If a government body wants to spend tens of millions of dollars for a construction project, there are lots of ways to gauge the public temperature.

It's hard to imagine a more roundabout approach than the one chosen by the Rock Island County Board.

Last week, the board voted to put a referendum on the April 9 ballot, and if your eyes glaze over while reading it, that might be the goal. The measure asks: "Shall the County Board of The County of Rock Island be authorized to expand the purpose of The Rock Island Public Building Commission, Rock Island County, Illinois to include all the powers and authority prescribed by the Public Building Commission Act?"

Of course, most people don't know what the Rock Island Public Building Commission is, or that it even existed - let alone its current or potentially expanded authority.

And there's no way to know from the words what the endgame is. There's no mention of a new or renovated county courthouse or county office building, or of a location, or of a price tag - which could be anywhere from $13 million (the low estimate for a new court facility alone) to $50 million (the high estimate for a new courthouse and county office building in downtown Rock Island).

In short, the referendum appears designed for maximum obfuscation - a seemingly innocuous question about an obscure public body. The move could easily be interpreted as a deceptive attempt to gain public support for something the public otherwise might not support.

Bill Daley called the other day. We estimated that it had been about three or four years since we had last spoken to each other, which is par for the course.

Going back to at least 2001, Daley - the brother and son of former Chicago mayors - has mulled a bid for governor. The last time was in 2009, when he publicly considered challenging Pat Quinn in the Democratic primary. And now he's talking about it again.

Before I returned Daley's call, I wanted to check around and see what might be different this time.

"Frankly, I'm not sure they want it," Illinois Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno said Tuesday about the Democratic legislative leaders and state pension reform.

It sure looked liked she was right last week, at least in the House, where Speaker Michael Madigan barely lifted a finger for any of the pension-reform bills that were on the table.

His top aides insist that he does indeed want pension reform. Madigan has said he wants a bill to pass. So what will it take to get him off the dime and start pushing for a solution?

In the 1940s and '50s, print and TV ads depicted, of all things, doctors and professional athletes enjoying the soothing benefits of smoking cigarettes. One TV spot stated, "In a repeated national survey, doctors of all branches of medicine, doctors in all parts of the country, were asked, 'What cigarette do you smoke, doctor?' More doctors smoke Camels than any other cigarette" (RCReader.com/y/cigs).

Of course, since then we've all wised up and realized the absurdity of the message that cigarettes are a healthy habit. Under the premise of healthful living, in 1952 the City of Davenport contracted with the Iowa Water Company to add fluoride to the public water supply (RCReader.com/y/agreement). Sixty years later, it's time to wise up and realize the absurdity of this practice ... or at a minimum, with the benefit of scientific research, have a public debate about medicating the populace through the public water supply.

In December 2010, the Reader published a cover story titled "Don't Drink the Water? Author Paul Connett Wants People to Take a Fresh (or First) Look at Fluoridation" (RCReader.com/y/fluoride). This article explored Connett's book The Case Against Fluoride and how he hoped it would get people to consider fluoridation "beyond the endorsements of professional societies and public-health officials."

Managing Editor Jeff Ignatius wrote in this article: "While the provocative subtitle is How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water & the Bad Science & Powerful Politics That Keep It There, the book's primary concern is science. ... The simplest way to state the ... premise is that until better scientific studies can be done on the effects of fluoridation, the risks of health problems far outweigh the proven benefits, which The Case Against Fluoride says are negligible."

Quad Citians concerned about the health and well-being of all who must rely on the public water supply are fortunate that environmental toxicologist Connett will be speaking at two free public events, January 14 at the Bettendorf Public Library and January 15 at the Moline Public Library. Both events will begin at 6:30 p.m. and together will launch a public-awareness campaign being positioned by opponents of fluoridation as "Have the Debate." Connett will give a presentation on the first evening, while the second evening will be a debate forum at which proponents of fluoridation will have the opportunity to publicly prove Connett wrong.

"If the broad light of day could be let in upon men's actions, it would purify them as the sun disinfects." - Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

What characterizes American government today is not so much dysfunctional politics as it is ruthlessly contrived governance carried out behind the entertaining, distracting, and disingenuous curtain of political theatre. And what political theatre it is, diabolically Shakespearean at times, full of sound and fury yet in the end signifying nothing.

Played out on the national stage and eagerly broadcast to a captive audience by media sponsors, this farcical exercise in political theatre can, at times, seem riveting, life-changing, and suspenseful, even for those who know better. Week after week, the script changes - the presidential election, the budget crisis, the fiscal cliff, the Benghazi hearings, the gun-control debate - with each new script following on the heels of the last, never any letup, never any relief from the constant melodrama.

