Illinois Attorney General Won’t Run for Governor

CHICAGO â€" Lisa Madigan, the attorney general of Illinois and the daughter of the longtime speaker of the State House, will not run for governor next year, ending months of speculation that she would.

Ms. Madigan will instead seek a fourth term as attorney general, a decision that will help narrow the Democratic field for William M. Daley, a former chief of staff to President Obama, who is expected to oppose Gov. Pat Quinn in a primary.

In announcing her decision late Monday, Ms. Madigan, 46, cited her family connections â€" which benefited her early political career â€" as a reason not to run for governor in 2014. Her father, Michael J. Madigan, is still the State House speaker and is one of the most powerful politicians in Illinois.

“I feel strongly that the state would not be well served by having a governor and speaker of the House from the same family and have never planned to run for governor if that would be the case,” Ms. Madigan said. “With Speaker Madigan planning to continue in office, I will not run for governor.”

An unusual number of candidates from both parties have shown interest in running for governor here in 2014. The state is struggling to solve a looming pension crisis, and there is a sense by some critics â€" including, on Monday, Ms. Madigan â€" that the state needs new leadership to get anything accomplished.

“I considered running for governor,” Ms. Madigan said, “because of the need for effective management from that office and the frustration so many of us feel about the current lack of progress on critical issues facing Illinois.”

Mr. Quinn, a former lieutenant governor, was elevated to governor in 2008 after Rod R. Blagojevich was indicted on corruption charges. Mr. Quinn then won a close election on his own in 2010.

Illinois Attorney General Won’t Run for Governor

CHICAGO â€" Lisa Madigan, the attorney general of Illinois and the daughter of the longtime speaker of the State House, will not run for governor next year, ending months of speculation that she would.

Ms. Madigan will instead seek a fourth term as attorney general, a decision that will help narrow the Democratic field for William M. Daley, a former chief of staff to President Obama, who is expected to oppose Gov. Pat Quinn in a primary.

In announcing her decision late Monday, Ms. Madigan, 46, cited her family connections â€" which benefited her early political career â€" as a reason not to run for governor in 2014. Her father, Michael J. Madigan, is still the State House speaker and is one of the most powerful politicians in Illinois.

“I feel strongly that the state would not be well served by having a governor and speaker of the House from the same family and have never planned to run for governor if that would be the case,” Ms. Madigan said. “With Speaker Madigan planning to continue in office, I will not run for governor.”

An unusual number of candidates from both parties have shown interest in running for governor here in 2014. The state is struggling to solve a looming pension crisis, and there is a sense by some critics â€" including, on Monday, Ms. Madigan â€" that the state needs new leadership to get anything accomplished.

“I considered running for governor,” Ms. Madigan said, “because of the need for effective management from that office and the frustration so many of us feel about the current lack of progress on critical issues facing Illinois.”

Mr. Quinn, a former lieutenant governor, was elevated to governor in 2008 after Rod R. Blagojevich was indicted on corruption charges. Mr. Quinn then won a close election on his own in 2010.

Anti-Citizenship Protesters Issue Warning to House

Christopher Gregory/The New York Times Protesters opposed to a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants held a “March for Jobs” rally in Washington on Monday.

About 2,000 demonstrators opposed to an immigration bill passed by the Senate marched down Pennsylvania Avenue in sweltering heat on Monday and rallied outside the Capitol, hoping to stop any similar measure â€" especially one that would grant legal status to illegal immigrants â€" from advancing in the House of Representatives.

Conservative protesters came to Washington from 26 states to “march for jobs” and decry any bill that includes legalization, which they reject as amnesty that would erode the rule of law and, in a new emphasis, threaten the jobs of American workers. The gathering was organized by a group called the Black American Leadership Alliance in an effort to unite several forces for the immigration battle in the House, including conservative blacks and Tea Party followers, as well as supporters of restrictive immigration policy who have long been in the fight.

The comprehensive Senate bill, which includes a pathway to citizenship for 11 million immigrants in the country illegally, passed on a strong bipartisan vote, but House Republicans said they would not take it up. Speaker John A. Boehner of Ohio said the House would deal with immigration in smaller, “bite-sized” pieces over the coming months.

Opponents of the overhaul were on the defensive during the Senate debate, but now, with many conflicting views emerging among House Republicans, they see a chance to stop the House from passing any legislation that could be paired with the Senate bill to produce a compromise measure.

“Kill the bill!” was the marchers’ rallying cry. They wore red T-shirts saying, “Protect American Jobs, No Amnesty!” Some protesters carried big signs with black letters and one word: “Deport!” While there were many black speakers, the crowd was largely white.

