Changes in the House Rules that Would Allow Ordinary Members To Be More than Digits

The deposing of Mike Madigan, dictator of the Illinois House brought to mind my first session in Springfield–1973.

Cal Skinner, Jr., campaigning in DeKalb with Listenijng Post in 1976.

W. Robert Blair, the Will County House Speaker who had gubernatorial ambitions which he thought would be fueled by of the Regional Transportation Authority’s creation, concentrated power in his hands, although not as much as Madigan has.

To win a second term against the challenge by Henry Hyde, Blair had to decentralize power.

It was decentralized so far that the Chairmen of the Appropriations Committee was allowed to hire their own staffers.

However, as important as getting rid of Madigan is changing the rules to allow ordinary members to have power (except for the last week of the session, which I think will always be controlled by the leaders).

There are way too many committees. 

People can’t serve well on more than three, I think, but the proliferation is a way Madigan has been able to hike salaries for members (because those who chair committees get extra cash). 

I think the large number of committees is a deliberate attempt to keep members from talking to each other and to Senators. 

If members have little time to converse, leaders have more control over the process.

In the seventies, I had time to get to know both Democrats and Republicans. 

One finds out that every member is there for some reason…even if one thinks it is not a good one. 

The House is truly a representative body. 

The nineties were dismal, under both Madigan and Daniels (more under Daniels from my perspective because Madigan did not find most of my bills a threat).

My first session was the second of Bob Blair’s.

He must have acted dictatorially.

In Henry Hyde’s challenge, I did not support him. 

Since I could count, I voted for Blair.  (Hyde had no chance of winning.)

However, the changes in rules led to the most decentralized General Assembly of my eight sessions. 

Apparently, supporters of Blair demanded changes for their support.

Other rule changes that would benefit ordinary members include

  • calling bills on the calendar in numeric order until all numbers called (even if it takes more than one day).  Now, no one has any idea when their bills might be called.  All power resides with the Speaker.
  • mandatory assignment to committee (within some period of time, maybe two days).  A Speaker should not be able to kill an idea by denying a chance for consideration.  (It seems to me that consideration should be mandated in committee, but I don’t know how to do that.)
  • majority vote to overrule the chair. Sometimes a ruling is so egregious that a majority disagrees.  Now I think a super-majority is required to override the Chair.  (I remember succeeding in such a motion when in the minority. Acting Speaker Ted Lechowicz was livid.)
  • no limit on the number of bills one can introduce or the number than can be considered on the floor.  Ideas do not spring equally from members.  There are always a number of folks who are just place sitters. 

Under Democratic Speakers, Chicago Democrats sat in the back row and called themselves the Order of the Mushroom.

They told people they werr kept in the dark and fed sh*t.


Comments

Changes in the House Rules that Would Allow Ordinary Members To Be More than Digits — 1 Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *