The price tag and our state's failed politics appear to be the two biggest arguments against holding a constitutional convention.

Every 20 years, Illinois voters are given the right to call a constitutional convention. I want you to vote "yes," but various interest groups are spending millions to convince you to vote "no."

The "vote no" ads claim the projected cost of holding a convention is too high, especially considering that the state is running a horrific budget deficit.

They aren't telling you something.

I'm a member of a union. My father was a proud union member. His father was a union member and, for a time, a union organizer. I own a business. My maternal grandparents, whom I cherished more than anyone else when I was a kid, were farmers. My mother was a public-school teacher for several years. Both of my parents are now retired and rely heavily on their government pensions.

What the heck does any of that have to do with anything?

The polling results I've seen from both sides of the debate say a plurality of you will vote for a state constitutional convention this November.

The numbers still aren't there yet. The question on the fall ballot must either be supported by 60 percent of those who vote on the issue, or by at least half of all those voting in the election itself. Still, it's getting there.

I'm one of those who supports a constitutional convention. And after 18 years of covering Illinois politics, I am not only convinced that a convention is necessary; I also believe I have a duty to tell you why.

Senate President Emil Jones began a meeting of his Democratic members not long ago with a playful announcement that despite what everyone had read and heard, he had no intention of retiring from office.

He was joking, of course, but while the joke may have temporarily relieved a bit of tension in the room, there's still plenty of infighting ahead.