Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: The religious opposition
Next Post: Stuck in the middle
Posted in:
The outcome itself was perhaps less surprising than how long and difficult the debate had proved in a state with both legislative chambers controlled by Democrats and where President Obama, once a member of the State Senate, specifically voiced his support this year. Illinois already permits civil unions for same-sex couples, but even as a wave of state legislatures passed marriage provisions this year, the issue had stalled.
“We were aiming for this to happen a year ago,” said Bernard Cherkasov, the chief executive of Equality Illinois. In May, in the final hours of the State House’s regular session, a leading advocate of the bill reluctantly and tearfully announced that he would delay plans for a vote, suggesting that there were not yet enough votes to pass it.
“In many ways, it has taken longer than we expected,” Mr. Cherkasov said.
Despite Democratic control of both chambers, the issue had been particularly vexing for some Democrats in socially conservative districts outside Chicago and for some black Democrats in Chicago, where some clergy members have suggested that those supporting gay marriage should prepare for election challenges next year.
“We’re prepared to run and elect people who vote where the people’s minds are,” said Bishop Larry Trotter, senior pastor of the Sweet Holy Spirit Church in Chicago and an opponent of same-sex marriage. Mr. Trotter said he believed that most black residents agreed with him, even if it conflicts with the stance of Mr. Obama.
* House Speaker Michael Madigan was given credit by the bill’s sponsor for getting around those religious and political concerns expressed by his members…
Harris said House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, “made the difference in convincing some of my folks who were taking a little bit more time in making up their minds it was the right thing to do.” He said Madigan “pushed the bill across the finish line.”
Madigan said he used the “art of persuasion” on between five and 10 House members in an effort to round up the votes to pass the bill. He said he couldn’t use his art of persuasion when the bill was pending in May because the gap was wider then.
* More…
Later, Madigan acknowledged that he helped persuade “a significant number of people” to vote for the legislation. But always one to leave some mystery hanging, Madigan would not state how many or which lawmakers he brought across the finish line.
“It was over five,” Madigan said, adding that it was not over 10.
* David Ormsby, however, reports today that the total could be as high as 13 or 14…
The 13 were divided between 8 fence sitters and five potentially vulnerable lawmakers who wanted willing to vote for the bill, but on whom a brick had been placed by the Speaker’s political director.
“Madigan had to eyeball about eight members and had give Will the green light for the others who wanted to vote for it,” said the source, referring to Will Cousineau, the House Democratic Staff Issues Director.
“Cousineau may just need to work a little harder defending some,” the source added.
The eight “eyeballed” by Madigan included:
Luis Arroyo of Chicago
John D’Amico of Chicago
Anthony DeLuca of Chicago Heights
Thaddeus Jones of Chicago
André Thapedi of Chicago
Bob Rita of Blue Island
Al Riley of Olympia Fields
Pat Verschoore of MilanThe five that got the “green light” included four of five freshmen members:
Jehan Gordon-Booth of Peoria
Natalie Manley of Joliet
Marty Moylan of Des Plaines
Kathleen Willis of Villa Park
Stephanie Kifowit of Aurora
I’m not so sure about some of those, however. Rep. Verschoore’s spouse, for instance, was instrumental in convincing him to vote for the bill. Rep. D’Amico is Mayor Emanuel’s floor leader, so he had little choice in the matter.
But, whatever the exact number is, there’s no doubt that Madigan’s involvement played a major role here.
* The Speaker, however, was quick to credit President Obama’s public support for changing minds, as well as activists who worked the bill over the summer and the sponsor himself…
The speaker gave much credit to Harris, the bill’s sponsor, saying he was steadfast in the face of “unwarranted criticism” from some in the gay community who were not happy with the way Harris was handling the bill. Some activists had demanded Harris call the bill whether the support was there, contending failure to do so should result in his resignation. Madigan said those efforts “did not help the passage of the bill, it probably hurt the passage of the bill.”
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 10:04 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: The religious opposition
Next Post: Stuck in the middle
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
===Some activists had demanded Harris call the bill whether the support was there, contending failure to do so should result in his resignation. Madigan said those efforts “did not help the passage of the bill, it probably hurt the passage of the bill.”===
MJM and Harris … they would know.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 10:10 am
IMHO Ormsby slightly overstates the case, and is supporting a Madigan-as-boss scenario, a bit more than necessary.
