|
Hocus pocus, dominocus
Tuesday, Jun 20, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller * Say what you want about Rep. Scott Drury (D-Highwood) - and you can say a lot - he’s right about this assertion…
Instead of passing a minimum wage increase back when it would’ve been signed into law, Madigan put a non-binding question on the ballot to gin up votes for his party. But then Madigan did nothing after the election during the lame duck session even though he would’ve been justified in passing it because 67 percent of voters approved of the language.
|
- walker - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 11:48 am:
Yes, and goes double for the graduated income tax amendment over many years.
- Put the fun in unfunded - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 11:52 am:
Highland PARK (or Highwood), I think - leave the good folks in Highland, IL (Madison County) in peace.
- Say What? - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 11:53 am:
So true! Kudos to Drury for saying so.
Apart from maintaining his majority and his own longevity in office, I cannot recall anything MJM has done that has been beneficial for the public or that would rate as a legislative accomplishment in recent memory. I am not old enough to know what he did thirty plus years ago when the political climate was different. He seems to be a proponent of the status quo and preserving the remnants of Richard J. Daley Machine.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 11:55 am:
Madigan is for Madigan. Period.
- Real - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 11:56 am:
Drury can point fingers at Madigan all he wants, but he shares some blame as well. Did Drury propose his own minimum wage hike back then or did he press Madigan on this issue back then? I highly doubt it.
- walker - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 11:57 am:
But the problem with the “winning at any cost” rationale, is that when voters are overwhelmingly for something in competitive districts, supporting it would be a winning strategy on the surface.
The reasons to avoid a popular issue have more to do with lowering costs for stakeholders other than voters in House Districts. In other words, the “lowering costs over winning” rationale works better in this case.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 11:57 am:
===or did he press Madigan===
Like that would’ve worked.
- Real - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 11:58 am:
Drury was playing the game up until he decided to run for Governor.
- Nick Name - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 11:59 am:
Yes, if there is anything that Madigan (and the rest of the Dems) can be blamed for, it’s wasted opportunities. Twelve years of single-party rule — the last six of them with a halfway sane governor — and aside from a temporary tax increase that they allowed to lapse, they accomplished squat. A dozen years of interparty bickering and infighting.
- Real - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:01 pm:
Him pressing Madigan is not about if it will work or not. If you are an elected official working for the people and if you’re passionate about something you’re going to press whomever about it rather it works or not. Thats his job as an elected official.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:02 pm:
Gotta hand it to Drury, he crystallized the raw, absolute politics perfectly.
Rauner will be pleased every chance Drury can keep the focus on Madigan. This is a good way to do so within the slim window of the politics here and the larger picture of Democratic Party pitfalls.
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:04 pm:
From Greg Hinz at Crain’s
“Madigan, who not only is the power behind the throne but often acts like he owns it, is almost as culpable (in the state budget war as Rauner). Having once lost his speakership for a term back when I still had hair, his raison d’etre has become sheer survival. No policy, no accomplishments, no goals, nothing. Just survival as speaker.
“That was clear when Madigan declined to put votes on the grand bargain when it finally made its way out of the Senate. Supposedly there were only 46 or so Dems, with 60 aye votes needed. But I have little doubt that if he had wanted to pass the Senate plan, it would have passed. Instead, Madigan was worried more about
creating re-election woes for some of his members, which could have endangered his own 32-year speakership. That’s really all you need to know. Madigan finally had an opportunity to force the governor to
publicly take a position on taxes and spending and show his true bottom line, but he didn’t want to risk it.”
- Winnin' - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:06 pm:
Maybe, ala Drury, it’s time for Madigan to resurrect his millionaires tax as part of the grand bargain.
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:06 pm:
Rauner would have been better off “negotiating” with a potted plant than Speaker Madigan who apparently can’t play nice with even members of his own party.
- Ducky LaMoore - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:12 pm:
When Mike Madigan can make a guy like Scott Drury look extremely reasonable, the party has a big problem.
- blue dog dem - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:14 pm:
There is no party in Illinois that represents the working poor and middle classes.
- HistProf - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:15 pm:
So what I am hearing from the crew here, including Lucky Pierre, is that Madigan has failed to be enough of a Democrat, has failed, not because of his partisanship, but because he has been unwilling to move from supposedly safe centrism.
Is that a fair assessment of the posts here?
- Mike - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:19 pm:
I seem to recall MJM calling votes on Marriage Equality (and Domestic Partnerships before that). And abolishing the Death Penalty. And raising the income tax to a reasonable rate. Gosh, maybe he picks the battles he can win.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:19 pm:
So Drury prefers losing?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:21 pm:
===No policy, no accomplishments, no goals, nothing. Just survival as speaker.===
… and yet, SSM and Conceal Carry, two different policy accomplishments arguably only could occur with Madigan working with many others to cobble that 60. Hmm.
