Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Open thread
Next Post: Anatomy of a smear
Posted in:
* I told subscribers about this yesterday and then updated them this morning…
Also on Tuesday came the revelation that four more House lawmakers — Reps. Deb Conroy (46th), Robyn Gabel (18th), Rep. Anna Moeller (43rd) and Rep. Ann Williams (11th) — recently sent a letter to Madigan telling him it was time for new leadership. Rich Miller’s Capitol Fax blog first reported it.
A source tells Playbook that the foursome didn’t intend to go public with their message to Madigan, and they still aren’t releasing the letter.
Instead, they issued a statement Tuesday saying: “Ensuring that the voters have confidence in their elected leaders at all levels of government is of the utmost importance to us. The conversation about the leadership of the Illinois House is a critical one, especially during this time of unprecedented crisis in the state of Illinois. We will continue to work internally within the House Democratic caucus to determine the future of our leadership while working to restore public trust.”
The four reps join eight others who have already said they aren’t backing Madigan. The opponents to Madigan expect one more representative to step forward. That would leave Madigan with a 60 to 13 vote, if it were held today.
I think there’s more than one, but we’ll see who steps forward and when. And we’ll see where this latest twist goes.
* Crain’s…
The four reps did not make public the text of their letter, which reportedly stops short of explicitly saying they’ll vote for someone else for speaker in January if Madigan, now 78, seeks a new term. The letter was first reported by Capitol Fax. […]
Springfield insiders I’ve spoken with say it’s too early to count out Madigan, who retains strong support from organized labor and most members of the black and Latino caucuses, despite Madigan being under federal investigation in the ComEd bribery probe.
But they also indicate that his rule is in real jeopardy.
“He’s got nine lives, so he’s not gone yet,” one veteran House member told me. Still, that source added, the letter “is not great for his prospects.”
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:02 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Open thread
Next Post: Anatomy of a smear
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Ann Williams. that says it all.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:05 am
MJM: If all your friends decided to jump off a bridge would you do that too?
Kids: I mean, maybe…
Comment by Free Market Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:08 am
Although the support for The Speaker is waning, why get rid of him when he’s probably not going to get indicted? With a new U.S. Attorney comes new priorities. Mike Madigan was a big winner in the 2020 election.
Comment by Air Man Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:10 am
If Madigan survives this, one wonders what the retaliation will be…..
Comment by Fav Human Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:16 am
“Mike Madigan was a big winner in the 2020 election”
A little forewarning please. I have to clean the coffee off my monitor from laughing so hard.
Yes, Madigan was a huge winner on election day. /s/
If he was such a big winner, why did he lose the progressive income tax, lose house members and is now facing calls to step down as both Speaker and Party Chair?
Comment by Pekin Duck Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:17 am
Madigan will lose until his opponents have to actually name a replacement. And as to a new Federal Attorney I saw that both Durban and Duckworth are planning to support retaining the present US Attorney
Comment by DuPage Saint Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:20 am
=lose the progressive income tax, lose house members=
I am not sure about the big winner stuff but, he still has a super majority. When you have that many seats in your cacus it is going to vary a little from election to election. So in that regard he really didn’t lose much. The progressive income tax wasn’t his initiative and I would question how much he was really behind it.
Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:20 am
=== why did he lose the progressive income tax===
That’s on the governor.
Governors own.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:21 am
Airman- read the news much? Both of our Dem US senators have publicly asked Biden to keep the US Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois
Comment by Sue Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:23 am
Remind me…how many votes does he need to be elected Speaker?
Comment by Stritze Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:23 am
does Madigan need 60 yes votes? What if a bunch of Dems abstain? does he need a plurality and not an absolute majority?
Comment by Liquid Soap Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:23 am
Pekin Duck-
Madigan lost seats and still has a super-majority.
I guess that what passes for a ILGOP victory these days.
I think he needs to go, but if he still gets the votes, whoo-boy.
Comment by Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:27 am
- Pekin Duck -
The Speaker is still standing with the real hope of a new US Attorney. So, he lost the progressive tax thing this round. It will be back. Democrats will be drawing the new map.
