Question of the day
Thursday, May 7, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Chuck Sweeny…
In deciding to please the barnstormin’ reformin’ Republican governor, did aldermen raise the ire of the powerful Democratic speaker of the House, Mike Madigan? Democrats control both the House and Senate by substantial majorities.
“When you have the speaker upset, that’s never a good thing,” said state Rep. John Cabello, R-Machesney Park.
But is the speaker really angry at Rockford because of the actions of eight aldermen? Here is what Rich Miller’s Capitol Fax had to say about the situation, leading off with, “No casino for you.”
“Mayor Rahm Emanuel has renewed his push for a city-owned casino and Rockford has long been in the mix for its own riverboat if a deal should ever happen. But the Rockford City Council recently passed Rauner’s Turnaround Agenda resolution, calling on the Legislature to give it the power to create local right-to-work zones, among other things. That vote apparently did not go down well with the House speaker, who has long had a soft spot in his heart for Rockford, the home of Madigan’s late political mentor Zeke Giorgi.”
Capitol Fax added, “Some of the towns which passed the resolution were clearly hoping to curry favor with a governor who wants to slash their state revenue sharing in half. But Governor Rauner isn’t the only person who can play hardball at the Statehouse.”
Well, that’s the understatement of the decade. I put my question to Steve Brown, Madigan’s longtime spokesman: Would Madigan really punish the third-largest city in Illinois by denying it a casino license because of eight aldermen?
“I wouldn’t try to take it to that extreme,” Brown said. “In past years, the speaker has generally recused himself form speaking on gaming expansion. Mike Madigan’s general attitude and his record is one of being helpful to Rockford whenever it is possible, and I see no reason why that would change.
“I don’t know that the speaker has an opinion on the actions of the city of Rockford. I know that (Rockford-area) legislators were very disappointed the City Council took that action. So he’s heard that. Most cities around the state have either rejected the (Turnaround Agenda) or voted on modified versions. There hasn’t been widespread support because of the overall negative outlook for cities.”
* That’s not quite what I wrote…
NO CASINO FOR YOU? In yet another sign that the governor’s anti-union agenda is under siege at the Statehouse, could the City of Rockford possibly be in danger of losing its place at the table if gaming expansion negotiations proceed?
It was a warning, issued privately through back channels, I’m told, not a direct threat. There’s a difference, and I didn’t (and still don’t) know for sure if Rockford will lose out, which is why both the headline and the first graf were written as questions, not declarative statements.
But the fact that Madigan (and Senate President John Cullerton) can also play some hardball is a point that is being lost on some municipalities. So…
* The Question: Should legislative Demcrats take into account local governments’ “right to work” resolution votes when setting Statehouse policy and making budgets, or should they be forgiven? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
survey solutions
- Stones - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:01 pm:
Voted forgive them. I think the Democrats should give these Turnaround Agenda votes all the attention they deserve by ignoring them. Just a silly political stunt.
- a drop in - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:02 pm:
Forgive them. It’s like when you have the vast majority of votes and you let a few vote against you to appease some group. It doesn’t matter how Rockford votes.
- chi - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:04 pm:
Take them into account. The people that voted for it are grown-ups. Votes have consequences.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:09 pm:
Voted “Take into Account” but not for the reasons you may suspect.
Tier 1 Mushrooms.
Both the SDems and HDems need to consider, as they do exceptionally well, the micro district makeups, and work, as the HDems do beyond exceptional, to solidify “the program” on the Ground, and with the locals, the onslaught that will be coming from Rauner.
If you are not drawn in a Tier 1 district, or a target for the Dem Caucuses, just ignore it and move on.
The hyper-critical political aspect is shoring up Tier 1 targets and locking in their own GOP targets at the very specific micro level.
Add to that how “the program” at that level seems to be a winning formula, why change it?
Rauner needs recruitment of Campaign Crews, volunteers in those districts, local officials support… oh yeah, Rauner needs candidates. Both Cullerton and MJM have super-majorities. Playing defense with energized Union support against Rauner, and knowing how to win those districts is an advantage.
So, take the votes into account, but only in the prism of keeping 60 and 30 in the Dem Caucuses protected as is always the goal.
The rest is noise.
