* You’ll recall that 6 House Democrats sent the 19 Madigan refuseniks a letter this week informing them that their opposition to reelecting the longtime House Speaker was fueling the opposition and asked them to unite. Their response was sent today…
*** UPDATE *** Tribune…
Rep. Jonathan Carroll of Northbrook, one of the 19, said the group was “prepared to dig in our heels” in its opposition to Madigan’s reelection.
“The message we wanted to send is that we are of differing backgrounds, differing political perspectives, but the one thing that we are unified on is that we will not be supporting Mike Madigan for the 102nd General Assembly. These are 19 ‘no’ votes and we’re pretty comfortable with where our position is,” Carroll said.
Carroll said that it has been frustrating that the full caucus of the 73 House Democrats has not been held, either in person or virtually due to the pandemic, and suggested it is an effort by Madigan to buy time to try to persuade the dissidents to come back into the fold.
“The speaker falls into that category of being a great tactician who is sitting there right now looking to say, ‘What can I do to stall this process?’” Carroll said. “My guess is time buys him the ability to potentially flip certain members and I think the statement we put out is pretty much, ‘You can have all the time you want. We’re not flipping.’”
* WBEZ…
Writing collectively for the first time, 19 Democratic state representatives issued a joint statement Saturday reiterating that they remain committed to not voting for Michael Madigan to be speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives. […]
The statement from the 19 House Democrats comes two days after they received a letter obtained by WBEZ from six of their Democratic counterparts — including Rep. Michael Zalewski, D-Riverside, who asked them to “come together as a family,” and talk about a “path forward for us all.” […]
Zalewski seemed to take the letter from the 19 on Saturday as an encouraging sign.
“I appreciate and welcome an area of agreement over the last couple days: We need to come together collaboratively because the work ahead is critical for the State of Illinois,” Zalewski wrote in response to Saturday’s statement from his 19 colleagues.
- Southwest Sider - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 8:05 am:
Sounds like a backtrack for Zalewski. He is taking heat for his position.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 8:16 am:
The 19… speaking as ONE.
ONE voice, ONE letter, ONE purpose… and that 19 now is seen together… and committed to each other too, far different than 19 individuals seemingly saying one thing.
They can’t elect a Speaker, but this letter is the reminder… they are denying a Speaker, together.
It’s significant.
If writing a letter was sailing a ship only to burn that ship after leaving, this is taking all those 19 burned ships and spreading the ashes in port.
The new reality? Start finding that one person who can get 60, cobble to unite, bring the 19, the Black Caucus, and 20 or so together to find the consensus choice.
- Precinct Captain - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 8:20 am:
==“The message we wanted to send is that we are of differing backgrounds, differing political perspectives, but the one thing that we are unified on is that we will not be supporting Mike Madigan for the 102nd General Assembly.==
Rich white liberals from the city and richer white liberals from the suburbs. Real diverse. The Almost All Whites, 89% if you’re counting, aren’t representative of the Democratic Party. And they still have no plan and no vision on why the rest of the party should follow them.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 8:25 am:
=== Rich white liberals from the city and richer white liberals from the suburbs. Real diverse. The Almost All Whites, 89% if you’re counting, aren’t representative of the Democratic Party.===
… and yet they are denying… an old, white, wealthy lawyer and that’s bad?
That’s an odd take to purpose.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 8:27 am:
=== Rich white liberals from the city and richer white liberals from the suburbs. Real diverse. The Almost All Whites, 89% if you’re counting, aren’t representative of the Democratic Party.===
This won’t age well if the 19 unite to elect a person of color, a woman, or both.
The 19 are denying a person who has been Speaker, less one GA, since 1983.
That’s what’s going on.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 8:35 am:
Finally…
=== And they still have no plan and no vision on why the rest of the party should follow them.===
That’s not the goal or intent of the exercise.
