Illinois Dopers - Constitutional Convention?

Great Debates
1

So, Illinois Dopers, the title pretty much says it all. What’s your take on the proposal for the drafting of a new constitution? I’m not too sure what the ramifications are and exactly what the finer points are, but it’s my perception that Illinois politics are perpetually fucked up so perhaps this would be a step to solving that. Then again, maybe it’d be written by corrupt and incompetent people so it would open the door to even bigger issues.

Any opinions? It’ll be on the ballot come Tuesday.

2

Funny thing is my mom was a delegate at the last Constitutional Convention. I was sitting on her lap at one point when they were doing a vote for something or other (something everyone was pretty much on the same page with so no big deal) and I answered the vote for my mom with an “aye” (or something to that effect…I was five years old or so). The surprised (whoever it was running the show) looked up and said he’d count that as half a vote. No idea if it was actually recorded as such or not although my mom says it was (nice of her to say but I doubt it just the same).

So sure! Let’s do another one!

Actually my dad worked the better part of his life to get merit selection of judges working in Illinois. He never succeeded despite a lot of work to get it to happen. This would be a chance to get that done (perhaps) so if only for that alone I’d like to see it.

3

And a chance to fix school funding. Basing it on local property taxes is bullshit.

4

Seconding what dropzone said. And thirding, and forthing.

5

I early-voted yesterday to avoid the long lines on Tuesday (still had to wait an hour). Besides the presidential election–Obama/Biden–I particularly wanted to vote for the constitutional convention. Hell yes. Way too many loopholes, most of them flagrantly exploited by our loathsome governor and the Chicago machine pols.

One of my dearest hopes is to see Rod Blagojevich wearing an orange jumpsuit, sent up for at least a few decades.

For the persecuted Righties among us, Blagojevich is a Democrat.

6

Waste of money.

7

So this is the early consensus in this thread. What specifics are going to be fixed by it? What are the odds of it actually happening if a convention comes about?

8

No no and NO!

Nothing that can be done by Constitutional Convention that cannot be done by the legislative process. The difference is that the Convention process can be dominated by a few highly motivated single issue folks to ramrod through things that would never get through the more laborious legislative approach. Doing via legislature is slower and more thoughtful and y’know, when it comes to modifying a Constitution I like it that way!

Plus the cost would be outrageous when we are already running into major money problems.

(One clue to me was my neighborhood Right winger big time supports it.)

9

Can he share a cell with George Ryan?

And can it be the basis for a wacky sitcom?

10

There’s a whole laundry list, and it’s worth remembering the very real risk that things could get fucked up even worse, though that would take some doing. And that the state is in genuinely shitty economic condition, due in no small part to its spectacularly dysfunctional governance.

Merit selection of judges is one, reforming school financing and “guaranteeing” public employee pensions are others. At the current rate, the pension system for state and local employees will collapse within two decades. The one I am particularly interested in is straightening out the ludicrously complicated legislative districts. “Gerrymandered” doesn’t begin to cover it. There are a slew of others that may or may not be addressed, including gay marriage and gubernatorial pardons in death penalty cases.

Just about anything is fair game in a constitutional re-do (which is put on the ballot every twenty years). At the moment there’s much outrage over the governor’s (mis)use of an provision that permits supposedly minor amendments to legislation. You know, for clarity and correctness. (Apparently they lack competent transcriptionists or proof readers.) Anyway, our ghastly governor can basically rewrite bills before he signs them. The President of the Senate accepts bills for consideration–or not. If he doesn’t like a bill, it just disappears into limbo. As it is now, the President of the Senate has mind-boggling power. That’s an issue right there.

FWIW, the current President of the Senate, thoroughly a crony of the guv, just retired. The current House Speaker has been locked in balls-out, jugular-strangling war with the governor for several years. They hate each other, all very public and nasty enough to tempt Mike Royko back from the dead just to cover the fireworks. You can image how effectively the state runs.

