President Barack Obama seemed to admit almost right from the start of his address to the Illinois General Assembly last week about the need for a more civil politics that he probably wouldn’t sway his audience, which has been bickering amongst itself for over a year.
Obama talked about his first Illinois Senate speech, after which Republican Senate President Pate Philip “sauntered” over to his desk, slapped him on the back and said, “Kid, that was a pretty good speech. In fact, I think you changed a lot of minds. But you didn’t change any votes.”
Frankly, after months without any progress in Springfield, I’d settle for a few changed minds. But I’m not even sure a single mind was changed. Instead, the speech gave people on both entrenched sides just enough ammo to bolster their cases against the other.
Predictably, Obama weighted the argument in favor of his own policy views, bringing up his support for union collective bargaining, which Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner has repeatedly attacked.
But he threw just enough bones at the Republicans to allow them to issue statements like the one from GOP state Rep. Barb Wheeler: “The President reiterated what the Governor and others have said before, without compromise we cannot govern.”
It might come as a shock to Democrats, but the vast majority of Republicans truly believe that Rauner has tried to compromise and the Democrats are refusing to budge. So, the President’s words were music to their ears.
Obama said he believed many Republicans “share” many of his values, adding, “And where I’ve got an opportunity to find some common ground, that doesn’t make me a sellout to my own party.”
At that moment, Rep. Ken Dunkin, D-Chicago, jumped from his seat and yelled “Heck yeah!” Dunkin has portrayed himself as diligently working to move things forward by cooperating with Gov. Rauner. But he’s been thrashed by his fellow Democrats for being a “sellout” to the wealthy Republican governor by suddenly flip-flopping on issues and voting against his party’s values, including union rights.
“Well, we’ll talk later, Dunkin, you just sit down,” Obama said to uproarious applause. “One thing I’ve learned is folks don’t change.”
The line was a devastating slash at Dunkin, who Obama dealt with when he was still in the General Assembly.
Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass quickly tweeted: “So #Obama tells #Illinois pols about need for compromise, then rips Rep. Dunkin, D, who dared go against Boss Madigan. That’s #thechicagoway.”
But Kass did Dunkin no favors. Rep. Dunkin is fighting for his political life in a Chicago Democratic primary against a union-backed candidate. Call me crazy, but I don’t think his majority African-American constituency will be happy that their state legislator was publicly humiliated by the nation’s first black President.
Word is the Democrats warned the White House that Dunkin would attempt to insert himself into the visit, and they were quite satisfied with the result. They may have also warned the President that Dunkin’s 1990s arrest record was about to become an issue in his primary race.
Even so, House Speaker Michael Madigan made a significant mistake last week. Obama has often called former Senate President Emil Jones his political “godfather.” Jones mentored Obama, gave him important assignments and drew a district for him that meandered up Chicago’s wealthy Gold Coast to allow the ambitious young pol to raise campaign cash from the elite. No Emil Jones, no President Obama. The President gave Jones a couple of shout-outs during his speech and said he misses him.
But Jones and Madigan fought bitterly for years. Indeed, if you go back and look at what Senate Black Caucus members were saying about Madigan during that fight, you’d see they said many of the same harsh things about Madigan as Gov. Rauner says today.
Madigan relegated Jones to the gallery while inviting former legislators of far less stature onto the House floor. Madigan’s snub was deeply resented by many and brought back a lot of very bad memories.
If Rauner had done a better job of understanding his job, he’d be able to build on this anger at Madigan. But making statements about how tax money is being thrown down the “toilet” at the majority black Chicago State University, and cozying up to Dunkin (who just last week called his fellow legislators “monkeys”) and pushing social service agencies into bankruptcy has so damaged his relationships that he probably can’t take much advantage.