Note, these last five already supported the bill, and at least a couple of them would have voted for it regardless of Madigan or Will’s firm recommendation. Of the others, Madigan says he “helped convince” more than “five, less than ten,” which sounds exactly right. Some were “fence-sitting” waiting to see if they could get something else in trade, or more political cover, but would have voted for it in the end.
Madigan was definitely helpful in getting it over the hump, but so were Sullivan, Sandack, and Tom Cross.
Greg Harris and his allies made it happen.
Comment by walkinfool Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 10:29 am
There are several names here that are not properly assigned, but all save one would have obviously closely weighed any, ah, “input” or “suggestions” coming from the Speaker’s office.
Comment by Jeeves the Cat Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 10:32 am
Still talking about this? Time to move on.
Comment by Les Nesman Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 10:51 am
On to pension reform.
Comment by James the Intolerant Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 10:58 am
Here’s to you, MJM. This was one for the history books.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 11:08 am
Any truth in the story that Rep. Scherer was asked to vote for the bill or suffer from lack of support from labor groups?
Comment by downstate demo Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 11:11 am
Arroyo traded his vote in exchange for Marriage Equality advocates’ support of his son’s race for Cook County Commissioner of the 8th district.
Comment by Library guy Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 11:26 am
If the Speaker thought that this vote would have meant a change in the House majority, it would not have been called for a vote. Little attention is paid to doing the right thing for its own sake. It is telling that some of the legislators had to be given the “green light” (i.e., permission) to vote ‘yes,’ due to their vulnerability. It re-affirms the cynic in me that says that re-electability is the determining factor for equality.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 11:39 am
If the end justifies the means, it will be interesting to review what lies at the “end”.
Comment by A guy... Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 12:59 pm
The day after, my happiness at passage is tempered by my sadness at the historic opportunity that was missed by Illinois Republicans.
They had a chance. I have a knot in my stomach that they missed it. They could have changed the political dynamic in Illinois in a heartbeat.
JBT was on the floor urging a “yes” vote, bless her.
Sen. Kirk is a brave, national leader on civil rights, in the great tradition of Illinois Republicans, in a national party that today wants nothing to do with him.
Reps. Sullivan and Sandback are the coolest cats in Springfield.
I thought once the bill got to 60, there would be a jailbreak of GOP “yes” votes. I was wrong. I’m very sad about that.
They’ll never get a chance like that again.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 1:45 pm
WS, Never never pans out. There’s always a next time. There’s always another battle for humankind. There was a “jail break” on the Democratic side with the warden handing the keys to a few inmates. Others on that side decided to stay in jail along with the least coolest cats in Springfield. Be happy that a bill you believed in passed. It was “never” going to be 119-0. Until yesterday, it wasn’t even close enough to 60 to call the bill. Every stat is a line drive in the box score. It passed. It will become law. Put away the tissues. The melodrama is more than a little unbecoming.
Comment by A guy... Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 2:23 pm
A Guy, I don’t understand what you’re yammering about. You have a hard-on about me and this subject that is inexplicable.
Again, peace be with you, brother.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 2:33 pm
Sorry WS. Don’t mean to inspire that kind of feeling from you. I don’t have what you suggested I have about you or this subject. My sole point is that there is a sizable group of people in this state who felt a different way than you and many posters here. They’re not well represented here. This site is an exchange of ideas. You’re witty and thoughtful and share your thoughts. Agreeable or not, they’re interesting enough to comment or even disagree with. Here’s my thesis: How the SSM supporters handle this could go a very long way toward soothing whatever angst the folks against it may have. Don’t shove it down their throats. Keep selling it the way they did to win it in the first place. I guess I’m just yammering that being a graceful winner is important here. Peace back at you.
Comment by A guy... Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 2:45 pm
I am personally not against gay marriage, however, I would have preferred civil unions. I say this out of respect for the feelings of people who find gay marriage so problematic. I have read so many comments that demonize lots of good people who happen to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.
Having said that, my view on religion is that what God really doesn’t like is promiscuity and I have found that nothing curtails promiscuity like marriage.
Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 3:12 pm
A Guy, and also with you.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 3:24 pm
I’m of the opinion that much of the “angst” shown by anti-SSM people is insincere. Where is the angst when these people have to provide services to those who remarry after they got divorced for reasons other than spousal infidelity, for example? Jesus said that divorce should be granted only to men whose wives were unfaithful. There are multitudes of “sinners” to whom services such as church marriage and food catering are provided without angst. I think that people use religion to justify their homophobia.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 3:39 pm
“There are multitudes of “sinners” to whom services such as church marriage and food catering are provided without angst”
Ah ha, I always thought it was the food caterers behind all this controversy.
Comment by Phineas J. Whoopee Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 3:50 pm
PJW, don’t let the florists and inn keepers off so easy! lol.
Comment by A guy... Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 3:52 pm
–Harris said House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, “made the difference in convincing some of my folks who were taking a little bit more time in making up their minds it was the right thing to do.” He said Madigan “pushed the –bill across the finish line.”–
I love this dude.
Hey, Andy, Chuck, Carol, Kass, did you ever push the ball over the goal line? For anybody? On anything?
Did all your sanctimonious scribbling over the years ever mean a damn thing to the lives of real people?
This Irishman from the Southwest Side is the goods.
He’s not as powerful as every wannabe professional victim pretends that he is, but he’s smart, he has a good heart, he’s fiscally conservative, socially progressive and he will outwork you eight days to Tuesday.
Spendid behavior.
When I was a kid, I had the pleasure of seeing MJM in the chair when Fast Eddie, Pate and Lee tried to grab the airports in order to save Ed Kelly and stick it to Harold.
Ronan brought down indicted, coked-out, Larry Bullock to be the last vote.
There were a lot of procedural votes, with the gangsters winning, and then came the last one:
Bullock pretended to be sleeping; Ronan and DeLeo — good government types — came running and screaming down the aisles at him.
Madigan slammed that velvet hammer, looked Ronan in the eye and said “no.”
Way cool.
He’s a giant. We’re lucky to have him.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 3:53 pm
Speaker Madigan.
Those two words seem to bring all kinds of thoughts, and fellings. He is “all-Powerful”, he “plays chess as we all play checkers”, Speaker Madigan thinks … three steps ahead of everyone else. Speaker Madigan is ruthless, he has his “Madigan Rules”, and they have server… the Speaker … well.
Mike Madigan is no one’s Fool.
I have said the Speaker reminds me of Bear Bryant, where he can beat his with yours, and turn around and beat his with yours. Mike Madigan is a Master of understanding how to manuver, and to get things done.
That is what happened yesterday.
It is not about the May “no vote”, or picketing, or even about eloquent speeches to make others magically decide, “Yeah, I am going to switch”
Nope. Not even close.
The Speaker and his Staff work tirelessly to move an agenda, whatever it is, and when it is ripe, the trigger is pulled, and not half way, or kinda, or sorta … it gets done, and “you will be fine” is what is left to those either in the wake of the move, or those washed with the benefits of the hard work done by Speaker Madigan.
Speaker Madigan and Greg Harris can count. They both knew where the voters were, and how to get them…. and WHEN …when to get them at the most opportune time, to make sure there was no doubt how SB10 would turn out on the Big Board.
Results. Results when everytihing is at its zeinith, that is where the Power is.
No one out workes the Speaker.
That really is the lesson.
Forget the Bill, the polarizing sides, the arguements for or against, the press, the pressure, the lobbying, the arm twisting … the voting.
No one outworks the Speaker.
Here, endeth the Lesson.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 4:16 pm
Apologies:
===I have said the Speaker reminds me of Bear Bryant, where he can beat his with yours, and turn around and beat yours with his. Mike Madigan is a Master of understanding how to manuver, and to get things done.===
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 4:18 pm
OW, I always read what you mean, if not necessarily what you type.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 4:19 pm
Who was the 61st vote?
Is anyone else troubled that Naomi Jakobsson had to leave her son’s deathbed for this vote when apparently they had enough votes to pass this without her? If Tom Cross had told others his intentions earlier would that not have been necessary?
Comment by hisgirlfriday Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 4:24 pm
- 47th Ward -,
If I knew how to fix that poor affliction, I want you to know, I would.
No one should have to live with that agony.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Nov 6, 13 @ 4:25 pm