Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: OK, but who were the wimps? *** Updated x2 ***
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* Comptroller Dan Hynes comes out against recall today…
Talk of recall is all the rage in Illinois these days, fueled in major part by the Chicago Tribune, which in an Oct. 28 editorial said voters should add a recall provision to the Illinois Constitution as an opportunity to remove Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
I respectfully disagree.
I have been a vocal critic of this governor, both in terms of style and substance. But the beauty of representative government is that if the voters don’t like someone, we can vote him or her out of office next time around.
Voters also have the frequently used opportunity, in mid-term elections, to handcuff an underperforming executive by voting his or her party out of power in the legislature.
And finally, in cases of serious abuse of power, our state constitution already allows for impeachment.
Then there’s the recall. Setting aside logistical burdens and cost factors (California’s recall cost an estimated $60 million), I have a larger concern. Good government advocates (and editorial writers) have for years fought to diminish the influence of special interests in politics. They have also decried the proliferation of the poll-driven politician, and bemoaned the increasingly “permanent election cycle.” These reformers are right on all three counts.
Ironically, however, a recall provision would promote each of these blights upon the political process. People love to say politicians make too many of their decisions with one eye on the next election, and that the closer the election comes, the more that becomes true. Now imagine a political landscape in which any aggrieved, well-funded special-interest group has the potential power to shorten any election cycle via a recall.
That group would have just exponentially expanded its political influence. The offending politician would be more poll-driven, and less policy-driven, than ever. And the election cycle would never end.
* And my weekly syndicated column ends this way…
But - and this is a big “but” - any amendment to the Illinois Constitution implementing recall would have to either be passed by both chambers of the General Assembly or enacted through a Constitutional convention, which voters will have a say on next November.
It’s more than doubtful that the state House and Senate would voluntarily open that can of worms. Any convention, if it happens, wouldn’t take place until 2009 at the earliest, and even then a recall provision isn’t guaranteed.
In other words, you might want to recall him, but you’re almost undoubtedly stuck with Blagojevich as your governor through the end of his term in January 2011.
I feel your pain.
Discuss.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 10:51 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: OK, but who were the wimps? *** Updated x2 ***
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
So I guess Illinois’s only hope is making Blagojevich’s federal subpoenas public, then after the shock and outrage of what’s occurred behind close doors the last five years.
Blagojevich will finally be indicted by Patrick Fitzgerald.
Comment by It was all in a dream Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:00 am
I think we as a country like to sway back and forth between a “reformed” government, and a “non-reformed” government, to use a poli sci perspective.
All because we think the grass will be greener on the other side.
I can’t quite figure out whether a recall measure would be a positive step or not.
On the one hand, it let’s you hold political leaders accountable. Which is good reform.
On the other hand, it moves the leaders further away from governance concerns, and more into political concerns. Which would be the wrong direction.
Didn’t we create city managers and non-partisan municipal elections to try and keep our leaders focused on governing? Isn’t that what we want to encourage?
Additionally, Mr. Hynes makes a really good point regarding special interests, one we cannot underestimate. A group like SEIU on the liberal side, or the Chambers of Commerce on the conservative side, could easily fund and muscle in a recall measure unless you catered to their every need. That is a lot of power in groups that have too much power already.
So, I am not really sure what the answer is.
Comment by GoBearsss Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:07 am
Hynes is right on. There’s impeachment….and then there’s Patrick Fitzgerald.
Comment by Left Leaner Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:09 am
This isn’t the first time recall was discussed. Wasn’t this discussed when George Ryan was governor?
Comment by Levois Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:31 am
I disagree. As a politician, and one eyeing the gov spot, Hynes has a vested interest in the protection offered by not having a recall provision.
Everyone mentions CA recall as somehow bad. They got rid of a horrible gov who was costing them millions, and replaced him with a gov. they overwhelming support. I take the opposite lesson from CA, it shows the usefullness and advantage of a recall provision. If the Government is to represent and work for the people, then why is everyone so afraid of giving the people more control.
Also Hynes makes an odd assumption, that looking at polls and taking into consideration what the people want is bad. He is pretty much calling us the stupid and unwashed masses. We are not smart enough to drive issues and remove damaging poloticians. The impeachment process is a joke, since jones can block the process single handedly. A recall provision is good, and listening to what people are concnerd about through polls is no more inherently bad then spending on so called pork projects.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:35 am
I think Illinois’ increasingly weakened middle class voters, who have to fund everything, need every possible tool at their command to hold their elected officials accountable. It doesn’t mean they have to use it. But the option of recall, like impeachment, should be there. And when things get bad–when the economy is tanking and our elected officials want to raise our taxes, for example—there should be a public discussion of the recall option.
The recall discussion should take place independently of one’s feelings about Blago.
And I wouldn’t be so sure his run will end in January, 2011. Illinois voters have a penchant for re-electing known pols, no matter how corrupt or ineffective, and Blago will likely benefit from this tendency should he, as seems likely, choose to run again.
It’s hard to blame all of this on groups like SEIU
or even the Chamber of Commerce. Each represents a small fraction of the total voting population. The
culprit is us, if we sit back and let our highly paid, mostly wealthy elected officials, who are increasingly in league with powerful business interests trolling for government contracts, mismanage their roles and take bribes from various interest groups and we do not speak out. Speaking out isn’t that difficult these days–there’s the internet in addition to letters, phone calls, and visits to local and state officials. The recall option simply adds to the citizen’s toolbox. One wonders why anyone would be against it.
Comment by Cassandra Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:38 am
Ghost,
Thank you. I keep trying to point out that despite states across the West having recall laws, the tool is extremely rarely used. These states certainly don’t have a shortage of special-interest groups, and Illinois should hardly fear moving in their direction. I have never heard complaints from those states’ residents–or even from their legislators–about the recall provisions.
Instead of speculating about disastrous consequences, we ought to examine how the laws have affected the states in whcih they exist. Short answer: minimally.
Comment by Greg Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:43 am
Why would anyone want to recall/impeach Governor Blagojevich? He has courageously held the line against raising sales and income taxes despite assaults on our wallets by everyone from Madigan to Daley to Stroger and other lessors around the state.The schools are still open and funded much better than under any of his predscessors, the busses and trains are still running despite the obstructionist tactics of various and sundry legislators and mayors, he has withstood assaults from all quarters, including the press, while forging ahead to do the people’s business. Open Road Tolling(Rod Blagojevich, Governor), the Dan Ryan re-construction, even road repairs on the downstaters’ roads to nowhere, have been accomplished under Governor Blagojevich. He has kept his pledge to the people to fight for them.To try, against all odds, to fight the special interests and political hacks that would deprive them of decent health care, to provide for our seniors and our veterans and our school children.It is too bad that we as a state have to rely on Little Dick Daley to come to Springfield to keep the Speaker in line while he pouts and will only talk to his Republican soulmates.
Thanks Gov. Blagojevich for being there for us. you will be Governor of Illinois as long as you want to be. We the people will remember.
Comment by Bill Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 12:02 pm
It’s all about “POWER”. And those with the power don’t want to give it up by putting the “Little People” is charge. And the ones with the “POWER” know who the are.
Comment by Dead on the Tracks Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 12:07 pm
That sure was mouthful Bill.
Your always on point. Don’t get to birdy.
Comment by Temptation Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 12:12 pm
Bill…are you truly serious? Blago jumped off the deep end after he was elected the second term. Surely you can see how big of a heel turn Blago has made?
Now Dan Hynes can complain about “worst possible scenerio” but geez, can he explain clearly why California is much WORSE off having recalled Gray Davis? I don’t think he can. I also doubt any one special interest group can force a recall election simply due to the fact that they don’t have the numbers alone to make it happen, and whatever issue they’re pushing isn’t going to render a public outcry for it.
Comment by Crimefighter Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 12:49 pm
I think the Best response to the headline, “Hynes Opposes Recall”, is to wonder what Hynes has against a good old schwarzeneger sci-fi flick
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 1:04 pm
Am I nuts, or did Hynes just call for voters to make their changes via mid term elections (in other words, turn over legislative power to the republicans)? What kind of Democrat would suggest that the voters unelect members from his own party? Oh yea — a Democrat like Dan Hynes, who has had his eye on the govs office since Rid first ran. Only a self centered little brat would suggest that voters turn on his own political party and argue against the recall in hopes that he may some day inhabit that office.
Wow, Dan. And I thought you didnt have any testicular virility.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 1:06 pm
Bill
It’s time you came out of the closet…..we know you are Blago in drag.Send me some of that funny stuff you are smoking!!!
Comment by MOON Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 1:06 pm
Wisconsin has a recall also. It doesn’t seem to have hurt them at all.
Has anyone else noticed that IL is just chock full of things that we need, can’t do without or can’t have, but a majority of the other states DO have and seem to be quite ok?
Hynes
Pro life tried to recall Feinburg in WI, it didn’t happen though.
Comment by Pat collins Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 1:22 pm
hit enter too soon. Some WI legislators have been recalled, but not a lot.
Comment by Pat collins Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 1:25 pm
Ghost, you have totally re-written CA history.
Governor Gray was only recently re-elected when the utility market manipulation of Enron caused an energy crisis in CA. Everybody chose to blame Gray, and he was re-called by a movie heroe. (Only later did the truth come out about who was really to blame for the energy crisis.) The Governator then totally stumbled out of the block and made enemies in the legislature. He took his issues to the voters in referenda, and as Obama would say, got “spanked”, badly. Only then did he wise up, start playing ball with the legisature and accomplish something. Now, yes, he is popular.
Hynes is totally correct and I admire his courage to openly go against the populist grain.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 1:33 pm
Anon 1:06pm-
You are either nuts or can’t read. Hynes says nothing of the sort. He didn’t call for voters to do anything. He merely said they have the opportunity every two years to show their disatisfaction.
Comment by 2for2 Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 1:37 pm
Look again, 2for2. He clearly states that the voters can “handcuff an executive by voting his party out of power in the legislature.” If he isnt suggesting that voters “throw the bums out” durnig the midterms, why does he raise this point?
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 1:47 pm
Good for Dan Hynes. I think he’s right on target, and again showing himself to be an adult, stand-up guy.
Comment by steve schnorf Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 2:10 pm
Anonymous, you should check your facts. Gray was also under fire for such gems as giving huge no bid contracts to his computer buddy at oracle for almost 100mil. Gray was not unlucky, he was corrupt. The recall system worked well to get rid of a gov who was passing on 100mil contracts to donors and friends; and put a governor that is well liked by the constituents.
No rewrite here, but then I was looking at the problems with Gray in whole, which included but was not limited to the oracle deal, not just the single sound bite issue Gray fired around.
Comment by Ghost Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 2:13 pm
Forget about Gray versus Arnold. Those issues plague many regular elections. The important takeaway is that it’s a once-a-generation experience across the many states that allow it. For most states, it’s the occasional crazy local pol who’s recalled.
Comment by Greg Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 2:21 pm
Anon, I think his point is that if voters are unsatisfied with a governor, any governor not just Blago, then they can do something about it. I really don’t think any other reader interpreted that to mean Hynes was saying give control of the GA to the republicans. Nor should any reader make that interpretation since there is zero basis for such a conclusion.
Comment by 2for2 Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 2:42 pm