Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » Senate overrides governor’s SB1 AV 38-19
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Senate overrides governor’s SB1 AV 38-19

Sunday, Aug 13, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller

* Sen. Sam McCann was the lone Republican to vote against the governor…


McCann is not only considering a run for governor against Rauner, he picked up a $53,900 contribution from the IEA last month.

* During his closing remarks, Sen. Andy Manar addressed this statement by Gov. Rauner during his appearance on the Fox News Channel on Friday

We passed a good school funding bill on a bipartisan basis that I championed.

But the Democrats and the majority in the House inserted a poison pill, a pension bail out for the city of Chicago, hundreds of millions of dollars every year diverted away from classrooms in the suburbs and down state, so I had to amendtory veto that bill and we’re going to get it fixed so it’s fair and more equitable for everybody.

“Can anybody explain that to me?” Manar asked.

Rauner certainly didn’t have anything to do with the passage of SB1 out of the Senate. Just the opposite. He pulled votes off.

Manar also noted that anyone could have filed a motion to accept the governor’s AV, but nobody did. He said the Senate President was involved in negotiations until late in the evening and early this morning, which is why he waited until the last moment to file an override motion.

…Adding… The Senate Republicans are pushing back hard against the claim that they could’ve filed a motion to accept the AV. They point to Senate Rules (9-3) which don’t appear to allow that. However, Sen. Manar said today that he checked with the parliamentarian, who said it has historically been allowed.

* And Sen. Kimberly Lightford, who was one of the official negotiators on a compromise, claimed the Republicans weren’t interested in any such thing…


       

69 Comments
  1. - Groundhog Day - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:04 pm:

    Looks like “I’ve never failed at anything ” will not be on Bruce’s gravestone.


  2. - 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.


  3. - 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.


  4. - Matt P.. - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:12 pm:

    Rauner should have let SB1 go and just focused on the tax hike.


  5. - 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.


  6. - 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.


  7. - 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.


  8. - 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.


  9. - Sue - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:21 pm:

    Let’s ask Anne Coulter for an opinion


  10. - 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.


  11. - 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.


  12. - 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.


  13. - 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.


  14. - 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.


  15. - 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?


  16. - 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


  17. - 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.


  18. - Fax Machine - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:30 pm:

    By the way, did Bill Brady lose his designee title yet?


  19. - 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.


  20. - 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.


  21. - 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.


  22. - 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?


  23. - Anon221 - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:33 pm:

    Sorry- 8-1-2017, not 2013.


  24. - 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.


  25. - 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.


  26. - 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.


  27. - 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.


  28. - Fax Machine - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:38 pm:

    If they can’t get 4 HGOPs on board, some Dems will vote against override


  29. - Norseman - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:39 pm:

    === Can’t wait to vote against this guy. ===

    Can’t wait to vote for this guy.


  30. - 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.


  31. - 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.


  32. - 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?


  33. - 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.


  34. - 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


  35. - 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.


  36. - 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.


  37. - 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).


  38. - Norseman - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:48 pm:

    Retired Educator, I hope you’re right.


  39. - Real - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 4:48 pm:

    wordslinger

    The fact is you are wrong.. Lol


  40. - 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.


  41. - 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.


  42. - 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.


  43. - 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.


  44. - 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.


  45. - 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.


  46. - Oswego Willy - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:08 pm:

    ===Illinois taxpayers===

    We’re all taxpayers.

    Thanks.


  47. - 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.


  48. - 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


  49. - wordslinger - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 5:31 pm:

    Real, I’m glad that makes sense to you.


  50. - 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.


  51. - 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.


  52. - 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


  53. - #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.)


  54. - 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?


  55. - 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.


  56. - 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.


  57. - 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.


  58. - 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.


  59. - 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.


  60. - 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.


  61. - 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?


  62. - 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.


  63. - 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


  64. - 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.


  65. - 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.


  66. - perry noya - Sunday, Aug 13, 17 @ 9:49 pm:

    Rich, could you please ban “lol” or “LOL” from comments?


  67. - 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.


  68. - 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.


  69. - 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.


* Reader comments closed for the weekend
* Republicans denied TRO in bid to be appointed to ballot
* Isabel’s afternoon roundup
* It’s almost a law
* Credit Unions: A Smart Financial Choice for Illinois Consumers
* Was the CTU lobby day over-hyped?
* 'Re-renters' tax in the budget mix?
* It’s just a bill
* Open thread
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* Get The Facts On The Illinois Prescription Drug Board
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Live coverage
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller