Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: The roots of the impasse and how we got here
Next Post: More ideas, more demands
Posted in:
* From commenter lake county democrat…
What was Pat Quinn’s main goal when he came into office? Political reform. How far did he get with it? Nowhere - Madigan forced him to throw his own blue-ribbon commission under the bus and sign a warm puddle of next-to-nothing (I won’t say nothing because there was a soupcon of worth items in there). Now imagine if he had said “This state is messed up with corruption and I’m going to fix it, or you legislators are going to face the voters owning it. No budget gets passed without this reform.” Now imagine if Madigan had said “WE WON’T EVEN DISCUSS THOSE REFORMS - YOU WILL NOT HOLD THE BUDGET HOSTAGE.” I think there would have been immense pressure on Madigan to cave and at least agree to negotiate. I think there would have been stronger reforms passed as a result.
If you assume that 1) Rauner wants as many anti-union / pro-business goals as possible, 2) knows he won’t get everything he wants but 3) would rather force the Dems to take ownership rather than agree to something like Quinn did, his actions make sense. What other leverage does he have?
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:36 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: The roots of the impasse and how we got here
Next Post: More ideas, more demands
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
What? Another view of the Springfield impasse that doesn’t pin the blame on Rauner? Well said!
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:43 am
Lake County Democrat nailed it!
Comment by Downstate Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:44 am
I don’t see this as comparable. What reforms to government is Rauner proposing? Term limits yea but then you lose it as a campaign issue and you lose a big chunk of your own people and remapping I think everyone knows will in fact have to happen. So what reforms is the Governor proposing that will save the gov’t money and reduce corruption? Other than the destruction of unions, what can be given that gets the gov to address the budget.
Comment by burbanite Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:45 am
but rauner ran a campaign concealing his agenda unlike quinn. and your hypothetical of quinn using budget leverage to take on corruption isn’t comparable to the situation at hand because rauner’s attack on stuff like prevailing wage has nowhere near the broad support in this state that attacking corruption would.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:46 am
I second hisgirlfriday - Quinn was upfront about what he wanted (unlike Rauner) and a large percentage of people wanted what Quinn wanted (unlike Rauner).
Comment by Paddyrollingstone Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:48 am
Question to the post:
What happens (are the legal ramifications especially) if no budget for 2016 is even done? Is this a possibility? Is it possible to operate solely on court orders, go further into deficit, and start the “redo” with the 2017 budget cycle?
I’m not being facetious here, I honestly would like to know. I predicted January before the 2016 would be drafted, others are predicting March. What happens if we are all wrong? After all, we (Illinois) haven’t even done our equivalent of a Continuing Resolution like the feds.
Comment by Anon221 Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:48 am
But Rauner didn’t run on this agenda. And there’s not immense pressure on Madigan to negotiate. And Rauner’s anti-worker fanfic is vastly different from fighting political corruption. So, yeah, if things were different, they’d be different, but I’m not sure how much that tells us.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:49 am
Rainer is losing leverage by the day, and no longer has the passage of a timely budget as a “hostage” as no matter what it will be extremely late. People are suffering, local governments finances are strained, and non profits have already folded. Political exchanges happen all the time, using the budget as leverage is not entirely unreasonable, but refusing to negotiate a budget until he gets his way is unreasonable.
Comment by AC Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:49 am
Just so you know, those of you who are defending this strategy, that “the budget” translates to REAL PEOPLE. Not a concept. Actual human beings. People who are losing access to services they need to live, to be healthy, to have dignity, to transition to being self-supporting. And people who have (had?) jobs, who pay taxes, who shop in their communities, patronize their local businesses, volunteer at their churches and schools, who work to improve the lives of other human beings. THESE are the hostages.
Just be clear about the morality of the approach you are advocating for when you say “holding the budget hostage.” Don’t hide behind some euphemism. Be honest about your ethics and your approach. Mackey’s article lays it out in Rauner’s own words.
Comment by Pawn Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:50 am
Quinn, like most governors, chose not to behave like a petulant child when it came time to pass a budget. Reform takes time and consensus, not threats and unpaid bills.
Comment by Snucka Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:51 am
I mean, sure, if your goal is “smack unions around however possible” then Rauner’s tactic makes perfect sense, but I’m not sure that is everyone’s goal, or that everyone approves of every tactic in pursuing any goal.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:51 am
Rauner not Rainer, especially with the states self imposed budget drought.
