By Jamey Dunn
After repeatedly defending Department of Corrections Director Michael Randle, Gov. Pat Quinn is now seeking his replacement and facing political fallout as another top staffer makes an exit so close to the general election.
The Chicago Tribune reported early this morning that Randle resigned. Randle took responsibility for the controversial “Meritorious Good Time Push” program, which applied “good time” credit to prisoners’ sentences as soon as they began serving them. Under the program some prisoners served as few as 11 days. The department previously had a longstanding policy that required prisoners to serve at least 61 days before they could receive discretionary early release credit.
“I have accepted the resignation of Illinois Department of Corrections Director Michael Randle, effective September 17. I appreciate Director Randle’s dedicated service to the state of Illinois during these challenging times and will name his replacement shortly," Quinn said in a written statement.
Quinn has said Randle went against his orders by releasing some violent offenders early but defended him while many called for Randle to be fired. “The man made a mistake. He is a nationally recognized expert, and he’s done a number of good things with respect to running our prisons. This is not any easy job,” Quinn said.
Randle said he implemented the program to make required budget cuts. “MGT Push” resulted in 1,745 inmates being released before the usual 61 days. On average, they served 36 fewer days than they would have under 61-day policy. The DoC estimated that “MGT Push” could save $3.4 million annually.
Randle is leaving in the wake of several other high profile departures from the Quinn administration, such as former Chief of Staff Jerry Stermer and former Communications Director Bob Reed.
“There has been quite an exodus,” says Mike Lawrence, former director of the Paul Simon Public Policy institute. “I think [Randle’s resignation] opens [Quinn] up to continuing attacks regarding his management of government.”
He says that plays into the narrative that Quinn is having trouble keeping things under control in his administration. “There’s a feeling that Quinn is not on top of things. He’s been accused of being a micro manager and managerially inconsistent.”
Lawrence, who was also a spokesman for former Republican Gov. Jim Edgar, says he think Randle may have been motivated to leave because he could have potentially been on the chopping block. “He probably saw the writing on the wall. If [Sen. Bill] Brady wins [the governor’s race] I think it’s a good bet Randle would have been gone. And Quinn might have let him go after the campaign.”
He thinks there is a good chance that Randle’s replacement will be promoted from with in the Department of Corrections. “[Quinn] did move some of his people into the department, and maybe he will go with them between now and November … and see what happens in the election.”
Showing posts with label Mike Lawrence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mike Lawrence. Show all posts
Thursday, September 02, 2010
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Redistricting: Politics vs. reform
By Jamey Dunn
While the Senate Democrats’ proposed constitutional amendment may not be perfect reform, some who have tackled the issue of redistricting before say it could be the most politically viable option.
The Senate's Redistricting Committee heard about three hours of testimony on the Republican proposal last night. Multiple reform groups spoke out in favor of the so-called Fair Map plan, but no witnesses testified explicitly in favor of the Democrat’s plan, which passed on partisan lines.
The biggest point of contention was, of course, who gets to draw the new legislative map after the results of the 2010 census come in.
Brad McMillan, a former member of Gov. Pat Quinn’s Illinois Reform Commission, testified in favor of Fair Map. He said that putting an end to the legislature directly drawing the map is a national trend among states that are reforming the way they create voter districts. He said letting lawmakers draw the map creates a “direct conflict of interest.”
“We’re not asking for perfection. We just think we can do a whole lot better for the people of the state of Illinois,” McMillan.
The Republican amendment, as well as the identical voter’s initiative spearheaded by the League of Women Voters, calls for a commission named by the legislative leaders to draw the map. The eight-member group would vote to pick a ninth member who would likely cast the tie-breaking vote. Members could not be legislators or lobbyists for four years before the plan or 10 years after to avoid involvement from anyone who could benefit from the map.
The Democrat plan, known as the Citizen’s First Amendment, lets the legislature get a shot at drawing the map, and if lawmakers cannot agree, it next moves on to a commission. Both plans call for open hearings, and both parties say they want to encourage input from the public.
Both plans also eliminate the luck-of the-draw provision currently in place. The framers of the 1970 Illinois Constitution put in a last resort for redistricting if an agreement cannot be reached. Two names are put forth by the legislative leaders, and one is randomly selected. Currently the method is the secretary of state drawing a name out of an Abraham Lincoln stovepipe hat. The winner gets to cast the tie-breaking and presumably partisan vote.
The convention delegates thought that no party would want to risk that winner-take-all situation, so it would force compromise. However, it had the opposite effect and that method for drawing the district map has been used more often than not since its creation.
“Anything is better than a hand inside the Lincoln hat,” said Andy Shaw, executive director of the Better Government Association.
Mike Lawrence and John Jackson, who worked on a redistricting plan for the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute under initiatives that passed in the House in 2008, agree that the random drawing is the biggest problem with the current system.
