Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Madigan’s tenure and his rules

Posted in:

Illinois
Updated Posts

[Oops! I accidentally turned off comments on this one. Sorry.]

* From the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform…

The longest consecutively serving House Speaker in the United States was Tom Murphy from Georgia, who served 29 years from 1973-2002. Speaker Madigan has served 19 years consecutively.

The title for most total years as House Speaker is held by Solomon Blatt of South Carolina, who served 33 years, from 1937-1946 and 1951-1973. If Michael Madigan is re-elected on January 11th and completes the 2-year term, he will become the longest serving state House Speaker in the last century.

* But the Illinois Policy Institute has now pivoted to the second vote House members will make next week: The rules…

Illinois Democrats possess oversized power in Springfield.

Democrats control both houses of the Illinois General Assembly. Though this majority will not be veto-proof in the 100th General Assembly, whose members will assume office in January 2017, it still allows Democratic politicians to easily pass their party’s legislation through the House and Senate – and to block any spending or economic reform Gov. Bruce Rauner proposes.

But there’s another source of power the majority party of Illinois holds that allows its leaders a more underhanded influence over the legislative process and, ultimately, the daily lives of Illinoisans.

That power emanates from the little-known legislative rules that Illinois House of Representatives Speaker Mike Madigan – who’s held that position for more than 31 years since 1983 – uses on an everyday basis to orchestrate the legislative and political outcomes he wants.

Those rules allow Madigan to influence the makeup of legislative committees; how lawmakers vote; and when, if ever, the bills get voted on. But the most obstructive rule of all keeps bills – even those with popular support, such as term limits – from ever seeing the light of day. Madigan, and not the General Assembly, has the power to decide what has the chance to become law.

Virtually no state grants the types of powers to its legislative heads that Illinois grants to Madigan.

Those rules have contributed to the failed policies that exist in Illinois today and to the fiscal debacle Illinoisans must contend with as they try to make ends meet.

Many, if not most of the onerous rules the group looks at were actually formulated by the Senate Republicans back in the 1990s. But it’s still an interesting read. A few charts…

posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 10:18 am

Comments

I guess it is ok with Democrats to have a Speaker and Chairman of their party who can exercise total control over the legislative process.

Sure doesn’t sound like democracy to me.

Comment by Lucky Pierre Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 11:31 am
Props to IPI. They did a really good job on this piece. Restaurant quality as they say here.

Why doesn’t Raunet lead with stuff like this? This good clean conventional political warfare that makes sense to me.
Problem
Alternatives
Suggested solution

Really smart

Comment by Honeybear Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 11:32 am
Madigan’s Rules are entirely undemocratic and work only to preserve his power.

House Dems know this but they go along to get along with Boss Madigan despite undeniable and massive evidence that Madigan is killing Illinois.

Comment by Deft Wing Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 11:39 am
Speaker Madigan and the Pate Phillip he controlled in the 90s?

“Right? Exactly right!”

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 11:42 am
So the IPI goes on at length the highlight that committee chairs get stipends, and a number of committees rarely meet. But the bulk (though not all) of their argument is a bit of a red herring.

But members are only eligible to receive one stipend. So no extra stipends were handed out for the Chairs of Adoption Reform, Health and Healthcare Disparities, Small Business Empowerment, Tollway Oversight or Tourism and Conventions because their Chairs are either in leadership or chairmen of other committees that did actually meet.

Comment by Juice Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 11:52 am
Also, guys, this probably is not your strongest argument about the dangers of using stipends to enforce party discipline.

“The possibility of losing a leadership appointment and stipend creates the temptation for lawmakers to side with their leadership rather than the constituents they’re meant to represent. Party discipline rarely wavers.

When it does, there are consequences. This was in full view in January 2009, when state Rep. Ken Dunkin, D-Chicago, missed a vote to impeach then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich.[4] Madigan in turn refused to reappoint Dunkin as chairman of the Tourism and Convention Committee until June 8,[5] leaving the committee unable to hold meetings for the span of that time.”

Comment by Juice Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 11:53 am
Both Republicans and Democrats think it is ok to have their leaders maintain total control over the legislative process when they are in power. They only complain about it when they aren’t. It’s naive to think that true democracy is the goal of either party. Parties are about power and control.

Comment by Pelonski Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 11:56 am
===Madigan’s Rules are entirely undemocratic and work only to preserve his power.

House Dems know this but they go along to get along with Boss Madigan despite undeniable and massive evidence that Madigan is killing Illinois===

“Pate Phillip’s Rules are entirely undemocratic and work only to preserve his power.

Senate Republicans knew this but they go along to get along with Boss Phillip despite undeniable and massive evidence that Pate Phillip was killing Illinois”

Oh - Deft Wing -, that was fun going down Memory Lane.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 11:56 am
can we agree these rules are inappropriate no matter which party put them in place and holds the majority?

Comment by jim Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 12:01 pm
OW -
“Oh - Deft Wing -, that was fun going down Memory Lane.” Let’s not forget Pate Philip is 1/3 owner of The Ramp … .

Comment by Anyone Remember Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 12:08 pm
===Let’s not forget Pate Philip is 1/3 owner of The Ramp … .===

You’re ruining the narrative, lol.

Ah, Memory Lane.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 12:19 pm
I was on staff before rules committee was required for bills amd amendments. It was a nightmare. Failed ideas never died. Members would just continuously try to tack them onto every available vehicle. Tired of the turnaround agenda? Be careful what you wish for.

Comment by Langhorne Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 12:21 pm
–rules committee approval–

Comment by Langhorne Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 12:22 pm
Thoughts on giving each lawmaker one bill they can call for a straight up or down floor vote per year?

Comment by thechampaignlife Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 1:07 pm
Most people have no idea how legislative bodies work. Regardless of your politics, this should be required reading for those who want to understand how legislative power is actually distributed.

Comment by Chicagonk Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 1:08 pm
OW, my recollection is that the parliamentarian who drafted Pate’s rules was previously Phil Rock’s parliamentarian. Someone should ask Steve Morril, lobbyist extraordinaire, the good government rationale for those new rules!

Comment by Anonymous Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 1:33 pm
thechampaignlife
Pate Philip limited senators to 5 senate bills & 3 house bills. As a result, there were more than a few violations of the Single Subject Clause.

Comment by Anyone Remember Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 1:39 pm
===Anyone Remember===

They would still be able to file as many bills as currently allowed and work through the normal process. But, if one was buried in committee, this would allow them to call it to the floor for a vote.

Comment by thechampaignlife Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 2:20 pm
thechampaignlife
IF each member could call ONE bill for a floor vote, we’re back to what Langhorne described.

Comment by Anyone Remember Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 2:25 pm
I think the solution is in between the current system and assigning everything to committees. Still assign everything to rules but if a bill has x number of bipartisan sponsors then it is automatically assigned to a committee. That way bills with some appearance of wider support would be assured of the chance to be heard.

Comment by MyTwoCents Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 3:51 pm
” - Anonymous - ”

… and yet, Pate wanted them, and got them passed

Are you saying Pate was a Dem patsy?

That’s fun.

Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jan 6, 17 @ 3:54 pm