Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Kirk makes a strong stand on reelection bid
Next Post: UPDATE: $580 MILLION EXELON RATE HIKE?? Do They Really Need a Bailout After Making Nearly $1 BILLION In The Last 90 Days?
Posted in:
* From Kent Redfield…
Hi Rich,
You may have discussed this on the blog and I missed it, but I was talking to a lobbyist at bowling last night about how many governors Speaker Madigan has seen since he was elected to the General Assembly. Turns out, Bruce Rauner will be his 8th.
He was elected in 1970, two years into Ogilvie’s one term. When I started with the legislature in 1975 he was the Asst. Majority Leader and already cutting deals for the Mayor. When Speaker Redmond’s Majority Leader, Jerry Shea, did not run in 1976 he moved up to Majority Leader in 1977.
Ogilive
Walker - Asst. Majority Leader 1975
Thompson - Majority Leader 1977, Minority Leader 1981, Speaker 1983
Edgar
Ryan
Blagojevich
Quinn
RaunerTo watch 8 Governors come and go is just amazing.
Take care,
Kent
That’s just astonishing.
Redfield bowls with lobbyists?
/Snark
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 10:38 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** Kirk makes a strong stand on reelection bid
Next Post: UPDATE: $580 MILLION EXELON RATE HIKE?? Do They Really Need a Bailout After Making Nearly $1 BILLION In The Last 90 Days?
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Mike Madigan: making the case daily for term limits.
Comment by Grumpy Gus Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 10:40 am
Grumpy, it’s good to be King.
Comment by Nearly Normal Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 10:42 am
Smokey, this is not Vietnam. This is bowling. There are rules.
Comment by 47th Ward Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 10:42 am
Would be interesting to hear what Madigan thinks makes a good governor.
Not holding my breath.
Comment by walker Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 10:46 am
Term Limits crowd: To the people of Madigan’s district, I don’t like who you keep electing to be your representative, so I back term limits to tell you who you can’t vote for.
Sounds a bit undemocratic huh? Kind of like the Chinese trying to tell Hong Kong who they can and can’t vote for. Not sure I’d want to be associated with that group, but its up to you, I guess Gus.
Comment by PublicServant Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 10:47 am
Could easily be more than 8…one of those governors served for a record 14 years.
Most underreported story of this election cycle: Illinoisians think the state is on the wrong track, dump the Guv, but only one incumbent General Assembly member loses! (And Madigan doesn’t lose a single member.) When is the last time Illinois held an election and only one sitting GA member lost?
Comment by Rick Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 10:47 am
Rich, in today’s fax you said that rumor has it that rep. Bellock is being considered to run DHS. I’ve been hearing HFS, which would seem to make more sense. Any chance you reported the rumor wrong?
Comment by Sportsfans Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 10:57 am
PublicServant-
The self-righteous chest pounding of the anti-term limits crowd is exceptional. Truly exceptional.
Term limits. Tienanmen Square. Same thing.
Why don’t you also make some analogy about how it’s loading people into boxcars too?
Please never speak on a matter of public policy again. Ever.
Comment by Fight for the Bureaucrats Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 10:58 am
Fight for the Bureaucrats - Yeah…I’ll be taking your advice. Not. Read what I said. Never said anything about Tienanmen Square, but trying to tell people who they can vote for is a perfect match. Oh and bite me.
Comment by PublicServant Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:02 am
Kent meant to tell you that eight governors served Michael J. Madigan.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:03 am
47, that was quick. Well done.
“This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Alps!”
(broadcast TV version, Walter smashing the car with crowbar)
Comment by Wordslinger Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:05 am
PublicServant-
We tell people all the time who they can vote for by codifying the requirements of holding office. Age and residency, of course, being the most prominent. We tell you that you can’t vote for judges who aren’t lawyers… the same for state’s attorneys.
In the end, we basically take voters out of the equation in almost all ILGA races by drawing uncompetitive districts anyway. So let’s tone down the self-righteousness just a few degrees.
Comment by Fight for the Bureaucrats Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:07 am
He has serious mental problems…
Beyond pacifism?
