49 Comments - Dance Band on the Titanic - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:35 pm: I can see union members and supporters working precincts for Pritzker. I don’t see Janus supporters canvassing for Rauner. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:36 pm: How could union members be more angry at Rauner? Rauner’s supposed base, however, could be less angry. - Downstate - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:38 pm: Rauner’s base loves the Janus decision. High end pensions are as popular as property taxes right now. The Janus decision fits in nicely with that anger. - Arsenal - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:39 pm: Voted JB, but only because “push” isn’t an option. Rauner will probably get an ad or two out of it, but the issue is too technical for most people to care. But the unions aren’t “most people”, and they’ll care enough to make up for everyone else. It’ll be kind of like a mirror of gun politics, where the majority feels one thing but doesn’t vote on it, so the minority gets its way. - Mama - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:39 pm: It is hard to say whom the Supreme Court decision on the Janus vs AFSCME case will help. This should be a no-brainer for state employees & maybe teachers, but other people simply don’t care about union dues because they work in non-union shops or retired. - Anon - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:42 pm: Rauner was never going to get the strident union vote anyway, so no loss there. Rauner also isn’t going to get the strong Dems and liberals/progressives, so no loss there. Most conservatives dislike Unions and Rauner will definitely score points with them for instigating - and winning - this fight. And the fact that McCann is a union lackey means that conservatives will be less likely to back him and more likely to back Rauner. I believe most moderates do believe that unions have too much influence in state government. Even the suburban women that I know feel like the unions are part of Mike Madigan’s cabal. If this tips the scales to provide more balance, and if Rauner can convince them that this will provide long term benefits, he definitely gets more from this. - Arsenal - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:42 pm: I also keep mulling over something OW hinted at- how this is Rauner’s legacy and all that. And I wonder if maybe he’s put so much into it because that’s enough for him. Not that he’s going to roll over by any means, but that, now that he has this, now that he’ll be invited to every right wing dinner until the day he dies, maybe now it’s sure, winning re-election *too* would be great, but if it doesn’t happen, hey, he’s content. - Perrid - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:42 pm: Pritzker. I think most of the people who are happy were already going to vote Rauner, and this is going to scare/anger a lot of people who might have been on the fence before. - SAP - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:44 pm: I think it helps Pritzker. This decision gives conservatives who do not like Bruce Rauner a reason to vote for Sam McCann. - Lester Holt’s Mustache - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:44 pm: Voted Pritzker. The supposition about Rauner is only true if you actually believe that a) conservatives would have stayed home in November out of disgust with Rauner and not vote for McCann; and b) union opposition trumps abortion opposition. With McCann on the ballot, conservatives will have to decide for themselves - would they rather vote for a pro-abortion republican, or a pro-union republican? Not sure how much that choice motivates this particular group to vote one way or the other this fall. Might bring some trade union votes JB’s way though - Nick Name - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:44 pm: It helps Pritzker. It further solidifies labor opposition to Rauner, while Sam McCann is here to happily remind Rauner’s base of Rauner’s betrayals on HB40 and health care right of conscience. - Honeybear - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:46 pm: Pritzker I’ve already had a coworker say they want to go canvassing next time with me today. Janus will totally motivate union folk - Robert the Bruce - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:48 pm: Pritzker: motivates the base to vote against Rauner. I don’t see how Rauner votes become more motivated as a result of this decision. - Roman - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:54 pm: I said Pritzker, but only marginally. Dems will get some short-term benefit because their base is going to be fired up by Janus and other Supreme Court decisions that have gone against them. But the long term gain goes to the Republicans, as the decision will assist the long, steady erosion of organized labor. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:57 pm: ===…now that he has this, now that he’ll be invited to every right wing dinner until the day he dies, maybe now it’s sure, winning re-election *too* would be great, but if it doesn’t happen, hey, he’s content.== Just as important, Diana has HB40, and a liberal agenda Bruce consistently signed as the Raunerite caucuses voted against it. They both won today. Total cost $112 million and growing, but hey, they both made Raunerism and forced it upon an ill-prepared Party, and a vulnerable state. To the QOTD, I voted “Pritzker” “Why?” Rauner won, no need to fight anymore. The case is over. Pritzker and Labor know “… if not now, when?” is the rally cry. It’s almost by default. Will Labor and Pritzker hit that 1 in 5 or the 1 in 6 labor households? That’s the challenge. Voted “Pritzker” - Real - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 2:58 pm: This helps JB… But when groups of people are getting hurt i.e. Unions in this case republicans are happy. Last week it was illegals that republicans were happy about hurting. - m - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:03 pm: =Voted JB, but only because “push” isn’t an option. Rauner will probably get an ad or two out of it, but the issue is too technical for most people to care. But the unions aren’t “most people”, and they’ll care enough to make up for everyone else. It’ll be kind of like a mirror of gun politics, where the majority feels one thing but doesn’t vote on it, so the minority gets its way.