* More Bill Daley poll results have been leaked. This time, the numbers are about Speaker Madigan hisself…
The majority of those polled (600 2014 potential general election voters) have a negative view of the Speaker — 54 percent rate his job performance as either not so good (23 percent) or poor (31 percent) […]
Michael Madigan is viewed favorably by only 25 percent of voters and unfavorably by 46 percent, according to the survey.
Probably no surprise, considering his reputation.
44 Comments  
|
A conference committee primer
Wednesday, Jun 19, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Rep. Elaine Nekritz’s spokesman sent this explanation to reporters today about how conference committees are formed. I thought you might like to see it as well…
The Senate calls for a vote on a motion to non-concur on the House version of Senate Bill 1. If that is approved, the bill heads back to the House, which then votes on a motion to refuse to recede from its version. If that is approved, then the conference committee is created at either chamber’s request. If for some reason either of those votes fails, then the bill remains in limbo in the chamber in which it’s currently sitting.
I figure the House will try to do a voice vote on the refuse to recede motion today. We’ll see.
* From the House Rules…
The conference committee shall consist of 5 members from each chamber of the General Assembly. The number of majority caucus members from each chamber shall be one more than the number of minority caucus members from each chamber.
(c) Each conference committee shall be comprised of 5 members of the House, 3 appointed by the Speaker and 2 appointed by the Minority Leader. No conference committee report may be filed with the Clerk until a majority of the House conferees has been appointed. […]
No conference committee report shall be received by the Clerk or acted upon by the House unless it has been signed by at least 6 conferees.
If the conference committee determines that it is unable to reach agreement, the committee shall so report to each chamber of the General Assembly and request appointment of a second conference committee. If there is agreement, the committee shall so report to each chamber. […]
No conference committee report shall be adopted by the House except on a record vote of a majority of those elected,
* Mark Brown looks at the history of conference committees today…
Joint House-Senate conference committees, such as the one Quinn wants convened to end the stalemate between House Speaker Mike Madigan and Senate President John Cullerton, were once the norm in Springfield. […]
Usually, conferees met in secret, if they met at all. It was common for lobbyists to not only draft the conference committee’s report but then also circulate the report among its members to collect the required signatures for approval.
In this manner, a bill to increase the state speed limit could land on legislators’ desks for a vote at the 11th hour—magically transformed via conference committee report into an earmark-laden road-building program.
While that sort of change would never escape everyone’s attention, it was common for more obscure changes to emerge unnoticed in this same manner and “quietly” become law — sometimes by mistake, more often intentionally. You’ll notice that we reporters always talk about something “quietly” becoming law when we failed to catch it at the time.
The death knell for conference committees, I’m told, may have come when, in the midst of the Legislature abolishing “study commissions” that served as little more than patronage havens, a particularly crafty legislator slipped through a conference report creating three new study commissions.
As hard as it may be for some to believe, Madigan’s move to eliminate conference committees some 15-20 years ago was generally regarded as a significant procedural reform.
Of course, as with many such reforms, this one suited Madigan’s purpose of maintaining tighter control over all legislation moving through the House.
Madigan and his leaders and staff hold meetings on every bill, every amendment, every motion. He keeps control that way. There were just too many conference committee reports to read, so they’re gone.
* Related…
* Lawmakers expected to use special session to punt pension reform to committee
* Quinn, lawmakers plan another pension session for July
* Illinois pension fix headed to legislative conference committee
* Quinn, Madigan and Cullerton agree to form bipartisan group to negotiate a pension fix
* Editorial: Lawmakers, check your egos at the door - Conference committee might just work
* VIDEO: We Are One Illinois’ Mike Carrigan says Illinois’ public sector unions do not want to negotiate on pension reform any longer.
32 Comments
|
Daley poll shows big Madigan problem: The father
Wednesday, Jun 19, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The Bill Daley campaign released results of a statewide poll of likely general election voters late last night. Notice, however, that the campaign didn’t release any Daley numbers. The polling memo…
Lisa Madigan is personally popular (54% favorable / 26% unfavorable), and she leads Dan Rutherford among general-election voters in a head-to-head race for Governor (Madigan 50% / Rutherford 34%), whom we used as a placeholder candidate. Rutherford is currently only known to one-third (37%) of voters. Her lead also holds up after we give voters positive information about both candidates (Madigan 49% / Rutherford 38%).
However, Madigan faces a tough battle if she runs for Governor and her father remains Speaker of the House. In a vote between Lisa Madigan and Rutherford where her father does not resign his office, Lisa is in a dead heat with Rutherford (Madigan 41% / Rutherford 41%).
Voters shift away from Madigan after they hear of a conflict of interest with Speaker.
After voters hear the following about Mike and Lisa Madigan serving as Governor and Speaker, an easy message for Republicans to execute, the race moves to a tie (41% Madigan / 41% Rutherford). This includes a 27-point shift among Independents, who move from supporting Madigan by 4 points (Madigan 37% / Rutherford 33%) to opposing her by 23 points (Madigan 26% / Rutherford 49%).
