High court manages to upset everybody's beliefs w/ pair of rulings

Perhaps this is the Supreme Court of the United States’ idea of what constitutes bipartisanship – rule in ways that manage to offend the sensibilities of just about everybody.

The nation's Supreme Court issued a pair of rulings that … 

I couldn’t help but have that reaction myself when I learned Thursday of the way the court ruled with regards to gerrymandering and the Census.

WITH REGARD TO the latter, the Supreme Court ruled against the desires of President Donald Trump – who wanted the Census Bureau’s official population count next year to include questions about one’s citizenship.

Making it seem that Trump and his ideologue minions want to officially regard non-U.S. citizens as non-people who wouldn’t get fully counted.

Who knows? Maybe Trump fantasized about compiling all that information into some sort of hit list of people who could then be harassed openly – so as to appease the jollies of the xenophobic types who are inclined to think that Trump himself is the equivalent of a “royal highness” of the Americas.

Which we all ought to realize applies only to states whose political majorities lean toward Trump-type Republicans.

THE SUPREME COURT ruled against that notion, with a 5-4 vote in favor of a legal opinion saying the official argument that such information is needed to enforce the Voting Rights Act is fraudulent.

For what it’s worth, that’s the same voter tally the high court reached in another measure – one that said lawsuits challenging the setting of political boundaries based on political considerations are not proper.

In short, all of those Republican-leaning states whose legislatures chose to draw boundaries meant to benefit their own partisan interests aren’t necessarily doing anything illegal. For the court ruled that such action is a state issue – and not one for the federal courts to go about trying to overturn.

… struck down Trump's desires to use the Census, ...

I don’t doubt that the people who would have wanted some sort of singling out of so-called foreigners when it comes to the Census will be pleased the court left the composition of their Legislatures alone.

WHILE OTHERS WHO would have seen the population count measure as a blatantly-partisan political move that deserved to fail now are wondering how in the heck did those nitwits on the high court blow it so badly with regards to undoing the practice of gerrymandering – the rigging of electoral boundaries for political purposes.

Maybe it’s all that time walking around wearing those black robes that look like dowdy dresses.

There is one key to comprehending these two actions – the votes were similar. By and large, the people who wanted to single out non-citizens in the Census count also wanted to protect the Republican-leaning Legislatures. The people who wanted to stop the Census from becoming a political weapon also wanted to have the court undo Legislature composition they consider to be unfair and unjust.

The difference was in the form of Chief Justice John Roberts, who as it turned out voted against the Census count measure and for the measure saying that gerrymandering is not an issue for the Supreme Court to decide.

REINFORCING THE CONCEPT that Roberts is the “swing” judge on the court whose opinion breaks a tie either way. Meaning that much of America probably despises him these days – although for different reasons that say much about our own partisanship leanings than anything about the merits of the laws themselves.

Personally, I don’t doubt the Census question was a hate-inspired proposal. Seeing it die off is a good thing.

… while indirectly benefitting Madigan

While as for gerrymandering, I wonder if the court would have viewed it differently if the legal case at hand regarded the structure of the Illinois Legislature. Would the ideologue-minded people have been willing to approve a measure that targeted the Democratic-leaning Illinois House and state Senate – rather than the measures that focused on blatantly-Republican leaning states.

Which may be the way I wind up viewing the latter ruling – it offers some protection to the political set-up we have in Illinois, which means it sort of benefits the interests of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan. Most definitely a concept that will offend the conservative ideologues as much as their own partisan rants offend me.

  -30-

How much has politics changed? Madigan used to be anti-abortion ally

Michael Madigan, the head Democrat for Illinois (although not Chicago) and long-time Illinois House speaker, has formally been informed he can no longer accept Communion when he goes to church.

MADIGAN: Can no longer take communion

Strictly speaking, officials in charge of the Roman Catholic church in Springfield, Ill., have excommunicated him. Which must be tragic, of sorts to the one-time graduate of St. Adrian’s Elementary and St. Ignatius College prep schools in Chicago, along with the holiest of holy Catholic universities – Notre Dame.

THE ANNOUNCEMENT CAME down as a result of Bishop Thomas Paprocki, who is in charge of the Springfield, Ill., diocese. Paprocki is so peeved that the General Assembly debated (and approved) the Reproductive Health Act.

That’s the measure that ensures even if the anti-abortion ideologues manage to get the Supreme Court of the United States to act in ways meant to eliminate on a national scale the right of a woman to terminate a pregnancy, it will not impact Illinois.

