April 16, 2018
The Quincy Herald-Whig
U.S. must keep voting systems safe
Despite the determination by the Department of Homeland Security that Russian hackers tried to infiltrate election systems in 21 states in 2016, including Illinois, many of those systems remain alarmingly vulnerable to cyber-attacks with the midterm election less than seven months away.
While there is currently no evidence suggesting any voters were changed in 2016, we know a hostile foreign power gained access to voter registration databases, the very foundation of election integrity.
What should be worrisome to all Americans is that little has been done to address numerous security issues to prevent future breaches, even while federal officials warn that another Russian attempt at interfering with the November election is likely.
To illustrate that point, a February report by the Center for America Progress after a review of election security protocols in all 50 states and the District of Columbia found most of them substandard. The group awarded a grade of C to both Illinois and Iowa, while Missouri received a D.
Moreover, the Washington Post reported that researchers at Princeton University have demonstrated that they can pick the lock on voting machines in seven seconds.
In minutes, the researchers could have replaced the machine’s chip with a malicious one, ensuring that voters who voted for candidate A were recorded as having voted for candidate B, the newspaper said.
Those are chilling revelations that could pose serious threats to our democracy if appropriate steps are not taken — and soon.
Congress has allocated $380 million to upgrade equipment nationwide as part of its effort to prevent a repeat of 2016. Illinois is the only state to publicly acknowledge hackers penetrated its voter registration system, with election officials saying 76,000 of the state’s 8 million active voter records were accessed, although none was altered or deleted.
The congressional plan would award Illinois more than $13 million and the state would be required to provide a 5 percent match. Election officials said they would like to focus on replacing voting machinery and hiring cybersecurity experts.
However, the funding is a fraction of the $147 million Illinois received more than a decade ago from the federal Help America Vote Act, which allowed states to overhaul their voting systems, and election officials admit there isn’t enough time or money to overhaul the state’s voting infrastructure before November.
Lawrence Norden, deputy director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, told the Chicago Sun-Times that cybersecurity protections go beyond replacing machines. He said states should also protect their voter registration systems and implement better post-election audits to further strengthen public trust.
“The most damaging thing that can be done is undermining people’s faith in democracy and potentially undermining their desire to participate and believe in our democratic institutions,” Norden said.
That makes it imperative to do what’s necessary to fortify our vulnerable voting systems to ensure the sanctity of our elections.
___
April 13, 2018
Chicago Tribune
Illinois should ratify the Equal Rights Amendment
In June 1982, the Illinois General Assembly had the chance to vote for the federal Equal Rights Amendment as a deadline for ratification loomed. It chose not to. On Wednesday, nearly 36 years later, the state Senate voted 43-12 to approve it. It’s now up to the House to do its part in bringing about a valuable change that is long overdue.
The amendment states a simple proposition that is as pertinent today as it was then: “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” Congress passed it and sent it to the states in 1972 for their approval within seven years.
By 1977, 35 states had ratified the ERA, leaving just three to complete the process. But a “STOP ERA” campaign led by Illinois’ own Phyllis Schlafly managed to bring the momentum to a halt. Congress extended the deadline to June 30, 1982, but to no avail. Time ran out.
Or did it? In recent years, the ERA has been revived by advocates who argue that the deadline was invalid - meaning the amendment could still be adopted if three states decided to ratify. Last year, Nevada became the 36th state to do so, leaving two to go. Illinois has the chance to put it nearly over the top.
Since 1972, the Supreme Court has found numerous laws that discriminated against women to be unconstitutional. In a 1996 decision requiring Virginia Military Institute to admit females, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote, “Parties who seek to defend gender-based government action must demonstrate an exceedingly persuasive justification for that action. Neither federal nor state government acts compatibly with equal protection when a law or official policy denies to women, simply because they are women, full citizenship stature.”
Opponents once warned that the ERA would lead to the legalization of same-sex marriage and women in combat. Both have come about without the ERA. Abortion rights, which they feared the amendment would confirm in the wake of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, have been repeatedly upheld by the court.
So what difference would the amendment make at this stage? Maybe not much in tangible terms. But it would have immense symbolic weight, giving the highest affirmation to the principle that discrimination against women is wrong.
Getting that 38th state, however, would not be the end of the battle. The courts would have to decide whether the deadlines Congress set are valid. They would also have to rule on whether states have the right to rescind their ratification - as five of the current count of 36 have voted to do. If the answer to either question is yes, the effort to adopt the ERA would have to start all over. But the supporters make a plausible case that the answer to both is no.
It’s worth finding out. Over the past generation, women have made huge strides in a host of spheres, helped by changes in the law. But in the era of #MeToo, it’s clear that full equality, in every sense of the word, has yet to be achieved. Enshrining the ERA in the Constitution would hasten that day.
___
April 15, 2017
Belleville News-Democrat
Progressive tax may be dead, but Illinois’ progressives likely to seek resurrection
Illinois Republicans just scored a rare victory on behalf of taxpayers, likely killing any effort to get a progressive tax on the Nov. 6 ballot.
House Minority Leader Jim Durkin, R-Western Springs, wrangled 50 colleagues to sign on to a resolution opposing a progressive tax. House Democrats were pushing a ballot initiative to change the Illinois Constitution, but they needed 71 representatives to vote for it. Simple math: 118 minus 50 is 68, which isn’t enough to put a constitutional question on the ballot.
Durkin said a progressive tax would feed the addictions of Democratic lawmakers.
“We must change the customary practice of the General Assembly: Spend now, pay later,” he said.
Getting the Republicans in line was especially important after some broke ranks to help Democrats override Gov. Bruce Rauner’s veto of the $5 billion state income tax hike. The flat rate went to 4.95 percent in exchange for the first state budget in two years, costing the average local family $1,205 a year more.
“The Democrats’ progressive income tax is a calculated killer: it kills jobs and businesses and, ultimately, it will kill the middle class,” Rauner said after the Republican resolution announcement. “It has been less than a year since Illinois families were forced to begin paying for the 32 percent income tax hike I opposed. We need to send a message that emptying our citizens’ pockets with new taxes is not the solution to our problems. Instead of forcing families to fork over more of their hard-earned money to the government through a progressive tax, let’s build our economy, grow jobs and put money into their pockets.”
You’ve heard it before, but this is a drum that needs beating: High taxes are killing Illinois.
Being the most-taxed state in the nation would not necessarily be a problem if we were investing in our future by putting the money into our schools, but we are the very last state in the nation for state funding of education. Instead, we invest in the future of state employees with 25 cents of every state budget dollar going to their pensions.
Even that is not enough, and we owe them $130 billion for pensions and a total of $200 billion when their retiree health care costs are included.
Why in the world would state lawmakers and their gubernatorial candidate, J.B. Pritzker, be talking about a progressive tax if it were not a path to more of your money? Why aren’t they talking about how to fix the reason they need more of your money - the state pension systems?
It’s a rhetorical question, folks. You know why they don’t talk about the root of the problem: They are the root, along with their unholy alliance with the state employees’ unions that keep their campaigns fed.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.