48 Comments - OneMan - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:35 am: Wow… Makes my pick in the GOP primary really clear to me now.. - Demoralized - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:36 am: What Governor wouldn’t want to have as much power as possible? It doesn’t make it right, however. To me the fact that Rauner and Dillard said they would consider it makes them as big of juvenile delinquents as Quinn is on this issue. - Skeeter - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:38 am: Does anybody remember back when D-Lard was one of the calm and rational ones? The 2010 loss must have really rocked him. The man has gone off the deep end. - Mason born - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:39 am: Anyone who thought Pat Quinn was just fighting for the “common folk” and that this would never be used against you how are you feeling now? Seems to me it’s pretty obvious why Quinn needs to be stopped by the IL Supremes. On a side note can we all agree these two need to not win the primary? - Aldyth - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:40 am: I would hope they’d pay careful attention to what the courts have had to say about that tactic. The oath of office includes a promise to support the constitutions of the United States and Illinois. That’s a promise that really ought to be kept and not tossed over in favor of political stunts. - Frank - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:41 am: Term limits, withholding legislative pay, shrinking the size of the General Assembly…Bruce Rauner and Pat Quinn have a lot in common. Phony populism knows no idealogical bounds. - veritas - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:42 am: There’s no guessing what might come out of Rauner’s mouth next, but Dillard should really know better. - Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:42 am: I think Quinn should use it to force the GA to pass same sex marriage, increase funding for schools, increase the income tax (and approve a CA for a graduated tax), pass a motorcycle helmet law, pass some stricter gun laws…wow…the possibilities are endless… - Sir Reel - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:42 am: And of course Governor Dillard would decide if the budget was balanced. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:42 am: Rauner and Dillard will say anything if they think it will give them some juice. Somebody should ask Dillard why his old bosses, the Two Jims, didn’t use the tactic. - Whatever - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:43 am: Cue bandwagon, watch Dillard jump on. - Stones - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:44 am: Regardless of the merits of blocking legislators pay, there is still that little thing known as the constitution in the way. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:45 am: Utterly ignorant to the understanding of Government. Also, pandering to the worst in the electorate, by Rauner and Dillard admitting the Co-Equal branches of government is just something that they seem to not believe in. I expected no less from Payton Prep Clouter Bruce Rauner… I expected much more from “Jim Edgar’s former Chief of Staff!” Kirk Dillard. I am very disappointed in Kirk Dillard. With his “credientials”, that Dillard seems to always flaunt…. as someone who “understands government”, and portraying himself as someone ….who can “get things done”… and someone… who claims to be ready on his first day to be governor … Sen. Dillard, “Congratualtions. You’ve officially become everything you used to hate.” - Nearly Normal - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:46 am: Pandering to the voters? Probably. Will it work? Not really. Wait until the Supremes rule tactic as unconstitutional. Dumb and Dumber. - Grandson of Man - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:49 am: Good for Rutherford for not wanting to go down this path. As I’ve said before, it’s very unfair to punish legislators who have been doing their jobs and voting on bills. As far as I can tell, it’s not their fault that reform hasn’t passed. Though the Trib editorial board might disagree, I don’t believe they are part of some secret cabal meant to block pension reform: Madigan: “Are we ready for the double head fake?” Cullerton: “Ready? I have more head fakes than Patrick Kane in the final minutes of a Cup-winning game.” Henry Bayer: “Please proceed, Mr. Speaker.” Madigan: “Here goes: we will pass SB 1, Cullerton will pass SB 2404. SB 1 will fail in the Senate, and SB 2404 won’t get a vote in the House.” Bayer: “You guys never fail me and my members.” Madigan: “Last time it was the cost-shift handoff. Who knows what I will think of next?” - wordslinger - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:54 am: Brady and Rutherford deserve a lot of credit for being the grownups in the race on this. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:57 am: Jim Edgar quotes on Pat Quinn move: ===”First of all I can appreciate his (Quinn’s)frustration with the legislature,” says former Governor Jim Edgar, “I think every governor gets frustrated with the legislature, and I’m sure every legislature gets frustrated with the governor, and there were times I probably wanted to strangle them, but I don’t think I would have done what he did.” Edgar believes the real disagreement was between Quinn and legislative leaders, but rank and file lawmakers were affected as well. “I can think back when I was a freshman legislator,” says Edgar, “I was in the minority, I didn’t have any influence or power, and we lived from paycheck to paycheck.” Edgar tells us quinn’s move could set a dangerous precedent for the future, with governors and general assemblies blocking each others’ pay over disagreements. “Some future governor might do it,” says Edgar, “and he might do it in a way that’s even more damaging or disruptive than this was.”=== Sen. Dillard, is your supporter, former governor, Jim Edgar, going to now say, “Well, I know Kirk will use it right”? Governing within the Constitution, working with a Co-Equal branch, good faith with the Rank and File, sitting down with the Legislative Leadership to move Illinois forward and get things done…that is Jim Edgar…maybe the question you need to ask yourself, Kirk Dillard is … Who are you? - Mr. Jim Lahey - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 9:58 am: Not giving legislators money unless they produce a balanced budget would change it from a salary to an incentive. If you’re good you’ll get a prize! What about the governor? If they sign an “unbalanced” budget do they lose their incentive pay at the end of session? - Ahoy! - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:00 am: shouldn’t the court ruling put this issue to rest? - Wensicia - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:01 am: This is why the matter needed to be addressed through the court system. - Norseman - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:18 am: Dillard continues his Faustian quest for the Governor. He’s now shown that he’ll say and do anything to get elected. This is not the guy I voted for in 2010. Rauner doesn’t surprise me. In fact, this would be one of the prize tools that he could use to impose his will. - mm - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:27 am: I wonder how Democrats are going to feel if Rauner uses this to pass right-to-work, or Dillard uses it to pass a ban on same-sex marriage. Quinn opened Pandora’s Box with his wreckless grandstanding. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:30 am: I guess those who care about the constitution, and Co-Equal branches as written are really cheering hard for this to get to the Illinois Supreme Court and uphold the lower court ruling to put this to bed to save us from … the “Quinns”, the “Rauners” and the …”Dillards” Still amazed at the Dillard quote, just wow. - Bill White - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:39 am: Kirk Dillard’s quote helps Pat Quinn enormously as it neutralizes one of the strongest lines of attack against Quinn. - OurMagician - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:39 am: Kirk Dillard may have worked for Governor Edgar but I don’t think he ever listened to him. - Re-Pete - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:40 am: Are we really going to base our gubernatorial votes on this issue? There are like 1,000,000 issues that are far more important. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:46 am: ===Are we really going to base our gubernatorial votes on this issue?=== If a person running for Governor thinks extorting a Co-Equal branch is an acceptable way for Illinois to run, and that it’s against the constitution, not an “agreement” that they work together… yeah, this is as big as it can get. Rod Blagojevich NEVER did it, Jim Edgar’s quotes above say it all … I guess, - Re-Pete -, haveing a state running with a Constitution is not your style. Maybe a 3rd Wrold Banana Republic is more of your liking, with “legislatures” being seated every week, depending how the vote may go… Voting for a governor… who ignores how to run the state … is not a good way to get a good government. - foster brooks - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:47 am: Not only would Rainer pull this against the GA he would surely target state employees also. And the evil “union boss’s”. This is why the pay issue is so important to madigan and cullerton. - Frank - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 10:58 am: Dillard’s pandering on this issue — and his campaign’s direction in general — prove that this is not your father’s Illinois GOP. Neither Jim Thompson or Jim Edgar (pro-choice Republicans who raised taxes,) could win a statewide primary today. Dillard understands that, hence, his