IS SOMETHING BETTER THAN NOTHING?

On November 2nd, Illinois voters will have the opportunity to decide whether to adopt a state constitutional amendment that will allow for recall of the Governor. I checked “NO!” on my ballot. (I did early voting.) I feel in this case, something is NOT better than nothing!

Having a gubernatorial recall amendment as is currently worded is like having a life jacket during the sinking of the Titanic. You might think you have protection, but you are still going down with the ship! Voting “no” would send legislator’s back to the drawing board to write an amendment that should have shark’s teeth.

As proposed, a recall would first require hundreds of thousands signatures on a petition (at least 15% of the total votes cast for the Governor in their election!). To ensure “good signatures,” a petitioner always needs to get at least double the requirement, so we are actually looking at more than ONE MILLION signatures needed.

A recall would also require an affidavit signed by at least 20 State Representatives (10 Republicans, 10 Democrats) and at least 10 State Senators (5 Republicans, 5 Democrats.) That is 15 legislators from the Governor’s OWN party. The measure also only allows for recall of the Governor, NOT any other elected official. Are only Governors crooks or bad leaders?


Oregon was the first state to give voters the power to recall a governor during the Progressive Era in 1908. Should Illinois voters pass this amendment, we would become the 19th state to adopt such a measure. Recall has only worked twice in the history of our country: North Dakota's Lynn Frazier (1921) and California's Gray Davis (2003).


If approved by 60% of the voters, the proposed measure would add a new section, Section 7, to Article III of the Illinois Constitution. The Illinois Constitution definitely needs revisions and the Illinois electorate should have voted for a Constitutional Convention when they had the chance in the 2008 election, which I was in favor of, but they failed to vote for an entire revamp and should not accept this watered-down amendment now.


The amendment was proposed by Illinois State Rep. Jack Franks (D-Marengo) and Rep. Dan Cronin (R-Elmhurst). Franks said, "If any state needs to give the voters the power of recall, it is Illinois with its long record of malfeasance in office. The numerous failings of our former governor are an indisputable example of why recall is necessary." I agree with Franks that a recall is necessary, but a recall amendment should not just hold true for the Governor!


In opposition, Rep. William Black (R-Danville) said that although "this is the best we can do at this time," the proposed recall amendment doesn't represent "true citizen-initiative recall." He also stated that the proposed amendment, if used during Blagojevich's tenure, could have easily been circumvented.


If the petition drive succeeds, then, the proposed amendment says: “If the petition is valid and sufficient, the State Board of Elections shall certify the petition not more than 100 days after the date the petition was filed, and the question ‘Shall (name) be recalled from the office of Governor?’ must be submitted to the electors at a special election called by the State Board of Elections, to occur not more than 100 days after certification of the petition.“ That means the state would have to spend millions to hold a special election! Most of the time the state is broke, so where would the money come from?


Do I have an answer as to what the correct wording of a recall amendment should be? No, I just feel that if the state has one, it should have teeth to sink any elected official, not just the governor!