83 Comments - Face - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:04 am: “Participate or go home” Really? All Madigan wants out of this is bad votes by Republicans. Period. - PublicServant - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:06 am: If Republicans believe in the positions they hold, they ought to have no problem voting on them. - Downstation - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:07 am: So addressing Chicago’s high murder rate by banning weapons that barely contribute to it, but look “scary” is not cartoonish? A legitimate solution to addressing the murders in Chicago is to ban handguns …oh wait… - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:08 am: Yesterday’s amendments were just opportunities for future mailings to state that the GOP voted against saving children. They weren’t biting. Be at the Capitol this afternoon to find out what Illinoisians really think about CCW or gun bans. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:11 am: ===Yesterday’s amendments were just opportunities for future mailings to state that the GOP voted against saving children.=== That’s part of it, sure, but that’s always been part of the legislative process. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:13 am: ===Be at the Capitol this afternoon to find out what Illinoisians really think about CCW or gun bans.=== I’m sure y’all are gonna flood the Statehouse today. But don’t be under any illusions that your views are representative of what Illinoisans really think. When was the last time a pro-gun candidate won a governor’s race? Jim Thompson. Long time ago, man. - The Bopper - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:18 am: You can get 5,000 gun nuts to protest at the capitol and you can get 35,000 people protesting cuts to pensions, guess which group our friendly republicans tell us which ones they’ll listen too. They wonder why they lose almost EVERY election. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:18 am: Does the ISRA need a “pro-gun” governor to move their agenda forward? Is that why they are there today? - Downstater - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:21 am: ===Yesterday’s amendments were just opportunities for future mailings to state that the GOP voted against saving children.=== ==That’s part of it, sure, but that’s always been part of the legislative process. == Democrats own this and it is theirs to fix, now. - Skeeter - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:24 am: Every time I think of voting for the GOP, they do something like this. If you believe in a position, have the guts to vote that position. Way too often, people are worried about the next election. They don’t seem to get that they were elected to their current position to do something. When are they going to take action? If all they do is worry about how their vote will impact another term, what are they doing serving their current term? They need to start acting like adults. You have a job to do. Do it. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:25 am: ===Democrats own this and it is theirs to fix, now.=== Then why even have the Republicans show up? They are half of 1/3 of Illinois Government. The HGOP has a responsibility to be involved, and participate in the process, especially since these are REAL amendments proposed in GAs past. Shame on all the HGOP for “thinking” this is a sound strategy. This will come back and backfire, and probably far worse than they think it will. - walkinfool - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:26 am: “participate or go home” Amen! Votes for positions that many GOPers could take in this fashion, would make them look good in their own districts, regardless of what eventually happens with the formal bill. They are walking away from “good” votes for themselves, not bad ones. This format, (admittedly theatrical), is a gift from Madigan to both sides of the aisle, to soften the ground for future compromises. I understand looking at any Madigan gift very carefully, but he sometimes will try to help the whole House, after he is sure the Dems are at least covered. - USMC Janitor - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:28 am: Rich, you seem to confuse something here… No one is saying all of Illinois is “pro-gun”… But its funny even in the house last session we had a majority of votes for CCW, just not a SUPER majority to override home rule. To act like we dont have significant votes to MAINTAIN existing laws is simply anti-gun bias on your part. And shilling for the all these amendments by saying “that is how laws are made” while barely acknowledging the committee process was skipped and that the amendments are being placed into a complete shell bill is again just showing bias… I get it. you think guns are bad, and those for gun rights are nuts. OK. But to act as if we dont have lots of votes on both sides (R and D) is just ignoring facts. - Mason born - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:32 am: I really would like to hear the excuse for not voting at all. Is it a charade? Sure however these amendments were pretty clearly against what it is you claim to support therefore seems to me this was a golden opportunity to make your own mailers. Seems it is time to tell the GOP leadership to sit down and Shut it. -When was the last time a pro-gun candidate won a governor’s race?