Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Because… Madigan!

Posted in:

Illinois

House Republican Leader Jim Durkin, Fellow GOP Lawmakers and Candidates Call for Term Limits and Other Political Reforms
Political Reforms Needed to Return State Government to Illinois Citizens

Mike Madigan has rigged the system. He picks the voters for the politicians he controls and backs them with special interest cash. Now that a Cook County judge has ruled against the Independent Maps Initiative, many Republican statehouse candidates are pushing for political reforms, including term limits and fair maps, to restore citizen control over state government. Illinois is broken and we can no longer afford the rigged system built by the supermajority in Springfield.

Jim Durkin, House GOP Leader and 82nd District State Representative:

“The General Assembly is in desperate need of balance, but unfortunately that cannot come until we reform our political system. Term Limits and Fair Maps are the surest way to overcome the lopsided power structure in each statehouse chamber and return control of State government back to the people of Illinois. Powerful special interests will fight these reforms, but an overwhelming majority of Illinoisans - Democrat, Republican, Independent, you name it - support the Term Limits and Fair Maps initiatives. I call on Speaker Madigan and President Cullerton to pass these constitutional measures during the fall veto session and let the people of Illinois have the final say on these hugely important issues.”

As we’ve already discussed, Leader Durkin has served 18 years in the House.

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:04 pm

Comments

Jim “Do-as-I-say,not-as-I-do” Durkin insists that ten years is enough for legislators.

Comment by anon Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:10 pm
Rigged system, must have focus grouped real well.

Comment by Come on man! Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:13 pm
Translation: We, the GOP, have been ineffective in presenting the ideas and candidates to elect a majority in the General Assembly, so we would like to help our chances by instituting term limits. Especially, now that we have enough rich guys willing to throw us millions to fund the campaigns for open seats.

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:16 pm
How about reforming campaign contributions first? When you have millionaires buying elections, term limits are a minor problem.

Comment by A Jack Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:17 pm
Can we ask about all the Jim dandy reforms Durkie will serve or is just same C* as BigBrain peddles.
Oil saying no thanks

Comment by Annonin' Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:18 pm
Every proposal out there is just nutty. Everything is fine just how it is and we’re on the road to paradise. /s !!

Comment by A guy Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:21 pm
Such a charlatan along with so many other Republicans, but it plays well politically. I have been told by one Rep and staffers for a rep and a senator that they WANT Madigan and the IDP members to hold this so they do not face limits.

It would be funny if Madigan let it through.

Comment by JS Mill Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:23 pm
Term limits already exist; they’re called elections.

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:23 pm
Yes and Congressional Republicans have stacked the deck in their favor.

Have they “rigged the system?”

Fair is fair.

Comment by Sir Reel Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:23 pm
==”I call on Speaker Madigan and President Cullerton to pass these constitutional measures during the fall veto session and let the people of Illinois have the final say on these hugely important issues.” ==

I call on Leader Durkin to read the Constitution and the rules of the General Assembly. The General Assembly can’t pass a constitutional amendment during veto session. Shouldn’t he know that after 18 years.

Comment by fantasyland Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:24 pm
GOP history lesson in 1994 the GOP came out with the contract with America where the congressional candidates signed a contract. One provision was term limits

Is John Shimkus still a congressman. It was a campaign stint then and it’s a campaign stunt now

Comment by Publius Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:25 pm
Stunt not stint

Comment by Publius Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:25 pm
@Publius - Yes, and unfortunately John Shimkus is STILL my Congressman.

Comment by illini Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:28 pm
Maybe time passes differently in Durkin’s reality? Republicans are on a different “Tier” system.

Comment by Anon221 Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:34 pm
Ok, term limits is popular but silly. (See Federalist 10 about experienced leadership.)

But Rich has repeatedly argued that fair maps would be, well, fair. Since the Governor likes to pretend that a tax increase for spending he himself has proposed is a “give,” could Democrats similarly pretend that fair maps is a “give.”

And then we trade fair maps for a signature and Republican votes on a two year tax increase plus a constitutional amendment allowing progressive taxation.

Comment by HistoryProf Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:34 pm
Campaign finance limits - is more important than term limits. Interesting that Republicans never call for it…

Comment by Capitol View Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:35 pm
I’m for limits on phony newspapers and flyers showing up in my mailbox. I wonder how many people read these things. Mine are straight to the round file

Comment by Jink849 Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:41 pm
= Mike Madigan has rigged the system. He picks the voters for the politicians he controls =

Just like he picked his own voters after the 1990 reapportionment…

Comment by cover Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:48 pm
In fairness, Durkin’s service in the House was not consecutive. After redistricting, he was out of office for a time. He eventually moved to a different district and returned to Springfield.

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:49 pm
who in Springfield most acts like they are one of the infected in an episode of Braindead, and who does not? both sides have their unhelpful. find the middle people. please.

Comment by Amalia Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:55 pm
“In fairness, Durkin’s service in the House was not consecutive. After redistricting, he was out of office for a time. He eventually moved to a different district and returned to Springfield.”

Oh for pete’s sake, he took time off to get run over by Sen. Durbin in 2002. Don’t make him look like a saint when he is bad as the rest.

