasons the Senate ended up going with the House’s original proposal…
The list of budget restorations almost got bigger, with money added for cooperative extension programs, community colleges, mental health programs and grants to local health departments. Beaubien and Hannig, who were negotiating the budget bill, both said an agreement was tentatively reached for a more extensive restoration when Senate Democrats abruptly pulled the plug.
[Sen. Donne Trotter], representing Senate Democrats in negotiations, said the budget bill started ballooning.
* Everybody apparently wanted to get their pet projects into the bill, including Gov. Blagojevich…
[Blagojevich spokesman Lucio Guerrero] said he knew nothing of Trotter’s claim that Blagojevich asked lawmakers Tuesday to add $45 million to the bill for expanded health care.
OK. Stick with that one.
* As I said above, nobody knows what, exactly the governor will do…
It was not clear Tuesday evening whether the governor will go along with the legislative effort to block the cuts, which, in addition to threatening parks and historic sites, have forced dozens of not-for-profit social service agencies to cut back on services to disabled people and others dealing with mental health problems and drug addiction.
Blagojevich spokesman Brian Williamsen suggested there may be technical problems with the legislation, which could scuttle the legislative bailout.
“Of course we’ll be taking a look at the particulars,” Williamsen said.
Trotter predicted the governor would sign the bill but said there are no assurances he would embrace the funding priorities.
* The lopsided Senate vote in favor of the two bills does send a strong message, however…
“It was overwhelmingly passed by the Senate and the house so hopefully the governor will take that as an indication that this is how the people of the state of Illinois want their taxes spent.” [said State Rep. Careen Gordon, D-Morris]
State Sen. Gary Dahl, R-Granville, wishes the Senate could have had more say in how the money was restored.
“In the end, I supported this move as a one-time way to reverse the governor’s harmful cuts to our parks and frontline services,” Dahl said in a press release. “But there were better ways to do it; unfortunately the Senate leadership refused to let us vote on them. We must keep pressure on Senate President Emil Jones and his leadership team to come up with more responsible ways to fund our state’s important priorities in the future.”
Tax hike? What?
* And the fight to make sure that state parks stay open continues…
Morris resident Rachel Pfaff, who spearheaded the online petition that gathered more than 31,000 signatures, received the news Tuesday. She said she still plans to hold the Save the Parks rally Oct. 4 at Gebhard Woods in Morris. People are asked to meet at 9 a.m. at William G. Stratton Park in Morris to walk the I&M Canal path to Gebhard Woods.
* Remember last week when I told you that Republican Marty Ozinga’s campaign was whining about the Southland Chamber’s choice of moderators for this Thursday’s candidate debate?
It would be hard to imagine a presidential debate moderated by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann. Similarly, we cannot imagine a congressional debate moderated by Kristen McQueary.
Well, Ozinga has now pulled out of that debate. Here’s his press release…
“Both of our campaigns [including Green Party candidate Jason Wallace] have notified the Southland Chamber that we will not be participating in their candidate forum Thursday morning. Although we regret having to miss an opportunity to come before voters and discuss the issues important to Illinois’ working families, it became clear that Debbie Halvorson used her family ties to slant in her favor what was pitched as a fair forum by a purportedly non-partisan organization.
“Senator Halvorson’s husband was the Chairman of this chamber in 2004, and still serves on the board. The forum was to be held at her alma matter, where the senator herself serves on the board. The chamber employee who was responsible for the planning of the forum is an avowed partisan who worked for Democratic U.S. Senator Dick Durbin from 1996-2004. Unlike all other candidate forums to which we’ve been invited, a member of the general public wishing to be present at the forum was required to register with the chamber first. The chamber initially tried to exclude Green Party candidate Jason Wallace - again, something that no other sponsoring organization has attempted to do thus far in this race. Lastly, the chamber chose an opinion columnist as the moderator, rather than an objective news reporter.
“With all these ‘coincidences’ piled on top of one another, we had become convinced that this forum was intended as nothing more than a pep rally for Senator Halvorson, masquerading as a fair and informative candidate forum. We are disappointed in Senator Halvorson for trying to pull the wool over voters’ eyes. This is what Illinois voters are tired of - the same old brand of Blagojevich-style politics coming from Rod Blagojevich’s favorite Springfield politician. This is isn’t change - it’s just more of the same. We are confident that voters will reject Senator Halvorson’s shameful tactics, but we look forward to participating in several already-scheduled candidate forums with her as the campaign progresses.” [Emphasis added.]
OK, let’s parse, shall we?
The Southland Chamber is probably the most influential and important organization in the entire region. Its board of directors and executive committee have prominent members in both major political parties, community leaders and quite a few of the more powerful local business owners. Its membership list is huge.
The Southland Chamber vehemently denies - and has told Ozinga’s campaign - that Halvorson’s husband played any role whatsoever in setting up this debate.
The “Chamber employee who was responsible for the planning of the forum” identified in the press release was not the same person who actually did all the work. So, that’s a bogus claim as well.
As I wrote before, Kristen McQueary is a solid local columnist and the campaign’s attack on her was way over the top. The SouthtownStar is arguably the region’s most important newspaper.
Governor’s State University is an often-used spot for these sorts of functions. I was a participant in a set of legislative debates there several years ago. GSU is to the Southland what SIU is to southern Illinois.
So, let’s total up the Ozinga disses: Southland Chamber; Kristen McQueary; SouthtownStar; GSU.
That’s pretty much everybody who is anybody in that region.
Heckuva job, Ozinga.
