Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Reader comments closed for the weekend
Next Post: More Democratic budgetary landmines are detonating
Posted in:
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…
I don’t believe I’ve ever seen a governor openly and loudly laughed at on the House floor. At least not while he was present.
Gov. Bruce Rauner was doing pretty well with his legislative audience during his first State of the State address this week, delivering strong applause lines with his refreshing calls for bipartisanship. He even thanked legislators “for your service” and predicted they would do “great” things together. He warned them that he would say things they liked and didn’t like and urged them to see the “big picture,” which will “lift up all of the people we’ve been chosen to represent.”
Members of the Legislative Black Caucus were especially receptive to the governor’s attacks on labor union apprenticeship programs. Rauner claimed about “80 percent of individuals in Illinois apprenticeship programs are white even though Caucasians make up fewer than 63 percent of our population,” and demanded that be addressed with legislation. Black and Latino legislators have tried for years with limited success to break those barriers, and no governor has ever so clearly sided with them.
Legislators erupted in loud applause when the governor proposed raising the minimum wage to $10 an hour. But when Rauner added “over seven years,” their laughter was even louder, and longer. Democrats appeared to realize that they might’ve fallen for a bait and switch, and it was mostly downhill from that point on.
Much of Rauner’s address was aimed at his campaign enemies. As usual, public employee unions were at the top of his list. “Government must never force its employees to fund activities they do not support,” Rauner claimed. But, by law, state workers are not required to pay full union dues. They are automatically enrolled into what’s called “Fair Share,” which is the portion of dues that funds things like collective bargaining, grievances, etc. They can opt in to full dues, which include funding for things like political work, if they choose.
The Illinois Hospital Association backed Gov. Pat Quinn last year, and Rauner took a clear shot at the IHA last week. “While we currently ban contributions from many businesses with state contracts,” the governor said, “some of the largest recipients of taxpayer money, like hospitals that receive millions from Medicaid, are still able to funnel huge campaign donations to elected officials.” He then called for a campaign contribution ban from “organizations funded by entities receiving state Medicaid funds.”
But hospitals don’t fund the IHA’s political activities, mainly because most are nonprofits and are banned by law from contributing. Pretty much all of the group’s political contributions come from hospital executives.
The IHA was clearly surprised by the gubernatorial shot across its bow. “We’re not sure where this came from,” said an exasperated IHA executive. Not for nothing, but the IHA attempted to atone for its Quinn contributions by donating $100,000 to Rauner’s inauguration fund—and the check was cashed.
By the time he got around to attacking the trial lawyers with a proposal to ban all attorney contributions to judicial candidates, not a single person applauded on either side of the aisle. He waited for a briefly uncomfortable moment, then moved on.
Rauner’s people say he feels “liberated” since the election to say whatever he wants, hence the constant references to his enemies list.
There are those who believe (myself included) that there may be a method to the madness. Under this theory, the governor has planted his flag on a distant economic fringe so that he can drag the General Assembly off its current path. And if he’s eventually willing to compromise and tone things down, it just might work.
But it would’ve been much better for Rauner if he was booed last week. From some I’ve talked to, he may even have wanted that to happen. Being booed by the “entrenched elite” would’ve been a net positive for him with the general public. And legislators might’ve felt bad about booing him once they had time to reflect. Maybe they’d even feel the need to apologize for such a negative reaction.
When people are laughing at you, however, they don’t care what you think and they’re most definitely not listening.
Some rough waters are dead ahead.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 9:50 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Reader comments closed for the weekend
Next Post: More Democratic budgetary landmines are detonating
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Despite all of the rhetoric at the end of the day Rauner will need to compromise with the legislature to accomplish anything.
Comment by Stones Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 9:57 am
He’s going to have to learn to accept far less than he wants, and this is not a man that’s been told no very often over the last decade or two. Rough waters indeed.
Comment by slow down Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:00 am
“Government must never force its employees to fund activities they do not support,”
Like the Iraq war.
Comment by Das Kapital Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:03 am
We all know the tings he “wants” to do, but in the end, Madigan and Cullerton will still have the final say so on most things that get done.
Comment by Big Joe Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:04 am
Is it possible that this is the first speech he’s ever made to a group not predisposed to liking him?
What’s his public speaking history? Speaking to workers/execs at companies GTCR just invested in, campaign speeches to audiences that at least liked him enough to show up and listen, the limited debates during the campaign, any others?
This was like watching a five-year-old whose magic act has been killing it with the living room audience of his grandparents, parents, cousins and siblings trying to take his act on the road.
Nobody was impressed when he said “abwacadabwa” and made the flowers pop out of his little Marshall Brodien starter set wand.
Comment by LizPhairTax Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:07 am
Through mutual funds I own tiny bits of a lot of corporations. I do not approve of any of the donations that those corporations make to Republicans or to right-leaning groups. So does Gov. Rauner also propose to put an end to corporate political donations?
Comment by UIC Guy Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:13 am
Nice work Rich, lots of good stuff there to take pause and see things from different angles.