Comment by AC Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:52 am
Does lcd actually think that people would’ve supported Quinn taking the budget hostage for so-called corruption reforms?
Hostage taking is hostage taking no matter what the kidnapper demands for ransom.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:53 am
I thought this was fairly well put.
Governor Quinn was a hard-charging reformer. Until he became chief executive, and then everything was literally autopilot time until pension reform was passed and went down in flames (albeit after he left). This coming from the guy who formed CUB, cut the size of the legislature, pushed hard for the progressive income tax when he was Lite Guv and wanted structural reforms on state hiring.
Governor Quinn is a likable and well-meaning guy, but he was a real bumbler and doofus of a leader when the spotlight was on him. I know this is not always the best way to argue a point, but if Jerry Clarke had done a better of job of working with the RNC and NRCC then Bill Brady would have been Governor and would have won the 2010 election by 2-3 percentage points.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:53 am
===chose not to behave like a petulant child when it came time to pass a budget===
lol
Remember the legislator salary veto?
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:55 am
First of all, a lot of what Collins proposed did get enacted, even if not how exactly he wanted. Campaign finance now has limits and much greater disclosure, though still with flaws. He got his independent procurement officer. And look how great that has been. A very significant FOIA re-write was enacted. Strengthening the powers of the OEIG and whistleblower protections. Toughening the State’s revolving door prohibitions. I’m sorry that Collins didn’t get his wish to allow any state’s attorney with an axe to grind or a name to make the ability to bring RICO charges against politicians or change the re-map process (which yes is problematic, but has very little to do with government corruption). But goo goo times would much rather sulk and let the perfect be the enemy of the good. So whatever.
Comment by Juice Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:57 am
Maybe Rauner deliberately used different tactics than Quinn, maybe not.
But in the end, neither had the votes for their agenda.
Comment by Robert the Bruce Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:59 am
Good strong clear comment. Disagree that the analogy is that strong. Responded on the other thread.
Comment by walker Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:59 am
Also, being a good leader is often not indicated by the agenda that you push, but how someone deals with the situation that they are confronted with, and how they handle the cards that they are dealt. Pat Quinn didn’t understand this. Bruce Rauner doesn’t either.
Comment by Juice Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:59 am
The segregation metaphor didn’t go over, so we got this one.
Comment by Precinct Captain Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:01 pm
==Remember the legislator salary veto?==
Well, sure, and Quinn got fired. One imagines the current Governor wants to avoid a similar fate.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:02 pm
There is some merit in lcd’s comment, but on the other other hand, let’s remember: most Illinoisans support(ed) anti-corruption reforms, especially on the heels of Rod’s impeachment and removal.
Where is the public support for Rauner’s anti-union / pro-business goals? Heck, he still hasn’t even made a full-throated argument for why his reforms are needed now and what benefits we’ll reap if they are passed. You’d think he’d have a ready-made presentation on his agenda that he could use on the stump. I’m still waiting to hear why this is the time and why these reforms are the key to our future.
Because, you know, public support is also leverage. Quinn had more for his reforms. Rauner? I don’t see it so far.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:04 pm
The budget is not “leverage”, its not bargaining equity and its not a strategy for other means. No matter what the policy goal is, placing an axe over our societies most vulnerable populations is abhorrent to our very ideals as humans.
It is wrong no matter what the ends are.
You want leverage? You want your ideas to be enacted? Win some elections. Get the people behind your ideas. You know, democracy.
Comment by Abe the Babe Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:06 pm
===The segregation metaphor didn’t go over, so we got this one.===
The non-apology didn’t go over with me very well either.
Had the chance to apologize, blew it.
To the Post,
If the hostage issue is the same as Quinn, sure, that’s how it goes, than own the hostsges, own the situation, and own that all that is happening is by choice.
Rauner saying his hostage taking isn’t causing the fallout is disingenuous.
Doing it, like Quinn, then just stop trying to look for outs.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:07 pm
I still think that we should look to join other states that have a progressive income tax system. I know that it would take a constitutional change, but it seems like most of the states that have it are not in the financial state that we are in Illinois.
Comment by Big Joe Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:09 pm
“What other leverage does he have?”
