100 Comments - walker - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 11:52 am: Knew it was all for show. - 47th Ward - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 11:53 am: “I’ve been successful at everything I’ve done.” - Mason born - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 11:54 am: D’oh - walker - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 11:54 am: Thank God JBT’s staff is still around, and Munger is listening to them. - foster brooks - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 11:54 am: the AG is going to be busier than ever - Skeptic - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 11:54 am: “What if he made and Executive Order and nobody came?” - Oswego Willy - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 11:56 am: Big and bold move, albeit the correct move through the law, for Munger to make it very clear that she’s about doing what she feels/knows is right, over the politics that might be easy to fall into in this discussion. Kudos to Comptroller Munger, and her Crew for lookibg at the law. - Anonymous - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 11:57 am: - No hat tip from the CS-T, but oh well. - I think they laid off their hat tipper. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 11:57 am: “But…but…I’m the governor.” - illlinifan - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:01 pm: Good on the comptrollers office. When a boss asks you to do something illegal, you can’t go along with it, you have to have the guts to take a stand. There has been too little of this type of courage from political and business persons. She moves up to a higher rung on the ladder. - Norseman - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:02 pm: I concur on the kudos to Munger. Keep it up. - Wensicia - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:06 pm: Update: Rauner agrees the Office of Comptroller should come to a vote in 2016. - truthteller - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:07 pm: Given Dan Biss’ s interest in running for Comptroller and his poor relationship with public sector unions, Munger’s move shows that good government is good politics. - Toure's Latte - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:09 pm: Massive run on popcorn futures begins. - Eugene - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:09 pm: Combine this with the so-called pro bono representation from Winston and Strawn that turned out to be non-existent, and Team Rauner starts to look like the Gang that Couldn’t Shoot Straight. You have to wonder what this says about their ability to put together a budget or manage state agencies. - Mr. Moto - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:10 pm: This is staged to the max. - Rich Miller - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:12 pm: ===This is staged to the max. === Not sure I follow you. - senior citizen of goverment - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:13 pm: Tom Cross dosent look so bad as comptroller now does he Bruce? - Nick Naylor - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:14 pm: I suspect there was some communication between the Governor’s office and the State Comproller’s office. Nancy Kimme would be hard pressed to put her boss in a sideways posiiton to the Governor without the Governor’s staff knowing. - Rich Miller - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:15 pm: ===I suspect there was some communication between the Governor’s office and the State Comproller’s office=== Well, yeah. Somebody had to say they weren’t gonna obey the EO. But if you think this was planned in advance of the EO, you’re freaking nuts. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:16 pm: ===This is staged to the max. === For sure, because looking like a fool by issuing an order two constitutional officers thinks isn’t legal, AND, making Winston & Strawn take the heat of being dragged into something a governor says isn’t a conflict, only to admit, yourselves, there could be a conflict is pure political genius. - Mr. Moto - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:18 pm: I am cynical that Munger, appointed by Rauner, would take such a diametrically opposed position without some advance clearance. - Grandson of Man - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:19 pm: Great job by the Comptroller and AG. Rauner’s EO is blatantly illegal, going all the way up to SCOTUS, whose Harris v. Quinn decision was very limited. Rauner’s EO lawsuit is laughable. He is the plaintiff suing a long list of unions. How is a person who made tens of millions of dollars in the last two years a representative of how fair share fees hurt Illinois? How can Rauner speak for the First Amendment rights of fair share fee payers when they didn’t file the suit themselves? - Mr. Moto - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:20 pm: There are still Winston partners upset about the GHR pro bono representation. Webb likely has a great deal of autonomy on this. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:21 pm: ===I am cynical that Munger, appointed by Rauner, would take such a diametrically opposed position without some advance clearance.=== There are few, very few, that know exactly what the governor is doing…when he’s doing it. Rauner is going out there, it seems, many times without a net, or a clue, but with an idea and an alleged avenue to get there. - Anon - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:21 pm: Whew! - Mr. Moto - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:22 pm: I do agree that the EO is probably illegal but the Governor doesn’t care. - Demise - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:23 pm: Sun-Times story now references Capitol Fax. - Pelonski - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:25 pm: Good decision. Rauner’s EO was based on the fact that the US Supreme Court in Harris questioned the reasoning behind Abood’s allowance of fair share agreements for public employees. He ignored the fact, however, that the court did not rule Abood as invalid. Until he gets an actual ruling to that effect from the courts, he