Friday, May 15, 2015, 12:17 pm
Bruce Rauner’s Right-to-Work Bill Can’t Get a Single ‘Yes’ Vote—Even from Republicans
Bruce Rauner, the new Republican governor of Illinois, has been learning this week that it’s harder to impose a right-wing, pro-business agenda on a big state government than it is to overhaul a corporation after a hostile takeover—the work that yielded him nearly a billion dollars as a private equity investor before getting into politics.
It’s harder yet when it’s a heavily industrial state with union members who still turn out for protests, even in small towns, and where even the moderate Democrats controlling the state legislature can unite in opposition to Republican initiatives—whether for the benefit of their constituents or to simply exercise partisan power.
The 118-member House of Representatives delivered an embarrassing rebuke to Rauner on Thursday with an overwhelming defeat in of one of his top priorities, a right-to-work law, by a margin of 0 in favor, 72 opposed and 37 voting present (as Rauner requested, with one Republican amid the 72 opposed and other Republicans leaving to avoid any vote). What made the vote even more unusual is that the right-to-work proposal was introduced by the Democratic House Majority Leader Michael Madigan, not Rauner.
Rauner charged into office with an ambitious “turnaround plan” for the state of Illinois that included a grab-bag of right-wing policy treats for the wealthy and powerful, such as right-to-work legislation, which prohibits any legal requirement that workers pay for services that a union at their workplace is legally compelled to offer them; cutbacks in workers compensation; “tort reform,” making it more difficult for those suffering injuries to sue negligent and irresponsible companies; and reduced unemployment compensation.
Recognizing his limits with the Democrats in control of the state’s General Assembly, Rauner started his campaign by encouraging local city councils and other small legislative bodies to vote in favor of his turnaround agenda both to win piecemeal implementation. Contrary to prevailing legal opinions, Rauner believed that jurisdictions smaller than a state could enact right-to-work legislation on their own. In any case, he hoped the votes would build a sense of political momentum in favor of his turnaround plan.
Some legislative bodies in small towns, rural areas or even conservative moderate-sized downstate cities like Rockford did adopt Rauner’s plan, but according to tallies that political journalist Rich Miller published in the first week of May, less than 7 percent of the population of the state was represented by cities, counties or townships that voted in favor of Rauner’s turnaround. In many of these small legislative bodies, relatively large numbers of local union members and other grassroots activists turned out in protest at the meetings, effectively thwarting the strategy.
By some accounts, Rauner offered a budget that addressed the anticipated large deficit solely through cuts in programs that many Democrats consider essential and intended to bargain with the Democrats to accept some or all of his turnaround agenda in exchange for revenue increases that could save some of the most popular programs.
Madigan’s pre-emptive strike of introducing and rejecting right to work, which he may follow next week with votes on versions of Rauner’s other turnaround goals, may help to undermine the Rauner bargaining strategy. But the battle over the budget and new revenue for essential programs will not disappear.
This post has been updated.
Support Progressive Journalism
Donations from readers like you make up a full third of our annual income—that's how critical our end-of-year fundraising drives are. If you want to continue to read independent, progressive journalism in 2019 and beyond, we hope you'll consider chipping in whatever you can today.
For a limited time, anyone who makes a donation of $5 or more to In These Times will get a free copy of Verso's best-selling 2019 Radical Diary and Weekly Planner.
David Moberg, a senior editor of In These Times, has been on the staff of the magazine since it began publishing in 1976. Before joining In These Times, he completed his work for a Ph.D. in anthropology at the University of Chicago and worked for Newsweek. He has received fellowships from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation and the Nation Institute for research on the new global economy. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
More by David Moberg
- The UAW Vote in Mississippi is a Battle for the Soul of the U.S. Labor Movement
- Nursing Home Workers Win Big After Threatening to Strike: “We Have the Power Now”
- Trump’s Pick for Labor Secretary is Literally the Worst
- More Than 6 Million Americans Who Want Full-Time Jobs Are Stuck Working Part-Time
- The Hope From Audacity: Fight for $15 Pulls Off “Most Disruptive” Day of Action Yet