Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

House floor fight looms after Delgado appointed to Arroyo’s seat

Posted in:

Illinois

Ald. Ariel Reboyras (30) defied county and state party leaders on Friday by wrangling the voting power of former State Rep. Luis Arroyo to appoint Peoples Gas official Eva-Dina Delgado as Arroyo’ successor in the legislature.

Reboyras was one of four Democratic committeepeople who showed up to the meeting Reboyras had scheduled to pick Arroyo’s successor, in a process the alderman repeatedly said followed the letter of state law and party rules. But one of the committeepeople in attendance, Ald. Carlos Ramirez-Rosa (35), called the meeting “corrupt” and walked out as soon as proceedings got underway.

Arroyo resigned his House seat Nov. 1, a week after he was arrested on a corruption charge that includes allegations that he bribed a state senator on behalf of a firm that hired him to lobby Chicago officials. But he refused to resign as 36th Ward Democratic committeeperson, giving him the largest share of the vote in the party-driven process of choosing his replacement.

Reboyras suggested during the run-up to Friday’s controversial meeting that Arroyo would assign his votes to a proxy, but the alderman repeatedly declined say who would wield that power. It was not until the meeting had already begun that Reboyras said, in response to a question from State Sen. Iris Martinez (D-Chicago), he had Arroyo’s votes, giving him more than 50 percent of the weighted vote and unilateral power to fill the seat.

* Rachel Hinton at the Sun-Times…

Arroyo, who held the largest weighted vote, had called the meeting at the Alliance of Polish Clubs.

But after he did, Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan sent letters to the other committeemen, warning them that any involvement from Arroyo “whether a direct vote or a vote by proxy would cause the candidate’s qualifications to be challenged by the full Illinois House of Representatives.”

Ald. Carlos Ramirez-Rosa, who’s also the 35th Ward committeeman, walked out of the meeting Friday, saying the process had been tainted by the use of Arroyo’s votes.

“I’ve been urging Ariel Reboyras not to use Arroyo’s proxy for weeks — I told him that would put a cloud over the process,” Ramirez-Rosa said after he walked out. “It’s clear he’s hell-bent on filling the vacancy with the support and collusion of the disgraced former state rep.”

* Dan Petrella at the Tribune…

Reboyras said he did not coordinate the selection with Arroyo and that he arranged Friday night’s meeting with him through attorneys. […]

Because Reboyras used Arroyo’s votes to make the selection, other committeemen, including 35th Ward Ald. Carlos Ramirez-Rosa and state Sen. Robert Martwick, the 38th Ward committeeman, boycotted the process. Several potential candidates also withdrew from consideration.

“I think it’s a disservice to all of these candidates to allow them to go through this process when it’s very clear that they are unlikely to be seated,” Ramirez-Rosa said before leaving the meeting. “And I would urge any candidate that wants the respect of the community, that wants to be trusted as a candidate to fill this vacancy, to also leave this process because ultimately this process appears to be corrupt.”

Martwick didn’t attend Friday’s meeting but had given his votes to Ramirez-Rosa.

* Shia Kapos at Politico…

Delgado now faces the unusual prospect of being challenged from within the party to hold on to her 3rd District seat before an election is held since House Speaker Mike Madigan is sticking to his guns about ousting any appointment that included Arroyo’s weighted votes.

“The speaker’s position has not changed,” Madigan Spokesman Steve Brown told Playbook on Sunday.

We’re now in uncharted territory because such appointments are usually perfunctory. Lawmakers we talked to don’t know what a challenge might entail.

Delgado, who would hold the seat until January 2021 if she survives Madigan’s opposition, spent the weekend calling lawmakers for their support.

posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 9:27 am

Comments

I’m shocked Delgado would go anywhere near this tainted process. I thought she was smarter than that.

If the selection committee (aka Arroyo and Reboyras) felt they had to appoint someone, it should have been a statesman who would resign after the primary and let whoever won the primary get seated.

Comment by Just Me 2 Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 9:35 am
This will be fun to watch.

Comment by Precinct Captain Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 9:37 am
Any relation to Willie Delgado?

Comment by DownStateGirl Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 9:37 am
This will be interesting, for me, solely on process and the idea of denying someone being seated, even if the presiding officer, in this case a speaker of the house, can that be legally upheld?

I don’t know how much this will mirror Roland Burris, but Arroyo, as far as I can tell, has the legality to vote?

If it were my thoughts on this, I’d let Arroryo ramrod this and do a whole Ken Dunkin full press and defeat the appointee come next November.

Doesn’t mean my thoughts are right, just mute pointed to an end game and a show of strength in the wards and that district.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 9:40 am
I’ve got this thing, and it’s…

Comment by Langhorne Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 9:44 am
Dumb and unnecessary. Let Delgado take the seat and run in the primary and general. She didn’t do anything wrong and more importantly, the residents of that district are entitled to a state rep. All the floor fighting and challenges make it less likely they will get someone to represent them in the near future.

