Jack Franks Adopts 2002 Cal Skinner Issue

The poster used in the kick-off press conference for Cal Skinner's run for Governor as a Libertarian

The poster used in the kick-off press conference for Cal Skinner’s run for Governor as a Libertarian

The first sentence of the Associated Press story about State Rep. Jack Franks’ attempt to deflect criticism for his breaking of his promise to serve only three terms reads,

An Illinois lawmaker has introduced a proposal to ask voters in 2015 if term limits should be imposed on leaders in the state Legislature.”

Another original idea from the Marengo Democrat?

Not really.

In 2002, when I ran for Governor on the Libertarian Party ticket, the marquee issue was term limits for legislative leaders.

Clearly, Speaker-for-Life Mike Madigan was the problem in state government.

Of course, ideas can’t be copyrighted, so Franks and others are welcome to share my twelve-year old analysis of what is wrong in Springfield.  (83% agreed in an April poll.  A year and a half ago, the Chicago Tribune seemed to like the idea.)

On the sign that promoted Mike Tryon and Pam Althoff now appears a message about from Republican Steve Reick pointing out that Democrat Jack Franks broke his term limits pledge.

On this Route 14 sign near Woodstock’s Centegra Hospital appeared a message from Republican Steve Reick pointing out that Democrat Jack Franks broke his term limits pledge.

But, my heavens, calling for an advisory referendum on a day that local elections are held in Downstate Illinois and Chicago wards where someone did not win on primary election day…

What a feeble thrust.

Maybe enough to shield him from Republican Steve Reick‘s criticism, but not enough to do anything substantive.

Surely a Constitutional Amendment would be needed to impose such restrictions.

It doesn’t take a law degree, which Franks holds, to figure that out.


Comments

Jack Franks Adopts 2002 Cal Skinner Issue — 6 Comments

  1. Surely a former member of the General Assembly would know that a constitutional amendment takes 3/5 support from the legislative branch in Illinois whereas a bill takes a majority.

    So, which route is more plausible to pass given the landscape of Springfield?

    The real issue is Illinois desperately needs a new Constitution.

    Period.

  2. Maybe the original Constitution should have been left alone in the first place.

  3. Surely one knows that a bill can be changed by any subsequent General Assembly.

    And, an advisory referendum ensures nothing.

  4. I would not trust any politician to do the right thing.

    Remember the last time they changed the Illinois Constitution, the pols put in the clause that pensions cannot be diminished.

    I also question Mr. Franks motives in bugging the McHenry County Board.

    Is that to reflect away from the lousy job the Dems are doing downstate – tax increase coming as soon as the election is over folks.

  5. When Jack goes down the hill with a pail of……., the people of Illinois are going to be very upset with him. Gosh Jack, maybe you should have taken another route…

  6. Surely one would know an advisory referendum in 2012 by Franks is what pressured the McHenry County Board to get a binding referendum on the last primary ballot that led to a directly elected county board chair. Might not be the quick path, but the ends justified the means….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.