72 Comments - Captain Illini - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 1:58 pm: With trepidation I say yes…BUT…he must resolve to include the collective bargaining issue within the budget deal - since they’re tied together fiscally. If he doesn’t - then my trepidation is correct. - Downstate Dem - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:02 pm: He may be. He may feel the heat, finally, from those elements of society that are falling behind due to his intransigence and poor leadership. He is also showing signs of listening to the footsteps of his potential challengers. Suddenly, he’s talking about state universities as “economic engines” that we must protect … right out of the Chris Kennedy playbook. - Dee Lay - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:02 pm: “There is a lot of arrows” Dropping Gs and proper verbs… - Signal and Noise - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:05 pm: Nope. He thinks he can use Cullerton to isolate Madigan and get Workers Comp, Term Limits, Prop Tax Cap and Remap. He’d probably settle for 2 out of those 4, but other than Prop Tax, there is no ‘there’ there. - My New Handle - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:05 pm: A lot of arrows? That’s the clue right there. He is willing to let Radogno take them but not himself. Nothing the governor has done, not said but done, indicates he is willing to support via publicly working with this bipartisan effort. If he actually signs bills that enhance revenue and balance a budget, then I would say he wants a budget… but until that day, Eustace, until that day… - Cubs in '16 - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:07 pm: “…get a truly balanced budget with CHANGES TO THE SYSTEM to help job creators and PROTECT TAXPAYERS.” Nope. He’s not going to drop his insistence on ending collective bargaining. - Ahoy! - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:09 pm: I would assume Yes, he should not want to get too close to an election with no budget or a tax increase. He should know that he can not be the hold-up, if he at least gives a good faith effort and still not does have a budget then Madigan can be blamed, but he at least has to give a good faith effort. Especially since Trump is President, he really does not have room for error in 2018. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:09 pm: No IPI, GOMB, and Bossmadigan tell me he doesn’t want it OW’ s discovery of the vertical integration is correct. Get someone else to kill it. - Norseman - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:10 pm: No. Rauner wants to win. He’ll only acquiesce when he doesn’t have the political support to win or keep the impasse going. Our hope for impasse settlement lies with the Senate leadership actually LEADING. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:10 pm: Perfect perfidious performance today Governor - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:11 pm: I can’t express how pleased I was to hear those words from the Governor. I had wished, openly here, for such a statement. It’s critical, in my opinion, that the Governor to openly and honestly recognize the bipartisan work, not in the framing of the ridiculousness of triangulation, but in an Executive standing in front of the Legislative and making clear an honest appreciation of Process. I felt, if Rauner approached this statement as not a wedge tool, but as a friend in the brokering, it will mean a great deal in moving all of “this” forward. As the Speaker releases his statement, as of the moment of this comment, I’m encouraged by the silence by the Rauner Administration, or to be blunt, the lack of negativity aimed at the statement. It’s public statements based on Process not Politics, that will allow serious choices to see fruition and important votes to see action. The Question Rich poses is … “Do you believe the governor is finally ready to end this impasse and get to a deal?” My answer is an optimistic “yes”, for the reason(s) I have above and this… While “BossMadigan.Com” and the childish actors that the Governor has parading as thoughtful partisans, I see and read Sen Bill Brady’s remarks. I see and understand why bipartisan discussions are being touted by both sides in the Senate. I see and hear Leader Radogno and President Cullerton, not in “gotcha” framings or in a circus-like media tour, I see two strong leaders, catching…. … from all sides, willing to see where compromise lays, and walking the fine line while carting the heavy weight of this compromise discussions… together. That’s why. Governing. Thank YOU governor, for standing in the Well and making a specific point of Process where a point of Politics could easily have been a choice. Thank you Leader Radogno, President Cullerton, the Senate, thank you for looking big, taking heat, giving heat, but not squashing the hope of Progress. I vote “yes”, not blindly, but with open eyes to seeing and hearing the good, but I will see, very quickly if actions will follow these strong signals. I hope. I… hope. Oswego Willy. - AlfondgoGonz - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:12 pm: Ready? Sure, he’s been ready all along…as long as he gets everything he wants. So yes ready to end the impasse, but no, not ready to make a deal. - northsider (the original) - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:13 pm: He didn’t go “off-script”. He kept it off the printed page to make it look heartfelt, spontaneous and sincere when he said it. And the media fell for it. - Amalia - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:13 pm: when someone shows you who they are, believe them. all those anti pieces coming out of Rauner land? that is who he is. so, no. - Henry Francis - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:14 pm: No. That statement was as genuine of all those dropped g’s. He only wants a budget if it comes with his TA items. If no TA, then no budget and he will work to avoid blame and lay it all at the feet of MJM. History has shown very clearly that he prioritizes attacking MJM above working towards a budget. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:14 pm: No. Rauner makes cooing noises with words, while his lapdogs at the Chamber and IPI take action to strangle the baby in the cradle. I’m sure Rauner will bad-act very sad when this Senate effort falls apart. Rauner is the governor, for crying out loud. He, literally, has veto power over everything. Who’s going out on a limb, for realsies, if he hasn’t signed on? If Rauner wanted a deal, he’d be working it. The best way to ensure a deal doesn’t happen is for he and his sycophants to continue as they are. - Archiesmom - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:16 pm: The governor is dumping this all in the lap of the Senate. If they achieve a deal, he will be glad to take as much credit for it as he can get. If he makes it fall apart behind the scenes, he has Madigan to blame for it. He sees it as a win-win. And he can publicize it with all of his millions of dollars, no matter how it comes out. - Anon - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:17 pm: No, unless he’s allowed to stick it to AFSCME. - Huh? - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:22 pm: No. To do so would require 1.4% to admit defeat. - cdog - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:22 pm: “finally ready to end this impasse and get to a deal?” I would say 80% chance Rauner is chumpin’ everybody still, 20% he is sincere. Honeybear is right, the smoke signals from IPI,GOMB, and the Insult Factory cannot be ignored. - Downstate Dem - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:22 pm: Like Oswego Willy, I have some hope that the Governor will come to the table with a sincere commitment to work something out. Perhaps polling is guiding him on this, perhaps he’s feeling some heat from those damaged by budget inaction, and perhaps he’s hearing the footsteps from his potential 2018 challengers. The governor’s fresh talk about the state universities being “economic engines” comes right out of Chris Kennedy’s playbook. - Arsenal - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:23 pm: Not yet convinced. We’ll see what he does with IPI and the Chamber. - blue dog dem - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:24 pm: No. If the governor waited this long, and inflicted such pain, only to raise taxes this much and receive zero significant changes. He would be a fool. I don’t like him, but I don’t believe him a fool. - Old Shepherd - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:25 pm: “There is [sic] a lot of arrows.” Unfortunately, he will be the one slinging them. I fear that any Democrat who votes for this “grand bargain” will be caught in the Governor’s crosshairs for the next 22 months. - Rod - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:26 pm: I do not know if the Governor is endorsing the grand bargain or not. Because I just had a chance to read the text of the Governor’s speech as it relates to the grand bargain. Unfortunately he really did not endorse the package as it sat before him this morning or provide any guidance to the Senate on the extent to which he would support increased taxation encompassed in the amended bills. Here is what he said: “It’s heartening to see the Senate coming together on a bipartisan basis to acknowledge these changes are needed. Let’s build on that cooperation to achieve a truly balanced budget and changes that really move the needle on job creation and property tax relief.” That to be honest I don’t know what that means. While he did state earlier in the speech that “we haven’t had a state budget that is truly balanced in decades,” he does not call the grand bargain a truly balanced budget as yet. The Governor made reference to his “bipartisan task force to recommend changes to the unbalanced way our K-12 public schools are funded,” but he did not endorse the Evidence Based Model or its ultimate $5 billion a year price tag over current k-12 appropriations to achieve adequate funding for Illinois schools. Clearly the Governor knows all about this model and the long term cost projections associated with it, but he remains silent about the realities of the proposal. It would have also been nice if he gave Dr. Beth Purvis a little shout out for her work in driving the taskforce, even if one has reservations about the EBM and costs, she has kept the task force on track. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:27 pm: ===…comes right out of Chris Kennedy’s playbook.=== Polling goes up and down like elevators. Kennedy wasn’t part of this discussion, but bringing him into it reminds me how terribly Kennedy handled softball questions from an elevator, being chased, then mocked. - Honeybear - Yep, the vertical integration is still very active, but let’s see later how high they turn the knob to water down this small opening. We’ll see(?) - A guy - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:27 pm: Yes. Because. We’re running out of choices. We’re running out of time. Equally important. - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:28 pm: IPI and the usual suspects are busy pouring a lot of cold water on this, so I’m not sure I believe the Governor’s words today. The best plan for Governor Rauner is to pay attention to what he does, not what he says. He spoke a lot today, but didn’t do much. - Earnest - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:31 pm: I have to say ‘no.’ It seemed to me that, in thanking them, he was putting all ownership on them and taking none for himself. People who have already commented gave some good rationale for having hope, but I just can’t summon it up. - tobias846 - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:32 pm: Yes, I think he’s ready. He realizes that going into the 2018 election with no budget would be politically disastrous. He also doesn’t want the inevitable tax increase to happen too close to the elections, either. He has a very narrow window of opportunity to break the impasse and declare victory (however he defines it) without completely losing face. We’re in that window right now. - Dome Gnome - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:35 pm: I have grappled with this question for a few weeks. Honeybear is right that external sources are indicating no, that the governor doesn’t want a deal. There’s just too much resistance already. I also don’t believe Radogno would buck Rauner by working on a deal with Cullerton in the absence of the governor’s blessing. So what’s her angle? Either Rauner wants a deal and is using Rodogno to save face (slightly likely) or he’s using Rodogno to kick this over to Madigan’s court (more likely). Whether Rauner wants this budget agreement or not, he DOES want to back Madigan into a corner more than anything else. Rauner’s animosity for Madigan trumps his love of a balanced budget. So, no, Rauner doesn’t really want this. - titan - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:36 pm: The public statement of sorta support is good. See what IPI blasts out against the deal framework over the next couple days though. - Wow - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:38 pm: No.. he needs a bad guy to run against.. without “because Madigan” he has nothing to stand on - Pawn - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:38 pm: Not really. I won’t believe it until I see the IPI stand down, along with all that boss madigan stuff, like #TaxHikeMike, etc. that paints his own caucus into a corner and alienates the HDems. Actions speak louder than words. Believe his actions. - Anon - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:38 pm: No. This is an act. The last two years he has been saying things, especially during the state of the state and the budget address that do not correspond with his actual actions and the actions of his underlings. If he budges it will be due to the legislators that he has coerced with money, threat of money being spent against them, and who knows what else being put in a situation where if they actually care about their districts they have to bail on riding Rauner’s ship of doom into the depths. - Eugene - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:41 pm: The Senate Democrats are being played. Rauner will keep stringing them along, gradually trying to get the “grand compromise” closer and closer to his union busting agenda. Meanwhile he will pet them and say nice things, exploiting Democratic division and encouraging the Senate Dems to think that a deal is SOOOO close … if they just give a little more … and then a little more … and so on. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:43 pm: OR he is sincere and wants a deal because he knows am AFSCME contract resolution won’t be in the grand bargain. This Green lights him to push AFSCME out on strike which would surely destroy the union. It would also IMHO destroy the workforce. The senate and the house would allow this because it bled Rauner and eases the pension problem and lowers personell costs. It would also destroy thousands of families. Hope that theory is wrong. - MHJ - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:43 pm: I would say he is ready fr “a” deal, but not “any” deal–he might give a little more than he was willing to in 2016, but will only go so far. But, what about Madigan? there is no deal unti, everyone is on board— - MAMA - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:44 pm: NO - I cannot see him signing a budget that raises taxes because he is running for a second term. - Pundent - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:44 pm: No. Why? “A partisan rant coming from Madigan’s mayor is unhelpful to progress in Springfield,” spokeswoman Catherine Kelly said in a statement. “Madigan’s mayor should focus less on alliteration and more on getting his murder capital city under control.” Rauner has become a victim of his own ideology. He has to be able to get something of value out of this to justify what we’ve been through the last two years. - filmmaker prof - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:45 pm: I am a taxpayer, a state employee, AND a job creator. Stop separating the three as if they are all different. p.s. to those who are going to say “you’re not a job creator. you’re a university professor,” who do you think brings 44,000 students to Champaign-Urbana from across the world for 9 months a year, who spend thousands and thousands of dollars on housing, food, amenities, entertainment, goods, etc etc etc? They come for the faculty. WE CREATE THE JOBS. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:45 pm: Blames Rauner not bled - Politix - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:47 pm: “Yes. Because. We’re running out of choices. We’re running out of time. Equally important.” Rauner’a been out of time for 18+ months. His “choices” have always been non-negotiable and, therefore, limited. He’s never given a flying rat about either. Why would he start now? Try harder. - Anon221 - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:49 pm: Ask me again after the Budget Address. Now that O’Reilly has “outed” Rauner on Fox, Trump probably won’t have to ask, “Who?” next time. Rauner is going to have to face Trump arrows, more likely than not, in some form or other before the 2018 election. That may well be the trigger to cause Rauner to say he’s had enough, and walk away from it all. - Politix - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:49 pm: I am starting to believe he feels a sense of urgency to accomplish something but agree with others who rightly posted that he wants only to win. Who here truly believes he will sign off on a tax increase without breaking the union? - Anon No More - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:50 pm: The current proposals do not contain “enough win” for him, hence the IPI efforts to kill it. He needs a bigger win