|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
|
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| HOUSE JOINT RESOLUTION 137
|
2 |
| WHEREAS, Article XIV of the 1970 Illinois Constitution |
3 |
| requires that if the question of whether a constitutional |
4 |
| convention should be called is not submitted during any 20-year |
5 |
| period, that question shall be submitted at the general |
6 |
| election in the 20th year following the last submission; and
|
7 |
| WHEREAS, The question of the convening of a constitutional |
8 |
| convention was submitted to the electorate in 1988, and that |
9 |
| question has not been submitted during the past 20-year period; |
10 |
| and
|
11 |
| WHEREAS, The 1970 Illinois Constitution requires that the |
12 |
| question of whether to call a constitutional convention be |
13 |
| submitted to the electorate at the general election in 2008; |
14 |
| and
|
15 |
| WHEREAS, The Constitutional Convention Act authorizes the |
16 |
| procedure for preparing voter education materials to accompany |
17 |
| the question of calling a convention and requires the General |
18 |
| Assembly to prepare those materials; and
|
19 |
| WHEREAS, The General Assembly, by House Joint Resolution |
20 |
| 111, has created a Joint Committee for the Constitutional |
21 |
| Convention Proposal to prepare, for adoption by both houses, a |
|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
- 2 - |
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| report which provides a brief explanation and arguments in |
2 |
| favor of and against a constitutional convention, as well as |
3 |
| the form in which the question will appear on the ballot; |
4 |
| therefore, be it
|
5 |
| RESOLVED, BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE |
6 |
| NINETY-FIFTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, THE |
7 |
| SENATE CONCURRING HEREIN, that the report of the Joint |
8 |
| Committee for the Constitutional Convention Proposal, as set |
9 |
| out in this Resolution, is hereby adopted and shall be |
10 |
| certified to the Secretary of State:
|
|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
- 4 - |
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| To the Electors of the State of Illinois: |
2 |
| The 1970 Illinois Constitution requires the electors of the |
3 |
| State to decide, every 20 years, if it is necessary to revise |
4 |
| or rewrite the Illinois Constitution. In 1988 the electors |
5 |
| rejected the call for a constitutional convention, with 75% |
6 |
| voting against and 25% voting in favor of convening a |
7 |
| convention. At the general election to be held on November 4, |
8 |
| 2008, the voters will be called upon to decide whether Illinois |
9 |
| should convene a constitutional convention. |
10 |
| EXPLANATION
|
11 |
| The purpose of a state constitution is to establish a structure |
12 |
| for government and laws. The Illinois Constitution provides |
13 |
| citizens with rights and protections; creates the executive, |
14 |
| judicial, and legislative branches of government; clarifies |
15 |
| the powers given to local governments; limits the taxing power |
16 |
| of the State; and imposes certain restrictions on the use of |
17 |
| taxpayer dollars. There are three ways to initiate change to |
18 |
| the Illinois Constitution: (1) a constitutional convention may |
19 |
| propose changes to any part; (2) the General Assembly may |
20 |
| propose changes to any part; or (3) the people of the State by |
21 |
| referendum may propose changes to the Legislative Article. |
22 |
| Regardless of the method of initiating change, the people of |
23 |
| Illinois must approve any changes to the Constitution before |
|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
- 5 - |
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| they become effective.
|
2 |
| A constitutional convention is a meeting of delegates elected |
3 |
| by the people to review the Constitution. During a convention, |
4 |
| the delegates may propose changes to parts of the current |
5 |
| Constitution, write a new Constitution, or make no changes |
6 |
| whatsoever. If the people of the State on November 4, 2008 |
7 |
| decide it is necessary to call a convention, a separate |
8 |
| election will be held to elect delegates to represent the |
9 |
| voters during the constitutional convention. The elected |
10 |
| delegates will meet to review the current constitution and |
11 |
| decide whether the constitution should be revised or rewritten. |
12 |
| There is no limit as to how long a constitutional convention |
13 |
| may meet. The last constitutional convention met for nine |
14 |
| months. Once the delegates complete their work, the voters will |
15 |
| have an opportunity to approve or reject proposed changes.
|
16 |
| The call for a constitutional convention will be on the |
17 |
| November 4, 2008 general election ballot. Voters that believe |
18 |
| the 1970 Illinois Constitution should be reviewed, revised, or |
19 |
| rewritten through the convention process should vote "YES" on |
20 |
| the question of calling a constitutional convention. |
21 |
| Three-fifths of those voting on the question or a majority of |
22 |
| those voting in the election must vote "yes" in order for a |
23 |
| constitutional convention to be called. Voters that believe |
24 |
| that a constitutional convention is not necessary, or that |
|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
- 6 - |
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| changes can be accomplished through other means, should vote |
2 |
| "NO" on the calling of a constitutional convention.
