 |
| Somebody gave thought to what was right; how dare they! |
That
question, along with one whether a position of Chicago city consumer advocate
ought to be created, are the latest initiatives by Pat Quinn – the former
governor who is trying to remain politically active as a man inclined to throw a
wrench into the political works.
THUS
FAR, THE courts have ruled in ways that say the measures are not valid – saying
there already are too many referendum questions on the ballot for Nov. 6 AND
that Quinn screwed up in the way he filed the referendum questions.
But
as the Chicago Sun-Times reported on Sunday, elections board officials went
ahead and had ballots printed up WITH the referendum questions on them. Also,
voting machines used in polling places in Chicago will include the issues so
people can cast their “yes” or “no” votes.
Officials
say they went ahead and did so because they wondered if an appeals court of
some form will come up with a ruling making the referendum questions legitimate.
If
elections board officials had not shown the initiative to put the issues on the
ballot, it would be possible for a court to say they were legitimate questions that
could not be on the ballot because there wasn’t enough time to reconfigure
everything to include them.
WHICH
IS EXACTLY the kind of political chaos that people opposed to including the
referendum questions on the ballot would like to see happen.
Just
like the intent of the Chicago City Council to come up with three other
referendum questions for consideration wasn’t so much because anybody in city
government cares about the use of plastic straws in restaurants (an environmental
threat), but so as to screw up the intent of anyone who’d want to use a
referendum question to measure public support for a concept.
Such
as whether or not people should be limited to two terms (of four years apiece)
in the office of Chicago mayor.
 |
| Emanuel's choice makes term limits issue a moot point, … |
Nobody
in a position of political authority really wants anybody messing around with
that issue. Out of fear that voters might give a knee-jerk response and say “yes”
to the idea. Which would then put political people in a real predicament.
SO
IF YOU are of the perspective of the “goo goo” (the good government activist
who has some sort of high-minded noble concept of what government ought to be
all about), you are probably very pleased with the Chicago Board of Election
Commissioners.
Because
somebody there thought it important enough for votes to be recorded so as to
put the issue on the record, even if nothing is done with the vote tallies – an attitude the political hacks of the world most
definitely want nothing to do with.
As
for the “hacks,” I suspect their priority now will be to ensure that those
votes are NEVER counted, or disclosed in any way.
Which
if it turns out that the courts continue to say the referendum questions are
invalid, is exactly what will happen.
THERE
WILL BE no reason to count the votes that people cast on these particular
referendum questions. In fact, they will become the ultimate non-issue of the
Nov. 6 election cycle.
 |
| … but Quinn likely to pursue regardless |
In
fact, I’m sure there will be some activist types who will start making demands
that those votes be counted regardless, and that the vote tallies be publicly
disclosed. Something I’m sure the “hacks” will consider to be an act of
political heresy
How
dare you tell people that maybe a majority of people who bothered to cast
ballots would want to limit the stint one can serve as mayor – similar to how
we limit the time of anyone as U.S. president! As though the will of the public
serves any point in an election.
What
next? We’ll probably start hearing from people who say we’ve had too many “Daleys”
serve as Chicago mayor. Sorry Bill!
-30-
No comments:
Post a Comment