Letters & Commentary

Capitol Fax

Rich Miller's commentary on State Government

For the first time since taking office, a new Rasmussen Reports poll of Illinoisans shows that more than half of all voters disapprove of Gov. Pat Quinn's performance in office.

The poll of 500 likely Illinois voters taken October 14th found that 53 percent disapproved of Quinn's performance while 45 percent approved. That's a six-point switch from August when Rasmussen had Quinn's approval at 47 percent and his disapproval at 49 percent. Back in June, Quinn's approval was measured at 57 percent while his disapproval was 41. In April, Rasmussen had Quinn's approval rating at 61 percent and his disapproval at just 37 percent. There's an obvious trend.

Quinn's disapproval rating has been climbing across all demographics this year, including among Democrats. Just 26 percent of Democrats disapproved of Quinn's performance in June, but 38 percent of Democrats disapproved this month. Independent voters have been a lot more unforgiving. In April, 36 percent of independents disapproved of the governor's job performance, but Rasmussen's latest October survey has 59 percent of independents turning thumbs down.

The governor most assuredly was viewed extra positive by voters in the wake of Rod Blagojevich's ouster and the fresh start given Illinois politics. Quinn has since unsuccessfully pushed for an unpopular tax increase and has been unable to make good on promises to enact strong campaign finance reforms and also couldn't balance the budget. The constant crises are most definitely taking their toll, as they are with many other governors around the country.

The poll was taken near the start of the current TV advertising blitz being conducted by Quinn and his Democratic primary opponent Dan Hynes. Rasmussen rated Hynes' favorables at 46 percent, with 28 percent saying they rated him unfavorably and 26 percent were unsure. Quinn's favorables were 50 percent, with 41 percent saying they had an unfavorable view of him and 8 percent weren't sure.

The Rasmussen poll also shows Illinois Democrats have a significant advantage in the "generic" gubernatorial ballot, with 43 percent saying they'll vote for a non-specific Democrat and 37 percent saying they'll cast their vote for a Republican candidate for governor. Rasmussen has the national generic congressional ballot at just the opposite, with 42 percent Republican and 37 percent Democratic, but those Illinois numbers may be less strong for Democrats than you might expect in a state which has produced such gigantic Democratic majorities in the past decade.

The Republicans also have a big lead among senior citizens 65 and over, with 40 percent saying they'll take a Republican ballot and just 33 percent saying they'll cast their vote for a Democratic gubernatorial candidate. The Democrats have consistently won the senior vote by ten points over the past two election cycles, so this is a very worrying result for that party and worth a closer look. The poll, by the way, has a margin of error of +/- 4.5 percent, but that's higher for individual demographics.

Meanwhile, a recent Paul Simon Institute poll found that 65.5 percent opposed an increase in the state income tax from 3 percent to 4.5 percent - a proposal pushed by Gov. Quinn throughout the year. Less than a third supported the idea. Quinn's income tax hike plan has been a focal point of Comptroller Dan Hynes' TV ad campaign and the Republicans have been salivating at the chance to run against it next year.

Hynes has pushed an alternative plan to raise income taxes only on the wealthy. That proposal wasn't polled by the Paul Simon Institute this year, but they did poll it last year.

Asked how they felt about "a proposal to add brackets to the state income tax structure so that higher-income residents pay higher taxes," 66 percent said they favored it. Just 29 percent opposed it and 5 percent didn't know.

That's the only tax hike Illinoisans supported last year, so it's little wonder why Hynes would favor it this year.

Hynes appears to have the far better political positioning on the tax issue than Quinn, and doesn't have the baggage of incumbency, which is becoming increasingly toxic throughout the nation. But none of it means quite yet that he'll win the primary. Democratic voters won't speak until February 2nd.

Reading Between the Angry Lines

Obviously Mr. Wemstrom is a very angry person if he chose to admonish publicly and by name those opinion writers with whom he disagrees with (October 21, Everbody's Wrong). Perhaps Mr. Wemstrom needs a lesson in American history, as our very first right being an American is the Freedom of Speech. Wemstrom exercised his but does not want anyone else to exercise theirs. This is typical liberal nonsense rearing its ugly head.

First and foremost, Wemstrom loses all credibility when citing W.H.O. and Wikipedia while attacking Ron Rendleman. The W.H.O. has a one world global agenda and cannot be trusted as a reliable source of fact on anything. Wikipedia is a left-leaning website that allows anyone to post anything they choose and call it fact. This website has been exposed as fraudulent during the 2008 election cycle. While some of the diseases that he cites have for the most part been controlled, they are also making a strong comeback with the amount of immigrants that come into this country (legal or otherwise) from third world countries. Also, Mr. Wemstrom needs to realize that people have the right to choose what substances to have injected into their children. Many of the vaccinations that are doled out contain very harmful substances (i.e. the new H1N1 vaccination contains formaldehyde and mercury). How safe is that?

