Senate civil unions videos
Wednesday, Dec 1, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller * We’ll have more in a few. The governor will hold an avail at about 2:15, so check back. Sen. Koehler, the Senate sponsor… * 2:05 pm - Sen. Meeks after the vote…
|
Meeks says he’s still a “No” on civil unions. PASSED 32-24-1
Wednesday, Dec 1, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller * 11:57 am - Sen. James Meeks said this morning that he intends to vote “No” on the civil unions bill when it comes up for a vote today. This isn’t much of a surprise since Meeks’ record hasn’t exactly been pro-gay. But there had been some speculation that he might change his mind now that he’s running for mayor of Chicago. But Meeks said if he voted for the bill he’d be deemed a flip-flopper who was pandering for votes ahead of the mayoral election and he planned to stick to his principles. Of course, the other side is it could be darned tough getting elected in Chicago with that “No” vote on his record. * You can use this post to discuss the Senate’s civil unions debate, which ought to be soon. Watch or listen here. • UPDATE: GOP Sen Dan Rutherford just announced that he would vote for the bill. Rutherford was just elected state treasurer. • UPDATE: The bill passed 32-24 with Sen Ira Silverstein voting Present. • UPDATE: Sen. Rutherford was the only Republican to vote for the bill.
|
Burris: “There’s no one better qualified than me”
Wednesday, Dec 1, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller
Oy.
So, to sum up, the implied allegation here is that Meeks and Halpin hired a homeless sex offender to gather petitions, who then allegedly forged a notary’s seal on the petitions he gathered for Halpin, but not for Meeks. However, somebody else allegedly forged that same notary’s seal on some other Meeks petitions. If that’s true, then Meeks’ denials aren’t looking so great right now…
This may be the fault of the person who was hired by the campaign who also hired Hardy. It would be helpful if we knew who that was. * As I’ve said before, Rahm Emanuel may or may not have a solid residency case, but this might all come down to the judge he draws…
* Related…
|
A mixed bag for lame duck session
Wednesday, Dec 1, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller * Those who worry about lame ducks getting too far out of control should look at the medical marijuana bill, which came up way short yesterday afternoon in the House. The bill needed 60 votes, but when all was said and done it got 53…
All of you know where I stand on this issue. I’m not sure this is the greatest bill in the world, however. Three plants per month seems a bit much. Not that I would know anything about that, of course. * Here’s the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Lou Lang… * And then there was the death penalty abolition bill, which wasn’t called for a floor vote yesterday for lack of support…
The House is losing some members today, so it’s fate, as they say, remains uncertain. * Some other big stuff did pass, however. The Tenaska folks won the House round, but they have a tough fight ahead in the Senate…
Subscribers know the rest of that interesting little story. * And some sweeping changes were approved for police and firefighter pension funds in the House yesterday without much debate…
* The bill received a whopping 95 votes, even though it was hotly opposed by Mayor Daley, who sent his chief legislative liaison to town yesterday…
* Roundup…
|
Protected: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY… Senate schedule and redistricting reform
Wednesday, Dec 1, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller
|
Calm down, please
Wednesday, Dec 1, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller * I covered the years-long debate here over whether to include sexual orientation in the state’s human rights code. There were plenty of predictions of doom and gloom back then if the bill passed. It did pass, and I cannot remember a single instance where this law has created undue controversy or hardship. People generally expect the worst when big changes happen, but that rarely ever turns out to be the case. So, let’s all try to keep a cool head as the civil unions bill moves through the Senate today. I banned one of the bill’s opponents yesterday for some very weird, over the top comments. Some of the proponents got a bit too hot-headed as well, but I was too busy covering the event to monitor comments as closely as I should have. Let’s try not to let that happen again today, please. We can have a vigorous debate without resorting to needless insults, or breathless remarks or drive-by bumper-sticker slogans. Thanks. * This should be a non-issue for two reasons…
First, every lame duck member who voted for civil unions was either elected two years ago or (in one case) constitutionally appointed to the seat. Those legislators all serve until January under our Constitution. This is a legitimate vote. Second, the Catholic Conference of Illinois is actively supporting SB 3539 during the veto session. That bill would abolish the death penalty. If it’s OK for lame ducks to abolish the death penalty, why isn’t it acceptable for those same legislators to establish civil unions? I don’t get it. * I kinda get this, but not quite…
Churches don’t issue marriage licenses, government does. So, why couldn’t two seniors decide to join in civil union and then ask their church to sanctify it with a wedding ceremony? The church wouldn’t have to do it, of course, but they could. * It might be better if Gov. Pat Quinn would leave his religion out of this debate…
I completely concur that people of faith can disagree on this, but I’m not a Roman Catholic. If I was a Catholic, like Quinn, I’m not sure I could say that. * Now, on to some videos. First up, the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Greg Harris… * Rep. Ron Stephens started out well enough, then veered off the track… * Gov. Pat Quinn talks to reporters… * Our commenters did a good job last night live-blogging the civil unions debate. But Illinois Review did a remarkably even-handed and thorough job, so if you missed the debate, then you should click here and read through their notes. The bill text is here. The roll call is here. * Roundup…
|
Question of the day
Wednesday, Dec 1, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller * From a press release…
So far, the event’s website lists just two corporate sponsors, the Merchandise Mart and Chicago-Copywriter.com. * The Question: Who else should sponsor the governor’s inauguration? Snark is obviously encouraged.
|
Protected: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Wednesday, Dec 1, 2010 - Posted by Rich Miller
|
« NEWER POSTS | PREVIOUS POSTS » |