What describes the nature of Illinois politics better than the hiring of Democrat strategist David Axelrod’s firm by an establishment Republican to squash any possibility of a state constitutional convention?

Voting to convene a convention to revise the Illinois Constitution—which is required by that very constitution to be on the ballot this November—is hardly a subject on everyone’s (or even anyone’s) lips, but you never know when the natives might act up and demand a change in the nation’s most dysfunctional state government. No telling what it might lead to, something like, oh, government that works.

The Democratic and Republican powers that have run this state (into the ground) can’t have anything like that, so a coalition is about to hire Axelrod’s ASK Public Strategies and the public relations firm Hill & Knowlton to jointly run a $2-million to $3-million media and advertising campaign. “We haven’t signed the contract, but they’re going to be the choice,” the aforementioned Republican and head of the Illinois Manufacturers’ Assn., Gregory W. Baise, was quoted as saying in Crain’s Chicago Business. Baise is one of the leaders of the so-called Alliance to Protect the Illinois Constitution, a name selected to imply that any messing with the constitution is an assault on motherhood, God, country or, worse, the wisdom of the state’s political establishment.

Actually, any change would be an assault on the assorted gonifs in both parties that have made such a mess of the state and siphoned off uncounted millions for their lakeside summer homes, Cadillac Escalades and vacuum-packed, grass-fed Angus steaks.

I can understand the reluctance to re-open the constitution to a complete rewriting by who-knows-who that might pack the convention. Good government types have, in the past, opposed a constitutional convention (otherwise known as con-con), fearing a rogue assembly could turn the state over to some whackos. “We want to make sure people understand the potential problems with tinkering with a pretty good document,” Baise said.

Pretty good it may be, and certainly better than the antiquated one it replaced back in 1970. Never mind that it was a constitutional convention that was smart and self-controlled enough to craft the current pretty good one. And, actually, I—and I’m sure millions of others—never even gave voting for a con-con a thought until the Alliance to Protect the Illinois Constitution started yakking about it. So, perhaps it is worth talking about.

The coalition fears, for example, that a con-con might come up with new taxes—even though tax weary Illinois voters would have to approve the new constitution, which is unlikely if it contains major new levies. But—and I’m only guessing here—the coalition fears even more a proposed constitutional change that would allow voters to recall (i.e. boot out of office) incompetent, dishonest, smarmy or deaf-to-the-public’s-voice government officials.

The recall idea, first suggested here and supported by thoughtful and mainstream folks such as the Chicago Tribune editorial board, is the most direct threat to the bunglers and boodlers to come down the pike in generations, with the exception of U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald. The House passed a constitutional amendment that would have allowed the recall of the top state elected officials (if they were truly serious, they would have applied it to county and local officials too). But, they understood their vote wouldn’t matter because they knew that Senate President Emil Jones, a pal of the disreputable Gov. Rod Blagojevich, would never allow it to come to a vote in his chamber. He hasn’t, and what better illustrates the arrogance of power?

Here’s a point for the alliance to consider: If Jones would allow the recall amendment to come to a vote, and it passed, and it was approved in a referendum by three-fifths of the those on the question or by a majority of those voting in the general election (a whole bunch of big iffs), any move to call a con con would be deflated. Recall is the only constitutional change that a good hunk of the public seems interested in.

The alliance has history on its side. In 1988, the last time a con con question was put on the ballot, it was soundly defeated. The cards have been staked against the public by the extraordinary requirements of calling a convention or amending the constitution through the legislative process. One could argue that it should be so because only with great reluctance should our basic agreement for governing this state be changed.

But, can you think of a better reason for such a change other than the current collection of clowns that are putting the state into bankruptcy? The threat of removal from office may not be a guarantee of good government, and the amendment is unlikely even to get enacted when the very clowns who would face removal are in charge of whether the amendment will get on the ballot.

The only thing that makes me think that recall or con con efforts are worthwhile is the fact that the Illinois political establishment is willing to put millions of dollars into fighting the changes. Maybe they know something we don’t; maybe they have good reason to be fearful. And maybe that’s the best reason to make the effort.

**

Dennis Byrne is a member of the Chicago Daily Observer Editorial Board