Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Because… Madigan!

Posted in:

Illinois

* Jim Dey perfectly sums up what Speaker Madigan and most of those who support him simply do not understand about Gov. Rauner’s approach…

The long-serving Madigan, speaker for all but two years since 1983 and a 45-year veteran of the legislative process, casts himself as the great compromiser — a latter-day version of 18th-century Kentucky politician Henry Clay.

Madigan’s performance was both instructive and touching. To hear him laud his gentlemanly approach to civic life, one might almost forget that his nickname is, among other things, the Velvet Hammer.

But Madigan, who turns 74 Tuesday, has a point — he is willing to compromise.

Over the years, he has compromised on many issues with Republican and Democratic governors. That’s one of the reasons that blame for the sorry state of the state belongs to both Republicans and Democrats. […]

So Madigan clearly is willing to compromise. At the same time, it’s equally clear that Madigan’s past compromises have severely compromised the state of Illinois.

You may or may not disagree with Dey’s logic, but it is pretty much exactly what Rauner and his people have been saying for a very long time.

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 9:13 am

Comments

It’s the same argument used on the national stage. Elect anti-government zealots because no government is better than one that does stuff, because the stuff they did before was bad. I don’t find it very convincing at either level. If the stuff is so bad, elect guys that do better stuff. But don’t try to sell me the baloney that we’d be better off if we just let the whole government starve to death

Comment by Johnny Pyle Driver Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 9:18 am
If Madigan’s compromises have hurt IL so badly, why is that? Because he made them for his own benefit? For his party’s benefit?

Details, please.

If this discussion was about Obama, the problem with his compromises as President have to do with the ideas of those he felt forced to compromise with. The GOP has terrible, unpopular ideas, but they also have political power. So, compromise, for Obama, was necessary, but not desirable.

Comment by Blue Bayou Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 9:19 am
Doesnt change the fact that another compromise is needed today. Its up to both sides to make sure it is a fair one.

Comment by Union Dues Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 9:22 am
Dey has a point with this.

The rest of his opinion was a complete exercise in “errors of omission.”

Comment by cdog Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 9:24 am
Remarkable admission — “because compromise with Madigan is not acceptable.”

Like the Abolitionist position that Henry Clay’s efforts of compromise were unacceptable in the face of the overriding evil of Slavery.

Comment by walker Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 9:28 am
Rauner the politician wasn’t created in a vacuum. We helped create the politician who wants to impose radical proposals, via years of irresponsibility and mismanagement.

That is such a big lesson that many of us have a hard time learning. Today’s responsible behavior can help stave off tomorrow’s radicalism.

Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 9:46 am
This is a juvenile argument. Rauner could have taken the high road, but instead he abandoned it by proposing two out of balance budgets of his own.

As has been stated time and time again, Rauner doesn’t have the votes for his agenda regardless of who the speaker is. Whether or not Madigan cut good deals for the state in the past is irrelevant to the current impasse, and just an excuse for Rauner and his staff’s incompetence.

Show me a good deal Rauner is offering, then I’ll join the blame Madigan chorus.

Comment by Daniel Plainview Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 9:49 am
I’m confused — so the Rauner folks don’t want a compromise with Madigan, because his compromises have been bad?

That isn’t what they’ve been telling the public for a year.

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 9:56 am
We’re doing so well with not compromising now!

Comment by Norseman Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 9:58 am
One can argue that Madigan’s past compromises, compromised that state. However, we always had a budget, higher ed was funded, and social services were funded. And vendors got paid faster than they are under this administration. One has to ask: What is different this time around. And the answer points to this governor.

Comment by Joe M Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:09 am
=== Madigan has flatly rejected all Rauner proposals aimed at boosting the state’s economy, including worker’s compensation reform. He says these nonbudget items are “extreme” and unworthy of discussion. ===

A lazy acceptance of the Rauner narrative, or amnesia regarding the activities during the last year.

Take the public-private initiative desired by Rauner. It was reported that there was agreement on the initiative except the Dems wanted a sunset after reports of problems with similar efforts in other states. This reasonable ask was rejected out of hand rather than to suggest a longer time for the sunset.

Worker’s comp change has seen many iterations put to a vote, mostly for political messaging purposes. Most observers see this as a doable deal if Rauner and Madigan allowed the stakeholders to negotiate. Remember that Rauner doesn’t like unions to be involved in negotiations where he has some control over the situation.

Property tax freeze would be another doable if Rauner dropped his union killing poison pills.

When the anti-union poison pills are left off the agenda, things get done. Example, unemployment comp changes.

Comment by Norseman Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:13 am
These 2 need to check their egos at the door and work out a solution or step aside and let somebody else do it. Until this happens they are both the current problem.

Comment by Dan S Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:17 am
Rauner wants WC reform? OK. Make the insurance companies open their books. Also, crack down on unsafe employers. Make them pay a fine, if OSHA fines them, make them automatically pay the same amount to the state.

Comment by DuPage Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:21 am
Wait, the governor is dictating he gets his way destroying unions, thus severely undermining Madigans political party and Madigan is the one not compromising? In other words, “I’ll work with you if you saw your own legs off and hand them nicely to me”. Rauner has been trying to take the legs off already and is using leverage to make the DEMS do it themselves. No I’m sorry, that’s ridiculous. Yes, there are compromises to make but this Governor is entirely untrustworthy and really has shown no ability to govern or compromise himself. Come on.

Comment by Honeybear Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:23 am
It is way more simple than Jim Dey wants to make it. Madigan does a poor job. Rauner doesn’t do his job. But, do we really think the state would be in better condition now if Madigan had said the Jim Thompson, “No. Period.” And then the same to Edgar and then Ryan and then Blago and then Quinn. I don’t think so.

