Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

* UPDATED x1 * Rounding up the votes

Posted in:

Illinois

* The Trib takes a look at how the votes were corralled for the tax hike…

For some lame-duck lawmakers who were either retiring or defeated in November, consideration of a post-legislative career in a Quinn administration was under discussion for votes. For others, a second round of construction bonding offered prospects for new pork projects to bring home to their districts. Still others wanted assurances that new political maps being drawn to reflect the federal 2010 census would protect them from an election challenge.

Remember this from the governor’s inaugural address?…

“We have replaced a government of deals with a government of ideals.”

Not quite.

* And there was this…

The whole package nearly got derailed at the last minute when a $1.01-a-pack increase in the state cigarette tax was voted down in the House. The increase was expected to generate about $377 million to be earmarked for increased education funding.

Members of the General Assembly’s Black Caucus insisted that if taxes were raised, additional money had to be devoted to both education and property tax relief. When the cigarette tax failed, there was no money available for that increased education funding.

“That caused a problem, and rightfully so,” said Senate President John Cullerton, D-Chicago.

* I told subscribers about this today…

For Anthony DeLuca, a freshman state representative from Chicago Heights, it was a private moment with Quinn in his ornate second-floor office, where the governor agreed to breathe life into DeLuca’s idea of a bipartisan panel of lawmakers to recommend a half-billion dollars in state program cuts each year. The panel’s recommendations would be binding, unless lawmakers disapproved.

Quinn liked the idea, one longtime ally of the governor said, so much so that the governor will make the proposal part of his February budget address. In exchange, DeLuca, the former mayor of Chicago Heights, became the 60th and final House Democratic vote to boost the state’s income tax.

“That is why, for my particular vote, that is the reason why,” DeLuca said. “I think it was important that we just didn’t pass the bill and walk away. This has to be a continuing effort.”

* Andy Shaw profiles a temporary House member who ended up voting for the tax hike…

Some of her friends and neighbors may be unhappy with the tax vote but she won’t be facing any political consequences or voter backlash. And here’s why: She stepped down as an Illinois State Representative at noon on Wednesday. After one week on the job. That’s right—one week. She was, in simple terms, the lamest lame duck in a feckless Springfield flock. A billion-dollar baby.

“She” is Kathy Moore, a Lincoln Park friend and former public school teacher who was put in that unenviable position by the stark reality of political hide-and-seek. Or, in this case, seek-and-hide. Her reliably Democratic 11th District, which includes Lincoln Park and Lakeview, elected a brand new state representative, Ann Williams, in November, to replace John Fritchey, a popular long-time rep who won election to a seat on the Cook County Board. Fritchey began his new job in December, so Williams could have been sworn in as a state rep a month ago to represent the district in the lame-duck session going on in Springfield this past week. That was her initial plan.

But there were questions about how she would vote if a tax plan was on the lame-duck agenda. Williams claims that local Democratic leaders, including Fritchey and Senate President John Cullerton, wanted her commitment to support the tax hike before arranging for her to be sworn in. They say she got cold feet and decided not to start early—choosing instead to wait until Wednesday, when the rest of the freshman legislative class was sworn in. […]

So when the tax bill passed, without a single vote to spare, our lawmaker-for-a-week was a major reason. She says she’s not happy about voting for a gargantuan tax increase but she doesn’t think that she, or the state, had any other choice. Even though, as of Sunday, she hadn’t seen a bill. Or a press release. Or a fact sheet. Or a list of cuts, accountability measures and streamlining to go along with the increase.

Thoughts?

*** UPDATE *** Former Rep. John Fritchey replied to Shaw’s post…

Andy, even though I have previously said this to you, let me be 100% clear. At NO time did I ever pressure, or even ask, Ann Williams to vote for an income tax hike. Period.

