Politics

Bears don't merit top billing on the legislature's fall agenda

By CHARLES N. WHEELER III

A decade ago, the Chicago Bears seemed the reincarnation of the vaunted Monsters of the Midway, the meanest (and best) pro football team in the land, destined for a Super Bowl victory.

Those heady days are now long gone, the fall from glory so steep that one Chicago headline labeled the current crew "pathetic." Yet there is one Bear constant — indeed, has been one constant for two decades — and that is the team's desire to leave Soldier Field for a brand, spanking-new stadium, preferably one built with taxpayers' money.

The latest chapter of the long-running story finds Bears owner Michael McCaskey warning that the franchise might abandon Illinois altogether unless the state comes up with $185 million toward a new $285 million open-air home for the Bears.

In fairness, one might argue that McCaskey is not totally out of line in his request. After all, the legislature and then Gov. James R. Thompson built a new Comiskey Park for the White Sox and provided tax breaks and off-track betting to convince Richard Duchossois to rebuild his fire-ravaged Arlington International Racecourse. Indeed, just last May Gov. Jim Edgar approved more legislation intended to improve the bottom line for the racing industry, including a $5 million boost for Arlington over the next two years.

Election judge and service station owner. Neither calling is as glamorous as professional athlete or lucrative as franchise owner, but each is more vital to the social fabric

Unfortunately for McCaskey, the best offer he's had so far is the chance to share space in a multipurpose, domed stadium financed by McCormick Place bonds. Realistically, that's probably the best deal he can expect, because it would not require approval by lawmakers, who one would hope would be sensitive about subsidizing professional sports teams after cutting health care for needy adults and capping cash benefits to poor families.

Moreover, while the Republican legislative majorities are not likely to reconsider their ill-advised welfare "reforms," there are other Illinoisans whose plight merits higher billing on the legislature's fall agenda than the Bears. Consider two groups that symbolize the sort of old-fashioned American virtues so dear to GOP orators: election judges and independent service station owners. Both face trying days ahead unless lawmakers come to their aid this fall.

Let's look first at election judges, unsung heroes who put in 16-hour days at less than minimum wage to ensure that voting is conducted smoothly and honestly. Now imagine the sort of abuse an election judge might get from an outraged voter who's been told he can't vote for state senator or county sheriff because he's only registered to vote in federal elections. True, Edgar and Republican legislative leaders are largely to blame for the cockamamie scheme of dual registration for national and for state and local elections, their response to the federal "motor voter" mandate.

But neither the governor nor the GOP leaders will be there to mollify the voter; no, as things now stand, that thankless task will fall to the election judge.

Reasonable people might disagree about whether it's a good idea to allow citizens to register by mail or at public offices like driver's license stations and social service agencies, as the National Voter Registration Act provides. No one should dispute, however, that Illinois must follow the law, as a federal appellate court panel told Edgar, nor that implementing a two-tiered registration system will be costly and confusing, as local election officials warn. The most prudent move, and the most politically expedient as well, would be for lawmakers to revise state election law this fall to conform to motor voter requirements.

The "little guys" in the gas station business, meanwhile, won't have to deal with irate motorists. Instead, some worry they may be put out of business by huge insurance premiums to cover costs to

6/October 1995/Illinois/Issues

clean up leaking underground storagetanks. The background is fairly simple. Since 1990, the state has imposed a three-tenths of a cent per gallon tax on gasoline, kerosene, diesel fuel and home heating oil to help cover the cost of the federally mandated cleanup. But the cleanup fund is now some $40 million in the red, with new claims coming in at the rate of $4.5 million a month.

To close the shortfall, petroleum marketers last spring proposed a $60 fee on each 7,500-gallon tanker truckload of gasoline, which would bring in some $45 million a year and add about eight-tenths of a cent to the pump price of a gallon of gas, if station owners passed the entire fee on to customers. Skittish lawmakers balked at enacting the fee, however, for fear some future opponent would brand a "yes" vote as support for a tax increase.

When the legislature failed to act, federal regulators ordered station owners to show $1 million worth of financial assurance that they can handle cleanup costs without state help. Thus, many small operators now face hefty premiums for private insurance, if they can even find the coverage, and industry officials fear some may be forced to close.

A more reasonable solution, of course, would be for the legislature to approve the tanker fee, perhaps even at a higher level, if that's needed to cover both the backlog and the mounting new claims. To minimize political fallout, party leaders could fashion a bipartisan roll call, which would allow the relatively few legislators who aren't in safe districts to vote against the tax, while still providing more than enough votes for its passage. Supporters then could take credit for helping hundreds, perhaps thousands, of small businesses, often portrayed by politicians of all stripes as the backbone of the American economy.

Election judge and service station owner. Neither calling is as glamorous as professional athlete nor as lucrative as franchise owner, but each constitutes a part of the state's social fabric more vital than Mike McCaskey and his Bears. Let's hope the legislature is mindful of true priorities when lawmakers consider whom to help in the fall session.

Charles N. Wheeler III is director of the Public Affairs Reporting program at the University of Illinois at Springfield.

October 1995/Illinois/Issues/7