Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

A good question

Posted in:

Illinois

* From a reader…

Rich,

Maybe I have missed something, but I have never heard what the Republicans think will happen if Madigan is gone? I get that right now that would require them to win a majority. But if MJM just dropped the mic and walked off, do they think the caucus would rush to Rauner’s agenda? I just don’t get it.

It’s mainly just a schtick. Madigan is spectacularly unpopular. The Republicans think that unpopularity can move voters, so you go with what you think will work. Campaigns are different from governance.

My beef isn’t so much with the Republicans (campaigns are campaigns) but with supposedly sentient editorial boards and columnists who’ve never once pondered the above question.

And, yeah, it’s not like an overwhelming number of Democrats are ever gonna be eager to whack organized labor and the trial lawyers hard and cut off people from workers’ comp benefits.

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:15 am

Comments

“Campaigns are different from governance.” Truer words were never spoken.

Comment by Sir Reel Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:20 am
I think Madigan’s exit would expose how bad things really are much in the same way that Chicagoans learned how abysmal Daley’s financial stewardship was only after he retired.

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:21 am
To paraphrase Voltaire: “If Madigan did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.”

Nothing motivates quite like a common enemy.

Comment by thunderspirit Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:22 am
Deep thought from editorial boards? That’s not what they do.

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:22 am
=do they think the caucus would rush to Rauner’s agenda?=
NO. But the state would most-surely move closer to the center where things can get done in moderation. Clearly what the state needs IMHO.

Comment by Big Muddy Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:22 am
–My beef isn’t so much with the Republicans (campaigns are campaigns) but with supposedly sentient editorial boards and columnists who’ve never once pondered the above question.–

Meh, some of them are practically on the payroll already, or trying out for radio shows, or looking for flackery landing spots after the inevitable next round of newspaper layoffs…..

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:22 am
Why is it impossible for Illinois Democrats to reform public employee compensation, health and pension benefits as other solvent blue states like Massachusetts have done?

Speaker Madigan would not call Senator Cullerton’s pension reform proposal (1 billion in annual savings) for a vote and the Senate Democrats rejected Madigan’s my way or the highway budget.

Now we are waiting on the leverage of pension reform to get the state to fund the CPS budget.

Madigan has been the roadblock since Rauner’s inauguration

Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:26 am
Would it be akin to overthrowing Saddam? Huge power void? Doubt any Republican cares what happens when MJM goes, because it probably can’t get worse for them. Of course, the Bush admin probably thought that too….

Comment by Shemp Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:26 am
Big Muddy - Tuesday, Oct 25, 16== Is Rauner closer to the center?

Comment by tobor Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:28 am
===…the state would most-surely move closer to the center where things can get done in moderation.===

Really, in what way? Where in the “center”?

To the Post,

Going through the leaders of the HDems and knowing these past, nearly 2 years, Rauner moves towards forcefully taking head-on core Democratic beliefs, and that the HDems will be a “one defense” (SDems the other “one”), Madigan gone does absolutely zero for Rauner in this term.

“Decatur” ruined lots of possible angles.

If you look at the “sham” votes, those votes also speak to core Democratic beliefs. Rauner never saw that angle of playing off the Democratic Party during the “Fire Madigan” chants.

Rauner didn’t isolate Madigan with Democrats in the General Assembly, Rauner made Madigan more “important” to Democrats in the GA, and “very important” to HDems.

Rauner wasted so much opportunity.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:30 am
Given that it is a statistical impossibility for President Cullerton to lose his title and “grip” on the Senate, my guess is that a Leader Durkin would try to temper some of the efforts and initiatives. Maybe that view is a tad pollyannaish, but Cullerton could still kill anything “extreme” and could still have a veto-proof majority in the Senate to wield as a hammer.

Comment by Team Sleep Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:31 am
Big Muddy @ 10:22 may be onto something. Now if Rauner resigns, and we eliminate BOTH ultra-partisans, do we end up with a more functional government, or just a YUGE power vacuum that both sides will rush to fill so that the faces change, but the system really doesn’t?

Comment by Mr. Smith Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:31 am
It would be interesting to see how the GOP members of the House would react if Madigan just walked away and they won the majority.

I suspect more than few would learn where their green buttons are and would not have a lot of fun voting for things their district would not care for. They have been sheltered and hid behind their minority status for a long time.

A GOP majority would mean a lot really nervous GOP members learning to say Yes for not so popular things.