“We saw a need, and we thought that the current constitutional requirement of the random tie breaker was just not working because of course we had three straight decades of it not working,” said Jackson, a political scientist and visiting professor at the institute.
So they called together staff members from both parties, people who had dealt with the issue before and who had ties to both Democratic and Republican party leadership. Lawrence, former director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute, called the group the “alumni of redistricting.” Its goal was to create reform that could pass in the legislature
Jackson said that the issue of letting the legislature draw the map was politically tricky. “We thought practical politics dictated that we just acknowledge the legislature has the right to redistrict itself if it can.”
“You always are caught on the horns of the dilemma of needing change, and how much change can you get before the thing collapses on itself. And we stopped short of the mark where we thought the thing would collapse politically,” he added.
Lawrence said the current Republican plan “represents significant reform.” However, he said a commission selected by the leaders to draw the map would not completely remove political considerations or legislative influence from the process, either.
He said the goal of the group he worked with was to encourage the legislature to reform itself. “I still believe in the legislative process, even though it tests my patience and that of others.”
Shaw said it is important to consider the impression that the public has of redistricting. He called on lawmakers to try the Republican plan for the next map, pointing out that they could go back to the drawing board if the plan proves to be too flawed to use again in 10 years. “[Legislators], collectively as a profession, have lost the faith of the people,” he said.
Lawrence agrees that the people of Illinois have an important role to play.
“I am pessimistic that anything will come of it without the public being fiercely engaged, much more engaged than if it has been up until now,” he said. He added the process might change if there was “a grass roots uprising, and people flooded the offices of legislators with phone calls.”
While the Senate Democrats’ proposed constitutional amendment may not be perfect reform, some who have tackled the issue of redistricting before say it could be the most politically viable option.
The Senate's Redistricting Committee heard about three hours of testimony on the Republican proposal last night. Multiple reform groups spoke out in favor of the so-called Fair Map plan, but no witnesses testified explicitly in favor of the Democrat’s plan, which passed on partisan lines.
The biggest point of contention was, of course, who gets to draw the new legislative map after the results of the 2010 census come in.
Brad McMillan, a former member of Gov. Pat Quinn’s Illinois Reform Commission, testified in favor of Fair Map. He said that putting an end to the legislature directly drawing the map is a national trend among states that are reforming the way they create voter districts. He said letting lawmakers draw the map creates a “direct conflict of interest.”
“We’re not asking for perfection. We just think we can do a whole lot better for the people of the state of Illinois,” McMillan.
The Republican amendment, as well as the identical voter’s initiative spearheaded by the League of Women Voters, calls for a commission named by the legislative leaders to draw the map. The eight-member group would vote to pick a ninth member who would likely cast the tie-breaking vote. Members could not be legislators or lobbyists for four years before the plan or 10 years after to avoid involvement from anyone who could benefit from the map.
The Democrat plan, known as the Citizen’s First Amendment, lets the legislature get a shot at drawing the map, and if lawmakers cannot agree, it next moves on to a commission. Both plans call for open hearings, and both parties say they want to encourage input from the public.
Both plans also eliminate the luck-of the-draw provision currently in place. The framers of the 1970 Illinois Constitution put in a last resort for redistricting if an agreement cannot be reached. Two names are put forth by the legislative leaders, and one is randomly selected. Currently the method is the secretary of state drawing a name out of an Abraham Lincoln stovepipe hat. The winner gets to cast the tie-breaking and presumably partisan vote.
The convention delegates thought that no party would want to risk that winner-take-all situation, so it would force compromise. However, it had the opposite effect and that method for drawing the district map has been used more often than not since its creation.
“Anything is better than a hand inside the Lincoln hat,” said Andy Shaw, executive director of the Better Government Association.
Mike Lawrence and John Jackson, who worked on a redistricting plan for the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute under initiatives that passed in the House in 2008, agree that the random drawing is the biggest problem with the current system.
“We saw a need, and we thought that the current constitutional requirement of the random tie breaker was just not working because of course we had three straight decades of it not working,” said Jackson, a political scientist and visiting professor at the institute.
So they called together staff members from both parties, people who had dealt with the issue before and who had ties to both Democratic and Republican party leadership. Lawrence, former director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute, called the group the “alumni of redistricting.” Its goal was to create reform that could pass in the legislature
Jackson said that the issue of letting the legislature draw the map was politically tricky. “We thought practical politics dictated that we just acknowledge the legislature has the right to redistrict itself if it can.”
“You always are caught on the horns of the dilemma of needing change, and how much change can you get before the thing collapses on itself. And we stopped short of the mark where we thought the thing would collapse politically,” he added.
