Illinois House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch took the extraordinary actions last week of permanently kicking Rep. Fred Crespo, D-Hoffman Estates, out of the House Democratic caucus, stripping him of his legislative staff, removing him from his Appropriations Committee chair position and booting him from the bicameral Legislative Audit Commission.
Welch also suspended a Democratic staffer who reportedly helped Crespo prepare an alternative budget plan, which is what got both people axed.
Crespo took me aside Tuesday night at a reception and told me he was preparing to unveil a budget proposal that he believed could help the state weather at least some of the fiscal pain that the Republican Congress and the Trump administration were about to inflict on Illinois and all other states.
The very next day, Welch lowered the boom. Hard.
Needless to say, replacing an Appropriations Committee chair with barely two weeks to go in the spring session and tough budget votes ahead is not exactly commonplace. I’ve never seen such a thing in 35 years of doing this.
A source within the House Democratic operation said Welch told Crespo he hadn’t been engaging this session with the House’s top budget negotiators, appropriations staff, other members and the House speaker himself.
But the final straw was Crespo’s budget proposal, which was far outside the “silo” of his Appropriations Committee’s purview, multiple sources said.
Crespo’s budget idea would have at least temporarily freed up about $4 billion in state spending in the upcoming fiscal year. The proposal would’ve withheld state funds from discretionary programs, created $1.6 billion in contingency reserves (which has been done in previous tight budget years), and allowed short-term borrowing from special state funds.
Crespo almost tanked the state’s crucial revenue bill last May by telling his fellow Democrats to “vote your conscience” during floor debate. Several moderate, House Democrats wound up voting against the bill, and it took hours to pass the measure.
Now, however, Crespo has even less to lose by going all-out against the budget plan since his powers have been stripped. The end-of-session budget vote was already going to be difficult, and now it could be even more fraught with peril if Crespo spends the remaining session days publicly and privately dumping on the budget plan.
But, maybe not, because no House Democrats rose to defend Crespo during a closed-door caucus meeting on Thursday, although some were grumbling privately.
Welch clearly took the caucus reaction (or lack thereof) as confirmation that he was right to move against Crespo: “I levied the decision that I levied, and I’m comfortable with it,” Welch told me after the Thursday caucus meeting. “I slept well last night. And from the reaction of my leadership team and members, they believe I made the right decision as well.”
Asked if Crespo has a path back to caucus membership, Welch told me: “No. We’re not going to tolerate that level of disrespect to our caucus. In my opinion, there’s no way back.”
When I asked Welch if ejecting Crespo from the caucus was a disproportionate response to what Crespo did, Welch gave two reasons for his decision.
First, Crespo’s use of his committee chair role to pursue an agenda which runs counter to shared caucus goals: “He’s free to speak his mind. He’s free to vote his conscience, just like other members have done,” he said, but added that no one would be allowed to use their official leadership roles “to pursue an agenda that is antithetical to our shared goals” of passing a budget.
Second, Welch said that last week’s “rogue” behavior by Crespo was not isolated: “It wasn’t because of a single instance. It’s because of cumulative instances.
“I can’t allow someone to go rogue and be an individual,” Welch said.
Whew.
Welch also described his final sit-down with Crespo: “At two or three different points, he realized that what he did was wrong because he tried to apologize a couple of times.”
Crespo, however, claimed Welch said he felt like the member had stabbed him in the back. Crespo said he apologized to Welch if he took his actions that way because it wasn’t his intent. Crespo said he did not apologize for what he actually did.
Welch said he wasn’t concerned about Crespo using the remaining session days to try and pull votes off the budget.
“I believe that we have better systems in place than we did last year, and so I don’t have the same level of concern this year as last year.”
- Leatherneck - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:03 am:
=No. We’re not going to tolerate that level of disrespect to our caucus.=
It would have been helpful if that attitude would have been applied to House staff members when one of them reduced a Governor’s staff member to tears late in the last session when the cannibis bill was sabotaged.
- Perrid - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:08 am:
If someone in leadership doesn’t even want to talk to the rest of leadership about their plans, then yeah it’s not going to work out. Kicking him out of the caucus seems over the top, Welch took it personally, got insulted, and lashed out. Don’t feel too badly for Crespo, he dug this hole himself, but I do think Welch went a bit too far.
- Just Me 2 - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:10 am:
Removing someone from leadership for not following expectations is fair, but kicking them out of the caucus seems disrespectful to the voters. Their district nominated them and elected them.