has no legal basis for stopping fair share agreements. - Ducky LaMoore - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:26 pm: Congrats to the governor on not waitin’ for the GA to completely embarrass him, and takin’ the initiative to get it done himself. - Deep South - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:26 pm: Staged to the max, because Rauner got all kinds of love in the right wing media, which isn’t about to report this latest development. All in all, the EO advances and cements his right wing bona fides with “the base.” - CircularFiringSquad - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:27 pm: Very funny all this makes it looks like the Comptroller actually knew that Gov EO’s don’t apply and told same to BVR. In the meantime is anyone scoring these ideas to see if any survive the starting gate? - senior citizen of goverment - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:29 pm: No way this was staged, Munger followed the law plain and simple. I would love to be a fly on the wall the next time her and Rauner talk. Remember that speech have gave two weeks ago to the senate at saputos…….. oh boy - DuPage Dave - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:30 pm: Can someone please explain the “non-existent” aspect of the Winston & Stawn involvement? So they are not representing Rauner? Did not see that in the paper. - OneMan - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:32 pm: Not saying it is staged, but me thinks, Rauner will not be as angry as you think. - Rich Miller - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:33 pm: DD, the governor is not currently represented by the firm. I was originally told that they withdrew, but it’s actually only a temporary withdrawal while they conduct an internal conflict of interest review. Apparently, Webb jumped the gun. - Wordslinger - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:33 pm: The guvs lawyers need to get a little more personally involved in their lawyerin’. Unforced error. - Wordslinger - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:37 pm: Adding re the guvs lawyers, how are they going to figure he has standing to sue regarding this? How is the governor harmed, exactly? - anon - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:38 pm: Winston & Strawn did not appear on the lawsuit filed for a declaratory judgment on the EO. Someone should ask Lisa why she apparently appointed a “Special Assistant Attorney General” to file that lawsuit if she thinks it was frivolous. Suit was filed same day as the EO. When was the Special AG appointment made and did she actually approve the filing of the lawsuit? - 47th Ward - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:38 pm: ===How is the governor harmed, exactly?=== Duh, AFSCME endorsed his opponent. - 47th Ward - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:39 pm: Also, governing is hard. Rauner’s having a bad week. - the Patriot - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:41 pm: I wonder if this wasn’t a trap for the AG and the unions. They are praising the attorney general for enforcing their rights to take members money who don’t want to give it voluntarily, while she is working to take billions out of workers pensions. So the AG will enforce the law when it helps unions take money from workers, but fight the constitution when her father is trying to take money from workers. I support union workers 100%, but it is time to pay attention. The common theme is the union and the democrats are both working very hard to take money from workers. Don’t get so distracted by the snake in front of you, that you forget about the one behind you. - old time independent - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:42 pm: Boy can I ever hear that F bomb over the hallway… - Rich Miller - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:43 pm: ===So the AG will enforce the law when it helps unions take money from workers, but fight the constitution when her father is trying to take money from workers. === She’s actually enforcing the law in both cases, doofus. - Pot calling kettle - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:44 pm: ==When a boss asks you to do something== The Governor is not the “boss” of any constitutional officer. This was an excellent opportunity for the new Comptroller to ally the fears of some that she would be a wholly-owned subsidiary of our would-be oligarch governor. - Anonymous - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:45 pm: I guess AG Madigan’s election had a consequense as well. - Norseman - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:45 pm: === AND, making Winston & Strawn take the heat of being dragged into something a governor says isn’t a conflict, only to admit, yourselves, there could be a conflict … === Interesting! I can accept that the issuance of an illegal EO was done for political purposes. Rauner is selling the idea to the folks that he’s doing big things to shake up Springfield. That he’s thwarted by the law or courts doesn’t hurt his sales pitch. The narrative would be that the corrupt powers-that-be put up these barriers to protect themselves. However, the W-S fiasco is pure goof-up by the expensive Rauner dream team. - Kippax Blue - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:45 pm: Is there a primary vote for Comptroller before Special Election 2016? Its quite possible a significant chunk of that $20M just got earmarked… - ZC - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:47 pm: Good news , although again here we have to stop over-hoping that the Constitution will always save us from outcomes we don’t like. This isn’t over by any means. The Supremes were -very- invitational for a lawsuit like this in their _Harris_ decision. Careful for those who say, “Hurrah for the Constitution” - the Constitution may say something very different in the years ahead. - Demoralized - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:47 pm: I don’t know how any of you can come to the conclusion that this was staged. You really think the Governor staged something that makes him look like an idiot and totally questions