The “Land of Lincoln” will remain a place where abortion will be regarded as a legitimate medical procedure.

Madigan said Thursday he had been contacted by Paprocki prior to the Legislature acting last month on the bill in question, and knew that Paprocki would be likely to act with grave disapproval. Yet he went ahead and used his political influence to allow the issue to come up – where it passed overwhelmingly.

PAPROCKI: Taking a stand on abortion

AS MADIGAN PUT it, “After much deliberation and reflection, I made the decision to allow debate and a vote on the legislation.”

Then, he made the statement that I’m sure the religious ideologues will claim confirms his place in Hell for all eternity.

“I believe it is more important to protect a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions, including women who become pregnant as a result of rape or incest,” said Mr. Speaker,

Yes, I write that knowing full well there are those who will screech and scream about “God’s law” being supreme above all else, and who are more than willing to overlook any suffering in this lifetime because, theoretically, the life eternal is special enough to overcome the miseries of this existence here.

CULLERTON: Also dragged into battle

SO MADIGAN, STATE Senate President John Cullerton, D-Chicago, and for all I know, maybe all Catholic members of the General Assembly, are now excommunicated. To suffer eternal punishment for thinking a woman’s health and physical well-being is her own business.

Which is ironic because I remember back a couple of decades when anti-abortion activists considered Mike Madigan himself to be about as sympathetic to their cause as any politico could be.

His Catholic upbringing meant he wasn’t particularly sympathetic to that portion of Democrats who wanted the political party to be allied with women on this issue. I remember anti-abortion types saying Madigan was good for them because he’d allow their bills meant to restrict abortion in various ways to come up with debate. Some of them would even pass.

As opposed to playing political “boss” and cutting off any discussion on the issue.

OF COURSE, THE reason their larger stance never passed was because the majority was sympathetic on abortion, which ultimately drove Madigan into the abortion rights camp on the issue.

CUPICH: Shaking his head at donnybrook that has arisen?

And which now has him condemned by Paprocki. He won’t be able to take Communion – at least not as far as at any Catholic church in Springfield. Although Paprocki later told the Chicago Tribune he’ll restore Madigan if he makes an apologetic statement, then introduce a bill repealing what the Legislature just did.

As to whether Cardinal Blasé Cupich of the Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago would feel compelled to get involved, that remains to be seen. Considering that Paprocki is the bishop who, a few years ago, stirred up a national stink when he held an exorcism at his church in response to the Illinois General Assembly making it legal for same-gender couples to legitimately marry, he may be reinforcing a reputation amongst Catholic as to everything that is wrong with their religious faith.

Cupich himself may want to steer clear of this affair. While Madigan himself joins the ranks of many Catholics who step aside during Mass to let others take Communion, while wondering if this is further evidence their church has lost touch with the daily realities of life.

  -30-

Last man standing? It’s Mr. Speaker!

The Illinois General Assembly completed its business for the 2019 spring session this weekend – one day after they were scheduled to do so on Friday. History will record that they managed to get a lot of things done – including some measures (a casino within Chicago) that in the past seemed next to impossible.

 

MADIGAN: Illinois making recovery?

So perhaps it shouldn’t be surprising that Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, felt the need to issue a congratulatory (of sorts) statement.

BUT READING THROUGH it, I couldn’t help but sense the real purpose was to remind people that Bruce Rauner is political history, while he remains in office. Rauner being the guy who spent four years in office perpetually blaming Madigan for Illinois’ inability to get anything done.

And even implying, at times, that Madigan ought to be the Chicago politico facing criminal indictment – rather than Edward M. Burke!

For as Madigan put it, 2019 will go down as the year of a balanced budget that boosts education funding, helps senior citizens and women and helps pay off $1 billion in old bills.

“While there remains more work to be done to put Illinois fully back on track, in these steps we see what Illinois can be when our leaders stand up for our middle-class families while still seeking common ground,” Madigan said. “When we use our time to build compromises, when we have a governor who encourages Illinois to think big again and when we all commit ourselves to working together to build a stronger Illinois.”

I’M SURE THE ideologues of the rural portions of Illinois will have their own retaliatory rants. But the sense is that we are better off for not having a government that was so anxious to play political games with organized labor that it was willing to disrupt its daily operations.

 

RAUNER: He gone!

Heck, even Illinois House Republican Leader Jim Durkin of suburban Westchester called the budget deal “bipartisan” and praised the fact it did not include tax increases.

