Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition
Next Post: Madigan ignored his own unpopularity in Philly
Posted in:
* You should really listen to the whole thing, but here are some excerpts from an interview of House Speaker Michael Madigan by Amanda Vinicky and Craig Dellimore…
On term limits: “In the last primary election, friends of Bruce Rauner spent over $1 million in an Illinois House district on the Southwest side of Chicago, attempting to remove me from office. The voters of that district recognized who the enemy was and voted to keep me in office. That’s how term limits should be administrated.”
On the Monetary Award, or MAP, grant for low-income college students: “So if you’re a poor student today planning to attend college in IL starting in Sept, you don’t know the status of the MAP program, you don’t know whether there will be state support for your college tuition, or whether it won’t be there. That’s the product of the Rauner extremism in Illinois. It’s wrong. It ought not to happen, if Bruce Rauner wants to pick on some people, he ought to find some big people to pick on, not little people who are trying to put themselves through college.”
On his relationship with Senate President John Cullerton: “What the governor should understand is that that’s an old divide and conquer theory which was practiced by the British against the Irish. And he’s working with two Irishmen – Madigan and Cullerton – who are very aware of the British history, and we’re not going to allow that to happen.”
On if Democrats can pick up General Assembly seats in the November election: “You know I don’t think along those lines because it’s going to be a very interesting election. Clearly it’s going to be an ordinary election. You’ve got different personalities, very different types of personalities, different approaches. And so given all of that, why, there could be surprises in the election. We could suffer loses or we could have gains.”
Thoughts?
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 9:23 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today’s edition
Next Post: Madigan ignored his own unpopularity in Philly
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Without directly saying so, Madigan pointed out one of the downsides to term limits.
Deep pockets behind the scenes types would pour money into elections. Kinda like Rauner’s approach so far.
As with so many of Rauner’s causes, his true intentions aren’t initially obvious.
Comment by Sir Reel Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 9:30 am
–The voters of that district –
Which he carefully drew the boundaries for.
Comment by Ahoy! Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 9:43 am
Term limits put more power into the hands of the lobbyist because they will always be there “helping” the newly elected representatives with the “processes”
Instead of term limits representatives need longer term to avoid the constant election cycle a 2 year term creates
Comment by Publius Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 9:45 am
–The voters of that district –
Which he carefully drew the boundaries for.
(Yeah, because he never won when the boundaries were drawn by opponents. That would be insane!)
Comment by Delimma Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 9:48 am
As far as I am concerned Madigan is proof positive of the need for term limits.
At the GA level 12 years is enough. That would not include running for other offices in state government- such as SS or Governor- and it would not include running for federal offices.
And any past elected member of the GA should not be allowed to officially lobby in any form for at least 10 years after leaving office.
Comment by Federalist Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 9:52 am
=Which he carefully drew the boundaries for. =
Are still voters and he won by a landslide.
=As far as I am concerned Madigan is proof positive of the need for term limits.=
So, in essence, you favor a big money oligarchy type ruling class? Because that is what will determine elections even more than they do now.
If that is what you want, that is what you will get.
Or are you simply frustrated that everyone else won’t vote the way you want them to?
No, the current system works we just need more competitive elections.
Why, just ask Ken Dunkin about how that works.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:04 am
Federalist, I’m with you on the lobbyist 10 year restriction, but I think it’s easily gotten around by those who throw money around, since they’ll take care of their bought pols some other non-lobbyist way.
Term limits, on the other hand, I’m with Madigan on, and one of the reasons has to do with money’s much greater influence on an election of two newcomers to the office under consideration. The main reason, however, is that the people of the district can term limit any officeholder that they’ve previously elected in the current election. Term limits are undemocratic in that they prevent people from considering someone who they might very well want to represent them.
Comment by PublicServant Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:12 am
Pick your poison:
A) career politicians and staff
Or
B) career legislative staff and entrenched lobbyists
Comment by RNUG Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:14 am
And I’m totally with the multi-member district idea that Rich mentioned. He’s right. Multi-member districts will have much more of an effect on the legislature than so called “independent” maps will.
