Retiring state Rep. Joe Lyons (D-Chicago) said a debate on the House floor last month was his “finest hour.” He was probably right.
Lyons successfully fought off five hostile floor amendments to his bill requiring that women seeking abortions be offered a look at an ultrasound test before having an abortion. The proposal has been a matter of much contention for three years, and it came to a head again in late March.
Last year, after two years of failing to pass the House Human Services Committee, the ultrasound bill was assigned to the infinitely more conservative House Agriculture Committee, a move that enraged pro-choice advocates. They vehemently protested the assignment, claiming that “women are not livestock,” and were able to stop the legislation on the House floor with a flurry of parliamentary moves.
Lyons is a member of Democratic leadership who’s leaving the House early next year, so he took sponsorship of the bill this year to help give the effort some muscle. The measure was again assigned to the ag committee, where it was again approved.
This time, pro-choice opponents filed several hostile amendments, one requiring that men with erectile problems view a video of a painful pharmaceutical side effect. Those amendments were assigned to the House Human Services Committee, which approved it last month and sent it to the floor.
When the amendments were called on the floor for a vote, Lyons claimed that House Democratic leadership, which controls the rules committee, had deliberately shepherded the hostile amendments through the process.
“If the rules committee will do this to me as a fellow member of leadership,” Lyons said, “think what they’ll do to you if the will is there to try to hurt one of your bills and sabotage it, sabotage it in the rules committee.”
Lyons was applauded by the House several times during his speeches against the hostile amendments. Rep. Sara Feigenholtz (D-Chicago) said that if Lyons’ bill had been sent to “an appropriate committee and addressed in a dignified manner,” her erectile amendment wouldn’t have been needed. Rep. Jim Watson (R-Jacksonville) then rose to Lyons’ defense.
“There is no more dignified member of this chamber than Joe Lyons,” Watson insisted to roars of approval, “and for somebody to take this opportunity to try to slight him is a little out of hand.”
Feigenholtz’s amendment was soundly defeated 66-36.
Rep. Kelly Cassidy (D-Chicago) rose next to explain her amendment, which changed the bill’s title to the “Ultrasound and Erectile Dysfunction Information Opportunity Act.” After seeing what happened in the previous debate, Cassidy showed respect to Lyons up front but said it was “profoundly insulting” that his bill was assigned to the agriculture committee.
Lyons pointed out that the bill had gone nowhere in the human services committee and claimed the opinion of ag committee members were “just as valid as any other committee.” Cassidy’s amendment received a mere 32 votes. Three more hostile amendments went down in flames after that.
When the Chicago Sun-Times still endorsed candidates, the editors would ask my opinion of legislators. Lyons had a general election in 2010, and the editorial board seemed ready to support his opponent. But I told them that they were looking at Lyons too much from outside appearances as a mere run-of-the-mill Chicago political hack.
Lyons, however, had become one of the most respected members of the House. Legislators of both parties recognize the great reverence he shows the chamber and its members. There is, I told the editorial board, no more beloved figure in the House than Joe Lyons.
Republicans will loudly chant “We want Joe!” if whoever is sitting in the speaker’s chair acts less than evenhanded. They know Lyons always tries to be fair when he’s in that chair, and that’s why so many of his colleagues sided with him during those amendment debates.
The Sun-Times endorsed him.
Lyons’ retirement is going to be a huge loss for the House. Whatever you think of his stance on the issues, I’m here to tell you it’ll be impossible to replace him.
- MrJM - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:22 am:
And those of us who support women’s choice say, “Thank God for that!”
– MrJM
- amalia - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:27 am:
really? how difficult is it to stand on the floor and loudly voice support for where Mike Madigan sends legislation? so all the minions can follow the vote.
but, thanks for calling to attention the list of the 68 and 66 who believe in treating women like animals.
- OldSmoky2 - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:28 am:
I don’t question that he’s highly respected in the House or that he has earned that respect. That said, assigning that bill to the Agriculture Committee just to get it passed was wrong. I’m sure Downstate reps would start screaming, and rightly so, if bills strictly related to agriculture started being assigned to the Human Services Committee.
- Dan Johnson - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:29 am:
You’re right, Rich. Joe Lyons is an honorable man. He will be missed.