- When was the last time a democrat Governor candidate wasn’t entrenched with the Chicago Political Machine?? You Kiss the Chicago ring or you don’t run. How well has that worked for us??? Well at least we don’t have to pay Ryan’s or Blago’s pension. - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:34 am: Acevedo admitted yesterday that he has been trying to pass these gun grabber bills for 13 years now. This will be year 14, and he can ask for a record of votes if his bill makes it to the floor. - USMC Janitor - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:34 am: ====I really would like to hear the excuse for not voting at all=== ahh so Dems never do this right? or the ever present “present” vote in Illinois isnt just a non-vote that Dems never use right? take off the partisan blinders. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:37 am: ===the ever present “present” vote in Illinois isnt just a non-vote that Dems never use right? === A “Present” vote is still participation. On a bill, it’s equivalent to a “No” vote. Not voting at all is what’s at issue here. Occasionally, a member or two will “take a walk” on a bill to keep it from passing. That’s also actually part of the process. But a caucus refusal is a far different animal. So, get over yourself. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:40 am: Next thing you know, the Caucus will ask “Two-Putt” to write ANOTHER letter on his own … - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:41 am: Some of you folks had better chill the heck out and start paying attention to the warning in red above the comment box. Your comments aren’t ever gonna get through. And you’ll just be banned for life. Enough, already. Elevate yourselves or get out. - Leave a Light on George - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:42 am: =When was the last time a pro-gun candidate won a governor’s race?= Blago was pro gun. He told me (and others) so himself at the opening of the Shooting Complex in Sparta. - phocion - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:43 am: Er, Rich, didn’t you defend the Democrats in the Wisconsin legislature who left the state rather than vote on anti-labor legislation there? - USMC Janitor - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:43 am: [Comment deleted and commenter banned for life.] - Mason born - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:47 am: USMC Trust me i am no Democrat Partisan. I personally am a libertarian however when you want my vote and you run on CCW and Gun rights when a piece of legislation like this that is 180 degrees opposite of what you say you stand for i want to know why you decided not to vote at all. You are my voice and the voice of the rest of my district. Present doesn’t cut it!!!! You want to vote present then i can find someone else to take your place. Sorry but my Rep was pretty clear about where he “stood” i expect him to stand there. And i am sorry but i don’t care if it is the never ending political game that has happened forever here you represent me not your caucus!! - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:48 am: phocion, I’m not sure that I ever explicitly defended them, but their refusal served a parliamentary purpose - preventing any legislative action. That’s different than what the HGOPs did yesterday, which is just to sit in their chairs and refuse to participate for no real end except that they didn’t want to get caught on what could’ve been a bad vote. Also, notice that I wrote “participate or go home” at the end. Whatever the case, mailers can be devised just as easily to point out their refusal to participate. They’re not gonna get out of this either way. Might as well vote. - Skeeter - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:48 am: Pho, I can’t speak for Rich on that one, but I defended the Wisconsin Dems. The difference there was that by leaving they denied the other side a quorum. It was a tactical move to avoid having the bill passed. Here, there is no question of a quorum. It is simply a refusal to go on the record. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:49 am: Also, to be clear, I didn’t particularly care for Acevedo’s amendment. Way over the top. But this was a legit amendment from a legislator who has been working on this issue for years. It deserved a vote. - Mason born - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:49 am: Okay so i won’t expect a response from the janitor. Guess i should have waited a minute to see what Rich would do first. Oh and BTW when i am at the capital today i will be asking why my rep didn’t vote at all. - charles in charge - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:51 am: Anyone care to explain why Leader Currie withdrew the grandfathering amendment (#7)? When she introduced it, she said the reason for the amendment was to address a constitutional concern about taking people’s property without compensation. What suddenly happened to eliminate that concern? So now HB 1156, as amended, really would confiscate guns from people if it were to become law (the ultimate fear of gun rights advocates), and it only has Democratic fingerprints on it. Not that they ever had the votes to pass an AWB anyway, but the bill as amended only serves the narrative that it is an attempt to “take your guns away.” See how much support that gets. Sorry Rich, but this was a fake political exercise just like the pension votes last week. And the HGOP was right to stay out of it. - Mason born - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:52 am: Rich has a point i may think Acevedo is an idgit however his proposal does deserve a vote. In my opinion voted down but a vote. Had Repubs voted against it and it was defeated could we perhaps move forward and put this in the rearview we will never know because they