Since the end of World War II, the primary political regions of Illinois, Chicago and "downstate, " have lost population, wealth, and political power to a third region, the suburban collar, which has relentlessly expanded outward from Chicago. At the same time, legislative service has changed from a largely part-time "citizen" activity into a "professional, " career-oriented pursuit. Parochial perspectives of elected officials have intensified as reflected in candidates' promises to deliver their districts' "fair share" of government spending. The state legislature has become an arena in which each region battles for its own fair share, rather than an instrument for comprehensively addressing the state's problems. The authors foresee the emergence of political coalitions linking downstate and Chicago-historically at odds-in efforts to protect their "shares" and contend with the suburban collar. Illinois's political leaders face the challenge of looking beyond district interests to the broader concerns of work-force quality and statewide economic prosperity. Samuel K. Gove is Director Emeritus at the Institute of Government and Public Affairs, and Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Illinois. He is coeditor with Louis H. Masotti of After Daley: Chicago Politics in Transition. James D. Nowlan is an adjunct professor of public policy at Knox College and a Senior Fellow with the University of Illinois Institute of Government and Public Affairs. He is the author of A New Game Plan for Illinois.

For too long, the American constitutional tradition has been defined solely by the U.S. Constitution drafted in 1787. Yet constitutional debates at the state level open a window on how Americans, in different places and at different times, have chosen to govern themselves. From New Hampshire in 1776 to Louisiana in 1992, state constitutional conventions have served not only as instruments of democracy but also as forums for revising federal principles and institutions. In The American State Constitutional Tradition, John Dinan shows that state constitutions are much more than mere echoes of the federal document. The first comprehensive study of all 114 state constitutional conventions for which there are recorded debates, his book shows that state constitutional debates in many ways better reflect the accumulated wisdom of American constitution-makers than do the more traditional studies of the federal constitution. Wielding extraordinary command over a mass of historical detail, Dinan clarifies the alternatives considered by state constitution makers and the reasons for the adoption or rejection of various governing principles and institutions. Among other things, he shows that the states are nearly universal in their rejection of the rigid federal model of the constitutional amendment process, favoring more flexible procedures for constitutional change; they often grant citizens greater direct participation in law-making; they have debated and at times rejected the value of bicameralism; and they have altered the veto powers of both the executive and judicial branches. Dinan also shows that, while the Founders favored a minimalist design and focused exclusively on protecting individuals from government action, state constitution makers have often adopted more detailed constitutions, sometimes specifying positive rights that depend on government action for their enforcement. Moreover, unlike the federal constitution, state constitutions often contain provisions dedicated to the formation of citizen character, ranging from compulsory schooling to the regulation of gambling or liquor. By integrating state constitution making with the federal constitutional tradition, this path-breaking work widens and deepens our understanding of the principles by which we've chosen to govern ourselves.