If the sole reason you can’t replace any leader of… anything is… “there will be no plan and no vision”… that’s being held to a cult of personality, not any type of growth, to any group, with a default of…
“We don’t see a clear path to lead other than our leader of 37 years…”
… and that’s an argument of helplessness.
With respect to it all - Precinct Captain -
- Mostly Suburban 19 - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 9:54 am:
=This won’t age well if the 19 unite to elect a person of color, a woman, or both.
The 19 are denying a person who has been Speaker, less one GA, since 1983.=
I would like ask those members why they thing their fellow black and latino members are standing with Madigan. I would also like to ask if any of them even reached out to fellow minority caucus members before they made their decision.
Some of the 19 are actually white legislators representing latino majority districts yet the Latino caucus has not made an endorsement. Even within the minority caucus they do participate in they seem to not have been able to build consensus or just went out on their own.
All of this is probably why the racial and economic makeup of the group and their districts are important to highlight.
- Chad - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 10:06 am:
The 19 should not explain themselves further at this point. They should remain calm and not “take the bait” that they must answer these questions. The panic of anti-reformers will encourage more Members to join their cause.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 10:11 am:
=== The 19 should not explain themselves further at this point. They should remain calm and not “take the bait” that they must answer these questions. The panic of anti-reformers will encourage more Members to join their cause.===
This is the correct take.
The only thing the 19 have in common… No to Madigan.
=== I would like ask those members why they thing their fellow black and latino members are standing with Madigan.===
lol, they know why. You can’t play inside baseball on this and then assume no one knows why someone is where. Nope.
===I would also like to ask if any of them even reached out to fellow minority caucus members before they made their decision.===
Why? Each of the 73 (including Madigan) will choose how they are going to *individually* vote. The 19 only concur, “it ain’t Madigan”
=== All of this is probably why the racial and economic makeup of the group and their districts are important to highlight.===
You go with that, it sounds utterly ridiculous.
Race is at play as predominantly white legislators in a caucus are denying (checks notes) a old, white, privileged, man.
“Ok”
- Nick - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 10:14 am:
Literally only commenting to note Oswego Willy finally got his wish and they’re putting all of their names on the same piece of paper, haha.
- Chad - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 10:39 am:
Stated in the negative: The moment the 19 begin to explain themselves is the moment they will splinter as a group. They cannot possibly provide an explanation that will sufficiently recognize the views of everyone in the group. Some aspect of your answers will provide reasons for other Members to stay with Madigan. No matter what you say, it will somehow fail to sufficiently support (or oppose) the agendas of other Members. This is an exercise in nose counting, not party platform writing.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 10:43 am:
=== Literally only commenting to note … finally got his wish and they’re putting all of their names on the same piece of paper===
(Sigh)
It’s not that I am a factor in, frankly, ANYTHING, when it comes to governing, politics, and where they intersect.
I should sit in my Monday morning quarterback chair and leave all of this to those doing, listening to anything I say is a terrible mistake, I don’t recommend it.
The letter was the obvious and only rational play for the 19. That’s it. Full stop.
If anything… anything… I stated an obvious.
=== This is an exercise in nose counting, not party platform writing.===
How tasty-good is that?
It’s about 60 to Speaker… nothing… nothing more.
- Joe Bidenopolous - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 11:16 am:
Pretty bizarre that Carroll is lamenting the lack of a caucus meeting. As Majority Caucus Chair, can’t Willis call one whenever she pleases?
- Anthony Jr. - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 12:46 pm:
===Why? Each of the 73 (including Madigan) will choose how they are going to *individually* vote. The 19 only concur, “it ain’t Madigan”===
They are not just individual votes. They are also members of a caucus with diverse memberships and agendas.
Minority electeds know what is at stake. Maps in a year where the census was messed up and budget cuts that will hurt their districts the most.
Looks like none of the 19 have been able to make a case that someone else can handle this difficult situation.
The 19 mostly represent upper middle class voters whose lives will not really change with dramatic budget cuts or inadequate legislative maps.