decided to listen to the leadership and sit on their hands. - RonOglesby - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:54 am: Its interesting to read this site. Its also interesting to see Rich and commentoers defend pretty much anything the Anti-gun folks do as “this is how its done”. I read this and see the “gun saftey” people simply making this a show so they can catch the progun folks in a “See You voted to allow guns NEAR a school!!!” There is a negotiated house bill for CCW… it has sheriffs assoc. and chiefs association support. It has be negotiated by phelps and others for years. Yet we have to go through this just for show reasons. Its sad. Participate or go home? funny. The Dems own this state and are runnign this crap as if this is “always how its done” Defending it cheapens you and cheapens other positions you may take. its Rich’s show and he can ban who he likes (obviously) but its funny how much slack he gives the anti-gun folks here in the comments. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:58 am: ===but its funny how much slack he gives=== When you use swear words, your comment is deleted. When you completely fail to understand the point, your comment is rebutted - sometimes aggressively so. That shouldn’t be too hard to understand. I’m sick of the over the top chest-thumping nonsense from youse guys and your ironic whine that I’m too rough on your poor little souls. So, either y’all tone it down or go somewhere else. This is my blog, not yours. It ain’t a newspaper site where you can get away with saying pretty much anything. Deal with it or leave. Your choice. I won’t put up with it any longer. Heads are gonna roll, man. Forewarned is forearmed, so to speak. - Madison County Watcher - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 10:59 am: === A “Present” vote is still participation. On a bill, it’s equivalent to a “No” vote. Not voting at all is what’s at issue here. Occasionally, a member or two will “take a walk” on a bill to keep it from passing. That’s also actually part of the process. But a caucus refusal is a far different animal. === Agreed. At some point, they deserve part of the responsibility that the numbers are so lopsided and have to acknowledge and move past it…or look like fools at their own peril. They make Madigan make them look weaker than they actually are (which is saying something). - Anonymoose - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:01 am: Respectfully, here are some of my thoughts suggestion (please be gentle, I am not a professional): Got One Priority…yeah G.O.P…it is a little lame, but… The GOP sole priority ought to be for the State of Illinois to be put on solid financial footing. Pension mess handled first and foremost. The GOP should move to table (and certainly stop suggesting, and here are a few examples) tanning legislation, cell phone legislation and similar bills. Get to work today to solve the financial mess. How can one rise to a point of personal privilege to demand the chair bring up pension solutions, when the chair proactively brings up pension solutions, and most everyone sits on their hands? The GOP should think about approving most, if not all of these amendements. Let the record reflect how much you do not enjoy voting for these amendments. Being in this position truly sucks - but someone has to have some courage to do the right thing. Administer CPR to the heart attack victim and stop walking by. Your Republican leadership open letter to Democrat leadership is being answered my beloved GOP friends….one recorded vote at a time. - John Parnell - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:04 am: If the members refuse to even acknowledge their presence by voting present, that would seem to be a great issue to use in the next election. The Senate R’s threatened to not vote several years ago and started to walk off the floor when a bill was called. They turned around a voted instead. - RonOglesby - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:04 am: Rich, The point seems to be that you feel they should participate. Got it. Even if they think its a complete farce? I am just wondering as this seems to be the center of Illinois politics. Turn anything you dont want to deal with into a political farce, try to find something you can score points with in the next election then move on to the next problem without solving the first one and kick it further down the road. obviously many are upset with the R side of the house not voting. OK. maybe a valid point. But with a state run by the Ds is no one going to call them on the complete crap that is going here? - morrocco_mole - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:05 am: Funnily enough, Illinois will never solve the “gun violence” problem via the state legislature. It is Federal Laws that *create* the black market for drugs and guns in Chicago via prohibition. You guys can argue back and forth over gun bans - none of this will ever work. Humans will always want and use drugs - laws will never solve any of this. Decriminalization will. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:05 am: –The measure sparked heated dialogue between Chicago gun-control advocates seeking a solution to an unprecedented murder-rate in their city– That’s pretty surprising from the Sun-Times. For the record, the worst year for murders in Chicago’s history was 1974, with 970. Like most big cities, there was a steady decline in murders that started in the 90s. Since 2004, the number of murders has ranged between 435 and 513. Last year, the number was 506, the most in any city, but the rate is about middle of the pack. What’s vexing is comparing Chicago to New York, which had 414 murders in 2012, even though it’s population is three times that of Chicago. - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:09 am: I followed these votes and had the GOPers voted NO on each amendment, they would have defeated the first 5, it looks like 6 would have passed even with their unified NO votes. Another strategy could have been to vote YES on all of them, and then vote down the complete bill. Just sayin’. - Mason born - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:10 am: Ron My problem is this right thinking (in my view) Dems stood up and voted against this load of Horse Hockey. However the Repubs who claim that they are all for Gun rights couldn’t be bothered to vote at all. this leaves pro-gun Dems flying in the breeze because Repub Leadership is playing politics. - RonOglesby - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:11 am: Wordslinger “What’s vexing is comparing Chicago to New York, which had 414 murders in 2012, even though it’s population is three times that of Chicago. ” That is really what we are measuring against though. Our murder rate is way higher than NYC or LA say. But almost all the murders with guns in chicago are handguns. Less than 9 or 10 in 2011, the last report I saw, were with “assualt weapons”. Gangsters get guns. Just like they get drugs. taking away my rifle or magazines does nothing to solve any of that. Education, economy, etc will do more. If they focused on those things, rather than decades of worrying about guns maybe they could make a change. - - Mason born - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:12 am: Bengi Thanks for the Info I think my Rep has even more “Splaiin to do.” - RonOglesby - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:13 am: Masonborn “this leaves pro-gun Dems flying in the breeze because Repub Leadership is playing politics.” VALID point there, very VALID. that is where the people backing the Policy/position, like me being a pro-gun guy, are getting screwed by the repubs. - Mason born - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:13 am: Splainin the Lucille Ball show is apparently beyond my spelling abilities. - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:19 am: Or spelling my name - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:32 am: === What’s vexing is comparing Chicago to New York, which had 414 murders in 2012, even though it’s population is three times that of Chicago === In New York, as in other cities, there is an agressive campaign to remove handguns from the street. Stop and Frisk. Controversial to say the least, if you ask the ACLU crowd. It has been said that this is the reason for the much lower murder rate per capita in NYC when compared to Chicago, which isn’t doing the Stop and Frisk thing as I understand it. Should we try that here? The gun safety crowd seems fixated on the “assault weapon” ban as a means to lower the murder rate in Chicago. Which strategy is based more on reality, if not in legality? - walkinfool - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:33 am: To take this outside of any partisanship, and away from the issues at hand: A “Present” vote is either a recusal due to personal conflict, or it is a cowardly move IMO, whether by Obama or any other Illinois legislator. An “Absent”, for the purpose of denying a quorum, is a well-worn tactic, even practiced by Lincoln. A “refusal to participate” while sitting in the House, is tantamount to a resignation from the job you were hired by the voters to do. Back to this case: since many of these folks are in “safe” districts for general elections, and would likely be challenged from the “Right” in primaries — I still don’t get why some of them would not be better off voting “No” than refusing to participate. I could be wrong, but it still seems like a lost opportunity on balance. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:39 am: The bottom line in this Dopey idea of literally sitting and doing nothing is that the SGOP and the HGOP sent a letter, telling the President, the Speaker and the Governor to do … something … Then … When actual legitamite, (albieit …over the top) amendments are put forth in the House chamber, the HGOP REFUSES to participate??? We, as citizens, can NOT allow the refusal of the Process becuase the HGOP only has 47 seats, and they are shut out on everything, and they brought most it upon themselves by running a horrendous last election cycle of “Fire Madigan”. “Thems the Rules” You want things different? Win. Do the work and win. The “HGOP…winners”, the 47, have an obligation, to the state of Illinois, to do what it right and take a stance. Heck Cameron Fry in Ferris Bueller has more guts then these 47; “I am not going to sit on my (tail) as the events that affect me unfold to determine the course of my life. I’m going to take a stand. I’m going to defend it. Right or wrong, I’m going to defend it.” THAT … is what the HGOP did … Sat on their tail, let Speaker Madigan dictate to them, and when this is all said and done, and you, the HGOP have let Speaker Madigan dictate the mailers that will go out … (Empty Chair) “Wouldn’t you like a job where you don’t have to do … anyhting? Rep. (Name Here) has one. Rep. (Name Here) did not VOTE (# of times), all the while sitting in a chair, and getting paid by US” Do I need to point out all the mail against you by the NVs or are you going to listen when others are telling you DO YOUR JOB! Last point… If any of these HGOP members are parents … and your …children … decided to stand in front of you … arms crossed … not doing anything, what do YOU say to your … children. Guess what, that also will be in those Mail Pieces you are trying to avoid too. Dopes, the Lot of you. - Cincinnatus - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:48 am: So, what is the practical effect of the Republicans not voting. Does it prevent the Democrats from passing a bill or amendment? And without a committee hearing, what stops amendments from contradicting each other and causing unintended consequences? - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 11:52 am: DD, according to the NY Times, in 2012, Chicago police seized 7,400 guns (unpermitted or used in a crime), while the NYC police seized 3,285. The issue is not as simple as stop and frisk. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 12:04 pm: HGOP = WI SDEM, less the Hotel Rooms. How many Republicans in the General Assembly Railed on Pat Quinn and his take on the departure of the Wisconsin Senate Democratic Caucus? You members of the HGOP, you are making my vote for ANY of you seem foolish! When you are Veto-Proofed out of the ENTIRE General Assmebly, things like this happen to you, but as much as you loathe the charade and the farce, these last amendments had legitimacy in legislation, and Speaker Madigan ran them through the Body, and not the Committee. And there you all sat. News Flash: You have to STAND for something besides standing against Michael J. Madigan. Madigan and the Democrats use that “Fire Madigan” better than all of you, and yet, you try it again. Ok, how about this; Now what? What is the End Game? You did it, now … what? (crickets) When you all… are sitting there … NOT voting … what do you think? No snark. What is the thought process? If you all think that this will help the HGOP grow from 47, to even … 48 … how? - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 12:05 pm: ===I can see why the HGOPs refused to vote on Madigan’s top-down, cartoonish pension amendments last week. It was a charade.=== Rich, did you ask if the pension amendments offered by Madigan were inspired by Ty Fahner’s proposed pension reform plan? It seems to me the amendments closely mirrored what Fahner, the Tribune and others have called for, and I suspected Madigan was putting them up for a vote to demonstrate that, while they might sound like solutions to some people, there is absolutely no chance of them getting passed. In other words, thanks for your suggestion, but we voted on that and it only got 5 votes. If that was the case, and I have no idea whether it was, then Madigan’s pension amendment votes weren’t exactly a charade. That’s a bit off-topic, especially considering the heated comments on this thread. To the post: the House GOP members were elected to vote, so they should vote. And assualt weapons bans are good politics but bad policy in my opinion. I’d have no problem if my legislator(s) voted against them. It’s a distraction from the other problems of gun violence. Simple solutions are generally neither. - M O'Malley - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 12:06 pm: DD, If Chicago tried the NYC stop and frisk, IMO state law would have to be amended to redefine ‘reasonable suspicion’. Judges in IL would absolutely toss guns found on a person under NYC rules. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 12:31 pm: From the Red Eye, which does a great job of tracking city homicides: –What is the most common type of homicide? In 2012, the majority of homicide victims are young black men killed by gunfire on the South Side. Gunshot homicides comprised about 86 percent of the 515 homicides last year. Nearly 77 percent of the victims last year were black. About 63 percent of the victims were between the ages of 13 and 29, RedEye data shows.– - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 1:19 pm: I see a different mailer than the ones you do. The one I envision goes something like… The HGOPers did not vote to turn thousands of Illinois citizens into instant felons overnight like most of the HDEMs did. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 1:28 pm: - benji -, It easier in a 4-color mail piece to show that empty chair, then to be correct about an issue, and have to have lots of verbage to explain it. Further, a NV carries more weight against… because, the question becomes, “what are you doing in Springfield then?” With the ILGOP’s recent political history, an “Empty Chair” might resonate with voters more than your headline and a paragraph, even if the “art” is a person in the act of a crime with a gun. The ILGOP and specifically the H&SGOP need positive reasons for people to vote for them. If we have to keep using “did not” and Madigan together, then aren’t we losing the arguement? - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 1:38 pm: - benji - ===The HGOPers did not vote to turn thousands of Illinois citizens into instant felons overnight like most of the HDEMs did.=== No snark, I chose the “crime act” type of art to help, but that is not too good considering your point. What picture(s) can you see in your mail piece to illustrate. No snark, trying to follow you. - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 1:39 pm: A picture of clean cut family members behind bars would resonate more than an empty chair. “The House Dems voted to put your Aunt Martha in jail” - Leave a Light on George - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 1:42 pm: =The issue is not as simple as stop and frisk.