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:08 am
“Something bowling, politics something something gutter…”
– MrJM
Comment by MrJM Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:09 am
If Madigan ever retires, as opposed to dying with his boots on, perhaps then he would write a book about what he has learned and which pols were the most, and least, effective.
Comment by anon Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:31 am
Regarding term limits, how many times does this have to be said? We have term limits already. They’re called elections. I’ve had the same state rep for years. She works hard, knows the issues, and knows how to get things done. I want to keep re-electing her as long as she does that and wants to keep running. You don’t like your rep? Then get off your rear end and elect someone else. Don’t tell me I can’t choose to keep mine instead. You don’t like Mike Madigan being speaker? Then act like a competent opposition party statewide and change that. That includes recruiting and running decent candidates in Chicago, by the way. You can’t fail to run a single candidate in district after district and then complain when Madigan and the Dems still control who gets elected speaker.
Comment by OldSmoky2 Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:31 am
22 terms and counting….
Comment by Jaded Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:37 am
===perhaps then he would write a book===
He’s not exactly a tell-all type.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:38 am
We need term limits for leadership positions far more than we need them for elected offices. Speaker and Senate President are roles that could be limited to to one or two terms without limiting anyone’s ability to vote for whomever they want.
Comment by AC Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 11:50 am
We have term limits already. They’re called elections.
No - it is called the 22nd Amendment to the US Constitution. Applying it to other public elected offices helps create legislatures which better reflect the gender, race, occupations and diversities within the communities they represent.
Would you have told African Americans that they should have just voted out the old Southern Democrats that kept them second class? Would we even have a Barack Obama today in office without term limits?
Term limits importantly unlocks political power for citizens who are not white male lawyers and their families.
This is proven. It is a fact. If you believe that our politics and elected governments should be reflective of the diversities within the communities they are to represent in government, then term limits helps get us there.
There are plenty of places for our current crop of old white male lawyers to do public work besides padding their fiefdoms in public office.
Term limits will get that experience and talent out of the General Assembly and allow younger citizens to become a part of it. States with term limits have shown that new legislative talents are an asset to their states.
The GOP has got it wrong in that term limits shouldn’t be sold as a means of saving money, they should be sold as a means of helping build a better, more diverse and more accessible government to the groups currently shut out.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 12:04 pm
AC,
If Madigan is still in the House, I think that would work about as well as term-limiting Putin did. Suddenly, House majority leader would be a very powerful post.
No doubt in my mind he’ll see a ninth governor, particularly since the one elected in 2018 will have a say over the next map.
Comment by Marty Funkhouser Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 12:05 pm
Institutional knowledge is just as important as anything you bring to the table in governing;
What works, what doesn’t, approaches, techniques, parliamentary maneuvering, and even learning to fight another day…
“We’re going to do things a bit different…”
“Tried that, called ‘this’, failed. What else you got?”
You know if Rauner and MJM work well together, there will be a time or 5 that institutional knowledge will help both get what they want. It part of “we” governing.
The bills and idiotic plans of others that MJM thwarted is his legacy as much as the laws he pushed through. Ignoring that facet really speaks to not understanding what institutional knowledge is all about.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 12:17 pm
@ Word -”See what happens Donnie?”
Comment by Jerome Horwitz Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 12:22 pm
Ezra Klein says it better than I ever could in a 2010 piece entitled “The folly of term limits”. Enjoy.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/01/the_folly_of_term_limits.html
Comment by PublicServant Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 12:22 pm
VMan, what in the world are you talking about? Blacks didn’t vote in the South because of Jim Crow. People died to get rid of it. What does term limits have to do with it?
And you really think W would have won a third term? That’s demented.
Comment by Wordslinger Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 12:35 pm
And you really think W would have won a third term? That’s demented.
You sure are! I’m not saying that!
Clinton would have won handily in 2000 and probably would be president now. The man is a walking political genius capable of charming the pants off anyone.
There wouldn’t have even heard about George W except as the Texas governor who lost to Clinton in 2000.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 12:40 pm
Ezra Klein says it better than I ever could in a 2010 piece entitled “The folly of term limits”. Enjoy.
Ezra Klein must think the only reason term limits should be considered is for fiscal reasons. He is wrong.