To the contrary, I repeatedly told her that I was taking no position on the matter and that how she voted on a tax hike and whether or not she wanted to be appointed early was entirely up to her and was something to be figured out between herself and Democratic leadership. Any statement to the contrary is a patent lie. […]

I also had zero conversations with Kathy Moore about the income tax issue or vote. In fact, my only conversation with her while she was in Springfield was a 5 minute phone call to make sure that she was able to get access to any information that she may need for any of the matters that may be coming before the House for action.

posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 10:35 am

Comments

I realize back room deals have been going on for years, but would someone please tell me what the difference is between what BLAGO did and the Legislators that get something for their vote????

To me is is one of the same. Please explain????

Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 10:41 am
It brings back Dan Proft’s mantra during the campaign: “This state is not broken, it’s fixed”.

Comment by Ghost of John Brown Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 10:42 am
Rich,

Who were the Democratic Ward Committeemen in the district who appointed this person to serve as final vote for the tax increase? Reading legislative maps online causes such eye strain, maybe you already know the parties.

Comment by Honest Abe Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 10:53 am
Jiminy Andy is free to step up and run for something anytime he wants.

Comment by but of course.... Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 10:55 am
I think it would have been nice if the ‘legislator for a week’ story had gotten a little more play.

Do you get one of those special license plates after you leave office if you were there for a week.

Comment by OneMan Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 10:56 am
Andy Shaw’s article is somewhat revealing, but mostly baffling. Given that “She says she’s not happy about voting for a gargantuan tax increase but she doesn’t think that she, or the state, had any other choice. Even though, as of Sunday, she hadn’t seen a bill. Or a press release. Or a fact sheet. Or a list of cuts, accountability measures and streamlining to go along with the increase.” Why in the world did she vote for the increase, then? Was she threatened? Did she find a horse head in her bed? Was she bribed, offered a job, lawn service for life? What the heck– Shaw’s story just raises more questions than it answers. And, btw, read Rep. Fritchey’s response below– important context.

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 10:57 am
Honest Abe: terry matthews is the democratic committeeman who chose republican-funded mayor of chicago heights to replace george scully as the representative from the 80th district.

Comment by bored now Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:01 am
@Bartin -

Kathy Moore EARNED her retirement as a public school teacher. A job not many on this site are lining up to take. And this vote had absolutely no connection to the pension issue what so ever.

As for Shaw, where does he get off attacking Moore as “feckless”? Did he meet her, talk to her, before characterizing her as unthinking?

And where is his evidence that she was “pressured” into voting for a tax hike? She was representing a Democratic district, she was appointed to replace a Democratic lawmaker by Democratic committeemen…isn’t it more likely that she always supported the tax hike?

Finally, when did the BGA take a position on taxes? Did I miss something, or is Shaw professing his own agenda, and not the BGA’s?

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:02 am
“We have replaced a government of deals with a government of ideals.”
You simply can’t believe anything Quinn says. Just like Blago but with a whole lot less spine.

“She” is Kathy Moore
Does “she” get a pension after a whole week with the job title? Didn’t “Granberg” work two weeks?

Comment by Joe from Joliet Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:03 am
“Did I say a ‘government of deals’ has been replaced with a ‘government of ideals‘? Sorry, I guess I misspoke, I should have said replaced by ‘a government of my deals’. Sorry for the confusion.” — Pat Quinn

Comment by MrJM Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:05 am
Noting:

Fritchey’s response to Shaw makes it clear that Shaw’s piece was a fantastical piece of total fiction. Frichey never spoke to Kathy Moore about the tax vote and never pressed Rep. Williams on taxes.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:07 am
Nothing surprising here, it’s classic Illinois politics. Four years from now the state will be in the same shape as it is now and Madigan, Cullerton, and Quinn will maneuver to make these tax increases permanent.

Comment by Waco Kid Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:07 am
===Does “she” get a pension after a whole week with the job title? ===

Don’t be stupid.

Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:08 am
I wondered who was representing me this week. I knew Fritchey wasn’t there and Williams hadn’t started yet. Is there any reason people in this district were never told about this person?

