Q&A with Nekritz

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?

I am running for re-election to continue the work I have done in my first three terms as State Representative. I have tackled tough issues that affect residents throughout the state, such as property tax relief and infrastructure needs. I have also addressed issues specific to the 57th District, including rail traffic congestion and flooding. One of my top priorities is to continue providing prompt and comprehensive constituent service for everyone in the 57th District. We respond to all letters and assist those with problems to the best of our ability. We work hard at assuring that constituents are aware of the services we perform. I have held over two dozen town hall meetings as well as numerous open forums on specific topics such as prescription drugs, global warming, energy efficiency and education.

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.

In 2006, I was proud to sponsor legislation to dissolve the Suburban Cook County Tuberculosis Sanitarium District and eliminate a property tax levy imposed on suburban property owners. With the Des Plaines River running through the heart of the 57th District, flooding is a significant concern. Before 2004, no agency had undertaken a comprehensive approach to storm water management in Cook County. That year, I sponsored legislation to give the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) authority to address flooding and storm water problems in Cook County. Already, MWRD has provided considerable resources to address some of our most chronic flooding problems in northwest suburban Cook County. Third, both passenger and freight rail are growth industries. As a national rail hub, Illinois is uniquely positioned to take advantage of this expansion. To raise the profile of rail, I created a House committee to deal specifically with that industry. In addition, I am a leader in the Passenger Rail Caucus, which includes members from both chambers, both sides of the aisle and every region in the state. The Passenger Rail Caucus has successfully advocated for doubling the state funded Amtrak service and for including rail investment in a capital program.

3. Under what circumstances, if any, would you support raising the state income or sales tax? Please explain.

In June, 2008, Illinois' unemployment rate was at its highest level since September 2003. Nationally, the economy is still in the doldrums and showing little, if any, sign of recovery. Dramatic increases in energy prices are taking a big bite out of the paychecks of Illinois residents. This is no time to be raising Illinois income taxes. And Cook County sales taxes are already the highest in the nation. However, we have critical needs in Illinois that need to be funded. I support legislation to authorize the use of excess proceeds in the state's many special purpose funds to restore the cuts to human service programs - including those for the developmentally disabled, substance abuse and seniors. We could anticipate as much as $350 million from fund sweeps to restore these programs to their Fiscal Year 2008 funding levels.

4. Do you support the expansion of gambling by adding slot machines at racetracks? Do you favor licensing and building new casinos? Please explain.

I do not support an increasing reliance on gambling revenues to operate state government. It appears, however, that expanded gambling may be the only revenue source on which there is agreement to support a desperately needed capital program. In that case, I support the proposal by Speaker Madigan to completely revamp the Gaming Board and how members are appointed. All licenses should be auctioned to the highest qualified bidder. As shown by the level of casino profits, they are worth substantially more than the $25,000 (plus $5,000 annually) originally paid by licensees. The citizens of Illinois should enjoy the benefit of that substantial value. The Riverboat Gambling Act sets forth several criteria for awarding a casino license. These include projected revenue, adequate capitalization and other financial measures. The Act also provides that favorable consideration be given to economically depressed areas of the State as well as licenses that will provide significant economic development. I support these factors as the primary considerations for awarding a casino license. The process for evaluating bids should be more transparent. I support disclosing the terms of all bids as well as each of the factors considered by the board in making an award.

5. Would you support giving voters the ability to recall elected officials?

I did not support the proposed constitutional amendment to allow recall in Illinois. I join with Alexander Hamilton, one of our founding fathers, in believing that recall "will render the senator a slave to all the capricious humors among the people." And the history of recall in this country demonstrates that it is typically driven by deep pocketed special interests or multimillionaires - not dissatisfied citizens. Recall, and more importantly the threat of recall, removes the ability of the elected official to follow their conscience. Instead, every decision will be made with an eye on the polls. If every act subjects a public official to recall spearheaded by big monied special interests, they are less likely to act in a manner that will achieve longer term goals. There are public officials that commit criminal offenses or who fail so miserably to perform their duties that they deserve to be recalled. On balance, however, I believe the impact that the threat of recall has on the way in which all elected officials perform their duties outweighs any benefit that might be enjoyed from recalling a single elected official.

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?

I supported House Bill 656, the legislation to provide additional funding for the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) and it service boards, Metra, Pace and the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA). In addition to the one-quarter cent sales tax increase and the Chicago transfer tax, this important legislation included significant reforms for the CTA pension and retiree health care plans as well as RTA reforms to increase efficiency throughout the system as well as increase coordination and accountability. These reforms will save the transit systems millions of dollars.

7. If you are elected, will you vote for the current party leader of your legislative chamber? Why or why not?

The sixty seven members of the House Democratic caucus include white, black, Hispanic, city, suburban and downstate legislators. We are pro-choice, pro-life, pro-gun control and strongly pro Second Amendment. We represent strong regional interests. We are as diverse as Illinois and therefore it is an extremely difficult job to keep the group together and working toward any kind of common agenda. Speaker Michael J. Madigan works very hard at listening to our divergent opinions and developing legislation that will meet our various needs. Whoever serves as Speaker of the House, I support changes to the procedural rules that govern House operations in order to open up the legislative process. The rules give almost exclusive authority over legislation to the Speaker and the Rules Committee. Our rules are among the most onerous in the nation and I would like to see the procedures opened up to give individual members greater autonomy and authority and to provide more opportunity for input by the public.

8. What do you think of the idea, widely circulated, of impeaching Gov. Blagojevich?

The Illinois Constitution provides for impeachment but does not set any standards for this action. Historically, the purpose of impeachment has been to hold a public official accountable for abuses of power. The role of the House in an impeachment proceeding is most serious and I would not want to prejudge any case that might come before that body. And without extensive research to understand the precedents for impeachment and any legal standards that apply, I could not comment on whether the Governor's actions or inactions are impeachable. But if any public official, including the Governor, has engaged in conduct that meets the standards for impeachment, the House has a constitutional duty to act.