And, even if he’s absolutely right about everything (and he’s wrong about everything), if Ozinga can’t deal with a supposedly “hostile” environment on his home turf, how’s he gonna cope with the truly hostile environment of a Democratic controlled US House?
*** UPDATE 1 *** Statement from Halvorson’s campaign manager, Brian Doory…
“Whether it is failing to make his views known or even honor his commitments, Martin Ozinga continues to show contempt for local voters by selfishly making up the rules as he goes along.”
“Marty Ozinga is a member of The Southland Chamber of Commerce, and yet he still decided that it wasn’t worth his time to debate his opponents on issues of concern to his fellow chamber members.”
“This disappointing action speaks volumes about Marty Ozinga and his campaign. If he cannot even stand up and address business issues among his fellow chamber members, how can he expect to communicate with regular voters on the issues important to them?”
“Marty is afraid of being held accountable. He is afraid voters will discover he contributed $23,000 to the governor. He is scared voters will learn he supports the EJ&E deal. And most of all he is afraid of being held accountable for not being on the side of voters.”
“Even though Martin Ozinga is on the wrong side of the tracks on the EJ&E Acquisition, and so many other issues important to local voters, it’s deeply troubling that Martin Ozinga lacks the courage to look people in the eye and tell them he’s not on their side.”
*** UPDATE 2 *** No surprise, but the forum is now canceled. From the Southland Chamber…
The Chicago Southland Chamber of Commerce is deeply disappointed to announce that this morning, Marty Ozinga, the Republican nominee in Illinois’ 11th Congressional District, withdrew from the Southland Chamber’s 11th Congressional District Candidate Forum. The forum, which was scheduled to take place this Thursday, September 25, 2008 at Governors State University at 8:00 a.m. and would have been moderated by Kristen McQueary, columnist for the Southtown Star newspaper, has been canceled.
The Green Party candidate Jason Wallace, Democratic candidate Debbie Halvorson and Republican candidate Marty Ozinga were invited to participate in the candidate forum. All three candidates responded and accepted the invitation without reservation or condition.
Late on evening of September 18, the Southland Chamber was notified via email of the possible withdrawal of Marty Ozinga, citing “doubts about the fairness of this forum.” The Ozinga Campaign went on to say that the moderator, “Ms. McQueary is not an objective news reporter.” As a condition of participation, the Ozinga campaign requested the removal of Ms. McQueary or the addition of a second moderator. The Ozinga Campaign also questioned the venue, Governors State University, stating “the forum will be held at Halvorson’s alma matter, where she serves as a Director on their Board.”
The Chamber stands by its strong commitment to host a fair, impartial and informative forum for its members and voters of the 11th Congressional District. Furthermore, the Chamber stands by its choice of Kristen McQueary to moderate a fair and impartial forum with questions provided by the Chamber.
The Chamber is deeply disappointed and saddened to learn of Mr. Ozinga’s decision not to participate.
*** UPDATE 3 *** With a hat tip to a commenter, this is what Ozinga’s press release claims…
The forum was to be held at her alma matter, where the senator herself serves on the board.
“As the SouthtownStar’s politics and government columnist, Kristen McQueary has hosted and moderated many candidate forums over the years. We are confident the Southland Chamber forum would have been conducted with the consummate professionalism McQueary has shown every time she¹s been asked to serve as a host.
“In the Southland Chamber format, it was clear McQueary would have been reading questions prepared by Chamber members. The SouthtownStar is pleased to have been associated with the Chamber’s effort to educate voters in the 11th Congressional District by providing them an opportunity to see the three candidates respond to issues of the day.”
* As you already know, the Senate passed a broad ethics bill yesterday that was identical to the governor’s amendatory veto language in another ethics bill.
There’s been little actual analysis of this particular bill, other than the sharp criticisms about it being a product of Gov. Blagojevich’s mind so, therefore, it can’t be much good.
There are actually some decent ideas in this proposal. But some of it is just goofy.
We are supposed to have a citizens assembly in Illinois, not a full-time professional legislature. This bill begins the process of trying to define who can and cannot be a member of the General Assembly. That’s a foolhardy step. Here’s the language…
No member of the General Assembly, during the term for which he has been elected or appointed, may be employed by the State, a municipality, or unit of local government. This prohibition does not extend to employment as an elected official, firefighter, police officer, school counselor, teacher, or university instructor.
As one Senator pointed out earlier this week, the bill’s fine print allows a legislator to teach at a university, but not at a community college. Another noted that a legislator couldn’t be a part-time high school coach. Still others have complained that a doctor or nurse at Cook County Hospital would have to give up their jobs.
This is what happens when you start drawing lines. Where do you stop? Should farmers be excluded because they receive massive government subsidies and special tax breaks? What about business owners located in TIF districts? What about state government contractors, most of whom are now banned from contributing to the governor’s campaign fund?
Getting rid of double-dippers sounds great, but there are so many exceptions in the bill that it’s sure to be challenge as a violation of the equal protection clause.
I fully agree with that.
* I have no problem at all with extending that contractor campaign contribution ban to state parties. As Senate President Emil Jones rightly notes, it will be just too easy to get around the gubernatorial ban - which also applies to declared candidates - by washing the cash through a state party. Since Attorney General Lisa Madigan is gearing up to run for governor, that seems like a reasonable worry. Same goes for the Republican Party.
(I)t makes no sense to ban political parties and individual legislators from taking contributions from people with state contracts because parties and legislators don’t enter into those contracts. If [Blagojevich] wants to limit parties and lawmakers, he should try to do it with contribution and transfer limits. This approach is a waste of time.