“There has been some talk about Attorney General Lisa Madigan running for Governor. As you may know, her father, Mike Madigan, is Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives. If she is elected Governor, some say that creates a major conflict of interest to have family members running both branches of state government. If Mike Madigan decided not to retire or resign as Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives and the candidates for Governor were Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, a Democrat, and Illinois State Treasurer Dan Rutherford, a Republican, for whom would you vote?”
Voters are heavily concerned about how this relationship will affect state government. It’s a “serious concern” to 53% of voters that “If Lisa Madigan is elected Governor, the Madigans will control two branches of state government. This will put too much power in one family’s hands and break the system of checks and balances that is supposed to keep power in government separated.” A further 17% of voters think this is “somewhat of a concern”, making 70% total say it is a concern.
Nearly a majority will not consider voting for Lisa Madigan if her father is Speaker. A near majority of voters (49%) have already cut themselves off from voting for her as Attorney General if her father continues as Speaker. This shows shows the deep skepticism voters have of having the same family control two branches of government:
Which of the following statements comes closest to your own view, even if none is exactly right?
Lisa Madigan has been a good attorney general, and I am open to voting for her for Governor despite her father’s position….38%
I like Lisa Madigan, but I would have a hard time voting for her if her father continues as Speaker….23%
At this time, I plan to vote against Lisa Madigan regardless of her father’s position….26%
[VOL] Don’t know/refused….12%
* The poll, by the way, was taken in April…
Anzalone Liszt Grove Research conducted N=600 live landline and cellphone interviews with likely 2014 general election voters in Illinois between April 10-15, 2012. Respondents were selected at random, with interviews apportioned geographically based on expected voter turnout. Expected margin of sampling error is ±4.0% with a 95% confidence level and higher for subgroups.
* Sun-Times…
The wording in the question is undoubtedly loaded. However, it is likely to pale in comparison to how opponents would portray Lisa Madigan in TV ads during a primary or general election.
“Biased language? I don’t think that it’s anything in the extreme. We’re not making the argument that mimics paid communication,” Anzalone said. “It clearly affects the vote when you help people connect the dots.”
And…
In Springfield on Tuesday, the Speaker chuckled sarcastically when asked about a possible conflict with he and his daughter holding those offices.
“Oh, really?” he said.
He was asked if he saw it as a conflict of interest — having a Gov. Madigan and a Speaker Madigan.
“You know what, I’m not going to address those questions today,” Michael Madigan said. “But you should take the conflict of interest questions to your editors. Talk to them about conflict of interest.”
Um, hmm.
52 Comments
|
Madigan and Senators to Quinn: Hurry up, already
Wednesday, Jun 19, 2013 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Most people figure that Gov. Pat Quinn will probably try to rewrite the concealed carry bill and make it a utopian gun control measure, with some weak “may carry” language tossed in for good measure. An assault weapons ban, a ban on high capacity gun magazines and more are expected to be tossed into the mix.
But, hey, maybe not. Maybe he’ll surprise literally everybody and sign the bill. Or maybe he’ll just issue a straight-up veto with a long message pandering to his base. Whatever the case, the pressure for action is starting to increase…
House Speaker Michael Madigan - the attorney general’s father and a fellow Chicago Democrat - urged Quinn to sign the bill, which was a hard-fought compromise between the House and Senate.
“If you look at the vote in the House and the Senate it’s pretty clear that the governor’s veto could be overridden,” Madigan said after an unrelated committee hearing Tuesday.
* More…
But the Southwest Side powerhouse, whose daughter, Attorney General Lisa Madigan may challenge Quinn for governor in next year’s Democratic primary, also said he expected Quinn to take action “designed to advance his campaign for re-election.”
A tad hurtful, but true.
Cook County is Quinn’s base. And Cook County Democratic primary voters do NOT like guns. It’s as simple as that.
* But, it’s really not that simple. For instance, this is a statement issued yesterday by state Sen. Mattie Hunter, a Chicago Democrat…
“I am disappointed with the current situation surrounding the concealed carry legislation we passed. My approval of the firearms regulations package was and continues to be with reservation as I believe the legislature’s approved plan leaves much to be desired. It fails to address public safety concerns and the epidemic of violence occurring on the streets of Chicago daily.
“However, I have supported this concealed carry effort because I realize the importance of making sure we have a statute in place to protect our citizens. If the governor does not take action soon, we are in danger of not providing much needed security for our communities.”
The message here is fairly clear: If you’re gonna do something, do it soon and for crying out loud don’t undercut the people who stuck their necks out and voted for the darned bill in the first place.
