“He has taught us how to deal with him,” explained one top official in Gov. Bruce Rauner’s administration when asked why the governor has once again cranked up his public criticism of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.
You may already know that the governor blasted both Madigan and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel during an appearance on Dan Proft’s WIND-AM/560 Chicago radio program last week.
After accusing Emanuel of being “afraid” to take on Madigan, Rauner said the reason for this was self evident: “The speaker has been the most powerful politician in the state of Illinois for decades. It’s the main reason we’re in such big trouble as a state.”
Rauner went on to essentially blame Illinois’ “long-term, slow death spiral” on Madigan and said the majority party “likes the status quo,” claiming the house speaker is “not sensitive” to the real-world problems of the middle class. “He’s got a great system, he controls it. And right now, they’re unwilling to change. And without change, we’ll never get a true balanced budget.”
So, what the heck happened here? The governor seemed to mute his criticisms of Madigan in the closing weeks of 2015, even mostly holding his fire when Madigan skipped the last leaders’ meeting just before the holidays.
New year, new attitude, apparently.
The governor has reportedly come to the conclusion that Madigan is not now and may never be willing to negotiate in good faith. Rauner’s basically tired of negotiating against himself—pulling ideas off the table and never seeing any corresponding movement from the other side.
And he’s not completely wrong, either—at least about the negotiating part.
Madigan’s fellow Democrat, Senate President John Cullerton, has been trying to find a way to give the Republican Rauner some victories on things like workers’ compensation reform and local government costs. There was, for instance, reportedly more progress on workers’ comp during that non-Madigan leaders’ meeting last month.
And Cullerton is reportedly eyeing a recommended compromise from the Illinois Municipal League on binding arbitration for local governments. The idea would allow arbitrators to take into account a government’s fiscal condition when deciding a case. They can’t do that now, so even if their compromise is a ruling forcing the existing status quo on the two sides, that might still be far too costly for a government that has found itself in a fiscal hole.
But Madigan is said to want no part of even this smallish proposal.
Madigan has raised truly gigantic amounts of money from labor unions in the past few months. Those unions are allowed to give the same amount again after the March 15 primary, and Madigan will need all the cash he can stockpile for the fall campaign.
So, angering the unions before Madigan’s position is secure appears unlikely.
OK, so why did the governor throw his longtime friend Emanuel under the bus last week?
The mayor had apparently indicated to Rauner that he would act as a go-between in the governmental impasse and try to convince Madigan to find a way to compromise.
The governor has complained for months that Emanuel is privately saying one thing to him and publicly saying another. And now the governor is convinced that Emanuel has taken sides. The mayor is “hiding behind the speaker,” the governor told Proft.
And then he piled on Emanuel, calling the mayor’s public comments about opposing a federal investigation into the city’s legal department “incredibly disappointing.”
“How tone deaf can you be?” Rauner asked rhetorically about a mayor already under intense fire for not doing enough to reform the police department and then turning a blind eye after a federal judge rebuked five lawyers in that office in the past year for withholding evidence in two police misconduct cases, according to the Chicago Tribune.
In other words, he’s attempting to punish the mayor for siding with Madigan and punishing Madigan for not cooperating.
Will it work? Doubtful, but it’ll help him feel better, for sure, and lock down his base’s support. The governor isn’t exactly a popular guy in the city, and Emanuel has effectively pivoted back on Rauner in public, blaming him for the impasse and accusing him of using the city’s public school students as pawns in an unwinnable game.
As for Madigan, his people firmly believe that Rauner has lost the match and has yet to realize it. So, expect them to wait Rauner out, at least for now.
- Hedley Lamarr - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 9:15 am:
Is Rauner the pot calling the kettle black?
- @MisterJayEm - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 9:18 am:
“Will it work? Doubtful, but it’ll help him feel better, for sure, and lock down his base’s support.”
Of course it will work.
Making Rauner and his supporters feel better is all that this was ever intended to do.
