Comment on these letters by clicking here

Capitol Fax

Rich Miller's commentary on State Government

Gov. Pat Quinn brought out one of the biggest Democratic Party guns possible last week in his latest fight with Comptroller Dan Hynes.

As you already know, Hynes is running against Gov. Quinn for the Democratic nomination. Hynes recently refused to process several million dollars worth of state payments for tourism programs and various consulting contracts. Hynes said he'll pay them only if Gov. Quinn insists that they are vital to the state's interests.

So, Quinn held a press conference with Mayor Daley last week. Daley and Quinn were preparing to leave for Denmark for the final push to bring the Olympics games to Chicago.

The event was billed as a basic "rah rah" for Illinois tourism and the Olympics.

"This press conference is on that alone," Daley warned reporters during his prepared remarks, "Just more tourists and more conventions into the city."

But, as with just about everything in this state, no gubernatorial press conference is ever purely about government. And with Hynes' recent action, the governor's media event took on a decidedly campaign feel - with Quinn having all the clout on his side.

What about Hynes' refusal to pay those tourism bills, the governor was asked. "Well, y'know, that's politics," Quinn said with no little irritation.

"This is serious, this is all about jobs. I work with Mayor Daley every day, and I have since I was sworn in." Quinn then turned the gush spigot on full blast about his new bestest buddy. "I want to thank the mayor publicly. The day I got sworn in, he called and he was there to help me in a tough time for our whole state of Illinois."

Daley himself chimed in about the controversy without prompting. "You just can't sit back and say, 'They're gonna come to the City of Chicago.' It doesn't work that way." Daley then returned the governor's favor by praising the event's host. "I think that Gov. Quinn has realized that, that you... really have to work to try to get the conventions here," Daley said.

Hynes didn't back down. He demanded again that Quinn resubmit the bills for processing.

Quinn didn't back away, either. The governor said he won't resubmit the bills to the comptroller's office, adding that Hynes ought to just do the job he was elected to.

Unfortunately for Hynes, the politics of the event is far more important than the actual issue.

Anyone who has watched Mayor Daley knows he rarely makes these sorts of public appearances. He almost never overtly endorses anyone in primaries, particularly statewide primaries. But, Daley's presence at an event which was ostensibly governmental but overtly political had the impact of all but endorsing Quinn against Hynes. The fact that Daley spoke up and denounced an attempt to hurt tourism should send chills through the Hynes campaign.

One doesn't mess with two things in Chicago if one hopes to thrive. Up until recently, the only off-limits topic was the patronage-rich O'Hare Airport. But, the city's Olympics bid was added several months ago to Daley's "Do Not Touch" short-list. To mix my metaphors, Hynes has stepped on a third rail. He should've known better.

And that brings us to the inherent irony in this primary battle.

On the one hand we have Dan Hynes, who was brought up in, and brought to the political dance by one of the most influential Machine households in Chicago. That same guy has asked that he not be endorsed by the Cook County Democratic Party and has quickly found himself on the wrong side of Mayor Daley.

On the other hand, we have Pat Quinn, who railed against the Machine for years and was, in turn, despised by that very Machine. He just won the Cook County Democratic endorsement and then held hands with Mayor Daley at a very public love fest.

Right now, anyway, Quinn actually looks more believable in this bizarre role-reversal than Hynes, mainly because he has all the advantages of incumbency. At the moment, Hynes just looks like somebody who is making excuses for why he can't win, and is picking fights that, for the moment, are making him more enemies than friends.

Senate Week In Review

September 21-25, 2009, A view from the Illinois Senate Republican Press Office

SPRINGFIELD ­ Lawmakers and Illinois residents want more details on Gov. Pat Quinn's plan for the early release of approximately 1,000 prison inmates as a way to free up state revenues and reduce overcrowding in state correctional facilities, according to State Sen. Tim Bivins (R-Dixon).

Also this week, the third hearing of the Senate Redistricting Committee centered on proposals to reform Illinois' broken system of drawing legislative districts.

Bivins said the Sept. 18 announcement about Gov. Quinn's planned early release of roughly 1,000 Illinois inmates sparked concern across the state. Department of Corrections (DOC) Director Michael Randle, however, stressed that the inmates who are released will be "low-level, non-violent, short-term" offenders.

DOC has said there will be no early release of sex offenders, inmates who committed crimes against other people, anyone with a current order of protection against them or former parole violators. The early-release inmates are to come from minimum-security prisonsno early releases will be made from medium-security or maximum-security facilities.

Quinn has said the early release program is a way to save the state money, and will help non-violent offendersprimarily drug offenderswho will benefit from the community rehabilitation services and programs that are not as accessible in Illinois' correctional facilities. However, opponents have questioned how the state's already strained parole and social service system can effectively monitor and assist hundreds of new parolees.

DOC will screen inmates over the next two to four weeks. Those inmates who are released early will have electronic monitoring bracelets, and parole agents and others will be notified if they move outside of their approved residence or day-program areas, including daytime drug abuse programs. Violators can be returned to a correctional facility and charged with escaping prison.

The early release proposal comes at the same time that DOC has plans to layoff hundreds of workers at Illinois correctional facilities, due to the state's current fiscal crisis.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union is challenging the proposed layoffs in courtset to take place on Sept. 30due to safety and administrative concerns. The Quinn administration insists that the governor can proceed with layoffs, noting that without the cuts other areas of state government will see the chopping block.

Circuit Court Judge Todd Lambert is reviewing testimony related to the case, and is expected to make his decision in the coming days on whether to block Quinn's proposed layoffs.

During the redistricting hearing Sept. 22 in Peoria, former federal prosecutor and Illinois Reform Commission chairman Patrick Collins urged lawmakers to accept major reforms designed to end partisan political gerrymandering in Illinois. Collins said that the system is not transparent, doesn't encourage public participation, and Illinois citizens do not believe that districts are drawn fairly.

Collins was joined by Commission member Brad McMillan, who is Executive Director of the Institute for Principled Leadership in Public Service at Bradley University, in support of Senate Joint Resolution Constitutional Amendment 69 (SJRCA 69).

Many members of the Senate Republican Caucus support SJRCA 69, which incorporates the redistricting suggestions advanced by the Commission. The amendment advocates for the redistricting process to be conducted by an independent panel. Unlike the current system, the mapmaking process would be taken away from lawmakers, and the voters' political preferences or the incumbent lawmaker's address would not be taken into account.

McMillan, Collins and Republican lawmakers agree that the proposal could be altered, and other ideas incorporated. McMillan noted that the Commission doesn't have a "lock" on the solution to gerrymandering in Illinois, but stressed that lawmakers should take advantage of this opportunity for reform to show Illinois citizens that "the status quo is unacceptable."

Fed Up Independent Voter

I am an Independent Voter who is fed up with listening to the rhetoric from both Democrats and Republicans. There are so many issues out there that I feel strongly about that neither the Right Wing Republicans nor Left Wing Democrats would agree with me on.

Let me start first with the conservative Republicans who think that anyone who disagrees with them is not an American. I have two DD Form 214s for eight years of honorable service to MY country. By the way I "DO NOT" wear a flag pin. One of my Grandmothers had family (Germans) that dates back to Pennsylvania before the country was born. They fought with Washington against the Hessians. She had three sons in WWII and one in Korea. She is the only person I have ever known that stood up in her own home when the Star Spangle Banner (National Anthem for those that don't know) was played. My uncles were not professional soldiers but felt that when you are called it is your duty to serve. I was the first on either side of the family to enlist in the Armed Forces. I will forever believe in the "ALL men are created Equal", "WE the People of the United States", and "That Government of the People, by the People, and for the People". In my opinion if you do not believe in those three phrases then YOU are not an American.

