Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Another day, another video connecting Dems to Madigan
Next Post: Illinois Democrats finally move into the first decade of the 21st Century
Posted in:
* From a full-page newspaper ad that ran October 14th and signed by dozens of pro-choice Republicans and Democrats including Diana Rauner herself, who helped personally pay for the advertisement…
The only difference between Bruce Rauner and Pat Quinn on reproductive rights is the issue of parental notification. Pat Quinn opposes parental notification, and Bruce Rauner favors it.
* Project Vote Smart quoting Quinn’s campaign website…
In accordance with his beliefs that healthcare should not be predicated on income, Governor Quinn supports legislation restoring abortion coverage under the state Medicaid plan.
* Politico today…
About 20 Republican lawmakers sat down with Rauner in recent weeks to deliver a message on the abortion legislation: if you want us to support you in your quest for reelection, veto HB40. The meeting came at the urging of social conservatives who wanted a discussion with the governor about his intentions. The bill has been best known as a way to abolish a “trigger law” on the books now in Illinois that would make abortion illegal in Illinois if Roe v. Wade is overturned. However, language in the bill would also allow public funded abortions under Medicaid and state health plans. Social conservatives adamantly oppose both aspects of HB40.
‘Social conservatives have not asked for much’ — “They asked to meet with him and communicated how important this was and how this would be an indication of whether he was going to support a lot of people who got him elected the first time. I think that’s a fair proposition,” state Sen. Kyle McCarter told POLITICO last week. “I mean, the message has been delivered very clearly. I hope he’s listening to that. The social conservatives have not asked for much. We tolerated a lot and this is one thing that we do expect in order to support the governor in the next election.”
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 9:52 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Another day, another video connecting Dems to Madigan
Next Post: Illinois Democrats finally move into the first decade of the 21st Century
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
“Did Rauner renege on a campaign vow to appease conservatives?”
Bruce Rauner has always been at war with Eastasia.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:05 am
**Did Rauner renege on a campaign vow to appease conservatives?**
Yes.
Comment by JoeMaddon Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:06 am
Sure sounds like Rauner is throwing pregnant women under the bus for his own political advantage, but that is something he has become really good at: Using vulnerable people for his own purposes.
Comment by pawn Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:06 am
running to the right of Bill Brady and Kyle McCarter mmmmmm
Comment by Not Rich Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:11 am
“Bruce has no Social Agenda” - Diana Rauner, President, The Ounce of Prevention, wife of Republican nominee Bruce Rauner.
Understand, the Democrat Diana Rauner vouched for Candidate Rauner, a Republican on social issues like HB40…
If anything, Diana Rauner should feel like Bruce’s choice here, and folding to conservatives isn’t just a “business decision”, but a turning away from policy that millions in ads and the credibility of someone, a President of a social service agency, didn’t think was possible.
This decision is real, it speaks to those Diana Rauner ads, ads designed to make Candidate Bruce Rauner acceptable to moderate, suburban women, scared about things… like a veto of HB40.
It’s just mind blowing.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:11 am
The cynicism and lack of sincerity in rauner and the frat house is utterly stunning. They have no shame.
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:15 am
Well, it’s about choices isn’t it.
I frankly think he should have held off till after the Women’s March in Springfield on the 25th.
Governor now has to deal with the visual of a lot of signs aimed directly at him.
Not that HB40 wasn’t a rally cry already
But now there’s meat on it.
Frau Rauners perfidy of “no social agenda”
Will take center stage.
Thank you Gov. You just put yourself at the center of the bullseye for next week.
Comment by Honeybear Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:15 am
Bruce Rauner claims to be pro-choice. But its a political calculation, and he has made a political calculation that poor people don’t matter.
Comment by JoeMaddon Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:17 am
The trigger law is really the key political element here. Republican-leaning suburban women probably won’t be all that upset about Rauner opposing public funding of abortion. But a direct mail and television ad campaign about the trigger law — and Rauner opposition to repealing it — might really move the needle, particularly if there’s another opening on the Supreme Court between now and Election Day.
Comment by Roman Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:29 am
Wait . . . what? Are we to believe that GOP members of the legislature can stand up to the Guv and force him to take a position that he didn’t want to initially take?
They can do that?
So they really are OK with the rest of the stuff he has done, like gut higher Ed, close rape centers, and stiff vendors working and providing services to the state.