to justify the impasse, else it just looks like he drug it out for nothing. I think he wants it to end to help his chance in 2018 but under terms more favorable to him. - Paulus - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:55 pm: No. Just bs, like his support of term limits…plays well…that’s all - Annonin' - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:55 pm: Nope-a-dope Until BigBrain tells the stooges in the GOP/IPI/Proft fake news clown car to park it and shuffle off to IN or MO all of this mumbo jumbo means next to nothin’ - Not quite a majority - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 2:56 pm: I say no because he will only let it end when he has his complete list of the Turnaround Agenda. He can only win, there is not compromise. Total capitulation of all enemies. - Eric Zorn - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 3:04 pm: Rauner’s 2017 State of the State FolksyMeter score is in: 66 percent of all g’s dropped, by my count. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/zorn/ct-rauner-is-strikin-an-agreeable-contrast-to-trump-20170125-story.html - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 3:08 pm: ===…66 percent of all g’s dropped…=== Two out of three ain’t bad… - Chicago Cynic - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 3:37 pm: Nope. Not even close. No political courage on display today. No acceptance of any responsibility whatsoever. Nothing said about needing revenue. Claims of virtue for his previous bogus budget proposals. So, no. - NoGifts - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 3:37 pm: Maybe he finally took a look at the Illinois Constitution? That he put his hand on a bible and swore to uphold? - El Conquistador - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 3:42 pm: The g dropping confirms his ridiculously disengenuous people skills. And makes him impossible to respect or take seriously. - Last Bull Moose - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 3:46 pm: No. Rauner is not providing leadership. If he proposes a balanced budget, then I will believe he wants a deal. - Robert the Bruce - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 4:05 pm: Best guess: No, he’s not quite ready. Mainly he is hoping it’ll pass the Senate and then die in the House so he can blame Madigan. But he is keeping his options open. If by chance some compromise passes both chambers, he’ll have a tough choice, and I’ll guess that he’d then sign it. - Cheryl44 - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 4:08 pm: No. Where’s his proposed budget? - jerry 101 - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 4:40 pm: Nope. He can’t seem to get over his constant need to publicly insult and belittle the Speaker of the House. He won’t be ready to deal until he’s able to stop acting like a petulant child. - 47th Ward - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 4:51 pm: ===…66 percent of all g’s dropped…=== Didn’t he go to Dartmouth before he went to Harvard’s Bidness School? - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 5:23 pm: No, he didn’t dump tens of millions into his re-election campaign to give in now. If he stops droppin’ the Gs, I might start to take his words as substance. Meanwhile, it’s all campaignin’. - Rabid - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 5:41 pm: No he’s not baked enough - Mokenavince - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 5:50 pm: No we are cooked. A real Mexican stand-off. The state will just continue to drift. No courage in the House to even plead with Madigan. The cracks in the Senate will end up in Madigans eyes as good theater. He is just too locked up with people who pay his way. The people mean little to him - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 5:53 pm: No, not till his approval drops to about 20%. - Lucky Pierre - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 7:59 pm: We have indications the Senate wants a deal, the Goveror has said he would settle for a couple of items from the TA and has indicated he would raise taxes. What is the evidence the Speaker is finally willing to make a deal? - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 8:04 pm: ===What is the evidence the Speaker is finally willing to make a deal?=== The Post Rich had up with a statement from the Speaker. Keep up please. - Blue dog dem - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 9:35 pm: Prof filmaker. Therein lies the problem. - RNUG - Wednesday, Jan 25, 17 @ 10:40 pm: == We have indications the Senate wants a deal, the Goveror has said he would settle for a couple of items from the TA and has indicated he would raise taxes. What is the evidence the Speaker is finally willing to make a deal? == You can trust the word of three of those four players. The one you can’t trust will probably blow up the deal. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 6:43 am: Having Radando and Cullerton draft a budget allows Bruce to say he had nothing to do with the pain and suffering coming down the track. He’s abdicated his responsibility. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 8:21 am: Do all the commenters here who criticize the Governor’s folksy g dropping hold President Obama in the same contempt for his g dropping? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 8:25 am: - Lucky Pierre - So you’re admitting Rauner is phony if you think President Obama is phony… That’s very telling about you. You know Rauner is phony… but you don’t care? - Chicago Barb - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 8:43 am: I won’t believe it until he signals to House and Senate Republicans it is okay to get on board. - A Jack - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:21 am: I think Rauner is realizing that the remapping is the World Series and he won’t be in the game if he can’t make it through the next few years with some sort of accomplishment. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.