So, to you conservatives who had or still have bumper stickers that said: "America Love it or Leave it", I think it is time for you to heed what the sticker says. We had an election and YOU LOST. Deal with it. I had to put up with Clinton and George W. for the past 16 years.

Now let's go to abortion. Unlike Liberals I do not believe in abortion on demand or that it is strictly up to the woman; and unlike Conservatives I do not believe in "no" abortion. I believe in abortion in cases of rape, incest, deformity of the fetus or the mother's life is endangered. I do not believe that life begins at conception. I believe that life begins when we take our first breath of air because that is when we are on our own. We may die with our first breath or a hundred years later but that is a LIFE. That is GOD'S will and how GOD has made all animals on this planet. Humans are no better or worse than other of GOD'S creatures, they just think they are. This planet existed before humans inhabited it and it will exist after humans are gone.

Speaking of GOD. I believe there is only ONE. Humans have their way of worshipping GOD, which they call religion. I personally do not believe that any particular one is better than another. All religions have been started by man and mankind has been known to lie, cheat and steal. As a boy I attended a catechism class taught by a priest. He told us we shouldn't be playing with non-Catholic children because they were sinners. In my teens I watched the news on TV about the KKK which had many Protestant Clergy as members. I have also noticed how many so-called Christians are in favor of torture. That must mean that they completely agree with what the Romans did to Jesus Christ. I particularly dislike someone trying to force his or her religion on me or anyone else. The first Europeans who came to this continent came because of RELIGIOUS persecution. As AMERICANS we are guaranteed "FREEDOM of RELIGION".

I do not believe in prayer in a public school. What I do believe in is that in EVERY school, at the beginning of EVERY school day the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag should be said. Another thing is that when I learned the pledge it did not have the words "under GOD" in it. I believe the NATIONAL ANTHEM (not GOD Bless America) should be played at every public gathering or sporting event. When it is played people should stand and face the flag. I believe members of the Armed Forces and Veterans should salute. I personally feel better saluting.

Who are you calling socialists? I believe in the free market place BUT there are some things that must be done by government. How many people down in Louisiana feel that socialism is wrong. Do they know that FEMA is a very socialistic department of the federal government? I wonder how many would refuse the help because of it. How many people would fly every day if we did away with the FAA? Would you trust each individual airline for safety in the sky? I doubt it. We all get into cars now a days that are safer than any time in history. Isn't that the government looking out for all of us? When you mail a letter do you complain that what Benjamin Franklin created is socialistic? If your house is on fire do you refuse help from the Fire Department? To everyone out there, if you've forgotten please reread the Preamble to the United States Constitution.

How about the Health Care issue. I am 69 years old an on Medicare. How many Seniors out there have had or will have a hip or a knee replaced. Would they rather pay the asking rate or have Medicare handle it and reduce their cost drastically. themselves or have Medicare pay part? I do believe in a National Health Care covering everyone. I know Canadians and Spaniards who have it and are not scared of going broke should they get sick. There are good and bad doctors in their system just as there are good and bad doctors here. Their medicine doesn't cost what ours costs because their governments have put caps on the pricing. Here Health Care Companies donate (I call it bribes) to politicians' campaign funds and those politicians feel obligated to support legislation favorable to them. How can politicians on both sides of the aisle justify the government spending 1 trillion dollars fighting a war based on a lie which has killed 5000 GI's and be against a program that would save AMERICAN lives.

Now lets get to Afghanistan. Should we be there? Of course we should. As a matter of fact it is the only place we should have started a war. It is the place that Al Queda trained and will again if we fail. We helped the Afghans get rid of the Soviet Union and felt our job was done. That is interesting because after WWII we rebuilt Europe including Germany and Italy who were our enemies. We know that an educated prosperous people would ensure stability in that country. We need to have more non-military people there. It would be a great place for Peace Corps volunteers. Winning the hearts and minds of a people is the important thing not occupying their country.

