Some political updates
Thursday, Nov 18, 2021 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Politico…
Democrats move the line on litmus tests
Gov. J.B. Pritzker attended a fundraiser last night for state Sen. Mike Simmons, a signal to any potential primary challenger that the recently appointed lawmaker from Chicago’s 7th District has the deep-pocketed governor’s support.
Simmons is Black and the state Senate’s first openly LGBTQ+ member, a point of pride for the party.
But Simmons also didn’t take a position on the most prominent piece of legislation the General Assembly tackled this year: the clean energy bill. The governor fiercely supported it, and traveled the globe to celebrate it at the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Glasgow.
At the time of his vote, Simmons told constituents he was concerned that the legislation would raise residents’ electric bills by $4 or more a month. Simmons took a pass — voting “present” — out of principle, knowing that the legislation would easily pass anyway.
By not holding that vote against him, Pritzker seems to be signaling that he doesn’t use litmus tests when it comes to supporting fellow Democrats.
It’s a turn-around from how the Democratic Party handled a lawmaker who sat out a vote on a crucial issue in 2019. Then-Democratic state Rep. Yehiel “Mark” Kalish, the General Assembly’s first member also serving as an Orthodox Jewish rabbi, passed on voting for the Reproductive Health Act, a law that enshrined abortion rights into state law. Kalish checked with the bill’s sponsor beforehand to be sure that it could pass even with his non-vote.
But his fellow Democrats turned on him nonetheless because he had said during his appointment interview that he would vote for the bill. He later lost his reelection bid in 2020.
Similarly, Simmons said during his appointment interview that he’d support the clean energy bill — which is why a few 47th Ward Democrats in his district are now concerned about his non-vote.
There is a huge difference between Simmons’ climate/energy bill vote and the backlash against Kalish: None of the groups behind the climate/energy bill are up in arms and demanding Simmons’ political head be put on a platter. Kalish’s flip-flop infuriated the pro-choice groups, particularly at Personal PAC, which, like it or not, has been a hugely powerful and influential pro-choice organization for decades here.
So, Kalish had to go. And so might Simmons if the AFL-CIO teamed up with the environmental groups to angrily demand his ouster. That hasn’t happened. Also, Personal PAC is more of an all-or-nothing organization. Its motto is “Pro-choice or no choice.” Labor and the enviros are more about the art of driving hard legislative bargains.
…Adding… Good point in comments…
The bill changed drastically between his commitment and his vote. By all means feel free to hold him to it, but then expect more non-answers from politicians like “It depends on what’s in the bill.” Or “I support the principle of promoting clean energy, but cannot make any commitments until I see the bill.”
I’m sure onlookers looooove that kind of response, but that’s what you incentivize.
Kalish just 100% flipped on a clear issue.
* WGIL…
State Senator Neil Anderson has announced that he will run for re-election in a sense, but in a new Senate District.
Republican Anderson hails from Andalusia, Illinois, and has been representing the nearby 36th District in the Quad Cities area.
Anderson is a firefighter and paramedic for the City of Moline, where he holds the rank of engineer.
The newly redrawn maps by the Democratic-controlled legislature very narrowly put Anderson in the 47th where he will run to represent parts of Knox, Rock Island, Warren, McDonough, and Fulton counties.
That new district is much more Republican than his current district. It’s already been interesting to watch his generally pro-labor voting record change to voting against the climate/energy bill.
* Rep. Dan Brady has been in office nearly 20 years and represents a very GOP district. His campaigns have mostly been cakewalks…
As of Sept. 30, Brady had nearly $190,000 in his campaign coffers. By comparison, the top two Dem campaign coffers are owned by Giannoulias, who ended September with more than $3.4 million in the bank, and Valencia, who raised more than $707,000.
But Brady was undaunted by the financial challenges. The longtime state rep said he’s been the underdog — and underfunded — in every campaign he’s ever been in but “there’s no hill for a climber.”
Click here for a bit of electoral history.
…Adding… Mayor Lightfoot was asked yesterday about FOP President John Catanzara’s threat to run for mayor…
In all seriousness, it would be a gift.
- Miso - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:06 am:
Dear Sen. Simmons-
A lie, is a lie.
- Annonin' - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:15 am:
A Brady from Bloomington…will our dogs be safe
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:20 am:
===Rep. Dan Brady has been in office nearly 20 years and represents a very GOP district. His campaigns have mostly been cakewalks…===
My comments yesterday, it’s not that I dislike Brady or even disagree overall in a nearly 20 year career with Brady.