|
3 |
| Summary of Arguments In Favor of Holding a Constitutional |
4 |
| Convention |
5 |
| 1. A constitutional convention allows delegates to |
6 |
| consider important substantive issues that have failed to |
7 |
| advance in the legislative process.
|
8 |
| 2. Changes to our state and local governments are best |
9 |
| addressed by delegates elected solely to review the |
10 |
| Constitution.
|
11 |
| 3. A constitutional convention would provide the first |
12 |
| comprehensive review of the Illinois Constitution since its |
13 |
| adoption in 1970.
|
14 |
| 4. Any proposed changes to the Constitution must be |
15 |
| ratified by the voters before they become effective.
|
16 |
| Summary of Arguments Against Holding a Constitutional |
17 |
| Convention |
18 |
| 1. A constitutional convention could cost as much as $78 |
19 |
| million.
|
20 |
| 2. The current Illinois Constitution could be changed |
21 |
| without a constitutional convention, and in fact has been |
22 |
| changed 10 times since the last convention.
|
|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
- 7 - |
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| 3. A constitutional convention could be controlled by |
2 |
| special interest groups and lobbyists, and there is no way to |
3 |
| limit the issues discussed.
|
4 |
| 4. A convention could threaten the economy by creating an |
5 |
| unstable business climate.
|
6 |
| Arguments In Favor of Holding a Constitutional Convention |
7 |
| Address Important Issues That Have Failed to Advance in the |
8 |
| Legislative Process
|
9 |
| Amendments proposed by the General Assembly must be approved by |
10 |
| both the Illinois Senate and the Illinois House of |
11 |
| Representatives before they are submitted to the voters. If one |
12 |
| chamber does not like an amendment, or both chambers cannot |
13 |
| agree on the language of the proposed amendment, the voters |
14 |
| will never have an opportunity to vote on the proposed change. |
15 |
| State Senators and Representatives have proposed hundreds of |
16 |
| constitutional amendments, but only six have made it to the |
17 |
| ballot since the 1988 vote on whether to call a constitutional |
18 |
| convention. Many of the proposals that have failed to advance |
19 |
| in the legislative process address important issues such as |
20 |
| education funding, state and local taxes, electing judges, and |
21 |
| ethics reform to reduce the influence of special interest |
22 |
| groups and lobbyists.
|
|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
- 8 - |
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| Best Chance for Real Change
|
2 |
| Illinois has over 6,900 units of government, far more than any |
3 |
| other state in the nation. Delegates to a constitutional |
4 |
| convention could propose ideas to consolidate state and local |
5 |
| governments to provide citizens with more responsive and |
6 |
| cost-effective government services. A convention could restore |
7 |
| the confidence of citizens in the political process. Delegates |
8 |
| could discuss important issues including term limits for |
9 |
| elected officials, citizen initiatives for changes to the |
10 |
| Constitution, and a new process for drawing representative |
11 |
| boundaries designed to provide fair representation. A |
12 |
| constitutional convention with independent-minded delegates is |
13 |
| the best opportunity to address the issues and bring about real |
14 |
| change.
|
15 |
| Periodic Review Is Important
|
16 |
| The delegates to the 1970 Constitutional Convention wanted to |
17 |
| make sure the voters have the opportunity to review the |
18 |
| Constitution every 20 years. As one delegate stated during |
19 |
| debate at the last Constitutional Convention, "The voters ought |
20 |
| to have that chance to express themselves every 20 years." |
21 |
| Holding a constitutional convention does not mean that |
22 |
| delegates will automatically change the whole document. It is |
23 |
| up to the delegates to decide if it is necessary to write a new |
|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
- 9 - |
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| Constitution, update certain portions, or leave the document |
2 |
| unchanged.
|
3 |
| Voters Must Approve Any Changes
|
4 |
| Opponents to a constitutional convention argue that special |
5 |
| interest groups and lobbyists will influence delegates and |
6 |
| dominate the convention for the benefit of their clients, but a |
7 |
| strong argument exists that these same groups presently have |
8 |
| disproportionate influence over the legislative process. While |
9 |
| elected representatives approve any changes to the laws of our |
10 |
| State, any changes proposed at a constitutional convention must |
11 |
| be approved by the citizens. This approval process gives voters |
12 |
| an opportunity to participate directly in any revision of the |
13 |
| Constitution, countering the influence of special interest |
14 |
| groups and lobbyists.