The players come and go, the protagonists and antagonists trade places, and the audience members are forgiving to a fault, quick to forget past mistakes and move on to the next spectacle. All the while, a different kind of drama is unfolding in the dark backstage, hidden from view by the heavy curtain, elaborate stage sets, colored lights, and parading actors.

January 3 was not exactly a banner day for the Illinois Senate Democratic leadership. In high-profile moves, leadership's attempts to pass a bill legalizing gay marriage stalled, as did bills on gun control. Even a much-needed spending bill was unable to move out of committee. Pension reform went nowhere. The biggest winners were cigarette makers, of all people.

The gay-marriage bill turned out to be a dud. Opponents pointed out some serious issues with the bill's drafting, which, for instance, would have appeared to mandate that facilities owned by churches or religious groups allow same-sex marriage ceremonies. Proponents denied that, but they seemed to be on some shaky ground.

The measure was moved forward at the behest of some wealthy financial backers who appeared to dictate the timing, which is never a good thing in Springfield. Backers say that three senators who were supposed to vote for the bill were not at the Statehouse, and that kept them from passing it. But even if that were true, the drafting questions would likely have doomed the measure in the House. And the millionaire-funded media blitz just didn't work. Media blitzes, no matter how awesome to behold, aren't effective at the Statehouse if the actual bill is flawed and the votes aren't there.

As soon as the elections were over, a wave of commentaries extolling the virtues of compromise appeared in the press. The common theme is that it is time for Democrats and Republicans alike to end partisan gridlock - to make compromises that will shrink federal deficits without driving us off "the fiscal cliff."

That said, gridlock has its defenders. They fondly remember "the good old days" in the '90s when divided government (Democratic White House, GOP Congress) produced a gridlock that kept spending increases relatively modest and eliminated budget deficits.

Gridlock today, however, is not as benign as it was then. Also, the '90s constituted a special case that cannot be replicated today.

It's difficult to argue with a point by the Washington Post's Greg Sargent shortly after news had broken of the mass murder at a Connecticut school.

"If today's shooting doesn't prompt action on guns," Sargent wrote on his Twitter account, "then nothing ever will."

You'd think that the shocking horror of 20 children and 6 adults murdered at that school by a crazed gunman using a semiautomatic assault rifle with high-capacity ammunition magazines would prompt some action, either nationally or at least locally.

But nationally the NRA has almost completely embedded itself within the Republican Party and allied itself closely with congressional GOP leaders. As a result, when one of its own members (Gabby Giffords) was nearly killed during an Arizona mass murder by yet another crazed gunman, the U.S. Congress did little more than applaud her return to the chamber.

Gifts have been bought. Presents wrapped. Now all that remains is the giving and receiving. Oh, and the tracking, of course. Little did you know that all the while you were searching out that perfect gift, you were unknowingly leaving a trail for others - namely, the government and its corporate cohorts - to follow.

Thanks to the wonders of technology, the indifference of the general public to the growing surveillance state, the inability of Congress to protect Americans' privacy, and the profit-driven policies of the business sector, the corporate state could write a book about your holiday shopping habits: the Web sites you've visited when trying to decide what to buy, the storefronts you've browsed while wandering the mall, and the purchases you've made.

Even the store mannequins have gotten in on the gig. According to the Washington Post, mannequins in some high-end boutiques are now being outfitted with cameras that utilize facial-recognition technology. A small camera embedded in the eye of an otherwise normal-looking mannequin allows storekeepers to keep track of the age, sex, and race of all their customers. This information is then used to personally tailor the shopping experience to those coming in and out of their stores. As the Washington Post report notes: "A clothier introduced a children's line after the dummy showed that kids made up more than half its mid-afternoon traffic. ... Another store found that a third of visitors using one of its doors after 4 p.m. were Asian, prompting it to place Chinese-speaking staff members by that entrance."

Before Friday's horrific school shooting in Connecticut, people on both sides of the concealed-carry debate were saying privately that they did not expect Attorney General Lisa Madigan to appeal her major loss at the hands of the U.S. Court of Appeals.

A Seventh Circuit panel in Chicago voted 2-1 on December 11 to declare Illinois' strict laws on carrying guns unconstitutional and gave the General Assembly 180 days to come up with a new, much less restrictive law.

"A right to bear arms ... implies a right to carry a loaded gun outside the home," the majority opinion decreed, saying that Illinois had failed to show that restrictions on gun owners - including bans on concealed carry - had any positive effect.

Appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court could be harmful to the anti-gun cause, both sides admitted last week. New York's wealthy, influential, and legendarily anti-gun mayor could oppose an appeal out of fear that the conservative Supremes wouldn't preserve his own state's laws, which allow him to keep most concealed weapons off the street. Other states that allow limited concealed carry, such as Maryland and California, will also probably oppose an appeal for the same reason. They just don't trust the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold their restrictive laws.

Pages