Another thing that bugs me is our policy in the Middle East. It has not changed since 1948. It hasn't changed whether there has been a Democrat or Republican in the White House. Basically it is that Israel can do no wrong. Whenever there has been a sanction vote against Israel in the U.N. it has always been stopped by the United States. I do not want to hear that they are our ally. Israel is a protectorate of the United States not our ally. No one will ever convince me that the attacks by Al Queda were not related to our position on Israel. If there were any other country building settlements in occupied lands the United States would be critical and ask for sanctions against it. During the gulf war Saddam Hussein fired scud missiles at Israel and that is as far as the missiles could go. So, we invaded Iraq so that those scud missiles would not be fired again. I will never believe we invaded because of weapons of mass destruction.

The best man at my wedding was a SIOUX INDIAN (now referred to as Native American) who was killed in Viet Nam. I bring this up because of the race issue being brought up in politics. The same bigots that are opposed to Mr. Obama are the same kind of people who would have said, "The only good Indian is a dead Indian". Andy really loved this country. We were roommates while stationed in Spain in the U.S. Air Force. He was a jet engine mechanic and I was a radar and computer technician. The other two of our foursome was E.A. of Swedish decent and Marty who was half Navajo and half Spanish decent. We had all been high school football players, which was our original common bond. We worked with others of different races. The thing was that we were all American GI's doing what was needed to be done. To me the color of skin didn't make a difference then, when I worked for IBM later or now.

Liberals and Conservatives better consider the fact that their take over of their respective political parties has caused them to lose elections. The conservatives call Mr. Obama a liberal but then again I would be a liberal to them. At this time in our history I really feel good because there are not enough Democrats or Republicans to win a national election. It is we Independents that will decide any election. We vote for the candidate not the party.

Harry Cello

Lake Carroll, IL

The Way We Weren't

Reading Tom Kocal's "Heart of the Matter, The Way We Were" (September 23), I realized Tom and I must have grown up in parallel universes. My personal memories of the fifties and sixties and my impressions of the Great Depression are completely different from his.

First of all, yes I was told stories about the Great Depression and nostalgic stories about the marks that were left on fence posts by a homeless person indicating that the owners would feed the next person. And yes, individuals and the Community Chest did help some. However, acting alone, generous-minded people have never been able to solve the problems of unemployment, hunger and homelessness. Perhaps Tom should reread The Grapes of Wrath for a picture of the magnitude of the Great Depression and how people reacted to the homeless in their midst when the homeless were more than one or two colorful characters.

There were hundreds of soup kitchens; there were freight trains loaded with men wandering the country looking for work, veterans camped out in Washington DC pleading for their pensions. Thousands of people migrated from the south to the west and north looking for work, there were hundreds of Hoovervilles. The ideas of individual responsibility and self reliance preached by President Hoover weren't enough, and finally FDR had to act for the common good.

Tom also says that today people are just as generous. He's right, and again the problems facing poor people today are overwhelming. Food pantries and even government agencies designed to help the poor aren't enough. All indications are that the economy is slowly recovering, but high unemployment will persist for a much longer period of time. I don't think that the local churches and the United Way can handle the situation. There is a dark side to our generosity, as Barbara Ehrenreich has reported, citing current and even new laws harassing the homeless instead of helping them.

I, too, remember the Great Society. In particular, I remember two wonderful programs, ESEA elementary school classes and Head Start. They were very successful programs, and if they had ever been fully funded it would have made a major difference in millions of students' lives across the country.

I'll always remember, with pride, when the Great Society's Civil Rights Laws were passed and I'll also, shamefully, remember the horrible backlash.

