Illinois voters don’t want a Constitutional Convention, 68 to 32 percent. Apparently, they’re all happy with excessive executive power, gerrymandering that allows politicians to choose their voters instead of vice-versa, and the ability for about four people to put a stranglehold on the Illinois House and Senate. Good show!
Of course the real answer, as former Governor Edgar, et. al., explained on the radio countless times, is to simply vote these bad representatives out of office. So, let’s see who got voted out of office. Hmmm…. Ah yes, here it is: No one.
Well, I don’t want to hear any complaints about state government from anyone who voted against the Con Con. You had your chance to improve things, and you blew it.
I think most people did not understand what it was and they thought it was going to cost them money, so they voted against any more government.
How exactly can I vote Mike Madigan and Emil Jones (I realize he has just retired) out of office? Until there are limits on how long people can hold the key leadership positions nothing will change.
Uh…the same clowns currently in office are the ones that will be in the driver’s seat of any Con-Con. That’s why people voted against it.
CJ-I agree with you 100%.
I’m still on the Impeach Blago bandwagon.
Angie,
Considering the ‘record’ of our current President…can I assume you are also on the “impeach” Bush bandwagon?
The voters choose the delegates and then the voters get to vote on proposed changes. That is more power in my (and other voters’) hands than getting to choose between Gordon or Krupa. The impeachment deal is a perfect example. I would bet money that there are enough votes to impeach him, but it won’t get called for a vote.
Just think, con-con could have put Blago’s impeachment effort on a parallel track with that of his indictment. My money would be on impeachment because smart money says Patrick Fitzgerald likely won’t last long in Obama’s presidency. A cynical person could further speculate that Fitzgerald’s replacement will lack his passion for digging deeper into Illinois political corruption.
There was speculation on Chicago radio today that Blago will appoint himself senator and run back to D.C. Maybe A.S. will run for that seat in two years?….What say ye?
I voted against the con-con and I will complain about state government. While I do think the current state leadership sucks, I have multiple reasons why I voted against the con-con. Great things about elections, you get to vote how you want to. Everybody is different and everybody has different views. Just because someone didn’t vote the same as you doesn’t make them a moron.
So, you’d rather complain about state government than do anything to improve it?
I personally don’t think the con-con was the way to improve it.
Complaining is the way to improve it?
No, I’m not saying that. His original post said don’t complain about state government if you voted against the con-con. I have multiple reasons why I didn’t vote for the con-con. While some aspects of the con-con would be great, for me, there were far more cons than pros to the con-con. Just because I voted against the con-con doesn’t mean I can’t complain about state government as CJ has said. By voting against the con-con, it also doesn’t make me a dumbass as his original post implies. Maybe not what he meant, but it’s how I took it.
Would a new constitution in any way change the balance of power between Chicago and downstate? Isn’t that one of the main problems of state government? Would a new constitutional convention actually result in the impeachment of the present governor? Won’t we get a chance to elect a new governor before the constitution would have been changed–if the convention issue had passed?