Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Quinn vetoes bill *** Both sides of the fight
Next Post: Question of the day
Posted in:
* 12:07 pm - From a Bruce Rauner press release…
Just moments ago, Cook County Circuit Court Judge Mary Mikva ruled against the Committee for Legislative Reform and Term Limits and in favor of the Madigan-backed lawsuit to prevent the people of Illinois from voting on the Term Limits and Reform constitutional amendment in November.
“Today we saw the entrenched special interests that fund and support the political status quo prevail, and the people of Illinois be denied the right to chose for themselves if term limits should be the law in Illinois,” said Term Limits and Reform Executive Director Mark Campbell. “We’ve always known that term limits opponents would use the courts to try to protect the failed status quo, and we’ve long been prepared to defend our initiative in the Illinois Supreme Court, which we intend to do. We are confident that we will prevail there, and the people’s voices will be heard in November.”
More in a bit.
* 12:09 pm - I have confirmed that both constitutional amendments were struck down as unconstitutional today - term limits and remap reform. I’m currently trying to get a copy of the judge’s ruling. Stay tuned.
* 1:14 pm - Sorry for the unavoidable delay. To read the opinion, click here.
* The Sun-Times story is all about Madigan…
In a win for Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, a Cook County judge on Friday ruled in favor of a lawsuit that aimed to stop two referendums on the November ballot — one that would impose term limits, the other that would change the state’s redistricting process.
Cook County Judge Mary Mikva permanently enjoined election officials from putting either measure on the ballot.
Behind the lawsuit was Madigan, who opposes both measures. Madigan has previously derided both proposed referendums as “all Republican politics.”
* The Tribune went for substance…
Mikva said that in deciding previous cases, the Illinois Supreme Court’s “precedent dictates a very narrow provision for allowing the voters to directly enact amendments to the Illinois Constitution.”
Mikva ruled that “any term limits initiative appears to be outside what is permissible” under the state constitution and previous court rulings. She said term limits by themselves have been found not to affect “structural or procedural” changes in the legislature. She said adding other components, such as changing the number of senators and representatives “cannot save this initiative.” […]
As for the remap amendment, Mikva said “a differently drafted redistricting initiative could be valid,” but the one submitted went beyond changing the structure and procedure of the General Assembly by limiting who could draw the new map lines. […]
Under previous state Supreme Court rulings there is a limited window for using petition initiative attempts to change the 1970 Illinois Constitution. Such initiatives must affect both the structure and procedure of the General Assembly to be eligible for the ballot.
* 1:33 pm - One thing to note about the Rauner camp’s response and the Sun-Times story is that this judge was agreed to by all parties. They could’ve objected, but they didn’t.
Just keep that in mind when the professional victims start screaming.
* 1:41 - From the Quinn campaign…
Quinn for Illinois spokesman Izabela Miltko issued the below statement regarding today’s court ruling on Bruce Rauner’s poorly-drafted proposal. The Governor strongly supports term limits and redistricting reform that ensures equal representation of minorities. Miltko said:
“Governor Pat Quinn has strongly supported term limits since 1993 when he spearheaded a statewide petition drive for a citizen referendum to establish term limits in Illinois.
“During that petition drive, Bruce Rauner was nowhere to be found. Now, 20 years later, he turns up with a poorly drafted, election-year proposal. Rauner has nobody but himself to blame for harming the term limits cause.
“As the Governor said in 1994 and believes to this day, it is unfortunate that the people of Illinois have been denied the ability to enact pure term limits directly through referendum as Governor Quinn has long advocated.”
In 1980, Quinn led the successful petition and referendum drive that enacted the Cutback Amendment, which reduced the size of the Illinois House from 177 members from 118. This was the first and only constitutional amendment ever enacted by citizen petition and referendum in Illinois history.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:07 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Quinn vetoes bill *** Both sides of the fight
Next Post: Question of the day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Not surprising.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:15 pm
The courts shot down the term limits amendment when Quinn proposed it and now do the same when Rauner proposes it. Spare me the complaints about politics. Sometimes the law is the law.