Which makes the Madigan proclamation of the session’s end seem all the more the equivalent of a political raspberry – aimed in the direction of Gov. Bruce himself.

  -30-

Will Lightfoot make deferential gestures to Mr. Speaker to get along?

Just a thought about what the relations will be like in coming years between Mayor-elect Lori Lightfoot and the almighty and powerful Speaker of the Illinois House – Michael Madigan.

MADIGAN: Makes conciliatory remarks

It’s probably going to be up to Lightfoot on whether she desires an antagonistic relationship with “Mr. Speaker” himself!

IF SHE IS willing to show gestures indicating that he’s the guy of prominence within Illinois state government, it would be likely that Madigan would give support to the city’s needs and desires.

Of course, one possible key is that many of the people who were inclined to vote for Lightfoot and view her mayoral election as a moment of great historic significance likely are the same people who wish that Madigan somehow could be voted out of office.

I don’t doubt that at least a few of Lightfoot’s followers eagerly would want her to be hostile and do whatever she can to undermine his political influence.

If that happens, we’re going to see a political relationship that will sour quickly – and will make us think of the “good ol’ days” (heavy sarcasm intended) when people like Bruce Rauner and Rod Blagojevich were in positions of authority.

THIS ISSUE IS coming to the forefront because Lightfoot – although she won’t actually be mayor until mid-May, is making her first trip to the Statehouse Scene in Springfield.

LIGHTFOOT: Will she retort in kind?

She’s expected to be there until Thursday, although Madigan felt the need to issue a statement Tuesday welcoming her (sort of) to the capital city.

“I’m proud to welcome Mayor-elect Lightfoot to a Capitol where women, people of color and members of the LGBTQ community (Illinois House Majority leader Greg Harris is openly gay) are serving in critical leadership roles within the Illinois House Democratic caucus,” Madigan said.

I don’t doubt he’s being sincere, in that he wants all of those groups of people to not view him with hostility. As to whether or not he really believes in Lightfoot as mayor, that remains to be seen. But as long as he doesn’t view her as “the enemy,” perhaps she won’t view him that way either.

IT SHOULD BE noted that Madigan publicly always acknowledges the significance of Chicago’s interests in defining his job. I remember back to the days of Richard M. Daley as mayor when Madigan would always downplay talk of his own political power by saying that the mayor was the number one Democratic political official.

PRITZKER: Says he'll get along fine with Lightfoot

In theory, he’s giving Lightfoot the same treatment – respecting her new job title. Will Lightfoot return the gesture?

I couldn’t help but notice comments she made recently to WTTW-TV where she talked of “not wanting to be part of the (Democratic) party apparatus,” and also hinted that perhaps Madigan has held his dual role as Illinois Democratic chairman (since 1998) for too long.

“I respect the speaker, but I believe in term limits,” Lightfoot said – a line that likely will appease the North lakefront crowd that was the base of her voter support this month but had to have Madigan and his loyalists seething deep inside.

SO WE’LL HAVE to see just what kind of relationship Lightfoot is able to create with the state government officials. For what it’s worth, Lightfoot had dinner last week with Gov. J.B. Pritzker at his Gold Coast neighborhood residence, and he says he thinks he’ll get along just great with the new mayor.

Political amateur Lightfoot gets introduction to Statehouse Scene

But just as we’re still waiting to see how well Pritzker and Madigan manage to co-exist, it will be equally intriguing to see how the Lightfoot/Madigan ties play out.

As Madigan said on Tuesday, “I believe Illinois is strongest when Chicago succeeds and when all are heard.” Which certainly is true enough. But it seems we’ll have to see for ourselves just how sincere he is, and how much Lightfoot is willing to put aside her own ego for the betterment of the public good.

And we’ll have to see what kind of reaction she has the first time someone puts a “horseshoe” before her, that so-called sandwich concoction many Springpatchers try to portray as a culinary delight!

  -30-

Harris may be a new majority ‘leader,’ but Madigan is still the ‘boss’

The Illinois House of Representatives made much of the fact they have a new majority leader – and that he’s not just another stereotypical white, male politico.

HARRIS: New House majority leader

State Rep. Greg Harris, D-Chicago, now has the title that technically makes him the head of the Democrats in the Illinois House. He’s the “majority leader,” while state Rep. James Durkin, R-Westchester, remains the “minority leader” since there are fewer Republicans in Springfield these days than Democrats.

