Passing The Safe Roads Amendment Could Have Unintended Consequences

One of the TV ads put out to promote the Safe Roads Amendment is downright terrifying.

       Both the Tribune and the Sun-Times have urged readers to vote no on the measure, arguing that the campaign is fueled by cronyism, and that politicians shouldn’t need a constitutional amendment to force them into fiscal discipline. In September the Tribune ran an editorial blasting the amendment as “diabolical,” asserting that it would serve as a gravy train for the contractors and unions who make campaign donations to politicians.





       The federation also argued that requiring transportation-related revenue to be spent only on transportation projects could put more strain on state and local budgets, which could mean cuts to education and human services, and/or higher taxes.



       “We will have to fight for our share of the pie, as we do today, [but] the pie will get bigger—and that is key,” Burke says.



       “After actually reading the amendment and considering not only some of the issues you cite, but also the denial of transportation funding [for Illinois Department of Natural Resources research on alternative energy], I’ve concluded that this amendment is a bad idea.”