Contribution and transfer limits may or may not be a good idea. The transfer limits might quell the legislative leaders’ stranglehold on campaign money. But the contribution limits have done little to no good in DC politics. I just don’t think this contractor thing is a “waste of time.” Good for the goose, good for the gander.
*** UPDATE *** Here’s a clarification from Canary…
Unlike HB 824, SB 780 would prohibit campaign donations to political
committees that have no connection to the officer who lets the contract. Because that kind of ban treads heavily on contractors’ constitutional rights to free speech and association, the courts likely would rule it to be unconstitutional – but only after a lengthy and expensive court battle.
Example - Under the governor’s proposal, the owner of a company contracting to supply the Office of Treasurer more than $50,000 in computers, copiers, legal services or anything else would be prohibited from making a contribution to any political party, every state legislator, every candidate for the General Assembly, every statewide constitutional officer and every candidate for those offices.
It’s very likely a court would rule that an infringement on free speech.
Because campaign contributions are a protected activity under the 1st Amendment, legislation to regulate contributions must be narrowly tailored to address a compelling government interest. That’s what the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled. A wide-ranging BAN like that would not meet the test of a narrowly tailored restriction on campaign contributions. However, a LIMITATION ON THE AMOUNT of a contribution by individuals - whether an executive with a firm contracting with the
state or not — to ALL political committees would pass any constitutional test.
To sum it up — Because it quite likely would be ruled unconstitutional, it isn’t worth the effort to try to expand the ban on state contractor (the corporation, executives, owners, etc.) campaign contributions. It would be better to spend time on something we know to be constitutional — banning contributions by ALL orporations (whether doing business with the state or not) and by all unions and associations. At the same time, Illinois should limit the amount that any individual person can contribute in an election cycle and limit how much a political committee can transfer to other committees.
Some pieces of this bill are fine. The affirmative pay raise provision [requiring lawmakers to vote for legislative pay raises instead of allowing them to get the raise by not voting against them] is a fine idea. But it should be stripped out and run as a separate bill, not embedded in all this other crap.
I resent the idea that suddenly Blagojevich thinks he gets to set the agenda on what real ethics reform is with this slap-shot proposal. We’ve been working the pay-to-play ban for three years, and how he want to ram this through in 24 hours.
He’s the guv. He can do what he wants. And he does. lol
The senate voted to approve it today, but all the conversation I heard on the floor was how the bill wasn’t really ready, it sure needed more work. It looks to me as thought [the members of the senate] decided to vote for the bill to give themselves the ability to tell their constituents that they voted for ethics reform. It looks like a very cynical vote to me.
Faced with soaring demolition and environmental cleanup costs and a recalcitrant property owner, the Daley administration has broken off talks aimed at moving the $1.1 billion Olympic Village to the campus of Michael Reese Hospital.
Mayor Daley wanted to roll the dice that a depressed real estate market would come roaring back — by borrowing $85 million to finance the hospital purchase and sell it to a private developer.
We hope the four Republicans extracted something special from Stroger’s financial wizards during private huddles with them last week, because this vote could cost them their careers. Lots of potential GOP candidates covet their seats: They see voters fed up with this board—and the cozier these four get with Stroger and Finance Chair John Daley, the greater the opportunity to bounce them out of their baby-blue leather boardroom chairs.
But a proposal under consideration by Chicago Public Schools officials to allow students from the neighborhood to enroll in the new Skinner building set to open next fall has Lora-Stepan and other parents fearing the school’s high standards will be lost. Since at least 2002, the school has scored above the district and state averages on state tests, according to Illinois State Assessment Test (ISAT) program.
“I think every person that goes to a classical school must earn their spot,” Lora-Stepan said. “Why change a program that is excelling?”
“This is not about a lot of fans and a lot of drinking. We don’t want to see any incident outside, because if there is, that whole area will be voted dry tomorrow. Those citizens will get together and say, ‘I’m gonna vote every precinct dry. I’ll even vote Cubs Field dry,” Daley said.
“The biggest change is I now stand in line,” Edgar quipped. “It really hit home for me — and any governor — when you get in the back seat of your car, and it doesn’t move.”
• 4:02 pm- Take a look SB1103. That’s the Approp the House passed a couple weeks ago to keep state parks open and restore cuts to other programs. The bill was just popped out of Senate Rules. Word is the Senate will go along with the earlier House plan. SB790 is the fund sweeps bill passed by the House.
Bottom line: Weeks of huffing, two days of threats and talks and it’s status quo ante?
• 4:10 pm- Speaker Madigan just confirmed the above scenario. The House will be at ease while waiting for the Senate to follow thru.
MJM also said he didn’t know whether or for how long the House might return for “veto session”. They’ve dealt with the vetoes made to date.
…Adding… Some interesting twists and turns during today’s negotiations. More on that tomorrow.
* 4:31 pm - The Senate is now taking up the package.
* 5:16 pm - Fund sweep bill passed 40-15.
* 5:2 pm - Appropriations bill passed 55-0. These are concurrence votes so they don’t require House action. Next move: Blagojevich.
* 2:34 pm - It’s still early in the fiscal year, and things like this can even themselves out over time (I’ve seen it before), and $200 million isn’t that gigantic in the big budget picture, but this is from an Illinois Dept. of Revenue press release…
National Economy Weighs Heavily on Illinois Revenue Collections
Year to Date Calculations equate to $200 million shortfall for Fiscal Year 2009
SPRINGFIELD – As a poor national economy weighs heavily on state revenues across the country, Illinois is experiencing a triple threat of lower-than-projected revenue for the first two months of the fiscal year. Sluggish income tax collections, along with weak sales tax on an annual basis, would result in as much as $200 million short of the state’s already conservative projections.
