59 Comments - Fraud - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 7:07 am: take the three person meeting facebook live and show the people who’s ready to get to work for them - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 7:08 am: Crain’s 11/12/16 - Rauner Op-Ed ===”This is our opportunity to come together and pass a balanced budget, which is why I have invited the four legislative leaders to meet and immediately begin negotiations on an agreement containing a balanced budget and reforms.=== This is why Madigan isn’t meeting with Rauner, and why Rauner can’t understand how 60 and 30 actually work. Rauner doesn’t have the votes, yet wants meetings and posturing that doesn’t lead to governing. Let’s remember what Crain’s itself said. By nearly every measure, Illinois is worse off since Rauner has been governor. This continues Rauner not understanding. Unless Rauner steps in front of cameras and microphones with 16-20 Democrats from the House and the Senate members saying they want collective bargaining ended and prevailing wage ended too, this 11/12 Op Ed is just Rauner refusing to be a governor. Again. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 7:11 am: Oh “ck”, Who wants to meet with someone who doesn’t understand 60 and 30 and wants to lecture on unpassable wants that have nothing to do with budgetary realities How about this, “ck”… Show a bit more of that 1.4%, $500+ million return for destroying Labor, then you get back to us. K? K. “Thanks!” ow - Phenomynous - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 7:39 am: What could possibly be more important than this meeting? Also, Rauner’s op-ed didn’t call out specific people, it discussed in invitation to four leaders. I don’t know what you expect him to do? There isn’t enough votes for a budget, a tax increase, or reforms…and regardless of what people might tell you, policy formation doesn’t operate in a vacuum of specific issue areas. - Deft Wing - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 7:57 am: Nice attempt at spin by a “well-known” spinner in this space. Madigan doesn’t want peace & to solve problems. He wants to win & beat Rauner. And Cullerton, yet again, proves he’s Madigan’s lapdog. Rauner’s legislative wins over Madigan settled nothing. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:04 am: - Deft Wing - Making it about me, you have no point. Can you find 60 and 30? It’s not not wanting peace, it’s all about 60 and 30… Cullerton sees no reason to meet without all the Leaders. That isn’t being a lapdog, that’s being honest to the situation. If Rauner is going to “lecture” about “property tax relief” that’s really all about destroying trade labor’s ability to collectively bargain and have prevailing wage… why go to that lecture without Rauner securing 60 and 30? You don’t. Rauner gets in front of cameras and microphones with 16-20 Democratic General Assembly members, then Rauner has “leverage”. Until then, Rauner’s only leverage is the purposeful hurting of social service groups. - illinoised - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:08 am: Theatrics from the get go. - MOON - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:08 am: THE MEETING IS NOTHING MORE THAN A PHOTO OP! - Austinman - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:10 am: Look Rauner needs to be governor he also needs to learn how to compromise. The Governor wins on election day does not mean that he has a mandate. Get to governing sir. - zatoichi - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:15 am: You have not presented a required balanced budget for two years and just spent millions for ads saying I am the cause of all problems. Now you want to make nice and say we should work together? Let me ponder that. - Big Muddy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:19 am: Oh “OW”, Madigan has his 60 and 30. If he is really concerned about the future of the state he would do the doable. If he doesn’t have his 30 and 60 then he needs to simmer down and get to that meeting. Stop hiding behind excuses. - Mal - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:20 am: I don’t blame Madigan for not attending. Those reforms Rauner wants have nothing to do with budget. - Mal - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:21 am: Why should Madigan attend a meeting to discuss needless reforms that have nothing to do with budget? - wondering - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:23 am: What’s to talk about? The answer to Rauner “reforms” is “no”. Without Munger Rauner’s leash has gotten significantly shorter. As the collar tightens and his eyes begin to bug, Madigan should loosen it? - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:23 am: ===Madigan has his 60 and 30.=== Rauner has a veto, and - Deft Wing -, keep up, there’s no “phantom” veto-proof majority in the House. Governors need budgets. I can’t help that you don’t understand this. ===If he is really concerned about the future of the state he would do the doable.=== I keep “telling” the governor that, but destroying Labor gets in the way. Have you forgotten all the “sham” votes that included doing things doable, less Labor. You do pay attention, right? ===If he doesn’t have his 30 and 60 then he needs to simmer down and get to that meeting.