“We’re winning,” Rauner told a Downstate audience hours after Obama’s “unity” speech. No, he’s not. Nobody is.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 9:16 am:
===But Kass did Dunkin no favors. Rep. Dunkin is fighting for his political life in a Chicago Democratic primary against a union-backed candidate. Call me crazy, but I don’t think his majority African-American constituency will be happy that their state legislator was publicly humiliated by the nation’s first black President.===
The more Raunerites, and the Tribune, try to “prop up” Ken Dunkin as an “Independent Voice”, the more it looks so… “phony”… by those like Kass or the Tribune Editorial Board make Dunkin seem… thoughtful. Hilarious.
In a Democratic Primary..,
John Kass…President Obama?
Chicago Tribune… President Obama?
Bruce Rauner!…. President Obama?
Do Raunerites know we’re talking about a Democratic Primary? lol
- slow down - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 9:21 am:
“We’re winning” — that tells you so much about who Gov. Rauner is and what he most cares about, and it isn’t those people who have lost the state services that they and their families desperately need. Truly depressing.
- UIC Guy - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 9:25 am:
==“We’re winning,” Rauner told a Downstate audience hours after Obama’s “unity” speech. No, he’s not. Nobody is.==
I think this is right. Normally I think it’s a cynical view that politics is a zero-sum game. But in this case it really does seem to be a negative sum game….
- Depressing - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 9:27 am:
Rich, I don’t know how you are able to be steeped so long in this toxic stew of pettiness and backstabbing and still maintain a sense of propriety and humor. Jones. Dunkin. A speech that was supposed to be about the need for compromise and a better politics was held in a building that reeks of no-slight-is-too-small and populated by pols who never, it seems, see beyond personal agendas and what’s in it for them and how can I screw the other guy, and that came through loud and clear even as the president was speaking.
It’s like cutting down a tree so you can stand on a stump to deliver a speech declaring your opposition to deforestation.
- illini97 - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 9:30 am:
“Hang in there,” students, impoverished, mentally ill and abused citizens. After all, ‘we’re winning,” so there’s that.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 9:31 am:
A good governor doesn’t need to do as much campaigning as someone who isn’t governor. This is because being governor has incredible public powers. Doing something daily to keep a state muddling through is good governing. Voters don’t want their lives intruded upon with government issues. When a problem arises, it is best if it is handled quickly without a lot of publicity.
Rauner isn’t doing that. Consequently, he isn’t getting any benefits from being governor. Rauner didn’t choose governing. He didn’t choose stability. Rauner didn’t choose compromise, or muddling, or half-loaves, or familiarizing himself to government at all. Instead, Rauner chose chaos.
Chaos isn’t want any state needs. Even a state needing to be reformed, doesn’t benefit from chaos. Chaos is a poor environment to reach good governing decisions. Chaos doesn’t pay our bills, helps our needy neighbors, or raises our bond ratings. Chaos doesn’t attract businesses. Chaos is the opposite of governing. Rauner has deliberately chosen Chaos, in order to fight political battles while occupying the governor’s office.
Rauner doesn’t have the votes to win a battle, but he has enough votes to unleash the very worst thing upon Illinois, second to a natural disaster. Governors aren’t supposed to cause chaos and disasters. They are supposed to ease chaos and disasters. After over a year in office, Rauner has made our situations in Illinois far, far worse than they were on his inauguration day. Governors aren’t supposed to make things worse. Rauner, worse than any governor previously in Illinois, has deliberately chosen chaos and disaster to score personal political wins. His “persistent” drive for personal political wins comes at the cost of millions of Illinois citizens.
When we win, he wins. He has done literally nothing as governor to help Illinois win at anything. Not knowing this, or not believing this, makes Bruce Rauner the worst governor we’ve ever had.
- Frenchie Mendoza - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 9:31 am:
The fact that a governor is so bereft of common sense to frame major issues of “winning” and “losing” is astonishing.
Rauner never struck me as a smart guy. But this pretty much proves it to me.
It’s not a war he’s fighting. You don’t “win” by denying compassion to those that need it most.
- My New Handle - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 9:46 am:
I don’t know about the political relationship between Madigan and Jones prior to Jones’s ascendency to Senate President, but it seemed much of the friction between them had to do with Jones’s support of Blagojevich. During that time, Madigan cobbled together a “coalition” with Republican legislators to move bills, or kill them. It was a strategy meant to protect his Dem majority in the House. I wouldn’t say Madigan held a grudge against Obama, though Obama’s closeness to Jones was not a tie that bound Obama to the Speaker’s objective.
