29 Comments - Central IL - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 10:55 am: Wouldn’t waiting for a few more months just be delaying the inevitable cuts, if not making them worse? - Secret Square - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:03 am: And what happens if the vulnerable Dems all get strong primary challengers running on an anti-tax platform anyway? I guess they then will have to vote for even more horrific budget cuts. - Master Plan - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:03 am: Do they have 3/5 votes to over ride the vetos? - Anonymous - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:05 am: The word was critic, not expert. And to be fair, the comparison has caught on. - Linus - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:06 am: “.. legislators will know by then who their primary and (most) general election opponents are.” And then they’ll have brand-new old excuses to avoid voting for a tax increase: the specific names of actual opponents, instead of just the general idea of facing opponents. Doesn’t matter that the state’s collapsing around them and brutalizing vulnerable Illinoisans. Doesn’t matter that, privately, the vast majority of legislators really do acknowledge that without a tax hike there’s absolutely no way out of our budget mess. Gutless. Except for a wonderful few - just gutless. - John Bambenek - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:07 am: Itd would also entail making tax increase larger. You’d have to have a bigger tax increase to deal with only a partial year of collecting it. You could bond the difference, but that blows a hole in next years budget (albeit a smaller one). The pension note does blow another 2.5B hole in next years budget already. And that assumes they actually do balance budget. If they do not, I’m in court. - shore - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:08 am: It’s a great op-ed piece and pretty much demonstrates why the democrats deserve a major beating next year. Not once in that piece is there anything about policies that would be good for people or the state. Pure politics. The democrats have been successful politically but I’ve seen nothing to say that their policies have worked. For all the love Lisa madigan got for not running for governor, it would have been really nice if perhaps one writer in chicago, I don’t know made the point that leaders take on tough challenges and to ask her why she was walking away. I don’t know springfield, but I’m guessing AG is not a 9-5 job. It sounds like a family spending more time looking out for its political interests than the peoples interests. - Bill - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:09 am: Quinn has, through his inaction and constant flip flopping and final submission, officially declared himself a eunuch. From now on he will be completely impotent without any chance of ever influencing the legislature about anything. They will now have their way with him for the rest of his hopefully short tenure as givernor. - wordslinger - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:12 am: I agree completely that Madigan’s endgame was always to protect his majority. He’s a pretty conservative guy; although he personally voted for it, I’m sure he could probably live without a tax increase. I’ll disagree that his actions hurt Lisa’s chances that much. Maybe among the political insiders, but not among the populace as a whole, where she would still be very popular and her father is relatively unknown. The primary would have been tougher, but doable. - Secret Square - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:18 am: I know some people claim Illinois’ tax structure is driving businesses away already and increasing unemployment, and they use this as an argument against any kind of tax increase. But, might that be just as much or more due to uncertainty about what the tax structure will be in the future, rather than the actual present tax burden that exists now? I don’t recall where I read this, but I seem to remember (back during Blago’s GRT fiasco) having read an article about businesses that chose to locate in Wisconsin rather than Illinois, even though Wisconsin taxes are higher, because in Wisconsin, they at least knew what kind of taxes to expect for the forseeable future. So maybe the real problem isn’t so much the amount of tax as it is the STABILITY of the tax structure… if a tax hike of sufficient size to meet the state’s essential needs (of course, we have to decide what those needs are) for the next 10 to 20 years were passed, and then left in place for that amount of time, it might not be as big a liability as we think. - Cassandra - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:19 am: Given the effects of rampant gerrymandering, the enormous advantage of incumbency, and the difficulty of organizing and funding a political race to challenge an incumbent state senator or rep, I find it difficult to believe that a large number of current Democratic legislators are worried about a strong challenge leading to losing their seat. The only office I see as truly vulnerable is the governor’s office. Most people don’t know who their senator or rep is but they all know who the guv is. Now that Quinn has a serious chance at continuing in the governorship, I suspect he may be less obsessed with the notion of an unpopular and regressive personal income tax increase in the middle of a recession. If there is a reprieve, we middle class folks can only be grateful, whatever the reason, since the burden would fall most heavily on us. Five months would give us a chance to see if Quinn has the gumption to make some needed cuts. Anybody can govern with unlimited, poorly monitored barrels of cash. Five months would also give the guv and his staff time to look at other, less regressive ways of raising revenue. And many (but not all by any means) believe the economy will begin to recover in 2010, so should a personal tax increase still even be necessary, it will be less burdensome if not imposed until 2010. - Ghost - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:40 