68 Comments - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:38 pm: MJM - underestimate him at your peril… Isn’t that the Rauner mantra? Madigan never underestimates, or golfs on Election Day. Pieces are being put into place. They always are. Unions, constitutional amendments gears toward core constituencies, Oberweis/Rauner “.01%” narratives… Doesn’t sound like MJM is “Fine” with a “Gov. Rauner”, no matter what “looking forward to working together” chant Rauner tries to back-peddle, or “Take it to Madigan” battering ram Rauner tries to use as intimidation. MJM is “that” good sometimes… - Anon - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:41 pm: Given Republican resistance to making it easier to vote, and their support for voter ID laws, MJM is daring the GOP to oppose it. I wonder if Oberweis will take the bait? - American Citizen - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:42 pm: This says all persons? Does this mean a non US Citizen? Anyone can walk into a polling place without an ID and vote? Then I guess it possible to vote several times. Makes me feel real good about fair elections. - Chicago Cynic - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:43 pm: Sorry - maybe I’m missing something. What does this actually do? - MrJM - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:44 pm: Including “income” was a masterstroke. – MrJM - Montrose - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:44 pm: “This says all persons? Does this mean a non US Citizen? Anyone can walk into a polling place without an ID and vote? Then I guess it possible to vote several times. Makes me feel real good about fair elections.” Yes. That is right. It is overriding the US Constitution. Thanks for playing. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:47 pm: Interesting. I think the key word here is “register.” In regards to registration, The Constitution currently reads: –The General Assembly by law may establish registration requirements and require permanent residence in an election district not to exceed thirty days prior to an election.– To this layman, the proposed amendment would take away the power of any future GA to make mischief with registration. I hadn’t noticed that was an issue. Perhaps MJM could explain. Otherwise, yes, I think he’s looking to drive turnout and put GOP GA members in a trick bag. Lisa, can you see now why he didn’t retire? Dude’s having too much fun. - liandro - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:52 pm: Ah, my wonderful leaders. - This Day - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:54 pm: FYI, on this day in history: 1965 The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. led 25,000 marchers to the state capitol in Montgomery, Ala., to protest the denial of voting rights to Aferican Americans. - Johnny Q. Suburban - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:58 pm: I don’t know why but I find Madigan’s cynicism so much more impish and playful than Rauner’s. I suppose that’s why the man’s been in power for decades. - Chicago Cynic - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 2:59 pm: Not to be dense, but how exactly will this drive turnout? - Mr. T - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:06 pm: “no person shall be denied the right to register to vote” “status as a member of a language minority” Is this person a legal citizen? - Precinct Captain - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:07 pm: ==Not to be dense, but how exactly will this drive turnout?== Have you been paying attention to the battle by GOP legislators all over America to suppress voting? This would drive turnout because it would be an affirmative step that the state of Illinois will not allow, at least in its constitutional language, people to be targeted and not allowed to register to vote or vote simply because they belong to a demographic that overwhelmingly votes for a certain party. It’s no surprise that the leader behind Pennsylvania’s voter suppression law, with a disproportionate effect on African Americans, stated it would help Romney win PA. - A guy... - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:09 pm: Snark alert: [oerp ofyp r yrpyp addPUUPUjw. Translated: I’m now allowed to vote. Language: You aren’t allowed to ask me that. - facts are stubborn things - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:10 pm: For a man who does not follow the constitution (pension reform) he sure thinks it important to change it. - Anon - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:12 pm: This is about crowding out the term limit amendment, plain and simple. Maximum three public questions. If legislature approves three for fall ballot before term limit question is filed, the quota is used up for this fall, and the term limit question is toast. This particular constitutional amendment may sound good, but adds nothing to the law in existence today…it is illegal and unconstitutional today to deny the right to vote based on such forms of discrimination. This is not about the substance, it’s about using up the quota of public questions to crowd out term limits. Expect a third proposed amendment soon… - Mr. T - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:14 pm: Will this mean I can cut up my government photo ID’s. Why issue birth