|
15 |
| Arguments Against Holding a Constitutional Convention |
16 |
| Convention Expenses Could Be High
|
17 |
| Estimates of the total cost for a constitutional convention |
18 |
| range from $58 to $78 million. Illinois is in the midst of a |
19 |
| financial crisis that would be made worse by holding a |
20 |
| constitutional convention. Instead of paying for important |
21 |
| services, your tax dollars would be diverted to pay for the |
|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
- 10 - |
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| cost of electing delegates, salaries for delegates and staff, |
2 |
| printing and publication, and other administrative expenses. |
3 |
| Considering that there are two inexpensive ways to initiate |
4 |
| change if necessary through an amendment process, a convention |
5 |
| is a major expense that taxpayers do not need.
|
6 |
| Current Amendment Process Works
|
7 |
| The Constitution can be changed through an amendment process |
8 |
| and any changes must be approved by the voters. State Senators |
9 |
| and Representatives have the ability to propose changes to any |
10 |
| Article of the Constitution, and citizens may propose changes |
11 |
| to the structure and procedures of the Legislature. Since 1970, |
12 |
| voters have approved 10 of 18 proposed amendments to the |
13 |
| Constitution. Amendments encourage the same level of public |
14 |
| debate that proponents believe can only be achieved during a |
15 |
| constitutional convention. The amendment process is also less |
16 |
| costly and it ensures that citizens have an opportunity to |
17 |
| approve any change before it becomes effective.
|
18 |
| Influence of Special Interests
|
19 |
| There is no way to keep delegates to a constitutional |
20 |
| convention from the influence of special interest groups and |
21 |
| lobbyists. To be a delegate, candidates would need to raise |
22 |
| funds to run a campaign and win an election. Special interest |
|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
- 11 - |
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| groups and lobbyists will contribute money to these campaigns, |
2 |
| and if elected, a delegate may feel indebted to those who made |
3 |
| contributions. Delegates are not subject to the same ethical |
4 |
| standards as constitutional and legislative officers and do not |
5 |
| have to run for re-election, making them less accountable to |
6 |
| the voters for their actions. Additionally, there is no way to |
7 |
| control the issues debated during a constitutional convention. |
8 |
| The convention could be dominated by current controversial |
9 |
| issues like abortion, capital punishment, gay marriage, gun |
10 |
| control, public education, and state and local taxes. |
11 |
| Convention delegates might ultimately spend months or years, |
12 |
| and millions of taxpayer dollars, debating policy issues that |
13 |
| should be decided by legislators accountable to the people.
|
14 |
| Negative Impact on the State Economy
|
15 |
| Holding a convention at this time could negatively impact the |
16 |
| economy. To grow economically and attract new jobs, the State |
17 |
| must provide a stable climate for business and labor. An |
18 |
| important part of this is a clear, predictable tax structure. |
19 |
| Business leaders are worried that the uncertainty created by a |
20 |
| convention could make it difficult to keep businesses in |
21 |
| Illinois or attract new businesses.
|
22 |
| FORM OF BALLOT |
|
|
|
HJ0137 Engrossed |
- 12 - |
LRB095 20976 RCE 51642 r |
|
|
1 |
| Proposed call for a Constitutional Convention
|
2 |
| Explanation of Proposed Call
|
3 |
| This proposal deals with a call for a state constitutional |
4 |
| convention. The last such convention was held in 1969-70, and a |
5 |
| new Constitution was adopted in 1970. The 1970 Illinois |
6 |
| Constitution requires that the question of calling a convention |
7 |
| be placed before the voters every 20 years. In 1988 the |
8 |
| electors rejected the call for a constitutional convention, |
9 |
| with 75% voting against calling a convention and 25% voting in |
10 |
| favor of calling a convention. If you believe the 1970 Illinois |
11 |
| Constitution needs to be revised through the convention |
12 |
| process, vote "YES" on the question of calling a constitutional |
13 |
| convention. If you believe that a constitutional convention is |
14 |
| not necessary, or that changes can be accomplished through |
15 |
| other means, vote "NO" on the calling of a constitutional |
16 |
| convention.
|
17 |
| -------------------------------------------------------------
|
18 |
| YES For the calling
- |
19 |
| ---------- of a Constitutional
|
20 |
| NO Convention.
|
21 |
| -------------------------------------------------------------
|