The lege postures, horse trades, accepts bulging envelopes under tables, swaps favors, but usually produce bills, some of them even sensible. The governor either sits on them, just refusing to sign, or he tacks on whatever ridiculous, expensive pork he wants channeled to his cronies, etc. His “minor” changes can quite effectively gut a bill, change its effect or slap baggage onto it that the legislature never intended. Ooops!

Here’s a brief (PDF) outline of some of the issues and problems. Keep in mind how many powerful unions are involved, taxpayers groups justifiably annoyed at funding expensive waste and of course the established civil, respectful relationship between political parties. The overriding issue for me was, how much worse could this clusterfuck realistically get? The state’s pretty well paralytic right now anyway.

I think only Louisiana may have state government as corrupt.

11

Great, isn’t it, when the state pen needs an ex-Governor’s wing?

12

God, that’d be fun! I miss Mike Royko. Was it here I was reading the (pure) speculation that Blago might appoint Lisa Madigan to Obama’s Senate seat, just to get her out of Illinois? Could he do that? I’m not much up on their feud.

Oh, but the old people love him, since he decided that seniors get to ride the CTA for free. A nice gesture, but that’s a lot of money lost when the CTA is so financially fucked up.

Here’s a sample ballot. The one I used, anyway. I printed it out in advance and used the Windy City Times’ guide to choose the judges to keep, marking them on the ballot to take with me and refer to. When voting, it was laid out exactly like the real thing (only, well, electronic). I voted Yes on the Constitutional Convention. I hope it all works out.

http://www.chicagoelections.com/nov2008ballot/es172.pdf

13

Oh and, definitely a Yes on “Shall the Illinois Constitution be amended to establish a recall process for the office of Governor and other statewide elected officials?”

Bet that one’s got some people shaking in their boots!

14

Wow. I hadn’t heard that one. My mind just bent. Lisa Madigan is State Attorney General, and of course daughter of House Speaker Mike Madigan, he of the famed feud.

I suppose Blago could appoint her, unless there’s some conflicting rule that would prevent it. If there isn’t, it’d be just like him to do it because it would effectively remove her as Attorney General.

The idea has a certain hideous…Illinoisihness about it.

She’s actually done a pretty good job in position. Of course this is a state where elected office is considered family property, to be handed down to heirs.

15

Is anyone proposing anything like this?

16

Had to look up Blagojevich – My word! 4% approval rating! :eek:

17

I just made up my mind today to vote **YES **on Con-Con this Tuesday. A few problems that really need fixing are:

  • the ways public schools are funded (primarily through property taxes)
  • having both a state treasurer and a state comptroller
  • electing judges to the state supreme court
  • no way to recall politicians

As for those who are afraid that we would be opening a can of worms to special interests that would subvert the public good for private gain, remember that whatever the convention produces must then be approved by a vote of the people before it goes into effect.

18

Well, yeah, he’s as rotten as George Ryan, without the credit of a short-lived moratorium of a broken Death Row system to his credit.

As to the OP, I voted no on the convention. Millions to essentially rewrite the same document with the chance for lobbyists … I mean, our trusted elected officials… to get their greedy paws on it. No thanks. The only thing currently on my wish list is the power to recall, and conveniently that was the last question on the ballot.

19

Frostillicus, which of those are unable to be accomplished without a Constitutional Convention?

20

We TRY to keep it alternating governors. You know, Ogilvie-clean, Walker-jailbird, Thompson-clean, but Sam Shapiro broke up the alternation between Kerner and Ogilvie and Edgar broke it between Thompson and Ryan. But having a twofer with Ryan and Blago may balance the universe.

Even though I feel strongly about some of the issues, including the one I raised, I intend to vote against the ConCon. The cost and open opportunities for our manifold rapscallions decided me against it.

My fellow citizens, in this all-too-standard time of political impropriety, I recall tuning into a radio station from Louisiana and remarking aloud, “Jebus! Them Cajuns make us look like PIKERS!”