* The Champaign News-Gazette editorializes today in favor of a “Yes” vote on a constitutional convention…
The opponents of a constitutional convention in Illinois have collected more than $1.2 million for a campaign to persuade Illinoisans that there’s nothing wrong with Illinois government that elections won’t fix. But that’s part of the problem. The special interests opposed to a convention are the same interests that bankroll and control the Legislature and state government today. How satisfied are you with that mess?
That opening graf sums it up quite well.
* The paper offers up several problems that a con-con could address, including this one…
The current constitution requires that “(a)ppropriations for a fiscal year shall not exceed funds estimated by the General Assembly to be available during that year.” Yet, using a loophole, the Legislature has consistently spent more than it is taking in. That’s why, according to state Comptroller Dan Hynes, the state has about $2 billion in unpaid bills, much of that carried over from the last fiscal year.
* I’m going to address this first point soon, but the second point made here is also on target…
The opponents say the con con process would be dominated by the same legislators and/or special interests that control the Legislature today. Perhaps, but that wasn’t the case with the constitution of 1970. Those delegates, many of them bright, independent thinkers, were elected on a nonpartisan ballot. They produced a document that has held up fairly well, although it needs improvement.
* And I totally agree with this conclusion…
We do not make this recommendation for a constitutional convention lightly. It will require hard work by people of integrity and good will. Preparations leading up to the convention, as well as its work, will require vigilance by the news media, good government groups and others. But Illinois government is such an embarrassment that this extraordinary step is needed. The political parties have had years to fix the situation and are either unable or unwilling to do so. The voters must act. [emphasis added]
* Jim Edgar and Dawn Clark Netsch held a joint press conference yesterday to oppose the con-con vote. Edgar and Netsch ran against each other for governor back in 1994, so they are quite an odd couple…
Both leaders said the high cost of a convention which some estimates project at approximately $80 million is difficult to justify at a time when the state is facing deficits and is not meeting its obligations on education, health care and roads.
Those deficits are allowed by the loopholes in the current constitution that they both support.
* A Tribune article today includes this insight into the interest groups opposing the con-con…
They share the belief that stopping a constitutional convention now will be cheaper—and safer—than spending money on electing and lobbying delegates to push their own special agendas against each other.
That’s true to a point. More next week.
* The Paul Simon Institute poll asked about the convention as well. Is a con-con ncessary because state leaders are not addressing the problems, or could the problems be addressed other ways and a convention might not help and could make things worse?
*** UPDATE *** Jim Edgar is featured in a new TV ad by the Alliance to Protect the Illinois Constitution…
