The state of the State

There were some unusual twists to this year's end-of-session squabbling and bargaining. But at least some things remained normal as ever in Springfield. Namely, it was clear that political fighting and maneuvering over the most basic democratic ideals are alive and well, continuing to leave everyday voters confused and, sadly, out of the loop. If such behavior hadn't become the norm in Illinois state government, it would be enough to send most voters searching for their Maalox bottles.

This time, the issue was the right to vote. More precisely, making it easier to register to vote.

A federal law effective January 1, 1995, will allow voters to register for federal elections by mail, at driver's license facilities and at state agencies. Simple enough. But this so-called "motor-voter" law requires state governments to pass companion laws to allow people to register to vote at state facilities. Illinois lawmakers, for instance, must decide which state offices will conduct the registration. They also have to set up rules to permit registration by mail.

But lawmakers adjourned their spring session without setting up these parameters. Legislators seem to be among the worst when it comes to procrastinating. Why do today what you can put off until tomorrow — even if it ends up costing money and creating logistical nightmares for some voters and the people who register voters?

Without the state's approval of this legislation, people could register to vote in federal elections at driver's license facilities, for example, but not for state and local elections. That means people who registered this way conceivably could show up at polling places on Election Day and be told they could only vote in races for federal office, not state or local ones. How chaotic.

All lawmakers had to do was cast a yes vote on the matter and set up a process, as required, to register voters at state agencies and through the mail. The actual decision-making power was out of their hands. The federal government has told them they have to approve it. If they don't pass it before January 1, the state could face a lawsuit by the U.S. Justice Department.

Lawmakers will have another chance to pass the measure during the legislature's fall veto session in November, but that doesn't leave much time to get things ready by the due date. "It would be a real problem having things done in that short time," says Don Schultz, director of elections operations at the Illinois State Board of Elections.

What was the big holdup? As usual in Illinois, it had to do with political posturing. At first, it seemed neither the House nor the Senate was going to take a vote on the measure.

Republicans in general don't like motor-voter legislation because it is believed people who pick up applications at state agencies, such as public aid offices, will register as Democrats. Republican Senate President James "Pate" Philip (R-23, Wood Dale) seemed especially disinterested in calling the bill for a vote in his chamber because it was sponsored by Democratic Sen. Grace Mary Stem (D-29, Highland Park).

Stern has become so widely known as the Republicans' number-one priority for defeat this fall that she on occasion has donned a bull's-eye target on her back. Senate Republicans don't want to give her any legislative victories to tout in her race this fall. They're pouring lots of money and effort into her opponent's campaign. Stem said she offered to relinquish her sponsorship of the bill to get it called for a vote in the Senate, but to no avail.

To confuse the matter further, Chicago Democrats with ties to Mayor Richard M. Daley aren't so hot to see a state motor- voter law take effect in local elections

8/August 1994/Illinois Issues

before the mayor faces reelection next year. It seems the mayor's supporters recognize motor-voter enactment could result in a surge of African Americans and Hispanics registering to vote. If that happens, Daley fears, a rival candidate could snatch up this huge new block of voters and oust him from the mayor's office.

But when Daley-supporting Democrats in the House saw that the Senate was dead-set against voting on the issue, they realized it would be safe to vote in favor of motor-voter. Sure enough, it passed resoundingly with 110 votes.

And sure enough, it was never brought to a vote on the Senate floor, assuring Daley's friends they had cast merely a token vote of approval.

Some Democrats tried to play down the political nature of the votes. "I do not think it passed out of the House just because it wouldn't go through the Senate," Stern said during a press conference calling for Philip to call the bill on the final day of the session. "I don't accept that."

But her colleague, Sen. Alice Palmer (D-13, Chicago), an African American who represents a largely minority district, disagreed even as she stood side to side with Stern at the press conference. "There's some political underpinnings here," she said. "If you understand Chicago politics, (you understand) the numbers of voters of color who have played a pivotal role in elections."

Sen. Miguel del Valle (D-2, Chicago) agreed. "We all know this piece of legislation would affect the mayoral election," he said. "It's no secret — and I'm speaking for myself — there are folks in the (Daley) administration in the city of Chicago who don't want this to go through."

It is sad to see lawmakers procrastinate on this measure for political gain. All they've done is postpone inevitable action on a federal mandate to the point that county clerks may be thrown into turmoil. Worse, it means many of our public officials' hunger for power has taken precedence over the fundamental principle of involving more citizens in the democratic process.

That's an ironic attitude for people who make their living as elected officials. 

August 1994/Illinois Issues/9