“Yes” For Illinois

Few people think of arcane Constitutional issues when watching political theater like Blagojevich recent “Free Rides for Seniors” episode.

That doesn’t mean some one shouldn’t be talking about such issues. Article IV, Sec. 9(e) of the Illinois Constitution reads as follows;

(e) The Governor may return a bill together with specific recommendations for change to the house in which it originated. The bill shall be considered in the same manner as a vetoed bill but the specific recommendations may be accepted by a record vote of a majority of the members elected to each house. Such bill shall be presented again to the Governor and if he certifies that such acceptance conforms to his specific recommendations, the bill shall become law. If he does not so certify, he shall return it as a vetoed bill to the house in which it originated.

So what is the problem here? I can think of one right off the bat. This bill allows the governnor to “initiate” legislation independent of the legislative branch. This may seem a small thing, but if the seniors should ride free, let the legislature propose it.

What you basically have here is a one way ratchet. A governor could take virtually any bill, veto it, and insert virtually any language on any related (or unrelated) matter (thus initiating legislation), essentially holding the bill hostage. Amazingly, such a veto doesn’t even require a 3/5th vote, but merely a simple majority.

While this may seem to be a small issue, the 100s of similar baubles of poor policy abound in this horrible Constitution. In this instance, the Governor has immense power, and the legislature has a easy excuse to pass legislation that most people in the state may have no interest in. This is another perfect example of allowing members of the political class to evade responsibility for governance…

“The governor made me do it.”

As I was looking into this issue, I found this hilarious little tidbit on some NIU site. It’s from a 1977 “Illinois Issues.” Some absent-minded (in the true meaning of the term) professor wrote this piece of nonsense when defending the “Amendatory Veto.”

The trouble with the amendatory veto power is not the power itself, but the abuse of the power. If abused, the instruments of checks and balances are there for correcting its abuse. The abuse can be corrected by the General Assembly or by the courts. As the Supreme Court has demonstrated, it has not hesitated to act where in its opinion the power is abused. What is needed are clear guidelines. Either the legislature has to establish them by its own action in the review of amendatory vetoes or take the question to the courts to decide.

This is total claptrap written by some pointy-headed intellectual who has no sense of the obvious. He actually theorizes that power may not be abused by some one who has it. This, IN ILLINOIS!!! The last decade has shown us that the legislature and the Judicial Branch are either completely incapable or unwilling to curtail ANY abuse of Government power. These institutions destroy and undermine citizens’ individual rights at every turn, but never curtail government power.

---

Look at this state, ladies and gentlmen. Blagojevich isn’t “exceptional” in any way. He’s merely the latest example of the kind of leader we get when government is intended to reign supreme over the people. Blagojevich isn’t the problem. The Illnois Constitution is the problem. When you contemplate the $106 billion in unfunded debt, the rapid rise in property taxes, and the looming bankruptcy coming inspite of rapid revenue increases, please understand that this was inevitable under the piece of toilet paper called the Illinois Constitution.

Please disabuse yourself of the notion that this can be fixed by finding “better people” for public office. First, such people are easily stripped from the political process long before they have a chance of effecting change. Second, 38 years of this has created an Adminstrative, Legislative AND Judicial Branch that are actively engaged in the process of feeding off the citizens of Illinois for either their personal benefit, or for the benefit of interested parties.

A convention may not succeed in fixing Illinois, but it is the ONLY remaining chance that the state gets fixed.

As Sherlock Holmes said when talking to Watson (not Frank Watson), “Once you eliminate the impossible, what is left (a convention, in the case of Illinois), no matter how improbable, MUST be the solution.”