Just because Madigan happens to be an old white man does not mean that what the 19 are doing is not detrimental to black and latino communities if the “Old, white man” Is the only person who can deliver.
The 19 also feel no responsibility to get behind their own candidate. Just force other members to risk their agenda and find someone else.
This is now just a game of chicken. So far Madigan has 22 committed votes. Kifowit 0.
They are just 19 people united AGAINST something and for nothing. Not a recipe for success or strong leadership.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 12:48 pm:
===Not a recipe for success===
Yes, it is, if the measure of success if denying Madigan the gavel.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 12:58 pm:
Oh boy…
=== They are not just individual votes. They are also members of a caucus with diverse memberships and agendas.===
The individual votes need to equal 60.
That’s the ball game, that’s the *only* ball game.
=== Looks like none of the 19 have been able to make a case that someone else can handle this difficult situation.===
LOL, they don’t need to. The goal of the exercise is to deny Madigan 60. They don’t owe anyone “then who”, or “why”, or even “think of… “
No. That’s not what the vote is.
You are willfully ignorant to how this works, blissfully unaware as to what it would mean to any of the 19 to flip, and your words only seem fixated on Madigan winning.
This is… welp… some unbelievable gymnastics;
===The 19 mostly represent upper middle class voters whose lives will not really change with dramatic budget cuts or inadequate legislative maps.===
Friend, they can put these members, if they border, into districts where they *can* face each other. It’s like you are lacking a grasp of how a map plays to political interests and strategies for allies.
Then this? Really?
===Just because Madigan happens to be an old white man does not mean that what the 19 are doing is not detrimental to black and latino communities if the “Old, white man” Is the only person who can deliver.===
Are you then saying a person of color can’t deliver better than Madigan? Huh? What?
Only an old, white, man can help minority populations?
That’s pretty “messed up”
=== The 19 also feel no responsibility to get behind their own candidate. Just force other members to risk their agenda and find someone else.===
How many times do we need to all go over the goal?
Deny Madigan.
That’s it. Keep up.
- Anthony Jr. - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 1:09 pm:
OSWEGO WILLY IS RICH MILLER FYI
- Rich Miller - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 1:11 pm:
===OSWEGO WILLY IS RICH MILLER FYI ===
Perhaps the dumbest, most ill-informed, wrong comment ever. And that’s really saying something. lol
Idiot.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 1:22 pm:
Rich deserves better than having my lunacy thrust upon him as “his”
For better or worse, I’m me.
- Dotnonymous - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 1:43 pm:
I am Rich Miller.
- Shytown - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 3:24 pm:
Did the six really think that the 19 wouldn’t work in unity to forward the party’s agenda? This isn’t about their priorities and agenda. It’s about leadership.
And Anthony jr. just needs to go away.
- Precinct Captain - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 3:41 pm:
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 12:58 pm:
With respect, 21 Black legislators have committed to the belief that MJM best positions the House Democratic Caucus to deliver on their agenda. Maybe that will change, but right now that’s their choice.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 14, 20 @ 3:49 pm:
=== With respect, 21 Black legislators have committed to the belief that MJM best positions the House Democratic Caucus to deliver on their agenda. Maybe that will change, but right now that’s their choice.===
The 21 have endorsed Madigan. They have reason and rationale, and I respect the caucus, and their belief, even their endorsement. Labor agrees with them, and they aren’t the only ones voting for MJM, I’m guessing, of the 73.
That’s different than the 19 saying…
“No thanks to Madigan”
Further,
The 19 are in position to deny Madigan, “because math”
The rest?
The rest is indeed “what’s next?”
The old ways dying, that seems like a given now, and not because of the 19.
Maybe a better understanding and moving towards inclusive thoughts and policy in the caucus?
That’s up to the 72 as they get to 60… and building policy and an agenda, again up to the 72… and an apparatus… “up to the 72”… if Madigan wants to partake, then the 73.
The 19 ain’t budging, now in one letter they’re reinforcing it.
Respectfully, bud.