The unstated premise of lcd’s post is that Bruce Rauner’s anti-union agenda is so wildly unpopular and extreme that the only possible way for it to have any hope of becoming reality is to make political hostages of “the disadvantaged, the handicapped, the elderly, the children in poverty”.
And this is someone defending Rauner.
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:13 pm
With a hat tip to “My Cousin Vinny”:
“That is a lucid, intelligent and well thought out comment. So, it is denied, lake county democrat!”
Comment by Georg Sande Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:14 pm
==lol
Remember the legislator salary veto?==
I didn’t say he NEVER behaved like a petulant child. Just they he didn’t hold up the entire state budget.
Comment by Snucka Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:14 pm
If pq tried this stunt, MJM would be doing the exact same thing. Let pq take the hit for not appropriating money for autism, cancer and the homeless in the name of campaign finance reform. The only difference would be Durkin and Rodogno screaming their outrage and putting votes onto an over ride. The action described is just plain wrong, it doesn’t matter which Guv is doing it.
Comment by Dawn Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:16 pm
Perhaps Quinn backed down because economic pressures were the major issue impacting the state and he had to get an achievable budget done to minimize/lessen the impact.
Comment by Earnest Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:17 pm
I really don’t like the what if question. What if Rauner was actually proposing real reform? What if Madigan would have given in to Quinn? Oy, if my aunt had a ***** she would be my uncle. Why do we need a faux alternate reality to judge the current situation?
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:18 pm
Quinn had his agenda dictated by what the Speaker wanted and would allow. I think everyone suspects, or if an insider, knows that. I think many also believe or know that Madigan did not fear a Governor Rauner pre-election, and rather saw it as a situation where Rauner and the GOP would need to own the tax increase that everyone knew was necessary. Quinn campaigned on the need to extend the temporary tax increase, without Speaker support, and we know it was allowed to sunset contributing to our current problems. So far, the Gov has not done anything to raise taxes (no surprise), and today Radogno is quoted as opening that door (big surprise). The Speaker will get some portion of what he ORIGINALLY wanted if the two sides stop being petty, and get to the table and strike a compromise. Even if Radogno went rogue with her comments, bring the leaders in and see if they will hammer through a deal they can push to the Gov. Do it privately, keep the press out of it, and see if anyone cares enough to get a compromise done.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:19 pm
OW - out of respect, I honored your “request” not to respond to your last comment. ANd I didn’t write an apology before because it would have smacked of the kind of “so sorry if YOU were offended” faux-apologies I despised, but couldn’t think of how to write a way out of that. But since you raise it in this thread, I honestly thought that post was pretty clear I wasn’t referring to you personally, and that I’d not only be mean but pretty looney to call you that given the lack of any basis for it. But goodness knows I’m a flawed writer and if it comes off that way you have my apology whether it’s too belated for you or not. You can comment on that, forgive me, ignore me, or anything else - that will be my last word on the subject.
Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:19 pm
Why not just do away with the legislature entirely if they can’t be swayed by hostage taking. What else can a good dictator expect?
Comment by Mouthy Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:21 pm
In short, this tactic might lead to something. But would the certain damage be worth it, for the state, even in the best achievable case?
Comment by walker Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:21 pm
That Blue Ribbon Commission gets a bum rap. They didn’t get what they wanted, but their existence did prompt the creation of the Joint Committee on Government Reform. Given the neophytes on the Commission, the end result was far stronger than they could have expected. The difference here is that the legislature thought they could work with Quinn, find something they all could “win,” and move the ball forward. No one in the legislature today thinks they can work with Rauner. You work for him, or you’re the enemy. The legislature was willing to work with this governor when he was sworn in, just as they were willing to work with Quinn. Once Rauner made clear he had his own plans and would not be deterred, that honeymoon ended.
Comment by Elo Kiddies Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:21 pm
OK - I lied, I want to add to that that I don’t mean “if it comes off that way to you” but if it comes off that way in general and I’m insensitive to it. And add that regardless I should have been more sensitive when making such a charged analogy.
Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:21 pm
Trying to follow the logic here - are we saying because Quinn failed to get his corruption reforms through, suddenly all and any means are justified, no matter who gets hurt?