- Wordslinger - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:10 pm:
It’s hardball, everything’s taken into account. Doesn’t mean it’s decisive or even relevant.
A casino is a lot different then fixing a Rock River bridge, for example.
- Try-4-Truth - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:24 pm:
Ok, I’m originally from Rockford, so I think I can add a little here. I voted to “Take into account”, and here’s why.
Rockford hasn’t had any clout since Doug Scott lost his reelection for Mayor in 2005. The Mayor there is a complete amature. He thinks he’s some big city Mayor, but he’s been outside his depth since the day he took office. He pushed this “Turnaround” nonsense because he thinks he’s playing a game. So, if he wants to play a game, I say, let’s play it.
You picked the wrong side Larry! (Rockford Mayor Larry Morrissey). You lose.
- Jorge - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:29 pm:
Take into account. You don’t bite the hand that feeds you for a reason.
- Big Joe - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:31 pm:
Voted “take into account” because I feel that it would have been smarter to table the vote or pass some modified version as other cities have done. To go “all in” with Rauner on something that really has no teeth was a mistake of major proportions.
- Pot calling kettle - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:31 pm:
Take it into account. Passing the resolution (or an alternative of some sort) is an act that gets you into the game on one side or the other. If a city or county wants into this game, they are expecting some sort of benefit; so, they should also expect to be party to any down side.
Most local governments are taking a pass; that’s probably the smartest move.
- Juice - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:32 pm:
Take in to account. I think Rockford is the only city that was constitutionally granted home rule status that then went and opted out. So they reject local control, but then “turn around” and demand more of it. I’m sympathetic to the issues they’re having to confront, but don’t go looking to Springfield to gift you a casino if you claim you can take care of yourselves.
- Downstate Illinois - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:39 pm:
If I was a city council member I would wait until the legislation actually passes and gets signed before I stuck my neck out.
- truthteller - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:42 pm:
Are you kidding? Madigan takes everything into account.As Willy says it may be discounted for something more important to him.
- A guy - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:42 pm:
Didn’t vote either way. Munis have been pounded by these chambers for years with unfunded mandates, threats to funding, etc. To think of them even being in the position of “forgiving” hits me the wrong way. The other side of it- Take into account- could be just as easily phrased as “exact vengeance”. Munis should work to be less reliable on the mother ship and the state should do what’s go for the state; not play a stupid game of Pick me, pick me. Ugh.
- Phil King - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:48 pm:
Of course they should take those votes into account.
Those municipalities should be rewarded for their courage, maybe exempted from the LDF cut.
- Try-4-Truth - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:48 pm:
A guy,
I don’t think you understand things like the Illinois tax code. Have you ever worked for or been involved in local govt? You make it seem like things are so easy. They are not. I see now why you like Rauner. Solutions are easy to you and him, only they’re not easy in real life.
- Wensicia - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:50 pm:
Take into account. Local governments obviously hope to curry favor with Rauner (concerning revenue), so why shouldn’t they expect disfavor with the other side?
- zatoichi - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:50 pm:
Take the vote into account, but also remember a number of GA members simply voted ‘Present’ on a recent budget bill. Votes do have consequences beyond headlines and talking points, but so does thinking through a process. Votes can always be adjusted as Charleston and other towns have done. In every GA vote there are members who are considered safe or who need an ‘out’ in a tough spot. Those ’safe’/'out’ spots come with a to-be-paid price. Local governments fall into the same consideration.
- Illini97 - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:51 pm:
Voted “Take into account”
Placing this on the agenda has consequences. Mayors who have done so did it to curry favor with the Governor. They don’t get to do that without attracting ire from others for the same action.
- truthteller - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:52 pm:
Are you kidding? Madigan takes everything into account.As Willy says, it may be discounted for something more important to him, but it will be noted. Why give Rauner a pass. The Governor has made it very clear you get more favorable treatment if you vote with him.Rauner may have $20million but Madigan has at least that many means of political torture
- AC - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:55 pm:
Votes, like elections, do and should have consequences.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:59 pm:
Everything is always taken into account. Once you collect everything, it gets sorted and weighed and measured. Then, and only then, do decisions get made.
