Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Paranoia will destroy ya

Posted in:

Illinois

Legislation lowering Illinois’ voting age to 17 for primary elections has passed the Democrat-controlled state legislature and is on its way to Gov. Pat Quinn (D) for his signature.

Many believe the law is designed to create a permanent Democrat majority in Illinois using young Hispanic voters.

Illinois is home to two million Latinos and 773,000 Hispanic eligible voters. More than a third of that are between the ages of 18 and 29.

Um, OK.

I’m not gonna take a position on this particular bill either way because I really don’t care one way or the other. But the measure only applies to primary voters. If somebody is 17 at the time of the primary, but will be 18 at the time of the general election, then that person can vote in the primary. I really don’t see how this is some sort of “brown people conspiracy.” C’mon, man.

And secondly, even if it is a vast and nefarious conspiracy, why not start competing for those votes instead of complaining? Didn’t most of the voting restrictions that the GOP tried to put in place in other states before last year’s presidential election backfire? How about just getting out there with a winning message?

…Adding… Apparently, lots of Republicans are participating in this alleged conspiracy…

The Senate recently approved the bill 43-9. The House approved the bill 95-22 in April.

posted by Rich Miller
Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:15 am

Comments

The stock photo of clean-cut, friendly, young Latinos was an interesting pick in contrast to the fear mongering.

Implied message: Their coming for our Abercrombie & Fitch modeling jobs?

Comment by Jimmy CrackCorn Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:31 am
–Many believe the law is designed to create a permanent Democrat majority in Illinois using young Hispanic voters.–

If it were from any other source, I would assume it’s a gag. It doesn’t make any sense

Cue Chopper Jim, Hispanic 17 year olds pouring into Soldier Field….

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:32 am
Right on Rich.If you want the votes present a good program.

Comment by reflector Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:33 am
Rich, this is why I read capfax. Calling out the total BS regardless of side.

This is just ridiculous. Maybe it would increase hispanic participation in primaries? Mainly Democratic primaries? Who are the “many” that believe this?

Comment by Anon Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:34 am
Because if the uber right actually tried to compete, they wouldn’t have time to complain…and after all, isn’t that what’s really important? The ability to make a living by pointing why the other guys are wrong instead of why you’re right?

Comment by Downstate GOP Faithless Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:36 am
How is the “more than a third are between 18 and 29″ statistic even related? I don’t get it. If they’re 18 or over, this doesn’t apply to them anyway. Isn’t the number of 17 year olds (Hispanic or not) what’s important? Or maybe the proportion of Hispanic 17 year olds to non-Hispanic 17 year olds? Sounds like a classic non sequitor argument to me.

Comment by Skeptic Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:36 am
No on a conspiracy theory. I think this is just a way for Dems to pander to more people at a younger age. The reality is IL will be Democrat until we are broke our finances taken over by the federal government. Once you get them hooked on the government, they will never vote republican again. Well more than 50% are hooked on government in IL, and until we are so broke that a bunch of them get kicked off we ain’t goin republican. Everyone hated Blago and re-elected him. Everyone knew Quinn was an incompetent bafoon and we re-elected him. If JFK ran as a republican in IL, he would lose!

Comment by the Patriot Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:40 am
Actually having a program to reach out to Hispanic voters would require the IR crowd to think beyond the latest 30 second Fox News talking point and tht would require too much work.

Comment by train111 Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:41 am
I am beginning to believe the ILGOP will not be able to separate itself from the paranoia of the far right. They continue to paddle against the wave of change and the times we live in. It is difficult for a leader of “all the people” to break out of their party.

Comment by Endangered Moderate Species Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:47 am
Can I start a conspiracy theory that the Illinois Review was designed to create a permanent Democrat majority in Illinois? Just look at the Illinois GOP since 2005.

Coincidence?

Comment by hisgirlfriday Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:47 am
“why not start competing for those votes instead of complaining?” — that’s too difficult for them, Rich.

You can always count on the IR and the Repub Party to always do the conservative, manning up, responsible thing and moan, complain and cry when they don’t get their way!!

Comment by low level Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:53 am
–Once you get them hooked on the government, they will never vote republican again.–

That must be news to all those Republican members howling about state facility closings in their districts.

How does voting get you “hooked on government,” anyway?

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:54 am
Don’t forget this had broad, bi-partisan support.

Comment by Apple Friday, May 17, 13 @ 9:57 am
wordslinger- or how about the TARP program, originally designed to help homeowners under water but instead went to payoff big banks that made bad bets on mortgage securities?