his ability to use Executive Orders? Want to explain that one to me? - Macbeth - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:49 pm: The real power Rauner is looking for comes from the *issuing* of the EOs — not the legality of the EOs. He’s staking his ground — indicating boundaries. This is the power. The actual results — or the legality of the results — less so. - chi - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:49 pm: What an embarrassment he is. He attacks Illinois’ reputation every chance he gets, and then he personally tarnishes it. - Concerned - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:51 pm: The dude(tte) doe not abide. - Kippax Blue - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:51 pm: Heard just on second floor of the Capitol…”I will bury her!” - Anon - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:54 pm: I wonder if he’ll now withdraw his lawsuit, signed by Murashko claiming to be an AAG, or let it play out. - Anon. - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:54 pm: =How is the governor harmed, exactly?== According to the complaint, he would have to violate his oath of office to support the constitution if he were to go along with the fair share law. I’m waiting for him to issue an EO telling the AG to stop defending the pension reform lawsuit, because the reform is unconstitutional. - orzo - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:55 pm: There is a pattern developing in Rauner’s actions. There are, and will continue to be, a) actions which may violate some law or separation of powers issue, but are worth trying in case he gets lucky, b) actions which are probably violative, and he knows it, but figures there is no downside, since he’s playing to his friends and c) actions that he just wants to do, and is clueless about the law and/or Government. I think he needs some grown-up legal advice, and so far I’m not sure he’s getting it. The federal lawsuit is so full of problems it’s ridiculous. - anon - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 12:55 pm: There has been a surge in AFSCME locals for those with fair share status to convert to full union membership. That is a story line that Gov R might not have anticipated. This was obviously scripted before it went live. - Mr. Moto - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:00 pm: Orzo for the win! - Wordslinger - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:07 pm: Anon, I saw that reasoning for standing, but that’s pretty weak soup. I can’t think of a chief executive who’s done that before. Usually, if you have a beef, you just find a few real people who reasonably have standing. The NRA didn’t have standing to challenge Chicago and Illinois gun laws, but they found people who did, then bankrolled the suits. Happens all the time, not too hard. Although, given the Wall Street Journal’s brutal takedown on the alleged standing of the plaintiffs in the ACA lawsuit, it’s harder for some lawyers to find suitable plaintiffs than others. - Raunerbot - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:23 pm: Well this is definitely interesting and embarrassing for the new Governor. It is obviously one of his “rookie” mistakes that he acknowledged he will be making and learning from. As much as I find this situation disappointing, at least I know that Rauner is not appointing people that will simply rubber stamp what he wants accomplished. The union labor lawsuits the Rauner legal introduced in federal court are still in place and moving ahead. Also from what has been reported, a similar but much stronger case in California is also scheduled for a hearing with the SCOTUS. - Langhorne - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:26 pm: (Bueller principal voice) RAUNER? …RAUNER ? - I Never Lose - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:38 pm: It will be interesting to see if the comptroller now has an f’in’ problem with Rauner. And if this is the start of a war with the AG, we’re in for a long four years. As Clint E. so eloquently put it, a man’s got to know his limitations. - Sam Weinberg - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:41 pm: == The union labor lawsuits the Rauner legal introduced in federal court are still in place and moving ahead. == I wouldn’t be so sure, Raunerbot. The suit is predicated on the existence of the E.O. (it’s mentioned 30-some times in the Complaint). If the E.O. is a nullity, not sure there’s any basis on which he can even continue with it. - Remember His Words - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:41 pm: ==As much as I find this situation disappointing, at least I know that Rauner is not appointing people that will simply rubber stamp what he wants accomplished.== “I love it when people tell me I’m wrong.” That’s a direct quote from a Rauner speech delivered at the Sangamo Club in Springfield prior to Inauguration Day when he was boasting about how he was assembling a crackerjack staff. Either he doesn’t like being told that he’s wrong or his staff isn’t so crackerjack. - Filmmaker Professor - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:42 pm: Hasn’t this made any hope of bipartisanship dead and buried, before he’s even begun? It seems like an invitation to Democrats to dig their heels in deeper than they might have at this stage. - JB13 - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:45 pm: Did I miss something? The point of the EO was to initiate the court challenge, and get SCOTUS to eventually strike down Abood. How does Munger’s decision impact that process? I mean, so what if she doesn’t do what the governor wants? While her decision is in accordance with existing case law, that could change soon, could it not? - Bibe - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:46 pm: It’s not a likely scenario that the Governor and Comptroller staged this decision, but there is an outside chance that Rauner got word of how fast the membership cards (and Political Fund deduction cards for that matter) started rolling in this week and wanted to stop a flood of new fees to AFSCME at the exact moment he was hoping to starve them. Or that someone at CMS told him it would take 6 months of programming to accomplish the Executive Order. - Anonymous - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:53 pm: Interesting outcome is that at my work site more than half of the fair share employees signed on as full dues paying members this past week. - Skeptic - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 1:56 pm: “CMS told him it would take 6 months” More likely someone told him he hasn’t submitted his paperwork (in triplicate) to CMS for approval to start the project that will take 6 months to complete. - blah - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:12 pm: Let’s give his staff a break and the benefit of the doubt. The most likely scenario is the Governor told staff the outcome he wanted - an EO and a lawsuit - and they did what they could to give it to him. For all we know they told him this wouldn’t work, and he move forward anyway. You don’t know what advice he was given. - Macbeth - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:15 pm: I suspect this is actually a sign that Rauner’s not listening to Illinois. He’s listening to the Koch brothers, Ken Griffin, and other oddball GOP supporters — but he’s not listening to his staff or anyone that actually works in government. - Anonymous - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:16 pm: While this is certainly an embarrassing week for Rauner, I’m reminded of the first six months of the Edgar administration, which I saw up close and personal. There we had someone in charge with a lot of Springfield/legislative experience and no change in parties, yet still there were quite a few missteps as things got going with a new administration. I think it’s a little early to call them the gang that couldn’t shoot straight (even though I can’t stand the guy). - Raunerbot - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:20 pm: This was a smart move on Leslie’s part and beneficial to Rauner in the long run. It will prevent any unnecessary lawsuits directed at her department that would bog down our state in legal wars at this time. That is something nobody wants…except the lawyers. - Anon - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:20 pm: == Did I miss something? The point of the EO was to initiate the court challenge, and get SCOTUS to eventually strike down Abood. How does Munger’s decision impact that process? I mean, so what if she doesn’t do what the governor wants? While her decision is in accordance with existing case law, that could change soon, could it not? == I think the bigger problem for his lawsuit is the AG’s agreement with the Comptroller. I believe the complaint was signed by Murashko as a special assistant to the AG. It’s a huge optics problem at the very least when the boss of the lawyer who signed the complaint doesn’t think it has merit. - nadia - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:25 pm: Puppy chow for a full year (maybe more) til you’re full grown! - Anonymous - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:27 pm: When the Attorney General has a conflict of interest, she’s supposed to appoint a special assistant attorney general. At that point, the SAAG and the AG don’t have to see eye to eye on a legal matter, so there’s nothing embarrassing about this. - Raunerbot - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:29 pm: Leslie Munger was highly recommended by Ron Gidwitz for a reason…she is a very competent and savvy leader in her own right. Our state will be well served by her. - anon - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:34 pm: Lisa could revoke Murashko’s appointment as Special Assistant AG and then formally withdraw Rauner’s lawsuit. That would end all the nonsense, put Rauner on notice that SHE is the State’s litigator not him, and force Rauner to get his fair share through the legislature if he can. - Rufus - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:35 pm: Not to take anything away from BCCS -the CMS IT division, but payroll is still done in many of the agencies, not in BCCS. Thus the requirement of getting some 20-ish agencies to make the changes in their payroll programs sync’ed to the same date — all after their submitted charters to BCCS has passes the 3 gates. - anon - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:50 pm: =I think the bigger problem for his lawsuit is the AG’s agreement with the Comptroller. I believe the complaint was signed by Murashko as a special assistant to the AG. It’s a huge optics problem at the very least when the boss of the lawyer who signed the complaint doesn’t think it has merit. = The AG has the authority to appoint a Special AG to handle the case. That’s what happened here. It’s not unusual. Blagojevich used to ask the AG for Special AGs all the time (and he racked up lots of legal fees). The Speaker and President had their staff counsels represent them in court when Quinn tried to cut legislator pay. - chi - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:50 pm: == Did I miss something? The point of the EO was to initiate the court challenge, and get SCOTUS to eventually strike down Abood. How does Munger’s decision impact that process? I mean, so what if she doesn’t do what the governor wants? While her decision is in accordance with existing case law, that could change soon, could it not? == Yes, you missed something. There’s already a case from California that is trying to do the same thing. So Rauner has wasted time, taxpayer dollars, any chance of bipartisanship, and his reputation as someone that “succeeds at everything he’s ever done”. All in exchange for bubkus. - Phaedrus - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:54 pm: “I was originally told that they withdrew, but it’s actually only a temporary withdrawal while they conduct an internal conflict of interest review.” There is no such thing as a temporary withdrawal in this setting. Clearing conflicts is a very specific process with a beginning and an end and the ethical rules require it to happen before the legal engagement begins. These are law firm weasel words which indicate that Winston didn’t actually run conflicts, that other