The Illinois Department of Revenue (IDOR) reports that revenue from individual income tax is growing at a rate just over 1.2 percent, which is below OMB’s projected 3.3 percent growth anticipated in the FY09 budget. Income tax makes up the largest portion of Illinois’ revenue, and thus has the most influence on a balanced budget. A high statewide unemployment rate at 7.3 percent and stagnant wages suggest this trend could only get worse.
Sales tax revenue for the same period of FY09 was .5 percentage points below the level projected for the FY09 budget, the result of a decline in consumer spending due to rising unemployment, declining home equity, and stagnant wages. IDOR suggests that the ongoing financial market crisis will likely exacerbate already weak credit conditions, meaning further constraining consumer spending. Higher food prices mean people will spend less on other goods.
Finally, the corporate income tax makes the department wary. Since about 10 percent of the corporate income tax comes from the financial services sector, IDOR is concerned that September’s volatile stock market will further hurt FY09 revenue.
For other revenue sources, IDOR also noted that revenue from the real estate transfer tax, cigarette tax, and motor fuel tax is down.
* 2:39 pm - More from the SJ-R, which was apparently slipped the numbers in advance…
Gov. Rod Blagojevich said the budget lawmakers sent him this summer was more than $2 billion out of whack, and he cut $1.4 billion of that out in deep slashing that lawmakers are now trying to reverse. This revenue shortfall could only exacerbate the problem.
Revenue spokesman Mike Klemens said it’s iffy to make projections about the full budget year this early, but the department is basing its estimates on the most stable sources of revenue.
“Just watch out,” he cautions about the rest of the year.
The agency expects the situation could get worse, with motor fuel and real estate transfer tax money also down, financial markets struggling and consumer facing growing spending pressures.
Interestingly enough, the House and Senate are working on crafting a supplemental approp bill and a funds transfer proposal while the Dept. of Revenue makes an unusual early pronouncement of gloom.
* 11:38 am - The Senate is now taking up SB 780, which contains the governor’s language in his earlier amendatory veto of the ethics bill. Listen or watch here.
* 11:46 am - Sen. Ira Silverstein (D-Chicago) is pointing out that there were promises made yesterday in Executive Committee that the bill would be worked on first. The sponsor, Sen. Jim DeLeo, admitted yesterday that the legislation still needed plenty of tweaks.
* 11:49 am - Sen. Don Harmon is pointing out to the sponsor that he is now in the process of negotiating the bill with the governor’s office, so there’s no need for a rush. He also rightly pointed to the bill’s effective date, June of next year, as yet another reason to hold off passage. Harmon claimed moving this bill today would “undermind our negotiating position with the House.”
Harmon asked DeLeo to take the bill out of the record. DeLeo said that this bill is just the “beginning” of the process.
* 11:52 am - Harmon: “I am not accustomed to opposing ethics bills, but I’m opposing this one” at this time. Urges “Present” vote.
* 11:54 am - Sen. Matt Murphy (R) - Wants a “Yes” vote in order to move the process forward.
* 11:59 am - Sen. Susan Garrett (D) says she will support the bill.
* 12:12 pm - Dem Congressman Bill Foster’s first TV ad of the fall season…
* 12:23 pm - Hey, Rickey, I’m listening. lol And I already am in Hell. It’s called covering the Illinois GA.
*** 12:40 pm *** The governor’s ethics bill passed the Senate 50-1-5. Next move: House. If the House refuses to move the bill, then could another special session be in sight? Stay tuned.
* 2:04 pm - Statement from Gov. Rod Blagojevich on the Senate’s passage of the autism mandated coverage bill…
“I would like to commend the Illinois Senate for making the right choice this morning and voting in favor of families with autistic children. By approving the amendment to House Bill 2070, the members of the Senate have once again stepped up and shown that they, like myself, want to take action to make sure these families have the opportunity to receive the care their children need. Parents with autistic children cannot afford to wait on the officials who are elected to serve them to decide whether or not their children deserve to have this vital health care coverage. That is why I strongly urge the leadership of the Illinois House of Representatives to finally take the same positive action on this legislation, now.”
* 2:27 pm - More on the Senate’s ethics vote from the SJ-R…
Senators who pushed the idea said lawmakers need to capitalize on the momentum of yesterday’s ethics vote and go further to clean up Illinois government’s ugly reputation.
“Why not go the next step? Don’t vote this down just because Blagojevich thought of it,” said Sen. Rickey Hendon, D-Chicago.
But critics – including lawmakers who had played a big role in developing HB824 – said this measure wasn’t ready to be voted on.
Sen. Don Harmon, D-Oak Park, predicted it would go nowhere in the House in its current form, and said lawmakers would be wiser to negotiate an agreement instead of sending different bills between the two chambers.
* 3:05 pm - From the governor’s statement on the Senate-approved ethics bill…
“I urge the House to take advantage of this historic
opportunity and pass this legislation now before the
election. The voters and the taxpayers should expect
nothing less. It is my hope that the members of the
House act now and pass these comprehensive and
sweeping reforms.”
Election Day will be something of an afterthought for tens of millions of Americans — they’ll be voting well ahead of time.
