Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Reader comments closed for the weekend
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Posted in:
* Background here and here. From the twitters…
IL state GOP delegates now debating whether to change party platform language about defining marriage to be btwn one man and one woman
— Tony Arnold (@tonyjarnold) May 21, 2016
State Rep Terri Bryant says how will I win election if there's no distinction btwn the Democrats and me?
— Tony Arnold (@tonyjarnold) May 21, 2016
Crowd very divided over speaker defending changing platform over gay marriage language; 1 man yells "Go home" and another gives thumbs down
— Tony Arnold (@tonyjarnold) May 21, 2016
State Rep Peter Breen says "I'm here to win seats;" wants crowd to vote for same language from '12 defining marriage btwn 1 man, 1 woman
— Tony Arnold (@tonyjarnold) May 21, 2016
Breen says I've heard we'll lose young votes w/out redefining marriage platform; says the party will still win w/out changing it
— Tony Arnold (@tonyjarnold) May 21, 2016
Those standing at IL GOP convention want to keep party platform defining marriage as 1 man 1 woman; vote still going pic.twitter.com/QuT2cWDvh7
— Tony Arnold (@tonyjarnold) May 21, 2016
Schneider announcing results of vote: IL state GOP delegates voted not to change platform language of marriage being btwn 1 man 1 woman
— Tony Arnold (@tonyjarnold) May 21, 2016
782 of 978 delegates rejected the change
— Tony Arnold (@tonyjarnold) May 21, 2016
Pretty overwhelming.
*** UPDATE *** Comments are now open. And here’s some more from the Tribune…
A floor debate over the platform language on marriage grew raucous, when opponents successfully reinstated the 2012 wording to define marriage instead of the recommendation that “non-traditional families are worthy of the same respect and legal protections as traditional families.”
Ryan Higgins of the west and northwest suburban 8th Congressional District faced shouts of “Go Home!” as he spoke in favor of the new language and the “diversity of views” on same-sex marriage. Higgins noted the new wording also specifically supported “religious liberty,” which was not addressed in the 2012 language.
But state Reps. Terri Bryant of Murphysboro and Peter Breen of Lombard, and state Sen. Dan McConchie of Hawthorn Woods spoke in favor of reinstating the one-man, one-woman marriage language to help conservative Republican legislative candidates.
“In the last several decades, our pickups (of legislative seats from Democrats) in the state have been in the south,” Bryant said. By returning the definition of marriage language, she said, “Our platform distinguishes us from the Democrats.”
* Peoria Journal Star…
State Rep. Peter Breen, R-Lombard, also told the audience that there was little support among rank-and-file Republicans for adjusting the language in the platform.
“There’s no groundswell out there amongst Republicans to change the definition of marriage,” he said.
“It’s a core Republican principle across the country.”
Party chairman Tim Schneider had to twice call for calm and a respectful exchange of ideas as proponents of newer language were interrupted by jeers, boos and shouts of “Go home!”
* Daily Herald…
On the other side, Ryan Higgins, leader of the Schaumburg Township Republican Organization, defended the change recommended by a Republican committee as one that strengthened religious liberty principles in the platform.
As Higgins finished his speech, some delegates at the large convention gathering booed and shouted “go home.”
“Are you prepared to remove the notion that … Republicans may have a diversity of views on this issue?” Higgins said in part. “And if so, are you prepared to defend that exclusion to fellow Republicans?”
posted by Rich Miller
Saturday, May 21, 16 @ 2:42 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Reader comments closed for the weekend
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
To answer Rep. Bryant I would say we’ll always be able to tell you apart from the Democrats. You’re the one in the super-minority.
Comment by Not It Monday, May 23, 16 @ 8:51 am
I don’t understand these kinds of litmus tests. Would these delegates prefer that Mark Kirk change his party affiliation over this one issue?
Comment by Henry Monday, May 23, 16 @ 8:52 am
Another way to tell Rep. Bryant from the Democrats: She supports Bruce Rauner’s attack on higher education–while representing SIU and Carbondale in the legislature. What would Oswego Willy say to the voters in the ‘Dale?
Comment by Ray del Camino Monday, May 23, 16 @ 8:55 am
Way to go. You defined yourselves with an issue that has passed, and you lost on when it did. Dropping the reference altogether would have allowed movement on issues that are pressing this year not last year but you will now be harnessed with with this one thing.
Comment by SO IL M Monday, May 23, 16 @ 8:55 am
May as well be debating Betamax vs. laser disc at this point. Equality won. Move on.
The fact that any time at all was spent on this issue says as much about the state of ILGOP as the (to me) ridiculous result.