- regular democrat - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:32 am:
I happen to live in his district and am very sad to see hism go. He is a gentlemen and will be missed by everyone in the neighborhood. He still works his precinct for go sake How many state rep still do that? he was the top captain in the 45 ward as the state rep! Good article and good luck to him
- wordslinger - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:32 am:
Assigning abortion bills to the Ag Committee is quite insulting. I’m surprised there hasn’t been more of a beef about that.
- Chevy owner/Ford County - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:34 am:
He may be respected in the house, but it is unfortunate that he didn’t share then the same respect for women and their ability to make reproductive choices that he commands on the job…
- Cheryl44 - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:36 am:
Thank heavens he’s out of there.
- PublicServant - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:48 am:
I also am in his legislative district. He personally took students from my children’s school on a tour of the capitol each year they came down to Springfield for a field trip. He’s a good man, and he will definitely be missed.
In the primary to replace him, a shadow republican running as a democrat tried to con people into voting for her. She was soundly defeated by the high-information voters of the district.
- reformer - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:49 am:
If everyone in the legislature practiced the Golden Rule toward the other party the way Joe does, it would be a much more civil place.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:53 am:
Quickly, name a member of the General Assembly that their caucus will defer to them because its the right thing to do, and the opposing party looks to for a fair shake and an honest answer.
When you get past “3″ or so, lemme know ….
Joe Lyons is what is BEST in the General Assembly. Joe understands the politics, without playing politcs with the process or the results. That is huge. Joe’s self-proclaimed “finest hour” is easy to see why Joe takes pride in that moment. Every bit of Joe Lyons, the legislator, the leader, the politician (the best part of what that means) and the legend are all there to be seen.
The legislator - Shepparding the bill, understanding the “process” and talking those amendments off, legislatively, is pure Joe Lyons.
The leader - It’s not everyday that someone in leadership, takes on that leadership for what is RIGHT, especially, if others think political hay is best made whn going against what seems right. Leaders can do that. Joe Lyons in Spades.
The politician - the pure politics of the amendments versus the politician against the amendments usually ends with a compromise for “political expediency”. The politician saw the politcal poison the amends were, versus the pure political good of a clean amendment- free bill and bet on the bill. Good politicians know when to make their moves, Joe proved that.
The legend - How many legislators, on pure reputation, could get the deference Joe got? Stay on one hand, folks, that’ about it. The applause and deference were not on “the merits of the bill”, Joe Lyons was in the trenches, asking others to answer his call to see what was going on, and what he, and the others should do. The fact he did it is not noteworthy, but his legend, seen by both parties, made that a “real” call, and made the result real … only by Joe Lyons.
Legislators are called mushrooms, not only by me, but by a great deal of statehouse types who see legislators shrivel up at the thought of fighting off any challenge they may face. These mushrooms grow under the false light, and fed by the bi-products that the leaderships sprinkle upon them.
Then there are leaders. Fewer and fewer now as in years past, with neither party growing them in abundance. These leaders seek the middle ground. The Hard Right detests, and the Far Left loathes these leaders.
We are taught that when both parties in a dispute are not completely happy, and there is a resolution both can live with, then you have accomplished something. Joe Lyons looks to be fair, yet political, just, but not yielding, and honest, but not naive. That is a legislator I want working in Illinois.
We need more leaders like Joe Lyons, but the horizon shows very few. The “aisle” use to be about 4 feet wide, but now it seems like its miles apart instead of those four short feet. I just want a fair shake, and the chips will fall as they may. Joe gave my party that, and put all those, on both sides, on notice often.
Good luck, Joe. I hope my party can learn something in candidates and legislators by your career in Springfield.
- Anonymous - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:55 am:
It’s a shame that waging a war on women was considered his finest hour.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 11:59 am:
===That said, assigning that bill to the Agriculture Committee just to get it passed was wrong.===
The same Democratic-controlled Rules Committee which assigned the hostile amendments to Human Services assigned the underlying bill to Ag.
- OneMan - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 12:01 pm:
Rich, shhhhh… You are upsetting their narrative…
- Cal Skinner - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 12:32 pm:
I wonder if current members would welcome the pre-Madigan rules of allowing all floor amendments to be considered and voted upon.