I don’t think you would find many of the executives of those institutions on any progressive candidate’s fundraising call list! That’s some “hooked on government” - maybe call it “bailout crack”??

Comment by low level Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:05 am
“Many believe the law is designed to create a permanent Democrat majority in Illinois using young Hispanic voters.”

I guess these voters don’t have good, moral character?

Maybe the IR can fill us in on some of the details we seem to be missing.

Comment by low level Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:08 am
Is my calendar off? Is it April Fools day?
Is this a story from the Onion? I guess this stuff resonates in the echo chamber, but sheesh.

Comment by John A Logan Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:08 am
Insert Osewgo Willy “MY Party” comment here…

Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:11 am
–I don’t think you would find many of the executives of those institutions on any progressive candidate’s fundraising call list!–

I’m pretty sure you would, except for the Elizabeth Warren’s of the world. No reason not to buy everyone when they come so cheap. Just a cost of doing business.

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:11 am
I’m not for this bill, but it has NOTHING to do with Latino’s. The connection is absurd.

Anyway the voter turnout of 17 year olds will be miniscule.

Comment by Allen Skillicorn Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:12 am
Oh brother!

@the Patriot
=== I think this is just a way for Dems to pander to more people at a younger age. ===

By pandering, I’m assuming you mean actually advocating and pushing for laws that provide a helping hand for them.

=== Once you get them hooked on the government, they will never vote republican again. ===

Those darn Takers!

@Word
=== That must be news to all those Republican members howling about state facility closings in their districts. ==

Those darn Takers! LOL!

Rich, the views/fears of “the Patriot” and Illinois Review coincide, and THAT is the reason that Republicans, regardless of their mad scramble to “support” immigration reform, will find it difficult, if not impossible, to ever get behind a just immigration bill.

Comment by PublicServant Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:14 am
“How about just getting out there with a winning message?”

Amen.

“Once you get them hooked on government”

That’s condescending. Many African Americans and Hispanics (and others) work but either can’t afford health insurance or it’s not offered to them. These people enable employers to profit through their affordable labor costs, and consumers to benefit through lower prices that employers charge due to their affordable labor costs. When was the last time you turned away a deal or paid more for something due to principle, so that you don’t enable the welfare state……?

That’s what I thought.

Comment by Grandson of Man Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:19 am
===Cue Chopper Jim, Hispanic 17 year olds pouring into Soldier Field….===

I burned my nostrils!

To the Post, and that point,

If they are voting in the Primary, are all these “17 year-olds” going to, in unison, and of course, orchestrated, go and vote and destroy the Electoral Process, because Mom didn’t give birth in January or February, but gave birht in May?

Heck, the opportunity, to get “new” voters that are eligible to vote in the General, but NOT the Primary, and isolate them is a GREAT opportuinity to target a finite number of new voters, and try to make a difference in that subgroup, and what would be event BETTER? Vote them in the Primary at the age of 17!

Do 17 Year Olds like “Politcal” ice cream, or “Governmental” ice cream?

Maybe an Ice Cream Social at Soldier Field?

A 17 year-old, who will …WILL… be eligible to vote in November is not a “Conspriacy Theory”, it’s an opportunity to find new voters, unless you just raise your hands …

“They just will vote Democrat!”,

“Think of how many 17 year-olds will corrupt the Process”

“Having those 17 year-olds vote in the Primary for their options in the General Election, when they are 18 years old, does not sound fair to the democratic process of elections.”

Yikes!

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:21 am
This bill would have at best a marginal impact on turnout in PRIMARY elections. How in the world would that help Democrats beat Republicans in the general?

The sad truth is that contemporary conservatives have become knee-jerk opponents of any measures that would make it easier to vote. Almost all House Republicans, for example, voted three years ago against “no-excuse” absentee voting, so citizens can vote by mail without having to list a reason for so doing.

Comment by reformer Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:26 am
===Insert Osewgo Willy “MY Party” comment here… ===

I have to “own” it, to “fix” it - Cincinnatus -, I plan on sticking around to try and turn this, but to turn it, I have to “own” it, even the “bad, Dopey, ignorant, intolerant, and misguided”

The “MY” is ownership and personal responsibility, and when My Party has factions acting Dopey, wearing Tin Foil Hats, and those “leading” the charge are oblivious as to “Why” they are being Dopey…they need to be given a different perspective, and by someone “owning” their” Dopiness to correct it.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:27 am
Who is this “many” they speak of and what is the best way to avoid them?