Comment by Frank Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:16 pm
Awesome. Thanks Rich. Despite all of the whining that will occur there were catestrophic technical flaws with both. Sincerely not talking about the merits, only the law.
Comment by Lt. Guv Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:17 pm
Judge Mikva is a smart, thoughtful, and well respected jurist. I say this not to legitimize her opinion, though I do agree with it, but to argue that the fact the opinion is hers means it has a good likelihood of being upheld on appeal.
Comment by Chi Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:17 pm
The people of Illinois can choose to limit terms by voting against any previously elected state official they want removed.
Comment by Wensicia Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:18 pm
Bad few days to be Bruce Rauner…
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:18 pm
The hippocracy abounds here. Look, term limits prevent the people who actually live in a particular district from VOTING for the representative of their choice in this thing we call an election. Individual opinions about term limits for someone else’s guy, who they couldn’t otherwise vote for or against because they don’t live in that district should clearly be irrelevant. Term limits dilute an individual’s right to elect the representative of their choice, and should be illegal on their face.
Comment by PublicServant Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:18 pm
Also, Rauner’s campaign gets the scoop? They must have Quinnochio working outside his job description. Did he do any courtroom sketches while he was there?
Comment by Chi Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:18 pm
Confident you will prevail at the Supreme Court?
Hardeeharhar.
This entire effort was unconstitutional before
It started
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:19 pm
@Willy -
If Team Rauner honestly expected any other outcome, their campaign plan is seriously flawed.
Since they got the outcome they expected, I am calling it a WIN.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:23 pm
Not for terms for congressional seats but might be for leadership positions.
Comment by Jack Handy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:23 pm
The reality is Rauner knew that it would be struck down - Quinn’s was as well. He was just lying to people to gin up interest in his campaign and pass the primary without question.
Comment by anon Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:26 pm
So if this is upheld John Sullivan’s Senate District remains the size of Connecticut, rather than becoming the size of Maine. Good for us!
Comment by train111 Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:28 pm
===If Team Rauner honestly expected any other outcome, their campaign plan is seriously flawed.
Since they got the outcome they expected, I am calling it a WIN.===
So they are like Blago, lol
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:33 pm
Just curious: has this judge received “campaign contributions” from Madigan as head of the Illinois Democratic Party
Comment by Earl Shumaker Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:42 pm
Earl:
It is the other way around. The Judicial candidate has to give $30k to the Democratic party to be slated.
Comment by truthteller Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:45 pm
===- Earl Shumaker - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:42 pm:
Just curious: has this judge received “campaign contributions” from Madigan as head of the Illinois Democratic Party===
Just curious, similar amendments have been ruled unconstitutional too, so what is your point?
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:45 pm
As Molotov once stated it is not who votes but who does the counting.
Madigan make laws that are fool proof.
Comment by Mokenavince Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:46 pm
Raunervich got what he paid for - an issue near and dear to the right wing to help him win the primary. Now he’ll have to buy something new for the general.
Comment by Norseman Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:46 pm
How much money did Bruce “I’ve been successful at everything I’ve ever done” Rauner blow on this doomed adventure?
Cue Nelson Muntz…
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:49 pm
Bad week
First caught cheatin’ on fees
Then “borrows” Madigan biz tax reforms
Now learns law is law
Someone send out Mr. Shrimp for an ice pack
Comment by CirularFiringSquad Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:51 pm
Since we are on the topic, sort of, today Senate Leader Radogno and her family begin to lay her daughter to rest.
Some folks love to use our elected leaders as punching bags. They become dehumanized. We forget they are parents, spouses, daughters and sons…not because it isn’t evident, but because it makes it easier for the journalists, pundits and operatives to do their work and it makes it easier for the public to raise them either in effigy or as idols.
My heart is with Christine Radogno, her family and friends, her colleagues and staff today as they shoulder this horrible loss.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:57 pm
Thanks, YDD. I keep thinking about the Radognos, and how heartbreaking this is, for them and for everyone who knew their daughter. So very sad.
