69 Comments - Groundhog Day - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:04 pm: Looks like “I’ve never failed at anything ” will not be on Bruce’s gravestone. - wordslinger - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:08 pm: –“Can anybody explain that to me?” Manar asked.– Yes. The governor is lying. It’s kind of his thing, like saying “broken.” –Manar also noted that anyone could have filed a motion to accept the governor’s AV, but nobody did. – Curious, since the numbers that Rauner released just last night say it’s such a sweet deal for every district but Chicago. Maybe they don’t trust his numbers. - Huh? - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:09 pm: Good on the Senate for the override. I will remember who to vote against during the next election. ABR - Anybody but republucant. - Matt P.. - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:12 pm: Rauner should have let SB1 go and just focused on the tax hike. - Retired Educator - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:13 pm: Now it is time for the House to do the same. No one, not even a Republican can believe anything Rauner says. Vote your district, and your schools. The time for telling the Gov, to take a hike. is way overdue. - Norseman - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:13 pm: === Manar also noted that anyone could have filed a motion to accept the governor’s AV, but nobody did. === The minions have been purchased, but they’re not stupid enough to front the turkey Rauner and BTIA ™ produced. - Anon221 - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:15 pm: The Senate GOPies claim that they couldn’t submit a motion to accept because of Senate Rule 9-3 (from the twitters). If that is the case, then maybe next time one of the Republicans in the Senate needs to be the sacrificial lamb and vote on the prevailing side so they have that opening gambit. But, there is this at the end of that Rule, too: “If the principal sponsor does not call a bill within eight calendar days after the Governor’s objections to the bill are entered in the Journal, thereafter any person filing such a motion may call the bill.” Honest Question: Did that leave a window for the ILGOP Senate members to be able to file for acceptance? If it does, then the tweet they posted was very misleading. - wordslinger - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:15 pm: –Rauner should have let SB1 go and just focused on the tax hike.– You’re assuming Rauner didn’t want the money from the tax hike. He wanted the money, just not the blame. He sure didn’t put up any fight on that override vote. In fact, instead of sitting on the bill for 60 days to pick off votes, he told legislators to stay in town so they could override it immediately. It’s called having your cake and eating it, too. - Sue - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:21 pm: Let’s ask Anne Coulter for an opinion - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:22 pm: wordslinger I seriously doubt Rauner wanted the budget and tax hike to be overriden. This could also be the reason he fired his staff right afterwards. In his world he believes it was the job of his staff to ensure it wasn’t overriden. - Norseman - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:24 pm: Retired Educator, the odds on a House override are long. Your community needs to lean heavily on local GOP members. The message is that Rauner doesn’t negotiate for a resolution; he negotiates for himself. A no vote by GOP members will hang the lack of funding around their necks. - Piece of Work - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:24 pm: Figures McCann would vote with the Dems. Can’t wait to vote against this guy. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:25 pm: ===This could also be the reason he fired his staff right afterwards. In his world he believes it was the job of his staff to ensure it wasn’t overriden.=== No. Sorry, no. Even Sneed made it clear. It was that Diana Rauner and Bruce Rauner wanted better messaging so they could feel “comfortable” at Winnetka cocktail parties. The RaunerS were angered they were catching blame for destruction, not the destruction happening… or not. Keep up. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:27 pm: No. Sorry, no. Even Sneed made it clear. It was that Diana Rauner and Bruce Rauner wanted better messaging so they could feel “comfortable” at Winnetka cocktail parties.=== Still a tax hike and budget hinders Rauners agenda of busting Unions. - Fax Machine - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:28 pm: The override will have all 67 House Dems on it. Will 4 retiring overriders ride to the rescue once again? - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:29 pm: ===Figures McCann would vote with the Dems. Can’t wait to vote against this guy.