33 Comments - Ducky LaMoore - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:13 am: Sounds like a resounding success for a super-minority party. - @misterjayem - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:15 am: Elections something… Somethings matter… Something something… – MrJM - Arsenal - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:19 am: Sucks to suck, I guess. - Obama’s Puppy - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:21 am: You want to pass more bills? Win more elections. You don’t win a majority to hand the agenda to the minority. This is a ridiculous issue. Go check out how Dems are treated in Red states and tell me about fairness. - Data Boy to the Rescue - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:23 am: What are the numbers in DC? How do Dems fare in Red states? - don the legend - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:25 am: Timmy “the Tantrum” Butler probably doesn’t think much of these numbers. - Arsenal - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:26 am: To be a little less glib… The people of Illinois, by fairly large margins and in repeat elections, have said quite clearly that they want Democrats in charge of the state. Given that, it would lack a bit of democratic legitimacy to give the party that the state has repeatedly rejected too large a say. - Candy Dogood - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:26 am: While this is a fascinating statistic, I’m not sure that this metric would be more meaningful than suggesting that the party that has the super majority is more than willing to consider bills coming out of the super minority on their merits. The super minority GOP caucuses have expressed no interest in crafting bills to specifically pass as a goal, and if anything it’s pretty clear that there lack of interest of doing so is more present in the lower chamber and would apparently rather throw temper tantrums. The fact remains that if you didn’t vote in favor the bill addressing the seditious and treasonous behavior of Representative Chris Miller none of your legislation should ever leave committee. You should have no staff. Your constituents would be better served by someone who holds the interests of our State and our Republic above supporting people that share their party ID, even as they vocally support an assault on our national Capitol. The Democratic Super Majority has been generous in supporting those bills. The Democratic Super Majority has placed governing above a wise and prudent political position of refusing to pass the bills of those who refuse to support our Democracy and punish those who do not. This isn’t a meaningful number, and if there is any lesson to draw with it, it’s that the the Democratic Super Majority has completely abandoned the notion of Realpolitik even when it would be a good idea to user their legislative authority to maintain the spirit of our Democracy. Some of us might think of that as a mistake. The GQP isn’t just ad portas, they’re already in the chamber. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:27 am: Winners. Make. Policy. - SpiDem - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:36 am: This doesn’t apply to all GOP members, but an awful lot of bills were filed that were either wildly controversial, or filed for purposes of a press release, or both. The vast majority of bills moving are via consent calendar. Meaning like most bills every session, there is no opposition. These bills are never sexy, but the represent the lions share of the work every session. Controversial stuff is by it nature going to move based on the preferences of the majority. Right wing proposals filed in a supermajority Democratic chambers are never going to go far. In short — this really reflects a choice. If you want to pass laws, work on building consensus. If you want to issue press releases, rail at the clouds, and pass no bills, issue lots of controversial stuff that will go nowhere. - DuPage Dad - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:38 am: Party with super-majority and unified control of government doesn’t feel need to cater to needs of super-minority party with no money, story at 11. - Dance Band on the Titanic - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:47 am: Perhaps the GOP should focus more attention on introducing legislation that can garner bipartisan support. - A Guy - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:51 am: Regardless of personal views, a vast number of schools must not have taught fractions. 4.6 to 1.6 and keep a straight face? Unless you have the franchise in completely helpful ideas, you aren’t holding them accountable at all. Laughable, but not really. - Been There - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 10:56 am: I am also assuming most lobbyist tell the client that they will be using a dem legislator to sponsor their bills. And, as already noted, a lot of them end up being non controversial and passed as agreed bills. - Lt Guv - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 11:00 am: misterjayem said it best. The other observation I’d add is that there is a bit of skewing in these numbers. Some of those bills (on both sides of the aisle) are local concern issues that just about anyone elected to represent a locality would carry. I don’t know how many, but there have always been some of those in the mix. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 11:03 am: === Unless you have the franchise in completely helpful ideas, you aren’t holding them accountable at all.