Lawrence said the current Republican plan “represents significant reform.” However, he said a commission selected by the leaders to draw the map would not completely remove political considerations or legislative influence from the process, either.
He said the goal of the group he worked with was to encourage the legislature to reform itself. “I still believe in the legislative process, even though it tests my patience and that of others.”
Shaw said it is important to consider the impression that the public has of redistricting. He called on lawmakers to try the Republican plan for the next map, pointing out that they could go back to the drawing board if the plan proves to be too flawed to use again in 10 years. “[Legislators], collectively as a profession, have lost the faith of the people,” he said.
Lawrence agrees that the people of Illinois have an important role to play.
“I am pessimistic that anything will come of it without the public being fiercely engaged, much more engaged than if it has been up until now,” he said. He added the process might change if there was “a grass roots uprising, and people flooded the offices of legislators with phone calls.”
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Turn of events
Democratic Rep. Art Turner of Chicago is one of three finalists to lead the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University Carbondale. The center plans to replace Mike Lawrence, the executive director who retired, in January.The other two finalists include veteran journalists, William Freivogel, director of SIUC’s School of Journalism and a longtime journalist for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, and David Yepsen, a political columnist with the Des Moines Register.
Matt Baughman, who has been with the institute for a decade in various capacities, is serving as interim director.
Turner, who is in Springfield this afternoon for an abbreviated fall session of the General Assembly, says if chosen, he would resign his legislative post and move with his family to Carbondale. We'll have more soon.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
A new direction
Mike Lawrence, director of the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University Carbondale, is retiring from the institute November 1. He started in 1994 as associate director and became director in 2004, shortly after the unexpected death of former U.S. Sen. Paul Simon.
"You can’t really replace in some senses either Paul Simon or Mike Lawrence, but we’ve got to find someone who will carry on. And we have some very capable, accomplished people in the pool," says John Jackson, political science professor at the university and head of the search committee to replace Lawrence.
An interim director will be announced shortly, and the search committee expects to publish the top three candidates some time in November. A new director may not start until January, according to Jackson.
The new director will take over as the economic downturn continues to manifest itself in new ways. Lawrence told us in the spring that one reason he felt comfortable retiring is because Simon's goal of building a $10 million endowment had been accomplished and then some. But Jackson says just as universities throughout the state are experiencing lower returns on their investments, so too is SIUC. “The endowment is fine," Jackson says. "It’s the income off the endowment that’s not quite what it had been. So right now, we have what we hope is a short-term cash flow problem. Not huge, but it’s a headache for us.”
While Lawrence is packing his books into boxes, the university will continue to benefit from the stamp that Lawrence put on the institute and its agenda, Jackson adds. "He’s focused us more on Illinois issues, Illinois concerns, and I think that has been his forte because that’s where his network and his contacts were."
Before spending a decade with the Edgar Administration, Lawrence spent 25 years as a journalist, including 20 years with Lee Enterprises and its Statehouse bureau that he helped start and another year as Statehouse bureau chief for the Chicago Sun-Times. He plans to return to writing political commentaries, which he has said he stopped after being pressured to do so in the interest of the institute and of the university. He remains vice chair of the Illinois Issues Advisory Board.
We wish him the best of luck and look forward to seeing his byline again.
"You can’t really replace in some senses either Paul Simon or Mike Lawrence, but we’ve got to find someone who will carry on. And we have some very capable, accomplished people in the pool," says John Jackson, political science professor at the university and head of the search committee to replace Lawrence.
An interim director will be announced shortly, and the search committee expects to publish the top three candidates some time in November. A new director may not start until January, according to Jackson.
The new director will take over as the economic downturn continues to manifest itself in new ways. Lawrence told us in the spring that one reason he felt comfortable retiring is because Simon's goal of building a $10 million endowment had been accomplished and then some. But Jackson says just as universities throughout the state are experiencing lower returns on their investments, so too is SIUC. “The endowment is fine," Jackson says. "It’s the income off the endowment that’s not quite what it had been. So right now, we have what we hope is a short-term cash flow problem. Not huge, but it’s a headache for us.”
While Lawrence is packing his books into boxes, the university will continue to benefit from the stamp that Lawrence put on the institute and its agenda, Jackson adds. "He’s focused us more on Illinois issues, Illinois concerns, and I think that has been his forte because that’s where his network and his contacts were."
Before spending a decade with the Edgar Administration, Lawrence spent 25 years as a journalist, including 20 years with Lee Enterprises and its Statehouse bureau that he helped start and another year as Statehouse bureau chief for the Chicago Sun-Times. He plans to return to writing political commentaries, which he has said he stopped after being pressured to do so in the interest of the institute and of the university. He remains vice chair of the Illinois Issues Advisory Board.
We wish him the best of luck and look forward to seeing his byline again.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