But since when did anyone care about those silly voters, eh? That’s why we have gerrymandered district after all.
- OneMan - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:16 am:
==“I can’t allow someone to go rogue and be an individual,” ==
I think that line will come back and haunt him at some point.
- Bucky Barnes - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:25 am:
“The modern patriotism, the true patriotism, the only rational patriotism, is loyalty to the Nation ALL the time, loyalty to the Government when it deserves it.” ― Mark Twain
The idea that the House Democratic Caucus must be a monolith with no room for debate or dissent is not healthy. It sounds like Crespo was trying to solve a major challenge for his caucus, and sweeping funds isn’t exactly anethema to the party’s values.
The fact that legslators privately felt that Crespo was punished too harshly but were afraid to speak up in a caucus meeting is telling. A leader that creates an atmosphere were people are afraid to tell him the truth or share an honest opinion looses the benefit of all of their wisdom.
- Walker - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:30 am:
No one can dispute that Crespo is serious and knowledgeable.
Regardless of organizational challenges, now is not the time to avoid seriously considering all options and potential contingency plans to deal with exceptionally critical budget issues. This is a cycle like no other. We cannot afford to lose any ideas in the shuffle.
- Amalia - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:31 am:
No going back now, Welch. But terrible. Crespo trying to do something reasonable in the face of unrealistic $$$ ideas. We need more Crespo.
- Donnie Elgin - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:39 am:
=“I can’t allow someone to go rogue and be an individual,”=
Fall in line, think like they want, or face the Speaker’s wrath. Seems rather authoritarian to me.
- *ducks* - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:40 am:
“No one can dispute that Crespo is serious and knowledgeable”
With a challenging bedside manner. Lots of “Fred being Fred” chatter last week the morning after it happened. But the truth is he was mostly a caucus of one after MJM left, and these days that makes you expendable.
- 44 - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:50 am:
Disrespectful? I.e. wasn’t a toadie. Response seems over the top. Disrespect squared. His voters elected him to represent their interests. Hard to do on the outside.
- levivotedforjudy - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:50 am:
This does seem over the top, especially suspending the legislative staffer. That is concerning because they were probably just following orders. To me, this shines more of a light on the speaker than Crespo. I’m sure there’s more to this and more will come out over time.
- Blooms of Spring - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:52 am:
If you don’t apologize for what you actually did, but instead apologize for how the other person ‘took it,’ it’s not really an apology.
- Norseman - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:52 am:
=== I can’t allow someone to go rogue and be an individual ===
That last word was a poor choice. But I think the word that sums up Welch’s frustration was “unveil”. Crespo seems to want the publicity. Welch took it that he wants to set himself apart from the caucus. So, he’s not part of the caucus.
- Wonderful World - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:56 am:
Rep Crespo is the best representative in Illinois. He is intelligent, well-read and knows how to listen to ideas, unlike others in Springfield. His office provides first class service to all. He should be copied by other reps, not punished. This is simply outrageous. It is causing great anger back in Crespo’s district. I hope the Speaker knows he crossed a line; Crespo represents his district, not the Speaker. He is important to us.
- Demoralized - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 9:59 am:
I think some of you have completely missed the mark. He wasn’t ousted because he had a different viewpoint. He was ousted because he was going rogue. You don’t do something like this and not expect consequences. He was free to have a different viewpoint and express that viewpoint. He’s not free to go out on his own.
- City Zen - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 10:01 am:
==I can’t allow someone to go rogue and be an individual==
Does Welch represent the people or the Borg?
- Day by Day - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 10:07 am:
The House D caucus is raucous and full of differing ideas. Also, CW has repeatedly talked about how everyone should win within the caucus. So I find this reaction to rather surprising and a bit much. This was not Mary Flowers. This is Crespo. Hmmmm.
- Peoples Republic of Oak Park - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 10:13 am:
The map does alot of work for the dem caucus, but this line- “I can’t allow someone to go rogue and be an individual,” will be all over mail pieces.
- Pot calling kettle - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 10:23 am:
The bigger picture here is that Crespo was preparing his own budget in secret with the help of one staffer who was also willing to work in secret. The Speaker also indicated that Crespo was not sharing his part of the budget with the folks who needed it to do their work.
Surprising your boss is rarely a good idea; if the Crespo plan is so good, he should have let the rest of leadership know what he was doing. Add to that impeding the work of others while you pursue your own project. And, this is someone in major leadership positions.
