State Rep. Steve Andersson Not Running for Re-Election

The poster child for House Republicans who voted to override Governor Bruce Rauner’s veto of the Democrats’ 33% personal income tax hike, Steve Andersson, announced last night on Chicago TV that he was not running for re-election.

This photo of State Rep. Steve Andersson shaking hands with House Speaker Mike Madigan after the Governor’s income tax veto was overridden appeared numerous places after the Chicago Tribune put it on its front page.

Andersson represents the Sun City part of McHenry County.

The 65th State Representative District map, drawn by local political consultant Drew Veeneman.

At the time of the vote, Andersson was the Floor Spokesman for House Republicans.

Dan Ugaste

House Minority Leader Jim Durkin soon replaced Andersson with the more conservative Peter Breen.

When Andersson won the seat, there was a three way race among him, Dan Ugaste and Debbie Miller.

Anderson beat second place candidate Ugaste by 1410 votes.

Miller was 923 behind Ugaste.

Republican primary election results in 2014 in the 65th House District, which Steve Andersson won.

All three candidates were from the southern part of the district.


State Rep. Steve Andersson Not Running for Re-Election — 19 Comments

  1. We will find out the spoils Andersson sold us out for soon enough.

  2. There was not enough time for legislators or the public to evaluate the contents of the 3 budget bills, which were all passed on the same day.

    The three budget bills are:

    – revenue bill (included the income tax hike)

    – spending bill

    – budget implementation bill.

    Plus, those three bills, in a highly unusual scheme, included no method to distribute state funding to school districts.

    Thus the passing of the budget set up another planned crisis.

    The education funding bill is Senate Bill 1 (SB 1).

  3. 14 more to go. Curious what position Madigan will appoint him too.

  4. Sigh… Mark, wrong again.

    First, the drafts of the bills were shared before the day of. The legislators knew what were in the bills. They had a full analysis from their staff on the bills. It’s just an excuse you want to make.

    Second, there wasn’t a “highly unusual scheme” in the budget including no mehthod to distribute state funding to school districts. First, the approp Bills NEVER include a distribution method for education funding. Second, the Republican budget proposals contained the EXACT same language requiring an evidence based formula for k-12 education funding. That GOP budget proposal – introduced and sponsored by now Senate minority leader Bill Brady, and supported by Sen. McConnaughay, House Minority leader Durkin, and Governor Rauner (who said he would sign that GOP package) – included the exact same language.

  5. Also, for those of you who think that Steve Andersson sold you out for some kind of job, you don’t know Steve Andersson. He is one of the most ethical and honest legislators in Springfield, and he voted the way that he did because he believed (accurately) that it was the right thing to do.

  6. Went to college with Dan Ugaste and his wife, Denise and know them well.

    A principled intelligent and likeable man who truly believes in the idea of public service.

    Geneva made a mistake by electing his opponent who proved to be the contrary.

  7. David Stieper… Steve Andersson is EXACTLY what you just described – principled, intelligent, likable, and a person that truly believes in the idea of public service.

    Andersson making a decision that that you disagree with doesn’t make him NOT any of those things.

  8. Don’t you mean steve andersson the democrat and Madigan puppet

  9. Voting on bills last minute budget bills, the contents of which one has not had time to review, and the bikls were orchestrated by the opposing party, the bills do not allow state money to be distributed to local school districts, the associated bill to distribute money to school districts completely changes the state education funding model to local school districts, and the opposing party in the majority did not call the budget bills for months, and the opposing party has many times in the past waited until the waning day or days of the session to call budget bills, is not intelligent.

  10. Alabama, drafts of the bills were share with who on July 1st.

    All legislators?

    Or only certain legislators?


    State Representative Jeanne Ives has a post stating most state legislators were given a 583 page budget bill 45 minute before having to vote on it.


    Jeanne Ives

    State Representative 42nd District

    Hidden Budget Items Cost Taxpayers Even More

    July 17, 2017

    The 583-page state budget bill that most legislators were only given 45 minutes or so to read before having to vote on it contains several hidden ‘provisions’ that will cost taxpayers and local communities millions of dollars above and beyond the income tax hike that was passed the same day in a separate bill.”

  11. Next Alabama it is a highly unusual scheme to not have a way to distribute funding to schools a this point in the year.


    The three budget bills were:

    – revenue bill (contained state income tax hike)

    – spending bill

    – budget implementation bill (BIMP)


    Alabama is calling those appropriation bills?


    So why is this year different from other years Alabama?

  12. Next Alabama, the new evidenced based funding formula fo distributing state funding to local school districts is in Senate Bill 1.

    Are you saying the GOP budget proposal included the language now found in Senate Bill 1?

    If so what bill number was that?

  13. Do I have to do all your homework for you?

    Both the bipartisan budget that passed and the GOP alternative included the exact same language about K-12 funding using an “evidence based funding formula”. I repeat: the exact same language.

    To claim that this was some kind of last minute trick by the Dems is a blatant lie.

  14. **Alabama is calling those appropriation bills?**

    Huh? I am referring to the appropriation bill as an appropriation bill. That is correct.

    And the bipartisan approp bill that passed – SB6 – and the GOO alternative – SB2214 (page 533 to make it even easier for you) had the exact same language:

    Section 5. The following amounts, or so much thereof as may be necessary, are appropriated to the Illinois State Board of Education for Evidence-Based Funding, provided for in Section 18-8.15 of the School Code:

  15. And one last comment – Jeanne Ives isn’t telling the truth.

  16. Steve Reick

    Illinois House District 63

    The Pension Shift Buried in the Illinois Budget

    August 10, 2017

    As Nancy Pelosi famously said during the Obamacare debate: “(W)e have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it…”

    That quote must also be applied to the Budget Implementation Bill (BIMP) passed by the Illinois General Assembly on July 3rd.

    This Bill (SB 42) was the triggering mechanism needed to implement the provisions of SB 9 (revenue bill) and SB 6 (spending bill), which the Governor vetoed and which were overridden by the General Assembly.

    It is no exaggeration to say that we had less than one hour to review this 742 page behemoth; even a graduate of the Evelyn Wood speed reading course would have been hard pressed to get through it with any sense of comprehension.”

    What has resulted is things coming to our attention that we didn’t originally see, much like rocks rising to the surface of a farm field in the spring.”

  17. The evidence based funding formula was not defined in SB 6 (Spending Bill / Appropriations Bill).

    That’s a big problem, because it prevents state funding from being distributed to school districts.

    The evidence based funding formula is found in SB 1 (school funding bill) and is currently being negotiated.

    It is very unusual to pass an appropriations bill and not have a method to distribute state funding to school districts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.