by Kathryn Dinardo

Created on: October 28, 2008

The basic framework of the current Illinois Constitution is sufficient for its purposes. The most ethical manner by which to keep the document a "living document", as the founding fathers designed the United States Constitution to endure as it has, is to allow changes through the legislative process and that process alone. The proposed convention is both unnecessary and potentially detrimental to the future of the State of Illinois and its citizens.

Many may argue that this is not the shortest distance between two points in affecting change. However, we must remember that a complete overhaul should not be required of a document with as much thoughtful design as a Constitution. Also, by limiting change to the established process, special interests can be held at bay when proposing self serving modifications. These types of modifications are sure to be proposed at any such convention held at this time and with detrimental consequences that would waste the precious resources of the State.

Additionally, the individuals who would be required to attend a Constitutional convention are the same elected officials and other politically active people who have a vested interest in proposing changes that serve trendy, and perhaps superfluous needs. The conflicts of interest a procedure such as the one proposed presents in considering a complete overhaul of the backbone of our legislative process widely opens the potential for the creation of a document whose basic structure is flawed by the limited vision of self-motivated career politicians. These influences result in a very different environment than the one experienced by the original authors of the U.S. Constitution who held dear to the values of freedom, common humanity, respect for individual rights, service to the public body and the promise of happiness and prosperity at the dawn of a new nation.

Indeed, those positive inspirations will be drowned out by political party agendas, the bitterness over the recent failures of those elected to lead the State, and the sheer ambition that, unfortunately,drives many now elected to serve the people. These men and women who view their positions as ones of importance and power rather than as opportunities to serve God and their fellow human beings with conscientious responsibility will clamour so loudly that the noise will quell the voices of the few good public servants attending whose primary goal would be the minimal changes that are legitimately required.

Another aspect is the fact that in spite of great expense to the taxpayers of Illinois, the majority of the current Constitution would remain in place. ( Compare the current document to it's two predecessors and you can verify what type of change one may expect to result from a Con Con). An unbiased assessment will conclude that the modifications that are needed can be just as effectively brought into reality through proposed amendments far more efficiently than through the tedious review and redrafting of each segment as the current proposal mandates.

The current document is still very much alive and should remain so for many more decades with amendments passed through the legislative process.

Learn more about this author, Kathryn Dinardo.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.