36 Comments - cover - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:17 am: Good question! Historically, House Dems always had a reason to stay in Speaker Madigan’s good graces, as they could reasonably assume that Madigan would be around long after the Governor was gone. Blago never learned that lesson, IMHO. If Pritzker wins and serves 2 terms, he would leave office in January 2027, 3 months before Madigan turns 85. Assuming that Madigan will still be around that long might not be the safe bet that it used to be. - Concerned Dem - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:17 am: It will take more than just money for Pritzker to get rank and file legislators to choose him over Madigan, it will take having a campaign apparatus in place as well too. If JB has both in place there will be plenty of Dem legislators that will be happy to stick to Madigan. - Frank talks - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:18 am: I think Dem legislators will be happy if they’re in the Senate. sn/ - wordslinger - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:18 am: Most would go with Pritzker because: –Money. Madigan leaned on donors to funnel all fundraising for House races through him, making legislators dependent. –Superior power of governor’s office (if the governor can be trusted) – Madigan’s unpopularity. –Actuarial tables. – and money. - 47th Ward - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:19 am: This is a great question. From my perch, I’d say there are two types of House Democrats. All of them rely on Madigan’s cash and political operation to some degree, but one group has the ability to raise money and recruit/retain talented staff without Madigan’s help. So folks like Kelly Cassidy, Greg Harris, Sara Feigenholtz have a base that extends beyond Madigan’s orbit. There are obviously others too, but these are the folks in my neck of the woods that I could see siding with Pritzker over Madigan. There is another group, probably a bit larger, that couldn’t raise much money on their own and couldn’t put a 50% + 1 plan together to save their own political lives. They know who they are, and Madigan could probably finance primary challengers with little difficulty if it came to that. I think these are the folks that Pritzker will have a tougher time separating from the flock. Hard to put numbers to these groups, but the latter is larger than the former. For now. It’ll depend on the issue(s) that divides Madigan and Pritzker, assuming it comes to that. - OnPoint - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:20 am: They’ll still side with Madigan. Once JB tries to buy them off, campaign finance reform legislation is coming and it’ll come in a way that hampers these billionaires from continuing to buy our public offices and officials. JB is going to rarely if ever disagree w MJM because he’s going to want to succeed so he can run for President, and he knows that a disagreement can lead to 4 years of pain and failure…he’ll need only to look to the guy he ousted for that lesson. - DuPage Saint - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:20 am: They will stick with Madigan old habits are hard to break. And JB is new kid in block who knows if he will outlast Madigan - Arsenal - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:22 am: I don’t think there’s a one-size-fits-all answer here. It’s going to depend on the issue and the legislator in question. There will be some times they defy Madigan, but some times they defy JB, too. And some times when the rank and file splits between the two. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:26 am: Madigan won’t be Speaker so it won’t matter. - cover - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:32 am: = Madigan won’t be Speaker so it won’t matter. = Care to elaborate? If you think the GOP can win a majority in the House this fall, I want some of what you’re smoking! - Stark - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:34 am: Anonymous - If I had that opinion, I wouldn’t want people to know my name either. /s - cover - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:35 am: Personally, if I had to guess at when Speaker Madigan might leave office, I would say that he’ll serve through the end of the 102nd General Assembly and retire in January 2023 - just shy of his 81st birthday. The 102nd will be in charge of the next remap, and I believe Madigan would still want to play a role in that. - Anon - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:36 am: Mitt Romney vs. Billy Bulger Illinois-style - Long time R - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:37 am: Go with the guy that has a proven track record, Madigan. - Honey Bear - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:38 am: How can you possibly predict JB will win? You probably think the sun will rise again tomorrow too. - Because I said so.... - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:39 am: I think some of it depends on what happens at DPI. Instead of its focus being primarily on the House, members might feel the need to expand their base of financial support. Either way, it should be fun to watch. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:40 am: They will stick with MJM. “Why?” Like Rauner, and the dream of Rod, a caucus controlled by the executive, while feasible and mathematically possible, the politics of “60”, the premise of cobbling that 60, considering chairmanships, leadership positions, the likelihood of no former Raunerites looking to help Pritzker, even over Madigan, the question Rich poses is outstanding to what tried to transpire with Rauner and his attempt to get a Raunerite alleged bipartisan caucus and this idea that Pritzker can wrangle 60 from the same idea. What could be argued is Rod was correct, but only proven correct if it’s a Democrat as the Executive. Tough for me to see a Pritzker caucus of 60 dictating to Madigan policies and legislation. If it’s “one or two”, then it’s no different than a governor working a caucus to get that one or two passed, and moving on to other things, billionaire or not. So, I say they stay with Madigan. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:40 am: –Mitt Romney vs. Billy Bulger Illinois-style– Mitt Romney was bankrolling Massachusetts Democratic legislators? - Anonymous - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:43 am: I think they’ll stick with madigan simply because history shows he’s been able to keep an ideologically diverse causes fairly unified. The acumen of JB, a novice politician, has yet to be seen. (As a side note, I’m curious as to what the issue would be that JB wouldn’t eventually defer to Madigan’s position) - Try-4-Truth - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 11:56 am: Maybe, just maybe, they’ll vote their conscience. I know, crazy though. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 12:00 pm: Pretty simple any legislation that JB supports over Madigan’s objection will be torpedoed in the Rules committee Unless JB is chairman of the House Rules committee he will have to cower to Speaker Madigan too. - Been There - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 12:01 pm: ====what do you think rank and file House Democrats will do when he and MJM eventually have a significant difference of opinion on legislation?==== I think JB and Madigan will have plenty of differences of opinion. But those differences would still need to get out of committee. But Madigan has shown he will let members go in their own sometimes. But not if it will hurt them politically. - NoGifts - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 12:14 pm: Nice that people hold open the possibility that they WILL have a split opinion….given BR’s advertisements. I guess the advertising isn’t working. - Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 12:27 pm: Probably would see them stick with Speaker Madigan. Governors come and go. Mr. Madigan is the more reliable option to them. - Pot calling kettle - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 12:34 pm: Money is great, but try moving a bill without Madigan’s support. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 12:48 pm: ===but try moving a bill without Madigan’s support=== Agreed. However, his members usually support him on that stuff (Quinn and Blagojevich didn’t have much HDem caucus support). What if a lot of members are at odds with MJM? That’s what the question is about. - Last Bull Moose I - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 1:01 pm: I cannot see Madigan trying to override a Pritzker veto. But there should never be a need for a Pritzker veto, but except for show. Getting through bills on which they agree should keep them busy. - a drop in - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 1:04 pm: “campaign finance reform legislation is coming” From where? - Hickory - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 1:19 pm: What we must remember is the Speaker is in charge. - Boone’s is Back - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 1:41 pm: I would imagine that would depend on whether JB continues to donate to the state party or start his own statehouse geared PAC… - BlueDogDem - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 1:52 pm: Great question. It will be MJM for two months. Then he retires. The Victor. - anon2 - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 2:18 pm: I think it would be in the interests of both JB and Madigan to avoid sharp and divisive disagreements. Consequently, I predict the two leaders would compromise more often than fight. - Stumpy's bunker - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 3:10 pm: It’s likely there will be disagreements, but I do not anticipate demonizing, name-calling warfare as our current governor has chosen to pursue with the Speaker. That should help immensely toward the prospect of negotiation with the goal of governing for the good of the people. That being said, the Speaker must be somewhat battle-weary, less likely to “throw down” as he contemplates riding off into the inevitable, private-sector & family-focused sunset. - JS Mill - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 3:15 pm: Great question. Normally I would lean on the old axiom of “follow the money”. Not to hedge here but never count Madigan out. Still, they will go with the money. This may present the one opportunity for a regime change in the house. Madigan is smart enough to see it coming if it does happen and go out on his own terms. =Unless JB is chairman of the House Rules committee he will have to cower to Speaker Madigan too.= Like Rauner? - Lester Holt’s Mustache - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 3:40 pm: I think this question is moot anyway, because I think Madigan retires once Rauner leaves office - but assuming that doesn’t occur: Pritzker. There’s no loyalty owed to Madigan by House Dems. Few of them genuinely cares for Madigan as a person, and after his missteps this past year even fewer are willing to fight for him to stick around. Literally every single dem outside of Chicago would be better off if he were gone, and they all know it. Madigan has gotten a lot of House Dems elected, but he’s also lost a lot of races for those same House Dems a short while later. These days house races are closer than they should be simply because Madigan is still there. It’s time for him to move on, and his caucus knows it, they just need proof that Pritzker will have their backs if they defy him on whatever issue. I do believe the vast majority would drop Madigan in a heartbeat if a governor Pritzker were to really push someone new for speaker. I think deep down Madigan knows all of this too, which is why he retires after November unless Rauner somehow pulls off the upset of the century. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Jul 19, 18 @ 7:04 pm: MJM trumps Pritzker Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.