To the Post,
Rauner can’t be the final “say” in the Caucuses for their “dispensation” and look at this speech, to this specific audience of 177, and then decide to be the “Great Compromiser”
Can’t work.
The governing of “We” versus thinking the “Royal We” will be seen at the end of Session.
Partners persuade, Owners demand.
Funny, maybe ironic, but Raunerwas accused of making a statement about a female executive that he (Rauner) would bury her.
Rauner would bury her.
Welp, are the Owls like Rep. Sandack worried about being buried too?
How this relates to the speech is that the Governor of the state of Illinois all but told his “partners”…”you are going to be with me. You are. Or else.”
This speech, I see, as Rauner in his head thinking, he already owns 47 votes in his $10 minimum wage, with business reforms too, vote. Rauner already had 20 votes for it in the senate too. Why not go after anyone and everyone I want?
Indeed, Rauner may have wanted to be booed, but beibg laughed at, for me, is not just at the proposal, it’s reakky about not understanding the levers of governing too. Both.
Rauner can demand votes, suicide votes, give a nod over the Leader, bypassing the Caucus leaders, Rauner can do all that. The fail is believing the levers of governing with the Legislature is best done by strong-arming to your will, instead of cobbling your 60, your 30, by understanding your partners, instead of feeling you own your partners.
Enjoyed your column Rich, thanks.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:16 am
Somebody should have red-penciled that two-bits a year over seven years. What was the point?
Comment by Wordslinger Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:16 am
Great article. Liz summarized it perfectly.
Comment by Walter Mitty Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:17 am
==So does Gov. Rauner also propose to put an end to corporate political donations?==
No, but he will support legislation that repeals the law requiring you to invest in those corporations. Is that good enough for you?
Comment by Anon. Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:19 am
Rauner is a good negotiator. His opening offer was high. He will barter from there. In the meantime, he can blame the Dem. Legislature for gridlock. They will have to learn to say NO to loyal constituencies.
Comment by Formerpol Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:19 am
Rauner didn’t plant a far out flag as a negotiating tactic. He believes these things, and he might as well say them. The only thing he clearly does not believe in is raising the minimum wage, so he played pure politics and minimized that one right out of sight.
Yes. We might take comfort in the reality that he must compromise off of his stated positions to get anything positive done for Illinois. Hope that’s his primary goal.
Comment by walker Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:20 am
Rauner’s anti-union rhetoric might like Obama’s SOTU speech–wish list items but with little chance of passing. Obama said he wants the top capital gains tax rate to increase, closure of loopholes, free community college, etc.
I hope that Rauner focuses on the pressing fiscal issues and leaves off union-stripping, which might be a crusade for some of his supporters but hopefully not for him.
Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:21 am
Rich — great analysis (as always). I know that a lot of legislators and other observers are scratching their heads over Rauner’s attacks on public-sector unions, trying to figure out what is worse: whether Rauner apparently has NO strategy in taking such radical positions, or whether he thinks that such radical positions are somehow strategic. There’s something to be said for staking a position off center, in the hope that you and the other side will meet somewhat in between. But when you stake a position so far off center, you tend to look uninformed, amateurish, and maybe a bit crazy — kind of like offering $10,000 for a car with a price tag of $18,000. Right now, I think many observers think that Rauner falls into the second category — and his tone deaf compensation package for Arduin and others tends to reinforce that perception.
Comment by ChiTown Seven Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:25 am
I think the problem with the “planting a flag” theory is that the legislature doesn’t have to negotiate AT ALL on the RTWFL stuff- and probably won’t. There is nothing demanding the state address unions right now, and indeed, many commentators have said it’s been weird for Rauner to focus on it.
The budget is a different matter, a budget MUST be passed. The Legislature and the Governor HAVE to negotiate on that. But then, on the budget, Rauner’s rhetoric was much more conciliatory.
Comment by Arsenal Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:27 am
===They will have to learn to say NO to loyal constituencies.===
Um, no they don’t.
Rauner needs a minimum of 13 House and 10 Senate votes for…everything.
Minimum.
See how this co-equal government thingy works.
Unless the Executive magically has Legislative powers, the Speaker and the President will give what they feel they want to give, and they will set the price, they will set the market.
Big difference.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:28 am
@uic guy:
I do not approve of Broccoli as a food.
I think we need to create “Broccoli Empowerment Zones” or “Right to Broccoli” cities so that we can ban Broccoli!
Comment by Del Clinkton Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:29 am
It’s hard to know what Rauner really believes in. A lot of his statements are made using language that the listener can read multiple ways.
If he truly believes most of what he is spouting, it’s going to be a real interesting Spring and early Summer. I can envision the “Royal We” issuing amendatory vetoes on almost every bill .. shades of “Rewrite to Do Right”.
If the consequences weren’t so dire for so many people, it would be amusing to watch.
Comment by RNUG Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:33 am
The GA heard $10 min, but rightfully laughed at the seven year schedule. A quarter on 40 hours is ten bucks, not enough for a small pizza and two liters of coke. Any linkage to reforms was lost, or at least didnt come through clearly. So the dems can say, here is a bill to go to $10 or $11, in three years. Send us your reform bill and we will look at it.
