Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Where’s the plan?

Posted in:

Illinois

* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…

On election night, Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan started making his usual post-election calls to his Democratic members asking for their support for his own re-election as speaker. But at least a couple said they’d like to sit down with him before providing a firm answer either way.

Reps. Will Guzzardi and Kelly Cassidy, both liberal Chicago Democrats, confirmed they want Madigan to come up with a plan that, as Guzzardi said, involves more than “just saying no” to Gov. Bruce Rauner.

“I’d like to know what his vision of the next two years is,” Cassidy said. “Doing the same thing over and over again is the definition of insanity, so I want to know what the vision is.” She refused to comment further, saying she preferred to share her thoughts with Madigan himself. But Guzzardi wasn’t quite as reticent.

Right now,” Guzzardi said, “Rauner is the only one with a plan to fix this.” Rauner, of course, endlessly promotes his “Turnaround Agenda” reforms and blames Democrats for blocking him at every turn. He’s the one positioned as a change agent, Guzzardi said, and that, in turn, makes the Democrats look like obstructionists.

“We don’t have an agenda,” Guzzardi complained. The Democratic Party needs to show voters that “we want to change things and let people know what the party is doing for the people of this state.”

Asked about the state party’s aversion to social media and other 21st-century innovations, Guzzardi said it wouldn’t matter much now anyway. “We could hire a social media coordinator, but what would they say?”

“It starts with having a message,” he insisted, saying he has been talking with several other members about building “a platform that we can go fight on.”

Others in Madigan’s caucus are undoubtedly nervous about January’s vote for House speaker. Everyone who represents a district that Rauner won two years ago will be watched closely—and there are a bunch of them, although the number was reduced by five via the election.

There is no doubt that something has changed in the House Democratic caucus.

No actual “revolt” is brewing against the speaker. It’s just that members are worried about something that haunts all politicians: self-preservation. A vote for Madigan for speaker in January is, for many, absolutely guaranteed to cause huge problems for them back home unless this almost two-year impasse is resolved.

Even the least active legislators go to enough events to know what’s on their constituents’ minds. And thanks to unprecedented multimillion-dollar advertising buys in Chicago, St. Louis and other broadcast television markets, a large swath of the public has been overexposed to the pettiness and ugliness of legislative politics for the first time. And about half of those ads were focused mainly on one guy: Madigan.

The last time anyone voted “present” on a roll call for House speaker was 30 years ago this coming January, when Rep. Dick Mautino stuck his neck out. He was dealt with harshly, and Madigan put down a potential revolt a year later when he defeated one of the attempted coup leaders in a primary and defeated yet another plotter in 1992. It’s been mostly smooth sailing ever since.

And it’s not like public vilification is anything new to Madigan. I remember the 1988 campaign in the Kankakee area when appointed Rep. Phil Novak, D-Bradley, ran against Iroquois County Clerk John Kuntz. Novak was hammered on local radio and in the mail for his alleged ties to Madigan. But Novak shrugged it off and went on to win. Madigan just wasn’t as well-known back then and Illinois wasn’t in crisis.

But this year is different. The Republicans turned on the biggest anti-Madigan fire hose they could buy to shift as much blame as possible for this horrific two-year stalemate onto the House speaker. Madigan’s job approval numbers were already very low. Actually, they’ve always been low. But at a time of crisis, people look for a scapegoat and Madigan was handed to the populace by Rauner on an expensive platinum platter.

Nobody will say they are prepared to do it themselves, but plenty of House Democrats are speculating that some of their colleagues could vote “present” when Madigan comes up for re-election in January. That would be the rarest of rare events, and Team Rauner would most definitely do all it could to exploit it to the hilt. After Madigan lost a net of four seats on Nov. 8, any wavering of support by Madigan’s membership would be “proof” that the man was losing his iron grip.

That last sentence is why we saw the Illinois Republican Party pounce so hard on Reps. Brandon Phelps and Jerry Costello last week. They’re stirring the pot.

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 7:43 am

Comments

A vote for Madigan won’t hurt most Chicago Democratic Reps like Turner, Williams, Andrade, and D’Amico, for example. But the likes of Crespo, Sente, Mussman, Conroy, Drury, and even Nekritz will likely cause blowback in their respective districts. And yes Phelps and Costello will be watched too for a Forby/Bradley part two attack.

Madigan is that unpopular and toxic. And that toxicity will only get worse.

Comment by Deft Wing Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 8:09 am
The messaging of the Democrats, specifically the HDems is lacking, at best.

There has been such a lack of accountability towards the governor, and while Rauner has won nearly every veto override, it’s a bit disingenuous for members to think its about a plan when it’s the messaging that’s failing.

