OK. Why would I not want to vote yes to this?

It seems the no side is that future pensions can be re-set, the cost could be 80 mil for the con-con, the danged legislators would be the ones to meet, and.....

This came from and IEA website.

Per the Upcoming Events Thread, the League of Women Voters wants you to vote no. Does that do it for you?

So....vote "Yes"? Where the hell is Gus when you need him? The GELWV already hates me. Maybe I should stick to the "No" vote.

quote:

Originally posted by J.R.Briquette:
So....vote "Yes"? Where the hell is Gus when you need him? The GELWV already hates me. Maybe I should stick to the "No" vote.

Voting no isn't a bad idea considering this con con could cost the IL taxpayers up to $100 million to just put together a new constitution.

Personally I would love to see the Con-Con come back.

Sorry for the off topic but JR you made me laugh so hard this a.m. with your new avatar. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Business groups, labor unions, politicians are all thinking the same way - against the concon - on this issue - and when everyone's thinking the same way, no one is thinking.

Notice how no one is saying Hey, this constitution is great! Look how well you are being served! What they are saying is Watch out, it will only get worse... which is already an indictment of the current constitution.

The system needs fixing. A concon is an attempt to fix it at its core.

thecapitolfaxblog.com...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Ted E.,

Bump.

Interesting link, Sances