=== No. Unless Madigan and Cullerton have honest 71 and 36, they are just at the whim of a governor’s veto pen. Why do you think Ken Dunkin was SO critical these past two years. Your utter governing ignorance is noted. - MOON - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:25 am: BIG Madigan is concerned about the State. The “Doable” is a budget…what don’t you understand about that? - Pundent - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:27 am: I agree with OW that not having 60 and 30 makes these meetings pointless. But Rauner’s not motivated by the legislative realities here. This is yet another opportunity for him to claim that Mike Madigan is the singular obstacle to achieving a budget and reforms. At some point Madigan needs to recognize that he’s not doing himself any favors. And by stating that he has a “scheduling conflict” it creates the perception that he has more important things to do than working on a budget. We all know that this is nothing more than theater. Why not attend the meeting and then simply state the governor continues to push an agenda which I believe is harmful and doesn’t have the number of votes to pass in either the house or senate? Madigan is allowing this to be about him when it really should be about the governor. - Roscoe Tom - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:28 am: The meeting should begin with a reading of the section of the Illinois Constitution that states the Governor shall present a budget. When Rauner agrees that is the law they can continue the meeting. - wordslinger - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:31 am: Rauner should really show them how serious and statesman-like he is by proposing a balanced budget. Why wouldn’t he? Didn’t he take an oath, or something? It is required of the governor, and only the governor, by the Constitution. But he has failed to do so since taking office. Curious, since he has an entire state agency working directly for him that does nothing else but the budget. They should be able to figure out anticipated revenues and apply it to a spending plan. Yet Rauner hasn’t been able to pull off a duty explicitly charged to him by the Constitution. Is he incapable of doing this baby-step part of the job? Ori is he simply playing a game to fool some of the people, all of the time? - Michelle Flaherty - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:32 am: The meeting was a post-election pimp of Madigan from the beginning. Either the Speaker acquiesces to Rauner’s call for a meeting, or he doesn’t and team Rauner starts lap 2 of painting him as the problem. It was a setup all along. - Archiesmom - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:35 am: Here we go again… - Commonsense in Illinois - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:37 am: Willy - It isn’t 60 and 30 at this point, it’s 71 and 36 since the effective date is prior to July 1, 2017. - Commonsense in Illinois - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:37 am: Sorry…wrong button. We’d have to get to January before 60 and 30 are the vote requirements. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:40 am: - Commonsense in Illinois - True, but I’m of the belief… 1) Real compromise like the stopgap will have “lots” of Green, so 71 and 36 won’t be a problem. 2) It might come down to waiting for January to get the reset to 60 and 30 anyway(?) I skipped 3-4 steps, with shorthand. My apologies. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:40 am: - Commonsense in Illinois - lol, no worries, you went shorthand too. All good. - Anon - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:42 am: “We won some of the most conservative legislative districts being held by Democrats. Clearly, we have a mandate to rule as I see fit.” Really, the only thing he has a mandate for is shutting down SIUC. - Romeo - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:43 am: “Sorry Bruce, I have an appointment to wash my hair that day”-Madigan - Joe M - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:45 am: == I don’t know what you expect him [Rauner] to do?== Drop his non-budgetary agenda and focus on preparing and submitting a budget as the Illinois Constitution requires a Governor to do. - J.D. - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:48 am: = The meeting should begin with a reading of the section of the Illinois Constitution that states the Governor shall present a budget. When Rauner agrees that is the law they can continue the meeting. = Then jump to the part where the General Assembly is required to PASS a balanced budget. Nothing in the Constitution says they have to adopt the Governors budget, or reforms. (Note: It does have to be said that neither the GOP nor the DEMs have offered anything resembling a balanced budget in years [decades?]