Comment by ChicagoVinny Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:23 pm
I get that there is always going to be pain with any change. Someone is going to lose a job or get the short end of the stick. That being said, I don’t feel that innocent ordinary lives and livelyhoods should not be used as leverage no matter who is doing it. The damage being done is very real.( As documented by Rich but by few else) The damage being done in many cases is permenant (many many social service jobs will not come back. They will not reopen). Our social safety net is being intentionally, systematically, and comprehensively destroyed. Yes there was damage from before. Yes our state was fiscally crippled before. I’m not talking about that. Nothing justifies the damage and suffering being done NOW. It is unethical, absolutely unethical. Those who engage in corruption are not innocent. They get what they deserve. We are talking about intentionally causing suffering to innocents. It is not right and ethical conservatives are starting to give voice to the injustice. Conservatives actually have a tremendous amount to lose. Their valid political views have been hijacked by plutocratic oligarchs in order to subvert the democratic necessity of compromise and incremental change towards the common good. Instead plutocratic oligarchs are pushing to destroy our democracy and push all public benefit towards a private uberwealthy few. The Turnaround Agenda is solely for the benefit of 1%. NEVER ONCE has any one on this blog produced a shred of valid peer reviewed academic quality evidence that the Turnaround agenda will actually benefit the fiscal health of the state as a whole. NO return on investment has ever been offered. No the Turnaround Agenda solely benefits the owner class. It is designed to destroy the only strong voice of workers, unions. It is designed to drive wages down. It is designed to destroy the structure of the state government so that it can be privatized. It is designed to destroy the social safety net so the money can be rerouted to tax cuts for the wealthy. It is and continues to be called out as a complete falsehood and outright lie. Prove me wrong with academic peer-reviewed data. PROVE ME WRONG!
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:24 pm
“I used your name in a racial analogy wrongly. I did it. I was wrong doing that. I’m sorry”
Simple. I didn’t need numerous tries.
I’m done with it now.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:28 pm
“are we saying because Quinn failed to get his corruption reforms through, suddenly all and any means are justified, no matter who gets hurt?”
I’m too am waiting for an alternative interpretation. It’s a curious approach to representative democracy.
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:28 pm
I always had the feeling that Quinn would have been more dynamic about pushing his real agenda if Blago hadn’t just gone to prison…17 years is a long time.
Or it might have been that he wasn’t as agressive once he was in the real hot seat, the actual leader of the State.
Comment by Belle Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:34 pm
Honeybear:
They can’t prove you wrong, so they:
a. Troll
b. Remain silent and disappear
c. Retort, “I don’t have to, I know I’m right.”
d. Sit back and smile with fingers steepled (or as they walk away from the rope at the Pullman celebration)
My hope is, that national coverage will increase past the lottery payouts. I was glad that this made NPR, but it was with a bit of a snicker and grin on the interviewer’s part. We need to get the individual stories in the fore front of the national media. Or, maybe (my snark for the day), Illinois needs to start a GoFundMe campaign.
Comment by Anon221 Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:36 pm
Let’s not kid ourselves, there was “reform” in the late Blago/early Quinn era. It’s just that it was directed against private industry, and shielded unions and politicians. For example, contractors who do business with the state were forbidden from making political contributions. Unions who negotiate with the state were not. Business who have a great idea for the state cannot share it with an agency and still expect to get the business. Businesses have excessive and useless reporting requirements now imposed upon them if they expect to do business with the state. Unions have no such “transparency” requirements. These procurement “reforms” were unnecessary and now cost the taxpayer in terms of administration as well as lost opportunities to create better outcomes. Madigan went along with these “reforms” and the Democrats, lead by misguided and misinformed “good government” groups called it a day.
Comment by phocion Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:40 pm
Quinn and Collins got 90% of what they wanted, and 95% of what Madigan and Cullerton warned about has come true.
Special interests groups are hiding their contributions behind dark money organizations.
Multi-millionaires are parsing their checks out and funneling them through local committees to evade caps, and a billionaire just spent his way into the governor’s mansion and then used his money to purchase one political party and threaten the other.
“How’s that reform workin’ out for ya, Susan Garrett?”
You really need to come up with a better example to make your case, Lake County.
Comment by Juvenal Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:47 pm
phocion - I would agree with you that the “reforms” were one-sided against business and did not include the same type of limitations on the unions.
However, when you say that the reforms were unnecessary you’re just wrong. The reforms WERE necessary because there were real examples of businesses, and sometimes state employees and sometimes elected officials conspiring to steer contracts and public dollars. Are things burdensome for State bidders? Yes. But businesses are not required to bid on State solicitations. And since they’re not getting paid I don’t know why they’d bother anyway.