===Supposedly there were only 46 or so Dems, with 60 aye votes needed.===
If Mr. Hinz has other information that would refute the 46, even if it’s 45 or lower, the point that the budget had no support is the compelling one, not this…
===But I have little doubt that if he had wanted to pass the Senate plan, it would have passed.===
Argumentative, insofar as if Mr. Hinz looked at the “number” as 71 and not 60, then the call to arms has significantly more weight, since a veto could be overridden. I guess Mr. Hinz forgot how Rauner retaliated against the SDems and the passage there in their Chamber.
===Madigan was worried more about
creating re-election woes for some of his members, which could have endangered his own 32-year speakership.===
Forty-six is not Sixty, nor is it 71. A hill worth fighting for is if taking the hill is within grasp when we’re talking about going alone with $50 million in the back against ya as you vote, twice, (bill and the needed override) for the tax increase Rauner will use to sail towards re-election, as the much needed budget helps the governor who vetoed it.
===That’s really all you need to know. Madigan finally had an opportunity to force the governor to
publicly take a position on taxes and spending and show his true bottom line, but he didn’t want to risk it.”===
This is the best, and most solid point, in that grab.
Absolutely no different had Rauner agreed to Cullerton’s and Radogno’s Grand Compromise, and with Rauner’s Aud and support would’ve had a far greater chance of actual passage then just having Madigan put votes on bills Rauner will run against as its “Rauner standing up to Dems.”
With great respect and admiration towards Mr. Hinz.
OW
- blue dog dem - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:22 pm:
HIstProf. Nope he is lame. Higher income tax,ridiculous property taxes and now service taxes are the ultimate penalty for poor and middle class working families. Throw in a few sin taxes, and the perfect recipe for no differences between Rauner and Madigan.
- 100 miles west - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:28 pm:
There is no Democratic Party of Illinois, the organization exists only as an extension of the House Democratic campaign operation. Ask anyone who has worked non-House campaigns about the support they get from the statewide Democratic Party.
- Been There - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:29 pm:
======But I have little doubt that if he had wanted to pass the Senate plan, it would have passed.===
He would have had no problem passing most of the Senate plan. That income tax increase part was a wee bit too much without Rauner on board and GOP votes. If there ever is a deal I doubt Madigan will even put 46 Dem votes on it.
- NeverPoliticallyCorrect - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:29 pm:
It’s so much fun to sit and share our stunning insights on why and how this state has fallen upon hard times. We are more than eager to blame the “other side”. But we never hold those in power accountable for their action or inaction. Both parties have had multiple opportunities over the past few decades to do the right things with regard to budgets, pensions, state services, legislative district creation and they have all failed us consistently. They give us bread and circuses to distract us while the fires of economic and political destruction rage. All of us share in that responsibility, that loss of maturity in our consideration and expectation of those elected to serve. While our political system has never been perfect I believe there was always a sense of trying to get something done. That truly appears to be gone, apart from naming the next state “whatever”! It has been interesting to read the comments in these posts but I have tired of the same vitriol and snarkiness (some of which I have contributed to at times and for that I apologize.) I will continue to help my school board to run a district without a deficit and with success in educating our children. I will continue to run my non-profit as effectively as I can with payments months late and ever increasing compliance requirements that only serve to waste limited dollars. And if they don’t get a budget done this time then it’s time for a new party in Illinois that is (to take Mr Lincoln’s words out of context) of the people, by the people and for the people. God Bless all of you.
- Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:39 pm:
Same sex marriage was passed in 2013 and conceal and carry in 2014. Going back that far looking for accomplishments is telling
- Oneman - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:42 pm:
nice Harold Washington reference Rich
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:43 pm:
===Same sex marriage was passed in 2013 and conceal and carry in 2014. Going back that far looking for accomplishments is telling===
It is.
I guess Rauner has no accomplishments too.
Hmm.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:43 pm:
Madigan cares about nothing but himself.
- Robert the Bruce - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:47 pm:
Conservative republicans don’t realize how fortunate they are to have Madigan. No snark.
The minimum wage point is a good one. And how many states are as blue as Illinois, but with the large education spending disparities and no graduated income tax?
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:49 pm:
Do you know what they call a loser with principles?
Exactly.
Thanks Representative Drury for offering a reasonable accurate description of the problem. That and $1.50 will buy you a Tribune, where you can also read story after story pointing the finger at Mike Madigan for everything that is wrong in Illinois.
Wake me when you have a viable alternative.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 12:49 pm:
“Same sex marriage was passed in 2013 and conceal and carry in 2014. Going back that far looking for accomplishments is telling.”
Not to mention conceal and carry was a forced action by the Supreme Court ruling in Heller v D.C.
Madigan did work with the GOP and Quinn and pension reform SB1. That was, of course, before he decided that he will need all the help he could get from the Unions because…Rauner!