Comment by LizPhairTax Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:01 am
I guess standing by principle is more important than actually winning and being able to make a difference in the state government. Sheesh, I become a more disgruntled Republican every day.
Comment by cgo75 Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:02 am
Are they trying to force me out of the party?
I may become a Glibertarian, that is a green libertarian with glib answers.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:05 am
I thought the new Republican wedge issue was transgender politics.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:05 am
What was the delegates’ vote on Loving vs. Virginia and the 3/5ths rule?
–“In the last several decades, our pickups (of legislative seats from Democrats) in the state have been in the south,” Bryant said. By returning the definition of marriage language, she said, “Our platform distinguishes us from the Democrats.”–
Well, as long as endorsing reactionary discrimination is based on principle and not just politics…..
Pickups? Dude, Illinois Republicans aren’t supposed to be losing seats in the suburbs, like they have been. That’s supposed to be your base. You think this vote is good for your long-term prospects there? Hint: It’s not.
Then again, you never have to make a tough vote in the super-minority, which GOP lawmakers have grown quite content with over the years. Vote “no,” complain about being shut out of the process, cash your check, repeat, repeat, repeat.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:08 am
Further proof parties are run by the fringes.
Comment by Shemp Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:12 am
This is one of the many reasons why I’m a so-called hyper partisan. I wish the opposite of some, that the two parties were closer together, but until that happens I will mostly or exclusively vote for one party or independents.
I did vote for JBT, who took a brave stand for marriage equality. To me she transcended partisanship and political identification.
Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:17 am
Now I’m not going to be a hypocrite. The left has it’s issues with this as well. Although we did have a transgender woman speaker at the Rally on the 18th, I did notice a lot of my trades brothers and sisters tense up. They were respectful though and ended up cheering the rousing speech. But we shouldn’t act like LGBT aren’t a struggle for the left. I am happy about moving towards more inclusivity. Republicans aren’t there yet. To their credit at least the topic came up.
Comment by Honeybear Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:18 am
Well they just provided Democrats even more ammunition for mailers.
Just imagine the things they could send out with the caption “Our platform distinguishes us from the Democrats. - Rep. Terri Bryant of Murphysboro”. Yikes!
Comment by SKI Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:19 am
The language, which isn’t incendiary could have simply been left how it was. No one is going to run on this issue. Should’ve just left it be and work on other things.
Comment by A guy Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:23 am
“Only, Must, Never, Always”
Don’t care about the issue, don’t care about a platform.
You have a requirement, you’re not building, you are shrinking any party so set on having litmus tests.
Indeed, “Vote Accordingly”, and in many current GOP districts, this might still be upside down in polling, but… the ILGOP wants it I guess.
Boy was I all wet on Brady beating the Slytherins. Gleefully, the Slytherins but up, arguably the most ignorant response to a text ever, when dealing with zealots, but it took ridiculous bad form to do a screen shot of the text, including Brady’s cell number, to exacerbate the “masses” attending.
Pat Brady proves, yet again, how incredibly inept he is. Seriously, Pat Brady is sadly the worst coalition builder, and while it IS, unquestionably, bad form to exploit the text as IR did, you have to give props too… they completely undercut Brady and his… “inclusive?” … message.
My question is, not that Brady is soundly, unquestionably, been defeated with this, does the Reagan Rule apply, or will the Slytherin Jim Oberweis, the keeper of “who” is a Republican, decide how Republican you are? Isn’t this a settled, Suprene Court settled, policy abd if j agree with the highest court in the land, I’m not a member of the ILGOP?
“We know what the law says, this is what we say!”
Ugh.
Dear Republican Party Leader Rauner,
Here’s how this works. Please pay attention.
If you are silent to a Party platform, when asked about it, you own the plank. I’m not Car-Nac. If you don’t give a position, be it Trump, (”I’ll support the nominee”) or SSM (silence), I have to feel that a whole Party platform, and the Slytherin Jim Oberweis requiring leaders of the party to support the platform 100% (Slytherin Oberweis said that) that means your, Leader Rauner, by yiur silence, accept and believe “One man, One Woman”
That’s fine. You believe that, than own it, because your silence speaks to acceptance. That’s not poor deducting skills, it’s your continued silence on… wait for it … “having no social agenda.”
You now, Leader Rauner, do NOT support SSM as the leader of the Raunerized ILGOP.
And how incredibly delicious, that the convection then honored Judy Baar Topinka. How very sad, as her SSM legacy is the elephant in the room, as Brady learns a valuable lesson… win first, alienate second.