- OneMan - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:21 pm:
Using the “take it into account” logic, I guess I am still waiting on those cities that don’t have video gaming paying the price when it comes to capital projects…
Also, really… that petty?
- Mama - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:26 pm:
I voted “forgive them” because I don’t think those 8 aldermen understand what that piece of paper really stands for. They could always rescind their vote. Right?
- walker - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:30 pm:
No. Since I don’t really believe these towns will benefit in any way from supporting Rauner, they shouldn’t be punished either. Political theater of no import. Only their constituents should reward or punish them.
- Demoralized - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:31 pm:
I voted that it should be taken into account. If you want total control then you get total control of figuring out how to fund your government. Since you are all about “asking the voters” for everything the go ask them for money to support the local government.
- Ducky LaMoore - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:33 pm:
OW always says, “elections have consequences.” Well, so do actions. You don’t become Mike Madigan by not caring what everyone else does.
- very old soil - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:34 pm:
Forgive. Don’t punish the citizens for the mistakes of the city council.
- Norseman - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:38 pm:
Take it into account. I consider it big boy education. They need to learn that they have to analyze all the implications of their votes.
- A guy - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:40 pm:
=== Try-4-Truth - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:48 pm:
A guy,
I don’t think you understand things like the Illinois tax code. Have you ever worked for or been involved in local govt? ====
Very much so T4T. Been involved and worked as a vendor for decades.
- Anon221 - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:41 pm:
Voted to forgive. I’d be curious to know how many of these resolutions were passed by people on their way out after the spring election. Also, few of these resolutions saw the “light” for the public to comment on before they were passed. Based on some of the rescinded resolutions, I think once they were exposed for what they actually were (the resolutions and those who voted them in), backtracking happened readily.
- Langhorne - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:43 pm:
Worthless resolution, pandering to a gov who wants to cut your lifeline, and strangle you. Although worthless, it is still offensive on many levels. Leave it alone. Or neuter it before passage.
- A guy - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:45 pm:
Turn the question around: Should Rauner take this into account?
My answer would remain no. But before you answer the question at the top here, ask yourselves if your agenda doesn’t win, are you willing to deal with the whole “take it into account business goring your ox?
Some of the reaction might be just plain natural. To consciously decide to punish local governments….I’m guessing local voters could sort that out and do some punishing of their own.
Rockford should get a casino or not based on something other than this kind of approach.
- Pot calling kettle - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:45 pm:
“Take it into account” does not necessarily mean “punish.” It does mean that if they ask for something that contradicts their stated position, their request might not be granted. For example, the “turnaround” includes cuts to their state funding, so it seems fair to assume they are OK with those cuts.
- Norseman - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:50 pm:
A Guy, I’d turn the question around a little bit more: How many times did the superstaffers not so subtly imply that Rauner would take this into account?
- Anon - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:57 pm:
I voted yes. Actions have consequences.
- forwhatitsworth - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 2:58 pm:
Every politician and every political institution should be held accountable for their actions.
- MrJM - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 3:14 pm:
“Being an old farm boy myself, chickens coming home to roost never did make me sad; they’ve always made me glad.” — Malcolm X.
Take those votes into account
– MrJM
- jazzy - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 3:39 pm:
It is Karma
- Old Elephant - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 3:39 pm:
Now that I am (semi) retired, I no longer have the patience for the game playing in Springfield. Honestly, I now understand why most members of the public have such a low opinion of lawmakers. Too much game playing and no governing.
- dupage dan - Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 4:09 pm:
So, when Rauner does it, it is despicable the way he holds the sword over the heads of innocents but when MJM does it, it is just rightful politics as usual. I get it.
Old Elephant is right. You folks perhaps don’t, or can’t or won’t see it from the POV of the average Joe or Jane Voter. They don’t get the inside joke - the joke that is on them. And come the time when their votes matter, they’ll see the pols coming to them, more humble now (if the polls say that works, use it). Candidates presented as a package - hand picked, slated and approved. Vote for one schmuck or the other schmuck. In the end it won’t make much difference.
- downstate commissioner - Friday, May 8, 15 @ 8:14 am:
Agree with Pot- taking it into account does not automaticily make it punishment, but don’t count it out either-this is politics on both sides…