certificates? How many in the local cemetery will be voting? - SAP - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:14 pm: Madigan’s amendment does not prohibit denial of the right to register to vote or cast a ballot based on citizenship. - DuPage Rep - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:15 pm: ==This is not about the substance, it’s about using up the quota of public questions to crowd out term limits. Expect a third proposed amendment soon…== BINGO - Meanderthal - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:18 pm: Madigan seems scared these days. These are not the actions of a man confident he can control events the way he would like. - Norseman - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:18 pm: He needs to add sports affiliation. When I was up in Chicago, I had a number of folks questioning whether they would serve me because I was a Packer fan. Go Green and Gold! - wordslinger - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:19 pm: –Will this mean I can cut up my government photo ID’s. Why issue birth certificates? How many in the local cemetery will be voting?– For crying out loud, if voter fraud was a “thing,” you think turnout last Tuesday might have broken 25%? - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:20 pm: ==This is not about the substance, it’s about using up the quota of public questions to crowd out term limits. Expect a third proposed amendment soon…== Agreed. Rauner’s next “play” if MJM is sucessful? Another Howard Dean blathering? See, where Rauner is the most like Rod is literally trying to play in Madigan’s sandbox with half-baked checkers moves, and then when faced with being halfway down a road MJM doesn’t mind Bruce or Rod on, he ignores the salvos for compromise, and remembers the posturing and the rants. Bruce and Rod share the same thoughts it seems. Saw how it worked for Rod… - LincolnLounger - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:24 pm: Anon is exactly right. They just did this in Chicago with important referenda regarding gauging the public’s support for increased taxi fares and several other b.s. questions so they could keep the damning ones off. By the way, Precinct Captain. I love your “outrage” about voter “suppression.” I hope you paid close attention to the Rev. Sharpton and the gang in Ohio that just “honored” the woman who was convicted of voting 5 times (at least) for Obama there. She was convicted and given probation, and they honored her. Don’t tell us it doesn’t happen because it does. And I suspect that it has happened in rich, white DuPage and elsewhere, in addition to St. Clair, Massac, etc. The concept of people being “disenfranchised” because they have to have an i.d. to vote when they have to have one to bank, travel, perform nearly any other governmental activity, or attend the Democratic Nationao Convention is rich. - PoolGuy - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:25 pm: lol Norseman. yes need to add that to protect the Cards, Packers, Colts and Rams fans - Frenchie Mendoza - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:28 pm: I think another thing that’s going on here is that these kind of smart moves force Rauner to take specific stances — something he’s been remarkably reluctant to do. I suspect his campaign staff is urging this stance-less candidacy as status quo. The less you say, the more generalized platitudes you offer, the stronger you’ll be. “Shake up Springfield”, “Take on the Union bosses.” It’s all nonsense from Rauner — it really is. Rauner hasn’t a clue how he’ll shake things up or “take on” the union bosses. These recent moves will force Rauner to finally make some specific statements. What’s interesting, though — at least over the past couple days — is that Rauner’s response to Madigan has been remarkably tepid. Almost timid. I’m guessing this was Rauner’s MO during his so-called “business years”. Yell and scream and speak the truth to the choir — and then sorta fizzle out when he’s put on the spot. It’s a brilliant strategy — and it says a lot about the intellectual savvy of the people he’s courting for votes. - Upon Further Review - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:28 pm: Totally redundant and wholly unneeded. Madigan seems to forget that the Voting Rights Act is in full force and effect. The amendment proposal also ignores a series of SCOTUS decisions on voting rights. So why do it? To stage a publicity stunt or to crowd other proposed amendments off of the November ballot? - Sick of Illinois Politics - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:33 pm: If they bump independent maps off the ballot, I will be livid. - Upon Further Review - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:33 pm: When did a elections registrar or polling place judge ever question someone’ sexual orientation? This is pandering nonsense pure and simple. It is not voter suppression to see that only qualified voters have access to ballots. - MrJM - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:33 pm: “Richardson, 58, was convicted last spring of four counts of illegal voting. The charges say she twice voted in the 2012 election and voted three times in past elections on behalf of her sister, Montez Richardson, who has been in a coma since 