=== Hmm. “Figures McCann would vote Anti-Rauner. His district voted for this guy because he’s was Anti-Rauner” Better - wordslinger - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:29 pm: –I seriously doubt Rauner wanted the budget and tax hike to be overriden. – Then how do you explain his inactions/actions? He could have put a brick on both for 60 days. He did not. For two months, he could have pounded shaky GOP votes on multiple media platforms and at the grassroots. He did not. Instead, he said “stick around for the override.” People can say anything. What they do and don’t do reveal true objectives. - Fax Machine - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:30 pm: By the way, did Bill Brady lose his designee title yet? - Anon221 - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:31 pm: I don’t know if Sue if insulting me or not, but here’s the definition of Journal in the Legisalative Glossary: “Journal An official record of each house of the General Assembly reflecting all actions taken on the floor each legislative day.” Here are the actions taken on SB1: 7/31/2017 Senate Sent to the Governor 8/1/2017 Senate Governor Amendatory Veto 8/1/2017 Senate Placed on Calendar Amendatory Veto 8/13/2017 Senate Motion Filed Override Amendatory Veto Sen. Andy Manar If the clock started on 8-1-13 with the AV’s placement on the Senate calendar, and it wasn’t called until 8-13-2017, then if I’m interpreting Senate Rule 9-3 correctly, a motion to accept could have been filed. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:31 pm: OW I already know of the Rauner cocktail party and wanting better messaging. None of that means I’m wrong on Rauner firing his staff immediately after he was overridden. Everything I stated could also be a factor in why Rauner fired his staff in addition to better messaging. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:32 pm: ===The override will have all 67 House Dems on it.=== Last time it had 59 and Chicago’s McAuliffe. That means 8 Dem “Green” Tall ask. ===Will 4 retiring overriders ride to the rescue once again?=== Are they bringing at least 4 or 5 with them? Plus, Ms. Wheeler is a Raunerite. So there’s that. - Wensicia - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:32 pm: “Are we going to fear the governor and his money, or are we going to fear the mirror.” Good question. How long will Republicans continue to back up Rauner’s lies to the detriment of our public school system? - Anon221 - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:33 pm: Sorry- 8-1-2017, not 2013. - Curl of the Burl - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:36 pm: This will fail in the House on Wednesday. Some schools start on Thursday. This will put us right back at square one. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:37 pm: wordslinger Why would Rauner hold the bill on his desk for 60 days when the state was on the verge of being downgraded to junk status? He would then own it.. This is why Rauner got it off his desk asap. - Fax Machine - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:37 pm: If they get assurances from 4 HGOPs that they will override, all 67 Dems will be on it. - Retired Educator - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:38 pm: Norseman; I am an incurable optimist. I actually believe the odds ar in favor of an override. I don’t believe the House Republicans want to go home and explain they stood in the way of school funding, to keep the Governor happy. I think some who said they won’t return will return some of what the Governor has been giving them . 2 1/2 years of intimidation, lies, and threats, will make some of them make the vote needed. Then they can say bye bye, with a little class. - Fax Machine - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:38 pm: If they can’t get 4 HGOPs on board, some Dems will vote against override - Norseman - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:39 pm: === Can’t wait to vote against this guy. === Can’t wait to vote for this guy. - SAP - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:40 pm: To add on to WS at 4:29 comment, the immediate veto on the budget also meant that Bill Haine would be in Springfield for the override instead of back home getting cancer treatment. - wordslinger - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:40 pm: –Why would Rauner hold the bill on his desk for 60 days when the state was on the verge of being downgraded to junk status? He would then own it.. This is why Rauner got it off his desk asap.– LOL, you’re making my point — and an argument for both the tax increase and the budget. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:41 pm: ===s from 4 HGOPs that they will override, all 67 Dems will be on it.=== Good luck with that. This is a double play ball, the Senate got the first out today, the second out isn’t guaranteed. You’re under the impression that all 67 want to be “Green” on this override. What makes you think that all 67 are on board? Faith? - Fax Machine - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:42 pm: Basically the critical question for override is whether or not 4 HGOPs sign on. If more or less than 4 sign on, some vulnerable Dems may not vote for override. If it is exactly 4 however, Rauner’s dishonest AV set it up so that an override vote isn’t just voting for a Chicago bailout, so all 71 HDems will vote for it if necessary. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:42 pm: wordslinger Rauner holding the bill for 60 days and going to junk status would do nothing to help him politically… Lol - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:43 pm: ===so all 71 HDems will vote for it if necessary.=== There’s only 67… and Drury… so 66. Math. - wordslinger - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:46 pm: Real, your argument is with yourself, not with me. By his inactions/actions, Rauner avoided junk status and blame for the tax increase. Not a real brain-teaser. - Fax Machine - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:46 pm: Rauner’s AV changed the narrative so voting for this isn’t voting for a Chicago bailout - now it’s voting against his agenda. Easy political ask for all 67 Dems & Speaker wants it so it’ll happen (if 4 HGOP on board). - Norseman - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:48 pm: Retired Educator, I hope you’re right. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:48 pm: wordslinger The fact is you are wrong.. Lol - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:51 pm: ===Easy political ask for all 67 Dems & Speaker wants it so it’ll happen=== Same ask when SB1 was voted on 3 times. It’s not an “easy” ask. If it was, there woulda been 66 votes on it last time, (less Drury) Rauner was 66 for 67 on stopping overrides when Madigan had 71. Madigan has 66. SB1 had 59 HDems last time. Math. - wordslinger - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:53 pm: –The fact is you are wrong.. Lol – Whoa, careful with the big guns of facts and logic there. Real, the fact is both of your positions cannot be right at the same time. I’m happy you can live with the cognitive dissonance.I’m sure that makes being a Rauner supporter easier. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:56 pm: Wordslinger So you believe Rauner would hold the budget on his desk for 60 days as ste state is downgraded to junk status? As Universities close up due to no funding? Lol you are way off. Rauner would gain nothing by holding it for 60 days. - wordslinger - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:00 pm: Real, you claim two things. 1. Rauner didn’t want the tax increase and budget. 2. He didn’t want the state to be downgraded. The tax increase and budget are the actions that prevented the downgrade. If you don’t see the conflict in your two positions, that’s your problem. - Retired Educator - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:02 pm: Real; Rauner would have gained a crisis. He wants to leverage those at all times. Even he was smart enough to know that the situation was growing worse by the day. He took a chance and lost. The biggest problem, is all the crying and grinding of teeth afterwards, It was and continues to be unseemly. - Black Ivy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:04 pm: Why did I even bother checking in on Capitol Fax on a Sunday? The anti-Rauner vitriol is on full display today. One ambitious and misguided Senate Republican failed to respect Illinois taxpayers in his amendatory veto override vote. Let’s hope House Republicans have the courage to do right by Illinois taxpayers. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:08 pm: ===Illinois taxpayers=== We’re all taxpayers. Thanks. - ArchPundit - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:19 pm: ===Looks like “I’ve never failed at anything ” will not be on Bruce’s gravestone. Bruce cannot fail, he can only be failed. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:24 pm: 2. He didn’t want the state to be downgraded.==== Correction. He didn’t want the state to be downgraded while the bill sat on his desk for 60 days…. This is why there was a quick veto. Keep up - wordslinger - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:31 pm: Real, I’m glad that makes sense to you. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:45 pm: wordlinger. Holding the bill for 60 days as the state is downgraded makes sense to you? Lol The fact is Rauner got the bill off of his desk asap so that he would not be ultimate blame for the state being downgraded. If you have Universities, schools, and so many other agencies demanding state money it does nothing for you to hold the budget on your desk for 60 days. You seem to think that a quick veto means Rauner wanted it to be overridden. That makes no sense at all considering the state was on a verge of being downgraded to junk. A 60 day delay in issuing that veto the state would be in junk status and newspaper editorials and legislatures would be blaming Rauner. But somehow you seem to think Rauner had 60 days to linger on in issuing his veto. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:50 pm: wordslinger Rauner issued a veto of sb1 fairly quick. I guess that quick veto means Rauner again wanted it to be overriden right? Lol It would make no sense for Rauner to hold sb1 for 60 days as schools need to open and it also made no sense for Rauner to hold the budget for 60 days as the state would of been in junk status because the bill sat on his desk. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:54 pm: - Real - You are advocating Rauner vetoed quickly in hopes to be overriden quickly to avoid a downgrade? Then the veto was symbolic and it also spared the state Rauner’s pain I don’t even think you know what you’re saying, lol - #5 - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:00 pm: “One ambitious and misguided Senate Republican failed to respect Illinois taxpayers in his amendatory veto override vote.” LOL! Funny, this taxpayer doesn’t feel disrespected by his vote. In fact, if he had voted to leave the schools to the whims of a capricious governor, I would feel differently. (BTW, Sen. McCann, thank you for supporting our schools.) - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:01 pm: OW I’m not sure that you are comprehending with I am saying… As I am saying the opposite of what you claimed I was saying. wordslinger advocated that Rauner issued a quick veto in hopes to be overridden. I advocated that Rauner issued a quick veto of sb1 and the budget because he would gain nothing by holding both for 60 days. 1. He would gain nothing by holding sb1 for 60 days as schools needed to open. 2. He would gain nothing by holding the budget for 60 days. Why hold a budget for 60 days and be downgraded while the budget bill sits on your desk? Do you even know what you are advocating? - Grandson of Man - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:06 pm: “That makes no sense at all considering the state was on a verge of being downgraded to junk.” So Rauner secretly did want the tax increase to pass and didn’t hold the bill, because of fear of junk status. Instead brave Republicans and Democratic GA members, unike Rauner, risked a lot to pass something of tremendous need that has tremendous risk to them. Wow, that seems to make the Wordslinger point, that Rauner really wanted the tax increase, he just wasn’t honest about it. Actions, not words. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:09 pm: ===1. He would gain nothing by holding sb1 for 60 days as schools needed to open.=== You’re assuming that the needed override will happen in both chambers. If it fails in the House, it will be Rauner’s veto alone that will cause schools to shut down without funding or not open in a very few cases at all. Can’t assume the override will happen. ===He would gain nothing by holding the budget for 60 days. Why hold a budget for 60 days and be downgraded while the budget bill sits on your desk?=== Rauner knew the overrides were possible, so vetoing and letting the overrides happen was the politics. ===Do you even know what you are advocating?=== Rauner vetoed the budget quickly to get his veto overriden quickly, so he wouldn’t be “Gov. Junk” in actuality. Rauner’s veto here of SB1 needs the override or schools either don’t open for a very small few, or stay open for a full year. Rauner needs overrides, no governor wants their veto closing schools. Will the House override? Dunno. If they don’t, Rauner’s veto will have damaged all school districts in Illinois, as the bill dies. - Rich Miller - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:10 pm: GoM is correct. In addition, Rauner held a press conference (the infamous “2×4 to the forehead” presser) to claim that what the bond raters said made no difference to him. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:11 pm: To those that say Rauner wanted the budget and tax increase… Care to explain how Rauner secretly wanting a tax increase would help a man who is hell bent on busting Unions? This should be interesting. Also considering how much backlash the 10-15 republican legislatures took over that vote. And considering that much of them are either retiring or facing a primary.. If Rauner secretly wanted a tax increase I highly doubt those same republicans would either be retiring or facing a primary. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:13 pm: - Real - You are clueless to the politics, the governing, and Rauner’s need of things, and the need to blame others for his needs. Good luck. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:18 pm: OW You are clueless… I would like for you to explain how Rauner secretly wanting a tax hike helps him bust Unions? I believe Rauner wanted a tax hike, but only after he succeeded in busting Unions… Not before. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:19 pm: ===You are clueless… I would like for you to explain how Rauner secretly wanting a tax hike helps him bust Unions=== Rauner’s own budget required a tax hike. Capiche? - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:26 pm: OW Yet you can’t explain how Rauner secretly wanting a tax hike helps him in busting Unions. As Rep Ives stated on the house floor “the only winners in this tax hike and budget would be Unions.” Since when is Rauner in the business of giving Unions wins? Rauners budget relied on a tax hike, but Rauner’s budget plan also was bad for Unions. This is one of the reasons why there was a 2 year impasse. Rauner wanted a budget plan with his turnaround agenda items that were bad for Unions with one of them being the property tax freeze. This was the only way Rauner was willing to sign that tax hike. And since dems did not agree with him he held the budget hostage. But funny you won’t explain how a tax hike without Rauner’s agenda items helps Rauner bust Unions. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 6:29 pm: ===But funny you won’t explain how a tax hike without Rauner’s agenda items helps Rauner bust Unions=== Your utter ignorance to math and Rauner’s own budget is noted. Keep up, to get, even the union busting items, Rauner 100% required a tax increase. Are you allergic to basic arithmetic or you can’t read Rauner’s own bills that required and called for a tax increase Good luck, lol - anon2 - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 8:26 pm: === Lol you are way off. Rauner would gain nothing by holding it for 60 days. === If Rauner’s top priority was stopping the tax hike, he could’ve held the bill for, say, 15 or 20 days to work on wavering House GOPers to support him. Perhaps it wasn’t his top priority. - Anonymous - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 9:35 pm: The tax increase helps Rauner bust unions because it gives him another reason to say “Illinois is broken. Cost of doing business is too high. Yadda, Yadda, yadda”. Let’s him blame unions for the need for more revenue. - perry noya - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 9:49 pm: Rich, could you please ban “lol” or “LOL” from comments? - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 10:25 pm: Rauner’s own budget required a tax hike.==== Rauner’s own budget required a tax hike along with many anti-Union agenda items. You can’t argue both ways. Just the other day you were saying that Rep Wheeler’s resignation due to Rauner losing leverage for his agenda items was a big Rauner loss. Now you are saying that he wanted a tax increase.. So which is it? Did he want this Madigan budget with a tax hike or did he want his version of a budget with a tax hike that also contained anti-Union agenda items? To say that Rauner spent millions to become Governor to accomplish none of his turn around agenda items because he wanted to be overridden on a tax hike is a foolish statement. Oh yea Rauner played this game this long because he wanted to be overridden at the end without accomplishing any of his legislative items.. All that after spending millions to become governor. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 10:37 pm: First, Ms. Wheeler is a Raunerite who admitted that hurting people was a game she thought was important and saving Illinois was bad. I wouldn’t call her a thoughtful legislator. ===Just the other day you were saying that Rep Wheeler’s resignation due to Rauner losing leverage for his agenda items was a big Rauner loss=== I said no such thing. ===- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 9, 17 @ 2:30 pm Then… It’s a really good thing Ms. Wheeler is leaving… when an obstructionist leaves… more gets done=== Or this… ===- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 9, 17 @ 4:57 pm To bring this back to Ms. Wheeler… I find it amusing that “betrayal” for Ms. Wheeler consists on continually hurting, on purpose, Illinois most needy, most vulnerable, students, higher education… Ms. Wheeler thinks betraying is actually trying to save Illinois from destruction. I’m relieved Ms. Wheeler isn’t coming back in 2019, for Illinois’ sake.=== Either you can’t read… ===Now you are saying that he wanted a tax increase..=== It’s not up for discussion or debate. Rauner required a tax increase. You lack a clear understanding. ===Did he want this Madigan budget with a tax hike or did he want his version of a budget with a tax hike that also contained anti-Union agenda items?=== A required element isn’t a “give” in forming a budget. Never can be, wasn’t then. ===To say that Rauner spent millions to become Governor to accomplish none of his turn around agenda items because he wanted to be overridden on a tax hike is a foolish statement.=== Then why say it. I didn’t. Rauner can’t count to 60 and 30. That’s why “Bruce Rauner fails” Rauner needs overrides because Gov. Junk would stick, and schools need to be open. You seriously lack any political acumen to realities… and how Rauner beat Quinn. ===Oh yea Rauner played this game this long because he wanted to be overridden at the end without accomplishing any of his legislative items.. All that after spending millions to become governor.=== Bruce says Diana Rauner believes Nruce has never been happier, LOL. I kid, I kid… Sometimes people fail. Bruve Rauner fails and the only way to keep from failing is begging for overrides when the leverage goes to far… and Diana Rauner floors by like being ridiculed at Winnetka cocktail parties. - Anon221 - Monday, Aug 14, 17 @ 8:38 am: Just a reminder to any Senator pushing back on Senate Rule 9-3 taking away their “rights”- you all voted for it… https://tinyurl.com/y966d9zz Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.