Comment by Cheryl44 Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:11 am
With all due respect to Rep. Williams, if she isn’t prepared to take hard votes, perhaps she should re-consider her new career. She has been around long enough under the Dome to know the nuances and expected committment/loyalty.

As for Rep. Moore, assuming she was sworn in pre-2011, that would make her a Tier I beneficiary for pension benefits under the General Assembly Retirement System, which is reciprocal with many other funds, so let’s she if she lands somewhere else. Combined with a teacher’s pension she would be making significant progress towards a double-dip!!

I find it typically disingenuous of Rep. Fritchey, as a self-proclaimed “independent/reformer,” to have been the puppet master behind all of this. True to form of other reformers on the County Board, I’m sure Rep. Fritchey will be busy with his Board duties and lobbying career in Springfield.

I’ve got to hand it to these self-righteous lake-front-liberals/reformers. They can play the good-old-boy game better than the good-old-boys!!

Comment by Helm Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:12 am
My stomach grinds a little more after I read another article about how things work in Springfield. A tad of topic, but I’m having a tough time deciding which one I’d rather not have, this tax increase or the Olymmpics in Chicago 2016.

Comment by Davey Boy Smithe Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:13 am
When I get some time tonight I’ll go back and look at the questions shaw asked during the debates abc-7 hosted. I recall being upset with him for some reason during one of the debates and having one of his pals on here bark at me.

There’s a wttw debate next week for mayor, you might want to see if one of your pals in chicago can figure out a way to livestream it here in case those in springfield and around the state want to watch it. Otherwise we can live blog it, but as a republican I am obviously not neutral and in 2011 you should be able to get live video on here either via skype or google video chat.

Comment by shore Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:13 am
Wonder why Andy Waited until After the Vote?
Rep. Moore was in SPI for several weeks….Can we guess Andy was too dumb to figure it out in advance?
You can bet he talked with the legislator.
BTW anyone want to run Andy’s name through the files of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Cook County?
Might be a enlighting moment for the Swells who fund the BGA

Comment by CircularFiringSquad Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:17 am
===Is there any reason people in this district were never told about this person? ===

Ask your Chicago news media. I told my subscribers about it.

Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:18 am
Too bad the GOP couldn’t even put a serious alternative on the table. Things might be different.

But can’t beat something with nothing.

Comment by just sayin' Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:20 am
===Don’t be stupid.===
Too late with that advice, Rich. Where were you when I was in first grade?

The point regarded “Granberg’s” huge pension sweetener for assuming a job tile he held for an incredibly short period of time. Does this apply to all departing legislators?

Cynical -
Nobody is commenting on her teacher’s pension. We just wonder what the warp factor is when she adds “state rep” to her resume.

Comment by Joe from Joliet Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:23 am
YDD –

Fritchey’s response to Shaw makes it clear that Shaw’s piece was a fantastical piece of total fiction.

No, not really, Fritchey says there was no pressure, however in the story we have this

Williams claims that local Democratic leaders, including Fritchey and Senate President John Cullerton, wanted her commitment to support the tax hike before arranging for her to be sworn in

So you have two Democratic elected officials offering two different versions of things. What do you expect Shaw to do, just take Fritchey’s word for it and not report what Williams claimed?

Heck I believe Fritchey on this.

But the new rep saying she was getting pressured on a tax hike vote is in fact, news and something that should be reported.

Also do you really think either party would appoint someone to a seat the week before the end of session without getting an idea of how they would vote on some major issues?

Seriously?

Comment by OneMan Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:30 am
===Does this apply to all departing legislators?===

Not any longer.

Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:36 am
—* The tax increase debate has brought in a raft of new commenters. Most of the newbies are furious at the tax hikes.

I feel your pain. Really. I don’t like paying more taxes. But stupid, empty, angry drive-by comments are not welcome here. You will be (and have been) deleted and banned. This is not a newspaper website or a typical blog. Tone it down or go away.—

From Rich’s post where he didn’t allow comments - but I feel compelled to give a huge thumbs up! You continue to show leadership that is so critical, especially now Rich. Way to go and THANK YOU!

Comment by collar observer Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:39 am
*I realize back room deals have been going on for years, but would someone please tell me what the difference is between what BLAGO did and the Legislators that get something for their vote????

To me is is one of the same. Please explain????*

Personal gain.

Comment by Montrose Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:48 am
I’m shocked!…..shocked!…..to find horse trading going on in this Capitol!

Comment by just sayin' Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:51 am
Yellow Dog, ===Fritchey’s response to Shaw makes it clear that Shaw’s piece was a fantastical piece of total fiction. Frichey never spoke to Kathy Moore about the tax vote and never pressed Rep. Williams on taxes.===

Personally, I believe Shaw more than I believe Frichey. To cut and run after voting for a tax increase in a lame duck session is wrong in so many ways including abandoning the taxpayers who voted for her.

Comment by Soccertease Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:54 am
Rich, there is a mention of Wisco’s higher taxes, though it’s burried in the second to last paragraph: “Wisconsin still has higher business and individual tax rates than Illinois even after Quinn implements the tax increase here. That – along with one other undeniable factor – should prevent a mass exodus across the border despite the onerous tax hikes from Springfield, one top Illinois business leader said.”

Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:55 am
–My stomach grinds a little more after I read another article about how things work in Springfield.–

“Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made.”

Otto von Bismarck said that. In the 19th Century. In Germany.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:55 am
Ooops, posted to the wrong thread — I’m referring to the Sun-Times article you linked to.

Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 11:56 am
===Is there any reason people in this district were never told about this person? ===
As I constituent,I tracked what was happening with my representative, and thanks to Rich, knew when Rep. Moore took office. Rep. Fritchey’s phone number rang in her Springfield office–so I would assume that others reached her besides me. Her vote was not necessarily in a complete vacuum.

Comment by WI IL Transplant Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:13 pm
Let me clarify–a vacuum of actual constituent interests.

Comment by WI IL Transplant Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:16 pm
I would like to think that the legislators knew the tax increase had to pass or things would fall apart soon. If Rep. Moore hadn’t been there, someone else would have provided the 60th vote. The Speaker would have looked for the least vulnerable of the remaining Reps and told that person they had to vote yes.

With respect to the suggestions of quid pro quo, why is the default assumption that someone from the governor’s office had to tell the lame ducks looking for a job how to vote? If you were hoping/planning to work in the Quinn Administration, you would probably be think about what it would be like in that new job and you would want your new position to have some revenue to spend. That’s the simplest explanation. They were voting to fund their future agency.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:17 pm
From Ms. Williams website:

My name is Ann Williams, and I am running to be your next State Representative in Springfield. I am running to change the culture of corruption and insider deals that pervades state government –and to fight for everyday people.

Comment by Sam I am Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:23 pm
Pot calling kettle — If a legislator thought it was the right thing to do they should have voted that way regardless of vulnerability…

Comment by OneMan Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:24 pm
–Let me clarify–a vacuum of actual constituent interests. –

That’s a clarification? Then why does my head hurt after reading it a few times.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:27 pm
Rich,

“Ask your Chicago media?” Congratulations on demonstrating the value of a subscription. We report from 11th Dist and we hadn’t known of her before Tuesday.

Are we at fault for missing this till Tuesday? Yep. Hell, I’ll even offer to buy a bullet for the inevitable firing squad.

And in another drive-by shooting:

“===Does “she” get a pension after a whole week with the job title? ===

Don’t be stupid.”

That isn’t a stupid question for many citizens. Readership growth is based on attracting NuB’s. You do your thing here. However I think there are stupid comments but not stupid questions.

Patrick

Comment by Patrick Boylan Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:28 pm
From the Tribune article,

“For some lame-duck lawmakers who were either retiring or defeated in November, consideration of a post-legislative career in a Quinn administration was under discussion for votes.”

I didn’t see anything in the article to substantiate this assertion. Did I miss something?