- Swift - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 1:09 pm:
While Drury is correct about pandering to a party’s base with no action, it’s disingenuous when his campaign website leads with “Tired of Madigan and Rauner” and contains no real policy statements or plans. Just as raising the minimum wage polled well in 2014, anti-Madigan and Rauner statements are going to poll well in 2017-18, and in my opinion Drury is just engaging in the same pandering with no plan or actions.
It’s a given that the minimum wage advisory was to turn out the votes of young and minority voters, but what did that get the Democrats? A smaller Rauner majority? Maybe, at best, a house seat? The flip side of this is Trump, he won on rhetoric with no policy formulation behind outrageous plans because he pandered to the far right. Now, 6 months later, has the foundation for the “wall” been built, nope, and they don’t need to either, they won the election and in 4 more years there will be some new outrage to America that needs addressed. Either way, the pandering is a gamble, sometimes it works out, other times not. It’s nice to see Drury recognizing this, but to win you need votes and to have votes, you need to turn out voters, it’s 2017 now and it’s about winning, not governing.
- Stand Tall - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 1:10 pm:
“Not to mention conceal and carry was a forced action by the Supreme Court ruling in Heller v D.C.” - beat me too it.
Same sex marriage was another one the courts were going to make happen soon as well. So might as well get ahead of them and buy the votes.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 1:18 pm:
Hmm.
Everyone seems to think SSM and Conceal Carry were slam-dunk, forced, easy wins.
That’s fun.
Both bills and subsequent laws needed to cobble their majorities to passage and when both occurred it was seen as work well done by all, including Speaker Madigan when passage wasn’t guaranteed and hurdles were many.
How many GOP votes, for example, were on SSM, both Chambers?
How many GOP members that were “Green” on SSM are still in the General Assembly?
Why wasn’t both SSM and Conceal Carry 100% “Green” with Dem support?
You don’t like Madigan, I get that.
I’m not a fan of Gov. Rauner but the extraordinary work done in Criminal Justice reform he spearheaded, I recognize and understand his role in that arena.
Being blind to accomplisments or trying to change history to fit a narrative isn’t being honest on the issues.
- James Knell - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 1:57 pm:
So Madigan is about winning at any cost.
Rauner??? No one even needs to ask right?
The billionaire GOP donors try to buy what they believe is rightfully theirs in the same way the monarchs of post-Napeleon restoration believed their authority came directly from God. Except today god is money.
So pardon me if I don’t care that much that Madigan isn’t St. Bernie.
I think Drury is covered by the machine’s maxim, “don’t make no waves, don’t back no losers.”
- Johnny Justice - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 2:02 pm:
Drury is 100% correct. He stated the same thing on the House Floor during the debate on current minimum wage increase bill, which Madigan allowed to pass because he knew Rauner would veto it. These are the games played in Springfield while the people be damned.
The current Illinois Democratic Party is non-ideological. It’s only goal is maintaining power, and while that may work for a while, over the long term it is a losing strategy.
- Stand Tall - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 2:37 pm:
Always knew this guy was full of himself but he really proved it with his last post.
Democrats had such overwhelming control of the State for over a decade before Rauner and did not pass their major core agenda. They did not fix any major problems. They are no different then their counterparts when it comes to buffaloing the voters.
- Say What? - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 2:38 pm:
My complaint is that Madigan keeps claiming that his efforts to stymie Rauner are designed to protect the working class and the middle class — the same folks who are taking it on the chin constantly due to the impasse and the property assessment breaks for MJM’s wealthy clients.
Redefining marriage or being the last state in union to grant concealed carry permits (while under court order to enact a law or have the court impose its own law) did not put a dollar in the pockets of most of working stiffs.
- Free Set of Steak Knives - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 3:53 pm:
Those are Ken Dunkin’s talking points that Drury is using.
@Say What?: There were 370,000 appeals filed in Cook County in 2015. The idea that Madigan filed most of them, or that Madigan’s law practice had any impact on your property tax bill is ludicrous.
You know what does impact your tax bill? State funding for public schools.
- blue dog dem - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 4:12 pm:
I know what impacts my tax bill. High school PE. Drivers ed. $100k/yr AD’s. Driving school busses 100 miles for a Friday night football game. Astro turf fields. Practice fields for the marching bands. Regional superintendents.
- blue dog dem - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 4:14 pm:
I forgot my point during my rant. Cut K-12 spending. Don’t increase it.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 4:17 pm:
===I know what impacts my tax bill. High school PE. Drivers ed.===
Goodness. Do you yell at kids to get off your lawn, too?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 4:23 pm:
===I know what impacts my tax bill. High school PE. Drivers ed…. Driving school busses 100 miles for a Friday night football game. Astro turf fields. Practice fields for the marching bands===
Wow.
The Burgermeister Meisterburger only wanted all the toys banned…
- Say What? - Tuesday, Jun 20, 17 @ 4:24 pm:
@Free Set of Steak Knives:
Madigan’s law office did not begin appealing property tax assessments in 2015. Add in the previous three decades of data and you can get back to us and explain how there was no impact.