Support for Illinois term limits are far more than overwhelming

When up to 80 percent of any group can agree on something, you know that (1) it's got to be right or (2) an awful lot of people are getting fooled.

When it comes to imposing term limits on Illinois legislators and legislative leaders, I believe that it's the former. Illinois voters are so fed up with the corrupt (and sometimes imprisoned) "public servants, the nepotism and favoritism, the gawd-awful governance and incompetence so deliberate that you suspect that the looney bin has been moved wholesale into the state capital.

The latest astonishing number in favor of getting rid of the gonifs, thieves and idiots are revealed in a Reboot Illinois post:

A Paul Simon Public Policy Institute survey released this week showed respondents overwhelmingly favor term limits for members of the Illinois General Assembly. Nearly 80 percent favor some form of term limits for senators and representatives with 82 percent in favor of limiting the time lawmakers can serve in leadership positions (House speaker, Senate president and House and Senate minority leaders).

The leadership limit is suspected to be directed at House Speaker Michael Madigan, the most arrogant, narcissistic pol running state government that Illinois has experienced in generations. But the self-serving constituents in his district--bought off by patronage as far as the eye can see, keep re-electing him, and shaky Democrats who beg him for campaign dough keep him in power. The only response is for the full electorate for rise up and give the schmucks the boot.

Eric Zorn, in a well-researched post, predicts that the Illinois supreme court would strike down any term limit constitutional amendment to be unconstitutional, a oxymoron that defies common sense, but that might be legal and technically correct. (I didn't expect much different from the politicized Illinois supreme court.)

We'll have to wait some years and a lot of patience before citizens have a right to call a constitutional convention, but that appears to be our best alternative to correcting everything from the obscene important and greedy legislators, the system of remapping the steps over the line of insanity and a pension guarantee that is breaking the state.

Says the Institute's study:

 Support for term limits is strong in every demographic, geographic, and ideological subgroupin the Institute’s poll.

For example, while Republicans were among the groupsmost likely to support the term limit proposal (89.9 percent strongly or somewhat infavor), even an overwhelming majority of Democrats approved of it (73.4 percent strongly or somewhat in favor).
What was America's greatest come-from-behind war? Go here to find out.

To subscribe to The Barbershop, type your email address in the box and click the "create subscription" button. My list is completely spam free, and you can opt out at any time.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Oxymoron? Did you rather mean a 'contradiction'? An oxymoron usually is only an apparent contradiction which upon analysis has some validity.

  • I'm always sceptical of cold-call telephone surveys on topics to which the subjects will have given little attention. I suspect Paul Simon Public Policy Institute could call 1001 people and ask if they would favor a repeal of the law of gravity and get a substantial number of favorable votes.

    In addition, I have never understood why in a democracy we would limit the right of the people to elect the officeholders they want. If a majority wishes to return experienced representatives to office, why should they be told they can't?

  • In reply to jnorto:

    I'm not a big fan of term limits. But do you mean that you would repeal the 22nd amendment that imposes a term limit on the president?

  • In reply to Dennis Byrne:

    Yes, I would prefer to repeal the 22d Amendment. It was passed to prevent future presidents from following the example of FDR, who won four elections for president. I have never understood why a democratic majority should be told they cannot reelect leaders they trust.

Leave a comment

  • ChicagoNow is full of win

    Welcome to ChicagoNow.

    Meet our bloggers,
    post comments, or
    pitch your blog idea.

  • Advertisement:
  • Subscribe to The Barbershop

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

  • Dennis Byrne’s Facebook Fan Page

  • Like me on Facebook

  • google-site-verification: googlefdc32e3d5108044f.html
  • Meet The Blogger

    Dennis Byrne

    Chicago Tribune contributing op-ed columnist and author of forthcoming historical novel, "Madness: The War of 1812." Reporter, editor and columnist for Chicago Sun-Times and Chicago Daily News. Freelance writer and editor.

  • Our National Debt

  • Twitter

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

    • In reply to Rick Bohning:
      I get the analogy, but where it fails is with the assumption that all contraception is equally efficacious in all ...
      Read the story | Reply to this comment
    • In reply to Aquinas wired:
      Logical fallacy: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque. Look it up. In short, hypocrisy does not make or break ...
      Read the story | Reply to this comment
    • In reply to hatch3:
      Another logical fallacy: appeal to authority. Just because the experts claim it to be true, does not make ...
      Read the story | Reply to this comment
    • In reply to Dennis Byrne:
      I think I'll go with the experts on this one. https://www.acog.org/About_ACOG/ACOG_Departments/Health_Care_for_Underserved_Women/Frequently_Asked_Questions_about_Hormonal_Approaches_to_Emergency_Contraception "4. Does this mean that emergency contraception can cause an ...
      Read the story | Reply to this comment
    • I don't see how covering these contraceptives for their employees is violating the religious freedom of the owners of ...
      Read the story | Reply to this comment
  • Monthly Archives

  • /Users/dennisby/Desktop/trailer.mp4
  • Latest on ChicagoNow

  • Advertisement:
  • Fresh Chicago News