So, are we still an 80% Reagan Rule Party, or Rauner, Inc, LLC, financed by Rauner, but allowed to run amok by zealots, as long as the GOP GA is “Yellow”, “Red”, or “Green” whenever and whatever Rauner wants?
Rep. Bryant wants differences? Here’s one. Diversity of thought. Democrats embrace diversity, Republicans during the time of Edgar, Kustra, Jim Ryan, George Ryan, Lolita, Judy… Lee… Pate… embraced the conservatives, moderates, downstate, upstate, “Fab 5″s… LeaderS…
Majorities always embrace what unites us, not allowing what divides us to be a test of loyalty. That is the shame. The stain is that this convention out front and center Slytherins, because owning voting switches matters, even if it means having fewer of them.
There’s no mistake. The platform won. Handily. That’s real. But then where does diversity of thought fall when uniformity is required, to be… different.
(Tips cap to -Ray del Camino -)
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:24 am
Another Pat Brady “success”. Maybe he was too busy preening for the media to whip votes for his proposed changes.
Comment by Whatever Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:36 am
Who are the 196 who voted for it? Does it include other IL electeds?
Comment by lake county Monday, May 23, 16 @ 9:59 am
To be yet another wedgie for their wedges.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:18 am
Nationally, the Republicans are trying to be more inclusive, but in Illinois…..
What next, a proposal to build a wall around the state to keep out the liberals and force George Soros to pay for it?
Comment by A Jack Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:42 am
In other news, GOP’ers tell the government to keep out of our lives while telling others how to live their lives.
Comment by AlfondoGonz Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:45 am
If any candidate thinks this is all they have to worry about, they should not be running for office! What is wrong with these people?
Comment by Mama Monday, May 23, 16 @ 10:55 am
Why did they even bring this up? They’ve once again brought up a topic that portrays the party as unwelcoming. Some of these social conservatives really need to let it go. They lost this war. Get over it. Move on.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:06 am
In other words, the state GOP remains officially opposed to marriage equality, which is supported by a clear majority of Illinois voters. I can’t imagine this will help in suburban Cook, where Higgins is from, and where the GOP has been losing seats for two decades.
Comment by anony Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:31 am
His party still opposing marriage equality won’t help Sen. Kirk, either.
Comment by anony Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:35 am
I really wish the party would go back to being fiscal conservatives and stay out of people’s bedrooms and private lives. That to me is the true meaning of conservatism and less government. The saying - my right to swing a fist ends prior to your face- ought to be what we are going for. I have a right to be uncomfortable with your life style, not to prevent you from doing it.
Comment by Thoughts Matter Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:39 am
No change in GOP platform on marriage equality
or on equal rights for women.
Comment by Enviro Monday, May 23, 16 @ 11:47 am
Bold new leadership for the 1960s from my party! Those of you old enough will remember more than 40 years ago large numbers of Democrats saying their party had left them when the Ds were increasingly controlled by the ultra-left. Now we’re seeing the same on our R side.
Our party trails nationwide by 32-23% in party identification. If we allocate the remaining independents according to their R/D leanings, it becomes 48%D-39%R. So we’re losing. We lead among undereducated white males and southern white males.
So we continue to spit in the face of the fast-growing Hispanic population (Trump), the young, thru our bigotry against gays (among others)and so on. So if we moderates want to remain Republicans do we have to accept bigotry, shortsightedness, and permanent minority status?
Comment by steve schnorf Monday, May 23, 16 @ 12:37 pm
A 2015 SIU Simon Institute poll last year said 67.8 percent of Republicans in Illinois supported either civil unions or full marriage rights for same-sex couples: http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2015/05/01/poll-shows-decline-in-opposition-for-same-sex-marriage/
So is this a case of the party taking anecdotal evidence, like a few very vocal anti-SSM voters they’ve personally met, over polling data?
I don’t see how this helps them in contested districts, and it should tell them something that recent statewide GOP winners (Rauner, Kirk, JBT) at least didn’t take a firm “no” stance on the issue.
Comment by John Gregory (ex-IRN) Monday, May 23, 16 @ 1:12 pm
This could have been dropped with dignity. What the state does is one thing. What the church does may be another thing. As long as the state is not ordering the church to sanction it, there should be no problem.
Comment by Richard Afflis Monday, May 23, 16 @ 1:41 pm
“Are they trying to force me out of the party?”
Well, if Rauner and Trump didn’t pushed you out…
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Monday, May 23, 16 @ 1:47 pm
Dear ReTrumplican Party: you must be very proud. gak.
Comment by Amalia Monday, May 23, 16 @ 5:22 pm