Comment by Air Man Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:30 am
Madigan is not giving up the remap. He will find those 60 votes and stick around.
Comment by twowaystreet Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:33 am
Ooh, a letter. Is it strongly worded?
==four more House lawmakers==
I noticed a typo, more is spelled “minor”.
Comment by Jocko Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:35 am
Why did the Governor lose the progressive income tax?
Because of lack of trust in the Speaker as the leader of the Democratic Party.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:35 am
There are two reasons to get rid of the Speaker
1) Party performance
2) Corruption
The Democratic Party in Illinois’s performance:
A net gain of one Illinois Senate seat.
A net loss of only one Illinois House seat. In what magical universe was Jesus himself saving Nathan Reitz?
Held all congressional incumbents.
The only “failure” is that Kilbride only got 57% of the needed 60% to be retained. He was then replaced with a placeholder who is a probable Democrat.
All of this in a year where a tax increase was on the ballot and a pandemic prevent big canvassing operations for part of the year.
As for corruption, Trump’s DoJ subtweeting the Speaker in indictments while running “if you saw something, say something” press conferences begging for information doesn’t strike me as sufficient to remove him from office (yet).
Comment by Nuke the Whales Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:36 am
To the post,
The family squabble (which is a huge political fight with moving parts including labor and progressives) first, last, everything… is 59… 59 plus MJM… 60.
The reality is the HRaunerites expanded their hefty total of 44 to… 45.
A supermajority will need to find a 14, and they very well might find them, and in the end maybe easily, but that’s the ball game right now, and why labor, progressives, and everyone in between in the family that understands steps, any discussion that isn’t focused on the 59/60 number is not grasping… steps.
If HDems get 15 “on the steps” unwilling to vote MJM, that’s the only clear step that begets others.
Herding 73 to commit, it could be a slow slog then speeds up uncontrollably.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:38 am
Those who support the president at all costs have set a very bad precedent. Short of an indictment, why should Madigan be removed as Speaker, in this environment?
Keeping Madigan would be like keeping a moth near a light for the ILGOP, so the moth can keep running into the light. The result of years-long attacks on Madigan is super-minority status. The Madigan crutch needs to be removed.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:38 am
Air man - I can tell you beyond any reasonable doubt once a investigation starts like the one on Madigan it’s not easy to stop even with a change in the White House. Don’t assume he’s getting off for that reason if and I say if he even did anything wrong.
Comment by Hard D Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:40 am
=== the real hope of a new US Attorney.===
Both US Senators, publicly, support retaining the current USA.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:42 am
— ==four more House lawmakers==
I noticed a typo, more is spelled “minor”.—
4 committee chairs.
Comment by King Louis XVI Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:43 am
A new administration has a new Deputy-Attorney General coming. When politicians are involved the Deputy Attorney General is the last word on indictments. There will be a new last word. Don’t write off Mike Madigan yet.
Comment by Air Man Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:46 am
== Those who support the president at all costs have set a very bad precedent. Short of an indictment, why should Madigan be removed as Speaker, in this environment? ==
Perhaps that after all of this time under his leadership perhaps his members see a chance at a bit (or a lot) more freedom, a new leader regardless of whom they are will likely not have the same grip Madigan has?
One of the things Rod had talked about (and always struck me a plausible) is how members would talk a big game about standing up to Madigan when having a drink, but would never actually do anything. Perhaps this is the time they ‘do something’.
Comment by OneMan Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:50 am
=== A new administration has…===
… not even began the true transfer of power by any real measure.
Dunno how many USAs or ASUAs are going to let politics dictate prosecutions, or ending any.
The current USA forgave a quarter of a billion (with a b) in fines to ComEd for assistance in future prosecutions.
You think their gonna give that break for the prosecution of an Intergovernmental aide at ComEd and be done with it?
Hmm.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:50 am
===does Madigan need 60 yes votes?===
Yes. The Google is your friend. Try to keep up.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:51 am
The USA has to get approval from Washington on high level elected officials. That might be one explanation on why the Danny Solis situation has taken so long. The process started with the same FBI and many career people on the 5th floor but… different USA and different administrations. The Speaker is still standing.