rightward march. - Norseman - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 11:19 am: === prove that this is not your father’s Illinois GOP === This is not my father’s or my GOP and that is sad. - Re-Pete - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 11:30 am: == Re-Pete -, haveing a state running with a Constitution is not your style == Unlike everyone else here, I’m not a constitutional lawyer, so I don’t know what’s right and what’s wrong. I will say this - when people hide behind “the constitution” the alarm sounds. There are parts of the Illinois constitution that are willfully ignored, and parts that are unenforceable and I never know which is which. No offense, Willy, but I don’t trust some anonymous blog commenter to tell me which is which, I’ll let Springfield sort it out. - Hans Sanity - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 11:39 am: Mild & uninformed speculation on how this relates to 2014: Rutherford & Brady have better bridges to GOP legislators. Rauner knows his campaign is about creating & buying “effective” ads with his own cash. Dillard wasn’t going to get much help from legislators anyway. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 11:48 am: ===I will say this - when people hide behind “the constitution” the alarm sounds.=== Well, that is better than the Tin Foil hat heating up and buring a scalp … Since a judge already cited the Constitution as part of his ruling, its pretty safe to say, the Constitution has a role in the decision, and in what Quinn is trying to do, thanks. ===There are parts of the Illinois constitution that are willfully ignored, and parts that are unenforceable and I never know which is which.=== What is “unenforceable”? Example? Further, If you don’t want to learn from your ignorance, or want to post “drive-by” questions, expect to be called out here. This is not your “Dad’s blog”. By the way I tried to count the Million other issues, but I never got that many. Maybe you could help get us all to a Million, or was that a “Drive-By” to makes us all think? - Linus - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 11:52 am: - Are we really going to base our gubernatorial votes on this issue? There are like 1,000,000 issues that are far more important. - And a gubernatorial “no pay for legislators” tactic could be used in the case of any or all of those 1,000,000 issues, thus underscoring its importance and relevance. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 11:52 am: I have met Kirk Dillard and think he’s a likeable guy. I supported him in the last gov election but thought he ran a lackluster campaign. It looks like he thinks he lost because he wasn’t “right” enough. Going the populist route now with hard right rhetoric is the game plan, right, Kirk? I want the GOP to win the mansion and the GA back. Dillard maybe wins the primary but will not win the general with these ploys. Anyone voting would ask, “why vote for Dillard when we already have the Kingfish in Springfield?”. Same goes for Rauner. Brady had his chance but he, too, was viewed as too extreme last election. He’s so yesterday. Mr Rutherford, I bet the door is open for many republicans to walk in. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 11:56 am: OW, respectfully, Re-Pete is a troll. Why give him the benefit of your wisdom? Unless you’re having fun, of course. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 12:03 pm: - dupage dan -, Appreciate the very nice compliment, far too kind, I thank you. To your point, Yeah, Some I like to see how far they will go before they fold and call names. To the Post, ===And a gubernatorial “no pay for legislators” tactic could be used in the case of any or all of those 1,000,000 issues, thus underscoring its importance and relevance.=== Here endeth the lesson, well said. The minute a tactic takes the Co-Equal away, it can be thrusted upon the other, and not necessarly with any thought of what is right, wrong, or just, but to what agenda is not passabel under a Constitutional government, and only passable through tactics too many people fought for, for over 230 years. - reformer - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 12:53 pm: Willie It’s refreshing and rare to hear an analysis based upon principle, and then to have it applied to a candidate from your party whom you formerly supported. It’s something precious few partisans are willing and able to do. - Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 2:27 pm: Vetoing salaries was offensive and unconstitutional when Quinn did it. It’s just as odious and illegal coming from another (theoretical) governor. - Ruby - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 2:32 pm: @ 9:49 am: “Who knows what I will think of next?” How about a court fight over funding of legislative pay and the separation of powers? Oh, wait… - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 3:12 pm: - reformer - The constitution is for all Illinoisans, Republicans and Democrats. I can not have any future governor think that Pat Quinn is even remotely right in ignoring the seperation of powers, and thinking Co-Equal is just lip service. As for My Take and My Party, it does ne no good to take a partisan view or even a favorable view of the 4. Favorable. These 4 GOP Candidates hear all day how great they are, how smart they are, how important they are… I am helping more by trying to point out shortfalls, than joining the Dopey chorus that they hear every day on their greatness, and no one ever pointing out where any of the 4 can be better. If the arguement is “true”, and “right”, and has merit, that is on the arguement, not me, and I can’t take the credit. However, if it is wrong, and misleading, and utter spin with facts being ignored… that is “on me” and I should be called upon to defend it. As should anyone, 1 million issues or not. To the Post, How can/will Dillard walk this back? After a court ruling in favor of the Speaker and President, just plain ignore his own statement in hopes it goes away? I will be very interested in how Dillard’s Crew will try to take that quote, and the innocualtion of Quinn (good catch - Bill White -), and try to show the voters the “Kirk Dillard” who can govern without Dopey tactics his own former governor supporter thought was as possible “dangerous precendent” in the making. This is one that is an easy call to call out on Rauner and Dillard. - downstate commissioner - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 3:36 pm: Good job, Willy. Too many Republican candidates: hopefully, this will thin them out a little-Dillard just lost any support he might have had from me. Voted for Whitney last time, Brady was just too far right, but at least he is knowledgeable about the system. At this time, Rutherford is my first choice, but against Quinn, Brady would be an acceptable alternative. - walkinfool - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 5:25 pm: Dillard knows better. Man what a disappointment he is becoming, at least as he tries appeal to the edge of his base. Focusing such a specific weapon on the “balancing” of a budget, means that all revenue (and state economic performance) forecasting for the next fiscal year will become highly charged and politicized. It also will be hard to enforce. That’s nothing to say about its blatant abuse of Separation of Powers — which I still say is unconstitutional on the face of it. - Nearly Normal - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 6:29 pm: The Journal-Register is reporting this pm that Gov Quinn is appealing to the Supreme Court– http://www.sj-r.com/breaking/x452546719/Quinn-files-to-appeal-lawmaker-pay-to-Illinois-Supreme-Court?rssfeed=true - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 6:37 pm: I wonder … How will Sen. Dillard respond if Quinn is rebuffed by the Supremes? “I am disappointed that the Illinois Supreme Court did not side with the Governor, and… as a member of the General Assembly, wanting a Co-Equal partner, I am thrilled that the Illinois Supreme Court sided with Speaker Madigan and President Cullerton.” Boy, I am looking forward to that line of questioning… - Just The Way It Is One - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 8:51 pm: Understandably, the case is under appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court as of today, and, technically, not resolved with FINALity as yet, but with all of the turbulence surrounding the legislative paycheck brouhaha and Pat Quinn’s heretofore embarrassing defeat on that issue, (despite some decent Popular appeal) it’s a bit befuddling that those two GOP candidates would jump aboard the “It’s Fine With Me, TOO” Ship…! At the very least, with “the Jury still out” on this one via the Illinois Supremes, perhaps indicating Neutrality at the moment, or at least a “wait ‘n see” approach would seemingly make more sense. Now, Rauner and Dillard are “on the record” for the issue, as they say, and to try to turn back down the road, if, for instance, the High Court further stymies Quinn, as may very well not be unlikely, would make it the old, unsavory “flip-flopping” on their part–a No-No in Major Elections like the Gubernatorial one - Just The Way It Is One - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 8:52 pm: …! - Bill White - Wednesday, Oct 2, 13 @ 11:40 pm: Suppose an “unbalanced” budget was passed by a 1 vote margin. Does candidate Dillard believe the entire General Assembly should forfeit their paychecks, or only those who voted “Aye” ? Also, I am supremely confident the Supreme Court will sustain the trial judge in declaring the line item veto a nullity. Otherwise, how can they distinguish zero-ing out legislative salaries from zero-ing out judicial salaries, in the event the Governor disliked a judicial decision? Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.