That said, I’m with you in that unions should be held to higher accountability standards as well.
Comment by BluegrassBoy Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 12:57 pm
problrmis lake county used the same false/misleading chracterization to try and support the point.
Rauners demand the public sector unions give up the right to negotiate over salaries, insurance, retirement etc is not probusiness… these are PUBLIC sector union employees, not private. restate the above, Rauners demand that public sectore union be eliminated changes the tenor of the discussion. Rauner has demogoued the union as anti-buisness and used a false preganant assumption that his antimiddle class reforms are probusiness.
what if rauners proposals crash illinois economy by reducing purchasing state wide and dripping salaries and disposable income? is it probuisness to add minimum wage people who need government support for food and insurance?
Comment by Ghost Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:05 pm
@honeybear
“Prove me wrong with academic peer-reviewed data. PROVE ME WRONG!”
Gee, honeybear, all your asking is that posters have their posts and arguments “academically peer reviewed” before disputing your unsupported claims? Seems you hold others to much higher standards than yourself.
Although it isn’t “peer reviewed” I’d refer you to the NEAs “Ranking and Estimates” most recent report showing the overspending in Illinois (union dominated)education compared to Texas (non-union)K-12 education. Look at the NAEP test scores for 8th graders, and tell me what paying the unions and educrats 17.8% per student above the national average did to provide better student outcomes (virtually no difference). Remember also that Texas has a higher percentage of low income kids and more ESL problems. Texas spends about $3K per student less than Illinois. It seems like union domination is certainly a bad deal for the kids and taxpayers.
Tell me what good allowing teachers to retire at 55 at over 70% of their salary when fully vested did for the kids.
Show me where paying senior faculty more than double the “journeyman” rate for teachers was money well spent, since it was the unions that set up a system that overly rewards senior faculty while shafting younger, often better, teachers.
You don’t need to “academically peer review” your answers, Honey. Simple logic without the rant , but with some references, would be just fine….
Comment by Arizona Bob Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:07 pm
I’d have more sympathy with LCD’s comparison if Rauner would put his turnaround agenda, his reforms, in bill form and at least tried the process. His secretive meetings to achieve a legislative consensus before the public even see’s the proposals. You have to reform the process, by working the process, and he’s never tried.
Comment by Relocated Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:11 pm
thanks azbob, could not have said it better
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:17 pm
== What other leverage does he have? ==
Rauner is the Governor. Plus he has tons of money to push it.
To use an English phrase, he has the power of the bloody pulpit. He can use it to try to get the public on his side. If the ideas are good, that should be an easy sale.
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:26 pm
I’m not sure I agree with the this line: “I think there would have been immense pressure on Madigan to cave and at least agree to negotiate.” Do we really believe that the Speaker would have caved to Governor Quinn any more than he is caving to Governor Rauner?
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:27 pm
AZBob, what do you think cutting teacher pay (Rauner’s objective in eliminating collective bargaining) will do for education here? Improve it? Leave it the same? Just curious.
Comment by Concerned Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:31 pm
Okay that was a high bar. Just produce peer-reviewed academic data to prove ANY ONE item on the Turnaround Agenda. That will at least start the conversation. But even IF you could produce peer-reviewed academic data to back one item up, it still doesn’t give Rauner the right to FORCE ,by naked aggression and malice, the State of Illinois to adopt and accept it without democratic process and the compromise necessary to achieve it. RAUNER IS CO EQUAL, NOT SUPREME. (supreme executive power is derived from a mandate from the masses not some farsical aquatic ceremony) Sorry I couldn’t help myself.
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:32 pm
==He can use it to try to get the public on his side==
It pains me to say this, but I think AZ Bob laid out the Governor’s failure to do this pretty well yesterday.
Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:33 pm
RNUG - and hence why I noted on the post about Leader Radogno’s change in hear that Rauner needs to drop the more unpopular/untenable demands (CBA especially) and focus on tort reform and redistricting.