Comment by Soccermom Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:00 pm
Thank you Yellow Dog. . .well stated.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:00 pm
Or at the least end up with a nice list of voters who want term limits as well as giving an issue one way or the other. May not be that bad of an investment.
Comment by OneMan Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:01 pm
They had to know this would be struck down. No one is that dumb.
They wanted this for the issue, not because they thought it would pass.
Comment by J Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:01 pm
The opinion
http://www.scribd.com/doc/231596889/Mikva-Opinion
Comment by Bill White Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:03 pm
==Cue Nelson Muntz…==
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo
Comment by Precinct Captain Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:05 pm
(Yellow Dog Democrat - 12:57pm)
Thanks for me as well.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:09 pm
As I am reading Judge Mikva’s opinion, I again find myself thinking that repealing the Cut Back Amendment and returning to multi-member districts would be a more effective way to reduce the consequences of gerrymandering and the need for term limits.
Comment by Bill White Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:10 pm
The authors of both amendments feel that they know best.
If you don’t like the map, vote for the other party.
If you don’t like your representative, run against or support someone running against her. See Toni Berrios.
Comment by low level Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:14 pm
The term limits petition was wrong on its face. It combined way too many elements for a ballot initiative, some clearly unconstitutional, others maybe passable. So wrong that I am not sure Rauner’s crew even expected it to pass. It did its political job, and now adds to his message about insiders in Springfield. They flim-flammed good people who worked for this and signed it in good faith.
The remap reforms looked more promising. Have to read the decision.
btw I support versions of both ideas.
Comment by walker Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:21 pm
Any evidence of Quinnochio doing a sad dance?
Comment by Jose Abreu's next homer Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:22 pm
==The reality is Rauner knew that it would be struck down - Quinn’s was as well.==
Yes, they knew it and so did the Chicago Tribune as well. Yet, they put out editorial after editorial demonizing anyone, especially Madigan, for trying to investigate the legality of the signatures and the amendments. I can’t wait to see the scathing editorial they’ll put out next criticizing the judge’s decision.
Comment by Wensicia Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:23 pm
I happen to be very satisfied with my senator. She has voted correctly on all the major votes of the past 5 years.
Therefore, why should anyone - especially Bruce Rauner - be able to deny me my right to vote to re-elect someone I am very satisfied with?
It’s a very elitist thing to say, as Bruce and others seem to think, that they know best who should represent me.
Comment by low level Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:25 pm
Beware “disjunctive conjunctions”
Comment by Bill White Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:27 pm
Now Rauner can run as a true outsider and rail against the political class that protects and upholds the status quo. This may work in his favor.
Comment by Keyser Soze Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:33 pm
===- Earl Shumaker - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 12:42 pm:
Just curious: has this judge received “campaign contributions” from Madigan as head of the Illinois Democratic Party===
No. And she hasn’t had a campaign fund since 2004.
Comment by Snucka Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:35 pm
===Just curious: has this judge received “campaign contributions” from Madigan as head of the Illinois Democratic Party===
Nobody objected to this judge. Nobody. Get over it.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:35 pm
==Today we saw the entrenched special interests that fund and support the political status quo–
Bruce Rauner? He’s certainly in the picture of the biggest bankrollers of the status quo.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:35 pm
Please, stop us before we vote again.
The right of the people to choose to prevent themselves from choosing SHALL be infringed.
Perhaps some people want to vote to limit elections to the absolute minimum so they can just stay home. Well, they can just stay home.
“Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” H. L. Mencken
Comment by Glenn Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:36 pm
Low Level
“If you don’t like the map, vote for the other party.”
Isn’t that the problem though? The maps are designed to ensure that what you propose cannot happen or at least is as improbable as can be. So if you feel your political voce is being stifled what sit back and get used to it? Don’t get me wrong i agree on the term limits. However the way our maps are drawn are clearly designed to favor the party in power at the expense of the voters who may disagree. I am bummed about the shoddy work done by the remap guys and hope they can tweek both their process and their proposal to meet muster.