How do I know?

Rauner has no plan but dividing social services versus labor, and now it’s to drive a wedge into the Democratic Caucuses.

So, “what is Rauner’s plan that’s so winning?”?

It’s like treating the broken leg when the patient is in cardiac arrest.

So, Dems come up with a plan. Ok, how is that stellar messaging they’ve been doing going to win that PR battle?

Until Democrats get out of 1954 messaging and decide that going after Rauner to win the day occurs, the ILRaunerites will troll HDems, not kinky because they can, because some feel the broken leg is “just more important”.

BTW, even the ILRaunerites were surprised they were +4 on Election Night, so these “calls” for “we’re losing, what’s the plan” is literally missing what “missing”, which is that Rauberites can control and troll Democrats because the PR battles are being lost daily, and there is no narrative to hold Rauner accountable, and to the Raunerites’ credit, they’ve pounced at the lacking.

If Dems have a “plan”, what makes any of them think the Dem’s shop will win the day with it, given these past two years?

Yeah, good luck with that.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 8:18 am
I agree, Democrats need an agenda. That agenda should involve reforms that don’t decimate their core constituents. They should craft a message on economic fairness, since we have the biggest plutocratic takeover of government in our history and a governor who is decimating social services and harming education as a tool to attack political opponents and organized labor.

I would like to see fresher ideas and younger leaders–not because I’m against age, but because I believe we need leaders who want to legalize recreational marijuana and boldly push for more criminal justice reform.

Comment by Grandson of Man Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 8:21 am
I’m tired of his non-negotiating stance.

Comment by illinoised Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 8:22 am
The game has passed Speaker Madigan by… he just doesn’t know it yet. The HDem’s that stand with him until the bitter end will find themselves wanting. Wanting of a job.

Comment by Big Muddy Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 8:46 am
The opposition party always struggles to find an agenda until the next time they nominate a candidate for chief executive. There’s always a lot of ideas- as there are right now, though notably fewer ideas on the House side- but no one coalesces around anything until one of the idea-makers gets the nomination. That’s not new, and it’s not the most damaging thing for the Dems.

The most damaging thing, at least for House Dems, is that they actually have a unifying figure, he just doesn’t have any agenda.

Comment by Arsenal Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 8:51 am
Also, really interesting that it’s Cassidy and Guzzardi talking about this. They’re the future of the party. I just hope it’s not one of those “and always will be” kind of things.

Comment by Arsenal Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 8:55 am
One of the most frustrating things about the last few years (other than, you know, the willful destruction of Illinois social services, higher ed, etc.) is the utter failure of messaging on the part of Ill Dems. Given all the [banned word] Rauner’s pulled, his numbers should look like Madigan’s did in June. Instead, the loud-mouthed demagogue with “no social agenda” continually wins the day in PR while Illinois burns & the Dems futz around playing “inside baseball.” Incompetents.

Comment by Crispy Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 9:02 am
Free Messaging to Any Illinois Democrat:

1. Henceforth the proposals of Bruce Rauner & the Illinois GOP will be referred to as Rauner’s Millionaires Agenda - NOT Rauner’s Turnaround Agenda. Efforts should be made to highlight how Rauner is trying to build an economy that benefits millionaires like Rauner at the expense of everyone else. One need only point out Rauners own reported income surge at the same time Illinois middle class families are hurting and the entire state is hurting from lack of a budget to show how disconnected he is from what is really going on.

2. The Contrast — The Illinois Democratic Party’s Middle Class Agenda.

Components of this could be:
a. Keep hitting Rauner Republicans on the Millionaire’s Tax approved by Illinois Voters. Keep Rauner the Millionaire in focus and keep pressing Rauner Republicans for their own revenue and/or cutting solutions. This will fit with where Republicans are going nationally by rolling back protections and benefits for middle class families to give huge tax breaks to millionaires and corporations.

b. Connect Rauner’s desire to kill social safety net in Illinois with Republican cruelty on the national stage, not just their going after Obamacare, but also Paul Ryan’s stated goal to overhaul Medicaid and voucherize Medicare.

c. Stand up for public universities with some meaningful commitment or budgetary support. Not just to try to increase student turnout in an off-year (although that should absolutely be a goal) but because universities affect everything. The parents worry about tuition and student debt along with their kids. Downstate communities worry about closures wreaking economic devastation to the area. Employers need a work force that is educated and its bad for our state when smart kids leave for college and dont come back.