Demoralized - one thing I will say in response whether MJM would’ve caved to Quinn: MJM backed Blago for Governor not once but twice. And he co-chaired Blago’s reelection efforts in 2006. “We” - the Cap Fax community - openly wish the HGOP and SGOP members would “stand up” to the Governor and “do what’s right”. Well, when MJM had a chance to the EXACT SAME THING in 2006, he chose partisanship over policy and stability. Quinn could’ve banged him over the head for that relentlessly. Instead, he pushed for a capital bill and a return to “normalcy”. Okay, but the chance to restructure the political culture was missed because Quinn didn’t want anyone to be mad at him. And don’t give me the “it was best for the state” crap. He flopped coming out of the gates.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:35 pm
=== If the ideas are good, that should be an easy sale.===
Exactly. And didn’t Rauner bill himself as a superstar salesman? This should be a no-brainer for him. Surely the economics line-up with his policy proposals. Surely this is a well thought-out plan. Surely Rauner’s Turnaround Agenda will provide tangible benefits.
All he has to do is show us exactly what he wants and how we’ll all be better off because of it. Then, if it’s a good idea, Madigan and the Democrats will have no choice but to go along with it.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:36 pm
Demoralized - fair enough, but remember that back then Quinn was coming off Blago’s impeachment, with the memory of George Ryan still fresh. I think the media and a lot of others would think “sad, but this is what it’s going to take” and have sided with Quinn. I think at least some charities, who today are willing to avoid pressuring Madigan because they realize Rauner is generally hostile to their goals, would have turned to Madigan and said neither preventing political reform or upholding some sacrosant principle about budget negotiations is worth this - do something.
Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:43 pm
Rauner should get on a conference call with Leader Radogno and Gov. Kasich and just have Rauner, for 6-10 minutes hear Gov. Kasich and what he learned in Ohio about Unions.
I know, Rauner already “knows” everyone, till Rauner doesn’t know anyone.
The lack of secondary voices inside the Rauner walls is breathtaking for a man who put “successful teams” together.
I guess though, if every time the goal was to break something and sell it off, how many dissenters would you recruit that are against making a buck like that?
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:43 pm
RNUG and 47th Ward - come on now, we know that “the power of a good idea” doesn’t translate to political power. We could spend a lot of time listing examples of great ideas, many of which enjoy widespread public support, which have gone nowhere at the state, county or city level.
Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:47 pm
The pre-election fight between Quinn and MJM was over the extension of the temporary tax increase. Quinn did push, did campaign, did argue. MJM wanted Rauner to own the tax increase if he won. He would have passed it after the election if Quinn had won. It was politics then and its politics now.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:50 pm
The Speaker didn’t want his members to vote for a tax increase before their own elections. He wanted the super majority intact.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:52 pm
If Rauner campaigned to do what he is doing right now - he would have lost. He knew that he would. What he chose to do is lie to all of us until he was sworn into office.
Rauner cannot claim that he won his race against Quinn because he told voters what he planned to do. There is a big difference between “shaking up Springfield” and telling voters that you have no anti-union plans, then reneging only days after being sworn into office.
The analogy isn’t accurate, in my opinion.
Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 1:52 pm
–What other leverage does he have?–
Because of the rigged maps, the Governor does not have any other leverage, but that’s just my opinion.
Also, I believe some of the issues the Governor is pushing are also budget related, but I guess if you consider revenue enhancements and spending cuts as non-budgetary issues, then no, they would not be budget related.
Comment by Ahoy! Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 2:02 pm
I thought most criticisms of Rauner were being made while understanding this, or something similar. Kudos to @lake count democrat for the effort.
@walker also nails it. Will future gains surpass the current pain? There is no truthful answer yet, not until after any reforms are enacted.
Comment by Formerly Known As... Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 2:06 pm
==come on now, we know that “the power of a good idea” doesn’t translate to political power==
And yet, most politicians at least *try*.
Anyway, I’m just happy that we’ve moved on from “It’s Madigan’s fault/they’re both to blame!” to “It’s Rauner’s fault, but he had a reason!”
By the time Rauner signs a budget, we’ll all just accept that he stuck his foot in a bear trap on this one.
Comment by Arsenal Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 2:13 pm
BlueGrassBoy,
I appreciate your reply, but you miss the point. You said “(t)he reforms WERE necessary because there were real examples of businesses, and sometimes state employees and sometimes elected officials conspiring to steer contracts and public dollars.” Steering work as you describe was illegal before the “reforms” took effect. Adding paperwork does not make it more illegal. SB51 which took effect in 2009 is an example of merely making an already onerous procurement process more inefficient and expensive. The illegal acts of which you complain sent people to jail. This new law did nothing other than to let Quinn say they did something.