In fact, six weeks out from Election Day, some voters in Kentucky, South Carolina and Virginia already are done. | Video
Nationwide, about a third of the electorate is expected to vote early this year, thanks to expanded early voting provisions and fewer restrictions on absentee voting, researchers project. In all, more than 30 states allow any registered voter to cast an early ballot, some in person and others by mail. […]
It’s a trend that is fundamentally changing the home stretch of American political campaigns. October surprises? They’d better come in September if campaigns want to influence every vote. Get out the vote operations? They’re already under way in some states.
“You can’t hold your big guns right to the end,” said Paul Gronke, director of the Early Voting Information Center at Reed College in Oregon. “When up to 25 or 30 percent of the electorate has already cast a ballot, it might not be wise to wait until the last minute” to make a game-changing play for votes.
Even the presidential debate series, which begins Friday and runs through Oct. 15, will come after many have voted. However, experts say the earliest voters tend to be party loyalists who wouldn’t be swayed by debate performances anyway.
* The question: Should Illinois keep early voting or drop it? Explain.
* We have two relatively recent polls from Democrat Debbie Halvorson and Republican Martin Ozinga in the 11th Congressional District contest.
* The Halvorson poll is slightly older. Taken September 14-16 of 500 likely voters, Halvorson’s poll shows her leading 43-35.
* Ozinga’s poll is more recent - Sept. 17-18 vs 14-16 - but the survey sample size is smaller - 400 likely voters vs. 500 likelies. It’s impossible to discern how each campaign is defining “likely” voters in their screens, so that could be one reason for the discrepancy. Ozinga claims Halvorson’s lead is just two points - 38-36.
* Judy Baar Topinka actually won the 11th District two years ago 50.3 to 49.7 by almost exactly a thousand votes over Rod Blagojevich. Considering she lost the state by about ten points, that’s pretty good for the GOPs. The following will give you an idea of how closely divided the district is. From the Halvorson pollster’s analysis…
The generic ballot in this district is virtually even (38% Democrat / 40% Republican). Those numbers are better than you’d expect in a Republican-held district
* From the Ozinga polling memo…
The Presidential ballot underscores the competitive nature of this district.
The Presidential ballot is a statistical tie (44% McCain/43% Obama) in an open seat district in Obama’s home state.
* And here’s some back and forth on TV messaging. From Halvorson…
Halvorson’s television buy is doing a good job of expanding her personal popularity, but she needs the resources to sustain it. She currently receives a 38% favorable / 20% unfavorable rating – an increase of 14 points in her favorable rating since May. While Halvorson’s ratio of favorables to unfavorables is nearly 2:1, Ozinga’s unfavorable rating is nearly as high as his favorable rating (28% favorable / 22% unfavorable).
* Ozinga…
Despite significant spending on the part of the Halvorson campaign, Debbie Halvorson holds a tenuous two point lead on the ballot (36% Ozinga/38% Halvorson). This represents a net 15 point improvement for Ozinga since our April survey (26% Ozinga/43% Halvorson) and a net five point improvement since August (33% Ozinga/40% Halvorson).
* Halvorson’s slightly earlier poll showed no movement…
Halvorson has maintained her vote share since May (43% Halvorson / 32% Ozinga). The small amount of movement in Ozinga’s vote is within the poll’s margin of error, in spite of his strong spending on television ads (more than $400,000) and his extensive direct mail
program, which has included more than ten pieces and has been heavily negative.
* Ozinga’s poll did show movement. Lots of it…
Since April, Halvorson has dropped five points (43% to 38%) and Ozinga has climbed ten (26% to 36%). In addition, John McCain is holding his own in IL-11, despite Obama’s favorite son status in Illinois.
* Halvorson’s poll included the Green Party candidate…
Halvorson leads Ozinga by a 43% to 35% margin, with Green Party candidate Jason Wallace at 6%.
* There was no reference to Wallace in the Ozinga press release, but Gov. Blagojevich rated a mention…
Halvorson’s negative attacks on Marty Ozinga have not improved her ballot numbers and have instead reinforced her image as a typical politician who is inexorably tied to the incredibly unpopular Rod Blagojevich (15% fav/72% unfav).
* Halvorson poll methodology…
Anzalone Liszt Research conducted n=500 live telephone interviews with likely 2008 general election voters in Illinois CD-11. Interviews were conducted between September 14-16, 2008. Respondents were selected at random with interviews apportioned geographically based on expected voter turnout. Expected margin of sampling error is ±4.4% with a 95% confidence level.
* Ozinga poll methodology…
Public Opinion Strategies conducted a telephone survey among 400 likely voters in Illinois’ 11th Congressional District. The survey was conducted September 17-18, 2008 and has a margin of error of +4.9% in 95 out of 100 cases.
*** UPDATE 3 *** Our very own Kevin Fanning caught up with Treasurer Giannoulias, an Obama protege, and asked him about the McCain ad flap…
“One of the things that keep people out of politics is sleaze and mud-slinging. I experienced this when I ran, with people trying to make my family look dirty. I’m biased because I’m a friend of Barack Obama, but I thought the ad was ridiculous. It never mentioned what Daley did for Obama, I’m pretty sure it just said something like Bill Daley, brother of Mayor Daley. I actually spoke to Bill Daley this morning, and he told me that John McCain actually helped him become Commerce Secretary. The ad also mentioned something about Barack being responsible for Governor Blagojevich’s failure to lead. Everyone in Illinois knows that is ludicrous. “
In response to a recent ad from the McCain For President campaign, Mayor Richard Daley said Tuesday that “people are desperate.” […]
At an unrelated event on Tuesday, Daley said, “If people throw mud, it comes back in their face.”