Add it all together, and you have some very serious violations of trust within leadership and among the caucus. If your caucus and the other leaders cannot trust you to be open and fulfill your duties, getting booted from the caucus and leadership should not be unexpected. It is pretty harsh, but anything less also sends a message.
- Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 10:31 am:
You can be right all day long.
But, if no one can stand you, it don’t mean a thing,
- 47th Ward - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:04 am:
If he’s not careful, Welch is going to make Crespo a political celebrity.
- Lansing Larry - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:14 am:
–He’s not free to go out on his own.–
100% you cannot have your appropriations chair going rogue, totally fair to remove him as chair.
But to imply that to be a member of the House Democratic caucus you cannot be an individual is WILD. Where is the line? What is an individual? Can I not make a statement without the supreme leader giving it the thumbs up? Am I allowed to file legislation without the fear of being tossed from the caucus?
I think it gives us an insight into the way the Speaker sees his hold on the gavel…..feeling like he needs to squash any decent with an iron fist is not sign of feeling confident in yourself
- Springfield Transplant - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:17 am:
Would someone post the D/R split of the district that Crespo represents?
- Leatherneck - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:20 am:
=The bigger picture here is that Crespo was preparing his own budget in secret with the help of one staffer who was also willing to work in secret. The Speaker also indicated that Crespo was not sharing his part of the budget with the folks who needed it to do their work.=
Unless it’s out there, Crespo needs to introduce his own budget as a bill. Even if it gets bricked the rest of this biennium. He should show his work plus I and others are curious to see what similarities and differences exist between the Crespo budget and the Welch-supported budget.
Also, would any of you be surprised if Crespo’s “proposed budget” got the endorsement of Comptroller Mendoza?
- low level - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:25 am:
As others have mentioned, its how the staffer was treated that concerns me the most. They were doing what the member wanted and should not be punished for doing as they were told.
- Regular democrat - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:33 am:
This is very Madiganesque. The speaker had to be bold and blunt to discourage any future dissent. Same movie different actors. If Welch thinks The way they are handling things is so great. What is he afraid of?
- Leatherneck - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:35 am:
=As others have mentioned, its how the staffer was treated that concerns me the most. They were doing what the member wanted and should not be punished for doing as they were told.=
No wonder the House staffers wanted to be unionized. I don’t blame them.
- Retired School Board Member - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:36 am:
If only that staffer had the benefit of union representations… Oh, wait…
- JoeMaddon - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:42 am:
“Would someone post the D/R split of the district that Crespo represents?”
Harris won by 15% on ‘24.
Pritzker won by 25% and Duckworth won by 27.7% in ‘22.
- Retired CEO - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:51 am:
I’ve heard Welch give several speeches. In a recent speech he talked about a book written by James Clear called Atomic Habits. It’s a book every CEO has read or should read. Having members of your leadership circle go rogue and direct staff to conduct secret missions is a serious violation in any organization. Welch couldn’t condone that kind of behavior from any person in a leadership role. It seems to me that Crespo could have handled this differently. He could have spoken to the Speaker about his plans or to other members of the budget team, but he chose to go about it his way. He suffered the consequences. Hat tip to Welch for handling it the proper way.
- anon2 - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:52 am:
== If he’s not careful, Welch is going to make Crespo a political celebrity.==
If the State loses $billions in federal funding, then the Crespo budget will appear prescient.
- Anyone Remember - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:53 am:
“… and allowed short-term borrowing from special state funds.”
That is not serious budgeting. Blago/Filan’s “looting” er, I mean, “short-term borrowing” was a major cause of special fund activities / agencies being as hollowed out as those funded by GRF.
- That Train's Never Late - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:54 am:
“This is very Madiganesque.”
- Suburban Democratic Operative - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:55 am:
Crespo is too conservative for his district. He does not represent his constituents. He’s not even visible in the district. Crespo will likely be primaried and lose, and all his opponent needs to do is tell primary voters he was about to propose $4 billion in cuts like Bruce Rauner tried to do. Crespo’s days are numbered.
- SpiDem - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:56 am:
Regular Democrat: =This is very Madiganesque=
No, Madigan never publicly targeted members of his own caucus to this degree. You really had to go full Ken Dunkin to see the wrath.
Madigan would have had a conversation with Crespo and tried to find a way to fold his recommendations into the discussion, and keep him inside the tent.
In less than three terms, This is the 4th member of his own caucus that Welch has targeted. It’s become a pattern, and it does not indicate strength.