Comment by In 630 Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:27 am
I suppose it’s true, if you consider that the US by one stusy now has one of the highest 18-24 non employment rates in the developed world, these kids aren’t getting hooked on the private sector.

But the tiny germ of truth here is yes, it might be easier to register the kids at the age of 17. At that age they’re still more often in school and the teachers can encourage it, get them in the habit. By the time they’re 18 they’re usually out of school and … Who knows where. Some of them sitting on their parents’ couch hearing about how much the stock market is growing and home housing prices are recovering, two metrics that may be wholly irrelevant to them.

Comment by ZC Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:29 am
Patriot - say what you will about Pat Quinn, but at least he knows how to spell “buffoon.”

And here’s a question — all those farmers who accept government subsidies: Do they consistently vote Democratic?

One more thing — JFK couldn’t win Illinois as a Republican? That might be because JFK was a Democrat. People voted for him because he said things they liked - -things that were aspirational, like “Let’s put a man on the moon.” He talked about increasing our national investment in science and education, rather than taking a hatchet to our national budget. And he presented voters with a clear and compelling vision.

I like this bit from JFK’s convention speech, referring to his opponent: “His party is the party of the past. His speeches are generalities from Poor Richard’s Almanac. Their platform, made up of left-over Democratic planks, has the courage of our old convictions. Their pledge is a pledge to the status quo–and today there can be no status quo.”

So yeah, if that guy ran in Illinois, I’d vote for him in a heartbeat. But I don’t think he’d run as a Republican.

Comment by soccermom Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:33 am
” How does voting get you “hooked on government,” anyway?”

VOTING. The other gateway drug.

Comment by Happy Returns Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:38 am
Allan S

So why do you oppose this bill, since you admit it’s not part of a conspiracy to entice young Latinos to defeat the GOP?

Comment by reformer Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:40 am
Wasn’t making fun of the “MY” stuff at all, OW, just saying that your comments about the lack of awareness of some in the ILGOP would fit into this thread well…

Comment by Cincinnatus Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:46 am
What, Illinois’ election laws aren’t complicated enough that we need to add a tiered system of age eligibility? There’s a solution in search of a problem.

Comment by Lycurgus Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:47 am
My seventeen year old is much more conservative than I am and I consider myself very conservative. More surprising, her twitter and facebook accounts with about 1500 friends and followers seem to be just as conservative as she. They actively discuss politics and government and this is in St. Clair County! She would be thrilled to vote in any election.

Comment by southwest Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:49 am
–I suppose it’s true, if you consider that the US by one stusy now has one of the highest 18-24 non employment rates in the developed world, these kids aren’t getting hooked on the private sector.–

Those kids carrying those relatively high-interest student loans are going to be hooked on working and servicing that debt for a long time. Big money maker for the government.

Comment by wordslinger Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:56 am
- Cincinnatus -,

Not even remotely taken badly on my end. Not at all.

Much respect.

Sometimes letting something like this “simmer” and the complete lack of awareness something like this breeds and then is “agreed to” that IR has this right is just unbelieveable.

I took it as you intneded and clarified. All Good.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 17, 13 @ 10:58 am
Maybe the IR would like to restrict the voting age to the AARP membership threshold level?

Comment by Boone's is Back Friday, May 17, 13 @ 11:01 am
I’m more interested in the merits of the bill itself. What “problem” is it really trying to solve? Why is it necessary? Who wanted it in the first place?

Comment by Anonymous Friday, May 17, 13 @ 11:19 am
Amazing how every tactic can be seen by the IR crowd as focusing on Hispanics.

If voting means getting “hooked on government” then I’m all for it, regardless of which party’s primary is involved.

This is supposed to be a government “by the people, for the people” isn’t it?

Comment by walkinfool Friday, May 17, 13 @ 11:40 am
“What “problem” is it really trying to solve?”
–Funny you should ask. I’ve been asking the same question regarding this bill:
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocTypeID=HB&DocNum=976&GAID=12&SessionID=85&LegID=71342

As for the merits of if you will turn 18 by the time of the general election you should be allowed to vote in a primary if you are 17, just think about it a little. Maybe do some research. Look at the vote even.

I’m sure you’ll figure it out.

Comment by low level Friday, May 17, 13 @ 11:44 am
My own personal experiece;

I was able to vote in a Primary, with my birthday falling before a March Primary.