Comment by Mason born Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:42 pm
Well, it wouldn’t be Bruce Rauner denying you your right to vote, it would be your neighbors in Illinois. Just like they have denied some rights in the past. Like your right to have 3 legislators in a district (cutback).
The right to bail for things that could lead to a life sentence (1982) was taken away by the voters.
So sorry it isn’t rich guys who take away your rights, it’s the voters.
Comment by OneMan Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:43 pm
“The hippocracy abounds here.” Now come on, they may be a little pudgy, but they’re not THAT overweight!
Comment by Skeptic Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:47 pm
Or are we talking about the Elephant in the Room now?
Comment by Skeptic Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:48 pm
=The people of Illinois can choose to limit terms by voting against any previously elected state official they want removed.=
i live in the 24 district but yet somehow madigan and the voters of 22nd district have more influence in my district than my state rep herself. can someone please explain this to me?
Comment by ok... Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:49 pm
This is a solid opinion. I expected no other outcome. This isn’t politics, it’s law.
Comment by Archiesmom Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:53 pm
“Ok…” Even if Madigan were out of office, he could easily have just as much influence as party chairman or other power broker (See: Bill Cellini.) Term limits (either on the seat or the leadership position) wouldn’t help that, and could arguably make it worse.
Comment by Skeptic Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:53 pm
Well you can just vote that person out, duh….
Comment by OneMan Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:55 pm
What if instead of worrying about who is drawing map lines, they mixed in proportional representation & hence those votes could not be gerrymandered? Perhaps mixed-member proportional representation like they have in Germany. Each voter casts to votes, one for their district rep & another for their preferred party. The parties then get a certain number of reps dependent on how many votes they got statewide in vote-by-the-party votes.
Comment by Illiana Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:56 pm
The issue was decided in 1969 when the Illinois Constitution was written and drafters decided to avoid the California open referendum system. This was ratified by Voters and failure to call a new Convention 20 years later re-ratified that decisions. Rauner’s presser just shows, again, his ignorance of Illinois government structure.
Comment by D.P.Gumby Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:56 pm
If you don’t believe that entrenched incumbents with a lot of money can be defeated, ask Eric Cantor what he thinks about the topic.
Comment by Old Shepherd Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:58 pm
===Just curious: has this judge received “campaign contributions” from Madigan as head of the Illinois Democratic Party===
- Nobody objected to this judge. Nobody. Get over -it.
Before these initiatives were ever started I (and others, including former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor) have protested having elected judges. It’s not like they had the opportunity to get an impartial judge “outside of the system.”
Also, for all the venom being directed at these initiatives, how about some for the legislators who won’t put these issues on the ballots themselves? Oh, that’s right, we can’t dare hold Quinn (who claims to support these measures!) and Madigan to the same standards as Raunner and the fair maps people.
Comment by lake county democrat Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:59 pm
=Well you can just vote that person out, duh….=
kinda hard to do when there is only one choice due to gerrymandering………
Comment by ok... Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:01 pm
===kinda hard to do when there is only one choice due to gerrymandering………====
No one is stopping anyone who gets enough signatures to be an alternative.
Stop being a victim. Please learn. The only one stopping you is you.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:03 pm
This was always just an election gimmick anyway. Rauner has never had a problem and has regularly supported long time entrenched incumbents like Mitch McConnell and Rich Daley to name just 2.
Comment by too obvious Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:05 pm
Note the last line of the decision banning the Board from taking any additional action. I know Rich reported that most of the challenges to the fair maps proposal were directed towards “non-signature” issues, but by his account 12% of the rejections were the kind of things the fair maps people were spinning as the main issues, and if they had flipped 50% of those rejection rates they’d have, iirc, squeaked past the requirement. There was also pressure on the Board to grant sufficient time to get the voter registration records back. The judge could have stayed her opinion on appeal - typical when there are issues of timelienss (if she’s overturned by the appellate court or state supreme court, the Board could say “sorry, not enough time” - I don’t even know if the issue would get heard by the supremes before election day unless they expedite this).