Comment by MikeMacD Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:29 pm
=== To cut and run after voting for a tax increase in a lame duck session is wrong in so many ways including abandoning the taxpayers who voted for her. ===

Williams was elected to serve in the 97th General Assembly, not the 96th. She did not “cut and run.”

Moreover, let’s assume Shaw’s right and Fritchey WAS pushing for a tax hike.

Moore was appointed to replace Fritchey…do you think it makes sense to replace him with someone who had a different view?

Look, I’ve got a long record of opposing back room shenanigans. When County Democrats pulled a fast one to elect a dying John Stroger and replace him with Todd Stroger, I vigorously criticized them on behalf of Andy Shaw’s messiah, Forrest Claypool.

If Shaw weren’t a former investigative reporter, I might even cut him some slack. But this story is two unrelated pieces of innuendo strung together by speculation and fabrication.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:33 pm
===Readership growth is based on attracting NuB’s.===

I don’t base advertising prices on “outside the building” readers, so I really don’t care. The more newbies I have, the harder my job is, so I really don’t care.

Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:33 pm
“where the governor agreed to breathe life into DeLuca’s idea of a bipartisan panel of lawmakers to recommend a half-billion dollars in state program cuts each year. The panel’s recommendations would be binding, unless lawmakers disapproved.”
OK, I don’t get this. What’s the difference between this new panel, the budgeteers, the appropriation committees, the budget staff and oh yeah, the General Assembly. As for the “recommendation would be binding, unless lawmakers disapproved” isn’t that EVERY bill that is heard? Because correct me if I am wrong the recommendations would eventually need to be put into bill form. So, other than it sounds really good on paper, what’s the point?

Comment by The KQ Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:41 pm
===isn’t that EVERY bill that is heard? ===

No. This would be more like the the federal base closure commission.

Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:45 pm
=== For some lame-duck lawmakers who were either retiring or defeated in November, consideration of a post-legislative career in a Quinn administration was under discussion for votes. For others, a second round of construction bonding offered prospects for new pork projects to bring home to their districts. Still others wanted assurances that new political maps being drawn to reflect the federal 2010 census would protect them from an election challenge. ===

I’m with you, MicMacD. I reread the article twice and saw nothing to substantiate the Tribune’s claim.

Trading your vote for a job is illegal, BTW, so you’d think the Tribune would be reporting it to prosecutors.

Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 12:50 pm
YDD — Yeah become some state rep is going to say to the Trib, Yeah I am going become Canoe Czar next week after I vote for the tax increase.

You really think this didn’t happen?

Comment by OneMan Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 1:01 pm
OneMan and others, I’m sure (because I know) that some of those lame duckies are getting jobs. I’m also pretty darned sure that there was no direct trade. I think the Trib story was artfully written. Some of you have jumped to needless conclusions.

Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 1:03 pm
Rich, do you think they would have had their Jobs pulled if they did not vote against it? There HAD to be some serious arm twisting.

Comment by He Makes Ryan Look Like a Saint Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 1:14 pm
But Rich, they would still have to pass the appropriation which would eliminate the funding. So, there would still be a vote.

Comment by The KQ Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 1:14 pm
Kathy Moore and John Cullerton go way back. Kathy Moore’s vote and position were absolutely known before she was appointed. Of this, I am absolutely certain. I know both of them.

Comment by Logical Thinker Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 1:23 pm
I am sure that no one said “you vote for this you will become canoe czar”. One would like to think that most folks down in Springfield are smarter than that in this day in age.

But….

Why do I suspect if the vote had failed, not the same number of folks would have ended up with jobs…

Comment by OneMan Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 1:29 pm
HMMMMM
” She says she’s not happy about voting for a gargantuan tax increase but she doesn’t think that she, or the state, had any other choice. Even though, as of Sunday, she hadn’t seen a bill. Or a press release. Or a fact sheet. Or a list of cuts, accountability measures and streamlining to go along with the increase.”

Yep sounds about right I remember another tax raising Dem saying we have to vote for the bill to find out whats in the bill not to long ago.