=== What does this even *mean*? Holding who accountable to what? If the super-minoritied Raunerites can’t get bills passed, either win elections or work with Dem sponsors in a bipartisan sponsorship to not only look like it’s ok to work with Dems but also be effective. It’s like Grant Wehrli saying he was ineffective… but vote for his ineffectiveness. Luckily for his former district they decided Wehrli’s ineffectiveness and least helpful ways needed replacing. Great example of who (Wehrli) is a legislator that fails to pass things. - Norseman - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 11:06 am: Watching the GQP legislative atrocities roll out in red states, I’m not troubled at all. Like OW said. Winners Make Policy - walker - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 11:11 am: A good sign: That there are so many consent calendar bills, means that Republicans in committee didn’t obstruct and delay. They acted very responsibly during the process. Proud of Illinois again. - Take a closer look - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 11:13 am: Is this a story? When are Democrats responsible for passing the Republican agenda? - Siwash - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 11:16 am: One party rule. Long term negative for the state. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 11:17 am: === One party rule.=== Narrator: Elections have consequences. - Steve Rogers - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 11:20 am: “One party rule. Long term negative for the state.” Do you feel the same way about Kansas, Texas, Tennessee, etc., etc.? - low level - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 11:44 am: I’d be curious to know the ratio of the total number of votes for Democratic candidates foe the legislature vs GQP, then comparing this ratio of bills passed vis a vis the two parties. - Members matter - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 11:49 am: A silly question. Substance of bills substantially more indicative of keeping bi partisan promises. - Pot calling kettle - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 12:20 pm: ==One party rule.== If that is the case, why are there any Republican bills moving? To the larger point, pick a Republican Legislator, read a few bills that have been “Re-referred to Rules” and you find bills that reflect the Republican platform (repeal the estate tax, repeal the FOID, photo ID to vote, etc.). These bills are not going to pass; moving them forward is a waste of everyone’s time. - Mary - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 12:52 pm: Dance Band on the Titanic-all of the R bills will have to pass with bipartisan support; none of the D bills do. What would be more interesting is how many bills with just R cosponsors alone vs. how many bills with just D cosponsors alone passed. My guess is a negligible number of R-only bills passed, unless they had to do with ag or something that the D’s don’t really care about (license plates). Did anything that is a core part of the R agenda pass? Not a bit. But the D’s passed most of their core agenda on housing, unions, education, etc., and kept a lot of other stuff bottled up (ethics/elections). Big things that aren’t moving (eg energy) are because the D’s are fractured, and horsetrading votes (gun issues where the progressive women want more gun control, and the black caucus wants decriminalization/expungement). - Arsenal - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 2:02 pm: ==One party rule. Long term negative for the state. == Then maybe the other party should stop actively repelling the voters. - Chicago Cynic - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 2:11 pm: Let me think. How many bills did the Dems pass in the US House when the GOP was in charge? Umm, yea. That would be Zero. How many did the GOP pass when Dems were in charge? Yup. Still zero. Elections. Have. Consequences. - Anyone Remember - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 2:12 pm: Aware if was the pre-internet era, but does anyone have the same figures for the Spring 1993 Senate? - Lurker - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 2:40 pm: — The people of Illinois, by fairly large margins and in repeat elections, have said quite clearly that they want Democrats in charge of the state. — I disagree with that statement. Many of us have said we do not want the Republicans of Illinois. May seem like a slight difference but important to me. - Arsenal - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 3:59 pm: ==I disagree with that statement. Many of us have said we do not want the Republicans of Illinois. May seem like a slight difference but important to me.== The result is the same. If anything, your distinction makes it even less justifiable to give the minority party anything approaching parity in setting the agenda. - MyTwoCents - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 5:05 pm: So what does the GOP want to happen? Their bills be brought to the floor and voted down? The end result is the same. Whether it’s bottled up in committee, voted down in committee or voted down on the floor, the reality is very few GOP priorities are going to pass because they are not Democratic priorities. That’s kind of the point of a two party system. - logic not emotion - Monday, Apr 26, 21 @ 5:10 pm: More evidence that Illinois should go with an open primary and ranked choice voting like some other states. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.