The mayor suggested that perhaps there should be more talk of the Keating Five investigation in the early ’90s — which included Sen. John McCain. It was, in Daley’s words, “… the biggest example of greed … as so many lost their homes.”
*** UPDATE 1 *** Bill Daley takes another whack at McCain via CNN…
Daley accused McCain of hypocrisy for attacking Obama on lobbyists: “When I was at [telecom company] SBC, I had to hire [McCain campaign manager] Rick Davis to see John McCain,” he said. “He wouldn’t see anyone unless you hired one of his lobbyist friends. Telecom was his and Rick Davis was his telecom lobbyist. That was in ‘02, ‘03, ‘04.”
***************************
* Bill Daley has been drawn into the Obama-McCain presidential contest, and it appears that McCain goofed in his TV ad, whether deliberately or not. I posted the ad yesterday, but here it is again…
Daley’s son, William Daley Jr., is a former lobbyist for Fannie Mae. Daley Jr. is now with Morgan Stanley, and he is registered with Cook County and the State of Illinois as a lobbyist for the firm.
“The whole thing is an outright lie,” said Daley, who is furious with a new anti-Barack Obama ad released by the John McCain campaign that focuses on Chicago’s shady politics and its political machine. […]
Quoth Daley: McCain “cuts an ad making it look like I’m a thief and a gangster like Rezko” — that would be Tony Rezko, the former campaign fund-raiser for Obama and Gov. Blagojevich who was convicted on federal charges in June.
Added Daley: “The ad claims I’m a lobbyist. I’ve never been a lobbyist! My son, Bill, was a lobbyist five years ago. I don’t know what they’re talking about,” Daley told Sneed.
“A year and a half ago, he [McCain] called me the greatest U.S. commerce secretary ever, at a conference being held at Deer Valley,” Daley said. “I certainly thought he was being extreme, but he even voted for my confirmation as U.S. commerce secretary when he was chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee!” […]
“This past March, I even went over to visit McCain at his Hilton Hotel fund-raiser — and walked away with an autographed picture!” […]
Daley, who is identified as Obama’s economic adviser, is furious with being associated with Rezko, described in the ad as a convicted felon — and Obama’s patron and money man. Furthermore, he’s included in a list that describes Blagojevich as having a legacy of federal and state investigations.
But the suggestion that Obama is a politician in the classic Chicago mold is way off base. He wasn’t a machine candidate in his bid for the Illinois Senate in 1996, and he won the 2004 nomination for the U.S. Senate seat in a heavily contested primary without Daley’s support. Though he now enjoys the support of establishment Democrats, Obama is a man governed by his conscience, not by his associations.
Obama wasn’t “born of the corrupt Chicago political machine,” and that makes his rise all the more remarkable. But the McCain camp is betting voters know less about Obama than they think they know about Chicago, which can usually be summed up in three words: Dead people vote.
Chicago, regrettably, deserves that rap. Obama does not.
The Chicago Machine concept is one that Republicans in Illinois had long urged the McCain campaign to tell the nation, noting the dysfunction of Democratic-controlled Illinois government. Yet it also is a premise that McCain draws overly broadly in the ad and one that risks confusing voters unfamiliar with the day-to-day players in Chicago politics.
The Obama campaign had anticipated the Chicago Machine card would be played in the campaign and the candidate, himself, noted earlier this year that he felt he had done well in rising politically “without being entangled in some of the traditional problems of Chicago politics.” […]
Obama has worked to distance himself from Blagojevich and notably invited three potential challengers to the governor’s possible 2010 re-election bid to speak at the recent Democratic National Convention. But Obama also has said little about the Blagojevich-led Democratic debacle in Springfield that has largely kept state government in a stalemate.
Obama was not spawned by a Chicago “machine” ward organization. His Hyde Park-Kenwood community is one of the few “independent” outposts in the city. In his early political career, as a state senator, Obama steered clear of local entanglements. He ran and lost a U.S. House race without Mayor Daley’s backing.
The remnants of the Daley machine — a confederation of political families — the best known named Madigan, Lipinski and Hynes — did not back Obama in his U.S. Senate Democratic primary bid, though he did have as his top consultant David Axelrod, Mayor Daley’s key adviser.
As a U.S. senator, Obama rarely used his popularity to force change in the local culture of corruption.
This John McCain ad is mostly accurate and largely pointless.
The one serious distortion is in claiming that Barack Obama was “born” of the Chicago machine. Obama was actually an independent outsider who challenged the party establishment, both in running for the Illinois Senate and in unsuccessfully opposing U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush. Obama did use hardball tactics on occasion but was not embraced by the party apparatus until later in his career.
Three of the four names included here do no damage to the senator from Illinois and serve mainly to reinforce the impression that Obama swims with sharks. Bill Daley may be a lobbyist and the brother of Mayor Richard Daley, but he is a former commerce secretary with a solid reputation. State Sen. Emil Jones gave Obama a boost early in his career, in part by assigning him to shepherd ethics legislation through the legislature. Obama has no connection to allegations that Jones has helped some of his own family members on the state payroll. And while Blagojevich is Obama’s governor — indeed, he is the governor of Oprah Winfrey and Mike Ditka and every other Illinois resident — he and Obama are not close politically.
Rezko is the exception, a major albatross for Obama. He was a key fundraiser for Obama and sold him a patch of land adjacent to Obama’s home — a deal that the Democratic nominee has called a “boneheaded mistake.” But the Chicago businessman, who was convicted of corruption charges in June, was not under investigation at the time of these dealings.
