Amy Grant: 2022 candidate for Illinois House District 47

Bio

Party: Republican

Office sought: Illinois House District 47

City: Wheaton

Age: 67

Occupation: State representative

Previous offices held: DuPage County Board

Q&A

Q: What needs to be done structurally to make the legislature more effective? What is your position on term limits in general and for legislative leaders specifically?

A: The first thing that could be done is to turn over the process of district mapping to an independent commission, much like Iowa has. As long as one party virtually ensures a large majority which does not reflect the actual partisan makeup of our state, there's no impetus whatsoever for the majority to entertain bills, or even ideas from the other side of the aisle. Since those in power behave as if they own the franchise on popular opinion for the entire state, somewhere between 45-50% of the population will continue to have no input or effect on legislating. I do believe in term limits. The key is the length; as in not too long, but long enough to legislate and govern effectively. 10 years would seem appropriate in my opinion.

Q: Federal assistance has enabled the state to make important advances toward improving its budget. What will you do to ensure these advances continue when the federal aid is gone?

A: Federal assistance combined with higher tax receipts on account of 7%+ inflation have been the sole reasons for these "advances." There was an opportunity to do so much more with the federal help, which of course is also tax money on the people of Illinois. The gluttony of Illinois government missed the opportunity to do so much without foolish gimmicks. We were loaned $4 Billion by the Federal Government to fill the gap in our Unemployment Trust Fund when the pandemic brought economic hardship. Instead of using the entire loan to shore up the UTF fund, the Governor redirected $1.8 Billion of that loan into political pork projects, to give the appearance of balance. We continue to owe on that loan with interest. Our tax receipts benefited from a painfully high inflation. We received even more fed money from the American Recovery Act and still didn't pay back the loan on the Unemployment Trust. We still have approximately $130B liability in our State Employee Pension Funds.

Q: To what extent are you happy or unhappy with the evidence-based model for education funding now in place in Illinois? How would you define "adequate" state funding for Illinois schools and what will you do to promote that?

A: Our system continues to heavily rely on property taxes to fund education, which are now utterly excessive.

Local school boards are elected to make decisions for the communities they serve. Instead, they have acted as a cudgel for state mandates that don't address the needs of any particular community while applying rules, mandates and curriculum decisions to all.

Parents have been removed from the equation in the current formula. These problems need local solutions by those elected members of school boards. Every formula for education in Illinois is always top-down, rather than starting from the student and working up. The models that work most efficiently aren't pursued for very obvious reasons. We can truly state that we are funding education very adequately. The legislature needs to yield more to locally elected school boards for their more individualized needs in their local communities.

Q: Do you believe elections in Illinois are free and fair? What changes, if any, are needed regarding election security and voter access?

A: I can't speak for the whole state, or other regions beyond my own. Our county reportedly had more votes cast than registered voters. We have voter rolls that are continually 'out of date', containing people who have moved away or died many years prior. As long as those records continue to regard these records as eligible voters on the rolls, the opportunity for corrupt practices exist and can be exploited. Voter access has gotten to the point where no one should complain they didn't have the opportunity to vote. It's likely too lax in some cases that threatens voter integrity; every aspect of the process should have oversight. If any shred of doubt exists, a potential voter should prove who they are. We should do everything we can to eliminate the potential for security problems while maintaining convenience and access.

Q: How well has Illinois responded to Supreme Court indications that it considers abortion, gay marriage and other social issues to be state, not federal, responsibilities? What if anything needs to be done in these areas and what would you do to make your vision come to pass?

A: Illinois legislators acted immediately in response to these decisions, and did so in a manner of solidifying, and even expanding the legislation that was in place. With a super majority, they really had no incentive to consider any views that didn't comport and agree with their own. The Supreme Court decisions and varying opinions have sent some issues back to the states over time to arbitrate for themselves. That has happened here. Many of these issues have been settled here in the legislature, where the court believed they should be settled, and are protected by law. From a legal standpoint, the Federal Judiciary filled its responsibility and the State legislature acted in accordance to fill theirs. The results, whether agreeable or not to any individual, were achieved in the manner our system of Separation of Powers is designed to work.