= Agree and voted the same. Right now the coverage comes down to “strikes a blow to unions and collective bargaining.” That helps Pritzker, because there are plenty of union people that still like(d?) Rauner, as evidenced by polls, especially in trades. They might take him more seriously as anti-my-union now though. The people speaking out against the decision would have you believe that the SC just outlawed unions and collective bargaining. The hyperbole, in my opinion, will stoke fires of support for JB, but the people most excited are already that excited. The people who like the decision are speaking to the actual specifics of the decision, which is a bit more technical, and less likely to stir support, even if you’re anti-union. The reality is it simply removes the ability to force union dues on those who don’t want to join, while leaving them covered by union bargaining. It’s bad for unions more because it hits their pocket book so it’s a longer-term weakening of their power. The reality isn’t sexy enough or fast enough to really stir people in support of “Rauner’s great victory”. Rauner may see the estranged parts of his base come back, which is a positive for him, but as long as the pro-union folks keep the spin on their message, it will be more of a gain for them. If JB and unions can pitch “the sky’s falling!!!!!” hard enough, they may even move some of the people in the middle, but I don’t think this really riles up the moderates that much. I think it gets especially weak when people realize this is more about weakening union coffers and influence, because I think the average voter would like to see every special interest, from unions to oil companies, lose influence, even though they might not like where this potentially leads. So long story short, not a major factor, but advantage JB. - Responsa - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:08 pm: I have long thought that union membership in AFSME and others is not as politically monolithic as some want us to believe. With all the talk here and elsewhere about hoping some union members “learned their lesson” about supporting Rauner over Quinn–well, what if there *was* no lesson to learn. What if those union members were being deliberate with their vote and not merely stupid or naive? What if we give them and their families the benefit of respecting that maybe they knew what they were doing in that vote and that the Janus win (silently) validates them in their minds? There are plenty of issues in the Illinois 2018 gubernatorial race to consider. But I think the Janus decision will basically be a wash for Rauner and Pritzker. Just my opinion. - Chris Widger - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:14 pm: It looks like, while the polling is split 55/45 in Pritzker’s favor, votes for Pritzker are far better represented in these comments. I voted for Rauner in the poll for a very simple reason. Pritzker has every advantage–more money, leading polling going into November, a blue state, the opportunity to disingenuously attack an incumbent and unpopular president. What Rauner needs is changes to the status quo, and this is that. There’s no assurance that this will meaningfully help Rauner, but since Pritzker is all but assured victory in any case, Rauner needs to root for news events and potentially unpredictable outcomes from those. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:16 pm: JB - X-prof - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:19 pm: Voted JB. A key reason Rauner won last time is that union folks couldn’t see past their anger at Quinn. Quinn isn’t on the ballot this time, and the unions (and their supporters) will be doing a lot more than not voting for Rauner this time. This decision makes that doubly true. Unfortunately, anger seems to be the strongest motivator to vote these days, and I don’t see Rauner gaining much from this in November. Stay strong Honeybear. - Real - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:20 pm: Why are people voting that it helps Rauner yet aren’t saying how or why in the comments?? Obviously, they dont really believe it will help him. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:24 pm: Once the ads are prepared and show how this decision helps Bill & Betty Bungalow, it will have a significant boost for Rauner. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:26 pm: ===Once the ads are prepared and show how this decision helps Bill & Betty Bungalow, it will have a significant boost for Rauner.=== Polling disagrees with you, but, ok. - Baggs McCoy - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:28 pm: They both won. JB gets to intensify the activism of the unions. Rauner gets to help mend the family fences. I voted Rauner only because union membership is what like 10% of the workforce in Illinois overall. There is some resentment of non-union workforce Rauner can tap into if he does it right. I have constantly heard people say they don’t get raises or the benefits that union workers get. Bashing union workers won’t hurt him as he lost them anyway. He will dive in the deep end of union bashing is my guess. Curry favor of 90% of the workforce against 10% of the workforce. It wont be pretty. - DuPage Saint - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:32 pm: Pritzker gets bump. Union workers will not forget. To non union people not that big of a deal and long time to election some other bread and circuses will come along and deflect their attention - chi - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:34 pm: Rauner was first to the buffet line, but agency fees were doomed when Trump won and Gorsuch was appointed. If it wasn’t the Janus case there were plenty of others already in the pipeline, he really doesn’t deserve much credit. - Board Watcher - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:39 pm: Rauner, it helps bring his base back and brings him plenty more money from his big donors. Uihlien, Griffin and Zell will open the check books and plenty of money from anti union groups across the country will also contribute. His pocket book just became equal to Pritzkers for the campaign. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:39 pm: ===He will dive in the deep end of union bashing is my guess. Curry favor of 90% of the workforce against 10% of the workforce. It wont be pretty.=== Polling above seems to say that’s swimming upstream… Rauner is already unlikable, union bashing will make Rauner more likable with polling for labor as it is? Hmm. - Wensicia - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:43 pm: Voted for Pritzker because I don’t think Rauner gains enough advantage to wipe out McCann’s influence, let alone overcoming a blue wave. Not in this state. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:43 pm: Dupage, on the blogs I sometimes frequent, residents are outraged at real estate taxes and public pensions–big time. Folks read that Madigan’s right hand guy was making $208,000, will receive $130,000 from unused vacation and sick time and his pension will start around $134K-$135K a year. In ten years it will be about $180,000 a year. Average households take notice of these stories. - Wensicia - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:50 pm: ==he really doesn’t deserve much credit== Ives sure isn’t giving Rauner credit in the above tweet. - Honeybadger - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:53 pm: -Anonymous, figure out a name for this site willya? You obviously frequent “right-wing” blogs. Maybe those people should try and form or join a union and they can enjoy pension benefits. - CrazyHorse - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:53 pm: Voted Pritzker. The rabid anti-union crowd was going to vote for Rauner regardless of the decision. Will it bring over a small percentage of Republicans that were maybe going to sit this one out? Perhaps but it is not going to be nearly enough to defeat Pritzker. I would see it differently if this were a closer race than what it is right now. The Janus decision just gives Rauner another jolt from the defibrillator. It simply delays the time of death. - Lester Holt’s Mustache - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:55 pm: ==What if those union members were being deliberate with their vote and not merely stupid or naive?== This isn’t an either/or, Responsa. Rauner denied on multiple occasions that he would seek to destroy unions, and a couple of times explicitly said he would not use the governors office to push for right to work laws. Many (trade) union guys I know took Bruce at his word. They weren’t naive or stupid, just lied to. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:56 pm: I agree with those above, too… Rauner will abd should be able to fundraiser off it… but Rauner’s Crew must make it tighter to be taken seriously. - Stark - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 3:57 pm: Politically: Pritzker Policy-wise: Rauner - Precinct Captain - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 4:01 pm: This helps Pritzker. Unions will focus like a laser on internal organizing. Why is the Culinary Union so powerful in Nevada, a RTW state? The most fierce and intense internal organizing effort in the country. Part of that effort is supporting the people on your side and that sure ain’t Rauner. - Arsenal - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 4:03 pm: ==I have long thought that union membership in AFSME and others is not as politically monolithic as some want us to believe.== It wasn’t until Rauner came to town. Republican Governors regularly worked hard to at least engage AFSCME. But Rauner called all that work “corrupt”, so here we are. ==What if those union members were being deliberate with their vote and not merely stupid or naive?== What if people wore dogs on their heads instead of hats? If you don’t like unions and want to see them weakened, you probably don’t join one. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 4:04 pm: Honeybadger, do you consider this blog “right wing?” I see you have no comment on my public pension example that taxpayers are funding. - Grandson of Man - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 4:04 pm: I voted Pritzker. Trump and Rauner are union busters who are directly tied together by the Janus case. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 4:08 pm: If the question were Rauner vs madigan…my answer would be different - JT 11505 - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 4:15 pm: People who are satisfied aren’t motivated. People who are mad are motivated. Thus my vote for Pritzker. Besides going after unions, what did Rauner have backing from the right on? - d.p.gumby - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 4:33 pm: Anything that increases the enthusiasm for Dem and union and pulls them away from the phony claims of Trumpism will help Pritz. - Roman - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 4:41 pm: == Average households take notice of these stories. == Meh. Big payouts for political hacks? Yes. But Supreme Court decisions on “fair share” rules? I don’t think average folks know what that means. The decision will fire up activists who do know what it means short term, and it will erode union influence long term. - Question - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 5:42 pm: This election cycle it helps J.B., however it helps the Illinois GOP in the long run. - Tony S - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 9:31 pm: It will help JB in November as one more reason for progressive voters to get fired up about voting Rauner out of office. But this will hurt the organizational efforts of unions in the long run, thereby helping the GOP. - justacitizen - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 9:46 pm: Voted Rauner. AFSCME has way too much power and at some agencies actually call the shots rather than management. Like an earlier commenter suggested though, it probably won’t have a significant impact on the upcoming governor election. - BlueDogDem - Wednesday, Jun 27, 18 @ 10:24 pm: Pritzker. The motivation for Dems will be huge. How can any conservative be fired up by this phoney? I moved the needle to 11% after today SCOTUS decision. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.