In yet another blow to the Illinois Republican Party, state Senator Matt Murphy (R-Palatine) has withdrawn his name from contention for the state-GOP-chair job.

And, no, it didn't have anything to do with Murphy being injured during the annual House-versus-Senate softball game last week.

Murphy was approached a month or so ago about taking the party job when the current chair, Pat Brady, eventually resigns.

Brady has been under fire all year for publicly supporting a gay-marriage bill, among other things. The Illinois Republican Party's platform specifically opposes gay marriage, so Brady was accused of being in flagrant conflict with the party's beliefs. Brady has said that he merely supported gay marriage as a private citizen, but the hard right in the GOP didn't buy that argument.

Murphy was initially open to the chair idea and seemed to be leaning toward taking it. He wanted assurances, though, that Brady would be allowed to resign on his own timetable.

A new statewide poll shows a majority of Illinoisans favors concealed carry. But an overwhelming majority in every area of the state also says it's okay with them if Chicago and Cook County police have additional authority over who gets to carry in their jurisdictions.

The Capitol Fax/We Ask America poll of 1,284 likely voters found that 52 percent say they approve of allowing concealed carry.

"Illinois lawmakers are debating proposed laws that would allow some citizens who are properly licensed to carry concealed firearms," respondents were told. "In general, do you approve or disapprove of allowing licensed citizens to carry loaded, concealed firearms?"

The poll, taken April 24, found that 46 percent disapprove and just 2 percent were neutral or had no opinion. The poll had a margin of error of 2.7 percent. Twenty-six percent of the numbers called were cell phones.

During the House floor debate over the National Rifle Association-backed concealed-carry bill last week, I was told by an intimate of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan that the speaker wanted to make sure the bill received no more than 64 votes. Because the bill preempts local-government home-rule powers, the bill required a three-fifths majority of 71 votes to pass.

The anti-gun forces had been demoralized the day before when their highly restrictive concealed-carry proposal received just 31 votes, so Madigan wanted to do the same to the NRA, I was told. The idea, the source said, was to show both sides that they couldn't pass their bills on their own and that they needed to get themselves to the bargaining table and work something out.

I've always believed that just because somebody claims to be a reformer, it doesn't mean the person has the right solutions.

Many years ago, an activist named Pat Quinn came up with an idea to change the Illinois Constitution. He used the petition process to get rid of a third of Illinois House members in one fell swoop. This, Quinn said, would save money and make legislators more responsive to their constituents.

In reality, all that did was allow a guy named Michael Madigan to more easily consolidate his power. And one way he consolidated that power was by spending lots more money. Quinn's plan backfired.

But even though this sort of thing has happened over and over again here, the media tends to give reformers a pass, almost no matter what.

So I guess I shouldn't have been too surprised when I read the major media's news reports of last week's Senate Executive Committee hearing. It wasn't at all like the meeting I attended.

Admittedly, I arrived a little late and had to leave for a meeting before it was over, but from what I saw, Illinois Gaming Board Chair Aaron Jaffe's years-old criticism of the General Assembly's gaming-expansion bills was exposed as hollow and not entirely fact-based. He badly stumbled through his testimony, couldn't directly answer questions, and - despite long-standing public criticisms, a notebook filled with thoughts, and a history as a state legislator himself - seemed woefully unprepared for the hearing.

You can always tell when somebody is losing an argument because they are constantly backtracking and recalibrating. And it's no different with gay marriage.

Back in January, for instance, newly elected state Senator Jim Oberweis (R-Sugar Grove) freely admitted that gay marriage was at the heart of his desire to oust state GOP Chair Pat Brady, who'd recently announced his support for a Senate bill to legalize same-sex marriage.

"I believe we have to have a meeting to ask Pat for an explanation, to modify his actions or get a new CEO," Oberweis told the Kane County Chronicle back then. "Our CEO has taken very open, public action contrary to the organization, and that's unacceptable."

Immediately, however, more-moderate GOP leaders pushed back hard against Oberweis, saying that ousting the party's chair over gay marriage would send absolutely the wrong message to the voting public, which was coming around fast to supporting the issue. Young people, in particular, counted themselves as strong supporters of the concept, so the old ways of staunchly advocating outdated policies would continue to stunt the party's potential growth.

As it turns out, Illinois House Democrats didn't need Republicans to put 30 votes on a significant pension-reform bill.

There's been worry for at least two years that the Democrats would have to rely heavily on Republicans to get anything out of the chamber and that maybe even 30 Republican votes - half the required 60-vote majority - wouldn't be enough to pass a pension-reform bill.

But 41 House Democrats voted for a bill this month that severely whacked retirees' annual cost-of-living increases. Just 25 Republicans voted for the bill - five votes fewer than they've repeatedly said they had for a significant pension-reform proposal.

The measure would cap annual cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) at $750 or 3 percent, whichever is less. That change has the impact of limiting COLAs to only the first $25,000 of annual pension income. Anyone who makes less than $25,000 would continue to receive compounded increases until the cap is hit.

The proposal also forces retirees to wait until they either are 67 years old or have been retired at least five years to receive their annual COLAs.

A recent meeting between Metro East legislators and Governor Pat Quinn's staff turned heated at times, and as a result nothing was accomplished in the standoff over Quinn's appointments to the Southern Illinois University Board of Trustees.

The governor's three appointments to SIU's board were unanimously rejected by the Senate in late February - the first time anybody I've talked to can remember anything like that happening. But the governor has doubled down instead of compromising.

Quinn replaced three members with close ties to the university's Edwardsville campus, which is near St. Louis. For years, governors followed a "gentleman's agreement" that gave the Edwardsville campus three of the governor's seven nominated members. That agreement has coincided with explosive growth at the formerly backwater campus, so locals are loath to go back to the old days of being treated as the redheaded stepchild of the Carbondale campus. Just one of Quinn's new appointments had connections to Metro East, a complete unknown who applied for the trustee post on the Internet.

"Pardon me," said Ty Fahner to a nearby microphone that he had accidentally bumped during testimony to the Illinois Senate Executive Committee last week.

Fahner could probably be excused for apologizing to an inanimate object. The president of the Chicago-based, business-backed Civic Committee and self-styled pension expert had been forced to sit in the hearing room and wait for hours before testifying against Senate President John Cullerton's omnibus pension-reform bill.

Cullerton was obviously furious with Fahner for helping organize the opposition to his bill, and he grilled former Illinois Attorney General Fahner mercilessly, tag-teaming with Senate President Pro Tempore Don Harmon, who picked apart the hostile witness piece by piece. Fahner tried to remain calm, but apologizing to the mic showed how much he was rattled.

House Speaker Michael Madigan was hoping on March 7 to avoid the same results as the previous week.

Back then, one of his pension-reform proposals received just one vote - his own. None of his other pension amendments received more than five votes.

That wasn't supposed to happen. Members of his leadership team thought some of those amendments would get at least a few dozen votes. Oops.

Making matters worse, the House Republicans refused to even participate in the process, with not a single member voting up, down, or "present" on Madigan's amendments.

Asked about the GOP refusal to vote, Madigan on last Wednesday's Illinois Lawmakers television program said he believed the Republicans had made a "mistake."

"They're elected," Madigan told host Jak Tichenor. "And their electors tell them to come here and vote. They don't tell them to come here and not participate."

Nobody ever really knows what's going through the head of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan except for Madigan himself. So the actual purpose behind last week's highly choreographed gun-control and pension-reform debates - ordered up by Madigan - wasn't completely clear to anyone.

That's by design, of course. Madigan prefers to keep people in the dark until he's ready to make his final move.

But I did hear one theory from a Democrat that made quite a bit of sense - at least for a while.

Pages