… IMO they have both forsaken their obligations to the people of the state [labor and taxpayer alike] for marginal political gain.) - Ducky LaMoore - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 8:48 am: Glad we’re still doing meeting invites via press release. Hey ck, you want a meeting? Have your boss maybe pick up the phone. But we all know what happens when that happens, “I talked to Speaker Madigan” when he didn’t. - MOON - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:00 am: JD The Gov. could have made amendments to the Dem. budget and brought it into balance. Unfortunately Rauner did not have the “Stones” to do that. Rauner lacks leadership qualities and rather continue to point fingers at the opposition. Eventually the voters will see thru Rauners inabilities and political nonsense. - A guy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:04 am: Not going to a leader’s meeting is a tactical error. It sends a message to everyone, but the folks who hear it the loudest aren’t impressed. He should reconsider. Pres. Cullerton will need to be careful how closely he wants to follow this course. - Louis G. Atsaves - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:17 am: Here we go again. Governor calls a meeting of the legislative leaders to discuss the budget. After a few days of silence, Madigan suddenly determines that his schedule does not permit attendance. Madigan offers no other dates. Rep. Lou Lang said it best last week. There will be no budget during the entire term of Governor Rauner. Lang just didn’t finish the sentence, ” . . . because Madigan!” - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:23 am: - Louis G Atsaves - ===We will continue to work to schedule a meeting and look forward to getting an agenda for the meeting from the Governor.=== Where o where is the agenda? Or is the agenda the Turnaround Agenda or no budget? - Politically Incorrect - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:24 am: Things often happen in a veto session that are deemed impossible at other times…. like tax increases. But these take planning and meetings in advance. The day before by Rauner is a pitiful attempt to claim he wants to meet. And the standoff by Madigan to continue weilding his power is not helping the state. I see little hope of a better year in 2017 . - wordslinger - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:26 am: Louis, the governor doesn’t need a meeting or Madigan’s permission to fulfill his Constitionally mandated responsibility to propose a balanced budget. It’s just another weak excuse. - LizPhairTax - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:28 am: Along the lines of Wordslinger’s comment, ck et al. Would have a much more credible complaint if they put out an agenda and a budget document. If a 4 unit condominium association can do it, they can too. - Team Sleep - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:29 am: “Speaker?!” “Yes, Steve?” “Governor Rauner wants to hold a legislative leaders’s meeting.” “Um…” “What should I tell him?!” “Well…crap…I really need to catch up on The Walking Dead and Big Bang Theory. Tell him I have a “scheduling conflict”.” “Okay.” - Juvenal - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:33 am: Meeting was already off on the left foot. Would not have made things better. Probably would have made things worse - Handle Bar Mustache - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:39 am: Speaker M shouldn’t blow off these invitations. He should go and disagree with Rauner face to face. He should share his side of the disagreement with the public, and remind us that he is “negotiating” with a charlatan who has knowingly inflicted a lot of pain on a lot of human beings in our state. - Don't Worry, Be Happy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:48 am: I think a lot of these comments miss the point. We may all know that this is a photo op/dog-and-pony show, and the importance of 60 and 30, but we are not the audience. The non-insider folks woke up today to headlines such as: DEMOCRATIC LEADERS DECLINE BUDGET MEETING WITH GOVERNOR BRUCE RAUNER - WLS-TV Madigan cancels Monday meeting with Rauner; Cullerton also withdraws - Tribune Madigan passes on meeting with Rauner, other leaders - Sun-Times Democrats withdraw from Monday legislative leader meeting - SJ-R This just makes the Dem leaders look bad, and bolsters Rauner’s argument that Madigan is the problem in Springfield - the message that appears to be hurting the Dems electorally. Madigan and Cullerton would have been much better off attending, and then coming out and complaining that it was all a sham, and that Rauner only wants to talk about ‘reforms’ and not the budget. - justacitizen - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:49 am: Still amazed that four political leaders can’t get together and just talk in a civil manner. Maybe the election changed some Rauner turnaround “demands”. Trump has even entertained allowing a fence instead of a wall, - Demoralized - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:51 am: == He wants to win & beat Rauner== You could turn that statement around and say Rauner wants to win and beat Madigan and it would be just as true. Unfortunately your hyper-partisanship doesn’t recognize that both men are in this to win it (whatever that means). - Demoralized - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 9:52 am: If they go ahead with the meeting it becomes nothing more than a photo op. It’s a waste of time. - Ractin - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:09 am: J.D., you said Rauner didnt propose a budget. In his address, I thought I heard one, and while out of balance, there still was a budget. Rich even reported on it: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20160220/ISSUE11/302209993/yes-gov-rauner-the-budget-does-matter-and-heres-why While the proposal was outlandish, not to mention his alternative, the house held it for 4+ months, with no intention on trying balancing it or attempting to. The Speaker brings all agenda items for a vote, and I do not remember this even getting that 15 seconds for the vote. Or a multitude of other items we the voters and taxpayers wanted, that have been sitting on his desk/trash can for months/years. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:20 am: - Ractin - I think what you neglect, or just plum ignore, is that Rauner’s own framework (not a budget) was billions out of budget as well, having Rauner fail to submit 1) a budget and 2) a balanced budget. Rauner then proceeded to “explain” he was open to revenue (which his framework already required, not optional) for optional reforms. What. A. Crock. So - Ractin -, should the GA vote on Rauner’s unbalanced budget, vote to add required revenue to find it, AND destroy Labor while they’re at it? Seriously? LOL - A guy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:23 am: Could the Speaker not (hypothetically) cut $7B from his proposal and walk into the meeting with a balanced budget as well? Because at the moment, that’s what the most recent budget proposal looks like. I’m not certain that’s a position with much strength. - Honeybear - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:23 am: The ILRB decision is tomorrow. I’m sure it’s going to declare impasse. Why would Madigan show to be issued the final demand for unconditional surrender? AFSCME gets shot in the head tomorrow. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:27 am: - A guy -, The “Rauner Cuts” will be the Rauner legacy, along with the “Rauner Tax” Rauner wanted to be Governor, governors propose cuts. Are you saying Rauner isn’t up to his constitutional duties and Madigan needs to do Rauner’s job? That’s fun. - Louis G. Atsaves - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:30 am: @wordslinger, Madigan in his press release makes no constitution demands on the Governor, but you and many others around here seem to feel otherwise. Since you prefer constant fighting while the State of Illinois flounders further, what benefit does blowing off a meeting by the Speaker of House have to the people of the State of Illinois? Did he suggest an alternative date? Didn’t see that in the press release. And for those demanding an agenda, Rich Miller on another thread states: “I’m told there is an agenda.” Everyone needs to grow up. Only grownups will find a solution. - wordslinger - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:48 am: Guy, you’re not even trying. The most “current” budget proposal is the one pushed by the governor, passed by the GA and signed by the goverenor that has an $8 billion deficit. Louis, I don’t make “Constitution demands,” whatever that means. I’m just pointing out what the Constitution requires of the governor, a responsibility he has chosen to blow off. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 10:50 am: Maybe the governor can make public the agenda? Sounds like in Crain’s it’s… “Pass my agenda, you get a budget too!” That’s not going to get 60/30… it hasn’t so far. - Rich Miller - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:09 am: I put this on another thread, but people need to keep their discussions confined to the topic and not each other. Thanks. - Anonymous - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:13 am: I don’t get it Madigan just meet. You are not helping anyone or anything at this point I want them to put the meeting on camera so we can watch the dog and pony show. - Pot calling kettle - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:27 am: This is clearly a political move by Rauner, but Madigan does not help his case by flat out rejecting the meeting. Appearances are everything and not showing up feeds directly into the narrative Rauner is crafting. If Madigan chooses not to go, fine. But, it would be better if he laid out the real reason instead of a “schedule conflict” For example: === STATEMENT OF SPEAKER MADIGAN ON PROPOSED MEETING. A short time ago, I determined that the lack of an agenda or any preliminary staff work on topics to be discussed will prevent a meeting with the Governor and other legislative leaders from being productive. At previous meetings, we were not able to make progress because the budget was not discussed. We will continue to work to schedule a meeting should the Governor choose to discuss the budget. === - facts are stubborn things - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:33 am: MJM has to only win his district in two years and Rauner will have to win state wide. If the state is a mess, Rauner will own it and loose while MJM wins his district. MJM understands this. - facts are stubborn things - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:42 am: MJM is setting the terms of any future negotiations. He stands ready to negotiate on a budget, and not reforms. The constitution requires Rauner to present a balanced budget…keep this in mind going forward. - walker - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 11:42 am: An agenda, and a commitment to actually discuss the budget, would be nice. - Deft Wing - Monday, Nov 14, 16 @ 1:38 pm: Those here desperately defending Madigan’s decision to skip today’s meeting due to substance or tactics are missing the big picture. Rauner is defining Madigan as an obstructionist and THE problem … and that’s going to continue. Madigan’s intransigence makes it all the easier. It is tough, though, on Madigan’s caucus though … they are in harm’s way. And they know it. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.