Comment by Air Man Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 10:02 am
=== The USA has to get approval from Washington on high level elected officials. That might be one explanation on why the Danny Solis situation has taken so long.===
… if they are following the tradition in this short term to not move on political corruption in windows of campaign closing days.
You may be out of your depths here, your conspiracy theories are easily refutable to what is happening, precedent to timing, and what you want shaped into a wanted reality not existing.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 10:09 am
== - Lucky Pierre - Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 9:35 am:
Why did the Governor lose the progressive income tax?
Because of lack of trust in the Speaker as the leader of the Democratic Party. ==
Come on. You think people voting on the question said, “Hum, well I don’t trust Mike Madigan or Democrats, so I guess I’ll vote no on this,” but then voted for a whole bunch of Democratic candidates on the ballot including Senator Durbin?
The voters didn’t reject Fair Tax because they don’t trust the Speaker or the Democratic Party. They rejected Fair Tax because 9 times out of 10 a voter is always going to vote against something defined as a tax increase unless they are educated on it and given reasons to support it. And they weren’t. Even if Griffin hadn’t dropped more than $100M, it probably still would have failed because there wasn’t an adequate effort to pass it or show why it was necessary.
When you educate the electorate and give them concrete answers about what a tax increase will do, they might support it. Look at Arizona. They passed a tax increase for high earners because they did the work and made it abundantly clear to the voters the the money would go to education.
Comment by southsider Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 10:31 am
=== Why did the Governor lose the progressive income tax?
Because of lack of trust in the Speaker as the leader of the Democratic Party.===
Whadda gonna do if Madigan finally leaves, LOL
Not one Congressional seat was picked up.
Gain 1 in the Illinois House, lose 1 in the Illinois Senate… and after all that dough to oust Kilbride, the ILSC put a Dem in the seat until the next election AND probable remap.
Your dismissing the Frerichs Tax too.., why?
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 10:36 am
I wonder if I will ever know what it’s like to live under a Democratic Party that is not ruled by a gerontocracy.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 10:37 am
hisgirlfriday-
Because someone is forcing your residence in this state?
Comment by Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 10:44 am
I imagine this question is in the minds of more than a few House Dems: I won because of Madigan, now am I going to lose because of him?
Comment by TNR Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 11:07 am
The Governor may own as OW states, but many that voted against the Tax Amendment did so because they know that the Illinois Legislature has done next to nothing to fix the problems of the State. And the recognized leader of that dysfunctional body is The Speaker. They realize that under three decades of fiscal mismanagement under his leadership that they didn’t wish to give him and his minions more money to mismanage and not fix problems.
Comment by Arock Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 11:07 am
Both US Senators, publicly, support retaining a US Attorney that has not indicted Madigan.
Comment by Bigtwich Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 11:08 am
@FlyinElvisUtahChapter -
The gerontocracy presiding over the Democratic Party is not just an Illinois phenomenon. Have you looked at U.S. House leadership lately? Checked out the president-elect?
There isn’t anywhere to move to escape it.
Comment by hisgirlfriday Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 11:10 am
=== The Governor may own as OW states, but many that voted against the Tax Amendment did so because they know that the Illinois Legislature has done next to nothing to fix the problems of the State===
(Sigh)
Who was bankrolling the pro-tax amendment?
The rest is to how the campaign was won or lost.
=== They realize that under three decades of fiscal mismanagement under his leadership that they didn’t wish to give him and his minions more money to mismanage and not fix problems.===
No. Keep up please.
The messaging was not trusting the legislature, not a partisan legislature.
Maybe you need to rewatch the ads.
What you want versus what was fed are two different things.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 11:10 am
Like it or not, the odds of Madigan losing re-election have increased. If he were rejected, who would be his likely successor?
Comment by anon2 Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 11:11 am
===… that has not indicted Madigan.===
Yet, and has given a quarter of a billion (with that b, to be clear, again) in breaks of fines.
If there’s this idea that our criminal and judicial system is corrupt, how can you believe that it can be so “un-corrupt” so quickly?
Maybe the USA just plain doesn’t have enough?
