Winters: Jones sees Jefferson as black first, Madigan’s guy second

3 comments May 9th, 2008

Rep. Dave Winters, R-Shirland, recently made what struck me as a remarkable observation about the politics of race and leadership in the General Assembly. In response, Rep. Chuck Jefferson, D-Rockford, provided some insight into how he sees those powerful, yet delicate, dynamics.

Jefferson

I was talking to Winters about the status of Rockford Mayor Larry Morrissey’s truancy agenda — sponsored by Jefferson — and he said he was confident that Jefferson could garner Senate President Emil Jones Jr.’s support for Morrissey’s plan once it clears the House and lands in the Senate.

I’m no expert on Jefferson’s relationship with Jones, I told Winters, but I wouldn’t think Jefferson would necessarily have the inside track to Jones. Last spring, Jefferson joined House Speaker Michael Madigan’s leadership team. Jones and Madigan, both Chicago Democrats, are feuding. So my first assumption would be that Jones would view Jefferson as a Madigan surrogate and would therefore be hostile toward him, I told Winters.

Winters

“I would assume that he is not seen as Madigan’s guy as much as he is the Black Caucus guy,” Winters responded. “Emil probably has very good relations with the Black Caucus.”

Members of the House Black Caucus — the collection of African-American state representatives, all Democrats — pick three members of Madigan’s exclusive leadership team. Last spring, they picked Jefferson for one of those three seats.

Like Jefferson, Jones also is black.

“Blood is stronger than water,” Winters said.

Jefferson disagreed with Winters’ interpretation. In fact, Jefferson suggested the sentiment may be just the opposite of what Winters suggested — that perhaps Jones is disappointed in black House members for following Madigan’s lead.

“Jones has some animosity toward the House members as it relates to the Black Caucus because we are under Mike Madigan’s reign,” Jefferson said.

“Well, he’s the speaker of the House. That’s who we supposedly follow. (Jones is) upset sometimes that maybe we don’t follow his lead the way he feels we should. And that’s OK. That’s his perception of the situation. Just like Emil holds his members accountable, we’re accountable to Mike Madigan. And because we’re accountable to Mike Madigan, it doesn’t get us favoritism with the president of the Senate.”

Jones spokeswoman Cindy Davidsmeyer declined to comment.

Jones

“(Jones) views that sometimes it’s maybe not (the House Black Caucus) being in his corner as it relates to a lot of things. Well, that’s not the case,” Jefferson said.

“If we’ve got to pick an issue, we’re probably going to be more supportive of the House issue, under Mike Madigan’s reign, than we would under his leadership as president of the Senate. I don’t think we’re enemies. But I don’t think that I can get anything done (in the Senate) any sooner than (Sen.) Dave Syverson (R-Rockford) in the Senate. If anyone is going to champion a bill, I’d certainly want to go and talk to President Jones about the bill. But I think that we need to pick it up on that side with Sen. Syverson to make sure he’s doing everything.”

Jefferson concluded, “We need to be able to cut across party lines. And the fact that I’m black and Emil is black, I don’t think carries a lot of weight with Emil at this point in time.”

What’s Madigan Up To? Updated X3

1 comment February 18th, 2008

A great pastime at the Capitol is speculating on the objectives and motives of House Speaker Michael Madigan, D-Chicago. Madigan seldom speaks in public and he generally is the last of state leaders to show his cards.

When he does show them, he tends to stake out a contrarian position. By positioning himself opposite other interests, he creates leverage to accomplish his goals — whatever they may be.

This spring session, Madigan was the first to show a card when he spread word last week that no major initiative will clear the House, the chamber that he controls, unless it contains language effectively pre-empting Gov. Rod Blagojevich from attaching rules elaborating on its thrust.

It’s uncanny for Madigan to announce such a radical position before the governor has a chance to set forth his own strategy Wednesday in his State of the State/budget address. Then again, Blagojevich and Madigan are great political adversaries. Together with Senate President Emil Jones Jr., a third Chicago Democrat allied with Blagojevich, the two last year faced off in a battle last so fierce that session literally dragged from the spring straight into this year.