DURING HIS 12 years thus far as a state legislator, Harris has gone through political life with the tag as only openly-gay legislator. Even now, the official statement declares Harris to be the “first openly-gay majority leader.”

Which the Democrats in charge are saying is evidence of their superiority when it comes to being open to all kinds of people.

“This is the first in a series of leadership appointments that will be announced in the coming days reflecting the diversity of our state and reflecting our caucus’ approach to the coming legislative session,” party officials said, in their prepared statement.

But before the conservative ideologues start to get all riled up over the idea of one of “those kinds of people” (actually, they’ll probably use cruder terms, but I’m trying to operate a family-style weblog here) being evidence of how much our society has declined, keep in mind that the “majority leader” title may well be the most overblown of all within Illinois government.

FLYNN-CURRIE: The former leader

FOR THE FACT is that both the majority and minority leaders in the Illinois House fall below that of the Illinois House speaker within the legislative pecking order.

And the role of “Mr. Speaker” in Illinois is, has been, and will remain the province of one Michael J. Madigan – who has been a state legislator for some five decades and has been the Speaker for all but two years since 1983.

As for the two-year period in which Madigan was reduced to the role of “minority leader,” it is regarded as a political aberration where Republican ideologues ran amok and we got the historic freak episode of “House Speaker Lee Daniels” with Robert Churchill as majority leader – before sanity was restored by voters in 1996.

MADIGAN: Still in charge!!!

I realize that within a purely legislative perspective, the “majority” leader fills some duties – largely in terms of keeping the individual Democratic legislators in line with the larger policy goals that the Speaker might want to take on.

MEANING IF NEWLY-elected legislator Anne Stava-Murray, D-Naperville, tries to carry on a Madigan-opposition technique to her government service, it will be Harris who gets to crack down on her – thereby leaving Madigan free to deal with larger issues.

Just as former Illinois House majority leader Barbara Flynn Currie, D-Chicago, served in the role of keeping Democrats in line. She served in that role since 1997, and likely would still be doing it if she hadn’t had to step aside for health reasons. Although her presence created the idea of a woman in a significant leadership position, just as how the previous majority leader, former state Rep. Jim McPike of Alton, gave the impression of a downstate official with a significant title.

I’m not trying to diminish the public service of either McPike or Currie. Both had public service stints I’m sure they’re not ashamed of.

It’s just to realize that no matter who has the title, Mike Madigan remains the “boss,” at least of the Springfield political scene – while realizing he’s there to enforce the political desires and needs of Chicago government.

ALL TOO SIMILAR to that scene from the old Star Wars’ film “Return of the Jedi” when the evil Darth Vader who has been running roughshod over the galaxy in the previous films suddenly kneels before the Emperor – his ultimate master.

Who's whom in Illinois political universe?

Which means the ultimate political bout could come following the mayoral election if someone whom Madigan doesn’t feel like kneeling to manages to win. Is he strengthening his hand now for a future political brawl?

But back to Harris – whose role will be to keep the machinery working so that an ultimate demise of the Democratic majority doesn’t become undermined by petty whining of an internal nature.

While the political rhetoric being spewed says Harris has helped achieve progressive goals on issues such as Medicaid and equal rights for same-gender couples, keep in mind they advanced only as far as Madigan himself permitted -- and he's still in charge!

  -30-

Freshman senator already declares candidacy for an Illinois top pol spot

I remember a time some two decades ago at the Statehouse in Springfield interviewing a legislator – Nancy Kaszak from Chicago’s Northwest Side.

STAVA-MURRAY: A freshman playing like powerhouse

What sticks in my mind about this interview was now unproductive it was. She wasn’t able to say much, ultimately explaining her ignorance on the issue by saying, “I’m a freshman” and that leadership hadn’t kept her fully appraised of this particular issue.

I COULDN’T HELP but think back to Kaszak when I heard this week about Anne Stava-Murray – a newly-elected Illinois House member from suburban Naperville. She hasn’t even taken office yet, but already has declared her political intentions for the 2020 election cycle.

She’s am ambitious sort, I’ll give her that. She’s going to run for the U.S. Senate seat from Illinois that will be open next year. That, of course, is the seat currently held (and has been since 1996) by Richard Durbin.

Of course, the presumption is that Durbin will be seeking re-election. If he were going to try moving to another political post, the obvious shift would be to try becoming Illinois’ governor.

DURBIN: Does he have credible opponent?

