Sneaking Up On the Outside: It's Con-Con 2008
If you thought the 2008 presidential election, certain to have at least one candidate with strong Illinois, was the most important issue facing our state in 2008 -- you were wrong. Despite the fact that Hillary Clinton was born here, and Barack Obama lives here and represents us, the presidential election is not the important event on our calendar.
And if you thought the recently re-convened Illinois General Assembly with all of its antics and sideshows and false promises and lawsuits was the most important issue, you'd be wrong again. (You might be amused and frustrated but you'd be wrong).
What is the most important event on the 2008 Illinois calendar is one that few people (if a recent poll can be believed) are aware of: the statewide referendum asking Illinois residents if a convention ought to be called in 2009 to re-write the Illinois Constitution.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and Dick Durbin and Steve Sauerberg (he's the Republican running against Durbin) aren't likely to talk about the con-con referendum, even though it could have a major impact on their state (of former state, in the case of the Illinois => Arkansas => New York resident. John McCain -- almost certain to be the Republican candidate for President -- gets a pass on this one as he's never had a strong (or residential) connection to Illinois. (Someone will correct that quickly if it's in error).
The reason why the constitutional convention (con-con) referendum is so important is that if approved, the entire Illinois Constitution could be re-written and some of the looney forces in Illinois in 2008 could be the delegates who write a new constitution.
True, a new constitution would have to be approved by voters in a statewide referendum but those same voters elected the current government leaders in our state and it's not certain that they can be trusted. Some of them can, but certainly not all.
The con-con referendum will be on the ballot in November because the current Illinois Constitution requires that voters have the opportunity to call a convention every 20 years. This is the year.
In the shadow of presidential politics and the other news-grabbing events in Illinois, it's not surprising that few Illinois voters are aware that the referendum is on the ballot. A recent (very current) statewide poll shows that fewer than 10 percent of Illinois voters were aware of the upcoming referendum.
While that is not surprising, it's a dangerous thought because it means that 90 percent of the voters could be influenced one way or another on the issue between now and November. If voters are convinced that things aren't so good in Illinois (THEY'RE NOT!), they could be convinced that the way to fix the problem is with a new Constitution (IT'S NOT!) instead of electing better representatives and leaders.
There is likely to be a lot written about the con-con referendum and early indications are that some very diverse groups of interests are opposed to the con-con call. It's too early to call them a "coalition" because many are REALLY diverse -- but maybe they'll all work together for the good of the state.
One of the leaders in the early "information" stage is the Illinois Business Roundtable.
(Full Disclosure: IBRT is a member of the Illinois Civil Justice League and was, in fact, the founder of the ICJL).IBRT is releasing a comprehensive research paper on Con-Con today. While it is the first of many analyses of the past, present and future of the Illinois Constitution, it is worth a look because it includes a thorough history of previous Illinois constitutions and amendments to the constitution and previous referenda.
You Can Find It Here. (.pdf)
-- Ed Murnane
Illinois Civil Justice League
February 18, 2008
6 comments:
I've never heard anyone advocate a complete rewrite of the constitution. On the contrary, Con-Con proponents advocate specific reforms -- such as about how we fund public schools -- that can't pass thru the Springfield gridlock. The complete rewrite is a straw man.
FFJ,
Do you really think that there won't be a complete re-write if there is a convention?
The Illinois Constitution, pride of Dawn Clark Netch, is a truly terrible document.
First off, the Judicial, Legislative, and Executive Branches routinely ignore virtually any of the decent language in it.
The fact is that the entire thing should be re-written, as it is a laundry list of rights with an asterisk that says "void where prohibited."
What is needed is a re-write that re-empowers citizens by articulating a clear set of controls on the scope of government.
One of the reasons that both the Teachers Unions AND the Business Lobby are coming out against it is that they likely realize that the existing class of clowns have so badly bungled the job that once the citizens realize the have a chance at real reforms, they will do exactly that.
It's about time.
The fact is, that whether you are correct or not depends on the delegate races.
As I've gone around the state talking about the importance of a yes vote, I'm finding that once you tell people about the benefits of a full re-write, their ears perk up.
I haven't read the full IBRT document, but I've read enough to see that they are coming out against it.
This is typical of the "quarterly report" short-sightedness that we see from businessmen who should know better.
While the amount of money necessary to mount a successful campaign to reform IL from the ground up would be considerable, that amount is infinitesimal compared to the reaming that will be visited upon the business community under every other scenario.
I've read far enough into the report to see this howler.
Despite concern with the current functional capability of state government, many of today's issues are neither the cause for nor remedied by constitutional change.
Illinois current constitutional framework is adequate, open, and not hostile to resolving the serious issues that confront the state today.
I find that statement to be boiler plate for people too tired and beaten down to fight for a better Illinois.
There is no longer a Republican Party in the state. (and there probably won't be for the foreseeable future)
There is not a single group advocating the necessary reforms to put IL back on track.
There is absolutely no framework for resolving any of the state's problems.
For only one small example, look at the "balanced budget clause" in the Const. compared to our $106 billion of unfunded liabilities.
Look at our "equal protection clause" and the funding disparity in school districts.
While I have a great deal of respect for Ed Murnane and his level of experience, I'm saddened that some one of his stature is falling back on the failed strategy of "playing not to lose" in a battle that Businesses and taxpayers lost 10 years ago.
Absent a convention, there is no scenario whereby Illinois returns to a stable course. The 30 years of explosive spending that is getting locked in with every new "retiree", combined with the spending explosion that Lisa Madigan will bring us when elected, will destroy this state.
The idea that a resurgent Republican Party will somehow stop it is laughable. They merely want another shot at the spending spigot.
Illinois needs a new Constitution that dramatically curtails the power of government. It's sad that as the stars align for a successful run at such an idea, the Business community aligns itself with the Teachers Unions and Pension seekers that are bankrupting their own constituency.
Murnane, you gripe about the supposed threat that "some of the looney forces in Illinois in 2008 could be the delegates who write a new constitution." Yet you don't seem to gripe about the loonies who have made a joke out of our state government.
I'll be voting yes on "CON-CON" and I urge everyone else to do so in November. We simply can't afford to wait another 20 years to fix this broken-down system.
If you don't like the prospect of an efficent state government Murnane, you can hop on the next Greyhound bus heading out of state.
Fed Up,
The "Loony" argument is a very weak one from another angle as well.
Not only are you correct that the "loonies" are the ones running things right now...
Personality Conflicts
Inbred 2nd Generations
absurd legal and illegal corruption
...but the idea that "loonies" will write anything crazy into the new Constitution is very unlikely.
Every delegate is going to know that the Constitution has to be ratified by the electorate.
There won't be any mandated "gay marriage" because the electorate will veto it.
There won't be any bans on "gay marriage" because the electorate will veto it.
Anything too far outside the box will fail - even in Illinois.
The sad fact is that if the so-called "business lobby" spent as much on promoting good ideas...
Term limits
Ballot initiative/Recall
Ending Gerrymandering
Eminent Domain protections
[Hmmmm, some of them may like getting municipal hacks to take citizens' land to sell it to them cheap
Hard Spending caps on government growth at every level
Government transparency
...as they are planning to campaign against it, they would be half way to getting the best business/citizen oriented state in the nation.
But no, they prefer their dwindling access to the Devil They Know.
Does anyone know how delegaes are selected for the Con-Con?
Anon 9:14,
If there is a "yes" vote, the legislature will decide on the time and place for a convention, as well as the cirteria for election of delegates.
This is where they have some room to "game" the system.
Article 14 calls for...
The General Assembly, at the session following
approval by the electors, by law shall provide for the
Convention and for the election of two delegates from each
Legislative District; designate the time and place of the
Convention's first meeting which shall be within three months
after the election of delegates; fix and provide for the pay
of delegates and officers; and provide for expenses
necessarily incurred by the Convention.
They could set the bar at 25,000 signatures, or at 500. They could try to make it a "partisan" (Dem Rep) or non-partisan election.
The last time they had a nonpartisan primary and nonpartisan general (top 4 from primary with the top 2 winning)
They have room to play. Regardless, if you, or someone who you think would make a good candidate, wanted to run, you would be under the same set of rules as all the other delegates.
Come in, the water's fine. I think it would be easy to run against ANY Republican or Democrat hack put forth by the clowns that run this state.
All you have to do is ask the voter if "they really want to elect a delegate from the same class of idiots who have screwed things up."
The good guys can win this.
Too bad the business community is suffering from Stockholm syndrome. OTOH, they (the business community) might just LIKE TIFs (tax increase financing), Takings, and graft.
One wonders what they are thinking.
Post a Comment