Q&A with Sherman
1. Why are you running for this office, whether for re-election or election the first time? Is there a particular issue that motivates you, and if so, what? What will be your main priority?
End the scams that government uses to unjustly cancel our rights, steal our money, spy on us and, in many cases, take away our freedom, itself. Represent those who do not have sufficient clout to be treated fairly by government. Reduce taxes by eliminating cost shifting scams, such as grants. Lap and shoulder seat belts on school busses. Cap county sales taxes at 1%. Ban sales tax rebating. Succeed in getting road projects, such as Route 53, built that the incumbent has failed to get done. Ban property taxes, because they are not based on your ability to pay. Ban mandatory waivers of your constitutional rights as a condition for participating in government programs. Ban excessive government fees and fines. Ban marriage discrimination against gays. Increase the speed limits on Interstate Highways. Widen major roads in the 53rd District that are still one lane in each direction. Ban judicial fraud.
2. For incumbents and non-incumbents. If you are an incumbent, describe your main contributions. Tell us of important initiatives you've led. If you are not an incumbent, tell us what contributions you would make.
I have spent my entire adult lifetime fighting injustice, one victory at a time, by articulating reasonable solutions to controversial issues that all sides can agree upon. That's what has been sorely missing from Springfield. Since I already have excellent relations with many legislative leaders and members, as well as many constitutional officers, I will be the person who will be able to break the gridlock in Springfield and get things done. The special talent that I will bring to the Illinois House is the clear appearance of impartiality, since I am the Green Party candidate, so that matters can be resolved in the best interest of the people, rather than in the best interest of either the Democratic or the Republican parties. The incumbent is a good guy, but I will succeed where he has failed because of my outstanding debating and negotiating skills and my spotless, flawless reputation.
3. Under what circumstances, if any, would you support raising the state income or sales tax? Please explain.
None. We're paying enough taxes. We are being taxed out of our homes and I will not raise either the sales tax nor the income tax. The way to get more money is by cutting spending for things that are not the state's responsibility. In particular, we must eliminate grants. A grant is where one party gets a benefit and everybody else gets stuck with the bill. Grants often occur when some party wants something, but they don't want it bad enough to pay for it themselves, so they seek a grant from Springfield so everybody else gets stuck paying for their stuff. Eliminate grants and you will eliminate spending on things that really weren't worth spending money on to begin with. By eliminating this type of cost shifting scam, we will cut spending. Do that and there will be more money to pay for things that are State's responsibilities.
4. Do you support the expansion of gambling by adding slot machines at racetracks? Do you favor licensing and building new casinos? Please explain.
No. Casino gambling is portrayed in their advertising as glamorous, but I've visited our casinos. The customers are, generally, pathetic, dysfunctional zombies who are being intentionally and severely manipulated psychologically to throw away their money. It's just not fair to allow the mentally fragile to be victimized like this. Lotto is OK because it can be done for fun at very little cost. However, I am opposed to leasing the Lottery. The Lottery literally is the goose that is laying the golden egg. It would be folly to kill that goose to get a little more money in the short term, but at an astronomically cost down the road. I would like to see more mega-jackpot Lotto games. Those are the games that people who normally don't gamble buy into because you can get in at a very reasonable cost and still have fun fantasizing about being a gazillionaire.
5. Would you support giving voters the ability to recall elected officials?
No. That's why we have elections. However, I will support legislation that would reduce the number of signatures that one needs on nominating petitions to enable normal people to get on the ballot. Incumbents have raised the number of signatures needed to astronomical levels specifically to try to prevent anybody from running against them. That's a major reason why our General Assembly is so screwed up. The only skill that you need to be a legislator is to master the art of persuading thousands of people who haven't got a clue as to who you are or what your position is on the issues to sign your nominating petitions. You don't need good judgment or good positions on the issues. You only need to know how to get signatures on a nominating petition. I'll change all that. I will substantially reduce the number of signatures need to run for office.
6. Did you support the suburban tax increases that were used to keep the public transportation trains and buses running without cuts or fare increases?
No. Absolutely not. Raise the fares. Stop the cost shifting. The RTA already has a resource for the additional funds that they want. It's their passengers. The cost of private transportation has tripled in recent years, but the price paid by transit customers has only gone up a small fraction in that time. Who should pay more to cover the cost of transit? The people who use transit or the people who don't use transit? I say that it should be the people who use transit. Stop sticking the rest of us with their bill. Besides, there are immense infrastructure needs for motorists and retail store customers. Motorists and retail customers don't need to have any more of the taxes that they do pay diverted from meeting their own needs to further subsidizing the costs that transit customers are generating. Time for transit customers to pay for their own transportation.
7. If you are elected, will you vote for the current party leader of your legislative chamber? Why or why not?
As the Green Party candidate, I can work well with anybody. I have excellent relations with Mike Madigan and his staff, but there may be an opportunity for me to put together a multi-partisan coalition for new leadership. It really doesn't matter to me, because my skill at persuasion will surely result in much less gridlock in the House. Besides, with Green Party member Rich Whitney as the next Illinois Governor in two years, the House will be glad to have me there to lead the way for cooperation and accomplishment. The important thing is to get my agenda enacted into law. That will only happen if I maintain good relations with whomever is the Speaker of the House. In fact, two years from now, members of the House may be so impressed with my leadership skills and effectiveness at multi-partisan cooperation, they may want me for Speaker.
8. What do you think of the idea, widely circulated, of impeaching Gov. Blagojevich?
I'm against using impeachment to achieve political goals, and that's what it would really be all about. Rod has great vision and has come up with some fabulous program ideas. Unfortunately, he has been the Santa Claus governor, proposing gifts for everybody but offering no way to pay for them. He then waits for others to take the heat for raising the money to pay for his vision. That's not leadership. If Rod wants a new program, then he needs to propose the way to pay for it, and mortgaging important state assets to get a one-time payoff for his projects, while leaving future taxpayers to pay the bill for his past programs, is not an acceptable answer. When I propose any new program, I will designate a way to cover its cost. That's real leadership. There won't be pay to play campaign contribution scams in my office, either.