Next, Wemstrom attempts to smear Richard Kocal's opinion concerning our elected officials upholding our Constitution. Our Constitution has been under attack since the 1920's when the progressive movement started. One of the worst offenders of usurping the Constitution was Franklin Delano Roosevelt with his "New Deal," which has since been proven to actually have prolonged the Great Depression. He also admonishes Richard Kocal for not providing examples of "tyranny raising its ugly head." Let me provide some of those examples for Mr. Kocal, but first let us define tyranny:

Tyranny: oppressive power, oppressive power exerted by government, a rigorous condition imposed by some outside agency or force. Source, Webster's Dictionary 2008 version.

Was it not tyrannical of Obama to fire GM's CEO Richard Wagoner? How about taking over total control of GM using taxpayer money and forcing Chrysler to sell out to a foreign auto manufacturer? What about the complete takeover of banks and insurance companies (again using taxpayer money) and now the regulating of pay for the top executives of those companies with a so called "pay czar"? Or the bill that Congress immediately passed to tax bonuses at a 90% tax rate even though those bonuses for execs were in their contracts? Is it not tyranny to attempt to get rid of the very capitalistic system that has made America the most prosperous nation on the planet by declaring war on Wall Street as the Obama administration has done?

Is it not tyranny to slash our defense budget while we are in the middle of a war, yet increase domestic spending on social programs while bankrupting the entire country? Is it not tyranny to try to cram down the collective throats of the American public yet another unconstitutional social program called Health Care Reform? Would it not be considered tyranny to turn entire future generations into indentured servants to the government to pay for all of this administration's big government programs? I was under the impression that slavery ended in 1865. What about the quadrupling of the nation's debt in less than six months?

Is it not tyranny to attempt to silence news organizations and talk radio with the Fairness Doctrine, Localism, and now Net Neutrality? Thwarting our First Amendment rights at every turn first, then our Second Amendment right to bear arms next? I agree with Richard Kocal concerning the taking of guns to rallies and the taking back of our country from the current crop of malcontents in Washington DC. That is called freedom and freedom is what Americans do best.

Mr. Wemstrom then goes on to berate Jane Carrell and her support of GOOOH and removing every member of Congress and replacing them with new guards that will uphold the Constitution. I have to wonder if he has ever read the Declaration of Independence, for if he has, he has forgotten the very lines in it that state that it is our right and our duty to throw out such guards and replace them with those who will uphold and defend our honor and freedoms, I quote: "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security." Source: The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776.

Mr. Wemstrom obviously does not have very much confidence in his own abilities if he advocates for a bigger, ever expanding government. Wemstrom is severely mistaken if he thinks that big government is the end all and be all, it is not. Government has always been the problem and never the solution. The solutions lie with the American people and her exceptionalism, ingenuity and honor.

Lastly, Mr. Wemstrom states that our "Founding fathers quickly discovered that the Articles of Confederation had established a government which was too weak and they had to quickly write the Constitution and form a new government." Wrong on all levels, our Constitution was years in the making as we ended the Revolutionary War in 1776 and our Constitution was not ratified until 1787, and that in the Constitution most of the powers were relegated to the States and to the people, not the feds. This is yet another example of tyranny performed by Washington DC by stepping on the rights of our 50 states at every given turn.

It was our Founders belief that only a moral people, a nation of Godly citizens with common spiritual and social values were capable of self-government. Obviously we have lost our moral compass according to Wemstrom because he only believes that a bigger and more intrusive government is the answer to our problems.

Lastly, Wemstrom seems to forget about the unnamed woman who waited outside of Independence Hall for Benjamin Franklin and asked, "What do we have, a Republic or a Democracy?" Benjamin Franklin stated so eloquently, "A Republic if you can keep it."

Kathy Hood

Chadwick, IL

Vaccines

I know that now there is a controversy going on as to whether people should be required to get the H1N1 flu vaccine. I've heard the argument that "I'm not getting it because it is an illegal action by the government".

I remember the Asiatic flu of 1957.

"Asian Flu (H2N2) ­ Possible mixed infection of an animal with a human H1N1 and Avian H2N2 virus strains in Asia"

It killed 70,000 people in the United States and 2,000,000 worldwide

The number of kids missing school was staggering. One day at football practice we didn't even have 11 players show up. We had pounding headaches, sick to the stomach and the whole body ached. You spent days in bed. There were no flu vaccines available like today so we built up our immunity the hard way. So those of us who lived through it and the Hong Kong flu of 1968 (there was a vaccine) have less chance of getting the H1N1 now. We will get the shot(s) anyway just to be safe.