But that would have entailed him being willing to give up his current Senate seat in order to run in last year’s election cycle – instead of becoming one of J.B. Pritzker’s political supporters. He wasn’t willing to risk his seat – and it may well be he enjoys being one of the Senate’s elder statesmen, with hopes his name will someday be held in the same regard as Everett McKinley Dirksen, who served in D.C. from 1933 until his death in 1969.

THE LONG-AGO Republican from Pekin who became among the GOP elder statemen with a reputation for being willing to work in a bipartisan political manner. A legend, of sorts, in the halls of Capitol Hill.

Except to people like Stava-Murray, who claims that if Durbin were serious, he’d have already formally declared his candidacy. Although I suspect he already has the beginnings of a re-election bid up and running in a low-key manner.

MADIGAN: Her 'real' opponent?

She’s already setting her sights on Durbin, which will have one political benefit for her.

It will help her erase the stink of being just a freshman representative in the Illinois House – one that she was definitely going to face because she has openly talked of the need to dump long-time (a full half-century) Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago, from his political post.

SHE WAS IN full agreement with those Republican ideologues who tried running campaigns last year on the grounds that we need to “Dump Madigan!” and she publicly refused to take the aid that Madigan usually provides to Democrats to support his own Illinois House majority.

It’s not likely she’d have a lengthy future as a representative, since I don’t doubt the Madigan operation is already seeking someone more politically sympathetic to “Mr. Speaker” to challenge Stava-Murray come 2020.

DIRKSEN: Most definitely of the past

But by doing this, she’ll shift the story from her being a renegade legislator to her being one of Illinois’ top politicos (along with Sen. Tammy Duckworth, Gov.-elect Pritzker and whichever of the assorted characters manages to win the mayoral elections to be held next month and in April).

I don’t doubt that Democratic operatives will go out of their way to undermine Stava-Murray and try to ensure she returns to being a political nobody after next year.

BUT I HAVE to wonder what goes through her mindset – if she really thinks she’s the beneficiary of a revolutionary “movement” against Madigan, instead of someone who won because of the intense level of contempt many of us feel for Donald Trump!

TRUMP: His critics led Stava-Murray to win

To me, the explanation is that she’s from Naperville – which once was a part of the great DuPage County Republican organization that was among the strengths of the GOP nationwide.

There once would have been a time when Stava-Murray would have been a Republican aspirant for political office – except that the Republicans have gone so far overboard to become the political party of rural America that I suspect if she had tried to run in the Republican primary last year, she’d have lost. They wouldn't want her. She's a Democrat by default!

It may well be that Stava-Murray is showing off her political ignorance and doesn’t fully realize “which side” she’s on. For her sake, she’s going to have to figure things out and “pick a side,” or else it could turn into a bloody two years for her.

  -30-

Last-minute partisan acts so common

Wis. GOP trying to keep Walker spirit alive

I’ve been hearing many people complain about the politicians in Wisconsin, where the voters dumped Republican Gov. Scott Walker and a GOP-leaning attorney general.

All of which has the still-Republican-leaning General Assembly inclined to use its authority to impose limits on the kind of powers those two positions will have in the future.

Ill. GOP would do the same, if possible

IT’S AS THOUGH the one-time Party of Lincoln has truly been taken over by this Age of Trump we now live in – they want to make sure the Democrats who now hold those two Wisconsin state government positions can’t do anything to undermine the kind of things that Republicans imposed on the Badger State in recent years.

Sleazy? Authoritarian? Un-Democratic, if now outright un-American? All very definitely true. But also not the least bit surprising.

If anything, I’d be surprised if Republican partisans weren’t trying some sort of measures meant to penalize the kinds of people who (in their minds) had the unmitigated gall to vote against them.

For it could be said that Wisconsin voters, by dumping Walker, engaged in the same kind of sentiment we here in Illinois did by voting Bruce Rauner out of office. In many ways, Walker was exactly the kind of governor that Rauner wanted to be here in Illinois.

BUT WHILE WALKER gained national attention for the conservative measures he was able to enact into Wisconsin law during his eight years in office, Rauner’s national attention was for the way in which he was thwarted by the Democratic Party leanings of the Illinois Legislature.

I suspect Democrats in Illinois will go out of their way to erase any traces of the Rauner years. Similar to how Republicans are using the fact that they still control the Legislature in Wisconsin to force the continued existence of their way of doing things.

Wisconsin's progressive spirit merely history?