= Maybe, but we need to start somewhere. Why not start somewhere that has proven effective instead of the feel good mishmash we are getting now? - dupage dan - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 1:43 pm: I agree word - the issue is more complicated than that. Thanks for the stats - I could have found those as well, and should have. It has been suggested that the break-up of the 4 major Chicago gangs with the resultant gang chaos of many smaller gangs competing for power in the vacuum has alot to do with the high murder rate compared to NYC. I wonder if there is a straw man gun purchase issue in the Big Apple like there is here. This is perhaps a hard nut to crack. Many variables involved - “assault weapons” NOT being one of them. I listened to a radio piece by WBEZ, local public radio, discussing this very issue. Young folks in different gangs were spoken to. It seems as tho the dynamic has changed. Drugs and money being less of an issue and simple turf issues and disrespect looming larger. Literally dozens of gangs based on geography of little more than the block you live on. And the access to illegal guns. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 1:43 pm: - benji -, I like it! - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 1:52 pm: - benji -, Now, in Moderate leaning or “toss-up” districts, you send out that mailer, howm many “Indies” are you going to pick up? How many Republicans that didn’t vote last time will that influence? Don’t the GOP conservatives already have the 2A vote? If your mail universe is “all households” how will that play? The empty chair, its not about ANY issue but the Member, their empty chair, and a referendum on wether we as voters want a “do-nothing” legislator, as I am sure the mail piece will make that arguement. I like the picture and the premise, but how do you see breaking it out on the guns/felony/non-voting as a winner in swing districts while trying to attract new voters? That is my fear. Thanks for answering, and well done on the “art” - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 2:10 pm: So, I think that the mailer would have no effect on the typical gun hater at all. They would probably toss it. But, it would be foolish to ignore the fact that more and more people are gun owners today. Read the news about the FOID card demand, go visit a gun shop and try to find a gun or ammo on the shelves. On my city block in the 36th ward, I estimate conservatively one quarter of the households have a gun inside, and there are probably some unregistered ones under a few mattresses. I know my neighbors pretty well. Gun ownership is more mainstream than you think, and if you don’t believe that many of your neighbors own one, it’s because they can tell you are a gun grabber yourself (not necessarily you in particular) and they’re just not going to let on. So to an undecided fence sitter who owns a gun or few, they will not be tossing the mailer, they will bring it to the polls with them, albeit discretely so that you don’t see it. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 2:16 pm: - benji - Understood. While I do see your valid points, make no mistake, that Madigan is going to go after these 47 and the Nominees next time as “Empty Votes” as well, and all we can hope is that a program like the one I described, loses to your mail program to defend these guys. Do me a favor, Make sure you hit Caputo’s on Harlem today, their cannoli … is always fresh. - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 2:25 pm: My doctor tells me I should lay off the cannoli but the veggies there are always fresh too. - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 2:27 pm: Oswego, MM is going to go after the 47 regardless of whether they voted nor not. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 2:32 pm: Madigan is going to go after them, but why … help him with the NVs? Well, take the veggies, leave the cannoli. - VanillaMan - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 3:05 pm: So let me get this straight…When Madigan doesn’t participate by revealing his hand, he’s being careful - but when the minority party doesn’t participate in voting for these kinds of non-bills they’re refuseniks? Double standard here. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 3:06 pm: –But, it would be foolish to ignore the fact that more and more people are gun owners today.– USA Carry puts Illinois near the bottom of gun ownership among the states, at about 20% of adults. http://www.usacarry.com/forums/general-firearm-discussion/9841-percent-firearms-ownership-state.html Illinois’ death rate from guns is also near the bottom, according to the Violence Policy Center. http://vpc.org/fadeathchart13.htm - Demoralized - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 3:15 pm: @VMan: That’s a silly comparison and is apples to oranges. ========== I fail to see why some cannot understand the difference between voting present or “disappearing” as opposed to just sitting there like bumps on a log pouting. I agree with Rich. If you are just going to pout and not participate, leave. Save the state some money. Go home and do something productive. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 3:16 pm: ===but when the minority party doesn’t participate in voting for these kinds of non-bills they’re refuseniks?=== If you can point out when MJM refused his entire Caucus from casting a vote when Lee A. Daniels was speaker, then I am with you. Party with the most seats plays the tune, minority party refuses to Dance, unilaterally, on legistlation that is actually legitimite, you get called on it. “Thems the Rules” I may be wrong, maybe Madigan DID the same exact thing … or not. - BleugrassBoy - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 3:31 pm: I believe many of the ammendments were wrongheaded and deserved to be voted down. I have a Republican representative who I voted for. When they are in session I expect him to show up, do his job and vote (hopefully the way I want). If the Republican’s want to claim they shouldn’t have to go through Speaker Madigan’s charades then do us all a favor and as Rich says “go home”. That will save the taxpayers from paying your per diem and we’ll know that we have elected people who are unwilling to do their job they were elected to (so its time to get some new GOP reps in their place!). - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 4:13 pm: LOL wordslinger, I don’t recall registering any of my hardware with either of those two groups you linked. Looks like its stale data too, from 2009 and 2010. Go Google the record sales by S&W, Ruger, etc. and report back with your findings. - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 4:26 pm: This article shows that Illinois was in the top 20 in 2010 http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/06/28/states-with-the-most-guns.html - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 4:26 pm: Ben, not sure what your beef is. USA Carry is an NRA-affiliated site so I presume they have some credibility on gun ownership rates. Sales are good. I get it. I don’t know what that has to do with where Illinois ranks among the states for gun ownership or gun violence. Give it a think and report back. - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 4:28 pm: You are in denial, I get that - wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 4:30 pm: Denial about what, Ben? - benji - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 4:33 pm: lulz - have issues? - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 4:33 pm: Rich- what is occuring is akin to an open rule. The floor amendments do go to Rules but it appears all of them have been cleared by 4-0 votes. So why haven’t the Republicans offered any amendments? How is this a charade or a circus? The HGOPs have been crying since they lost power in 1996 that the process is too “closed.” Now that they have a chance to offer any amendment they like, they not only don’t do that but in an amazing show of political courage, don’t bother voting. The fact that a “Yes” vote on the assualt rifle amendments might have brought about a conservative challenger; and a “No” vote might have brought about attacks in a General Election, I am SURE had nothing to do with their NVs. For some of the suburban Reps, explaining this may become a bit like the excuses offered for refusing dates; e.g.- 1)”Sorry, Mrs. Smith. I know you are very concerned about another school shooting, but I was in the bathroom so I couldn’t vote.” 2)”I was getting my hair done just at that time” 3)”I had a bad itch on my finger, so I couldn’t vote.” Smoking is no longer allowed off the floor, so “smoke break” won’t do. - Mason born - Wednesday, Mar 6, 13 @ 7:16 pm: Benji Sorry about spelling that is why i have a secretary. - civil - Thursday, Mar 7, 13 @ 2:13 am: rich, you can’t denies your bias shows at times as does most peoples at times. i presume you take pride in this site and the its journalistic value. while i don’t agree with you all that much, i like the site. however, i am troubled by the aforementioned bias. i have previously stated your better than that. i might have to back away from that assertion. a pro-gun Governor is your way to justify the gun control temperature of Illinois? Governors in Illinois only serve to indicate dysfunction and corruption in Illinois. bottom line rich if you spin data… join one side of the debate… diminish or demean or threaten a side… either side…. that side responds with escalation… so really you are in control of comments more so via your commentary and the way you join the debate rather than your threats of bans for life. respect is contagious. rich while i disagree with you stance of gun control.. i acknowledged the value of your site… please acknowledge the value of pro-gun contributions rather than debunk demean dismiss… - civil - Thursday, Mar 7, 13 @ 2:16 am: at 2 am i’m not at the top of my grammar and spelling game… typos are hardly deal breakers. - benji - Thursday, Mar 7, 13 @ 8:58 am: Using data from 2009 and trying to pass it off as status quo is laughable. The world changed for Illinois, and most notably for Chicago on June 28, 2010 when SCOTUS reversed the 7th Circuit decision in the McDonald vs. Chicago case. The Daily Beast link I posted above shows Illinois as #18 on that day. I have no reason to believe that Illinois has dropped back to the bottom of gun ownership among the states as you claim, unless you report back with more recent data. - Jeeper - Thursday, Mar 7, 13 @ 9:12 am: Early in this thread, I read that Acevedo’s amendment “deserve(s) a vote” though it was described as “Way over the top.” OK; this same guy has been pushing the same solution in search of a problem for 13 years. Does that mean the legislature must reconsider the same bad ideas year after year and decade after decade? Do these insane ideas -really- seem less insane for having been considered before? I guess it’s true; this piece of tripe looks more like filet mignon every time it comes around. At least it seems to appear so to the legislature. Remember what I said about the insane bill concerning forcing anonymous posters to attach their full legal name, address and IP address OR forcing the site to take those remarks down? Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.