Comment by lake county democrat Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:08 pm
===if they had flipped 50% of those rejection rates they’d have, iirc, squeaked past the requirement.===
Nope.
If they won every single challenge, they’d still be short.
Also, I’m hearing they’re finding duplicates as signatures are being rehabilitated. It’s not going well for them. The court case is likely moot.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:10 pm
OW - come on now, gerrymandering ensures that in many, probably most, districts, what you are suggesting is that the typical voter must elevate “limiting the term” over every. single. other. issue. that matters to them. In my case, I’d have to put that above the safety net, gun control, abortion rights, etc. etc. just to make my point about term limits. To fliply say “you can have term limits - just vote them out” is ridiculous. And the barriers to primary challengers, particularly given Madigan’s fundraising/ghost candidates/even reported intimidation, makes “just primary them” even more flip.
Comment by lake county democrat Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:12 pm
Rich - am I misreading the last lines of the judge’s ruling (last page, point III) or that the Board can’t do any more “finding” - it’s not the court case that’s moot, it’s the appeal at the Board which is halted. I take “don’t spend another dime” as the equivalent of “halt”
Comment by lake county democrat Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:16 pm
===am I misreading===
No, but SOP is to stay on appeal.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:18 pm
MAJOR Defeat for Rauner. Major VICTORY for Pat Quinn and MJM. The Gov. can say, (as he did in his Statement today, in effect), “Great idea. All for it. But we TEIED that way back when in 1993 with my OWN Petition Drive to no avail THEN–and Billionaire BRUCE was NOWHERE to be found–so he stole MY idea and STILL messed it all up.” Plus, we ALL know how the Speaker stands on this matter…!
Comment by Just The Way It Is One Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:20 pm
Whoops–that was meant to read above, “But we TRIED that way back when in 1993…!”
Comment by Just The Way It Is One Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:21 pm
=== To fliply say “you can have term limits - just vote them out” is ridiculous. And the barriers to primary challengers, particularly given Madigan’s fundraising/ghost candidates/even reported intimidation, makes “just primary them” even more flip.===
Will Guzzardi.
Being a victim takes more time then trying to win in the precincts.
Never met a winning candidate whose whole campaign is victimhood.
You want Madigan out. Beat ‘em.
The rest is talk.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:22 pm
=No one is stopping anyone who gets enough signatures to be an alternative. Stop being a victim. Please learn. The only one stopping you is you.=
I’m a strong democrat and I’ll give you that point maybe im complaining to much but the message i’m getting on here is. “it’s the way things are, so deal with it” but i refuse to believe that, i think we can make a better effor to make districts more competitive in order to weed out the ” idiotic shill” candidates, all i want good candidates but they don’t come when its been gerrymandered to protect the incumbent and madigan staffers spend time kicking potential candidates off ballots. this why many people are not happy with the way this state being run but yet somehow incumbents get reelected an overwhelming majority of the time.
Comment by ok... Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:27 pm
===…but the message i’m getting on here is. “it’s the way things are, so deal with it” but i refuse to believe that,…===
Thems the rules, you play in the rules, you can win, Guzzardi proved that.
===…i think we can make a better effor to make districts more competitive in order to weed out the ” idiotic shill” candidates,===
Beat bad candidates with good candidates. See a pattern here? Breen beat Pihos, whom some felt was a candidate as you describe.
all i want good candidates but they don’t come when its been gerrymandered to protect the incumbent and madigan staffers spend time kicking potential candidates off ballots. this why many people are not happy with the way this state being run but yet somehow incumbents get reelected an overwhelming majority of the time.===
And….”there” is the Victimhood.
Breen and Guzzardi seem to fly in the face of your theory.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:34 pm
OW - if Will Guzzardi’s election was due to being a reformer, he would have won the first time in a landslide. But for teacher union’s agenda, he’d have lost again.
