It would be a mistake to pursue a recall amendment to Illinois constitution…

The editorial page of the Chicago Tribune issued a request for feedback from readers as to whether or not they would support an amendment to the Illinois State Constitution that would give the voters of Illinois recall power over the Governor, and presumably all statewide elected officials.  Illinois Lieutenant Governor Pat Quinn came out publicly in full support of just such an amendment, which was proposed by Representative Jack Franks (D-Woodstock) and Senator Dan Cronin (R-Elmhurst) Thursday in Springfield, and the response to the Tribune open forum was overwhelmingly supportive of the idea.

Predictably, Blagojevich shrugged off the bold statement by his independent deputy and the Tribune editorial staff Friday, though local pundits and bloggers have seized upon the prospect of shortening the Blagojevich reign in Springfield and brought the debate over the merits of a recall measure to the forefront of local political discourse, as people have become absolutely fed up with his $6,000 per/day, taxpayer financed commute to Springfield from his Chicago home, among other glaring deficiencies as a Chief Executive.  Blagojevich is not the only Democratic politician that has the state lusting for his head on a stick.  Cook County Board President Todd Stroger has discovered previously unheard of means of dispensing patronage to loyal political allies, failed to cut a penny from the massive county budget and introduced several new sales and property taxes to pay for his disastrously managed agenda.  Even the usually popular Speaker of the House Michael Madigan has been vilified for his lack of influence over the impending CTA funding crisis.

Personally, I share the opinion of State Comptroller Dan Hynes as he articulated it on WTTW’s Chicago Tonight yesterday, and view the possibility of every major policy decision carrying the burden of a potential recall as a totally unacceptable option. If leaders are overly obsessed with the results of their decisions before they even make that final judgment, what types of positions could be reasonably expected from leading state politicians other than unimaginative and overly cautious policies that will have minimal effect on the state of affairs.

The events of a few years ago in California were the exception to the rule, and should not be considered a viable strategy for quickly removing one government in favor of another in every other state. California is in many ways entirely unique from the other 49 states, and one of the most unique characteristics of the Golden State is its long-standing tradition of utilizing referendum to make statewide policy.  Essentially, a recall is a public referendum on the performance of a sitting politician.  It fits much better into the political culture of California than it does in Illinois, though it is difficult to reject the idea of throwing Blago out of the Governor’s mansion that he has never slept at and only seen from the backseat of his SUV en route to the Capitol complex from the Springfield airport.

It seems as if I am the last Chicago political blogger to weigh in on the question of whether or not we need a recall provision, which makes all of my thoughts totally unoriginal, but it allows me to weigh the insights of Illinois’ sharpest political thinkers as I consider the growing movement against the Blagojevich Administration. The movement to oust Blago has been floating around op-ed pages and gathering momentum for a few months. The oldest opinion piece I have found so far calling for the explicit recall of Blago was in the Daily Illini. My favorite north side political thinker, Backyard Conservative, also falls in the pro-recall column. Popular local blog The Chicagoist points out that though we may all think recalling Blago is the greatest idea since sliced bread, reality is that it would take a Constitutional Convention, as per Article 14, Section 1,

Whenever three-fifths of the members elected to each house of the General Assembly so direct, the question of whether a Constitutional Convention should be called shall be submitted to the electors at the general election next occurring at least six months after such legislative direction.

It may well be the case that we are stuck with Bla-joke-avich for the remainder of his second term, but the widespread expression of disgust for the government in Springfield, not to mention the Cook County Board and City Hall, shows that the stranglehold on Illinois political institutions maintained by Democrats for years in some places and generations in others, is on the verge of total collapse. The opportunities for the IL GOP to resurrect the party by seizing upon general disenchantment with the Democrat’s unabashed power trip and unproductive legislative agenda are clear and if Republicans fail to build momentum behind this anti-establishment movement the hope for the future is not bright.