partners weren’t aware that it would be “pro bono” (because why? Rauner can’t afford to pay?)or that Winston helped out with drafting a complaint but didn’t consider itself actually retained. In any event, it’s pure butt covering and pretty soon we will find out whose. - Cassandra - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 2:56 pm: If he learns something, maybe not so disastrous, although it makes him look silly going into labor negotiations. Maybe he should take another look at Winston Strawn if they advised him to proceed, their advice is expensive and somebody should have seen this coming. Or maybe they advised against he wanted to go ahead anyway. Who knows. - JB13 - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 3:02 pm: == There’s already a case from California that is trying to do the same thing. == And? If there are two cases asking the same question from two different states in two different circuits, including one initiated by a governor, it increases the likelihood it will be speedily heard by the SCOTUS. And if he wasted his chance to succeed, sounds like you’ll be A-OK with it, and will welcome in his Democratic successor with laurels come 2019. - Illinois taxpayer - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 3:09 pm: First big mistake–appointing someone without making sure she’s loyal and with the program. - Oswego Willy - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 3:11 pm: ===First big mistake–appointing someone without making sre she’s loyal and with the program.=== …because following the law is second to beung loyal to Bruce. Dope. - Bibe - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 3:18 pm: @JB13 Yes, I think you did miss something. The Governor had to have intended to withhold large sums of cash from the Unions at a time when they are all initiating the collecting bargaining these funds are collected to pay for. His long term goal may be in place but his short term one is blocked. - john - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 3:25 pm: The EO on “fair-share dues” was an unforced error on Gov. Rauner’s part. Rich said it earlier this week - the governor feels “liberated” to speak his mind on these issues. Governors run very large and complicated service delivery systems. Feeling “liberated” is not reason enough for a governor to say something. A governor’s words/actions have far reaching consequences for the people of Illinois and when Gov. Rauner speaks/acts, he must take that under consideration. It is clear that this unforced error was made because Gov. Rauner felt “liberated” to impose his ideological position on Illinois government. This “liberated” decision was in error legally, constitutionally, and politically. People are counting on him to help lead the state out of the financial mess we are in. It doesn’t bode well for the next 4 years if the governor and his staff don’t deal with state government like the large, complicated service delivery operation that it is. - Arsenal - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 3:33 pm: “If there are two cases asking the same question from two different states in two different circuits, including one initiated by a governor, it increases the likelihood it will be speedily heard by the SCOTUS.” Not really. A circuit split would increase the likelihood of SCOTUS taking the case at all, but it wouldn’t make it any faster, as you’d have to wait for both cases to work through the circuits to even know if there is a circuit split. - old time independent - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 3:38 pm: Raunerbot - if Gidwitz did sponsor her that will be his last favor. Remember dont bring nobody that nobody sent. - Raunerbot - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 4:02 pm: Bruce Rauner has known Leslie a long time. She in no incompetent political hack wannabe. Very refreshing. - DuPage Dave - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 4:08 pm: Rauner is quite wealthy and has a reputation for being very smart and not a very nice guy when it comes to taking over businesses (e.g., “I’ll bankrupt you with legal fees”). So you’ve got to wonder what he’s thinking in making this all-out assault on unions his number one priority as a new governor. It doesn’t seem smart. He has no chance of changing state law given the composition of the legislature. So he issues an order that even his own hand-picked Comptroller won’t enforce. Is it too soon to call this anti-union thing an obsession? It doesn’t bear the marks of a well designed strategy. Is this evidence of his reputed mean streak? Time will tell. - Anon - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 4:14 pm: I’m looking forward to reading the motion(s) to dismiss if he doesn’t withdraw the complaint before they’re filed. - Enviro - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 4:23 pm: Rauner was playing to one important segment of his base when he issued his “fair share” EO. That would be his big campaign contributors. - Macbeth - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 4:25 pm: Rauner is speaking his mind but not the law. If he was elected to authentically and legitimately steer Illinois out of a fiscal crisis, he’s so failing. In other words, he’s a failure — so far. I expected more from Rauner. I don’t want a partisan failure. I want a guy — or gal — that can actually contribute solutions — legal solutions. Rauner is so far showing that he’s not capable of this. He’s weak. Very weak. - ArchPundit - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 4:26 pm: What? The Illinois Policy Institute’s idea didn’t work? I’m shocked….shocked I tell you. - Anonymous - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 4:32 pm: Everyone thinks Dan Webb is God but he was unable to beat the George Ryan prosecution. - Wordslinger - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 4:35 pm: When’s the last time Dan Webb won a big one prominent in the media? The slam-dunk indictment of Vanecko doesn’t count. - big r - Friday, Feb 13, 15 @ 5:59 pm: I think there could be an opening for state comptroller! Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.