Telling someone who lives in a gerrymandered district to vote Madigan out is like telling the ace of the Chicago Cubs to stop whining and throw a no hitter if he wants a victory.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:34 pm
==It’s not like they had the opportunity to get an impartial judge “outside of the system.”==
==Oh, that’s right, we can’t dare hold Quinn (who claims to support these measures!) and Madigan to the same standards as Raunner and the fair maps people.==
You’d be whining that Madigan secretly was selecting the judges if they were appointed and somehow every GOP governor pre-2002 was his puppet and so was Blagojevich and Quinn.
Quinn can’t just put amendments on the ballot. The legislature can. Why would you hold someone accountable for something they can’t do? Plus, as a citizen he already a term limits amendment, so you can’t criticize him for not trying to put his ideas on the books.
Also, The whole point of limiting citizen initiative amendments to the legislative portion of the constitution is that the legislature would be unwilling to crimp their power. This kind of situation was perfectly forecast by the framers. It’s Rauner’s fault he cobbled on all this other junk about the size and veto power and then tried to pass off a dollar store moonstone as a diamond.
Comment by Precinct Captain Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:38 pm
(OW - Sorry, for some reason that posted as anonymous - it’s LCD. You’re still just as wrong in citing stray outlier elections to support your argument)
Comment by lake county democrat Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:38 pm
==Stop being a victim. Please learn. The only one stopping you is you.==
They’ll never learn. These are often the same folks who drone on and on about the “Founders.” Well, the Founders certainly didn’t envision their republic as full of people whose only political act was casting a ballot every couple of years. Walk precincts, talk to your neighbors, arrange a meeting at the district office, hand write letters, etc. This is a diverse world, not everyone is going to support your issues or think they are important. That’s the whole point of advocacy and politics, to get people on your side and put into place your agenda. You don’t do that by whining.
Comment by Precinct Captain Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:44 pm
The entire stream on conscious on this thread is disheartening. The majority are focusing on a number of variations of the same theme. That being “the law is the law, deal with it.” I accept that. However today’s decision is nothing to celebrate, unless you have come under the political Stockholm syndrome that so many have come under. If Speaker Madigan had the best interests of Illinoisans in mind, he would have brought a terms limits, or remap proposal to bear himself. However it has not been about the people of Illinois in years. It’s about the political ruling class only heeding the laws that are useful for their ends. Good for Madigan for shooting down another reform. I respect his political acumen, much in the same way a person has to respect a pick pocket. Both are skills, but do little to advance the betterment of the state of Illinois.
Comment by John A Logan Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:46 pm
- lake county democrat -,
Don’t let reality get in the way of being a victim…
So you want Berrios over Guzzardi after the 2nd bite if the Apple, or you only get one?
Beating MJM’s candidate ain’t good enough? Geez.
===Telling someone who lives in a gerrymandered district to vote Madigan out is like telling the ace of the Chicago Cubs to stop whining and throw a no hitter if he wants a victory.===
lol, you and the members of My a Party…
You are not “Firing Madigan”, you are voting for alternatives, like a Breen or like a Guzzardi.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:47 pm
=== If Speaker Madigan had the best interests of Illinoisans in mind, he would have brought a terms limits, or remap proposal to bear himself. However it has not been about the people of Illinois in years. It’s about the political ruling class only heeding the laws that are useful for their ends. Good for Madigan for shooting down another reform. I respect his political acumen, much in the same way a person has to respect a pick pocket. Both are skills, but do little to advance the betterment of the state of Illinois.===
I know where you can get a boatload of “Fire Madigan” t-shirts…cheap.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:50 pm
Looks like this will ruling will be appealed all the way to the Illinois Supreme Court. That is a win for Rauner. The more this is in the media the more people get the idea, the Democratically controlled courts are making the rulings based on politics. Most people view both of the proposals as reasonable. It will make for a good campaign issue for Rauner and Republicans in the fall.