I don't want to go back to fifties and sixties because I remember when schools, neighborhoods and workplaces were segregated; when divorced women were slurred and called "divorcees"; when gays had to hide in the closet because they feared for their very lives. I remember before blacks moved north, many Americans discriminated against Polish and Italian Americans. I remember when Chinese Americans knew that they had to stay in Chinatown and when other Asians came they quickly learned that it's best to live in little Korea or little Saigon. I remember when married pregnant women had to quit teaching and when women couldn't wear slacks. I remember when even white women were treated as second class students on college campuses and when women could only become secretaries, nurses or teachers. God forbid that they should want to become doctors. I remember before Title IX when there were no girls' sports. I remember when women died after botched back alley abortions. I remember when schools ignored students with special needs or warehoused them in a special school. I remember when unions led the fight to make states force health insurance companies to cover mammograms and birth control pills. I remember when nuns, my earliest teachers, discarded their habits and emerged as some of the brightest, wittiest and most articulate women in American. (I'm angry now that the current Pope wants to put them back in their place.) I remember when Christians not only discriminated against Jews, but against each other. I remember miscegenation was illegal.

I especially remember Viet Nam and the three million people the U.S. military killed trying to maintain western dominance of the Pacific Rim.

Tom is a champion of small government and localism. But we all have to learn to think and act both locally and globally simultaneously. In a global age, although small government still has a vital role to play and love of a local place is important, a big robust well-funded government also has a big role to play. Air and water pollution don't recognize state boundaries. The water in Lake Michigan is managed by a bi-country, multi-state treaty; trade in North America is governed (not always sensibly) by a tri-country agreement. The waterfowl and birds that use the Mississippi Flyway migrate from South America up the width of America into Canada. They're not cognizant of man-made boundaries. And when we think of what's best for the old Savanna Army Depot, we have to consider the entire picture. Everyone, except a few naysayers, recognizes that climate change is a global threat that will be solved only by coordinated, international action with the big governments of the big countries leading the way.

Tom talks about the need to protect local control of schools. What local control of schools means is the ability of folks to create school districts for people just like themselves. It also means that there are winners and losers, rich districts and poor districts. Even in the northwest corner of Illinois, school district boundaries mean that different districts end up with different levels of resources regardless of need. What local control really means is that the rich whose children are the most well-prepared for school get the most school resources and that the students who need the most school resources get the least. It is perpetual class warfare on the poor.

What advocates of local control also often mean is no judicial orders to desegregate schools or implement Title IX or maintain affirmative action programs.

The great irony about local control doesn't mean curriculum control except in a very narrow negative sense. A school board will rise up in righteous indignation and force the librarian or teachers to stop teaching Catcher in the Rye, Beloved or biology. But when the great changes take place, local school boards go along, perhaps reluctantly, but they go along. We have long had a national curriculum not because of NCLB but because the economics of the textbook industry dictate the need for national sales and because teachers were educated and have always been educated to believe that they and their students through education gain a broad perspective, an international perspective on the world. They have long believed that all students should read both classic and contemporary literature. They know that science can't change to conform to local attitudes. This philosophy predates any state or federal guidelines and mandates.

And yes, sometimes the need and demand for change does start from the bottom, but it gains legitimacy from educators and scholars as the ideas permeate from parents to the administrators, school boards and scholars, for example adding African American literature and history and feminist and gay literature to the curriculum.

Big problems need big solutions and when anti-government folks kill programs like the Great Society they leave in their wake even bigger problems. Sadly, they have no solution for the new problems that they have helped create and as those problems continue to fester and weaken our society they have no realistic idea, no clue, on how to solve the major problems facing our country. The health care debate is just one example. Sure the bill has shortcomings. However, let's talk about the shortcomings and come up with a better bill. But that's not the way anti-government folks think. They just say no. No to every problem that comes along! In their own words, "They want to kill the beast." Perhaps, they don't really want to solve the problems. Perhaps they believe in some cathartic crash and burn, some great purge of the soul.

Chuck Wemstrom

Mount Carroll

What's euthanasia? Your dictionary needs correcting

Euthanasia is in the news daily now, with promoters denying and opponents charging that it's imbedded in ObamaCare, so it's important to know what the word originally meant and how it's misunderstood today.

Fredric Wertham, M.D., an expert on human violence, explained it in his 1966 book A Sign for Cain, which documented the involvement of German medical professionals in the Holocaust.