Seems pretty straightforward
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 11:13 am
This isn’t about what has come before, this has to be about what comes next: the remap.
A remap without the Speaker leading it will generate a lot less outrage — no matter the shapes of the districts — than a map with the MJM stamp.
Also, if we all still agree that politics ain’t beanbag, then a run at the boss is a healthy and regularly occurring phenomenon in a relatively post-patronage era.
Comment by county not country Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 11:20 am
JB….leaders don’t play the victim card.
Its time you get some skin on and actually enforce these restrictions. Its clear to me you are weak willed and are not a true leader. At this point you need to at least act like you are one.
Comment by The Dude Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 11:31 am
Please stiff arm Speaker Madigan out of Springfield…
There’s no other way this will happen…
Comment by Loop Lady Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 12:11 pm
= Have you looked at U.S. House leadership lately? Checked out the president-elect?=
Mitch McConnell? Chuck Grassley? With teenie boppers like them in the GOP I guess the democrats do seem old./s
Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 12:14 pm
=== Come on. You think people voting on the question said, “Hum, well I don’t trust Mike Madigan or Democrats, so I guess I’ll vote no on this,” but then voted for a whole bunch of Democratic candidates on the ballot including Senator Durbin?===
@southsider, that is exactly why I voted ‘No’ on the Tax Amendment while still voting for Biden and Foxx.
Comment by Scarecrow Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 12:46 pm
=== A remap without the Speaker leading it will generate a lot less outrage — no matter the shapes of the districts — than a map with the MJM stamp. ===
The map will still presumably have Madigan’s Yes vote on it, but even if Madigan retires it wont matter.
Maps dont generate outrage, political parties and interest groups generate outrage. Just ask yourself how happy Republicans will be with a map that elects a supermajority of Democrats.
Unless the map looks like it was built with lego bricks by a computer, Republicans are going to claim that it was gerrymandered. They will accuse Pritzker of breaking his promise.
They will primarily argue that since Biden only got 57 percent of the vote, a map that gives Democrats more than 67 seats is biased in Democrats’ favor.
Are there 7 downstate or suburban Democrats that are ready to give up their seats in the name of equity? Maybe.
Probably not downstate, but perhaps in the suburbs. You could create a couple of GOP house seats in Lake county for sure, and a gOP senate seat. Probably Naperville, Aurora and rockford. The 66th distict definetly loses a piece of elgin, that might flip it back to Republicans.
The easiest place to make the case of gerrmandering is where you have medium size cities that have multiple lawmakers.
Comment by Thomas Paine Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 12:48 pm
The assertions of Thomas Paine resonates
with me…
Comment by Loop Lady Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 1:25 pm
I really didn’t expect him to say “ my vaunted political organization got you 10%”
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 1:50 pm
I wonder how much longer before WAND-17, the Herald-Review, or someone in the Decatur media (or Springfield as her district includes the east side and Capitol Complex/Vinegar Hill area) asks Rep. Scherer whether or not she will vote to keep Madigan as speaker in January.
Comment by Chatham Resident Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 3:45 pm
People need to be careful for what they wish for. This is looking to be a tumultuous 2 years for Democrats in this State and the elections of 2022 will undoubtedly be brutal for them in Biden’s midterm. I don’t think there is another person in the House that can maintain a campaign apparatus the way the Speaker does.
Comment by Powdered Whig Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 4:05 pm
Meh, does someone have 60?
All little games right now.
Sadly some of the House members are playing checkers when the Speaker plays 3D Chess.
Comment by Frank talks Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 4:24 pm
This thread will not age well
Comment by Random online Blogger Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 7:01 pm
- Random online Blogger -
Whew…
=== - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 10:09 am
=== The USA has to get approval from Washington on high level elected officials. That might be one explanation on why the Danny Solis situation has taken so long.===
… if they are following the tradition in this short term to not move on political corruption in windows of campaign closing days.
You may be out of your depths here, your conspiracy theories are easily refutable to what is happening, precedent to timing, and what you want shaped into a wanted reality not existing.===
The timing of indictments specifically… after elections… became today.
Whew.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 18, 20 @ 7:04 pm