While the ad is a stretch, McCain is trying to tie Obama to the specter of ethically challenged big-city machine politics, undoubtedly hoping the word “Chicago” will turn off suburban and rural voters.
* Despite all the parallel universe pronouncements emanating from the governor’s office, Statehouse reporters didn’t even come close to buying the official spin about the Senate’s override yesterday of Blagojevich’s ethics amendatory veto.
In a 55-0 defeat for Gov. Blagojevich, the Senate Monday rejected his rewrite of an ethics package and reinstituted an earlier ban on political contributions from big state contractors who have been the governor’s financial lifeblood.
“This shows he has zero credibility on the issue,” said Comptroller Dan Hynes, who was one of the guiding forces behind the new restrictions.
In an overwhelming rebuke of scandal-tarred Gov. Rod Blagojevich, Illinois lawmakers on Monday approved the state’s first ban on campaign donations from supporters seeking lucrative state contracts.
The vote is a stinging rebuke to Blagojevich, who had vetoed the ethics bill while offering what he said was a superior alternative. Critics said that move was actually designed to kill the reform and keep in place an unrestricted political system that Blagojevich has used to raise millions of campaign dollars.
* Meanwhile, as I told you yesterday, the Senate Executive Committee advanced the governor’s AV proposal as an amendment…
The Senate Executive Committee advanced a bill including his ethics ideas to the Senate floor Monday evening, possibly setting up a vote today.
Blagojevich applauded the Senate for advancing his ideas while playing down the significance of the ethics override vote.
“The General Assembly didn’t really move the ball forward. They only followed my lead and are just now catching up with something that I did two months ago,” Blagojevich said in a statement.
If that’s voted on today, we could be in session a while longer.
[Cindi Canary, director of the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform] testified against the legislation, saying reform groups continue to meet with the governor’s office to refine the ideas, but that they’re not ready to become law. Reformers prefer an across-the-board limit on contributions each election, as is the case for federal races and in most states.
That bill’s sponsor, Sen. James DeLeo, D-Chicago, said if the Legislature wants ethics reform, it should go all out.
“If you do business in government, if you make money off the taxpayers, don’t contribute,” DeLeo said.
Cindi Canary… said it felt odd, but she had to oppose the [governor’s] new measure during a Senate committee Monday evening. She said the more expansive ethics legislation is “not ready for prime time, yet.”
She said she supports the concept but believes the governor’s proposal isn’t the right vehicle for enacting contribution limits on legislators. Banning state contractors from donating to elected officials who have no control over state contracts could invite a legal challenge based on the First Amendment that protects free speech, she said. She also questioned the fallout of prohibiting active state legislators from also working in some public sector jobs but not others. And she said the one aspect that would be ready to go if it were proposed as a stand-alone measure is the portion that would clarify the system of approving legislative pay raises.
I don’t have the energy right now to go into my thoughts on what the Governor will likely do next. But I can’t help but think that, regardless of what his next steps may be, that he would have been a lot better off just signing this bill in the first place.
The Senate also voted to override an amendatory veto on another measure requiring stricter disclosure for campaign committees. Blagojevich had changed that bill to ban campaign contributions from any government employee, state or local. That measure, without the governor’s change, goes to the House.
Sen. Donne Trotter, a Chicago Democrat and budget negotiator, said the Senate Democrats found $42 million of that $221 million that they would like to spend in a different way than approved by the House. That includes $37 million the House included to reimburse mass transit districts for the free rides granted to seniors and people with disabilities enacted earlier this year. The Senate Democrats would take that out and shift the funding, for instance, to increase the amount of money for college grants through the Monetary Award Program. The House also would restore funding for constitutional officers at 100 percent of the original funding level, while the Senate Democrats would restore them at 75 percent.
Republicans are involved in the budget negotiations. According to Patty Schuh, spokeswoman for Senate Minority Leader Frank Watson, the GOP Caucus prioritizes restoring funding for state parks, historic sites and human services. But members argue that it doesn’t make sense to restore funding to the parks and historic sites and then sweep money from the special fund dedicated to the Department of Natural Resources.
— Rejected the governor’s third effort to require insurance coverage of autism treatment, even though he called a special session Monday morning specifically on that issue.
— Voted 55-0 to allow another ethics bill to proceed without the governor’s proposed ban on political donations by state and local government employees, saying it went too far.
“The governor’s veto basically had no rational point of view why he vetoed it,” said Sen. Terry Link, D-Waukegan, in pushing for the override.
— By the same vote, overrode Blagojevich vetoes that would have required some hospitals to provide more discounts to uninsured patients, and that would have forced schools to develop policies to deal with students with severe food allergies.
Blagojevich said in a statement he was “extremely disappointed” by the Senate votes, calling the food allergy vote a “regrettable action.”
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column kicks off an election-season series about the upcoming vote on an Illinois constitutional convention…
There is a defect in the Illinois Constitution that is so fundamentally fatal that it practically begs voters to approve a state constitutional convention this November.
You cannot correct this flaw by throwing every incumbent out of office. The prospect of legislating a solution is nil.
The problem is that the Illinois Constitution has allowed three people to accumulate infinitely more power than the framers ever dreamt possible.
Those three people are the House speaker, the Senate president and the governor.
The problem was exacerbated in 1980, when voters were misled into approving a constitutional amendment that slashed the size of the General Assembly by a third. Before then, there were three House members in each Senate district, and both major parties were assured of holding at least one of those seats.