- reformer - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 12:32 pm:
Oswego Willie
What an eloquent tribute! Well said.
- Pot calling kettle - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 12:32 pm:
==That said, assigning that bill to the Agriculture Committee just to get it passed was wrong. I’m sure Downstate reps would start screaming, and rightly so, if bills strictly related to agriculture started being assigned to the Human Services Committee.==
It is common practice for certain bills to be assigned to an unrelated committee to allow them to the floor for a vote. The other technique is to substitute committee members to provide a majority.
And yes, they do complain, but perhaps not as strenuously as might be expected.
The shuffling of committees and members is not new and it is not uncommon. From the broader perspective, it provides legislators with the opportunity to have their bills put up for a full vote in the chamber.
- Hon. John Fritchey - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 12:34 pm:
Joe and I were both sworn in early in late 1996, were seatmates, and became good friends. Even though our politics, and styles, could not be more different, Joe and I forged a strong relationship based on mutual respect.
Back then, it wasn’t uncommon to have stretches of a couple straight weeks of 12 hour session days. During those times, we’d talk about politics, family and life in general. We listened and counseled each other through ups and downs, Joe always the good friend.
In the 14 years we served together, I don’t think I saw Joe lose his cool more than 2 or 3 times. But when he did, you didn’t want to be on the other side of it
Those memories of talking with Joe, eating green noodles that we’d pick up from Saputo’s are some of the best ones I have from my legislative career.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 12:43 pm:
- reformer -
Thanks. When you have people like Joe to comment on, its easy to put to words how special they are.
Commissioner Fritchey,
Nice post. That chamber you left is far different then when you first went through the big doors, huh? Continued success to you on the Board.
Cal,
How great of a debate would THAT be on a rules change, to allow that amendment change.
I doubt MJM would allow the change, or a vote on that change, since more likely than not it would be “welcomed” by the Mushrooms, which I know is your point!
- Ace Matson - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 12:49 pm:
Speaking of retired house members, did you see the Daily Herald front page story today about how former Rep. Beth Coulson was shipwrecked off Borneo last week, and was rescued by the Malaysian navy? I am not making this up . Wow!
- Wensicia - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 12:51 pm:
I can’t understand how Lyons can be so affronted at the hostile amendments put forward without understanding how hostile his ultrasound bill appears to most women.
- truffler - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 1:05 pm:
I don’t care how respected Joe Lyons is, he may be a great guy but a system that sneaks this legislation thru the ag committee is not something Joe can be proud of.
If every committee is equally valid to debate any proposed legislation, then what’s the point of having specialized committees at all, let’s just do everything on the floor.
There is nothing statesmanlike about a cowardly and under-handed process, and that’s what this ag committee subterfuge is. Joe would have my respect if he played this one straight.
- GetReal - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 1:08 pm:
“I can’t understand how Lyons can be so affronted at the hostile amendments put forward without understanding how hostile his ultrasound bill appears to most women.”
- Yeah, offering (NOT requiring) an ultasound test is SO hostile. What woman should be burdened with a reply of “No, thanks.” Will this War on Women ever end?!
- collar observer - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 1:09 pm:
Of course it will be impossible - the system is all about cultivating those mushrooms - and clearly Lyons wasn’t one of them. Thank you for sharing these fine tributes to a leader.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 1:13 pm:
truffler, again, the same House Rules Committee that assigned the hostile amendments to Human Services also assigned Lyons’ underlying bill to Ag.
- Capt. - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 1:32 pm:
With out a doubt Joe Lyons is one of the finest men I have ever met inside or outside the legislative arena. I would hope others in the legislature would take note of his integrity and character.
- Anonymous - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 1:33 pm:
No one in government is irreplaceable. That’s a bit of hyperbole I did not expect to read here.
- WAK - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 1:37 pm:
I have not been around long enough to really comment on Lyons in the historical sense but last year he hijacked a bill(the cottage food bill) I was working on in Senate at the request of the Cook County Public Health Department in order to kill it before we could get our intended sponsor to pre-file. Then he would not even give me the time of day to talk about it. In the end we got a shell and passed the bill but to me that did not speak well to his civility and even-handedness.