To hell with the will of the voters! It’s as though modern-day Republican partisans want us all to think they are the natural order of things, and that it was only the opposition's delusions that took away their authority to impose their will upon us all.

Yes, I believe the Republican actions are ignorant, overbearing and border on corrupt. But I’ve seen enough political people to know they’re not surprising.

THEY ACTUALLY REMIND me of the final days of 1996 – which is when the Republican domination of Illinois government that resulted from the November 1994 elections came to an end.

For the 1996 elections saw the return of Michael Madigan as Illinois House speaker. Which caused the soon-to-be no-longer Republican majority to engage in one final act of overbearance on their part before Madigan regained a say in the legislative process.

Remember back a couple of decades when state officials were determined to oppose then-Mayor Richard Daley’s desires to turn Meigs Field into a public garden of sorts? Which caused the Legislature to vote for a state takeover of the city-owned airport.

Which was little more than a “screw you” to Democrats and to city government officials (who are, by and large, the same thing). Which is why I always got a kick out of the eventual outcome of the Meigs debacle – with city officials sending in the bulldozers to demolish the airport (and carve giant “x’” into the runways to make them unusable) in the middle of the night.

IT MAKES ME wonder if Wisconsin officials will come up with some equally-diabolical means of getting back at their Republican counterparts for trying to limit the powers of future governors.

Meigs Field gone, despite last-ditch GOP efforts to try to preserve it

Which I don’t doubt in the least that Republican legislators would be more than willing to fully restore when the day comes that cheese heads re-elect a Republican to fill the post of the state’s chief executive.

This is all petty and ridiculous, and certainly not in the spirit of a government looking out for the best interests of its citizens.

But it is the reality we have devolved into in this 21^st Century – that of governments that think they can only operate if everything is rigged in their own ideological favor!

  -30-

Who’s the boss (and I don’t mean that old television program) of Illinois?

Will new governor have to take marching orders … 

J.B. Pritzker has been governor-elect for a week now and has already created a team of advisers (including Republicans such as former Gov. Jim Edgar and former Illinois Senate leader Christine Radogno amongst them) to advise him on how to go about actually running Illinois government.

Yet there are those who are persisting with such political rhetoric as to say the only person who’s really going to influence him is the guy who will actually run the state.

… from Mr. Speaker himself?

NONE OTHER THAN Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago. As though they can’t let go of all the trash talk that they tried to use to tie everybody in sight to Madigan so it would cost them re-election.

It didn’t work. Yet we’re still hearing the trash talk.

I got my kick out of the Daily Herald newspaper account where Jeanne Ives, the ideologue who tried (but failed) to beat Bruce Rauner herself, said she thinks Illinois is safe from any sort of progressive tax hike.

Although state government certainly could use the money to make real progress toward paying off all the bills it accumulated during Rauner’s partisan efforts to undermine organized labor’s influence, Ives said she believes Madigan won’t let the Democrat-dominated General Assembly approve any such thing.

Radogno and Edgar (below) … 

SHE SAYS MADIGAN is political astute enough to realize a large segment of the population would disapprove, possibly even revolt, and would start electing Republicans again if Democrats get to brazen.

“I think Mike Madigan will still run the state,” Ives told the suburban-based newspaper. “He is savvy and knows the state can’t withstand another tax increase.”

So is J.B. really nothing more than Madigan’s puppet; expected to sign off on whatever bills Madigan (with state Senate President John Cullerton’s cooperation) allows to get as far as the gubernatorial desk?

… are among those advising J.B. these days

Or is Ives, the state senator from Wheaton (no longer a bastion of the Republican Party) merely trying to maintain a semblance of relevance in today’s Illinois political age?

THIS IS A debate I have heard often – trying to figure out who’s really in charge these days! Because it is likely (if not downright predictable) that there will be a falling-out between Pritzker and Madigan. A rivalry will develop within the party over who ought to be listening to whom. Which is why people used to think Illinois would never have Democrats as governor -- Madigan wouldn't permit anyone who could undermine his influence!

Pritzker may well adopt the attitude that the people picked HIM to be governor, while Madigan may well feel J.B. is a political amateur who’s never run NOTHING and who ought to leave the governing to the big boys who have been doing this for awhile.

I’ve even heard it said that Pritzker is in a unique position to challenge such incumbent thought because he’s so wealthy. Similar to how Rauner tried to buy the Republican Party political structure to support his own desires, Pritzker has the kind of money to where he could be the guy that Democrats turn to for political support, instead of having to rely on Madigan’s labor connections to raise their political funds.