Comment by PublicServant Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:15 am
I think we need a law that says NO ONE can have any job for more than 10 years. Can you imagine how much better companies like Facebook, Google, IBM, GM, Ford, and similar companies would be if they could eliminate the baggage of experienced CEOs so they could replace them with minimum wage new hires? That would be awesome for those companies, and the economy!
Comment by Delimma Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:20 am
===the multi-member district idea that Rich mentioned===
I don’t think that’s allowed any longer under the US Constitution.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:27 am
Actually, I think Madigan would (or should) prefer to not gain seats in November.
Give the stated intention of the IL GOP to assign 100% of the blame for the needed tax increase to IL Democrats, Madigan could be better off with only 68 seats after the November elections than he would be with 72 seats after November.
Madigan needs to lose 3 or 4 seats to end up with an optimal hand heading into the 2018 elections.
And, John Cullerton’s guaranteed super majority in the IL Senate means Rauner isn’t passing anything the Dems don’t agree with, regardless of what happens in the IL House.
Comment by Hamlet's Ghost Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:32 am
I intended to include this link with my last comment:
https://capitolfax.com/2016/07/29/cullerton-repeats-demand-that-rauner-will-decide-tax-hike/
Comment by Hamlet's Ghost Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:35 am
JS Mill - Hear Hear!!!
Comment by Galena Guy Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:38 am
Nice historical dodge on his relationship with Cullerton.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:39 am
Madigan is a primary reason that I support term limits. He has nearly ruined Illinois and we can’t get rid of him.
Comment by Ron Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:40 am
Sorry, can’t listen to the full-blown speeches of Madigan or Hillary. I prefer the written, Readers Digest versions.
Comment by justacitizen Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:41 am
Hamlet’s Ghost is on it.
I don’t think Madigan gets to concerned this election cycle and knows what losing a few seats can do for him politically.
This governor will continue vetoing bills and, if the IDP losses the numerical super-majority, it takes that narrative out of the game (only to replaced by another I am sure).
It could also force some more traditional compromising and has the added potential to split some IGOP votes at times.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:48 am
@federalist:
I’m sure you’d agree that we should Amend the Constitution of the United States of America to insert term limits, end gerrymandering, and 10 year term limits on the Supreme Court.
As far as I am concerned Brady is proof positive of the need for term limits.
Comment by Doug Simpson Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:58 am
The most common argument I hear for term limits seems to be “we need to get (insert name of some politician the person doesn’t like but cannot vote for or against due to districting) out of there!”
Doesn’t that ignore that, in their district, voters still want to be represented by that person?
Comment by illini97 Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 11:01 am
Rich, multi-member districts can still be used, but would have to be done in a way that complies with the voting rights act.
https://ballotpedia.org/State_legislative_chambers_that_use_multi-member_districts
Comment by vibes Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 11:07 am
JS Mill & Hamlet - although you pose an interesting theory, I believe it would be incredibly damaging for Rauner to believe his “message of turnaround” is winning through IDP losses in November - which he will claim. He would use those losses by democrats as renewed vigilance toward all out hostage taking in every facet of state government - from the supposed “mandate” by voters.
No, defeat is the only thing in my opinion that will change his tune and begin the long march toward his leaving - turning him into a lame duck 24 months before he can sulk away to one of his vacation homes.
Comment by Captain Illini Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 11:16 am
=== Madigan is a primary reason that I support term limits. He has nearly ruined Illinois and we can’t get rid of him. ===
I’m always amused by these statements. It’s like Madigan is the Dark Lord of the Sith using the power of the dark side to persuade or force Governors (including GOP), GOP Senate, Dem Senates, Dem House members and, most dastardly of all, the voters to do his bidding. Perhaps we should turn to Luke et al to save us.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 11:19 am
Delimma
So an 8 billion dollar debt, crumbling roads, under funded schools, etc., etc. proof that the career politicians were doing so well running Illinois even before Rauner showed up?????
