What Checks & Balances Really Means…

Since when did the concept of a three branch system of government end being defined as “whatever one guy wants to do”? I’m just curious about the understanding of checks and balances in Illinois after reading this article on the status of their concealed carry bill.

Many lawmakers expect Quinn to use the issue to try to help himself politically, taking advantage of his amendatory veto powers to rewrite the bill to make it more stringent. On Thursday, Madigan said she agreed that the governor would rewrite the bill.

The comments came at a luncheon where she encouraged female politicians to use their children as political props to create a “soft” image, but to be careful not to be so blatant about it that voters can actually see that they view their offspring as political tools.

3 Responses to “What Checks & Balances Really Means…”

  1. chiefjaybob says:

    The amendatory veto power that the governor has in this state is just another scam perpetrated on the people of Illinois. Ultimately, what has to happen if he takes the red pen to the bill and sends it back, is the sponsor in each chamber must agree to have a vote on the changes. If the sponsors don’t agree, the bill dies. This won’t happen. But it doesn’t guarantee a veto-override, either. This state sucks.

  2. Thirdpower says:

    Basically he’s going to try and jam through a ‘no issue’ bill on Jul 9th. It’s going to turn into a complete circus.

  3. Amiable Dorsai says:

    Since the 1970 state constitution, a ball of fail and suck if ever there was one. Besides the amendatory veto, there’s a provision that keeps the state from changing the provisions of the pensions that are bankrupting us, and the weakest imaginably version of the second amendment.