Chicago Tribune practically begs someone to take 9th District seriously…

When issuing their official endorsements for the 2006 Congressional elections, the Chicago Tribune made a very strong statement on exactly what they think of Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky and her record as a member of the House of Representatives.  Here is the exactly what the Tribune editorial board had to say about the five term House member,

 9th District: We endorsed Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowsky in her last few elections, even though we disagree with her on many issues. But her style of unceasing partisanship contributes to the bitter atmosphere in Washington. She’ll bash Republicans on all matters, but when her husband Robert Creamer was sentenced earlier this year for federal bank fraud, she wouldn’t acknowledge he had committed a crime. She’ll rack up big numbers in this heavily Democratic district against Republican businessman Michael Shannon of Park Ridge, who refuses to take campaign contributions. The Tribune makes no endorsement.

I had determined that I was going to make a run for the House seat occupied by Schakowsky before I read this non-endorsement, but now that I have seen that the most respected news outlet in the Chicagoland area has given up hope that she would grow out of her partisan beginnings into a more mature representative of her constituents, I am convinced that I might be able to make a good run against my more experienced and better financed opponent.  I have no expectation of being endorsed by the editors of the Tribune, but I am going to do everything in my power to earn that endorsement based on my ideas and the professional manner in which I conduct myself as a candidate, which should draw a clear distinction between myself and Mrs. Schakowsky.

I am not interested in a partisan shouting match.  I am strictly looking for an idea-based campaign which provides 9th District voters with a sharp contrast between my vision for America and Chicago and that of Rep. Schakowsky.  I am convinced that once the reality of Schakowsky’s radical agenda is put before the voters from Devon to Dempster, it will be clear that the honorable Congresswoman does not have the interests of anyone but her MoveOn.org friends in mind when she votes on legislation in Washington.

Stop pandering about War cost to grandchildren, start talking about real fiscal problems facing future generations…

Congressman Lantos mentioned that “we are passing the costs of the Iraq War onto our grandchildren” during his pathetic and long-winded opening statement in the House Armed Services Committee today, which makes me incensed. I am about the age of Lantos’ grandchildren, and I consider it an insult to insist that Iraq is the most pressing fiscal liability facing the future leaders of this country. In fact, compared to the other major spending programs that are facing impending insolvency and financial ruin, such as the Social Security system, Iraq looks like an investment more than a line of credit.

I will pay thousands of dollars over the next few decades into a social welfare system, not a penny of which I will see when I reach retirement age because of the irresponsible management of the system by DC politicians since its inception, yet no Democratic Party leader has the courage to inform young voters about this reality. It disgusts me to read polls that claim 70-80% of young voters (under 35) are aligned with the Democratic Party. What has the Democratic Party done for us exactly to earn this support? The only politician in Washington with the courage to even acknowledge the social security problem has been George W. Bush, but unfortunately he was unable to use his “political capital” effectively after his re-election in 2004 to enact meaningful reform.

Nobody in Washington likes telling their constituents that they are cutting entitlement programs because they assume that it is going to lose them votes and cost them elections. Democrats have no incentive to face reality and help the GOP fix the social security problem because the voters who have the most invested in the long-term stability of the social security system either don’t mind that they are not going to receive a penny back from the system they pay into every week, or they are totally ignorant to the fact that the system is nearly irreparably broken. I would like to think it is ignorance that leads my peers to blindly endorse candidates that are completely detached from reality and actively working against our interests, but perhaps we are an uncharacteristically selfless generation of Americans. Regardless of the reasons for our lack of interest in holding politicians to account for the real fiscal problems facing Washington, if we don’t wise up soon, a war in the Middle East is going to seem like a day at the beach compared to the economic disaster that the collapse of the social welfare system will cause.

GOP Hub: Building a conservative alternative to Digg and Reddit for social bookmarking

I have been working as a co-founder and strategic director of GOPhub.com since the beginning of July and in that time we have witnessed the site blossom into a very promising outlet for GOP bloggers to share information, critique each other’s work and develop individual identities within the larger Republican web community. Born out of frustration with leading social bookmarking services Digg and Reddit, which are blatantly biased toward the Democratic Party and liberal causes, GOP Hub has been steadily establishing itself as an exciting new Politics 2.0 startup that has boundless potential for growth as the most contentious and web-centric election in US history approaches.