Comment by Fed up Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 1:33 pm
The Chicago media don’t shoulder the whole blame for not letting people know about this. The Committeeman/men who did the appointing, House leadership, the Cook County Democratic Party, the Illionis Democratic Party, the Illinois State Board of Elections, the Chicago Board of Elections, Fritchey, and Williams all could and should have had the responsibilty to let people know who was actually representating them.

Comment by Lakefront Liberal Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 2:01 pm
One Man’s 11:30 post wraps everything up best.

Comment by Just Observing Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 2:02 pm
===and Williams all could and should have===

Why her? Her term didn’t start until yesterday.

Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 2:05 pm
The toothpaste is out of the tube now, and it ain’t going to be put back in no matter how many people want to change things. I don’t know Moore, but she was representing me in the Springfield for the past few weeks. W IL and others like me knew she was there, and although I presumed there was some coordination with her appointment, who cares? Moore voted the way I wanted her to, and if Williams didn’t want the early appointment, that’s fine too. But the time for complaining about was last week, not this week.

To all those complaining (cough*AndyShaw*cough)who just figured this out, shut up and move on. And pay attention next time.

Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 2:18 pm
So because Moore represented 47th Ward’s beliefs, then everything is ok. Do you think the majority of her constituents feel the same way? She literally cost people thousands of dollars.

Was she elected? No
Was she qualified? No (she’s a very nice woman though)
Did she really care about the bill? No

She even said she was there to “push a button.”

And this is how democracy works these days?

Comment by Logical Thinker Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 2:49 pm
LT, my point was that it was common knowledge among those of us who follow politics that Moore was legally appointed to the seat. I raised the question of how that squares with the concept of accountability on this very blog in a comment last week. That was s a fair question, but is now moot.

And your characterization of her is way off base. She was perfectly qualified for the appointment. She was legally appointed and she voted for herself based on the merits, Shaw’s cocktail party anecdote notwithstanding.

Yes, her vote will literally cost me and my neighbors thousands of dollars. I think it was the prudent thing to do. Reasonable can disagree on that, but the vote was taken and it’s over.

You can’t rewrite history and you shouldn’t smear Moore because you disagreed with her vote.

Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 3:04 pm
Committeemen for Kathy Moore - Michele Smith, John Fritchey, Dick Mell and Gene Schulter. May be missing some but how nice to know that the “independents” and the “machine” can lay in the same gutter.

Comment by Juli Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 3:07 pm
47th,

I would hardly call anything I said about Kathy Moore a “smear.” I will tell you that I know her personally; I like her and has been fair to me.

At the same time, she was nothing more than a placeholder. This is not news. However, she was put there purposely to cast a vote on the biggest issue in the recent history of Illinois. She wasn’t accountable to ANYONE! She could literally do anything she wanted without recourse or consequence.

And yet, every citizen of Illinois is impacted by her decision. EVERY LAST ONE! Is this even close to being fair?

My second point is how was she qualified? I know the circles she is in and I know how this might have materialized. It makes me sick because it wasn’t above the board. It was probably a small, tight-knit group sitting around saying “who can we get to go cast the vote we want?” Ah ha. How about Kathy Moore?”

Comment by Logical Thinker Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 4:02 pm
I’m in agreement with MikeMacD, the Trib article was completely irresponsible. In the lede they claim that the votes were gathered by offering up administration jobs to lame ducks, pork, and friendly districts. But then the only examples they cite in the article are two legislators who wanted spending controls and a promise to the black caucus for increases in education funding. The Cubs newspaper makes great toilet paper.

Comment by The Captain Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 4:13 pm
Thanks LT,

Again, I asked the same question about accountability here, last week, and nobody bothered joining the discussion.

And I detected a bit of a smear on your part by calling her unqualified and implying she didn’t care about the legislation she was voting on. Thanks for clarifying what you meant.

Again, now that the vote is over, this discussion is focused on Moore but not the others who were parachuted in to vote on behalf of the party bosses who appointed them. I don’t think that’s fair, but more importantly, it’s pointless. It won’t change the outcome, and they aren’t going to have a do-over vote.