Comment by langhorne Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:34 am
Rich - I very distinctly remember a moment in a State of the State speech given by Governor Blagojevich in which he went through several verbal contortions and then simply declared that he had single handedly balanced the budget. Loud scoffing and laughter ensued.
Comment by Pool Boy Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:43 am
Glad someone finally pointed out yet another mistruth from Rauner. If he has evidence that hospitals are making campaign contributions, then he should call the IRS and/or U.S. attorney. Otherwise he should shut up.
Comment by Someone Finally Noticed Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:50 am
===…his confidence in the punitive power of his slush fund has overridden any desire to seek a middle ground with his opponents.===
That is my fear and the way I see that too.
Rauner feels empowered by a $20 million hammer, and sees those who may oppose him as nails(?)
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 10:53 am
Rauner knows “right-to-work” is going no where in the GA, so Rich is probably right about his flag-planting theory. But, it also serves as red meat for the right wing. He may have visions of 2016 Republican VP nomination dancing in his head.
Comment by RJ Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 11:06 am
RNUNG = the “Royal We” issuing amendatory vetoes on almost every bill=
If the governor vetoes everything he does not like, both houses can override his vetoes. Right? However, anyone who votes against the governor will lose their next election - - according to Rauner & his “$20M Do what I tell you to do fund.” The next 4 years are going to be painful to watch due to a lot of people losing their job.
Comment by Mama Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 11:11 am
=Rauner feels empowered by a $20 million hammer, and sees those who may oppose him as nails(?) =
That’s the way it has worked in the past and will work in the future. Nothing like a $20 million dollar hammer (primary challenger, with money) hanging over your head to help make a decision.
Comment by Apocalypse Now Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 11:16 am
===That’s the way it has worked in the past and will work in the future.===
Besides Blago trying to THINK he could do this, what sitting… Illinois governor… told Caucuses, not individuals, while caucuses, that he was taking them on, and or taking them out…ever?
You are a Dope.
===Nothing like a $20 million dollar hammer (primary challenger, with money) hanging over your head to help make a decision.===
How embarrassingly pathetic that you, out of hand, think entire caucuses should fold to one governor, any governor, should co-op the legislator, and that buying a caucus is “good government”, that is the definition of a Raunerbot;
“Yeah, whatever Bruce said! Democracy is overrated…”
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 11:30 am
Anyone, can you give us a little insight here? If someone says to a legislator, ‘If you vote for my bill I will contribute to your campaign fund and/or not support your opponent in the primary’ — is there any reason that this conduct doesn’t that run a afoul of the Criminal Code?
Comment by ChiTown Seven Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 11:30 am
Unfortunately, I believe the laughter will be the high point in their interaction. As we see Rauner’s anger, the reactions will be much harsher on both sides.
Comment by Norseman Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 11:50 am
=How embarrassingly pathetic that you, out of hand, think entire caucuses should fold to one governor, any governor, should co-op the legislator, and that buying a caucus is “good government”, that is the definition of a Raunerbot;= Hello, OW! How do you think Mike Madigan controls his caucus? Or Rham Emanuel controls the alderman? OW, you crack me up.
Comment by Apocalypse Now Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 12:00 pm
- Apocalypse Now -,
Speaker Madigan is not governor, the head of another whole branch of Illinois Government…
“Apples” to oranges.
Please learn.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 12:04 pm
The fun is just beginning…Bruce’s budget plan is when the howling and laughter really begins.
BTW…every legislator is now aware of the $20,000,000 hammer, or persuader, Bruce Rauner has up his sleeve in his magical act.
Bruce Rauner, and his team, do not do anything without a plan…failure is never an option for them.
Comment by Raunerbot Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 12:40 pm
BTW…great article Rich…I agree with most of your insight.
“There are those who believe (myself included) that there may be a method to the madness. Under this theory, the governor has planted his flag on a distant economic fringe so that he can drag the General Assembly off its current path.”
Comment by Raunerbot Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 12:44 pm
==- ChiTown Seven - Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 11:30 am:==
The conversations are more along the lines of “Support my priorities and I will support you.” Tying specific amounts to specific votes would seem to run afoul of anti-corruption laws. Since everyone is free to look up A-1s and quarterly reports from the State Board of Elections, any legislator can deduce what support might mean from the more general statement.
Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 1:54 pm
==Somebody should have red-penciled that two-bits a year over seven years. What was the point? ==
It allows the current minimum wage to keep up with the cost of living.
Of course, that does not make up for what has been lost in value. It was weak tea, but at least it was a recognition that the value of the minimum wage declines over time.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 2:10 pm
Rauner worried about unions but Mike Ruppe is still in charge at DCFS and calling the shots. He is a big person responsible for the mess there yet he is still collecting 100000 dollars per year. This person was appointed by Deb MCCarrell who is being rumored as the next director. What a joke she was in under Pat Quinn as well as mike ruppe. Get to work rauner and remove these people and get some qualified people in at dcfs.
Comment by Marcellus Wallace Monday, Feb 9, 15 @ 7:30 pm