McEndorsements

In my daily attempt to take over the world, with the aid of my lovely assistant, Gracie, I offer the following endorsements for the November 6th elections.

But first, a break to hear from one of our sponsors:

2012 is the Year of the Protest Vote for me. I’m fed up with the whole bunch of them from the top down. So from the bottom up I say we fix this mess.

For President I am voting for Jill Stein (G). She’s the only candidate that represents real change and it is most sorely needed, abroad and at home. Bronco Obama and Mitt Romney are tired old retreads of the political system of party loyalty with a healthy dose of favors for and from those who have access, at the expense of those who have not. Which microphone gaffe was worse, Romney’s 47% write-off disclosure or Obama telling Medvedev that Putin would find him much easier to dwork with after his re-election?

Like Bloomberg I may have been able to vote for the Romney of 2010. But I don’t believe a word this Romney says because his positions change so much.

Obama is from Illinois, Cook County, to be exact. Trust? The President’s administration does not follow up on accountability for his economic recovery plans. I didn’t read that on a blog. It’s not spin. I witnessed it as American Recovery Act money was used to purchase flood plain property in DeKalb while claiming to create 1.5 full time (equivalent) jobs. Next.

So what is this change Stein is all about? She’ll end the drug war. That means we’ll stop throwing 17 year old kids in with career criminals as their prison mentors for smoking dope. It means less confusion in pot producing countries where people are hunted, harrassed, punished and killed by agents from their best customers. A new bountiful tax revenue is born for government that is less regressive than gambling and the money is torn away from organized crime. Less crime. Less criminals. Less prisons and jails. More money. More jobs in agriculture, medicine, logistics and social services.

That kind of change is no brainer. Come on. We’ve got high school drop out kids over in our crowded jail in Sycamore awaiting continuing criminal education in prison over marijuana charges while we give highly educated appointed administrators a $45,000 severance package, with a condition of silence (of course) for potential white collar criminal behavior with public funds. This is the 21st century. We can do better. Why not transfer the funds we spend waging war on the drug culture romanticized in Hollywood to vocational schools and restarting lifelong education?

This is a protest vote. Take the tired old two party FAIL and stuff it.

In the 16th U.S. Congressional District I am voting for Wanda Rohl. She’s seen life from the bottom up and she’s climbed on every rung on her way up. Bonus points: I don’t know if Adam Kinsinger even knows where DeKalb County is. Rohl has introduced herself to me on a couple of occasions. Sorry, Adam, but incumbents start out in trouble in this election. You’ve done nothing to climb out of the whole.

Incumbents are in trouble and deservedly so. Illinois tops the nation in the number of governmental units, corruption, debt and unfunded pension obligations. We’re at the bottom for credit worthiness. Our last two governors are in prison and not for smoking dope. FAIL.

In the State Senate race, Dave Syverson has no opponent. Neither does Bob Pritchard for his State House seat. But neither congressman has lifted a finger or attended a meeting of the Stop the Mega-Dump citizen group who are trying to fight the Pay to Play Crony Capitalist system that rewards the NIMBYism of at least 17 Illinois counties at the expense of Cortland Township residents who’ve done everything they can to tell the county board they don’t want the damn thing in their backyard either. I actually like Dave and Bob a lot. But I hope they get enough undervotes, like mine, to get the message across. Fix it or else.

The same could go for the uncontested races for Circuit Clerk, County Coroner and County Treasurer. But these offices are different. They’re not legislative positions. Each office calls for specific executive and administrative duties. Compared with the salaries of appointed executive administrators, qualified elected officials are a bargain. Based on performance and longevity earned by re-election, Maureen Josh and Dennis Miller have done their jobs right. Mark Todd’s the new face at the County Treasurer’s office and he faced no challenger in the primary nor does he in the Nov. 6 general election. Not up for election but certainly worthy of mention when discussing quality work among elected professionals is Sheriff Roger Scott. An impressive example of an elected professional’s work can be found visiting the website of John Acardo, DeKalb County Clerk. Click here enter your name and birthday and you can instantly double check your precinct, ward, township and county board district and you can click a button and remind yourself how you voted in previous elections, view an actual sample ballot and other neat stuff.