2003.” http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/03/21/democrats-convicted-poll-worker-hero/6712981/ LincolnLounger is right!!! The epidemic of poll workers illegally voting on behalf of their comatose siblings is a legitimate threat to Illinois!!1! – MrJM - Linus - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:36 pm: - Madigan seems scared these days. These are not the actions of a man confident he can control events the way he would like. - I disagree entirely. This is the way the Speaker always has worked to control events, and pretty effectively. And Frenchie’s right: This is another way to force Rauner into staking/owning some actual policy positions (in addition to crowding the constitutional-amendment field and helping to drive voter turnout). A hat-trick for the Speaker. - Raymond - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:37 pm: === These are not the actions of a man confident he can control events the way he would like. === That’s just the thing - he IS controlling events. (And doing it with confidence.) - Ray del Camino - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:38 pm: The legislature is limited to amending three articles. I don’t think their limit applies to amendments generated by initiative/petition. Lawyers out there? Am I right? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:53 pm: I’ve voted dem. al my life. Madigan and Quinn still owe me at least 12000.00 in back-pay, not counting what this has since shorted my retirement by not having this money calculated into the formula. I’ll vote straight Rep. this time. I’ve been stole from enough I’m with Rauner, it’s time for term limits, then people like Madigan can,t think they are god. - Jimbo - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:54 pm: Ray, The limit is 3 legislative articles. It does not apply to citizen initiatives. This is about driving democratic turnout AND making Rauner take a stance on specific issues where the party line diverges greatly with public opinion. - SAP - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:54 pm: RdC: That’s how I read Article XIV of the IL Constitution. http://www.ilga.gov/commission/lrb/con14.htm - DuPage Rep - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:55 pm: Jimbo Is there a case or statue that makes this clear? - Raymond - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:55 pm: === The legislature is limited to amending three articles. I don’t think their limit applies to amendments generated by initiative/petition. Lawyers out there? Am I right? === Unless there’s something I’m missing, I’d agree with that. The Constitution does not appear to preclude an amendment brought by initiative based on the number of amendments approved by the GA. - Jimbo - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:58 pm: Jezus anon, Rauner has specifically stated your contracts are the problem. Do you actually think he’ll treat you better? I can see refusing to vote for Quinn, but you are actively voting for destruction of your union. Those raises you’re owed would never have even been in a contract if Rauner was gov. Get ready to be treated like the merit comp folks if Rauner wins. - Jimbo - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 3:59 pm: DuPage, Rich stated it here last week when the other amendment was proposed. I believe it is clearly stated in the Constitution. - RetiredArmyMP - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:00 pm: Since the consensus seems to be that a low voter turnout, especially in Cook County, would hurt Quinn and possibly allow Rauner to oust him, this appears to be an attempt to ensure high Democrat voter turnout. Interestingly, the amendment would seem to allow non citizens to vote - wouldn’t this be a violation of federal law? Have there ever been any problems or issues that would be corrcted by this amendment? Seems to be a solution in search of a problem. - Joe Bidenopolous - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:01 pm: I apologize if this has been said, I haven’t read through comments yet. But, isn’t there a max number of constitutional amendments that can be on the ballot? If so, MJM might just want to fill it before Rauner’s amendment can be filed. - phocion - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:04 pm: I wasn’t aware that voter rights have been suppressed in Illinois. - Jimbo - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:05 pm: Yes. The limit is in the legislative amendment section. There is no limit in the citizen initiative section. Additionally, I’m curious what happens if Rauner gets the term limit signatures but term limits are struck, can he still propose changes to veto override and size of the Senate with those signatures? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:05 pm: I’ve voted dem. al my life. Madigan and Quinn still owe me at least 12000.00 in back-pay, not counting what this has since shorted my retirement by not having this money calculated into the formula. I’ll vote straight Rep. this time. I’ve been stole from enough I’m with Rauner, it’s time for term limits, then people like Madigan can,t think they are god. I voted Republican all my life. I’m voting straight Dem because of the structural revenue deficit that has not been filled all these years by adequate revenue. When we ask our wealthy conservative friends to help out with a progressive tax or more revenue, they cry class warfare. I’m voting for Quinn because he will stand up for students and the working class. I’m going to get my family and friends to vote for Quinn, and they’re going to get their friends, and so on, and so on, and so on, and so on… - DuPage Rep - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:05 pm: Thanks Jimbo and SAP. - Charlie Wheeler - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:08 pm: Point of Information: Constitution of the State of Illinois ARTICLE XIV — CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION SECTION 2. AMENDMENTS BY GENERAL ASSEMBLY (c) The General Assembly shall not submit proposed amendments to more than three Articles of the Constitution at any one election. No amendment shall be proposed or submitted under this Section from the time a Convention is called until after the electors have voted on the revision or amendments, if any, proposed by such Convention. No similar limiting language appears in SECTION 3. CONSTITUTIONAL INITIATIVE FOR LEGISLATIVE ARTICLE Charlie Wheeler - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:09 pm: Glad for the clarification. Thanks. The narrative and the driving of turnout is still so very much at play here. The idea of ginning up the electorate was s Rauner play, now MJM is going to play for that too. Given the GOTV seen by Rauner, should Rauner’s Crew be a bit nervous? Yes. - Upon Further Review - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:10 pm: Still, if the ballot is crowded with numerous items, does such an action bury the fair maps and term limits proposals at the bottom of a long ballot where it winds up being ignored? - Jimbo - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:17 pm: I think the brilliance of Rauner’s ammendment, is that it gives massive power to the Gov immediately, but includes the term limits to get the signatures. If the amendment is struck, there could be voter backlash against the entrenched powers and that backlash could gain Rauner votes. If it goes on the ballot, folks will vote for it and maybe Ruaner since it was his initiative, and He’ll have more power than the last govs did against Madigan. It’s a win win, and I’m sure he thought he was a clever lad until Madigan started playing the game - Charlie Wheeler - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:24 pm: Further Point of Information: Constitution of the State of Illinois ARTICLE III — SUFFRAGE AND ELECTIONS SECTION 1. VOTING QUALIFICATIONS Every United States citizen who has attained the age of 18 or any other voting age required by the United States for voting in State elections and who has been a permanent resident of this State for at least 30 days next preceding any election shall have the right to vote at such election. The General Assembly by law may establish registration requirements and require permanent residence in an election district not to exceed thirty days prior to an election. The General Assembly by law may establish shorter residence requirements for voting for President and Vice-President of the United States. (Source: Amendment adopted at general election November 8, 1988.) Logically, an individual would have to meet the Voting Qualifications test of Section 1 before being covered by the proposed new Section 8, Voter Discrimination. Charlie Wheeler - Ahoy! - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:26 pm: I wonder if the speaker and Rauner will cut a deal to both withdraw their constitutional amendments. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:34 pm: ===I wonder if the speaker and Rauner will cut a deal to both withdraw their constitutional amendments.=== Rauner can’t back down now… MJM’s genius is that Rauner has to follow through to have Term Limits bd in the ballot. Fine. Madigan makes ginned up amendments to make sure the Dem electorate also come out. Rauner has no leverage, Madigan let Rauner wrap himself around his amendment. The amendment removal by choice takes away a Rauner arrow in the quiver. The Speaker may be enjoying all this “pre-game”, and seeing the GOTV Rauner … I guess… had(?)… lets MJM and his Crew prepare with the Unions supporting Quinn a blueprint for identifying and voting “pluses”. This is MJM’s wheelhouse. - Hans Sanity - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:39 pm: The real kicker would be if (1) there is a third amendment (2) it beats Rauner’s term limits amendment to the ballot and (3) it amends ARTICLE XIV sect. 2 to allow more than 3 amendments in future elections. - Shemp - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:51 pm: Is any citizen of the State being denied the right to register now? In the last several decades? - Excessively Rabid - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 4:51 pm: At least it doesn’t ban discrimination with regard to life status. That would kill (ha!) the good old way. - Bill White - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 5:18 pm: I believe the General Assembly needs to approve the language for a constitutional amendment before May 5 or thereabouts) If Bruce Rauner comes out against one or more of these amendments (millionaire surcharge for example) this will provide an early test of Rauner’s ability to persuade General Assembly members to joint