Republicans in Chicago, who currently have almost no voice in any governmental body, all had at least one GOP state representative. The same was true for Democrats in DuPage. But the voters decided that fewer legislators was a better idea.
The independent thinkers were mostly wiped out in 1982, the first election after the Cutback Amendment took effect. A few months later, a brilliant Democratic politician named Michael Madigan was elected House speaker. Madigan was eventually nicknamed “The Velvet Hammer” for the way he consolidated power over the now much more easily governable House.
Ten years later, a new district map allowed the Senate Republicans to seize control from the Democrats and their leader decided to wage war on Madigan’s House. The Senate used the war to justify passing a new set of rules that stripped rank-and-file members of numerous basic rights. Those powers now were completely in the hands of Senate President Pate Philip.
The House Republicans essentially adopted the Senate GOP’s rules when they took control two years later. Madigan took back the House in 1996 and kept the Republican rules in place.
No bill or amendment can advance without the approval of the speaker or the president.
Members are simply powerless.
Throughout time, the legislative party leaders also learned how to control who would be elected to the General Assembly. Once elected, they are beholden to their leaders for literally everything.
Something else happened during this time period. All state budgets were negotiated behind closed doors by the House speaker, the Senate president and the governor. The multibillion-dollar budgets were then presented “as is” to members, who would dutifully pass it so they could leave town for the summer. Then other issues were added to the budget negotiations, and pretty soon all big issues were being decided by the three men.
And then Rod Blagojevich was elected governor.
Blagojevich despised Madigan while he was in the Illinois House during the early 1990s, and he set out to use his new power to fight Madigan at every turn.
Blagojevich has sought to expand the power of his office ever since, and he has accelerated the pace since being re-elected in 2006. He has called umpteen special sessions merely as a tactic to publicly humiliate Madigan. He has abused his amendatory veto power to add radical proposals to legislation in order to put Madigan on the spot. He also has recently abused his power to issue executive orders in an attempt to cut off campaign contributions to the Democratic Party of Illinois, which Madigan controls.
All along, Senate President Emil Jones has used his own rock-solid control of the Senate to back Blagojevich’s every move. And Madigan has retaliated by stifling almost all legislative progress this year.
The power the three men have carved out for their respective offices likely will remain after they’re gone. That’s the thing about expansions of power - it’s a genie that’s almost impossible to put back into the bottle.
Every 20 years, Illinois voters are given the right to call for a constitutional convention. Delegates then are elected and voters have the final say about the endproduct. It’s a reasonable system,and we simply can’t wait another 20 years for change.
We essentially have an elected dictatorship of three men. Our only hope of breaking that stranglehold is a constitutional convention that can force democratic reforms on the process.
So please, vote “yes” this November on the constitutional convention.
I’ll propose some reform ideas in my next column.
* Scott Reeder of the Small Newspaper Group had the same idea for his column this week. Here’s an excerpt, but go read the whole thing…
The drafters of the state constitution wisely mandated that every 20 years the voters must vote on whether to call a constitutional convention. It’s the ultimate way voters can hold state government accountable.
I’ve heard some political insiders say the “crazies” would take over a constitutional convention and talk about guns, abortion and gays — and neglect everything else.
Gee, sometimes, democracy can be inconvenient.
Sometimes if you want your issue debated, you have to listen to someone else’s. Besides, a constitutional convention requires that any changes to the constitution be approved by voters.
Voters aren’t going to accept a constitution that drives jobs out the state through unreasonable business taxes or leaves retired folks without the pensions they earned.
Those asking you to vote against a constitutional convention would have you believe that a group of politicians in Springfield are more likely to bring reform – than you, the voters.
A review of the current system will clearly point out the basic flaws in the governing process in Springfield. Here are a few of the very obvious examples:
1) There is too much power vested in the four leaders, and individual General Assembly members have no say over the issues before them. This was caused by the ability to amass huge war chests by the leaders, which is then doled out to the willing members in exchange for compliance with the leaders requests. Term limits should apply to all leadership positions.
2) The governor’s office should not be able to rewrite legislation, change priorities clearly sent to the governor’s office by the legislature or misuse public dollars by punishing individual legislators or segments of the General Assembly.
There are other issues that can be reviewed and modified by the delegates elected to the 2010 Constitutional Convention, and I believe that a better system of governance can be established in Illinois.
Now is the time to act. The system is truly broken and it needs a total bipartisan review and overhaul.
The piece, which also appeared in the Tribune, was written by Al Ronan, former House member and bigtime Statehouse lobbyist.
* Illinois Republicans Worry About Future of Bailout Bill
BIGGERT: We’ll have to put liquidity back into the system so it’s going to affect us all. Not just our homes and jobs, but our retirement, savings, any type of investment that we have, even student loans and our pensions.
That’s according to today’s Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper. which says that while the Collinsville Republican is “not exactly a fresh face,” he has still “emerged this session as one of the GOP’s go-to-guys on the party’s all-consuming issue of energy and gasoline prices.”
Here’s the rest from Roll Call: “Shimkus can give a partisan whack with the best of them, but he has also earned the respect of some Democrats, who see him as someone whom they can work with next year
I mean, if you’re going to have a bailout, let’s take the time to debate this thing. You know, let’s not push it down our throats after one or two days.
The agency announced Monday it has begun test-driving a digital advertising display board, mounted on the curb side of the No. 124 bus, along the Navy Pier route. The board is part of a 10-year deal the CTA inked with Titan Outdoor this year to sell digital advertising on its bus and rail systems.