Comment by Give Me A Break Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:31 am
Madigan has been better organized at getting large amounts out of organized labor starting very early and continuing throughout the primary and general than any previous cycle I can remember. I would guess that if Madigan just up and walked away the caucus would elect as their next Speaker whoever they thought would best be able to continue that considering how much Rauner/Griffin money they’re now facing and are likely to face again in 2018.

Comment by The Captain Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:32 am
I was thinking about this yesterday. What if (and I know MJM would ever agree to concede defeat to Rauner) but what if MJM stepped down. Claim health or something. But no longer be Speaker or a rep.

What would Rauner do? What would the IPI do? What would Kass write about? All the air that is in their balloons would be gone.

But seriously. What would be Rauner’s excuse for his failure to govern? Wouldn’t be have to start getting stuff done (without his union busting stuff)?

And of course after sitting out 2 years, MJM can always make a Willis Reed-esque return. Who knows, maybe after 2 years of Rauner et al continuing to run this state into the ground, MJM’ might be a wee bit more popular. (You never miss em until they’re gone)

Comment by Henry Francis Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:35 am
Mr. Smith,
I don’t necessarily disagree. The upside to Rauner has been the contrast and exposure of Madigan. The downside has been the polarizing hatred it has caused, in the House particularly.

Regardless of the Nov 8 outcome our leaders on both sides have to govern. BOTH. SIDES.

Comment by Big Muddy Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:36 am
Saw the Madigan movie last night in Chicago. I thought it was a snooze fest. Also, MJM’s primary opponent was in attendance.

Comment by Jockey Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:40 am
The hope would be that the next speaker would be free from having to defend decades of poor governance and would want to establish their own legacy.

Comment by Chicagonk Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:41 am
When Madigan leaves, I expect the Democratic party to shift to the left. By that I mean towards a more activist State government with more pressure to redistribute resources.

Cohesion would drop for a while, but Rauner has forged ties of opposition to his turnaround agenda. The Democratic party majorities would continue in each chamber. Getting anything done would be harder.

Comment by Last Bull Moose Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:46 am
Chicagonk - wishful thinking but the more I think about it the mantle would likely be passed to Lou Lang.

Comment by Team Sleep Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:48 am
One thing about the Speaker is that he’s probably as conservative as a Dem can get.
Wonder if hm stepping down would expose the ILDem split (progressive/uber liberal vs centrist). Without Madigan, who would whip all the Dems to one column.

Like already mentioned here, if Madigan were no longer Speaker I doubt much will change between. The state will still tilt Blue/Dem.

Comment by Meh Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:54 am
It would be a neoliberal fantasy land. No regulation or statute to get in the way of unrestrained free market capitalism. That’s what Raunerites want. No labor, no corporate taxes. Plenty of loopholes for the wealthy. Low emoyee wages. High ceo compensation. And dividends every month.

Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:56 am
Employee wages. Sorry. cell phone

Comment by Honeybear Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 10:59 am
Will all those who dislike Madigan say the same things about Lou Lang?

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:03 am
===Campaigns are different from governance.===

Except in the case of our Governor…just sayin.

Comment by PublicServant Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:05 am
Instead of three-dimensional chess, we will have one-dimensional checkers.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:13 am
what will happen if Madigan (Mike) is gone? what happens if someone leading any organization suddenly quits, or becomes ill, or worse yet, dies? I’m sure there is someone down there who is competent, perhaps not just like him, but competent. it’s a non issue issue.

Comment by Amalia Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:31 am
Mike droppin’ the mic. Too fun.

I think it would put a whole new spin on “Governor’s own,” as in the soon to be $10b accounts payable liability sitting on the ledger.

Which tax hike do you prefer GOP? (remember your 1.4% ROI for the TA won’t go very far, if it even ever becomes reality.)

(Just think, Rauner’s wife is even helping by paying the campaign bills from trying to achieve that nightmare.)

Comment by cdog Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:36 am
Leaders matter. Look at what Trump is doing.

Comment by Last Bull Moose Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:36 am
@10:56am Are you sure you didn’t mean to say, “gamed market capitalism”?

Comment by Hieronymus Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:37 am
After reading all the fawning comments about Madigan’s brilliance it sure looks like the 26% who approve of him are on the right track

http://paulsimoninstitute.siu.edu/_common/documents/opinion-polling/simon-institute-poll/2016/oct-3-psppi-simon-poll-clinton-leads-trump.pdf

Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:39 am
Wait - so all that Madigan vs. Cullerton stuff was just kabuki, or the individuals in leadership make a difference?

Comment by lake county democrat Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:48 am
Money or no money, the only thing currently less organized than the Dems in this state is the Republicans. Rauner is a great demonstration of that.