am: TII and TIMM This is Mike Madigan - Irish - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:53 am: So maybe it is time to send Mike Madigan a little message. He can’t keep the State hostage to protect his little fiefdom. Apparently his statements in the past about worrying about the little guy was just you know what. He does not care about who is being adversely affected by his games. I personally am going to vote against any Dem on the ticket next election just to send a message that I know what he is doing and I for one am not going to enable his little power ego. I would suggest others do the same. Maybe the opposition won’t be the best candidate but at least they won’t be controlled by Mike. Currently we have a bunch of non thinking sheep just waiting for their ruler to tell them what to think. Any candidate is better than that. - Ill_will - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 11:55 am: Just to brighten Monday take a look at the July 11th-17th issue of the Economist. It has a briefing (as they call it) public employees’ pension plans. Not just in the UK but here in the States. No easy answers anywhere. Let me close with one sentence from the article(page 80). “The absence of a painless solution may simply encourage governments to push the bill further into the never-never.” - Anon-13 - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 12:00 pm: Does anyone actually have a list of the projects included in the Capital Bill? Rumor has it that one exists, but that its under MM’s pillow. - Rich Miller - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 12:18 pm: Anon-13, the projects list is in the bill. - VanillaMan - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 12:20 pm: Of course I agree with this diagnosis. I don’t wear a tin-foil hat on this discussion and by observing what has happened over the past six years, I reached a similar conclusion regarding budget overtime and the reasons for it. If you take a look at the folks who have Michael Madigan as a leader, you could see people who would like to emulate his political success. The Speaker has been in office a very long time and he is considered by many as a man to listen to regarding politics. His history of successes has given his plans a level of credibility few in Illinois can match. While there are those who believe that Michael Madigan is some kind of Svengoolie who has an abnormal ability to sway his Party, it is the recognition of his political successes that sway his Party - not a conspiracy. Mr. Madigan’s followers are not hypnotized, they are fully cognisant of his ability to survive, prosper and grow in power, and they are listening to him and following him out of respect for his Tortoise-survival skills. If Mr. Madigan’s Glee Club could be faulted, it is it’s willingness to compromise Illinois in the short term, in order to benefit personally in the long term. Instead of watching a man who brings bold passion to the Speakership, they are lauding a man whose calculations prevent boldness and rewards caution. Consequentially, a man with bold passions and leadership abilities, such as Rod Blagojevich, don’t have the patience or understanding necessary to remain as a Madigan follower. These kinds of legislators are not found in the House - they move on to bigger prizes. What remains in the General Assembly is a group of legislators unwilling to take risks to their own political careers, willing to hide behind Mr. Madigan when votes are counted, and disinterested in doing their jobs, causing paralysis and failed government. While there are positive attributes to having a Mr. Madigan as a Speaker, in times like these, the negatives far outweigh the positives. For those who believe in government solutions, there has to be a recognition of how this lack of dynamism impedes effective actions. Stagnation may not harm a society at it’s apex, but it is not able to handle issues when a society is experiencing change and crisis. Mr. Madigan’s cautious style of leadership will not provide the kind of direction Illinois needs. In it’s fear of making a wrong decision, and protecting it’s political careers, it is allowing Illinois to collapse and lose it’s position as a viable place to conduct business, raise families, and be successful. - Capitol View - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 12:55 pm: Human services providers may be able to cope with the 90% budget for the rest of the current calendar year — if the past due reimbursements are paid. But I worry that the post-filing period legislature will have to pay off this new debt of $3.3 billion first, and then the old bills, and then we can talk about rate restructuring — until we hear from my friends in education who will want to grab their usual 33 - 50% of all new revenues. State government will save some money from those providers who have already shut their doors. The waiting lists will grow, but hey - it’s all about politics, not doing what state government was created and is structured to address. I’m going to have trouble looking some of my long term legislative friends in the eye tomorrow. - Will County Woman - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 1:39 pm: wordslinger, i disgaree with you. i suspect that while lisa was taking her sweet ole time, she was conducting polling and found that the madigan name wasn’t getting much traction with voters. I think the budget stalemate made it difficult for her, and her father knew it. i suspect that quinn was polling better than her, which is why she did not want to take a chance against him. when she was on chicago tonight she said something to the effect that it was easier for her to run against blago becasue his name was synonomous with corruption, but that was not the case with quinn. as the chicago electronic media kept pointing out over the last 3 months: mike madigan is trying to make quinn look bad so his daughter can win. and…the media kept harping on the fact that blago and jones were gone and the one constant has been mike madigan. hence yet another budget crisis and stalemate. no surprise