Comment by Henry Francis Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:30 am
Wonder what Dr. Rauner’s email would look like today?
http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2014/10/diana-rauner-bruce-convinced-pro-lifers-to-put-aside-their-views-on-this-issue.html
Comment by Anon221 Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:34 am
“”?”"
Too early to tell. Rauner has shown he can tack away from any deal.
Comment by walker Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:35 am
Last I checked the Governor has never pushed an agenda that deals with social issues. That is what and agenda is right? Pushing law that deals with your ideas. But he has to act on legislation that reaches his desk that deal with other people’s agendas. Two major bills on the ’social agenda’ that he has had to deal with were the birth control bill and the abortion bill. He signed the birth control bill over the anger of social conservatives. A bill that not one republican voted for. He has indicated he will veto the abortion bill presumably because it has funding for all abortions not just safety of the mother. if your going to attack the governor on this issue at least bring all the facts to the table.
Comment by Suburban Hillbilly Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:36 am
I’ll give McCarter this much, he’s right, they have asked for next to nothing from Rauner. Maybe that’s how you define success with this guy.
Comment by Signal and Noise Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 10:36 am
The flaw on this one lies with the “gilding the lily” approach the legislation took. If it were to stop at the Trigger Law, I seriously doubt the group would have mustered the fortitude and courage to trot in to speak with 1/3 (or so) of the House caucus represented (in person, or in support) Asking to expand an already hugely burdened Medicaid system to pick up the cost was a huge mistake. Even many of the pro-choicers feel that goes too far.
Many of them are in districts where a screaming communication stating “Rep. XXX isn’t just promoting abortion, He/She is now demanding that we pay for this procedure we object to”.
The middle is being relied upon not to be squishy on this. But, they are.
Comment by A guy Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 11:13 am
“Bruce has no social agenda” - Diana Rauner.
Trying to parse this veto out as anything less than completely making the Diana Rauner ads a sham is disingenuous to the reality here, and the choice by Bruce Rauner that suburban women will look at as Bruce Rauner turning his back on Diana Rauner’s own words in those ads.
Governors own vetoes.
Same as it ever was
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 11:18 am
That’s a bit of an attenuated argument. It would work perfectly in a courtroom, but maybe not so much with voters.
That being said, I still think Rauner’s stance on HB40 will hurt him, but so woulda signing the thing. It’s just another reason that he was the second saddest person in IL that Clinton lost.
Comment by Arsenal Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 11:34 am
I agree with @Roman and @A guy.
There is some middle ground for Rauner to cling to here. Plenty of folks who consider themselves pro-choice do not support public funding for abortion. If HB 40 can’t pass the House, it will be interesting to see if the supporters amend out the Medicaid language and run it as just a “trigger law” repeal. Rauner would really be in a trick bag then.
Comment by Anon414 Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 12:35 pm
“The cynicism and lack of sincerity in rauner and the frat house is utterly stunning. They have no shame.”
Neither does, Diana. I didn’t believe her for a second in 2014, and look at what we got. Not budget cuts. Total zero… goose eggs… libertarian paradise.
Is she going to try that again… of course she is.
Comment by James Knell Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 1:27 pm
“Plenty of folks who consider themselves pro-choice do not support public funding for abortion.”
It’s not ‘choice’ if one of the choices is prohibitively expensive.
Comment by A Womb Of Ones Own Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 2:20 pm
==It’s not ‘choice’ if one of the choices is prohibitively expensive.===
Except it’s no prohibitively expensive. And in all but very, very few cases, it’s elective.
Comment by A guy Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 3:35 pm
The ad actually said, “Bruce doesn’t have a social agenda, he has an education agenda.” Diana Rauner knew better when she said that. You can’t have an education agenda without a social agenda. That is what Ounce of Prevention has been preaching all along. Just another hypocrite.
Comment by Chicago Barb Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 4:11 pm
Yes. He has let down conservatives. But mainly for his lack of spending cuts.
Comment by blue dog dem Monday, Apr 17, 17 @ 4:17 pm
Rauner clearly needs all the votes he can get. Here, he sacrificed the remaining moderate suburban women votes only to excite anti-choice activists. They’re fired up (kidding) but it’s not like they were going to flip anyone in the collars. In my honest opinion, this was a bad political calculation.
Comment by Meh Tuesday, Apr 18, 17 @ 12:48 am