Daily Herald Endorses “No” Vote on Amendment 1

Written by John Lopez

On Sunday October 16, the Daily Herald urged a “No” vote on the top-of-the-ballot question on Amendment 1.

Illinois Family Action, like other freedom-loving and higher-taxes-loathing conservative organizations, is grateful for the newspaper’s rejection of Amendment 1. Interestingly, the Herald‘s editorial board also skewered some proponents who tried to use the abortion issue as a reason to vote for Amendment 1.

The Daily Herald on September 29 hosted a joint endorsement session with multiple newspapers around the state.  Through the Illinois Associated Press Media Editors, the editorial media panelists included the Daily Herald and two members from Shaw Media. The Daily Herald editors concluded,

We recommend a “No” vote on Amendment 1 because it is not needed and because unneeded Constitutional provisions unwisely tie the hands of the people’s representatives and the representatives of future generations to deal with problems we may not even foresee today.

The Daily Herald also took issue with the proponents’ labeling of Amendment 1:

The amendment is fashionably described by proponents and sympathetic politicians as the Workers Rights Amendment.

We are disinclined to refer to it by that name, partly because the language is intentionally loaded, but mainly because it is inaccurate. While it would strengthen workers’ rights in some ways, it would outlaw them in others.

During the editorial endorsement interview, the proponents’ spokesperson attempted to inject the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the 50-year-old Roe v. Wade decision as an example of what can happen to the 75-year-old Taft-Hartley Act, which allowed Illinois to become a right-to-work state.

Taft-Hartley was federal legislation that became law through presidential veto override in 1947. It allowed states to offer right-to-work protections so people wouldn’t be forced to join a labor union as a condition of employment.  Currently 28 states plus the territory of Guam have some kind of right-to-work provisions in state law.

The Herald editors did not buy the Roe v. Wade link:

For those who would nervously inject the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision into the conversation, please remember: the amendment would not fend off a national Supreme Court right-to-work ruling anyway.

Touche!

During the editorial endorsement interview, the opponents’ spokesperson also distinguished between Taft-Hartley and Roe v. Wade: Taft-Hartley was passed in Congress by the people’s representatives, while Roe was a court ruling.  He argued this was the significant reason Taft-Hartley has stood the test of time, as opposed to case law which can be overturned in a future court ruling.

In closing, the editorial endorsement promoting a ‘No’ vote summarized this stance well:

If there were a need for this amendment, we would be supportive. But there is no compelling need. That being the case, the voters of 2022 ought not limit the rights of voters in 2072 or any other year to deal as they see fit with the challenges their era presents. Vote ‘No’ on Amendment 1.

The overarching message from the Daily Herald is that Amendment 1 protections are not needed in the state of Illinois. But the editorial endorsement also touched upon arguments promoted by not only Illinois Family Action but also by the Illinois Policy Institute and Wirepoints. That is, the tax increases that would be passed on to property owners to pay for collective bargaining done outside of public view if Amendment 1 passes.

If this is not bad enough, through Amendment 1 “worker classification,” union leaders will try to grow their membership by turning workers from “independent contractors” into “employees” through worker classification legislation backed up by Amendment 1’s language.

On Oct. 13, this concern was addressed by IL-11 Republican nominee Catalina Lauf of Woodstock during a forum with the Schaumburg-based Technology and Manfacturing Association, within context of federal law. The cued video to the specific question can be viewed here.

In spite of proponents for Amendment 1 out-spending opponents by millions of dollars, the basic message against Amendment 1 resonated through editorial board endorsements with two of the three major newspapers in Chicagoland (Chicago Sun-Times no longer endorses candidates/issues). Shaw Media has yet to weigh in through its editorial board.

With the threat of Amendment 1’s higher property taxes and loss of workers’ freedoms, we can only hope more editorial endorsements for a “No” vote will be forthcoming around the state.

In the final three weeks of the 2022 campaign, through prayer, fasting, and, most important, obeying the promptings of God through His Word and/or the Holy Spirit, may God’s will be done up and down the ballot during the election as all freedom-loving voters do their part by voting “No” on Amendment 1.

The full editorial endorsement can be viewed here.

The editorial endorsement interview can be viewed in its entirety through YouTube here.

John Lopez has written about policy and elections through the McHenry County Blog since 2019 through July 2021.  He is now semi-retired, and does freelance work with analytics, as well as political candidates, emphasizing policy as the means to advance the conservative message, by engaging through policy “dog fighting”, applying discernment for winning and advancing God’s Kingdom agenda.

John’s known for getting past the talking points, the narratives, the abstracts, the platitudes and the bromides in order to discuss policy and apply Scripture to overcome unholy divisions in the local community, our state, and nation.  John has been married for over 17 years.

Follow John on Twitter: @MarcVAvelar