Comment by Chucktownian Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:53 am
Madigan is more centrist than the majority of his caucus. Durkin seems more centrist than the majority of his caucus. Careful what you wish for. Different doesn’t automatically mean better.

Comment by walker Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:55 am
@Big Muddy, I think the House would move to the left, not the center.

Comment by From the 'Dale to HP Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 11:57 am
L.P. Thanks for the link.

Madigan has consistently passed budgets that created unfunded liabilities. I disapprove of that.

Rauner has not even proposed balanced budgets. I disapprove of that too.

Comment by Last Bull Moose Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 12:09 pm
Madigan is not some mythical bogey man. He has a really good, hard working, detail oriented crew. If he were out of the picture, the Party would have a significant void that would be very difficult to fill.

Comment by titan Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 12:21 pm
== Speaker Madigan would not call Senator Cullerton’s pension reform proposal (1 billion in annual savings) for a vote ==

Wouldn’t have mattered if they did pass it. As last proposed, it most likely would have been unconstitutional. That $1B in savings is only in somebody’s imagination.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 12:52 pm
Madigan is going to drag down Dan Beiser, and probably John Bradley as well.

Comment by downstater Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 12:56 pm
If MJM was gone, most likely the House would be more liberal / left leaning and the budget impasse / gap between the two sides would be even wider than today.

Comment by RNUG Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 12:58 pm
Chucktownian - your dislike for Rauner is duly noted (and you make it known all the freaking time) but there are quite a few GOP campaigns that are very well organized.

Downstater - that is my thought and prediction as well. In some districts where Trump and Kirk will do well Speaker Madigan may very well be the deciding factor.

Comment by Team Sleep Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 1:00 pm
If Rauner believes that the Turnaround Agenda has a greater chance of happening without Madigan, then Rauner is clearly out of his mind.

Rauner doesn’t know what he is doing.

Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 1:14 pm
Titan - no offense but is that really the biggest issue here? Few people are truly irreplaceable. I hate that assumption in politics. We are all human. Officials and staff can be replaced.

Comment by Team Sleep Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 1:47 pm
Team Sleep: I think Trump will greatly outperform Kirk in Southern Illinois and the Metro East. Kirk has lost many conservatives down here when he unendorsed Trump, along with his F rating from the NRA and his waffling on Merrick Garland.

Comment by downstater Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 2:34 pm
Downstater - maybe, but Kirk will still outperform Tammy Duckworth in several key areas that we have discussed. It may not be a huge spread but it will be noticeable.

Comment by Team Sleep Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 2:45 pm
At best Rauner’s campaign and money against Madigan has united the democrats and other supporting groups. I think it has also made Madigan a martyr, as I heard a lot of support for Madigan at a senior church gathering that is know for strong republican views.

Comment by Seehear Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 2:49 pm
=== NO. But the state would most-surely move closer to the center where things can get done in moderation. Clearly what the state needs IMHO. ===

Don’t be so sure about that. Madigan is a pretty centrist Democrat. If he is gone what will stop the party from moving further left?

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 2:50 pm
There will be a day when the Speaker will no longer be there. I’m not sure any of us are going to be ready or like what happens when that occurs.

Comment by JDuc Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 3:42 pm
== It’s not like an overwhelming number of Democrats are ever going to be eager to whack organized labor…==

Yep. The idea that rank-and-file Dems in the House are just dying to cut a deal but are being held back by Madigan is a big chunk of Tronc/IPI/Rauner-inspired baloney.

There have been many times during his tenure in which Madigan has had to twist arms in order to exert his will on the caucus — this is not one of them.

Comment by JTR Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 3:50 pm
== Why is it impossible for Illinois Democrats to reform public employee compensation, health and pension benefits as other solvent blue states like Massachusetts have done? ==

Madigan drove such a bill through during Quinn’s term, to the enduring unhappiness of unions and public employees. Not long ago. Large element of Rauner’s election.

Comment by peon Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 4:12 pm
== Why is it impossible for Illinois Democrats to reform public employee compensation, health and pension benefits as other solvent blue states like Massachusetts have done? ==

Tier 2 is the reform of public employee pension benefits and was passed over five years ago.

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 6:10 pm
== Why is it impossible for Illinois Democrats to reform public employee compensation, health and pension benefits as other solvent blue states like Massachusetts have done? ==

“Massachusetts imposes a 5.1% tax (effective January 1, 2016) on both earned income (salaries, wages, tips, commissions) and unearned income (interest, dividends and capital gains.); certain capital gains are taxed at 12%.”

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Oct 25, 16 @ 6:12 pm