- Niblets - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 9:58 am:
Rich,
Thank you very much for these insights. Not all of us know the historical complexities that created the current mess that is Illinois politics.
I truly wish that there was less for you to explain and more to praise.
- walker - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 10:03 am:
==I wouldn’t say Madigan held a grudge against Obama, though Obama’s closeness to Jones was not a tie that bound Obama to the Speaker’s objective.==
yep
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 10:14 am:
I think the governor is winning on his own terms.
I’m sure he would have loved it if Democrats in the General Assembly would have just handed him all of his anti-union agenda.
But the governor is a smart guy; he must have known that was not possible.
So he’s taking the next best thing: fundamentally altering the future course of state government by wreaking irreparable fiscal and programmatic sabotage on it right now.
If the governor didn’t want all of this to occur, he would have used his reduction veto powers to mitigate the damage back in May.
The state would still be running a deficit, but not nearly the $6.2 billion shortfall that it is now. In addition, there would be some funding for higher ed and social services.
“Squeeze the beast” to advance “the shakeout” is the goal, and on those, the governor is winning.
- JackD - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 10:35 am:
@ wordslinger: I don’t see any evidence that the “shakeout” is being advanced; only that the state’s finances continue to disintegrate.
- lake county democrat - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 10:51 am:
For more, check out Jodi Rosen’s biography of Michelle Obama on her feelings about Speaker Madigan.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 10:51 am:
– I don’t see any evidence that the “shakeout” is being advanced; only that the state’s finances continue to disintegrate.–
The “shakeout” is happening.
Social service agencies are tossing people out of work and scrapping or reducing programs due to the state not honoring its contracts.
University are throwing people out of work, as well.
- Wensicia - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 12:37 pm:
If Rauner’s plan is to reduce the “takers” and their programs in this state, then yes, he’s winning. Everybody else loses, including the taxpayers who will have to foot the bill after he’s finished his term.
- Chucktownian - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 12:43 pm:
Well said, Vanillaman. In my 48 years on this Earth I’ve lived in six states and seen all types of governors. Rauner is easily the worst I’ve ever seen. Having to watch one of my coworkers receive a layoff notice last week was just devastating. If I ever meet Rauner it will be hard to be civil. (I’ve met many governors in my life, including one who went on to be president.) Chaos is most certainly not “winning.”
- Mama - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 1:58 pm:
““We’re winning,” Rauner told a Downstate audience hours after Obama’s “unity” speech. No, he’s not. Nobody is.”
Rich, you are right, no one wins with Rauner’s plans for Illinois.
- Honeybear - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 3:42 pm:
JackD- I’m not sure where you live but I can assure you as a DHS caseworker in Southern Illinois, the situation is beyond dire. It might be a “shake-up” in Chicago where you have wealthy donors attending charity balls and galas but down here it’s like a nuke went off. It’s quite simply nuclear winter. The mom and pop private social service agencies are gone. LSSI, Catholic Charities are in full retreat and disarray. Only Urban League is standing here in the Metro East untouched because they are based across the river in St. Louis. I used to resent that Missourians threw scraps our way. I thank a loving God for it now. The only saving grace is that the winter has been fairly mild. My office services 60,000 poor, disabled and elderly residents of one county in the Metro East. That’s not 60,000 thousand residents of the county. That is 60,000 residents in need in that county. Along with 2 offices in the neighbor county we are barely holding the line again it. That and we are down 20 case workers since I started here 2 years ago. 17 of those left since Rauner took over. I swear I expect to see the four horseman of the apocalypse at any moment. Sir, it’s bad. Understand your privilege not to see it.
- Mama - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 5:31 pm:
It won’t be long before Rauner will throw more IL people out of work. The private sector will lose too.
- Mama - Tuesday, Feb 16, 16 @ 5:32 pm:
Hang in there Honeybear.