Comment by low level Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 9:53 am
The Speaker and House Democrats will not be able to allow this to stand. First of all, to do anything other than what was threatened would make him/them look weak.

Second, when it comes to Arroyo, we don’t know what we don’t know. Is it likely the extent of his alleged wrongdoing is the bribery of one state senator? Probably not. The feds asked for a 60-day extension in bringing a formal indictment. Who knows what he may be telling them or what else they’ve discovered?

Third, it’s become a broader political issue that if not addressed promptly could be wrapped around the necks of Dem candidates next fall and it becomes an issue the governor is not going to want to be asked about repeatedly and have distracting from his agenda.

Fourth, there’s no animus towards Latinos. That’s absurd on its face. Easy enough for those opposed to Delgado’s appointment to say they support a Latina, just not one appointed with Arroyo’s votes.

Comment by Moe Berg Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 9:53 am
If you had told me six months ago that Madigan would be positioned as a reformer against one of Mayor Lori Lightfoot’s handpicked Committee chairs I would have called you nuts.

Comment by Charlie Brown Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 9:53 am
=== Third, it’s become a broader political issue that if not addressed promptly could be wrapped around the necks of Dem candidates next fall and it becomes an issue the governor is not going to want to be asked about repeatedly and have distracting from his agenda.===

Politics of this nature isn’t done in a vacuum, with respect.

You can’t say your premise is correct and then ignore this POTUS and the national narrative of his issues and also ignore the 2018 results and how Rauner ran and the results at all levels of state government.

This idea that a broader narrative is being created here and ignoring the numbers this POTUS has in Cook and the Collars, the alleged damage may be we here it should be, in the primary, in that district.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 10:03 am
Oswego Willy: are yous saying that the rampant Trump administration corruption and malfeasance is, to borrow a football analogy, an offsetting penalty to whatever is going on in IL, so the two cancel each other out?

Not sure I’m following you, can you please clarify?

Comment by Moe Berg Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 10:15 am
=== are yous saying that the rampant Trump administration corruption and malfeasance is, to borrow a football analogy, an offsetting penalty to whatever is going on in IL, so the two cancel each other out?===

I dunno if it will truly cancel it out as a “wash”, but outside the effected districts, if 2018 is an indicator of voters overall embracing Rauner’s own call “before it’s too late” on the “Democrat corruption” angle too…

… I look at the landscape in Cook and the Collars and don’t see the Raunerite type thinking, with the national narrative as it is, cutting through outside specific districts effected.

Of course, had the Raunerites moved on and the party decided to “we learned, we heard you, we are inclusive”… but with notorious Raunerites like Demmer and Barickman still phony-ing it up, the state level hay is mired in Raunerism hangovers and POTUS issues too.

Hope that helps. OW

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 10:35 am
It’s politically offsetting . People just don’t even notice with the Trump fiasco.
The Illinois dems politically get off but won’t hopefully legally.
It still may sink the fair tax which is unfair.

Comment by Not a Billionaire Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 10:36 am
Trump is a massive headwind. The KY and LA governor’s results, VA legislature, and even the Dem out-performance in the MS gov race, can’t be ignored and suggest nationally that the Dem 2018 momentum continues.

That said, it’s not just the 3rd district seat, but the totality of what may be going on in IL that could be a surprise factor in 2020. Maybe not enough to counteract the dynamics created by the national situation, but a known unknown at this point. So, why take chances? There’s a lot more value in suburban members in swing districts and some city members with primaries taking a stand against corruption than in acquiescing to the disgraced Arroyo’s preferences.

Comment by Moe Berg Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 10:49 am
Relevant Provision of the IL Constitution:

(d) Each house shall determine the rules of its proceedings, judge the elections, returns and qualifications of its members and choose its officers. No member shall be expelled by either house, except by a vote of two-thirds of the members elected to that house. A member may be expelled only once for the same offense. Each house may punish by imprisonment any person, not a member, guilty of disrespect to the house by disorderly or contemptuous behavior in its presence. Imprisonment shall not extend beyond twenty-four hours at one time unless the person persists in disorderly or contemptuous behavior.

IL Const., Art. IV, section 6(d).

This appears to be the same broad grant of authority given to the US House of Representatives to determine its own membership. The Supreme Court, rejecting the claim that the clause presents a political question, has interpreted that grant to include only the authority to determine the validity of the qualifications set forth in the Constitution. Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969). It treats those qualifications (25 years of age, 7 year citizenship of US, state residence) as exclusive, meaning that the House cannot add more requirements to membership.

On this analysis, it appears that a federal court might be inclined to rule the same way here. However, longstanding abstention doctrines and concerns for federalism govern cases when they present sensitive issues of state law and interpretation. In light of those precedents, I think it doubtful that any federal court would insert itself into a political process that will turn on an interpretation of the state constitution. This probably should be litigated in the state courts.

I do not know whether the state courts have ever considered such a question.

Comment by Senator Blutarsky Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 10:50 am
=== Maybe not enough to counteract the dynamics created by the national situation, but a known unknown at this point. So, why take chances?===

How are the state party and caucus war chests looking to make this argument so overreaching and prominent?

Where exactly do you see this hay being made? With respect, the Dems are struggling within their party but are united against POTUS. Trumpkins are united against Democrat folks, sure, but where is that surge gonna come in Cook and the Collars, where the chambers find the battleground to be?

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 10:58 am
Here is the other relevant provision, which, like its US counterpart, recites only the basic qualifications for membership:

(c) To be eligible to serve as a member of the General Assembly, a person must be a United States citizen, at least 21 years old, and for the two years preceding his election or appointment a resident of the district which he is to represent. In the general election following a redistricting, a candidate for the General Assembly may be elected from any
district which contains a part of the district in which he resided at the time of the redistricting and reelected if a resident of the new district he represents for 18 months
prior to reelection.

Comment by Senator Blutarsky Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 11:02 am
=== Any relation you Willie Delgado ===
No.

Agree with those that said a caretaker should have been appointed (maybe even the aforementioned Willie Delgado) and any serious candidate should have filed to run in March. That didn’t happen, so now the circus begins. There are many things the Speaker can do short of expelling Ms.Delgado. Maybe she doesn’t get any committee assignments? Maybe her office is located on the 6th floor of Stratton? Who knows. But I wouldn’t go up against the Speaker.

Comment by Boomerang Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 11:52 am
I would take anything Ald. Ramirez-Rosa says about Ald.Reboyras with a large grain if salt given their history. I get the process is tainted by Rep. Arroyo, but how else can you select someone without disenfranchising the 36th Ward? If the community is so outraged about the selection, they’ll vote Ms. Delgado out in the next election. It seems preferable to let democracy resolve the issue rather than excluding the 36th Ward from the whole process.

Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 12:24 pm
===and defeat the appointee come next November.===
OW, I assume you meant defeat in the March primary? Not a chance whoever wins the primary loses in November in that seat.

Comment by Been There Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 12:36 pm
- Been There -

To the specific,

===This idea that a broader narrative is being created here and ignoring the numbers this POTUS has in Cook and the Collars, the alleged damage may be we here it should be, in the primary, in that district.===

Your grab was to a broader discussion by the state party.

Hope that helps. Thanks for asking.

Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 12:41 pm
===That didn’t happen, so now the circus begins. There are many things the Speaker can do short of expelling Ms.Delgado. Maybe she doesn’t get any committee assignments? Maybe her office is located on the 6th floor of Stratton? Who knows. But I wouldn’t go up against the Speaker. ====
As Willy has also pointed out I’m not sure how they can keep her off of the seat. But she will be a caucus of one. Sit her in the middle with no one next to her, give her that office on Stratton 6, no committees, etc. But I’m not sure how they should handle her if she wins the primary. Maybe wait until Jan 2021 until she is sworn in as a rightfully elected rep then let her into the camp? But first she needs to get through the primary which is definitely not a lay up.

Comment by Been There Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 12:41 pm
===Your grab was to a broader discussion by the state party.
Hope that helps. Tracks for asking.====
Got it. Understand now.

Comment by Been There Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 12:43 pm
The House could challenge the election procedure because of tainted people involved.

Comment by Last Bull Moose Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 1:10 pm
I know Rich hates “drive-by” comments, but I just have to vent how disgusting this whole process is. We have a known corrupt politician who is participating in the process to name his successor. Why can’t we figure this out? Why is this so hard? Only in Illinois.

Comment by Just Me Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 1:19 pm
Rep. Delgado should bet on herself. She should bet that she will win the primary. She should state that she would step aside for the primary winner should she not win the primary. This allows the 3rd district to pick the winner and gives Madigan/DPI cover to not force a removal of a minority legislator. She can declare her a placeholder for now until the people have spoken.

Comment by Nagidam Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 4:15 pm
=== She should state that she would step aside for the primary winner should she not win the primary. ===

That’s actually not a bad idea. She could state that she felt she would be a good placeholder, but will accede to the will of the voters and resign if she loses the primary. That could save some face in this situation.

Comment by Boomerang Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 4:47 pm
=== Each house may punish by imprisonment any person, not a member, guilty of disrespect to the house by disorderly or contemptuous behavior in its presence.===
Wow. I can think of a whole bunch of people who should have ended up behind bars over the years. Lol

Comment by Been There Monday, Nov 18, 19 @ 7:34 pm