Gov Weighs in on Con-Con

Chicago Tribune’s “Clout Street” Blog:

The governor said he likes the “concept” of a constitutional convention, but said it could be a costly endeavor that “could upset the delicate balance between the executive branch and the legislative branch.”

“Thank God that the constitution gives the executive branch a lot of power to get around the legislative branch,” Blagojevich said, adding that without his ability to issue executive orders or use his amendatory veto power there would be no free mass transit rides for seniors or free breast and cervical cancer exams for women.

“If the constitutional convention were to occur and there was an effort to erode the executive branch’s ability to do those things, then I think less good things would happen for people,” Blagojevich said.

Place under “it should be satire, but it’s not” heading.

4 thoughts on “Gov Weighs in on Con-Con”

  1. ““Thank God that the constitution gives the executive branch a lot of power to get around the legislative branch,” Blagojevich said,”

    Yeah, keep that attitude up for the title of: Worst Governor Ever. In Illinois, with three previous ones going to the jail, the competition for that title is stiff.

  2. I am with this poster:

    “We should vote NO on the constitutional convention. But not because Blagojevich wants to maintain certain powers. We should vote NO because the problems with our state government are NOT with our constitution. The problems with our state government are with the people currently in power. We need to vote them out of office, not change the constitution. It scares me to think of the current IL administration using constitutional changes for political agendas.
    Posted by: Lu | Oct 30, 2008 6:36:21 PM”

    If enough decent people ran for office and won, we would not need recall and we would not need for government reform. We have a politician problem, not a constitution problem.

    Which will cost less, in money, work, and time:

    1. Vote the bums out

    or

    1. Vote for Con Con
    2A. Vote for enough decent people to change the Constitution (remember, if this is by legislative district, then the Chicago people will out number many other areas in the state
    2B. Have enough delegates in the majority to bring good changes to the Constitution
    3. Vote the bums out after the Constitution gets changed

  3. Well, that’s the heart of the debate, isn’t it: Whether it’s the structure or the people at fault, or in what kind of combination.

    Certainly I agree with the gentleman who said, “Politicians in office are like dirty diapers. They need to be changed regularly and for the same reason.” I come from a long line of civic-minded folks who took their responsibility to throw the bums out very seriously.

    But in Illinois government the culture is so entrenched IMO we need not only to replace the leadership ASAP but also to tinker with the structure in as many ways as possible to inhibit and discourage it. We require better campaign laws, we may need to consider term limits, and most of all we need to return as much of the decision-making as possible to the voters.

  4. TERM LIMITS
    Interesting since term limits was one of the major changes in the 1970 Con Con.

    Remeber the limits on terms was eliminated ” because to many good people were forced to leave office because of some silly limts on their term”

    Pevo

Leave a Reply