- 40,000 ft - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 11:56 am:
I’m greatly entertained by Welch’s comment that “no individuals are welcome” in his lean-hard-left tent. It gets me thinking of one of the few things Bruce Rauner got right–pounding the word “collectivism” into the zeitgeist for few weeks.
As a lean-right centrist, it’s disappointing that no discussion is allowed in the House about the merits of Crespo’s ideas. I find it quite revealing and somewhat alarming.
Maybe there’s room in the Freedom Caucus for him. A bigger tent, a safe space, that welcomes free-minded, solution-oriented, divergent creativists with good intentions, from all political ideologies is definitely needed in this state.
- Bucky Barnes - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 12:01 pm:
=== This is very Madiganesque. ===
No, Madigan never did anything like this. Ever. Madigan despised Scott Drury, but he was never stripped of committees or kicked out of the Caucus. He did not receive a clock one year.
I guess my question is whether Crespo is less loyal to the Caucus than Drury was, and I think the answer is No.
This move is more like Tim Mapes. Just petty.
- Who's the Boss? - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 12:04 pm:
======”Surprising your boss is rarely a good idea;”=====
Crespo does not “work for” Welch anymore than Welch “works for” Pritzker.
- Telly - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 12:05 pm:
== This is very Madiganesque. ==
Is it? I can’t help but think he would have handled it more subtly. Like remove the rogue member from all appropriation work and not schedule any legislative business for his committee. Then let him file his budget bill and turn the caucus against him (lots of cuts to pet programs.) I think Madigan would have provided Crespo with enough rope for him to hang himself.
- Leslie K - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 12:25 pm:
==This is very Madiganesque.==
Like some others, I also disagree. I can’t speak to Madigan in his early years as Speaker, but I just can’t see such an extreme reaction (and poorly worded statement about it) coming from Madigan in the later years. Replace him in committees, remove him from leadership, don’t give him a clock–all to be expected. But outright expelling him, and taking it out on the staffer as well? I don’t see it.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 12:39 pm:
===and poorly worded statement about it===
That wasn’t a statement. I interviewed Welch. It was a response to my questions.
- Pot calling kettle - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 12:48 pm:
==Crespo does not “work for” Welch anymore than Welch “works for” Pritzker. ==
Those appointed to leadership roles within the caucus and on committees serve at the pleasure of the Speaker of the House, President of the Senate, or Minority Leader.
- Steve Goodman's Ghost - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 12:48 pm:
==And from the reaction of my leadership team and members, they believe I made the right decision as well.”==
I love the part where Welch kicks Crespo all the way out of the Caucus and then asks anyone if they have anything to say about it.
- Norseman - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 12:50 pm:
Folks need to remember the respective legislative staffs are employed by the leader. So there is an expectation that they should keep the supervisors up to speed on their work.
- Friendly Bob Adams - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 1:32 pm:
In my opinion the speaker took things personally and went a bit too far. Not sure how this helps get everything passed by the end of the month.
- Islander - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 1:33 pm:
I read a comment last week where Crespo said he was “disappointed, but not surprised.” Why would Crespo say he wasn’t surprised? Did he and Welch have prior conversations about his behavior? Was he warned? Many of the commenters on this blog have probably never had to manage people or handle difficult situations. Welch appears to be a student of how to manage people. Crespo was behaving as an individual, but he accepted a role where he was expected to be a part of a team. He was definitely not a team player. He’s on the island he created for himself, and he should be a happy islander now.
- low level - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 1:34 pm:
==Maybe there’s room in the Freedom Caucus for him.==
Fred Crespo is not joining the “freedom” caucus. Fred may be many things but he is not stupid nor is he a clown. Therefore, he would not fit in. Thanks for the laugh.
- Sun God - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 1:44 pm:
@Anyone Remember
Blago/Filan made fund sweeps famous. Crespo’s plan is reported to include borrowing (not sweeps), meaning that GRF would pay those funds back. Now there were times during the Quinn years where those interfund borrowings could be forgiven (and most were), but unless we see Crespo’s plans we won’t know what borrowing actually was.
Either way, fund sweeps are a very different tool than interfund borrowing.
- Lincoln Lad - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 1:48 pm:
I guess we know who is the Speaker, and who isn’t. The only surprise is that Crespo didn’t seem to know that.