The Democratic Party has dominated cyberspace since it first became a relevant outlet for reaching potential voters and generating a buzz about issues and candidates, but recently an eConservative movement has taken shape that has the potential to revolutionize GOP politics permanently and grant the next generation of party leaders their first opportunity to show what they can do with the tools of their generation to build upon the successes of our parents, grow the GOP base and reign in younger, more techno-oriented voters. I have been fortunate to be able to establish myself as a leader of this movement at its earliest stage, and I believe strongly that the 2008 elections will be the first in which the GOP has a coordinated and efficient internet apparatus for growing and communicating with its base of supporters. I encourage everyone to consider GOPhub.com when seeking out news and information in the coming months before the primaries early next year, as other such sites will not offer GOP primary voters sufficient information to make an informed choice between the front-runners (however, they will tell you way more than anyone needs to know about Ron Paul). Join the revolution and help the “Rightroots” take back the web.

Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer…

There is one thing that is clear to me about what we must do to permanently end the threat posed by radical Islamic extremism: we must establish a relationship with the entire Muslim and Arab world based on genuine trust and shared interests. Our current presence in Iraq offers us an opportunity to accomplish this, but only if we are willing to face reality and treat Arabs as if they are equals to the Jews in Israel. No other American policy is more responsible for anti-Americanism in the Middle East (and in Europe, Asia and much of the rest of the world for that matter) than our ignorant and morally indefensible support of the hostile and oppressive actions of the Israeli government.

It would be correct to argue that war is not the ideal foundation for building a diplomatic and cross-cultural alliance upon, but it is precisely that which has put us in a position to rewrite our Middle East policy to better serve America’s national security interests. Heretofore, American foreign policy has marginalized Arab Muslims, more so than any other civilization on the planet, due in large part to our misguided support of Israel. Israel carries itself as if it were the 51st state of the Union, and for whatever reason US governments have reinforced American solidarity with the Jewish state despite its continues disregard for US interest and the will of the international community.

For all of the pandering heard from Democrats about the importance of listening to the international community when formulating US foreign policy or guiding the nation into a war, has anyone ever hear them apply this same logic to the issue of Israeli occupation of the Palestinians and total disregard for international law and countless UN resolutions? Of course not.

Republicans are no less hypocritical in their application of consequences for transgressions against the international community. One of the primary reasons given for the invasion of Iraq was its continuous disregard for UN resolutions demanding its disarmament, which is in my opinion a great and justified reason for imposing sanctions and using force to increase pressure on a government. However, in the case of Israel, it has acquired nuclear capability by spying on the United States, occupied its neighbors and reduced millions of people to a stateless and largely hopeless existence, all in the name of God and country. What have we done about that? Nothing. No sanctions, no force, politicians don’t even have the courage to speak out publicly against their irresponsible and harmful policies for fear that this would be politically unwise.

There are hundreds of reasons for this, not one of which makes any sense to me whatsoever. I will expand upon this idea over the next few weeks as I begin to outline my positions on the issues of importance to our nation and my generation, which is the greatest victim of the current crop of US political leaders who are more concerned with keeping their jobs than securing the interests of the children and grandchildren.

Official launch of my first political campaign…

For as long as I can remember, I have eagerly anticipated the day when I would get my first chance to run for political office, and today is that day. With the passing of my 24th birthday this past Monday, I have decided that now is as good a time as any to throw my hat into the ring, as never before have I felt so strongly that our country’s leadership has lost sight of what is important, the future of America and the prosperity of generations to come, particularly those who are still too young to have a voice. Over the next few days I hope to outline my strategy and positions on the important issues of the day, so please check back regularly and I hope you are encouraged by what I have to say. The future of America is at stake, and the 21st century demands leaders who truly understand the modern world and all the challenges it presents.