Allen West, a retired lieutenant colonel from Florida who served one term in Congress and is a favorite of Tea Party groups, said lawmakers should focus on creating jobs for United States citizens. “Take care of Americans first,” said Mr. West, who is black. “Get Americans back to work. Get our children back in colleges and universities.”

By passing immigration reform that includes a path to legalization, Mr. West said, Congress was sending the wrong message to immigrants who are here illegally. He described it as: “You don’t care about respecting our laws, it’s O.K. Just come on in and we’ll tell the Americans to take the back seat.”

“That’s not how we are in this country,” he said. Evoking an image from the black civil rights movement, Mr. West added, “Americans ride in the front seat of this bus.”

Representative Mo Brooks, an Alabama Republican who is a vigorous critic of the Senate plan, said it would bring a “huge influx” of low-wage foreigners who would become a burden on the federal government.

“You bring in foreigners who are going to be net tax producers, not net tax consumers,” Mr. Brooks said. “You bring in foreigners who are going to be a positive for our country, not a negative for our country.”

Supporters of the immigration overhaul have organized much larger rallies in Washington this year. But opponents appear to have the advantage of greater leverage over conservative Republican lawmakers in their home districts.

Ken Crow, a Texan and founder of Tea Party Community, an online social media group, congratulated the crowd for having the “bloodlines” of the nation’s founders. “You guys have incredible DNA, don’t forget that,” he said.

As an indication of the pressures House Republican leaders can expect from conservatives, Mr. Crow addressed a warning directly to Mr. Boehner. “If you want to run this bill through,” he said, referring to the Senate measure, “if you want something similar but not quite, you do so at your own political peril.”

If any legalization measure passes the House, Mr. Crow advised the speaker, “Tea Party conservatives across this nation will ensure that next year you’re going to get to send your résumé out.”

Congress Seeks Path Forward on Farm Bill as Deadline Approaches

Despite the differences between the farm bills passed by the House and Senate, the chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee said she wanted to work with her House counterparts to draft new five-year farm legislation that would continue agriculture programs set to expire Sept. 30.

“We are willing to take what they give us and work with the chairman and ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee,” the chairwoman, Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan, said in a conference call with reporters on Monday. “Time is of the essence, and we need to move forward on this.”

Ms. Stabenow said the Senate was still waiting for the House to send over its bill so the two chambers can conference and begin working out their differences. She reiterated her opposition to the legislation passed by the House.

The 608-page farm bill the House passed last week was the first since 1973 not to include a food stamp program.

The 216-to-208 vote saved House Republican leaders from a rerun of the stunning defeat of a broader version of the bill last month, but it left the fate of the food stamp program uncertain. The program, which normally makes up about 80 percent of the farm bill and costs nearly $75 billion a year, has been a constant target for House conservatives who say it has grown too large. About 47 million Americans receive food stamps.

House Republicans have proposed cutting about $20 billion from the program. Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the majority leader, has promised to “act with dispatch” to pass a separate food stamp bill in the future, but has not given a timetable.

The Senate passed its version of the farm bill, which included the food stamp program, in May, and Ms. Stabenow said the Senate would not accept a bill that did not include the program. President Obama has also threatened to veto any bill that does not include food stamps.

The House and Senate bills both include fundamental changes to agriculture provisions in the current law. Both would save billions of dollars by consolidating or cutting numerous farm subsidy programs, including the $5 billion paid annually to farmers and landowners whether they plant crops or not. The money saved by eliminating those payments would be directed into the $9 billion crop insurance program, and new subsidies would be created for peanut, cotton and rice farmers.

Both bills add money to support fruit and vegetable growers, and restore insurance programs for livestock producers that expired in 2011, leaving thousands of operations without disaster coverage during last year’s drought.

But the bills also differ on major issues besides food stamps.

The House bill includes a new proposal to repeal a provision in the current farm bill, called permanent law, that causes farm programs to revert to 1949 price levels if a new farm bill is not passed. Congress has traditionally maintained the provision to force lawmakers to pass a bill or face large increases in farm program expenditures. Without the provision, many lawmakers and farm groups fear there would be no incentive for Congress to pass a farm bill on time.

The Senate is opposed to repealing the permanent law provision.

The House bill would make substantial changes to a dairy program that limits the amount of milk produced and sold in the United States. Dairy farmers oppose the measures, saying they would result in a loss of revenue.

The House bill also includes a provision, added by Representative Dan Benishek, Republican of Michigan, that would require additional economic and scientific analyses before a sweeping 2010 law to improve the food safety system goes into effect. Food safety advocates say the provision would effectively halt implementation of the law.