Comment by phocion Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 2:14 pm
===chose not to behave like a petulant child when it came time to pass a budget===
== lol
Remember the legislator salary veto? ==
Yeah, I’mma call BS on that statement. Petulance and childish antics are hardly the sole purview of this governor, or of either party.
Comment by thunderspirit Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 2:27 pm
-There is no truthful answer yet, not until after any reforms are enacted.-
Exactly….like Kansas. s/
Comment by Honeybear Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 2:29 pm
VanillaMan @ 1:52 nailed it. Mr Rauner deliberately avoided discussion of eliminating collective bargaining, prevailing wage laws or “right to work” during his campaign, so he has no legitimate mandate whatsoever to impose leverage pertaining to the tenants “Turnaround Agenda.
Comment by kitty Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 2:36 pm
You’re right lcd. But Rauner is trying to up-end 226 years of representative democracy by taking the budget hostage to his ideological agenda. Scott Walker at least started with Republican majorities in his legislature. Rauner isn’t interested in campaigning on his agenda or trying to win voters in the next.
It’s politics. And Rauner is losing badly. I don’t think taking hostages changes the end result, it just makes a lot of people suffer in the meantime.
Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 2:36 pm
Speculation, I don’t believe that one bit. Governor’s own budgets. Rauner knows it. To hold the rest of the state hostage to a political point is irresponsible. There are other ways to get things done than forcing a collapse. Remember Newt Gingrich, Ted Cruz? Gov needs to resubmit a budget he and the legislators agree on. Period!
Comment by Union Man Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 2:41 pm
Quinn tried to do the right thing. He owned the problems and tried to fix them. Where did that get him again? Quinn owned trying to shut down numerous downstate facilities. Those people, lots of whom were in unions, abandoning him. Sad end to a career that was otherwise illustrious.
Yet, no way I could talk anyone where I live into supporting Quinn. It was a lost cause…
Comment by Southern Illinois Hoopdee Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 3:19 pm
CCP - the entire Turnaround Agenda was introduced by Leader Radogno in the Senate and Leader Durkin in the House. The bills were dropped the week before Memorial Day.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 3:33 pm
Team Sleep, that was because those bills were DOA.
It’s dropping something already dead.
Comment by Southern Illinois Hoopdee Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 3:35 pm
Yes, but they were still introduced (albeit a bit late in the game).
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 3:38 pm
=== The bills were dropped the week before Memorial Day. ===
Yes, Rauner’s big agenda was introduced on May 22nd, the Friday before Memorial Day. That would be nine days before the scheduled adjournment.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 3:51 pm
Norseman - approp bills and BIMPs are often dropped later than that. Those are also extremely lengthy and complex.
Comment by Team Sleep Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 3:56 pm
The key is ‘what leverage does he have’. Leverage is another term for ‘hostile takeover’. Gov. Bruce willfully caused a crisis which harms those least able while leaving himself and his pals without a scratch!
How does one deal with leverage? Make the lever break or take it away! Sprk Madigan and Democrats have been doing that. Gov.Bruce also knows Democrats like to solve problems (it is in our nature, see all the comments here). But Gov. Bruce doesn’t want to solve the budget issues — he wants his way.
One aspect of the budget issues is that Illinois has for the last couple decade under Madigan’s lead implemented the DLC or Third Way concepts once popular in Democract circles. DLC and Third Way economic policy were just an extension of Reaganomics. IL is just an slower, earlier example of the trickle down failures of KS, WI, IN, LO, NJ.
Comment by IL17Progressive Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 4:26 pm
Team Sleep, I know the process. Rauner’s bills don’t fit in either category. These were political statements introduced after he got pummeled in the media for not releasing the details of his proposals.
Comment by Norseman Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 4:38 pm
== Will future gains surpass the current pain? There is no truthful answer yet, not until after any reforms are enacted. ==
So we have to pass it to see what is in it?
Comment by RNUG Thursday, Oct 22, 15 @ 11:15 pm
Hi to all, for the reason that I am really eager of reading this webpage’s post to be updated regularly.
It contains good information.
Comment by Garry Tuesday, Oct 27, 15 @ 2:12 am