Comment by cow farmer Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 11:24 am
=No, defeat is the only thing in my opinion that will change his tune and begin the long march toward his leaving=
I get what you are saying, but so far that has not worked. He does not even acknowledge his major defeats in the primaries.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 11:25 am
Agreed…however, the general election is where the buck stops. There is no denying after a general smack down, only acknowledging the defeat would he gain any credibility, and maybe…just maybe some semblance of compromise.
Comment by Captain Illini Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 11:29 am
@Captain Illini
Even if Madigan were to win a total of 80 seats in November, Bruce Rauner would blame Donald Trump, double down for 2018, and demand that IL Dems take 100% ownership of any tax increase.
Comment by Hamlet's Ghost Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 11:37 am
Each legislator costs approximately $100, 000 a year with salary and health and pension benefits added in for a part time work. We have the 5th highest paid legislature in the nation. Does anyone think we are getting our money’s worth? Do we really need to triple the number of representatives to govern Illinois?
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 11:38 am
Oh no! He played the Irish card.
Comment by walker Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 11:54 am
- Doug Simpson - Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:58 am:
@federalist:
“I’m sure you’d agree that we should Amend the Constitution of the United States of America to insert term limits, end gerrymandering, and 10 year term limits on the Supreme Court.”
As far as I am concerned Brady is proof positive of the need for term limits.
About Brady, I agree it’s just that Madigan has been there for 45 years and has had immense power. Even those who very much support the Democrats at all costs must see that.
As to the U.S. Constitution being amended. I sure would like to see that just as you outlined it.
However, we can start right here in the good ole state of Illinois.
Comment by Federalist Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 12:28 pm
I agree wholeheartedly with Mike Madigan on the issue of term limits. We already have them. They are called elections. People whining about term limits should focus their energy on something that would really help, which is the way we draw legislative districts.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 1:02 pm
===Do we really need to triple the number of representatives to govern Illinois?===
No, we need to dramatically reduce them. Since the “six tops” have all of the power anyway, eliminate the other 200 odd electeds, and just have a six member unicameral council.
How can they suck 100k each from this state? Its a disgrace.
Comment by atsuishin Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 1:06 pm
===eliminate the other 200 odd electeds, and just have a six member unicameral council.
How can they suck 100k each from this state? Its a disgrace.===
Democracy is the worst, amirite?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 1:17 pm
Three state reps per senate district would be a 50% increase, not a 300% increase. 59 x 3 = 177
At the same time, cut individual state rep salaries by 40% and eliminate legislative pensions.
Comment by Hamlet's Ghost Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 1:23 pm
It is not term limits for the GA that is needed. It is the term for the Leadership positions that need to limited.
Comment by PlayK8 Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 1:40 pm
On the Monetary Award, or MAP, grant for low-income college students- Gov. Rauner has divided Illinois by class. There is no good excuse for not including MAP Grants for the smart kids who want to get a college degree so they can get a good paying job.
The United States should follow Germany’s example by providing education for PK- thru 4 years of college for free.
Comment by Mama Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 2:10 pm
I agree with Madigan on Term Limits. Let the voters determine the term limits.
Comment by Mama Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 2:11 pm
Anyone in favor of term limits need look no further than our neighboring state of Missouri. Ethical issues are constantly in the news and it seems that lobbyists are firmly in control of their legislature.
Comment by South Illinoisian Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 5:11 pm
RNUG I pray that yours is a false choice. I want informed voters not mailers about Mom, Apple pie Plymouth Rock and the Golden rule or attack adds. Something needs to be seriously different in the election process and in those who want the jobs.
Comment by Matt Vernau Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 5:35 pm
Remember, it was Pat Quinn’s cut-back amendment that made it possible for power to be consolidated in the IL House and Senate. Be careful of the law of unintended consequences.
Comment by RNUG Monday, Aug 1, 16 @ 10:59 pm