I'm also old enough to remember classmates in grammar school wearing braces on their legs and others in iron lungs because of POLIO. In 1952 there were 58,000 cases and in 1953 there were 35,000 cases in the U.S. Then in 1954 Dr. Jonas Salk started testing a polio vaccine. A nation wide vaccination program began in 1955 and I don't remember anyone that was exempt. It wasn't until 1957 that they were given in our high school. You were to get a total of 4 shots but because of the spacing I was only able to get 2.

However, in 1958 I enlisted in the military and it didn't matter how many I had received as a civilian. So I received 3 shots of the Salk vaccine. Then the Sabin vaccine came out and it was administered in sugar cubes and I got 3 of those. Then for whatever reason there was the liquid version, which was administered in a teaspoon. I got 3 of those for a total of 11. I'm still breathing and have no fear of polio.

I still have my military shot record. I pulled it out while typing this and I guess unless you were or are a GI you wouldn't believe the number of vaccines (shots) it contains. We got the shots because of what we "might" be exposed to.

In the military you got a flu shot every year unless you were allergic to eggs. I never knew or heard of anybody ending up in the hospital.

The last I heard was that the government would make the H1N1 vaccine available for those who want it. So the question is do you want to put yourself, your children, your relatives, co-workers, and friends at risk? If you don't want it good luck and be sure to stay away from me.

Harry Cello

Lake Carroll, IL

Quote Source

I must apologize to you for the quote included in my previous letter (Oct. 7, "A Good Read). As I mentioned, I got the quote from a magazine and they attributed it ti Abraham Lincoln. I had no idea that the quotation police would be on the job ferreting out the true author. I figured the magazine editors knew what they were talking about. I should have checked further and for that, I'm sorry.

I don't think the authorship of the quote diminishes its value or meaning. In other words, i still like it.

As far as novels are concerned, I've read both and they're great books. I know that fiction can accurately depict the era in which it was written, but my point is, that it is still fiction. Such works can also have great effect in swaying public opinion. "Uncle Tom's Cabin" is a good example. It championed a great cause and did much good, but it's strill fiction.

Here is a quote that I find interesting:

"Of those men who have overturned the liberties of republics, the greatest number have begun their career by paying an obsequious court to the people, commencing demagogues, and ending tyrants." Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 1

Bob Stretton

Savanna, IL

Questions Port Authority

I wonder how many property owners realize there is a new taxing authority in Carroll County? It is called the Upper Mississippi River International Port District. It was sponsored in the State Senate by Sen. Mike Jacobs, from the Quad Cities, and in the House of Representatives by Rep, Jim Sacia, from Pecatonica, and Rep. Jerry Mitchell, from Whiteside County.

It originally included Whiteside, Rock Island, Carroll and Jo Daviess Counties. It included provisions to include the creation of an ad hoc committee to develop a transition plan from the LRA to the Port District Board. It also included provisions that all property in the Port Authority District could be assessed a tax up to 1.5%.

At the April County Board meeting, Chairman Rod Fritz and County Administartor Mike Doty denied that Senate Bill 1784 was aimed at the property of the old Savanna Army Ordnance Depot, or that there would be any tax obligations on property owners in the County. This was in response to a motion to a Resolution to support SB 1784, creating the Port District. I believe the wording in the bill spoke for itself.

When the bill came out of the House, it no longer included Whiteside or Rock Island Counties. If this was such a good bill, why did Senate-sponsor Mike Jacobs, from Rock Island County, and Rep. Mitchell from Whiteside County, think it was such a good bill for Carroll and Jo Daviess Counties? One good thing that came out of the House Bill was that the Port District could no longer levy a tax of 1.5%, but can still levy a tax of .05% if approved by referendum of the county voters.

Don't be duped into thinking any property in the Port District will help the tax base of the County. It is very clear, and stated in the bill, that all property of every kind belonging to the Upper Mississippi River International Port District shall be exempt from taxation.

The registered voters of Carroll County can still sign petitions for disconnection from the Port District, and have it placed on the ballot in the Primary Election, to stay in the Port District or not to. All of the property in Carroll County is included in the Port District.

Once again, a few are planning to benefit at the rest of the County's expense.

What do you think? Do you believe you should have a voice, or do you believe others from other Counties should be able to dictate the wishes of Carroll County residents?

Sign a petition, and have your chance to voice your opinion.

Gerald Bork

Carroll Co. Board, Dist. 2

Mt. Carroll, IL

Bought and Paid For

Watching the health care bill proceeding in Washington D.C., it apperas the pundits are correct when reporting that our senators and representatives are bought and paid for by all sorts of lobbyists and special interests.

Case in point: One Democratic senator, head of the finance committee, has received about $3.9 million in campaign contributions since 2002 from the health insurance lobby, alone. And millions upon millions of dollars are being lavished on many of the other elected representatives to see that Americans do not receive the adequate health care that is needed.