then why she was likely polling badly against quinn. mike madigan is in his early 70s and people keep saying when he steps down and retires then lisa should have no problems. step down and retire???? come on people, when he goes we all know he’s not out going out like that. - Will County Woman - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 1:41 pm: p.s. i bet lisa wished she had taken her husband’s last name after all. if she were simply lisa byrne or byrnes she would be running for governor today. - lake county democrat - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 1:51 pm: Ah Rich, replacing name calling with reasoned argument as usual. Still waiting for those citations to where Lisa Madigan stood up to her father on the reform commission’s attempt to empower her and state’s attorneys with the same tools Patrick Fitzgerald’s office has. Or merely sought an expansion of her “public trust unit” which according to the Tribune has one attorney and two investigators. I’m sure when I next get to UIC’s library and can do a nexis search I’ll find them. - Anonymous45 - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 1:53 pm: Will Co Woman: Please check your “facts” before posting…for the record, MJM is 67 years old… - Rich Miller - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 2:20 pm: lcd, your comment made no sense. - Yellow Dog - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 3:45 pm: I don’t know if there’s a full moon tonight, but I find myself agreeing with Vanillaman! He calls Madigan “cautious,” I would call his strategy “conservative.” Some sports analyst would probably call it “playing it safe.” Madigan has remained Speaker for so long thanks to two reasons: 1) He follows a few simple rules, and, 2) He follows them with tremendous - depending on your viewpoint, godlike or slavish - discipline. I haven’t always agreed with Madigan. I thought, for example, he should have thrown the dice in 2002 and backed Paul Vallas. I thought, starting in 2002, the House Democrats should have been more aggressive in pursuing suburban legislative seats and spent far fewer resources defending downstate seats. But then again, I’m not Speaker and neither is Vanillaman. - lake county democrat - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 4:46 pm: Rich: First, let me note that what you write here comes close to the very “conspiracy theory” I presented last week. You write “Instead of helping her, Speaker Madigan further poisoned an already toxic political atmosphere - making a gubernatorial campaign incredibly difficult for Lisa in the process. After this horrific session, the father would’ve been a constant and deadly anvil around his progeny’s political neck.” How is that different than my speculation that it wasn’t “the kids” that kept Lisa from running but that she might be getting feedback that the “Madigan cabal” factor might not be playing well in Peoria and that Mike M. might not welcome the extra attention at the moment? Sounds like the only thing you disagree with is the last part and I’m not so sure about that. Given that it’s been widely reported that Lisa Madigan wouldn’t even consider the senate unless Obama/Rahm cleared the field for her, this hardly seems implausable, let alone “tinfoil hat” territory. But whatever. My post above relates to your contention last week about the independence of Lisa Madigan to Mike Madigan. A true anti-corruption A.G. would 1) push for more than 1 attorney in the anti-corruption unit (especially in this climate) and 2) would have spoken-up when the clear leader of the legislative branch killed the reform commission proposal closest to her territory: the empowerment of state government attorneys. (The attempt to get the Supreme Court to dump Blago with a frivolous legal argument was another example of her doing his bidding). But note, I’ve also written that that Lisa M. is no MORE beholden to Mike M. than any other pol who owed as many political favors. So who is conveniently forgeting and/or ducking here? You highlighted mine as your “favorite” commenter conspiracy theory — citing my statement that Lisa M’s “I’m doing it for the kids” was as suspicious as Sarah Palin’s (a statement I made before you wrote, and I acknowledged, that you had off the record conversations with her staff about, and which subsequently I wrote I believed this played a part in her turning down the invitation to run for senate). I present evidence, you call names. And when I said the last time I was called the same name it was when I presented something far more cynical which was later proven correct (giving you the reference — you could have also read Philip Gouravitch’s article in the New Yorker and subsequent prize winning book), you just mocked. - lake county democrat - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 4:56 pm: (And I leave it at that because I’m presuming the “b*** me” comment was meant for the person above me in a thread who questioned your integrity.) - state employee - Monday, Jul 13, 09 @ 8:08 pm: Great column, Like I thought, money-and-power-hungry thug. Didn’t know it until 5/31 this year. I’ll never vote for a Republican or Democrat ever again, only 3rd party and independents. I have no respect for and now despise the two major parties. Good word for them “partiers” in the “parties.” Certainly not leaders nor public servants. - tunes - Tuesday, Jul 14, 09 @ 7:31 am: Very well said, state employee. I too am so disgruntled with our so called ‘political leaders’ that I too will not vote for ANY incumbents. All are a bunch of chickens who are concerned with nothing but the next election cycle! - wordslinger - Tuesday, Jul 14, 09 @ 9:37 am: Will County Woman (sounds like a Neil Diamond song), you may be right, but I doubt it very much. Lisa would have smoked anyone she ran against. The race against Quinn would have been messier than the Senate, but she’s still a winner, I think. She is just an excellent candidate for this state. Take a poll around your neighborhood, and I bet that half the folks have never heard of MJM. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.