Why am I making such a fuss about elected professionals? I want to make an emphatic point of why I am voting NO to the question of whether I want the city manager to appoint the DeKalb City Clerk instead of voters hiring and firing the next one. Yep. Sure. We can occasionally vote in incompetence especially when party loyalty and favors get out of hand but we learn from our mistakes. And voters would have never given an employee no matter how competent or lack thereof $10,000 with a condition of silence. Not even voters in Home Rule communities.

I am voting for Clay Campbell (R) for DeKalb County State’s Attorney. He will step on toes. He has stomped on some. One of his boots kicked a can wide open that has been leaking since the days of David Smith and the sporadically published, The Vigilante. It is what it is or it isn’t. Those who have lived here long enough have heard the rumbles and rumors that all is not right in government business in DeKalb County and keep in mind that NIU is our largest government employer.

Campbell’s motivation is questioned especially by those who support his opponent, Richard Schmack (D), who has drawn public endorsements from core local Republicans like retired Judge Kurt Klein and retired Circuit Clerk Sharon Holmes. When one side of a contested political race accuses their opponent’s motivation both sides are up for review. But the can is now open and the public deserves to see what’s really on the inside. I don’t want that can kicked down the road so I’m voting for Campbell.

I’ve published a guide for removing landfill varmints from the County Board. If you click here you can read all I have to say about that. The Chronicle says people like me should dump our appeal and our fight with the landfill expansion since the 2nd Appellate Court said we failed to provide any evidence that the reason we are taking the word of applicant paid experts that 2,000 tons daily from 17 counties including one with more than half the state’s population buried in our soil about 1/4 mile from an elementary school is safe because we needed money to build a new jail.

We provided proof. They refused to consider it. Anyone in this county paying attention to the landfill issue knows the truth. The Chronicle knows. Here’s the first question for county board candidates from a very well done online Election Central guide written and published by the Daily Chronicle:

Did the county board make the right decision in approving a 500-acre expansion of the DeKalb County Landfill to expand the county jail? […]

AP-style Freudian slip?

I’m voting for Amanda Christensen (D) for Regional Superintendent of Schools because of the enthusiasm and command she displayed at the candidate forums. Her experience in a teachers’ union will prove a challenge and be of real value in a position that may take a greater role in providing educational services as districts look to increase efficiencies.

I’m undervoting on the race between Bill Brady (R) and Ron Matekaitis (D). Both are qualified. I have no preference.

A most interesting question on the ballot:

PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 1970 ILLINOIS CONSTITUTION
Explanation of Amendment
Upon approval by the voters, the proposed amendment, which takes effect on January 9, 2013, adds a new section to the General Provisions Article of the Illinois Constitution. The new section would require a three-fifths majority vote of each chamber of the General Assembly, or the governing body of a unit of local government, school district, or pension or retirement system, in order to increase a benefit under any public pension or retirement system. At the general election to be held on November 6, 2012, you will be called upon to decide whether the proposed amendment should become part of the Illinois Constitution.

If you believe the Illinois Constitution should be amended to require a three-fifths majority vote in order to increase a benefit under any public pension or retirement system, you should vote “YES” on the question. If you believe the Illinois
Constitution should not be amended to require a three-fifths majority vote in order to increase a benefit under any public pension or retirement system, you should vote “NO” on the question. Three-fifths of those voting on the question or a majority of those voting in the election must vote “YES” in order for the amendment to become effective on January 9, 2013.

For the proposed addition of Section 5.1 to Article XIII of the Illinois Constitution.
YES
NO

Well of course I’m voting YES. I’m voting YES because we will soon be paying more for pensions than we do for education. I’m voting YES because if passed and enforced it will make it that much harder for crooks-in-power to devise a scheme to scam the system for anymore pension abuse. I’m voting YES because all of the public sector unions are spending money to get people to vote NO. I’m voting YES because Mike Madigan sponsored the legislation that got this question on the ballot and both left and right leaning friends have told me that this will get thrown out in court if passed? I don’t trust Madigan but a legal fight over a constitutional amendment might bring legislators and voters together for real pension reform and accountability to the expense of complacent enforcement of ethics.