Capitol - Your Illinois News Radar » Question of the day
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      Mobile Version     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Question of the day

Tuesday, Nov 19, 2019

* Sens. Lightford, Steans and Manar have formed a new leadership PAC

Expect a fundraiser soon to support Lightford’s candidacy for Senate President.

* The Question: Should Sens. Martin Sandoval and Tom Cullerton be allowed to vote for Senate President? Make sure to explain your answer, please.

- Posted by Rich Miller        

  1. - Just Me 2 - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:29 pm:

    I think the bigger question is what will this PAC do if Sandoval and Tom Cullerton donate to it.

    heh heh

  2. - Been There - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:36 pm:

    I would think they could exclude them from the caucus vote but I would guess they have right to vote when the whole chamber votes. If I was the caucus I would ask them to sit it out.

  3. - Regular democrat - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:36 pm:

    I always fall back on presumed innocent so since they are both elected members I vote yes. If one becomes the deciding vote? Maybe a future question if the day

  4. - NotRich - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:37 pm:

    Yes.. Both are sitting members of the Illinois Senate, sent there by constituents/voters. Until that changes, they are entitled to carry out their duties.

  5. - Another Regular Dem - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:38 pm:

    Yes. Innocent until proven guilty. They won election and are there.

  6. - Bourbon Street - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:39 pm:

    I vote “yes”. They are still in office and therefore their constituents have the right to be heard through their elected senators.

  7. - JS Mill - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:41 pm:

    They should be able to vote so long as they are in the Senate, unless there is a rule against them voting. I do not support either one of them but we should follow the rules even if ultimately they are convicted of a crime.

    It does not look good for either of them, but others have been acquitted.

    I would rather see just about anyone elected as the senate president other than Lightford. Her work on SB 7 was really bad and we ended up with a paper tiger.

  8. - DIstant watcher - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:42 pm:

    It takes 30 votes to be elected Senate President. Any coalition that gets 30, wins. Hypothetically, someone could win with the Republicans and some Dems, while the majority of the Dems vote for a losing candidate. If the losing Bloc includes Sandoval, then what do you do?

    If it’s close, getting Sandoval support will be an issue. If it’s not close, no one will care except the IRP.

  9. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:44 pm:

    The process set by President Cullerton allows both members to be able to participate in the workings of the Chamber.

    Each chamber goes about its business differently, with the House handling indictment(s) in one way, and that is their way and privilege. Comparing the two chambers is terribly unfair, but when different rules are being applied to similar circumstances, it can’t be helped that not only comparisons occur, but comparing what can be seen as deficiencies in those differences happen.

    I’m voting “yes”, but I’m hoping that both members will choose to refrain from participating, but that is a hope and nothing more.

    As members elected, they, according to President Cullerton’s view, are still, allegedly, entitled to those votes by the parameters put forth.

    So… a reluctant yes.

  10. - nuanced take - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:44 pm:

    Should they be ALLOWED to vote? Yes, they are members of the caucus still.
    Should they VOTE? No. There is a possibility this will be a closely contested election, and the possibility of either of them potentially being a deciding vote would erode public trust in the newly elected President right from the start.

  11. - Commonsense in Illinois - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:45 pm:

    They have not been convicted, so yes, they should be able to choose the President of their choice. That said, it would be ethically correct for both of them to abstain from voting until there is a disposition of their legal problems.

  12. - Donnie Elgin - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:46 pm:

    I vote yes let them vote. Innocent/guilt not really a factor in Senate pres vote. They are part of the Dem caucus and until leadership can persuade them to quit you take the good with the bad.

  13. - A guy - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:52 pm:

    They shouldn’t. But I don’t see any legal impediment to prevent them. They should either voluntarily bow out or provide one vote for Kim and one for Manar.

    What an awful legacy if either of these 2 person’s votes make a difference.

  14. - NIU Grad - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:53 pm:

    Yes, because they are still Senators and caucus members. If either care at all about their party, they’d call in sick that day.

  15. - mcdouble - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:53 pm:

    Does this mean there is a truce between Lightfoot, Steans, and Manar?

  16. - Moe Berg - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 2:57 pm:

    Always an option for those who would be Senate President to announce that they will not accept the vote of those under such clouds (and, would add Link to that list). In fact, contenders could declare right now that they reject their votes.

  17. - 47th Ward - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:09 pm:

    If this goes off the rails and the Republicans get involved, I’d rather have the vote of Cullerton and Sandoval over the vote of any Republican senator.

    I doubt will see that scenario, but under the rules, it’s possible the GOP could play a role in this. Would the winner look better if she wins with GOP votes, or if it requires her to accept the support of two Senators under investigation?

  18. - Norseman - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:16 pm:

    Depends on who they plan on voting for. Just kidding.

    I have to go with let them vote. As mentioned, they are elected officials until convicted or expelled.

  19. - Been There - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:20 pm:

    I still say the Dem caucus can make up their own minds on this the same as they did when Cullerton got elected. They can decide that it will be a majority of their own caucus to decide and the other members would fall in line after that. So the repubs were not part of the plan. They could do the same except say its a majority of the 38 out of their 40 that would decide (majority of 37 if you leave out Link also).

  20. - SAP - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:21 pm:

    Yes, I think you have to let them vote if they are still in the caucus. I expect part of the ground rules to include that the vote for the new President will be a caucus position anyway. Tangentially, could John Cullerton step down from the Presidency, vote for his replacement, then retire his Senate seat?

  21. - Spectre - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:37 pm:

    Yes. If they can travel to Springfield, they should be allowed to vote.

  22. - R A T - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 3:39 pm:

    Should they be allowed? Not sure how they cannot be allowed.

    Should they? This one is harder for me but since they are allowed, I guess it is really up to them … and they will.

  23. - Powdered Whig - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 4:01 pm:

    Honestly, I think the answer is different for Cullerton than it is for Sandoval. Cullerton has been indicted on several counts.

    Sandoval has not even been indicted of a crime.

    At the end of the day, the Feds need to do better about expediting these cases when they decide to do very public raids such as they did here. But they wont. I think they are content with the chaos that ensued as a result of their “investigative” activities.

  24. - Been There - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 4:51 pm:

    === Should they be allowed? Not sure how they cannot be allowed.====
    As noted above I think they definitely have a right to vote when it actually is taken up on the floor. But the Sen Dems can make that perfunctory if they decide in their caucus (and behind closed doors) that a majority of just the Dems will come to an agreement and then the rest of them will accept that decision and agree to vote for that person on the floor.

  25. - Token Conservative - Tuesday, Nov 19, 19 @ 8:17 pm:

    Of course not…and the new Senate Presdient should immediately move to expel the schmucks from the body.

  26. - Eire17 - Wednesday, Nov 20, 19 @ 4:09 am:

    They have not been convicted. They have due process rights. They should be allowed to vote. The bigger question is that in this environment is it wise to create a PAC basically for the sole purpose of picking the next Senate Prez? Wouldn’t want to be the Treasurer of the one. Regardless of how squeaky clean it might be questions will be asked.

Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.

* 982 new cases, 97 additional deaths
* Is anybody out there?
* Base revenues fell $341 million in May, but income tax plunge vastly slowed
* Some people will believe anything on social media
* Attempts to heal
* Black Caucus lays out some of its agenda
* Oberweis wants expanded mail-in ballot program
* Today's must-read
* Testing sites reopening
* *** UPDATED x2 *** Three House Black Caucus members call for special legislative session
* Open thread
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Yesterday's stories

Visit our advertisers...





Main Menu
Pundit rankings
Subscriber Content
Blagojevich Trial
Updated Posts

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


RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0

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