- 47th Ward - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 1:41 pm:
Good column Rich. I’m a big fan of Joe’s, but one thing I’ve learned in life is that we’re all replaceable.
In politics, you’re often defined by your enemies. Joe represents a pretty strong Catholic area of the city, and he chose to end his career making enemies in the pro-choice faction of his party.
I’m not criticizing him for it, just pointing it out. This will make him a hero to some, which is why it’s always important to pick your enemies carefully.
Some commenters here are proving the point all too well today. Joe is a good guy, and a very good legislator. Attacking him and defining his whole career on one bill is going to make him a martyr to those who support this (bad) legislation.
So before you attack him for this bill, consider that all you’re doing is helping him earn the legacy he wants, which is a huge favor. Find fault with the bill instead, and leave the sponsor out of it.
- mark walker - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 2:17 pm:
Joe is a good man, and has been an exemplary legislator for many years. He chose to make his final stand with this bill, reflecting his deeply-held religious views.
If Joe weren’t so respected, liked, and on the way out, this lousy bill might have failed.
- Freeman - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 2:47 pm:
Interesting that so many comments focus only on 1 bill from a 16 year body of respectable legislation and hard work.
Excellent comments by Oswego Willy and 47th Ward (as usual).
Good luck, Rep. Lyons.
- Pot calling kettle - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 2:48 pm:
==If Joe weren’t so respected, liked, and on the way out, this lousy bill might have failed.==
Um…it did not pass. (It just didn’t get amended.) It is back in Rules.
- Carlos S. - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 2:57 pm:
Yeah, thank you Joe for the 67% tax increase last year and enjoy your tax-free pension. You are a saint.
- hisgirlfriday - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 3:41 pm:
“truffler, again, the same House Rules Committee that assigned the hostile amendments to Human Services also assigned Lyons’ underlying bill to Ag.”
@Rich:
So did Joe Lyons also call out House leadership on what a phony stunt it was to send the ultrasound bill to the ag committee in the first place just to help Southern Illinois Dems vote for a pro-life bill? I’m guessing not.
I actually like Joe Lyons, if only because his intonation of “have all voted who wish?” as chair is really the best.
But based on what you’ve described in your column on this particular debate, it really sounds like the loss of Joe Lyons is more of a loss for Republicans and the Illinois pro-choice movement rather than the people of Illinois as a whole. Lyons may be a beloved person, but his legislation in this case is not beloved by the majority of the people of the state of Illinois so why should he be treated differently than any other legislator when he brings bad legislation to the floor of the House? Watson’s comment as quoted in your piece just sounds like grandstanding by a fellow pro-lifer who knows he can’t win the legislation on the merits so he tries to turn the existence of the poison amendments as an attack on “one of the guys” by these women who don’t get how totally awesome Joe is.
If women aren’t supposed to take personally that bills regulating our health get debated in the ag committee, I don’t know why Joe or friends of Joe would take personally that a hostile amendment was proposed for legislation he introduced.
- hisgirlfriday - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 3:44 pm:
errr that was supposed to be Illinois pro-LIFE movement. obviously.
- Robert - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 3:45 pm:
I respect your judgment of Joe Moreno being a great guy and a well-respected legislator. I cannot dispute this.
But I do find it strange that his “finest hour” was spent advocating for a bill that he knew wasn’t going to pass and fighting back cynical amendments that the proposers weren’t serious about. “His finest hour” was spent in the heat of inside-Springfield gamesmanship?
- Robert - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 3:53 pm:
oops -Lyons.
- wordslinger - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 4:14 pm:
–It is common practice for certain bills to be assigned to an unrelated committee to allow them to the floor for a vote. The other technique is to substitute committee members to provide a majority.–
Yeah, everyone gets it, that’s not the point.
This one fascinates me. I can’t believe that “Drudge” didn’t scream a headline that “Obama’s Illinois Dems Put Abortion in the Barn.”
- DuPage Dave - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 7:50 pm:
I will never know the man and will accept that he’s a nice guy. But he is yet another man attempting to write legislation limiting the freedom of women.
- mark walker - Monday, Apr 16, 12 @ 8:15 pm:
@Pot: Thanks, my mistake.