(Hint: They appear similar on your ballot but the difference is huge!
Intro
Once upon a time, far, far, away there were ballot measures clearly stating a question using common language and clear, understandable sentence structure etc. Today, ballot measures often simply translate to more money, power and control for Illinois’ ruling politicians.
Face it, incumbents don’t need a referendum to benevolently lower taxes or give you back their power. However, If they use fancy confusing legal language to obscure the impact and agenda then we will vote in literally anything. Ballot initiatives written by the legislatures are always about more money and more power for somebody powerful.
Here is a 2022 example in Illinois
Your 2022 ballot contained Amendment 1 to the Illinois Constitution. It was the first numbered constitutional amendment to our 1970 illinois constitution. Strategically, It sounded good on 1st read. Unfortunately, it was extremely powerful and did the opposite of what it sounded like it was supposed to do. State amendments are actually more powerful than the Federal constitution. It passed.
Illinois became the 1st in our nation where workers lost their right to work unless they are in good standing with a union and whatever current or future union rules unions leaders decide to create.
How did they spin Amendment 1’s nick name? Worker’s Rights Amendment. Weird because as a result ALL WORKERS and voters actually lost power to the unions. The clever wording tricked us to unwittingly help our legislature to be blameless and we were tricked to forever give all desired worker control to the union’s leaders. As a result Illinois can never become a right to Work State and Union members yielded any negotiating power they once had with their own union leaders. The foxes are now watching the hen house. What could go wrong?
Illinois continually raises taxes as well as debuts levels. So how do incumbents keep their jobs?
By definition professional politicians became Incumbents who wield power and make money for a lifetime (or until we vote them out). They quickly learn that Greater Power = More Votes and Money Always = Power So controlling more money = more votes. Voters are too busy funding all this to look behind the curtain. Incumbents get away with anything. Just make legally non-binding promises and misdirect or confuse casual voters. Incumbents fundraise to vote-raise so they can ignore budgeting all together.
Ballot Measures November 2024 overview
It all began after a small non-for profit parents coalition gathered the thousands of petition signatures required to get a clearly worded parents rights initiative on this ballot. Of course Our legislature and Governor did not want voters to consider the popular parents rights issue which was likely to succeed.
See Parental Rights Question for Illinois
Our legislature set a legal limit of 3 measures per ballot. So our incumbents used that last 11th hour shenanigan to push the parents rights issue off your ballot entirely. No petitions required. No news cycle coverage. They just had to come up with any 3 other ballot measures and get Pritzger to sign off. They came up with 4 then finally chose 3 of the 5 options. In the last couple of days before the ballot deadline no less.
The actual new ballot measures are non-binding. Further they are each only one sentence long. Everybody knows that the devil is never in the bill title but always in the details. For example Our Saf-T act has a very short nick name. It started with 800 pages. Then later it added 300 pages of amendments. Perhaps all the devils could only thrive within 1100 pages of details. So a YES vote generally emboldens more incumbent “PolyTicks” to have more power to go around existing laws and seize more power for the powerful while protecting the powerful against any rising challenger in any future democratic election.
I digress. Back to your 2024 ballot. Here are the 3 ballot measures that made it
Illinois Assisted Reproductive Healthcare Advisory Question (2024)
Should all medically appropriate assisted reproductive treatments, including, but not limited to, in vitro fertilization, be covered by any health insurance plan in Illinois that provides coverage for pregnancy benefits, without limitation on the number of treatments?
Translation:
Your “yes” vote advises state officials to find a way to force all health insurance plans in Illinois to also provide unlimited coverage for medically assisted reproductive treatments, including in vitro fertilization.
Your “no” vote advises state officials that you oppose requiring over 99.94% of insured people to fund IVF which is successful by less than 0.06% of households annually. Since Insurance companies have to limit plan choices options they will be they are less competitive and your insurance costs with be higher.
Illinois Income Tax Advisory Question (2024)
Should the Illinois Constitution be amended to create an additional 3% tax on income greater than $1,000,000 for the purpose of dedicating funds raised to property tax relief?
Translation: State (controlled) Income taxes are comparatively very high,
Unrelated but also quite high are the locally controlled property taxes. So to get enough people to vote for higher state income taxes just tell them taxes only affect “other people”. Meanwhile use any funds generated for power to influence = votes. Once you vote, its too late. So politicians can rinse and repeat more new taxes next election. Meanwhile no checks and balances on spending so our state officials can blame your electoral vote for their new mandate to spend and accelerate our (your) debut.
A “yes” vote advises state officials to amend the Illinois Constitution so
incumbents can attempt to raise more income taxes. You suggest allowing them to create an additional 3% tax on earned income greater than $1 million (for now) so long as the state promises to force local governments to lower property taxes for some. You think the state of Illinois is better at controlling your local tax dollars than your local voters and locally elected residents. You endorse Illinois legislature incumbents to hold tax dollars hostage by whatever shenanigans they dream up in the future.
A “no” vote Advises state officials not to amend the Illinois Constitution to create an additional 3% income tax on income on some tax payers pinky swear to possibly use some of that for the purpose of dedicating some of those funds to property tax relief to some people somewhere.
Illinois Penalties for Candidate Interference with Election Worker’s Duties Advisory Question (2024)
Should any candidate appearing on the Illinois ballot for federal, State, or local office be subject to civil penalties if the candidate interferes or attempts to interfere with an election worker’s official duties?
A “yes” vote supports advising state officials to act as judge and jury to collect and keep financial civil penalties if the feel any candidate attempted to hurt the feelings or worse of election worker’s undefined official duties as they may be defined by the same incumbent “PolyTicks” at any time in the distant future.
A “no” vote opposes state officials selective invoking unbridled new civil penalties if any incumbent accuses a rival challenger of attempting to question if any election procedure was properly followed as long as the electron has any employees in some related function. Remember that today there are people who preach that Speach is Violence and Lilence is Violence. So what does interfere mean? We DO NOT want the foxes in charge of the hen house without any threat of court interference on behalf of the challenging candidates rights.
Jim Ensign Pct 36