“I call on Leader Durkin to read the Constitution and the rules of the General Assembly. The General Assembly can’t pass a constitutional amendment during veto session. Shouldn’t he know that after 18 years.”

When will a reporter get him the chance to ask if he understands the rules of the government he has worked in for 18 years?

A simple charlatan!

Comment by Dee Lay Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 2:59 pm
In reality, would the Republicans not do the exact same thing if given the chance?

Comment by stlboy Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 3:01 pm
“Representative Pot, meet Representative Kettle.”

Comment by G'Kar Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 3:05 pm
== Term limits already exist; they’re called elections. ==

This may be the best anonymous comment I’ve read on Cap Fax.

It’s true; you can limit the term of any representative by voting them out of office. I’m all for district map reform, but term limits, by their very nature, give *more* power to the two major parties, not *less*.

Comment by thunderspirit Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 3:14 pm
Is this Term Limits bill going to only apply to Dems? Maybe just to Madigan?
Or, is Durkin still smoldering that he got voted out (before he got voted back in)?

Comment by Belle Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 3:18 pm
===The General Assembly can’t pass a constitutional amendment during veto session.===

Got a citation for that?

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 3:19 pm
Term limits is for going foward action. The past is over. A good solution to term limits is better and more candidates.

Comment by zatoichi Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 3:27 pm
The Illinois Republican Party is hapless.

Comment by Saluki Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 3:43 pm
==Or, is Durkin still smoldering that he got voted out (before he got voted back in)?===

You’ve got a little research to do here. Or, in the absence of that, ask someone.

Comment by A guy Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 3:45 pm
So long-time legislators are not allowed to have an opinion on term limits? Seems many working within the system we live in supporting working toward changing it for the better would be a good thing. If he’s bad-mouthing “career politicians” or some fashionable version thereof, it would be one thing, but agreeing with those that believe caucus power needs to be cut down should be fair for any legislator. After all, any Legislature that passes term limits will likely not have a single member required to serve the minimum required by that new law, assuming the clock will start ticking the following election or term or whatever.

Comment by LessAnon? Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 3:56 pm
“… and return control of State government back to the people of Illinois.”

You can’t help but be amazed at how anyone can say this with a straight face.

Comment by Grimm Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 3:57 pm
I’m sick of Rauner’s campaign trying to blame Madigan for everything.

Comment by Mama Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 4:07 pm
= ===The General Assembly can’t pass a constitutional amendment during veto session.===

Got a citation for that? =

Thanks for calling that out, Rich. The General Assembly can pass a constitutional amendment proposal at any time.

However, passing an amendment proposal in veto session would have no different impact from passing one next year or in spring 2018, either way it would appear on the next general election ballot in November 2018.

Comment by cover Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 4:20 pm
Have any of these people agreed to limit their own terms? Nothing is stopping them from doing that right now. It’s hard to take seriously someone calling for term limits when they aren’t willing to lead by example.

Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 4:34 pm
== He eventually moved to a different district and returned to Springfield. ==

… so he picked his voters also.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 4:40 pm
Hey Mama, I’m sick of Madigan. Rauner is about the only thing going for this state at the moment.

Comment by Ron Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 6:00 pm
How about instead of term limits, we just ask our hapless, hopeless, do next-to-nothing legislators to actually be public servants in their “part time” role as legislators and take no pay, no benefits and no pension– leaving their employment budget available for state employees who actually do work — like social workers, teachers, first responders, etc. That would have the impact of term limits and save the taxpayers a bundle. The whole concept of “public service” is lost in the state house. It’s all about money and power and that needs to change — for the benefit of everyone in Illinois.

Comment by Oh Really? Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 6:03 pm
===Rauner is about the only thing going for this state at the moment.===

LOL!

Was this before or after a stopgap budget still destroying if her ed and social services or when there was no budget and Illinois was run be court decree?

Read the label… “Don’t operate heavy machine”

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 6:10 pm
“Was this before or after the stopgap budget, or… the continued destroying higher ed and social services… or the failed apropos to help people when a stopgap budget isn’t enough to save social services… or when there was no budget and Illinois was run be court decree?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 6:14 pm
Oh Really? we are way passed that. We have a bunch of incompetents running around in Springfield. They don’t get math, they don’t get taxation, they get that people are fed up

Comment by Ron Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 6:35 pm
===The General Assembly can’t pass a constitutional amendment during veto session.=== Got a citation for that?”

Resolutions are only valid for the duration of a General Assembly and both chambers have rules tabling resolutions after a certain date. House Rule 46: “No resolution proposing a change in the Constitution of the State of Illinois may be considered for passage after the last day preceding the day marking the beginning of the last 6 months before the general election occurring during the term of this General Assembly, and all such resolutions still pending shall be tabled at the end of business on that day.”

Comment by I think he meant... Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 9:19 pm
— cover - Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 4:20: However, passing an amendment proposal in veto session would have no different impact from passing one next year or in spring 2018, either way it would appear on the next general election ballot in November 2018.”

I don’t think this is correct. A general assembly cannot pass something that binds another general assembly.

Comment by Doh Tuesday, Aug 2, 16 @ 10:41 pm