While some naifs want Illinois Gov. George Ryan nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for enacting a moratorium on the death penalty in the state and issuing a blanket commutation to all those sitting on death row, Slate’s Chris Suellentrop knows better.

Most folks outside the state don’t know about Ryan’s ugly past, or about his impending indictment. Suellentrop offers a beginner’s version, and also lays out a case for why the same things that drove Ryan to abuse his political power in office also drove him to issue the blanket commutation.

Certainly, the commutation itself skirts the edges of the law, if it doesn’t outright break it. The governor has the power to pardon convicted criminals or commute their sentences based on careful review of each case, but Ryan admits he didn’t base his decision on the merits of individual cases but general flaws in the system. He simply judged that the system as a whole had failed.

That’s probably the correct judgment considering the 13 death row denizens who’ve been exonerated in the last few years. But was it within Ryan’s constitutional power to commute all these sentences on the judgment that the death penalty generally had failed? That’s a legitimate question, and an important one if you care abou the rule of law.

First he wanted to tax services like auto repairs and haircuts and now he doesn’t. He’s not floated any spending-cut ideas, though. Hmph.

As for the supposed crises all the states are have trying to balance their budgets, state spending increased by an average of 3.3 percent, adjusted for inflation, according to the USA Today’s Dennis Cauchon. I’m sure Illinois is no exception. (Link via Virginia Postrel’s The Scene.)

I don’t understand why Dubya came out against the University of Michigan’s admissions program. He tried to split the difference, sure, inasmuch as the White House brief does not condemn racial preferences in all circumstances, but that certainly won’t matter to the Democrats trying to get out the black vote in
2004.

Jeez, the only reason Florida was so close in 2000 was because of the incredible black turnout after Jeb’s jettisoning of racial preferences in the state’s contracting and admissions programs.

And, certainly, lame damage control attempts such as placing a story in today’s Post claiming that Condi Rice played a key role in Dubya’s decision won’t help much to assuage the concerns of black voters, who already have an unfavorable opinion of Dubya and a majority of whom are against the coming war in Iraq.

After all the machinations to get steel votes in Pennsylvania and Ohio (assuming that strategy works to begin with, which is questionable), they’ll probably be offset by an increase in black votes for the Democratic nominee in Cincinnati, Cleveland, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. And all of this on top of the Trent “All These Problems” Lott debacle. Anyone care to explain this to me?