Particularly since within the Democratic Party structures across the nation, there are splits between establishment types supporting the current structure, and those who want a more politically progressive structure.

AFTER ALL, WHAT’S the point of having a not-so-liberal Democratic Party? You might as well be a Republican, is their attitude. Madigan himself is most definitely of the party’s establishment – a guy who backs the Democrats because of his support for organized labor and its interests.

IVES: Trying to retain relevance

There are times when he seems to dread having to deal with more liberal elements and social causes. Only backing them when he can figure a way to turn them to his own interests. But that may be the relevant point – Madigan is a political mastermind who can figure ways to use issues for a greater good, so to speak.

We all saw how Rauner’s efforts to use his money to buy a political party for himself failed to the point where some now wonder if the Illinois Republican Party has anything left worth use! Could Pritzker be just as inept without Madigan’s mindset on his side.

Could it be in everybody’s interest that the two men figure out a way to cooperate? Which could mean the true threat to the people of Illinois is that Democrats are not really the united force for liberal causes in the way that elements of the modern-day Republicans have become the party wishing to force conservatism down all our throats.

  -30-

EXTRA: Illinois GOP strategy of “Dump Madigan!” seems to fail again

Illinois House Speaker/state Democratic Chairman Michael Madigan is the big winner of Election Night ’18 – and not just because he got re-elected to his Illinois House seat that is the base for all his political operations.

MADIGAN: Prevailed, big time!

Madigan, after all, was running unopposed for his legislative post representing the residents of Chicago who live in the area surrounding Midway Airport.

SO IT’S NOT like there was a chance he’d go off to defeat and political retirement following a career in Illinois government dating back to 1970 when he was one of many delegates who helped craft the current version of Illinois’ state Constitution.

But Madigan’s name has been dragged through the muck by just about every Republican running for just about every single office. The theme being that every Democrat is nothing more than a political hack who takes his (or her) marching orders from the almighty-and-powerful Illinois House speaker.

The leader in recent years of such strategy is soon-to-be former Gov. Bruce Rauner, who went through his campaign repeatedly blaming Madigan for everything that Rauner was unable to accomplish during his four years as governor.

His rhetoric often went so far over the top as to imply Madigan’s actions were criminal and that an indictment would be forthcoming, if only there were a sense of true justice in the world.

PRITZKER: $171.1 million spent for Springfield move

YET THE RAUNER defeat was so apparent that the governor made his concession call to Democrat J.B. Pritzker (who supposedly is Madigan’s hand-puppet and gay marriage spouse) less than an hour after the polls closed in Illinois. Some information sources didn’t even have preliminary vote tallies to report, yet the insider speculation was such that it wasn’t worth waiting in a sense of desperate hope that something would come up.

The man who was banking on the concept of a corrupt Madigan scaring voters away instead became a complete failure based off his strategy – which really is the same one that Republicans also tried using back in 2010 when Republican Bill Brady was defeated by Democrat Pat Quinn.

Who, by the way, told the Chicago Tribune on Tuesday he was anxious to see Rauner be replaced as governor.

RAOUL: Illinois' attorney general-elect

But like I already wrote, other candidates tried tying their opponents to Madigan, with Republican attorney general hopeful Erika Harold going so far as to say she’d never take orders from the speaker – and implied she’d use the post to conduct the investigations against Madigan that Rauner always fantasized about having done.

YET WITH THE early vote tallies in, Democrat Kwame Raoul held a solid lead, taking majorities in five of the six counties that comprise the Chicago metropolitan area. Only McHenry County seemed to prefer Harold – the one-time Miss America who can now add this defeat to her list of failed political aspirations on her part.

Then again, McHenry is also the lone Chicago-area county that liked the idea of “President Donald Trump” back in the 2016 election cycle. While in Cook County proper, Raoul had some 73 percent of the overall vote early on.

It’s going to take a real mighty blow from downstate Illinois to overcome the solid 64/34 percent lead Raoul is holding across the state over Harold Tuesday night.

There’s also candidates such as incumbent Congress members Randy Hultgren and Peter Roskam, who were lagging behind early on to Democrats Lauren Underwood and Sean Casten respectively. And in the area around Champaign/Urbana, Betsy Dirksen Londrigan had a lead over Rep. Rodney Davis, R-Ill.

