Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Campaign updates
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
Posted in:
* From the end of Brian Mackey’s interview of Gov. Pritzker…
BM: For the people of Illinois, is it a net positive or a net negative that House Speaker Michael Madigan continues in power?
JB: Look, I am the leader of this state. I’m the governor of the stat. And I set an agenda, and I have gone to the legislature and to the leaders of legislature with that agenda. And for the most part, we have passed much of the agenda that I put forward for last year. And so I intend to keep working with whoever is holding those offices going forward.
I believe that it is a positive that I am getting my agenda through, and I’m looking forward to continuing the progress that we’ve made and to bring a greater optimism and success to our state, as we did over the last year.
* The Question: For the people of Illinois, is it a net positive or a net negative that House Speaker Michael Madigan continues in power? Make sure to explain your answer in comments, please. Thanks.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:20 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Campaign updates
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Negative because why would it be positive
Comment by Alfred Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:22 pm
It’s a net negative for the people of Illinois because of the financial mess and other reforms that have been thwarted by Mike Madigan. Also, the corruption and #metoo stories in the media linked to Madigan are now a net negative.
Comment by Steve Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:27 pm
He is in office, but is he in “power?”
I think that is what we will have to see.
Comment by Ok Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:28 pm
Without knowing what an alternate Illinois universe looks like or how that universe might function, there is no definitive answer to that question.
Comment by My New Handle Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:28 pm
I think it is really neither. The republicans have done a good job painting Madigan as the root of all evil, but in reality, he is no worse that any other politician. (feeling rather negative of all politics today)
Comment by Bruce (no not him) Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:31 pm
Net positive.
Just the experience vacuum will be a killer for a lot of things for whoever next takes up the main residence in 300.
Comment by Precinct Captain Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:31 pm
The Guv is totally right on this one. He got his agenda through with flying colors. I don’t think it really matters who the speakers is as long as he’s getting things passed.
Comment by So_Ill Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:40 pm
Net negative, outside of the Springfield/Chicago
political echo chamber, MJM is an national example of political corruption. JB called MJM “whoever” no better example of being condemned with faint praise. Some leader.
Comment by Donnie Elgin Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:42 pm
Definitely a net positive. Of course there are many downsides but as Pritzker said much of his agenda was passed. And there is no doubt that labor would be much much weaker now if he wasn’t there during the Rauner years. I’m not saying a few of the members couldn’t make great speakers in the future but I always think its better to stick with who and what you know.
Comment by Been There Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:42 pm
Continues?
Probably a net negative.
If Madigan leaves, it’s a net negative to Raunerites.
Madigan right now, purely politically, is at his zenith in seats and Democratic state power. Once Madigan does leave, the shallow and hollow Raunerites, already at the weakest the former GOP has been since 1983. It’s indeed a net loss, politically, with Madigan gone going forward. The Raunerites are bereft of anything to build a party.
The Dems? Governor? Illinois?
Probably a net positive.
With all the Madigan baggage, the movie, IPI, the phony reformist… look how much was done *with* MJM and Pritzker. Imagine no Madigan…. 74, 40, all the statewides… no Madigan… it’s like folks are forgetting Madigan as bad as it may seem, so much got done, agendas achieved, legislation passed, even labor unified.
Yep. I’m being overtly pragmatic, political, and measured to both.
I answered the question as I framed it.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:42 pm
=== the phony reformist===
* Raunerites who held Illinois hostage.
For clarification
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:47 pm
Positive.
Experience, stopping Rauner’s agenda, shepherding JB’s agenda through the House and his ability to work with reasonable Republicans are reasons for a positive answer. And who is the Dem in the House who could successfully replace him at this time?
Comment by nadia Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 2:52 pm
It’s a net negative going forward, if only for the distractions from getting positive things done for the state, and the need to turn the page and clean up some of the current messes.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 3:07 pm
This is really a better question for June/July. He’s definitely a net positive in some places, but that is narrowing with the drip, drip, drip. If it continues and more of these shoes drop, he’ll go to net negative and pretty quickly gross negative in too many places.
For now, at the very least, he’s net positive, but steering a leaky boat.
Comment by A Guy Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 3:12 pm
Net positive.
Illinois is now an overwhelmingly Democratic state.
The Governor, The Mayor and The Speaker all keep each other in check and prevent any one institution from becoming too powerful.
That’s more important now than ever since we have a governor who is a billionaire.