Comment by Apacolypse Now Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:52 pm
=Breen and Guzzardi seem to fly in the face of your theory=
I can’t speak for Breen but for Guzzardi, Berrios’ had the district gerrymandered but recent shifts in demographics specifically in the logan square area allowed Will to make a move plus he had alot more support from unions and alderman, Guzzardi didn’t win that race, Berrios lost it. The two examples you used are exceptions to the rule.
Comment by ok... Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:53 pm
===Guzzardi didn’t win that race, Berrios lost it.===
I think his margin was 20 points.
Try again, victim.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:55 pm
===It will make for a good campaign issue for Rauner and Republicans in the fall.===
If anything, it will be fast-tracked, as the ballots are ripe for printing by a certain day.
The Illinois Constitution is not party affiliated. Blaming Dems for something unconstitutional is pretty lazy abs ignorant to the rule of law.
But, if you sleep better thinking these things …
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:55 pm
OW - of course not, but to analogize that reformers have a fair shot at replacing Speaker Madigan because a reformer who was incapable of winning until an incredibly energizing issue came around that had nothing to do with reform in an off-year election? ANd I still think Madigan beat CTU in the long run: let’s see how long they manage those supermajority strike votes in the future.
Wish I had the education to get the My a Party joke! I’ll stand by argument that the playing field is not nearly as level as you make it out to be and gerrymandering plays a major role in that.
Comment by lake county democrat Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 2:56 pm
==I think his margin was 20 points.==
Almost 21.
==OW - of course not, but to analogize that reformers have a fair shot at replacing Speaker Madigan because a reformer who was incapable of winning until an incredibly energizing issue came around that had nothing to do with reform in an off-year election? ANd I still think Madigan beat CTU in the long run: let’s see how long they manage those supermajority strike votes in the future.==
So you whine about the democratic process not being accessible enough but then praise Madigan and Stand For Children for that ridiculous supermajority strike vote they put in for CTU? LOL.
Comment by Precinct Captain Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 3:05 pm
Last, first ..,
===Wish I had the education to get the My a Party joke!===
Typo. I can look at you as a regular here and you get it, or understand you are more fascinated being a victim than being in a community or a discussion.
Up to you.
===OW - of course not, but to analogize that reformers have a fair shot at replacing Speaker Madigan because a reformer who was incapable of winning until an incredibly energizing issue came around that had nothing to do with reform in an off-year election? ANd I still think Madigan beat CTU in the long run: let’s see how long they manage those supermajority strike votes in the future.===
So, you can win, but can’t win without support?
Is this a new political idea, or been around since… Forever?
The issue is term limits, candidates, and winning. Why you insist on throwing up “problems” instead of looking at things for solutions, I dunno.
That us textbook victimhood.
It’s up to candidates to win, not to be give a fair shake because they are in the ballot. Earn.
Not everything is about participation trophies. Someone wins, someone loses. It’s hard, not equal.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 3:05 pm
“Telling someone who lives in a gerrymandered district to vote Madigan out..” The real problem you state isn’t that the district is biased D, it’s that you don’t feel you have freedom of choice over who runs. THAT’S the problem that needs to be fixed. That’s not a redistricting or term-limit issue. (And yes I know anyone can run, it’s the fact that a “non-sanctioned” R or D, or a third-party candidate stands a snow ball’s chance of winning is what I’m talking about.)
Comment by Skeptic Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 3:06 pm
=I think his margin was 20 points.=
Good point, but with a turnout of 8,000 voters beating someone by 20 points isn’t that hard. I had a political friend that canvassed for Guzzardi alot he told me that he could have won that race without canvassing. the 20 points is the result of a field program. We can disagree and maybe i’m wrong, i guess its a matter of opinion.
Comment by ok... Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 3:10 pm
===I had a political friend that canvassed for Guzzardi alot he told me that he could have won that race without canvassing. the 20 points is the result of a field program. We can disagree and maybe i’m wrong, i guess its a matter of opinion.===
Yeah. You win by not working. If you just say you are going to win, you win, Field Ops matter not…
Yikes.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 3:17 pm
=The Illinois Constitution is not party affiliated. Blaming Dems for something unconstitutional is pretty lazy abs ignorant to the rule of law=
So, now Oswego Willy is a legal constitutional expert! We know you think your and campaign expert, but this is just a little extreme, even for you. A highly partisan Democratic judge ruled for Madigan. Surprise! Surprise. That’s why there are appeals courts.
