Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Was a Murray resident waterboarded?
Next Post: Question of the day - Golden Horseshoe Awards
Posted in:
* The Tribune writes about Rep. La Shawn Ford’s (D-Chicago) bill to allow a recall of Chicago’s mayor…
Republican activists have sought to encourage GOP lawmakers to sign onto the bill, ostensibly to encourage Republican outreach to African-Americans but also to try to take advantage of a rare show of weakness by Emanuel.
Republican Rep. Jeanne Ives of Wheaton added herself as a co-sponsor. Signing on Tuesday was Rep. Ron Sandack of Downers Grove, the House Republican floor leader and a key ally of Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner, a friend of Emanuel.
Rauner’s office had no comment on the measure, but even House Republican leader Jim Durkin of Western Springs, an attorney, questioned whether a recall bill — if passed and signed into law — could affect Emanuel in his current term.
“I don’t think that the constitutional law can apply to a sitting mayor,” said Durkin, who has taken no position on the bill. “I’m not giving any advice (to members) one way or the other.”
Senate Republican leader Christine Radogno of Lemont said that while she supports “empowering voters,” she remains cautious. “Establishing the process for the recall of elected officials can set off a lot of alarm bells. If not done properly, it could put us on a dangerous path,” she said.
Thoughts?
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 9:29 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Was a Murray resident waterboarded?
Next Post: Question of the day - Golden Horseshoe Awards
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Durkin and Radogno are scared the bill might be crafted to include all local officials, and Tea Party types would use it to pick off their buddies in the suburbs.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 9:37 am
I hope Oswego Willy recognized the bipartisan spirit exhibited by Rep. Ives.
Comment by I hate RINOs Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 9:40 am
We shouldn’t be passing recall bills without a lot of thought and good sound logic. This bill is about helping democrats save their butts in Chicago. Are there other reasons for it?
Comment by Ahoy! Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 9:46 am
“If it’s ‘Angry’, it’s Ives!”
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 9:48 am
Considering that the real power-base of the Illinois GOP is in county, municipal and township governments, Rep. Ives’ co-sponsorship of the bill may have more to do with not thinking it through than bipartisanship. So many seats have been won by a hair then treated like a mandate. Rahm may be the poster-boy, but the reality is more likely to play out in the traditional bastions of the GOP.
Comment by Springfieldish Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 9:53 am
Ives and others have been silent on the Laquan issue for weeks since it happened. Too little too late.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 10:04 am
Ex post facto laws generally only apply to criminal law. That is the general view of the Supreme Court. From the Heritage Foundation: The weight of precedent and scholarly opinion, however, supports Justice Chase’s view. The Supreme Court has hewn to the position that the Ex Post Facto Clause prohibits criminal penalties only.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 10:05 am
Or laws that exact civil penalties. A recall election may not qualify as a “civil penalty.”
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 10:07 am
Set an effective date a few years out. Everyone is happy.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 10:18 am
The Speaker would give up Rahm for this term if Durkin gives up Rauner for this term
Comment by Wow Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 10:21 am
Recall elections are stupid. If the conduct of elected officials is impeachable, impeach them. Otherwise, elections have consequences…..
Comment by Jaded Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 10:22 am
Since when has Rahm been the Speaker’s BFF? Quite the opposite. I think the Speaker knows that. That’s why Lisa M was out there supporting the recall.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 10:24 am
This doesn’t seem like a hard bill to derail - someone just introduces another bill that contains unreachable triggers for a recall and all the pressure is off the city reps and they can support a recall bill but nothing has enough support to pass.
On the face of it, it does seem amazing that the ILGOP is taking a pass on a chance to torpedo the Democratic mayor of a Democratic city. Is the GOP staying off for now because they know that if this becomes a Republican bill, Democrats won’t vote for it? Or because their constituents are probably pretty pro-police and they’re not sure how this plays in their district? Or because Rauner and Rahm hope to share wine and vacations again some day? Or the GOP business folks in the city are terrified of a recall that might sweep their guy out and who knows what in?
My vote is on the latter, maybe the latter 2.
Comment by Century Club Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 10:39 am
Republican leaders not enthusiastic about recall bill because…they are afraid of Republicans being recalled.
Comment by low level Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 11:05 am
Hard to pass this bill for Chicago only.
Hundreds and hundreds of senior local officials across the state make up the core of the active Republican partiers. That’s why both this bill, and the efforts to consolidate local government bodies, are such tough sledding right now.
Comment by walker Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 11:35 am
The GOP leaders aren’t thrilled because they know the bill targets one of their own: a corporatist.
Comment by Precinct Captain Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 11:48 am
Illinois voters are lucky they get to vote once.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 12:22 pm
Is debating a bill to recall elected officials all the boys and girls in Springfield have to do? How about passing a budget!
Comment by Anon III Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 12:26 pm
Jeanne Ives keeps her own counsel, and the ILGA is a better place with her membership!
Comment by DuPage Don Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 12:33 pm
Like many bills, it could be drafted for “cities of over 500,000 people”. But what’s good for the goose should be good for the governor, no? I don’t think Rauner wants to subject himself to a recall election should the voters get to angry about the lack of the budget.
Comment by chi Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 12:55 pm
== Is debating a bill to recall elected officials all the boys and girls in Springfield have to do? How about passing a budget! ==
At this point, a recall bill might be easier to pass than a budget.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 2:01 pm
Durkin doesn’t seem to have a leg to stand on.
There is no Constitutional provision spelling out the terms of office for any mayor.
Perhaps Dan Johnson would care to opine.
Comment by Juvenal Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 3:10 pm
===Jeanne Ives keeps her own counsel…===
lol, some of that is by choice.
The Confederate Vetrans are thankful…
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 3:23 pm
If Jeanne Ives signed as a co-sponsor, that should tell everyone else to stay away.
Comment by Union Leader Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 3:26 pm
Just so folks are clear, the bill as written now, applies only to the City of Chicago.
Comment by Century Club Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 3:30 pm
Things may get ugly at the next wine club meeting.
Comment by burbanite Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 3:54 pm
Could it be that Rahm is a DINO? Democrat in Name Only? That would explain Republican reticence.
Comment by ottawa otter Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 5:03 pm
“D _ N _ “?
Ugh. Yeah, that’s why, ridiculous Slytherin labeling is why the GOP is not jumping at this.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, Dec 16, 15 @ 5:07 pm