Can, can you vote for a "Con Con" in 2008?
If the General Assembly can’t break the deadlock on education funding reform, ethics and property tax relief, then the Illinois voters should be encouraged to support the call for a constitutional convention, possibly changing the state document and making that reform happen. That’s what 48 representatives approved Thursday morning before the House and Senate finished their first, three-day week of overtime session. The House won’t be back in the Capitol until the June 12, the Senate June 14, much to the dismay of Gov. Rod Blagojevich. His administration repeated its belief that lawmakers should work all week every week until they agree on a state budget before the next fiscal year starts July 1.
The stalemate over the FY08 budget is just one example of the General Assembly’s inability to resolve some major policy issues.
In 2008, voters will be asked on the ballot whether Illinois should call another constitutional convention, last held in 1970. The existing state constitution requires the question to be on the ballot every 20 years. The last time was in 1988, when the call for a “con con” was soundly defeated by more than 1.8 million votes, said Cris Cray, legislative liaison with the Illinois State Board of Elections. Rep. John Fritchey hopes voters are frustrated enough to reconsider this time around.
His measure approved Thursday encourages Illinois voters to support the 2008 question and lists education funding, ethics and property taxes as issues unable to be resolved the General Assembly. The Chicago Democrat said during debate that a convention would allow the opportunity to reconsider whether the constitution should be changed to address those and other stubborn policy issues. “It’s about putting a room full of people in here that are going to put policy and intellect over election cycles, over politics, over campaign funding,” he said.
He gained support from Republicans, including his co-sponsor Rep. Bill Black of Danville, who said it’s time for the public to finally have a say in education funding reform. Because, he said, the other way to establish a major policy change, through legislation seeking a constitutional amendment, typically gets stuck in the legislative process.
Such opponents as House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie of Chicago and Assistant Majority Leader Lou Lang of Skokie don’t like the idea of opening up the entire state document to change. “I think there’s a big risk in saying, ‘Let’s throw the whole thing open. Let’s start from scratch,’” Currie said. “We don’t need to start from scratch” because the General Assembly has a “good, sound” document to guide its operations. Lang added that a convention would invite all types of groups with specific agendas to cause “mischief” in altering the framework of the constitution.
Forty-seven House members rejected Fritchey’s measure, but it had enough votes to be adopted.
Shortly after lawmakers left town for the weekend, the governor led the third overtime meeting with the four legislative leaders. But his “speechmaking” and “nebulous talking” isn’t getting them closer to a budget agreement, according to Senate Minority Leader Frank Watson per his spokeswoman, Patty Schuh.
Blagojevich sent out Deputy Gov. Sheila Nix to address reporters again after the meeting. She said he wants property tax relief, that he’s willing to consider different approaches and that he plans to bring in Cook County Assessor Jim Houlihan into next week’s leaders’ meeting.
9 comments:
How about term limits for legislative leaders?
The lack thereof is the biggest flaw I've seen in the legislative process.
Con Con 08 can't happen soon enough. How can one party control both chambers and Gov's office and not pass a budget without overtime? Who else can decide their own salaries in poison pill holding KIA military survivors benefits and long overdue 2003 funding of approved construction grants hostage? School funding in majority by property taxes is crushing residents even with the PTELL tax cap which is breaking the schools - the state needs to do majority funding. Other issues: unfunded mandates, term limits, citizens initiatives on the ballot: see www.illinoisconcon.com for more.
We definitely need to vote for the Convention in '08. It's time to fix a number of things in the Constitution, and add a few like term limits.
I can see the desire for conservatives to want a Constitutional Convention at the current time given the fact that they have almost entirely been blocked from any significant influence in government affairs and the obvious lack of cohesion by the dominant party to run the State in a responsible manner.
My big concern here is the timing. Do we really want to have Constitutional Convention when the State is overwhelmingly in a pro-Democrat mindset? Obama (and even Durbin's) poll numbers are horrifying. Bush's national poll numbers and the GOP's party strength at the moment seems to be generally accepted as in the gutter even by advocates and loyal party members.
To me it'd be like calling a national Constitutional Convention when the nation is overwhelmingly leaning socialist. The end result would likely be a far more socialist Constitution. That's certainly not in the best interests of the GOP in spite of the current, but I'd stress temporary, pitfalls they and the public are suffering through in this Democratic Party dominated clusterfrag.
Perhaps this fear is unwarranted but I can hardly fathom how considering the current political climate of the State and overwhelming support for even the scummiest of scumbags like Durbin who likened our troops to communist minions running gulags. Beyond vulgar.
I'd love to hear how I'm wrong on this because my short term view of the state of the State is fairly dismal... I could use some good news.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
I think it's time for a Constitutional Convention.
In 1970, our constitution was pretty cutting edge, with the right ideas (generally) about governing. After 40 years, I think it's time to review some of those ideas.
And while I share Currie's and Lang's concerns about possible mischief, Glock21's comments provide the answer. There is a fairly solid consensus in Illinois over some of the most controversial issues. I am confident that Illinois voters will solidly reject most socially conservative policies.
The big changes I would like to see are: 1) allowing progessive income taxation; 2) changes in the personal property tax replacement tax (currently allocating tax revenues based on economic circumstances in 1969, despite major demographic changes); 3) education funding reform; 4) campaign finance reform, possibly public financing; 5) merit selection of judges. Looking at GA structures would also be worthwhile.
If Currie et al. want to avoid Con Con, I would suggest that they send up a series of amendments for voter approval in 2008 that address the real issues but avoid any controversial social issues.
As for the second piece of news: that the Governor wants to look at property tax relief now that the session is in overtime? Has he ever been diagnosed for adult ADD? I'm not against property tax relief, and I strongly support HB750 (or whatever its current number is). But how can a Governor suggest a totally new concept (at least to him) this late in the game and still be taken seriously?
I have always opposed term limits for members of the legislature. Doing so eliminates the years of experience in substantive policy areas which is the only contervailing force against intense bureaucratic and special interest dominace over policy issues.
Given our experience over the past few years my position has changed with respect to term limits for the five constitutional officers. I am begining to think that a two term limit for governor and three term limit for the other four constitutional officers should be seriously considered.
Dear Glock21
Just because it isn't the best thing for the GOP we shouldn't do it?? That make absolutely no sense!
We need this convention. We need a bipartisan call to action that focuses on ending the corruption of the pay to play politics.
Yes, it can get worse, but at least we can go down swinging in an attempt to make things better.
Glock,
As some one who wants to see some "conservative" planks in a new Constitution (i.e. Spending - not tax - Caps on EVERY IL gov. entity), I'm well aware of the danger of having a Convention in this climate.
However, too many conservative/decent Dems/Greens/disaffected/etc discount the fact passing a convention will precipitate a CHANGE in that climate. I realize that I sound like a pollyannaish optimist, but that is not the case.
I realize just how difficult it will be to get a good Constitution out of this configuration. OTOH, if a convention doesn't wake up the forces that might wrest back this state from the corrupt class of mediocrities that are eating it alive, then they deserve what they get.
Post a Comment