Comment by Apacolypse Now Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 3:18 pm
Not a fan of term limits although I agree in Illinois they are needed in lieu of voters having common sense to throw most bums out. I do wonder that if a term limit question were actually on the ballot, is Madigan afraid the same dumb voters that continue to elect him, Lisa, Daley, Rahm would vote for term limits?
Comment by Brass Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 3:26 pm
(Sigh)
===A highly partisan Democratic judge…===
…that both sides agreed to have rule in this case…
===…ruled for Madigan.===
Ruled on the Constitutionality.
===Surprise! Surprise.===
Actually, no one was really “surprised”, both had flaws
===That’s why there are appeals courts.===
They said that when Quinn tried this too. Just sayin’
I don’t think anything of myself, if you think anything of me, you are wasting your time, I ain’t thinking of you, constitutionally or politically. Sorry.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 3:27 pm
=Yeah. You win by not working. If you just say you are going to win, you win, Field Ops matter not…=
OW i respect your opinion. I’m not taking anything away from Will Guzzardi he and his campaign worked they’re butt off to win that election and they did an amazing good job. but to say that Berrios’ demise wasn’t partly to blame on her part is just a plain lie. that election was an anomaly so i dislike when people mention him as an example of how to beat the “machine” aka Madigan, not every district has a area super progressive liberal area like Logan Square.
Comment by ok... Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 3:44 pm
===…but to say that Berrios’ demise wasn’t partly to blame on her part is just a plain lie.===
Not at a 20+ point clip. Sorry.
===that election was an anomaly so i dislike when people mention him as an example of how to beat the “machine” aka Madigan,…===
MJM has lost primaries before, will lose them again. Madigan doesn’t win 100% of the time.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 3:55 pm
- J - Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 1:01 pm:
You hit the nail on the head. If Rauner won the decision–make hay in the media, if he lost–beat the drum in the media. This effort was all about getting the Shake Up Sprinfield issues more exposure and beta testing a ground game.
As far as Guzzardi, Breen et al, I wonder who they will vote for to be Speaker on inauguration day? That’s all that counts.
Comment by Robo Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 4:00 pm
===MJM has lost primaries before===
Yep. He lost another one in Champaign County this year.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 4:17 pm
I am personally neutral on term limits, but am glad Rauner’s amendment was overturned because of the restructuring of the Senate. I never could understand how both limiting terms of office AND reducing representation was good for the people of Illinois.
Comment by G'Kar Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 4:19 pm
I just saw the Remap Group pulled the plug, money must have finally dryed up
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/clout/chi-judge-tosses-illinois-term-limits-remap-questions-from-fall-ballot-20140627,0,5444305.story
Comment by Someone you should know Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 4:20 pm
Nobody’s gonna pay for it anyway. And as soon as the deliveries are made in the front door, you move the stuff out the back and sell it at a discount. You take a two hundred dollar case of booze and you sell it for a hundred. It doesn’t matter. It’s all profit. And then finally, when there’s nothing left, when you can’t borrow another buck from the bank or buy another case of booze, you bust the joint out. You light a match.
Comment by Someone you should know Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 4:21 pm
=A highly partisan Democratic judge ruled for Madigan. Surprise! Surprise. That’s why there are appeals courts.–
So, because she didn’t rule the way you want her to, she must be a partisan hack? Geez, it’s called the law. There was an Illinois Supreme Court case directly on point. A circuit judge has to follow the law and abide by IL Supreme Court decisions. She cannot overrule them, only they can do that. If she had ruled the other the way, she would be criticized for not doing her job properly.
Learn how the law works before making a foolish comment.
Comment by summertimeblues Friday, Jun 27, 14 @ 6:47 pm