Either that or he is not in favor of diversity in our elected governments. He would rather mock the lady in charge for this narrow-focused piece with the broad, all-encompassing title, than admit she wouldn’t even be there if not for term limits.
Klein completely misses the point. He wouldn’t have written that kind of crap about Barack Obama without addressing it, would he have?
And besides, this article is FOUR years old. Take a look at California now. It still has term limits, and it is still better off with them than we are without them.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 12:47 pm
Our nation would be in a better place today if Bill Clinton had won a 3rd term in 2000
Comment by Bill White Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 12:56 pm
Gee VMan, who knew you were in favor of a California progressive income tax?
Top individual rate: 12.3 percent.
AMT: 7 percent
Corporate rate: 8.84 percent
Banks and financials: 10.84 percent
AMT: 6.65 percent
Comment by Wordslinger Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 12:57 pm
MJM was minority leader for 2 years from 1995 to 1997 when Lee Daniels took over when the Republicans took control. I made the mistake of referring to him as “mr. Leader” during that time…but only once.
Comment by facts are stubborn things Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 1:06 pm
Vman. remap brings diversity, not term limits. With the kinds of tightly controlled maps we’ve got, you replace one “white guy lawyer” for another or whatever the demographic commands. You chase people out of the process. Looking at our neighbors in Missouri, I don’t think they are reflective of the diversity of their state, and the brain drain and quest for Up or Out, means that legislators don’t develop any expertise, other than how to position to move from the house to the senate to statewide. Churning is not necessarily progress.
Comment by in the know Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 1:23 pm
@VMan
Term limits are for whiners who don’t like the outcome of elections. As others have said, we have term limits already. They are called elections.
But you keep on whining about it. I’ll keep on exercising my right to term limit elected officials by voting and if I don’t get my way I won’t whine about it. I’ll try again next time.
Comment by Demoralized Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 1:24 pm
We’d get more diversity if more of the people who you seem to think aren’t represented well, would vote in sufficient numbers and regularly, VMan…Kinda like the people who seem to favor old white lawyers do.
Comment by PublicServant Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 1:29 pm
“Astonishing”….. More like outstayed your welcome.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 1:38 pm
“There wouldn’t have even heard about George W except as the Texas governor who lost to Clinton in 2000.”
I am against term limits but I never came up with that good an argument.
Comment by Bigtwich Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 2:14 pm
“===perhaps then he would write a book===
He’s not exactly a tell-all type.”
I was eating lunch while reading and almost choked.
Comment by Soccermom Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 2:27 pm
Vegas put the over/under on how many future governors Madigan will serve with at 3.5.
I’ll take the over.
Comment by 1776 Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 2:34 pm
===Applying it to other public elected offices helps create legislatures which better reflect the gender, race, occupations and diversities within the communities they represent.
The literature does not support this. In fact, there is little evidence that terms limits change the diversity of legislatures. John Carey found this in the first work on it in the 1990s and I have seen nothing that changes his findings since.
Unless you have a cite?
Comment by ArchPundit Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 3:41 pm
such is the life of an immortal vampire
Comment by Wumpus Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 3:42 pm
So this Madigan character has been around a long time and has seen it all!
Comment by Levois Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 3:45 pm
Yikes, you have to go back to the Romans to find a comparison.
Comment by A guy... Friday, Nov 14, 14 @ 5:02 pm
–Yikes, you have to go back to the Romans to find a comparison.–
A comparison of what to the Romans?
Comment by Wordslinger Sunday, Nov 16, 14 @ 10:08 pm
–Tem limits. Tianamen Square. Same thing.–
Fight, you might want to lay off the China analogies. You’re a bit confused on the current events, history and geography.
PS was referring to the current protests in Hong Kong over the central authorities unilateral decree that it would now select the candidates for local Hong Kong elections, a violation of the handover accords that gave the region autonomy in everything but defense and foreign affairs.
Tiananmen Square is in Beijing. The massacre was 25 years ago and came after protests over much larger and different issues. Hong Kong was still a British colony then.
Comment by Wordslinger Sunday, Nov 16, 14 @ 10:45 pm