WHICH, IF THE Dems prevail in all, would add to the total tally of politicos who would serve as counterweights to the ideological nonsense spewed by Donald Trump.

HAROLD: Another defeat, will she try again?

Casten, in particular, faced a campaign strategy of being labeled as being a mere flip side of the same Madigan political coin. Instead, perhaps it seems many saw him as a potential ally to the man who stood up to the Rauner ideological tactics of the past four years and one who could stand up to anything absurd that Trump would try to do during the next two.

I’m not saying that the electorate of Illinois is all that enthralled by Mike Madigan. I’m aware of polls showing many people think he’s just another political hack. Even though he's now one with even more power -- since it seems his Illinois House majority is even larger now and can enable him to override gubernatorial vetoes single-handedly.

But perhaps one of the lessons we learn from Election ’18 is one that truly would benefit us all – candidates are most likely to prevail if they can sway people as to why we should vote for them. Not just why we should despise the opposition.

  -30-

Illinois F***ed? So admits Rauner!

This may well become the election cycle of the candidate who openly admitted what a mess Illinois government has become.

Of course, there also are those who will say the reason Illinois has become so f***ed up is because of Bruce Rauner himself.

SO YES, I find it sort of amusing to learn of the governor’s latest re-election campaign ad – the one called “Unholy Union” that portrays a clergyman presiding over the “wedding” of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan and his “bride,” J.B. Pritzker.

With said clergyman ending the service by proclaiming “Illinois f***ed” (with the beep blipping out the use of the obscenity). Implying that a vote for J.B. instead of Bruce come Nov. 6 will be to support a political union that will unleash all kinds of bad things upon the people of the Land of Lincoln.

Kind of odd in the use of gay marriage imagery, since there are those ideologues amongst our state who want to believe Rauner himself has been too lax in fighting against certain moralistic issues such as gay marriage.

But I’m sure Rauner is gambling that many ideologues will view the idea of two men being married, hear the names of “Madigan” and “Pritzker” and will become so grossed out that they will automatically vote “no” to notion of J.B. as governor.

AS FOR THOSE people who will become offended with Rauner for mocking a gay marriage image? He probably figures those people weren’t going to vote for him no how. No real loss there!

Let’s be honest; things did become significantly worse in Illinois during the Age of Rauner – largely because he came in with a solidly anti-union agenda. He wanted to play hardball against organized labor to try to reduce the influence of unions within Illinois government.

That is why we had nothing accomplished for those first two years of Rauner’s time in office, and why most political people have put the concept of dumping Bruce Rauner from office as their priority in this year’s election cycle.

If Madigan were truly the hard-core obstructionist that Rauner has consistently tried to portray him as being, we’d likely have countless horror stories from the many other GOP-oriented governors the House speaker has had to work with. Which we don’t.

SO YES, ILLINOIS is “F***ed.” We heard it from Bruce himself.

Perhaps a step in the right direction to fixing that is to dump Rauner and put people in charge who are interested in operating government – instead of trying to score political points for themselves at the expense of the unions and behaving as though everyone who disagrees with their ideology IS the problem.

Of course, all this “Dump Madigan” rhetoric isn’t new. It was the basis of gubernatorial campaigns in 2010 and 2014. Rauner is merely upping the ante of the campaign tactics that he thinks were successful when he first ran for election. He thinks he won, so it must have worked. Ignoring that he has been a Republican serving as governor, having to deal with a whole batch of Democrats in other political posts.

In fact, one theme I oft have heard from Republican partisans this election cycle is that we need to have Rauner in office to hold in check the actions that other officials might try to do.

ONE COULD ARGUE just as strong that we needed all those Democrats in place to hold in check Rauner’s own ideological leanings – which actually were very clear and open when he first ran for office. He’s anti-union. Everything else (including all those social issues the ideologues get so worked up over) is of lesser importance.

All this anti-Madigan rhetoric is spread throughout the campaigning; from the television spots proclaiming Madigan and congressional candidate Sean Casten to be “two sides of the same coin” to Republican attorney general candidate Erika Harold proclaiming, “I’ll never take orders from Mike Madigan.”

Seriously, what’s she going to do if she wins, then finds her office as the defense attorney for the Illinois House speaker? As much as some want to think of the Illinois AG as a super-prosecutor, she’s actually more likely to find herself defending Illinois when things get screwed up.

Unless she’s also more interested in playing partisan politics, rather than governing for the people. A concept that, to be honest, is “F***ed” up.

  -30-