Third Party Candidates
There are three third party--as opposed to power party--candidates on the horizon.
The best known prospective third party candidate is the Rev. and State Senator James Meeks. He is liberal on everything but social issues like homosexuality and abortion. He says he is running because he wants more money for public education. That is a none-too-subtle way of saying he wants to raise taxes.
The Chicago Defender (a newspaper aimed at blacks) late last week revealed that Meeks will journey Downstate to Rockford, Springfield and East St. Louis on May 20th, as well as holding a press conference in Chicago, to launch his petition campaign for the needed 25,000 signatures.
Over 5,000 signatures were obtained on Protect Marriage petitions at his church, so obtaining 25,000 should be no problem
I’m one who thinks Meeks is not really running for governor.
Oh, he probably will be on the ballot, but I think his goal is to become mayor of Chicago.
That would leave Jesse Jackson, Jr., in his congressional career, so the father’s coalition would have covered two out of the three bases that count. And, if lightning strikes and Meeks is elected governor, Jesse, Jr., could always be drafted for a mayoral run.
To follow in Harold Washington’s footsteps and the blueprint used successfully for Washington, one must rev up the base, that is, the black vote in Chicago, the year before the mayoral election. That election is the first week of April, 2007.
The May 12th Chicago Defender has this quote, which I think supports my analysis:
He (Blagojevich) has not met with Black leaders to say this is what I’m going to do for Black voters.If anyone can think of a better way to do run for mayor than to run for governor, let me know.
My guess is that Meeks will team up with
· the Illinois Farm Bureau, which favors raising income taxes and cutting property taxes on farms,I’m sure I have missed some tax eaters that incumbent Governor Rod Blagojevich has alienated.
· the Illinois Education Association, which favors raising income taxes in order to get higher salaries,
· the Illinois Teachers Union, ditto,
· AFSCME, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees union, which represents most state workers and
Constitution Party candidate for governor, Randall Stufflebeam, has been collecting signatures for 45 days.
There are 45 days left until the June 26th deadline for filing 25,000 petition signatures.
His campaign reports
We are half way through the 90 day window which has been given to us to get signatures. YES!!! REALLY, half way through. I know a lot of you have sheets with signatures on them, please get them notarized and sent in. We have probably a 10th of the number needed to just get on ballot and as you know we have a goal of 75,000 because they will be hotly contested.If this means that he has only collected 2,500 signatures so far, he’s not doing well…especially when you consider that Protect Marriage petition passers gathered over 400,000 signatures for the advisory referendum. Stufflebeam obviously has not been able to tap deeply into those petition passers, who would likely approve of much of his platform.
And, don't let me forget Green Party candidate for governor Rich Whitney. My guess would be that the Greens have more signatures for Whitney than Stufflebeam has.
And, an email I just received validated my guess. Campaign Manager Jennifer Rose writes,
We are right around 15,000. Barring any unforseen obstacles,The Libertarian Party is not running a candidate this year.
we fully expect to exceed the required 25,000 by 20,000 and to be on the ballot in November. We have a statewide effort with
hundreds of volunteers.
More Illinois politics is on McHenry County Blog.
11 comments:
Re: Meeks and his fake tax swap...
You can't serve the teacher's unions and disadvantaged youth at the same time.
We've been shoveling cash into the gaping maw of urban (and virtually all other) schools for decades, and the money has gone into never-ending staff increases and actuarially impossible pension schemes.
Anyone seriously interested in helping urban school children would be promoting 100% fully-funded school choice.
There is no intellectually sound argument against choice for these kids. There is also no intellectually argument to add one more thin dime to the existing (and utterly failing) system.
Fund Children, not corrupt systems.
Meeks is a joke.He got in the Gov.'s face with his threats and all it done was make the gov. laugh.Meeks looked like the court jester in front of King Blago.He is nor will never be a third party canidate.
DOWNSTATE, is that you?
Extreme Wisdom,
There you go again. Parents and students have school choice. They can choose private and parochial schools if they can afford to. As for public funds, they must go to fund public schools which are open to all students and do not promote any religious or political doctrine. As you well know school districts do not fund pensions. Save the over the top rhetoric for the uninformed. As far as Meeks goes, I would think that his right wing social views would appeal to a guy like you. Isn't protecting the sanctity of marriage and ending the countless abortions which you consider murder more important than a few tax dollars for public schools and the disadvantaged. Morality vs greed. Which one wins the taxpayer network sweepstakes?
Bill -
"As you well know school districts do not fund pensions. Save the over the top rhetoric for the uninformed."
Talk about rhetoric for the uniformed.. governments don't fund anything.. they take our money and move it to someplace else... so who cares which body makes the pension payment?
Oh yeah, and nobody made that payment this year...
As for the rest of the crap you listed, thats a big leap from Extremes well known view on schools to what you project on him for other thoughts...
One thing we agree on..." Save the over the top rhetoric for the uninformed" Bill...
Bill,
Thank you for your thoughts. You can guess what I think of your "everyone has choice as long as the bloated education bureacracy gets its booty" argument.
It doesn't fly, particularly for those disadvantaged kids stuck in the poorer suburbs or urban schools.
Further, it is you who appear "uninformed" if you truly believe that districts don't fund pensions. Their payments, though not enough to cover the actuarially impossible flow of cash to retirees, is no small amount of money.
First, numerous municipalities have a tax line-item specifically for teacher's pensions.
Second, payments for the obscene 'end-of-career' jumps in compensation for teachers and adminsitrators come right out of District coffers.
The Districts make 3-4 large payments to the pension system, and the State pretends it is enough to fund these artifically increased benefits for retirees who will probably live another 20-30 years.
Last year, the GA put a 6% cap on these obscene bumps. This represents a bandaid on a Tsunami of red ink.
But wait! Even the bandaid is too much for the Teachers Unions and their purchased legislators, and as we speak the Guv is waiting to sign SB49, which exempts a good chunk of the 6% cap.
It must be nice to be able "privatize" money intended to "educate a populace" and use it for the personal private gain of people in the exclusive "public education club."
__
As for your feeble attempt to change the subject, though I tend toward the social conservative side of the spectrum, I'm of the view that most of our "social problems" would fix themselves if the people got the "educated populace" that they were paying for.
We certainly aren't getting that from this protected, Enronesque bureaucracy we call "Public Education."
Fund Children, not Systems, Districts, or Bureacracies.
Bruno,
More disinformation! If "social problems" were addressed adequately the schools would produce a mostly educated populace. Blame the parents, students, society or whomever, not the schools. Garbage in, garbage out.
Bill,
We are in partial agreement. Parents who turn their children over to the current school system are truly negligent.
If they had a lick of sense (or information), they'd demand 100% fully funded school choice - which would make education "Public" again (as opposed to the "private" protected interests that currently control the system).
Fund Children, not bureacracies.
Extreme Wisdom -
If parochial schools are so great, why doesn't the Catholic Church fully fund them?
Don't lecture about waste and corruption when the Catholic Church is spending every thin dime it has to defend itself against sex abuse scandals and the ensuing cover-up.
And let's not forget that charter schools were recently busted for inflating their enrollment numbers.
Here's an economic model for you: you get what you pay for. We cannot continue to pay our school teachers less than our garbage collectors and expect to attract and retain qualified professionals to what is probably one of the most difficult professions in society.
By the way, I just have to laugh at your "fund children, not bureaucracies."
The Catholic Church is the oldest, largest, most heirarchical bureaucracy in the history of mankind.
Empty platitudes are not going to solve the complex challenges facing American schools today.
YDD,
While I'm sure you have many reasonable critiques of reform ideas, trying to raise the straw man of "Parochial Schools" and "Catholic bureacracies" isn't one of them.
I'm not Catholic, and I don't hold any special affinity for their bureaucracy over any others.
As per your comment on another post, I actually have put together an alternative plan that is a workable reform model for Illinois (and many other states).
Send me an e-mail, and I'll make sure you get a link to the re-write when it's done. There are parts you may even like.
___
I enjoy hearing the critique that my ideas are "empty platitudes," particularly in light of the fact that the Education Establishment is a generator of the most empty of all platitudes - that it's "for the children."
Another empty platitude is this silly notion that education issues are "complex."
Connecting neurons in kids heads ain't rocket science, though the myth that it is "complex" serves the "system" very well.
I notice that every reform idea is shot down based upon the fact that it "fails to address the needs of this or that 'complex issue.'"
With very few exceptions, most education issues would be solved quite nicely by giving each child a $6500-$7500 scholarship to apply to any school they want.
The fake "complexities" have been built into the system by decades of purchased legislation for the express purpose of making sure that only "systems" get funded at the expense of funding children.
___
If you're serious about improving education, isn't it time you started thinking about the children instead of the school teachers? It doesn't take more than a few minutes of research to see that they are doing quite well for themselves.
Based upon the outcomes of our school children (intrastate, interstate, and internationally), one could easily make the argument that garbage collectors are performing a more effective service.
As a matter of fact, if Garbage Collectors were paid so damn well, most of the teacher's union drones I know would consider switching positions.
But then maybe the work environment, 6 hour days, and 180 work days have something to do with it. (Oh, I forgot - the obscene pensions are probably part of the equation too.)
Post a Comment