The reality is the Rauner years in particular Brady got a nice “free pass” in some very damaging ways he voted to hurt Illinois and ironically the region he represented in higher education. Ignoring that reality and touting his years (years greater than what term limits would allow, but I digress) and running on his record… Brady has rarely faced what it means to run on one’s record, and unless Brady comes to grips that he “learned from mistakes made” in governing during these past times, some really bad things are gonna be hung on him and he then will need to defend them… like no budget, or decimating social services… functions of governing stifled by his votes.
If Brady chooses to still carry water for the Floridian Bruce Rauner and defend those votes while running on his career, welp, “ok”… if Brady does (it’s not a given or a known) have Ricketts, Trump’s former finance chair at the GOP, close to his campaign, welp, I’m sure someone will decide that’s worth noting too, let alone if Brady decides to embrace Trump in either the primary, or later in the general.
Announcing a run is the easiest day of the campaign, or it should be, and we’ve seen horrible rollouts I grant you, but Brady now might feel heat and have light on him far different than before, more like will than might…
You can’t run on your record or history in hopes others will forget your record or history.
We’ll see.
- Nearly Normal - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:22 am:
Annonin’–dogs are safe. You have the wrong Brady–that was Bill Brady. And they are not related unless maybe if you trace the families in Ireland.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:28 am:
===You have the wrong Brady===
Trust me, Annonin’ knows the difference. lol
- Telly - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:28 am:
@Miso
Who did Simmons lie to? Kalish committed to vote for a bill that had a tight roll call and didn’t. Maybe there’s some public comment out there I’m not aware of, but I don’t think Simmons ever committed to the bill.
- Momma - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:32 am:
Didn’t Anderson campaign on running only two terms?
- Been There - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:34 am:
===Dear Sen. Simmons-
A lie, is a lie.====
Miso, if you can show me that the final version of the energy bill language was available when Sen Simmons was asked if he would support, then I would agree with you. But my guess is the proposal that the Greens were touting at that time was vastly different than what passed. With many moving parts. So I can’t agreed that he out and out lied.
- Northsider - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:34 am:
If it comes to Mayor Lightfoot vs. John “Benito” Catanzara, I’ll take a lemon juice bath and crawl over broken glass to vote for her.
- Telly - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:41 am:
Oops. Sorry, Miso. Just reread the Politico piece. I see that Simmons committed to the bill at a ward event.
- Roman - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:45 am:
== It would be a gift ==
Much better from the mayor. Short, subtle and dismissive instead of the usual vitriol.
- Nazono Sakana - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:52 am:
+1 to Been There
==But my guess is the proposal that the Greens were touting at that time was vastly different than what passed. With many moving parts. So I can’t agreed that he out and out lied.==
- Paddyrollingstone - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 11:54 am:
Roman - agreed, it was a perfect answer. It was also demonstrably true.
- Arsenal - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 12:05 pm:
Dan Brady is, worst case scenario, absolutely qualified and legitimate, and will not embarrass ILGOP at all. Best case scenario, he’s Secretary of State. I think it’s fair to question if he has the chops to deal with the money machine headed his way, but stranger things have happened.
- Shield - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 12:09 pm:
Did Simmons commit to voting for CEJA or any bill? Because what passed is a long way from CEJA.
- JJJJJJJJJJ - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 12:27 pm:
@Miso
The bill changed drastically between his commitment and his vote. By all means feel free to hold him to it, but then expect more non-answers from politicians like “It depends on what’s in the bill.” Or “I support the principle of promoting clean energy, but cannot make any commitments until I see the bill.”
I’m sure onlookers looooove that kind of response, but that’s what you incentivize.
Kalish just 100% flipped on a clear issue.
- CubsFan16 - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 12:43 pm:
I second Arsenal’s comments.
- Cosgrove - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 3:41 pm:
For the record: Kalish promised to support the RHA in its final form many times to different people, including the sponsor, before he didn’t vote for it at the last minute. We had a written and signed questionnaire from him that he supported the content of the bill, on top of being appointed to the seat based on his pro-choice position and replacing an outspoken pro-choice advocate in Leader Lang.
- City remap vortex - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 4:05 pm:
MLL will not get her wishes, there will be more than a few more qualified candidates. I =did vote, and wished her success. But she has really IMO been a fraud.
- low level - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 5:39 pm:
Re: Votes. IMO, the only time you should vote present is if you have a conflict of interest. If you are doing it for political purposes, thats a bad idea. You will make no one happy and will likely annoy both proponents and opponents.
Re: MLL. Yes, but I wouldnt say that publically. If it wound up being JC vs Lori in a runoff, I’d have to vote for Lori. What a choice. Ugh.
- low level - Thursday, Nov 18, 21 @ 5:43 pm:
As for Simmons and Kalish comparisons…. Abortion and choice issues carry much more emotional (and thus political) weight then energy does. That may partially account for the difference in how both were treated afterwards.