Comment by Ducky LaMoore Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:29 am
So remind me again, if this is Rauner’s point of view as well, just how Madigan is supposed to “find another way” and help lead this inexperienced governor out of this mess?

I really don’t mean to offend. But seriously, if a compromise with Madigan is “part of the problem”, exactly how is this supposed to end short unconditional surrender by supermajority Democrats? And more importantly — has a supermajority in any state or at the national level ever done such a thing, ever?

By my tally, Madigan has shown willingness to deal on:

Property tax freeze
Medicaid Cuts
DCEO/Economic Development
Workers compensation
and now…Legislative Redistricting

He’s also in the last week thrown a revenue concept on the table, via Lang

Madigan has also been clear on what he won’t do (and could never pass the House in any event): He won’t destroy collective bargaining or cripple unions. On workers compensation, he won’t go into causation.

By any measure, that is a LOT for a normal Governor to work with in trying to find a middle ground — especially a Governor who has publicly acknowledged the need for revenue to be part of the solution.

But this is not a normal governor. Rauner does not want a compromise. What he does want is to kneecap unions and destroy Madigan.

So can we stop acting like its the General Assembly standing in the way?

Comment by PatQuinnsBrain Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:29 am
Not surprising coming from Jim Dey or for that matter almost anyone affiliated with the Champaign-Urbana News-Gazette. This newspaper and its staff can be counted on to support ultra conservative positions supported by the corporate elite and wealthiest members of society, even if not in the best interest of (or supported by) the majority of its readership. It strongly supports Mr. Rauner’s agenda to eliminate public sector collective bargaining and has been hostile to organized labor for many years.

Comment by kitty Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:33 am
Of course it is what the Rauner BigBrains have been sayin’ ’cause that’s about all Dey writes.

He constantly ignores what has happened and the actual compromises approved, but not enough for BigBrains to grasp. This list appears above.

Comment by Annonin' Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:43 am
So Rauner’s position is that the entire GA is corrupt. Regardless of party, he will support pols who will promote his agenda and veto everything else. Time for R’s in the GA to check and see if they have any principles or are they just using the “name your price tool.”

Comment by not so simple Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:59 am
Ducky makes a good point.

So, according to Dey and the Superstars, when Madigan was compromising with Big Jim, Edgar, Ryan, Pate, etc., those were the bad guys? He shouldn’t have been compromising with them?

Comment by wordslinger Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 11:01 am
How can Mr. Dey be taken seriously when he says something blatantly untrue? ” … like when he and the now-imprisoned former Gov. Rod Blagojevich decided to skip a crucial payment to the state’s public pensions and spend the money elsewhere.” As the late Judy Baar Topinka noted in the FY 2008, 2009, and 2010 CAFRs, those “skipped” payments were made up, in full, with interest.

Comment by Anyone Remember Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 11:02 am
I wonder what made Dey avoid discussing the obvious: Rauner’s wish list is absurdly unreasonable and bad for Illinois.

Comment by Union Man Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 11:03 am
Correction, JBT only said that in the FY 2010 CAFR. The previous two were issued by Dan Hynes. But all 3 said the “skipped” payments were made up.

Comment by Anyone Remember Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 11:06 am
The velvet hammer, 74, needs to pass the baton-but he won’t. He’s not the sole problem, but our sorry state hasn’t done so well lately, so it’s time for new leadership.

Comment by justacitizen Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 11:29 am
I’m more cynical:

I think Rauner and much of the GOP simply don’t think they have much to gain by compromise. They’re in a deep blue state and they’ve been gerrymandered to mostly safe districts. They only achieve significant change through the politics of misery. What does a nice little tax hike/budget tinkering deal get them, especially knowing in 2 years Rauner will be facing Lisa or at least a competent Dem opponent?

That’s why some are too quick to dismiss the political reform part of Rauner’s agenda - no, it doesn’t affect unions right away, but it might do more to put the GOP back in the game (at least get them beyond superminority status) than any pro-business move.

Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 11:35 am
What I would like to know is why we have a governor and his supporters questioning the methods used to govern, instead of mastering those methods?

It seems like they want to not only accomplish goals, they want to end the methods used to reach those goals as well!

With each failure, they take no responsibilities for them, instead they finger point at what they feel is the methods they failed at mastering.

These complaints are the results of ignorance, not conspiracies. Rauner’s excuses are excuses that cannot be proven since doing so assumes a unprovable premise.

He was elected to govern within a limited term in office. That’s the condition on every official. If he couldn’t have understood how to reach his goals without mastering the methods-he shouldn’t have wasted millions buying the governorship.

Madigan isn’t the problem when we obviously see a governor flailing at elementary government methods.

Rauner is the worst governor in Illinois history.

Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 11:42 am
Rauner’s policy ideas are, in general, really bad for Illinois. They’re just policy-wise pretty dumb. Not all, but a lot of his core points. They will benefit a few really rich dudes. Or they’re bad for government’s competency (which is in the long run also generally good for rich guys), like his very-popular-but-incredibly-misguided term limits proposal.

How much should you compromise to enact really bad policies that will in the long run hurt Illinoisans, or the capacity of the government to serve its people? How many stupid ideas is Madigan supposed to enact, in the interest of “compromise”?

Comment by ZC Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 11:54 am
True compromise would be letting the Turnaround bills as written be voted on instead of having Madigan’s watered down versions voted on. Some of the Turnaround agenda is popular with bipartisan majorities and these would be tough no votes to defend

Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 12:14 pm
== Honeybear - Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 10:23 am: ==

Honeybear, you make a good point.

Comment by Mama Monday, Apr 18, 16 @ 2:12 pm