In fact, according to the Sunlight Foundation, a Washington D.C. watch-dog group, the two recent former Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives from the Illinois 11th and 14th Districts were heavily being funded by convicted lobbyist, Jack Abramoff. After this and other glaring details were revealed about a middle of the night self-serving $207 million earmark, neither long-term representative sought re-election. Unfortunately, they abandoned their district after the damage was done and apparently were not or never will be held accountable.

As you can see, this is a Democrat and Republican generated problem. It is common fact that our federal and state elected officials take campaign contributions from lobbyists and their vote is basically for sale to the highest bidder.

It is not too hard to figure why this leaves the common, ordinary citizen with the uncertainty we are facing. Since our current system must be changed for the Republic to survive, how do we do it?

Two solutions would go a long way in solving the problem. One is public financing for all elections, and the other is to ban direct financial contributions to ant elected official by super rich lobbyists.

If this is so simple and for the good of the people, you might be wondering why this process was not changed long before this? Well, many years ago the super rich found a way to have the courts designate that money and free speech are one in the same in the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, since everyone has a right to give free speech to their elected officials, they also have a right to give money to their elected officials.

Although Congress has tried to mildly adjust this rule over the years to placate the voters, they surprisingly have not been successful because many elected officials have become very wealthy themselves from "serving the people"!

Unfortunately, to pass a Constitutional Amendment banning direct financial contributions to elected officials, it will take the President, the super majority members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, plus ratification by the States and, of course, the approval of the super rich.

Therefore, as you can imagine, this will very probably never happen thanks to our bought and paid for elected officials. And the super rich contributors will never give up their very lucrative position in owning the federal and state governments.

Only God knows what happens from here on out since the present system is about ready to crash and burn!

Donald G. Siedenburg

Mendota, IL

Thanks Extended

Chadwick Masonic Lodge #867 would like to thank all those who attended the chicken/biscuit and beef stew luncheon on October 25 in Chadwick. The success of the event would not be possible without the support of the local communities.

We would especially like to thank the local churches for their announcements of the event. Special thanks to the cook, dishwasher, servers, money takers, and everyone else that helped. Proceeds will be going to the Academic Bowl and Chadwick/Milledgeville Scholarships.

Sincerely,

Chadwick Masonic Lodge #867

Capitol Report

By Jim Sacia, State Representative, 89th District

I don't know of anyone who wasn't horrified earlier this summer when it was learned that employees at Burr Oak Cemetery near Chicago were reselling burial plots already occupied by someone's loved one. One of the standards that transcends political views is the sanctity of the deceased. What happened at Burr Oak was a debacle of unbelievable proportions and justifiably raised everyone's ire.

I must tell you it was inevitable ­ there would be an outcry. Representatives and Senators would bang their fists and denounce this outrage. Ah yes, lets also introduce some legislation. I knew it would happen and during our second week of veto we will deal with it as Senate Bill 1471 or Senate Bill 662. You guessed it; each bill is ninety pages long and punishes every cemetery in Illinois. Think of this as you drive past your local serene township cemetery sitting high on the hill. Unquestionably, it's well maintained (more often than not by relatives of those long ago laid to rest) and it's under the control of township officials who accept their responsibilities with pride.

Because of the Burr Oak fiasco, it is proposed that hereafter all cemeteries be licensed, require all employees to be licensed and registered, require all cemeteries to have a plat submitted under the supervision of a professional land surveyor, require each cemetery to submit an annual report to the state, require ongoing education for cemetery managersthe list goes on and on. I hope you can see all the dollar signs that will be involved. Once again the great State of Illinois will create an onerous obligation on our township officials who are in most cases already pushed to the limit. Oh, and you the citizens, guess whathere comes another tax because a Chicago-area cemetery screwed up.

It kind of reminds you of gun control, doesn't it? Let's all fall in lock-step with what Chicago does. I would think it was a joke if the ramifications weren't so serious. Maybe we can create yet another state agency and give the employees worn out state police cars to drive across the state visiting all of our cemeteries. Across the vehicle's door would be emblazoned "Illinois Burial Police." It gives me shivers just thinking about it. Rest assured I will do all I can to stop this ridiculous legislation.

Many of you contacted me in recent weeks urging me to do all I can to reinstate the State's MAP grant program for our deserving young scholars. Yes, I strongly supported it as I promised. We allocated $205 million to this sorely needed program. My good friend Representative Bob Pritchard (R-Hinckley) introduced a bill that would have generated more than $100 million to help pay for that MAP grant funding without a tax increase. A political maneuver was used to block it from being considered during our first week of veto session, but I'm willing to bet we will see it again in the coming weeks with another sponsor.

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