Besides, had the 11th remained vacant, then I suppose Madigan would have leaned harder on the gutless D’Amico and Mell to get this done. And there were other Democrats who voted no who were in less friendly districts than D’Amico and Mell, but who could have been sacrificed to get to 60 votes.

Singling out Kathy Moore misses the larger point, and isn’t really fair to her when there are better targets of your anger.

Comment by 47th Ward Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 4:14 pm
47th,

Fair and good point. Yes, Kathy Moore is probably not the fair target and there probably were other ways to get to 60 votes.

But Kathy Moore is a symbol of what is wrong. She was put in an unfortunate position and “used” by the system. The fundamental premise of a representative government is accountability. When this is gone, so are the basic principles of government. When the powers-that-be can put puppets (figurative term) in positions, to get desired outcomes, against the will of the people, we have crossed a dangerous boundary.

If there were other ways to get to 60, then why not let Kathy Moore be the one to vote NO? She is the one who has to live with the vote for the rest of her life. It was either done to benefit Madigan/Quinn/Cullerton OR it was done to shield Mell and others. Either way, she was used and we are all stuck with it.

That’s all.

Comment by Logical Thinker Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 4:46 pm
Ouch, maybe comments should be closed for a while.

Patrick, try giving business advice to someone who is less successful than you.

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 5:51 pm
LL: and, according to you, no responsibility rests with the citizens who don’t bother to pay enough attention to know who their Rep is? I certainly wouldn’t have to read it in the Trib (or the J-R) if someone new became my rep, or was going to shortly.

Comment by steve schnorf Thursday, Jan 13, 11 @ 9:16 pm
#1 Moore knew going into this that she would be voting on the tax increase. Perhaps she is a knowledgeable, responsible citizen who wanted to be there so she could do the right thing and help the state by making a vote she knew others would be to chicken to make.

#2 If I were in the GA hoping to be appointed to an administrative position in an executive agency, part of my future job would be to go to the GA and ask for funding. That would be a pretty hypocritical thing to do if I had voted against a tax increase; not only hypocritical, but impossible if there were no new revenue.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Friday, Jan 14, 11 @ 12:33 am
Hello Folks. Here I am, the great mystery woman, the elusive, stealth Rep for a week! Truth? It’s not as sinister as many of you seem to want to believe. Last Friday I attended a birthday party for a wonderful friend and woman, but was accosted by Andy Shaw the moment I walked in the door. I did not feel that I was obligated to talk policy or politics with Andy at a party and spent 20 minutes trying unsuccessfully to get away from him so I could visit with my hostess. I think it’s kind of sad that this is how he has to get his blog material, and if I were you I would take his comments with a very large grain of salt. Now..as to my vote. This may sound shocking, but I believe we DO need a tax hike in this state. I voted YES not because I was TOLD to by anyone, because I was NOT, but because I believe our financial situation is desperate. Because social service agencies that serve the poor, the old, the disabled, the abused, are closing their doors and denying service to those they serve. Because our children will suffer if the state cannot meet its obligations to our schools. Because, despite how Mr. Shaw would like to characterize it, I actually believe it is the right thing to do, and yes, I DO desperately hope that it works. For those of you who suspect I used the week to pad my pension, you are wrong; I would never have considered it even if the option were available.

And how did I get appointed in the first place? We have been personal friends of the Cullertons for 35 years. Through John we know Sarah Feigenholtz, who suggested my name to one of the Ward Committeemen whose job it was to fill the vacancy. I accepted proudly, and am honored that I was able to cast a vote to end the Death Penalty in Illinois. I stand proudly by my decision to raise the income tax along with 59 other legislators who wrestled with their decisions in a thoughtful and serious manner. I am sorry that neither Mr. Fritchey nor Ms. Williams found it convenient to be there last week. I was asked to do it and I did. I hope that answers some of your concerns.

Comment by Kathy Moore Friday, Jan 14, 11 @ 12:55 pm