46 Comments - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:12 pm: ===Rauner says he expects lawmakers would see the political writing on the wall and resign or quit early.=== I’ve never run into anyone who claims to know so much about legislators and knows so little about people, intentions, politics, and can read the minds of the “collective” of legislators. This is one of the few instances I’m embarrassed for Rauner. Embarrassed if he believes this… Embarrassed if that’s the best spin he (Rauner) has. I’m pretty sure there’s better spin. Honest. - Sir Reel - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:14 pm: All is possible when you live in Fantasyland. - Earnest - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:15 pm: ===Rauner says he expects lawmakers would see the political writing on the wall and resign or quit early.=== I’m not convinced he wants term limits other than as a campaign issue and as distraction from his deliberate destruction of human services and higher education and increasing his leverage by digging the state budget hole ever deeper. - The Captain - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:16 pm: Without term limits lots of legislators resign or quit early. Here’s just the ones who quit early this term, plenty more didn’t run for re-election: SENATE William Delgado Dan Duffy Dan Kotowski Darin M. LaHood Matt Murphy HOUSE John D. Anthony Rich Brauer Frank J. Mautino Raymond Poe Wayne Rosenthal Ron Sandack - Thoughts Matter - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:16 pm: Any legislator actually wanting to DO the job isn’t doing to quit years earlier than required-. Any legislator wanting to firm up a pension or reduce retirement health care costs isn’t going to quit years early either. I do not know what passes for thoughts in this mans’ head. - HRC2016 - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:17 pm: Maybe, he’ll see the writing on the wall and resign before 2018. Then, we’ll be able to see what Ole Slip n Sue can do. - Last Bull Moose - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:19 pm: Again Rauner launches a frontal attack on a strongly held position. Has he never heard of a flanking movement or of bypassing strongpoints and cutting off their supplies? At least supplement this with proposals to make staying in the legislature less attractive. Propose eliminating legislative pensions for all elected in 2018 and after, end the continuation of healthcare for legislators. When their term ends, all financial benefits should end. Even people who do not agree with term limits could buy into these proposals. - Gooner - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:22 pm: “I was scheduled to go to St. Barth for ten days this fall. An important court appearance came up and so I must cut it back to seven days to get back to handle the hearing. Because I must cut it back to seven, I’m going to see the writing on the wall and cut the vacation back to four days.” #RaunerLogic In all seriousness, does he really think anybody will be convinced? And why bother with the weird story? Why not just say he wants to get the clock rolling? For an elected official, he has remarkably poor political instincts and even worse communication skills. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:22 pm: == …and increasing his leverage by digging the state budget hole ever deeper. == Maybe not, but when IL gets a lot worse off with Ruiner’s ’stewardship’ even the bought-and-paid-fors might finally decide to actually help save IL? - illini97 - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:24 pm: Did he learn that they’ll resign in one of his many fabricated conversations with legislators? - Anon - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:24 pm: Has the interplay between term limits and redistricting reform been considered? It seems to me that we need the latter more than the former. Madigan has stated that he supports term limits as administered by the voters. Easy to say that when you’re picking your voters. I don’t support term limits, but I do support the need to change the redistricting process. - Sense of a Goose - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:25 pm: Impossible that behavior might change for the worse? Get in promising everyone a pony. Buy everyone a pony, equipment, food, care, etc. and get out before the bill comes due. A different way to make your mark in a short time. Understand the appeal but don’t think it’s a magic wand that will solve anything. People like ponies. - allknowingmasterofracoondom - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:25 pm: I don’t think any legislators would quit early. But I agree that having it passed would put all current and future legislators on notice. On notice that the job is for public servants, not for those who want to make a career and $ from being in office. That will change the herd of potential candidates BIG TIME. Maybe Rauners words are fumbled, but I agree with him on getting it done sooner rather than later. - nikobey - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:27 pm: Does the governor want us to to believe that term limits and redistricting are of a higher priority than than budget issues? Little wonder that he is losing credibility with each passing day. - Teddy K - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:27 pm: I was recently in a legislator’s office who has the “class picture” of the House chamber from 2011 hanging on the wall. We counted at least 60 members in that pic who have either left or aren’t currently running for re-election. So a majority of the House will have turned-over in five years. In other words, constitutionally mandated term limits will do nothing to increase the turn-over rate that is already naturally occurring. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:29 pm: Funny thing is Rauner is all about cutting pension cost. I would estimate that this could ultimately cost the state over 50% more on legislative pensions. To simplify they get full pension with few years of service, and this would result in a much larger turnover and more people drawing the generous pension that is paid to Illinois lawmakers. I’m not a fan of Madigan, but to put it bluntly he has saved the State of Illinois a lot of money by keeping many others from also receiving a pension. His pension % has been locked for a long long time! - Huh? - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:32 pm: “Does the governor want us to to believe that term limits and redistricting are of a higher priority than than budget issues?” These are the new demands for passing a budget and raising taxes. 1.4% said he was setting aside his u-turn agenda, so he needs a new set of demands in order to hang on to his hostages. - VanillaMan - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:34 pm: I favor term limits. Rauner makes them sound ridiculous. He could be the worst salesman ever. - Anon - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:35 pm: So, that’s 12 years out. I really wonder what portion of currently serving legislators actually plan on being around in 12 more years. “See the writing on the wall and quit” is probably how he’s going to pretend that retirements or leaving for other opportunities would be. - Ole' Nelson - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:36 pm: ” I would estimate that this could ultimately cost the state over 50% more on legislative pensions.” New legislators (who have not previously worked under state retirement system) would be Tier II. - walker - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:37 pm: Redistricting reform won’t have any impact until 2022, and term limits will have no impact until 2028. Even then any impact on fiscal health, or attracting business, or the state economy would be sketchy at best. Tell me again these things are worth the immediate destruction having no operating budget, underfunding education, failing to meet contracted state obligations to Illinois organizations, and seriously harming at least thousands of our fellow Illinois residents. There has to be some critical prioritization of the Governor’s agenda, and a better plan to achieve what is achievable. - DuPage - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:37 pm: Rauner tilting at windmills again. - illini - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:44 pm: I do not disagree with honest redistricting reform. This is needed and, if successful, will eliminate the need for term limits if the new districts are truly competitive. We all know how successful BVR has been in getting his entire TurnAroundAgenda implemented! So why not take two of the more reasonable proposals and turn them into campaign issues that he and his bought and paid for Raunerites will run on in the General Election? Maybe this was a part of the plan all along. - Federalist - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:46 pm: “If the General Assembly would put those on the ballot … immediately, right today, many elected officials would look and see ‘Wow, the game is kind of over.’ I think you’d see a number of people retire or resign soon.” NOT HARDLY! But I still strongly support a 12 year limit in the GA. - The Fool On The Hill - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:48 pm: He’s thinkin’, If Trump can do it, I can do it. - Bobby Catalpa - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:49 pm: The key word here is “game”. Rauner’s certain that the opposition party is playing a game. Nevermind that the biggest game in town has — literally — $20 million on the table at the moment. So, yeah, there’s that. And there’s this — going with the game analogy: the best players won’t quit. They’ll find a way around the rule change — and use it to their advantage. Here, I suspect it means a fairly radical entrenchment of partisan positions up until the day law kicks in. And lots of stuff to make sure whatever is implemented can’t easily be undone. The strongest “players” are going to lead the way here — and there’s no way they’ll just throw up their hands and quit. If they did that — if there was even a chance — they wouldn’t be the strongest players in the first place. What, the weak players throw up their hands and whine and leave? Get a job in the private sector? Or, more likely, become a lobbyist? Meh. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:50 pm: ===They’ll find a way around the rule change — and use it to their advantage=== Yeah, like House members who run for the Senate. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:51 pm: …and vice versa. - RNUG - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:58 pm: If Rauner spent this much effort on a graduated income tax amendment (which we know he wouldn’t), the State’s revenue problem would be solved. - Clint Michalopolous - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 12:59 pm: The only reason Governor Rauner wants this is because he wants to install a Republican Patronage Army in this state. Its just pure jealousy of Michael Madigan. Bruce, you ever read *Boss* by Mike Royko? - d.p.gumby - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:00 pm: exactly, rich. like water and money, they will find a way to run. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:00 pm: Rauner looks and sounds foolish because it’s simple-minded, and thinks people are simpletons. The simple truth is Rauner simply can’t wish his agenda into existence. If it were that simple, Rauner would have his agenda already. Simply put, Rauner can’t get anything yet, and simply says things simply to feel better fit himself. Or is that too hard to understand? - Anon2 - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:03 pm: @Teddy K is right. Talked to any multi-state lobbyist who only occasionally works Springfield and they’ll tell you they’re flummoxed by all the relatively new faces in the House. Then again, Rauner doesn’t care about turning over rank-and-file members. This is about one particular individual in leadership. - My New Handle - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:05 pm: Simple answers for simple minds. Potential term limits for legislators happen every two years at elections. Now if there were some kind of amendment limiting the terms of House Speaker and majority/minority leaders and Senate President and majority/leaders, that might be something. And, really, long-term Speakers and Presidents cause the illusion that term limits for all are desirable. - Rabid - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:08 pm: Performance and culture define my governor’s major objective - Bobby Catalpa - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:11 pm: BTW — one sure sign of an authentic loser is someone who looks to *change* the game instead of learning how to *play* the game. All it takes is one look at Rauner — and then one look at Madigan. It’s pretty clear who knows how to *play* the game. (For good or for bad.) Nevermind the fact that implicit in Rauner’s whiny and shrill litany of “change the rules! change the rules!” is essentially an admission of defeat. Two years in, and he still hasn’t figured out how to play. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:14 pm: Gov. Rauner, is your next race for governor your last race for public office? - Albany Park Patriot - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:47 pm: Term limits are not going to fix a thing when people like Rauner can go out and buy outcomes. And how can he even pretend like term limits are a priority when his one job is to sign a budget? - Anonymous - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:50 pm: I thought Madigan was 74. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:52 pm: Oh, you meant 2028. - anon - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 1:57 pm: I recognize some reasonable arguments for term limits, but Rauner is greatly exaggerating the efficacy of that policy. If Rauner were right, then states with term limits should have been markedly improved because of them. Walker makes a good point about term limits being unrelated to balancing the budget, except in Rauner’s mind. - Trapped in the 'burbs - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 3:21 pm: He’ll do anything to avoid getting a budget done. Why not present a proposed balanced with cuts and tax increases? He seems to want to continue to set conditions precedent to destroy the chances of getting anything done. Does he really think that he’s going to pick up enough seats in November to impose his will on Madigan? This isn’t going (or should I say goin’) get him to the White House. - pundent - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 4:15 pm: =Rauner looks and sounds foolish because it’s simple-minded, and thinks people are simpletons.= Some people are (not most commenters here) and that’s the audience that Rauner is playing to. Most of his messages are incredibly simple and lacking in any substance. This is why we get “reforms” “union bosses” and “Madigan”. It plays really well with the “common sense” folks that are willing to believe that these are simple problems that can be easily solved by a “business man” such as Rauner. As many are fond of saying, it’s a feature not a bug in Rauner’s messaging. It’s the same phenomenon that’s propelling Trump. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 4:54 pm: How about a term limits statute, similar to the revolving door law? You sign the pledge when you run for office. Should you decide to stay beyond the limit, an amount equal to your salary is deducted from your salary each paycheck and deposited into the pension fund for the general assembly? - Dr X - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 5:16 pm: The elephant in the room is campaign finance and the proven political science that representatives favor a small monied class. Term limits is not gonna be a victory for the common man. - No Sense - Wednesday, Sep 21, 16 @ 7:21 pm: I always been saying you run on the state ticket like Madigan or the people of the General Assembly everyone in the state should be able to vote for you just like they do any other state office . You don’t need term limit’s . Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.