Just a start but its more than MJM has offered as far as I can tell…

Comment by hisgirlfriday Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 9:26 am
===they actually have a unifying figure, he just doesn’t have any agenda===

Disagree…he has a simple agenda; attain and keep his majority, often by use of “3-dimensional chess”. I do agree that this simple agenda doesn’t move the state forward of its own merit.

Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 9:32 am
However feint…there’s a drumbeat that’s beginning to become audible. It’s time to transition. Even someone with the precise same views, but a new image, could help. The beginning of the end seems to have begun.

Comment by A guy Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 9:34 am
A guy

Bold prediction considering the man is pushing 75. So the “beginning of the end seems to have begun.” Got a timeline? Anything more than 5 years gives you a pretty safe out.

Comment by AlfondoGonz Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 9:44 am
It will be interesting to see what happens if anyone sticks their necks out…

My guess is they will reap the whirlwind.

Comment by Oneman Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 9:52 am
==Even someone with the precise same views, but a new image, could help==

And one thing to keep cognizant of is that few other Dems in the legislature are likely to act any different in regards to the Turnaround Agenda. They may be able to offer their own agenda and message it better, which will help the Democrats’ political fortunes, but a new Speaker would be unlikely to resolve the impasse.

Comment by Arsenal Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 9:57 am
Didn’t Guzzardi say last time that he wasn’t sure he’d vote for Madigan for Speaker, then did it anyway?

Comment by Foie Gras Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 10:08 am
hisgirlfriday @ 9:26am
You are correct–actively stand for something, not just against. The superminority Repubs were/are perpetually opposed to Dem budgets but never came up with one of their own. The Dems have real opportunity to grab the spotlight in a positive way now. I hope they do.

Comment by My New Handle Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 10:10 am
The calls for an agenda are interesting considering it was Madigan who pushed the Millionaires’ tax, voted time and again to showcase the lack of support for program cuts, destruction of higher ed, day care services etc.
He is also the guy who raised the campaign funds on a national level to compete with BigBrain’s zillions.

Comment by Annonin' Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 10:14 am
- Annonin’ -,

And yet, Rauner has owned and trolled HDems and Madigan and controlled the messaging that rarely has Rauner on the defensive about lacking any substantive discussion about funding within a budgetary framework and the messaging that Democrats are being unreasonable as THEY refuse to move off the status quo while holding up a budget with Super-Majorities that never existed.

I guess I’m confused, at what point can you win with a message when the message going out isn’t the one that helps?

I’ll grant you, a +4 seats with a map never designed for Democrats to continually hold 71 seats is a mixed bag kiss and win, and “66″ Democrats together with Mendoza winning a proxy war isn’t “devastating”, but at some point, Rauner continually brushing off accountability seems to be winning the day, every day.

With respect.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 10:29 am
Can an outsider be speaker? Article IV just says elected from its membership, does that include an outside party member?

Comment by Rabid Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 10:35 am
=== it was Madigan who pushed the Millionaires’ tax, voted time and again to showcase the lack of support for program cuts, destruction of higher ed, day care services etc.===

And then didn’t bother mentioning most of that during the latest campaign, or at least not in a credible way.

When you’re attacking female candidates for opposing rape kit funding, you’re pretty much destined to fail.

Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 10:47 am
I will believe it when I see it. No one has the cajones to mess with the guy that controls the money, the walkers, the data and the up and comer workers that know it’s best to kiss the ring if they want to move up the ladder. 99% of those on those middle rungs are smart enough not to shake the ladder too much or risk falling right off.

Comment by Worth It Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 10:51 am
===No one has the cajones to mess with the guy that controls the money, the walkers, the data and the up and comer workers===

Apparently Guzzardi and Cassidy do. And probably a few more. Drury? If he has all that and you still lose, what difference does it make? There’s rumblin’.

Comment by A guy Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 11:26 am
Perhaps using the word “extreme” to describe everything is not the best idea. Not everything is “extreme”.

Comment by Team Sleep Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 11:30 am
The Speaker’s trajectory is not upward. His legacy and the betterment of Illinois would be best served if he were to anoint a successor.

Comment by Keyser Soze Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 12:24 pm
This is the question I posed last week…you’re welcome!

The person who does not plan for the future is in denial…

The way to ensure your “legacy” is to groom an
Obediant succesor…

Comment by Loop Lady Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 1:05 pm
“I’m tired of his non-negotiating stance.”

What is there to negotiate? Death by hanging? Death by firing squad?

Why should the Speaker do anything to help 1.4% dismantle the core constituency of the Democratic party?

1.4% is demanding the Speaker act in a manner that harms his base and in return will allow the Speaker to raise taxes.

Take your pick - firing squad or hanging.

Comment by Huh? Monday, Nov 21, 16 @ 1:08 pm