But to truly understand the extraordinary nature of Madigan’s pre-emptive strike, you must consider the actual substance of his plan. By requiring all major bills to include language prohibiting the governor or his agencies from attaching administrative rules, the strategy could potentially shut down the legislative process.

In other words, Madigan has kicked off the session with a strategy that may do nothing but disrupt and delay the legislative process.

If Jones continues to side with Blagojevich through this session, he is unlikely to adopt Madigan’s strategy in the Senate. If the Senate rejects the strategy, and Madigan refuses to budge, it will be impossible for the two chambers to agree on legislation. And even if Jones does capitulate, and both the Senate and House do agree on legislation including the no-rules language, the governor could simply veto the language and send each bill back to lawmakers.

Lawmakers would then need to decide whether to override the governor. But I’m getting way ahead of myself here.

The bottom line is that Madigan does not often bluff. If he does bluff, he is not one to quickly go back on it.

Blagojevich and Jones, for their part, don’t tend to quickly swallow Madigan’s wishes.

UPDATE 1

Rep. Chuck Jefferson. D-Rockford, supports Madigan’s new strategy. Jefferson is a member of Madigan’s leadership team, so this is not surprising.

Jefferson echoed the speaker’s position, articulated last week by House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie, that the governor directly assaulted the Legislature when he declared that the body’s Joint Committee on Administrative Rules, which reviews the governor’s administrative rules, lacks the power to reject his rules.

“I think it’s a good idea if in fact the governor is going to continue to try and pull the political maneuvers to undercut what JCAR is in place to do,” Jefferson said. “I think it’s to the governor’s advantage at this point, but he doesn’t seem to think so.”

UPDATE 2

Rockford GOP Sen. Dave Syverson also supports Madigan’s strategy, at least the concept, he said.

Syverson said state agencies have misinterpreted his bills when they write the rules, but he could not think of any examples. He said he is then forced to pass another bill to clarify the first legislation.

“I agree with the Speaker to the extent that we need to put more in there in regards to the major issues because the governor has taken more leeway to expand definitions … taking it way beyond what the intent was and we need to rein that in,” Syverson said.
“The House version may go too far but the what’s currently in place does not go far enough. There may be some room for compromise, which we hope we can do.”

UPDATE 3

In line with the House Republican party line, Rep. Dave Winters, R-Shirland, disagrees with the House Democrats’ plan. He said rule-writing needs to be done by people with the expertise in that bill, such as those at the state agencies.

“I think the administrative rules should be written by the agencies that are to administer them,” Winters said, “not by a bunch of legislators who are not bureaucrats.”

Winters v. Little v. Woods UPDATED X1

1 comment January 23rd, 2008

Rep. Dave Winters, R-Shirland, finished last year with $28,011.90 on hand after raising $27,952.81 and spending $21,198.03. Winters faces two challengers in the Nov. 4 general election, so watch for him to step up fundraising in the coming year.

Winters’ biggest contributions include:

The challengers are Democrat Clint Little, a Loves Park alderman, and Gerry Woods of the Green Party.

Little has not registered his campaign fund with the State Board of Elections. He told me Wednesday that he will not start fundraising until after the Feb. 5 primary election.

“I’m going to start everything after the primary,” he said. “And even that’s going to be limited (fundraising) because I’m going to watch who I take money from. I think that’s half of the problem, half of what’s wrong with our government as a whole. I haven’t really been doing a lot with the lobbyists or different organizations.”

He added, “I usually raise a lot of the funds out of my own pocket. I’m going to be very selective who I take money from.”

Woods also has not registered a campaign fund with the state. I could not reach Woods.

UPDATE 1

Winters responded to Little’s fundraising plan: “That’s good to hear. We hadn’t heard much out of him.”