– MrJM
- Daniel Plainview - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 9:26 am:
- “He has taught us how to deal with him,” -
Right. They’ve dealt with him the exact same way since Bruce started his campaign, but now they’re Machiavelli in the flesh.
Classic attitude of the born on third base, think they hit a triple crowd.
- Johnny Pyle Driver - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 9:32 am:
I hope I don’t get flamed for asking this, but when Rauner “pulls an idea off the table,” what is a proportional corresponding move from Madigan supposed to look like? What extreme demand is Madigan supposed to back off from? That’s what I don’t get.
- wordslinger - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 9:43 am:
A guy who’s entire governing strategy is to do harm to various groups of citizens in order to get his way has no business talking about “good-faith negotiating.”
- RNUG - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 10:03 am:
I’m beginning to believe it is all about delaying the coming tax increases as long as possible.
- Lincoln Lad - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 10:15 am:
Rahm has been an incredible disappointment to the citizens of Chicago, with all that has come to light since the release of the McDonald video. It doesn’t matter which side he is on politically as much as what his administration is accountable for in how they’ve addressed (or didn’t) the real issues in the streets.
- Mama - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 10:18 am:
With Rauner I think it is about total control, eliminate the unions and the Democrats so he will have total control of Illinois.
- Mama - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 10:20 am:
With Madigan, I think its about keeping control of the House majority & his job.
- Tumbleweed lines - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 10:30 am:
560AM radio…bwhahaha! a whole .00000000001 Neilsen market share rating….come on Miller, stop giving Proft plugs.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 10:35 am:
===560AM radio…bwhahaha! a whole .00000000001 Neilsen market share rating===
And your point is…?
It doesn’t matter what the rating is, what matters is that he’s the governor and he said what he said. Should we just ignore it because he said it to Proft on a low-rated station?
Take a breath already.
- Norseman - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 12:06 pm:
I would say new year trying old strategy. Same results - impasse.
- Harry - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 12:08 pm:
Sounds like no compromise until the Fall Session at the earliest, after Madigan and his union money confront Rauner and his business/personal money in the November election.
That’s what I infer from what Rich writes.
In that case, can the State borrow enough working cash to keep operating what is currently operating? If so, how much will that cost?
- Anonymous - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 12:25 pm:
Madigan is complicit in holding the state hostage, and gradually becoming more responsible at this point.
The state is clearly in dire straits, yet he offers no new ideas or reform measures whatsoever. As one of our state’s most powerful leaders in public service, surely could offer an idea or two of what can be done to help Illinois.
- walker - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 3:01 pm:
Could be.
But this pattern has repeated itself based on another factor — Rauner’s perceived immediate audience. Certainly been true when he is speaking to select groups in person. On Proft’s show one tone, on another show my guess is more moderate.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 3:25 pm:
To the Post,
Rich, great work.
===Will it work? Doubtful, but it’ll help him feel better, for sure, and lock down his base’s support. The governor isn’t exactly a popular guy in the city, and Emanuel has effectively pivoted back on Rauner in public, blaming him for the impasse and accusing him of using the city’s public school students as pawns in an unwinnable game.===
What’s disappointing is the governing is failing while the game, and winning the game, is what’s most important.
Rahm has yet to deliver any substantial vote in the GA. No matter what is I said publicly or privately, Rahm can’t deliver.
It’s not a ding on Rahm, but a ding on Rauner
Did Rauner or the Superstars think something would change? Rahm isn’t a Springfield player.
Unless Rahm magically can deliver votes, waiting Rauner out, as Rauner chooses to hold the hostages, is best. “Why”? Damage by doing something that will lead to nothing will only inflict pain that might have not been intened.
Great stuff, Rich.
- Langhorne - Monday, Jan 11, 16 @ 4:19 pm:
How tone deaf can you be?
Rahm may be tone deaf dealing w his problems, but so is rauner w his situation. Rauner is failing. We are led to believe rauner would fire any subordinate doing one tenth of the damage he is doing. Yet he believes he is winning, and it will be worth it. rauner is shameless