I had friends in HS, who were 17, and in out Senior Government Class complaining that they were not allowed to vote in the Primary, but will be 18 in November and …well, is the issue of the Bill.

I came home for thanksgiving break that November and met that same friend, who was also back from break and we just were talking about the Class and I asked, “So, how did you feel finally voting?”

Response?

“Even on the Campus, and the chance to register and all, I just didn’t vote”.

Wether your 17 and a HALF, 18, 25, 55, or 105… if you are not motivated to vote, you won’t.

I see why the Bill is being pushed, but I do not see it being pushed because of a “Conspiracy”, in regards to Primary Elections, concerning the vote(s) of 17 year-olds.

But, I do hear “The Chopper” hovering over polling places…

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 17, 13 @ 11:56 am
“What, Illinois’ election laws aren’t complicated enough that we need to add a tiered system of age eligibility? There’s a solution in search of a problem.”

Ok, simply - what is the position of the folks who have to handle the work? The IL County Clerks handle all the election work (except for the Election Commission areas of Illinois), so being they are the people who have to make it work, what is their take on this whole issue?

Is this just no big deal or is it going to be a expensive and difficult pain to have to deal with?

Ask the folks who have to handle the work.

Comment by Judgment Day Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:16 pm
== a solution in search of a problem ==

Citizens from ages 18-24 have the lowest voting rate. This measure is a small tool to encourage voting, and start young people in the habit before they go off to college and voting takes more planning than the average 19-year old will make.

Comment by reformer Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:20 pm
The only way I can see this somehow harming the GOP is if an influx of left-leaning younger voters “infiltrate” them through our primary system and use that to somehow vote for a weaker GOP candidate.

It’s a goofy idea, but young kids tend to be more receptive to goofiness than their wise elders.

Even then, it wouldn’t likely amount to many votes.

Other than that, I fail to see how this is a cause for concern.

Comment by Keep Calm and Carry On Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:30 pm
Do other states have this provision?

Or would we be the only ones?

Comment by Keep Calm and Carry On Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:31 pm
===Is this just no big deal or is it going to be a expensive and difficult pain to have to deal with?

===Ask the folks who have to handle the work.

It shouldn’t be too hard to change the birth date that is acceptable to register to vote in a primary. All it requires them to do is allow people who qualify to vote in November to vote in March.

Comment by ArchPundit Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:33 pm
===This bill would have at best a marginal impact on turnout in PRIMARY elections. How in the world would that help Democrats beat Republicans in the general?

Hispanics! Don’t you see?

I don’t either nor does anyone with even a rudimentary grasp of logic, but this is the Illinois Review who is asserting the conspiracy so what do you expect?

Comment by ArchPundit Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:35 pm
===Do other states have this provision?===

Yes. Lots.

Comment by Rich Miller Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:37 pm
===Do other states have this provision?

Other states have it. I’m fine with it in general, but it isn’t a huge deal–there’s always some arbitrary cut-off.

http://www.fairvote.org/17-year-old-primary-voting-2#.UZZq7LXigRI
“17-year-olds can vote in primaries and caucuses in nearly half of states
States include: Alaska, Connecticut, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Virginia, Vermont, and Washington. Most have done this by state law, but others by changing rules in parties.
In Alaska, Kansas, North Dakota and Washington, 17-year-old Democrats may caucus, but are barred from participating in the Republican caucus.”

Comment by ArchPundit Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:40 pm
== Do other states have this provisionn? ==

“Nineteen other states allow 17-year-olds to vote. And on Monday, Takoma Park in Maryland became the first city in the United States to lower its voting age from 18 to 16. The Takoma Park law applies only to city elections.”

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2013/05/16/illinois-poised-to-lower-voting-age-to-17-latinos-growing-part-young-voters/#ixzz2TZb2wrc8

Iowa permits 17-year olds who will be 18 by the general election to participate in the presidential caucus.

Comment by reformer Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:46 pm
- Once you get them hooked on the government, they will never vote republican again. -

Pretty thinly veiled racism, pal. Are you asserting that another minority is “hooked” on the government and that’s why they tend to vote for Democrats?

Eventually the GOP is going to need a new myth to sell, the days are numbered for that one.

Comment by Small Town Liberal Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:49 pm
===there’s always some arbitrary cut-off.===

I may be a bit off … but isn’t the General Election Day itself for each election … the, um … Cut off …

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, May 17, 13 @ 12:51 pm
Thanks for replying, Rich and reformer.

Comment by Keep Calm and Carry On Friday, May 17, 13 @ 1:09 pm