* The proliferation of state’s attorneys issuing their own hastily crafted ad hoc concealed carry rules is really starting to concern legislators. Several Downstate Senators issued statements on the need for urgency yesterday…
Senator Gary Forby (D-Benton) “I know the governor has concerns with this bill, but we worked really hard to come up a proposal that we think everybody can live. He may not be happy with it, but it is a compromise. There are things you like and things you don’t like.”
Senator Mike Jacobs (D-Moline) “The governor needs to take action on this bipartisan concealed carry measure. We need a concealed-carry law that applies to all gun-owners equally, regardless of where you live.”
Senator Andy Manar (D-Bunker Hill) “I don’t think anyone will be surprised if the governor vetoes the bill. I would just urge him to act quickly so that the General Assembly has enough time to respond before the extended deadline.”
Senator Dave Koehler (D-Peoria) “We had to do something about concealed carry. This compromise is much better than the ‘constitutional carry’ alternative.”
Senator Pat McGuire (D- Joliet) “The concealed-carry bill passed by a large majority of Democrats and Republicans on May 31 was the result of much compromise between House and Senate members and various interest groups. If the Governor has suggestions for yet improving the bill, I hope he would seek to make those changes through follow-up legislation. We should not risk missing court-ordered deadlines and allowing a dangerous and confusing hodge-podge of concealed-carry rules across our state.”
Discuss.
…Adding… From 47th Ward in comments…
This is Quinn’s re-election campaign kick-off. It will not be a simple veto. It will be a full blown media event and re-write to do right, probably at the home of a Chicago gun shot victim, with lots of gun control advocates, ministers, cops and moms with kids. Expect the full monty of gun control porn, fear, fear, and more fear with a dash of victim stories and photos of departed loved ones. It’s going to be over the top.
Quinn will a/v it to include every conceivable item from ICHV and the Brady Center wish list. He’ll say this is what Governors can do, this is why you need strong leaders, the buck stops with him, he’s the only one who can protect us, yada, yada, yada.
It’s his big moment in the sun and it doesn’t matter that the veto will be promptly over-ridden. It’s too good for Quinn to pass up and it highlights his only strength. The over-ride just reinforces the message Quinn is going to deliver and makes him seem more relevant.
Trust me, it’ll be worth the wait.
I find it hard to disagree.
46 Comments
|
* This is, I think, the closest thing I’ve ever seen to an actual Speaker Madigan apology…
Tension seemed to grow between Cullerton and Madigan when it became clear in the last days of session that pension reform was not going to pass both chambers. Madigan attributed the failure to a “lack of leadership” in the Senate.
But [yesterday] he said that reports of that statement had misrepresented his intent. “I meant that I was very disappointed and that this was a major issue that should have been addressed in a better fashion by everybody in the legislature, which is why we’re here today talking about it.” He called the conference committee “a new start.”
He added: “Let’s get good appointments to the conference committee. Let’s expect that they’ll do good work, and they’ll go in good faith and they’ll give us a good compromise.”
* Meanwhile, I think Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, who worked for Cullerton’s office before her election to the House, summed up the disagreement over pension reform better than anyone I’ve ever seen in a mainstream media report…
“You’ve got two people whose leadership styles and caucuses are very different. Mike Madigan is a much more conservative and cautious person whose more fiscally conservative. The speaker’s goal was to hit a number that would solve the pension problem long-term. The senate bill was designed to pass constitutional muster. Those are two completely different goals.”
* And then there’s this…
There are some inherent institutional forces that have so far acted as roadblocks to a pension overhaul. That includes the Senate caucus’ long-held unwillingness to be seen as Madigan’s rubber stamp, whether the question is pension reform or the budget. Cullerton then is put in the position of losing his grip on power in his own chamber and of losing the backing of unions whom he vowed he would work with. […]
“The Senate doesn’t always appreciate how the House has just passed important pieces of legislation, sent it over to the Senate and chosen to adjourn, leaving the Senate with a take-it-or-leave-it proposition,” said a Democratic operative, who asked to remain anonymous.
That “long-held unwillingness” goes all the way back to at least Phil Rock. This tension ain’t new by any means.
Regardless, Fran Spielman and Natasha Korecki did a far better job of looking at this Springfield problem than anyone else in the Chicago media has done for quite a long time. They didn’t lazily rely on goofy conspiracy theories to pad their piece and went beyond the usual Springfield quotation class to bring in some fresh insight. Go read the whole thing, especially if you’re a Chicago political reporter.
37 Comments
|
* US Senators Dick Durbin and Mark Kirk say they will stay out of their respective parties’ gubernatorial primary battles. That’s probably a good idea, considering how nasty those primaries may get (a bit more on that topic later this morning). Sun-Times…
Durbin, to seek re-election in 2014, said on the Bill Press show during a Tuesday interview he was staying out of [the] contest, which is shaping up as a “spirited primary which I will observe with great interest.”
A Kirk spokesman said he is staying neutral.
21 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
   
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|