Team Rauner - Chavez-respecting Obamist - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 5:45 pm: Believe it or not, Lincoln, there are lots of people in this country who don’t bank, travel, perform nearly any other governmental activity. and for the record, it’s possible to travel without ID–go to Union Station, pay cash for a ticket, get on a train. - Bobo - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 6:06 pm: It’s a brilliant move because term limits would propel Rauner into the governorship. Without it, he will fail. - Downstate Dem - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 6:07 pm: What ever happens, the independent redistricting amendment is a must. Neither party should be able to have so much control over the rights of Illinois voters. Office holders now choose their voters in so many districts, with voters left holding the bag. - Pot calling kettle - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 6:57 pm: If Rauner’s term limit amendment makes it on the ballot, the GA should put one on limiting the constitutionals to one or two terms (one would be pretty funny, two would be reasonable). - Anon III - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 7:03 pm: Congressional apportionment is calculated based upon the number of persons, not citizens, according to the U.S. Constitution. In the 2012 general election, the voting age population of Illinois was 9,841,508. 9.0% of that population were non-citizens. Similarly, Indiana’s 2012 voting age population was 4,964,646 of which 3.6% were non-citizens. Ohio, 8,901,762, with 2.3% non-citizens, and Pennsylvania, 10,052,600, with 3.3% non-citizens. By comparison, California’s 2012 voting age population was 28,925,512, of which 17.6% were non-citizens. Since congressional districts and representation are based upon total population, not citizens, California has 53 Congressional Districts. It seems that the effect of enactment of the Madigan Amendment would be to increase voter turnout of non-citizens who are already in the State and already represented, though hopefully not voting. - Oh Come On! - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 7:14 pm: @Pot calling kettle: In the entire history of Illinois only two governors have held office more than two terms (Ogelsby — not consecutive terms — and Thompson). There have been other officeholders in state office (Attorney General and Secretary of State for example) who have greater longevity. - VanillaMan - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 10:14 pm: Why are you people applauding? Madigan is claiming he doesn’t want voters suppressed, but that seems to be exactly what he is doing. He wants to suppress voter turnout for term limits. He is suppressing the vote! Why is he doing this? Because he just wants to keep on being in complete power in Illinois and is using his office to shut down democracy in the voting booth. And you people applaud this? - Hey There - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 10:28 pm: As he often is, OW is right on. This type of thing is MJM at his best. He had a bad year last year– especially last summer–but he is going to make sure that isn’t repeated this year. This gets the base ginned up in a race in which all of us disaffected Dem voters need some ginning up. The reports of the demise of MJM’s political skills do appear to be greatly exaggerated. - capjunkie - Tuesday, Mar 25, 14 @ 11:03 pm: 1) The GA can propose to amend up to 3 articles. A petition to change the Legislative Article is not subject to that limitation. 2) Anyone who thinks that the amendment could somehow allow non-citizens to vote needs to (a) read the US Constitution, (b) read the IL Constitution, and (c) take a civics class. This amendment does not change the qualifications for voting - you must be a US citizen, 18 years of age, and live in IL for at least 30 days. 3) Frankly, I’m surprised no one thought of or proposed this before. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 26, 14 @ 6:43 am: ===A petition to change the Legislative Article is not subject to that limitation. === Exactly. Some of you people need to get a grip and read the actual Constitution… “The General Assembly shall not submit proposed amendments to more than three Articles of the constitution at any one election.” There is no limit on the number of citizen initiative amendments. Sheesh. - Not a Field Operative - Wednesday, Mar 26, 14 @ 8:40 am: ===Driving turnout again?=== Absolutely. This isn’t about crowding out other ballot initiatives, or even forcing Rs to come out for or against it. It’s all about turnout. Latinos and African Americans support the Ds at a 65-80% clip. For every additional 100 Latino or AfAm voter that’s 60-80 votes for the Ds. Remember that there are a lot of Obama voters from 2012 who have no intention of voting in the 2014 general. You take this message to them: ‘We have the opportunity to add to our state constitution, language that would ban voting discrimination based on our skin color, religion, etc. The opportunity to make sure what as happened in North Carolina, and Arizona, etc., doesn’t happen here in Illinois.’ Also get the right messengers talking about it (e.g. black pastors); I think you start to see how it can be effective. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.