- Leatherneck - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 1:50 pm:
= I can’t speak to Madigan in his early years as Speaker, but I just can’t see such an extreme reaction (and poorly worded statement about it) coming from Madigan in the later years.=
Didn’t Madigan have a harshly pointed statement toward Pat Quinn in the runup to the Cutback Amendment? Even questioning whether he was really Irish.
https://capitolfax.com/2009/05/19/beware-the-reformers/
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 1:55 pm:
Leatherneck, what the heck does that PQ thing have to do with the topic at hand?
- Give Us Barabbas - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 2:06 pm:
There’s a practice in some elite organizations of forming a “red team” to analyze a chosen strategy and game out how to counter it or make an alternative strategy. It’s a good way to check that you haven’t retreated too far up your own alimentary and reading your own fan mail too much. Welch could have let Crespo work on it this way, with the understanding that it probably wouldn’t go anywhere, but that it would be a different perspective on the situation.it’s how competent leaders work. Suspending Burden smells like anti- unionism retaliation under a convenient excuse.
- Bucky Barnes - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 2:16 pm:
=== Those appointed to leadership roles ===
And if Welch had stopped at stripping Crespo of his chairmanship, you would be on point.
Welch appears to have booted him out of the committee based on a paranoid rumor that Crespo was planning a press conference with Republicans.
Hopefully some intrepid reporter can convince Crespo to provide the budget proposal in response to a FOIA request.
The FOIA Request is so that Crespo can say “he had no choice” but to give it to reporters.
- Kind and Decent Man - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 2:16 pm:
Speaker Welch is a kind and soft spoken man who was the perfect choice by his caucus to be Speaker. What I have observed is that people continue to mistake the Speaker’s kindness for weakness. He’s a kind and decent man, and he is definitely not a weak leader.
- SpiDem - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 2:18 pm:
I would like to add one more thing. Though not mentioned in Rich’s weekly article, it was also reported last week that a major factor in kicking Crespo out of the caucus was the allegation that he was not lonely working on an alternative budget, but that he intended to unveil it at a Press Conference with Republicans. Welch was quoted as having made this accusation during the House Democratic caucus meeting.
After the first day, that detail mysteriously disappeared from the narrative, because the accusation was almost certainly a lie. Say what you will about Fred Crespo, but he is not a Republican. He’s a quiet guy who knows a ton about the budget and works hard. He has his own opinions. But he’s never been a disloyal member of the caucus.
In the intervening days I’ve personally talked to dozens of Democratic legislators and lobbyists. Not one of them thinks Welch was telling the truth when he made that accusation. Not. One.
I feel a large segment of the caucus has quietly taken note that Welch was likely not being truthful to the caucus. And it was not lost on members that the caucus was set up in such a way to ensure Crespo’s side of the argument would not be heard.
When your only consistent move to control your caucus is to remove them from the caucus, and you develop a reputation of being less than truthful, you are on a very bad and uncertain path as a caucus leader. My two cents anyway.
- Rich Miller - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 2:20 pm:
===it was also reported last week===
By me. It didn’t make the cut for the column. Had trouble getting it down to 750 words.
- Frida's Boss - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 2:28 pm:
“no House Democrats rose to defend Crespo during a closed-door caucus meeting on Thursday, although some were grumbling privately.”
“And from the reaction of my leadership team and members, they believe I made the right decision as well.”
Not sure the Speaker should take silence in a large group setting to imply that everyone is on board with the decision and isn’t looking sideways at it.
Guessing the trust level in the House will be shrinking, and a watch your back attitude when talking to fellow members of caucus
- C'mon - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 2:29 pm:
With a huge majority, Welch needs everyone to toe the line on every line item?
- Frida's Boss - Monday, May 19, 25 @ 2:41 pm:
“no House Democrats rose to defend Crespo during a closed-door caucus meeting on Thursday, although some were grumbling privately.”
“from the reaction of my leadership team and members, they believe I made the right decision as well.”
Not sure these statements work together.
The Speaker may not think people are against this decision, I’m not so sure.
A bit of advice-
House members, do not trust anyone. Do not talk to Clayton if you don’t like this decision; he will forward it to the Speaker. Do not talk to leadership about this either, as they will not keep silent if push comes to shove about who is not happy, lest they lose their positions.
You are an island. Work your district. Get your budgetary items and stay quiet these last two weeks. Come petition time, get your petitions, don’t get an opponent, and then make any move you plan once the ballot is solidified.
You don’t need to be Mary’d, Cyril’d or soon to be Crespo’d.