June 29, 2005

Very interesting

Rich Miller, of Capitol Fax fame, writes a very interesting piece about the clout of Speaker Madigan, his long struggle to pass a predatory lender regulatory bill to restrain their charging as much as 1000% interest to poor and hard up customers and blighting neighborhoods, and mentions our Senator Jacobs in the process.

Serious, intense clout usually only comes into play at the Illinois Statehouse on behalf of giant corporations, powerful political organizations, influential labor unions, entrenched bureaucracies, or other unstoppable special interests.

Rarely, if ever, is the full force of a legislative leader's office deployed to push a bill that is opposed by the powers that be and has no significant Statehouse constituency. But that happened last month, and it occurred almost entirely under the media's radar screen.

...

So, Madigan began pounding on individual Senate Democrats. At one point, the pressure was so intense that appointed freshman Sen. Mike Jacobs (D-East Moline), who voted against the bill the first time around, complained to the media about Madigan's attempt to dictate terms to the Senate and vowed to continue his opposition. But the speaker never eased the pressure and Sen. Jacobs and two other Democrats eventually voted for the legislation, giving it enough votes to pass the Senate.

Senator Mike fighting for predatory lenders? Say it ain't so! I'm sure there's more to this than meets the eye and Jacobs has a good explanation, likely that he disagreed with certain provisions in the bill. I hope.

6 Comments:

At 6/29/2005 9:56 AM, Blogger diehard said...

Why did Jacobs vote against a bill that protects the poorest of the poor? And why does the speaker have to put so much pressure on him to support it anyway? I though Jacobs was supposed to be a Democrat.
The rich people are more than ampley represented without Democrats defecting and going over to the other side.

 
At 6/29/2005 10:05 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Guess it's the old "ya dances with those what brung ya" maxim.

Like it or not, politicans and their votes are for sale, as much or more than a lady of ill repute.

Until the country gets serious about insisting on campaign finance control, it will continue and likely get worse.

And not all politicians like the way the system works either. They are forced to spend the majority of their time and effort begging people for money.

The influence of money in politics leads to poor governence and a vast majority of the public's needs and wishes going completely unheeded.

 
At 6/29/2005 3:03 PM, Blogger theheadusher said...

Rich Miller's story may be "intersting," but it's false.

I called Senator Jacobs' office and asked him what was going on here. Senaor Jacobs told me, and I later verified myself (at the State of Illinois web site) that he (Jacobs) DID NOT "vote aginst the bill (predatroy lending) the first time around," as Rich Miller reported in Capitol Fax.

The facts is Senator Mike Jacobs voted for the predatory lending bill both times it came before the Illinois Senate, and the second time he cast the vote to put the issue over the top.

Given the above facts "Dope," you should consider taking this story down. For the last thing you wantto be associated with is a false report!

P.S. Diehard, you might want to change your "username" to "blowhard," as it it more accurately describes your negative view towards life!

 
At 6/29/2005 3:38 PM, Blogger maybesomeday said...

Ok Usher,

I am going to say that Rich Miller has been at this a LONG TIME and he gets it right most of the time, so the advantage goes to him. Plus he does not have your record for gushing about nothin.

You called yourself? Oh you called Mike Jacobs -whatever.

Ha - what did yourself have to say about it Mike? Did yourself have a bit of a memory loss or what.

I betcha a steak dinner Rich is right and you are either mistaken on this vote or if you are Mike and yer lyin!!

And leave Diehard alone. He's a nice guy!

 
At 6/29/2005 10:09 PM, Blogger theheadusher said...

The headusher I am

I would not,
could not,
eat steak with you!

I would not like it here or there. I would not like it anywhere!

Since I refuse to eat with you,
here is what I will do.

I propose a bet.
A different kind of wagger.
The kind that makes the world seem better, safer, somehow more secure.

I'll wagger my hundred against your hundred that Mike Jaobs didn't vote as Miller wrote. But here is a catch maybesomeday, the winner donates the object of hope to THE INSIDE DOPE.

So Boland(Maybesomedayi'llrunstatewide, do you feel lucky? Are you interested in making my day? What's that Boland, Dr, Seuss got your tongue?

 
At 6/30/2005 12:00 PM, Blogger theheadusher said...

Maybesomeday (Mike Boland), your silence on this matter is deafening! Do we have a bet or not?

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home