Chris Lauzen's post mortum
An email from Lauzen.
Number 3 is a balance. I think the solution there is Justice Scalia's position: "It is blindingly clear that judges have no better capacity than the rest of us to determine what is moral".
Abortion, same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cells research should all be decided in legislatures and not by courts. That makes sense and it's a stand that's unmistakable.
Here's the Senator's ideas,
1. "Allow us to vote" for our Republican Party leaders just like Democrats do and just like Republicans used to do before 1986. I sponsored and unanimously passed SB600 out of the State Senate in April 2005. I have waited patiently for House Republican Leaders to ask for a vote. Democrat Speaker Madigan and Majority Leader Currie have acquiescenced to allow a simple up-or-down vote in the House. I now call upon Representatives Tom Cross, Tim Schmitz, and Pat Lindner to use their House Republican Leadership power to call SB600 for a vote during Veto Session within the next three weeks.What social conservatives have to remember is while many (if not most) agree, ...a durable majority of hard-working people know that the strongest social unit in the world is the traditionally family. It's an option no longer available for a growing number of single-parent lead households.
How in the world can a Republican precinct committeeman ask a neighbor to help grow this party, if our leaders do not demonstrate enough respect for that person's opinion to allow them to vote for the equivalent of the party's board of directors? We're fighting a war in Iraq in part for this basic principle of democracy.
2. "Clean up our act" by prohibiting party leaders from working as paid lobbyists on the side. Although it's getting old to be reminded of George Ryan's crimes by a Governor who has been in power for four long years and has more federal investigations directed at his administration than Ryan had, Republicans should have no party leader or elected official who is using his or her political influence and inside information to enrich himself and his friends.
3. "Emphasize traditional values and sound policy principles" rather than being distracted by position and power. A solid majority of citizens and voters in this country believe that every innocent human life is a gift from God and should be protected by society from destruction. They recognize that less government means more freedom. We are confronted by bad people so we need strong national defense externally and conscientious public safety internally. And, a durable majority of hard-working people know that the strongest social unit in the world is the traditionally family. As another Illinois-born Republican Ronald Reagan said, "...now is the time to speak in bold, unmistakable colors, not in timid pastel shades."
Further more of us are going to live the majority of our time alone. A majority of us will grow up in families that don't look traditional. Everyone will agree about the value of the traditional family, but many will not live in one.
It's that reality that in fact sparks much of this debate. It's a reality social conservatives are going to need to understand and learn to speak too, understanding that people live in realities, and not ideals.
The Republican position should be Scalia's: Judges shouldn't make these calls. That means legislatures do it and they need to be aware they shouldn't sound like Judges either.
xp Bill Baar's West Side
4 comments:
Chris Lauzen is pretty much maybe one of 3 or 4 politicians that I respect. While most are unabashedly focused on their own power and re-election, Chris has always focused on the voters of Illinois (and not just his constituents). He realizes that he was given a job to do by the voters, and he tries his best to do it. If we had more politicians like Chris, who actually followed their principles, this country would be much better off.
I agree with schroedk's assessment of Lauzen. There is only one gaping problem.
Aside from the arcane "election of committemen issue" (a barn burner issue for Illinois voters) and lobbying reform , there is only general "happy talk" about principles.
No one rational disagrees with those sentiments, but it's a bit like putting out a 5 alarm fire with a garden hose.
Isn't there a single BIG idea to capture the voters imagination? Is there even a scenario where some good ideas can get passed Illinois bought and paid for legilature?
I'm asking that question over at my blog, if any are willing to give me an answer.
Interesting.
In a very conservative way, Scalia wants to overturn Marbury v. Madison.
If he doesn't think that courts have a role in reviewing legislation, perhaps Mr. Scalia should find a new line of work, since that has been the job of the Supreme Court of the United States since about 1806.
I voted almost 100% democratic on November 7. That being said, I did vote for Chris Lauzen, and I'm glad he's representing me in the State Senate.
Post a Comment