Euthanasia comes from two Greek words: eu (well) and thanatos (death.) "By it," he wrote, "the ancients meant the art and discipline of dying in peace and dignity, with special emphasis on relief from pain and suffering." It meant mitigating and relieving pain and suffering during the death agony by medication or other medical means.

Even before the war, before Hitler wrote anything about it, leading German psychiatrists and directors of mental hospitals launched a program to kill all mental patients in the country ­ those whose life was "not worth living" (lebensunwerten lebens.) The term "euthanasia" was used to conceal the actual purpose of the project.

Were those "good deaths"? None of them were dying. (That was the problem, as it is today in America!)

That false meaning continues to corrupt our language today, Dr. Wertham notes. Look up the definition of euthanasia in any dictionary you have in your house or school. Most likely you'll read: "mode or act of inducing death painlessly or as a relief from pain."

That is not euthanasia; that's homicide. If you "put a person to death," that is, deliberately kill him, that's murder. If you do it "painlessly," it's still murder. Many murders, like suicides, are committed without inflicting pain. A widely used dictionary of psychological and psychoanalytical terms defines euthanasia as "the practice of ending life painlessly." Some mass murderers do exactly that.

"That such confused and confusing definitions are given in standard dictionaries." Wertham writes, "proves my thesis that violence is more solidly and insidiously set in our social thinking than is generally believed."

Sincerely,

Richard O'Connor

Pearl City, IL

Capitol Report

By Jim Sacia, State Representative, 89th District

God, Guns, Manure and Politics ­ as the mass media becomes more and more available we are inundated with more and more information. During a recent channel search I inadvertently happened upon a TV anchor challenging a candidate who had mentioned God in his campaign. She portrayed the reference to God as a significant negative, and suggested that this candidate should not be your candidate of choice.

If you'd taken a photo of me as I watched, you would have caught me with my mouth open, staring in disbelief. I am a believer and I work at being a decent, God fearing person. I distinctly remember a pin worn by many when I was a boy: PBPGINFWMY. We all knew it stood for "Please Be Patient, God Is Not Finished With Me Yet". I hung my hat on that, and always felt it was pretty neat.

I also vividly recall 1954, when I learned in my "Weekly Reader" that the words "under God" would be added to the Pledge of Allegiance because of this country's deep belief. It's kind of interesting to see how our direction has changed.

The push is on again by Chicago area legislators to get all of us to give up our guns due to the significant number of shootings in the city. Let me get this straighta city where guns are already outlawed, except for police, has a horrific problem with people shooting each other. How to fix it? We'll just outlaw guns throughout Illinois. That makes absolutely no sense. Good people don't shoot other people; bad people shoot other people. No matter how many restrictions you put in place, guns will always be available to bad people with money. How in God's name (there I go again) will taking my gun away prevent shootings in Chicago? Give me a break. Warm, fuzzy-feeling legislation will never stop a gang banger or other thug from illegally acquiring a gun and shooting people. My advice to my Chicago friends is to enforce your Chicago laws and leave the rest of us alone. You will never get downstaters, Democrats or Republicans, to give up our guns.

I've just been advised by the Farm Bureau that the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) is pushing legislation to significantly increase the amount of acreage necessary for livestock operations, in particular Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), manure applications. Livestock operators need to get on top of this one as the proposed Illinois requirements are far more onerous than those in any other state.

We all know who is backing the new requirements. The legislation will be touted as a "green" bill; "green" has become quite a popular buzzword lately. Need I remind anyone that livestock manure is made up of nutrients: principally nitrogen, phosphorus and potash. Those are the very same nutrients needed to grow the crops we eat. Modern farmers are truly masters at nutrient management. They should be applauded, not punished.

Do you think politics plays into all of the above? In my opinion, you bet it does, but then PBPGINFWMY.

As always, you can reach me, Sally or Barb at 815/232-0774 or e-mail us at jimsacia@aeroinc.net. You can also visit my website at www.jimsacia.com. It's always a pleasure to hear from you.

world wide web prairie advocate