In his last election Speaker of the Illinois House Michael J. Madigan received 17,155 votes in the primary and ran unopposed in the general election. He is the longest-serving speaker of any state legislature in the United States. He has become quite wealthy as a consequence of his elective office.
In Illinois state legislators do very little. Mostly they rubber-stamp the decisions of the leadership. Consequently, nobody is more responsible for Illinois’s fiscal mess than Mike Madigan, as this City Journal article by Daniel DiSalvo points out:
Illinois currently holds the dubious distinction of being the most fiscally derelict state in America. In 2015, Moody’s downgraded Illinois’ general-obligation bonds from A3 to Baa1, the lowest ranking among the 50 states. The state’s pension systems are only 40 percent funded, the worst ratio in the country. Forbes rated Illinois’ business climate 38th among states last year. Chicago, the state’s economic engine, has been cratering under the weight of huge pension costs, and had to enact a $500 million property-tax increase last year. In addition, Chicago’s schools are in crisis, and—most disturbing of all—the city has watched its crime rate explode. The migration rate out of Illinois over the last five years has been the highest of any state.
Digging so deep a fiscal and economic hole takes effort. Many people doubtless share some of the culpability. But if one person should be singled out as responsible for Illinois’ political and economic mess, it would be House Speaker Madigan. Unlike Rauner, who just arrived on the political scene, Madigan is at the heart of Illinois’ political establishment. Chicago magazine has long ranked him among the “most powerful†people in the Windy City.
Madigan, 74, has been involved in electoral politics for 43 years and has served as speaker of the Illinois House for 31 of those—making him the longest-serving state house speaker in U.S. history. His duties hardly stop there. He is also the chairman of the state Democratic Party, a partner in Chicago’s most successful property-tax law firm, and—last, but not least—a committeeman for Chicago’s 13th Ward, a post he has held since he was 27. These four positions and their associated networks of patronage appointees, legislative staffers, corporate lobbyists, campaign donors, industry clients, and family members are what some in Illinois refer to as “Madiganistan†or the “Madigan industrial complex.â€
Mr. Madigan has made his objectives quite clear:
- Maintain his own control over the state legislature.
- Maintain Democratic majorities in the state legislature.
Getting his daughter, presently serving as state attorney, elected governor might be in the mix there somewhere.
The citizens of Illinois, still predominantly Democrats, demonstrated their displeasure with “business as usual” by electing a Republican, Bruce Rauner, governor in 2015. Very little has been accomplished since then because of the stonewalling of the legislature. Lest one think that the problem is Rauner’s, can anyone seriously contend that we would have been better off if Pat Quinn had been elected?
Illinois presently has the highest net rate of domestic outmigration of any state. They’ve done what they can at the ballot box. Now they’re voting with their feet.
It seems Alaska passed you this year, but the great Illinois advantage in the race is that you’ve been losing people for so long.
Interesting to note just what bullshit all those stories about California emptying out were. We’ve been net positive throughout which, given that we aren’t exactly the land of cheap real estate and low taxes, is amazing. We don’t even have drinking water and people still keep coming.
Don’t declare victory yet, Michael. The table from Governing includes both domestic and international migration. Here’s an article from The Sacramento Bee. In terms of total numbers California has the largest domestic outmigration.
From another more recent article:
If California didn’t have substantial immigration from Mexico, China, and India (just to name the biggies), it would be losing total population.
It wouldn’t be ‘victory’ to me, I’d love it if more people left. We have enough upward pressure on housing costs and more than enough traffic.
Why is the source you cite talking about our growth being under 1%? That contradicts the tables you link to which don’t show anything nearly so low, in fact show closer to three times that number.
And our population is actually on the young side. Sixth youngest state, which surprised me. http://overflow.solutions/demographic-data/what-is-the-average-age-of-the-each-state/ That doesn’t look to me like we’re bleeding young people.
We are among the most highly-taxed, heavily-regulated states, and probably among the worst places to try and buy or rent a home, and people still keep coming. Every five years we add a whole Wyoming. Despite our best efforts we seem unable to stop people coming here. Jesus, people, don’t you know we’re the Great Failed Liberal Titanic? Go away, already. Go to Kansas they’re not even slightly liberal and. . . Oh, wait, they’re losing population.
Rumors of California’s death are greatly exaggerated. California’s been on the verge of falling apart since I was born here 62 years ago. It’s like the way my doctor keeps telling me I’m ‘pre’ hypertensive. I’ve been ‘pre’ since about 1990.
By the way, I’m looking right across the Bay at a big city that’s 34% foreign born, quite a bit higher than Chicago’s 20%, and we seem to be doing quite well with all our foreign-born.
Demographics of San Francisco:
Demographics of Chicago:
Another part of the story: the median income in San Francisco is $72,000; in Chicago it’s $36,000. That elucidates Emanuel’s strategy a bit. He’s looking at San Franciso or New York. Question: what to you do with half of Chicago’s population? Other than drive them out, I mean.
5 more days.