Comment by Thomas Paine Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 3:12 pm
How could it be negative he’s only been in the G.A. since 1971. Give him more time he’ll fix it..some day.
Comment by Yep Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 3:13 pm
Net negative, if you believe democratic policy is better for the state than republican policy. Since current Illinois republican policy for years has only consisted of “Mike Madigan is bad”, we’ll assume democratic policy is better for this discussion. Dems currently have a supermajority in both chambers and all the constitutional offices. Kevin Quinn, Tim Mapes, ComEd, Mike McClain‘s emails, one thing after another, stories that all tie back to Madigan in some way, can only drag down the party and its policies going forward. Considering they have nowhere to go but down anyway, it’d probably be impossible to prove. Any losses on the dem side will be accredited to having such a large majority to begin with, i.e., “It wasn’t the fault of Madigan or anyone else, total control of state government is just unsustainable”.
Comment by Lester Holt’s Mustache Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 3:26 pm
Net positive. Without him an extreme liberal would be Speaker and he/she would pass extreme liberal bills. Madigan is smart enough to know that if you over reach on liberal policies you do real damage. He just *just enough* to keep his caucus happy.
Comment by Just Me Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 3:30 pm
Net zero. The positives (he keeps people on taks and can get stuff done efficiently) are counter-acted by the negatives (it’s hard to get him to let new/innovative/important stuff move forward). He often chooses to do nothing in order to avoid the possible consequence of potentially, maybe losing a seat to the Republicans.
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 3:37 pm
Pritzker didn’t say the “M” word. Interesting.
Net negative. He’s been there too long and hasn’t been the best “gardener.” A lot of weeds popping up, lately.
Comment by ahh Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 3:46 pm
Net negative. We talk a lot about “that’s the way things are done here,” but a large part of that is *because* of MJM. Yeah, him not being the Speaker would change the dynamic, but I think we’re not thinking of how it could change things for the better.
Comment by Closing loopholes Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 3:59 pm
The Cult of Trump has no moral argument to make about Madigan, as bad and out of date as he is. As to the Democrats, all in due time. Amusing how reactionaries who favor separation of power between different bodies demand activism from Pritzker.
Comment by VerySmallRocks Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:01 pm
Negative, as his name is synonymous with corruption with most of the electorate regardless of political affiliation.
Comment by Upon Further Review Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:05 pm
=== his name is synonymous with corruption with most of the electorate regardless of political affiliation.===
While true, Democrats are at their most powerful after $130 million making things “synonymous”
It would be a net positive if Madigan left.
Pragmatically, how much, politically, better can Dems get here in Illinois?
This is a great QOTD.
With respect.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:09 pm
Also, the “who can possibly replace him?” card is overplayed and weak with almost all leaders.
Everyone is replaceable. The next woman or man will take the reins, make it their own, and if they are smart, be themselves.
It is the lesson we teach our children. If one is afraid of change . . . . .they were born in the wrong era.
Comment by Upon Further Review Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:10 pm
Negative because it got Rauner elected and ruined the GOP in Illinois (until it was ruined nationally of course).
Comment by R A T Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:17 pm
Negative, dems don’t need him anymore, Rauner’s off to Italy, thanks though, also don’t complain, you did fine
Comment by Rutro Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:19 pm
Just me hit on something nobody seems to talk about. Illinois’ next house speaker will likely be much more progressive.
Comment by Blake Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:21 pm
Regardless of my thoughts on him right now, like OW points out the question says “continues”
His time, I think, is up. It’s time for a new leader from a new era — for better or worse
Comment by Driving a car Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:21 pm
Negative. Just like Pelosi, Schumer, Biden et al he needs to be put out to pasture.
Comment by Collinsville Kevin Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:28 pm
Net negative. He looked the other way when his “boys” behaved in a morally corrupt manner. He is not doing himself or his party any good staying.
Comment by bogey golfer Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:48 pm
Neutral. He needs a little more before he goes. It’s hard to throw the guy out into the cold mean streets of Springfield knowing that he has few more years before he turns 80.
Comment by Can I have some more porridge Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 4:52 pm
The guy created and sustained the very culture the governor railed against yesterday, and rightfully so. So it’s a bigtime negative.
Comment by SSL Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 5:15 pm
Well if and when Republicans are able to get elected simply by saying Madigan it will be a net negative. But they certainly tried that last go-round and it only made him stronger.
There’s a lot of speculation on what Madigan knew, should have known, did or should have done. But we’ve seen this before. And each time there were plenty of people who claimed “this time its different.” And yet he remains in position and only seems to grow stronger. So in that sense it would seem that he has been a net positive. Whether that continues to be the case remains to be seen.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 5:25 pm
Net Negative. Illinnois needs a reputation boost (and has for some time IMO) Think of all the garbage we have endured the past 15 years, scandal after scandle, budget fiasco etc aways wondering whats next in the race for the basement.
Comment by theCardinal Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 5:31 pm
Net positive. Madigan has been the whipping boy and he gets things done.
Comparing Madigan to someone else who may or may not be able to get things done is a futile exercise.
Comment by Chicago 20 Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 6:24 pm
Negative. Madigan embraces and is empowered by a halcyon system of corrupt government based on party and prestige over public service. The sooner he and his cronies are gone, the more likely it will be that Illinois government can make the hard but politically unpalatable decisions that need to be made in order to check our slow descent into financial disaster. Madigan’s ship has sailed.
Comment by DQCardsFan Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 6:32 pm
theCardinal-
The legacy of the Sangamon County GOP would be worse than Madigan.
Comment by Anyone Remember Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 7:40 pm
Might have different answers for in the short-term vs. in the long-term
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 8:00 pm
Has everyone forgotten how many REPUBLICAN governors this state has had over the past 30 years?
Comment by BigJoe Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 8:42 pm
Madigan has been Illinois House speaker for 35 years, and his OK is needed for any bill to reach the House floor. That is too much power for too long for any one person. And we need term limits
Comment by Gregg Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 8:51 pm
MJM will cost the Governor his landmark goal - the graduated tax. Sixty percent is not an easy threshold and shaving a few points could cost them.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 9:27 pm
Madigan helped pass much of Pritzker’s agenda. Net positive.
Comment by Enviro Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 10:42 pm
Some friends and I considered this question at length this evening, assisted by a variety of beverages. Our conclusion was that Madigan is the ultimate pragmatist, doing what can be done and not wasting political capital on lost causes. Given that Illinois is in serious need of pragmatic (as opposed to ideological) leadership, Madigan has been a net positive for the state. Whether that continues to be so is an open question.
Comment by Flapdoodle Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 11:20 pm
Do 95% of you honestly believe Illinois better off after 35 years of Speaker Madigan’s leadership?
What do these people have all wrong?
https://capitolfax.com/2019/03/20/simon-poll-pritzker-job-approval-2-trump-20-durbin-10-cullerton-11-madigan-51/
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Jan 15, 20 @ 11:37 pm
Positive one half of one third of the government gets his power from the people’s choice of elected representatives . The people have spoken
Comment by Rabid Thursday, Jan 16, 20 @ 7:03 am
It is amazing to me how many on this page consider the Speaker a net positive, going forward. His type of governance, while it does get some stuff done, is the old school power-brokering that leaves way too much room for (actually encourages) the kind of stuff that we are seeing in headlines today, with the people in power treating others and the state as a means to their end.
It is like this state has Stockholm Syndrome.
Comment by CookR Thursday, Jan 16, 20 @ 7:05 am
=== It is like this state has Stockholm Syndrome.===
… and yet, if you look at all Gov. Pritzker accomplished legislatively, agree with *any* of it or not, President Cullerton, Speaker Madigan, 40, 74… they got a lot done.
You may not like it….
Now, going forward, that really is the question.
Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Jan 16, 20 @ 7:52 am
“It is like this state has Stockholm Syndrome.”
Because how dare those Illinoisans know what works for them and what doesn’t work for them.
Comment by 17% Solution Thursday, Jan 16, 20 @ 8:09 am
This is spectacular. First, a great question with some really good responses. But at 4:17pm yesterday, we crossed the Rubicon. Apparently a GOP governor being elected (and the blame for things not working out under said gov) has fallen squarely into “Because Madigan” territory. That’s phenomenal.
Comment by Ccapilla Thursday, Jan 16, 20 @ 8:17 am
If he takes the second seat and supports JB’s agenda, he will be a plus. If he pushes another agenda, then a negative.
My understanding is the failed changes to pensions after Quinn put in Tier 2 were driven by Madigan. That cost Quinn the election to Rauner.
Comment by Last Bull Moose Thursday, Jan 16, 20 @ 8:50 am
Net negative. He has no substantive political agenda other than maintaining power and rewarding his friends. He’s long stood in the way of his own party actually governing.
Comment by lincoln's beard Thursday, Jan 16, 20 @ 10:43 am