Good stuff from the Sun-Times editorial board today:
In the House, a more modest temporary income tax increase failed, garnering only 42 of 70 Democratic votes. [House Speaker Michael] Madigan voted for it but did little else to get it passed. Historically, Madigan has been a fiscally conservative guy, so to an extent his recalcitrance on a tax increase fits. And House members tend to be more cautious than senators because they face voters more often.
But none of that fully explains Madigan's obstinacy. It's not unreasonable to suspect he has his own agenda -- one that has more to do with holding on to power or his daughter's political future than with what's best for Illinois.
Madigan may be worried about preserving his Democratic majority -- a tax increase vote could hurt a few legislators come election time. But what's the point of having a legislative majority if you don't use it to get things done?
Majority for the sake of majority -- that's what we're apparently seeing in the Illinois House these days. What's the point, indeed.
fedyo dem (not verified) on Fri, 07/03/2009 - 17:47
"Majority for the sake of majority"? Attention Sun-Times... this is hardly news.
Nearly a decade ago, I asked a Democratic State Representative that I know who has solid ties to the Chicago Machine to describe the legislative legacy of Michael Madigan. The Representative could not help but laugh.
Until Lisa got into politics, Michael Madigan's legislative legacy (and remember, he has been House Speaker for 24 out of the last 26 years) consisted of making sure that at least 60 House members bleated out the name "Madigan" every two years during the vocal roll-call vote for Speaker.