
Gov. JB Pritzker is running for reelection. Who will he pick as his No. 2?
As the governor begins campaigning for his third term, the question of who will be the chief executive's second-in-command is the biggest in Illinois' political world this summer.
The job will become vacant with the state's two-term lieutenant governor, Juliana Stratton, running to succeed retiring U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin.
'They've got to be somebody who can do the job — if something happens and they had to take over,' Pritzker said, describing his ideal running mate to reporters Thursday in Chicago. 'And I think just as importantly, somebody who really has a heart for the people of the state of Illinois. That's not in everybody, right? But you got to have somebody who actually cares about all parts of the state.'
Whoever takes on the job will not only need to jibe with the governor in the traditional duties of the office, but also prepare to take on a greater role than most lieutenant governors have historically due to Pritzker's presidential interests.
Should Pritzker win the presidency, the lieutenant governor would take over the final two years of the governor's four-year term and be expected to pursue the work Pritzker has initiated. And although a lieutenant governor — a position that's derisively been called 'lite gov' because the office's powers are so minuscule — has no more responsibility running state government when the governor is out of state, the next such officeholder may be be expected to step up more than predecessors, should Pritzker spend considerable time campaigning across the country.
Pritzker, who announced his bid for a third term as governor on Thursday, has repeatedly said he loves the job. But the billionaire governor's kickoff last week repeatedly hit on national themes, and Pritzker continued to hammer President Donald Trump, which only amplified the view that Pritzker would make a bid for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, potentially handing the state of Illinois to a successor.
As with any politician who chooses a running mate, Pritzker will have to weigh his own political considerations and the aspirants' governing qualifications. And this year, he may have an eye on both the 2026 Illinois election and Democratic voters nationwide who will examine his record two years down the road.
'I imagine he's looking for the same thing he did before: someone who would be a good partner and ultimately could take the reins if they needed to,' said Aviva Bowen, a Democratic political consultant at The Strategy Group in Chicago.
The Tribune spoke to five strategists and Democrats close to the administration for their insights on Pritzker's likely thinking on picking a running mate. Most who spoke to the Tribune declined to be identified in discussing which individuals the governor might choose because they couldn't speak for the campaign.
Among those who likely top the list are Andy Manar, the former downstate state senator and Pritzker's current deputy governor on budget issues; Christian Mitchell, a former state representative from Chicago and ex-deputy governor for Pritzker; state Rep. Jehan Gordon-Booth of Peoria, who was previously a lead budget negotiator in the House; and state Rep. Elizabeth 'Lisa' Hernandez of Cicero, chair of the Illinois Democratic Party.
None of those potential contenders returned requests for comment.
Sources emphasized that those four didn't constitute a complete list and noted the governor has deep ties to the private and philanthropic sectors, as well as across government. The governor himself remained mum last week on whom he might select from Illinois' Democratic bench.
The key factors observers said candidates will need to bring: the ability to run the state and carry on Pritzker's legacy if circumstances call for it and the 'je ne sais quoi' compatibility that makes a good work partner. Loyalty to the governor, life experiences different from Pritzker's and a lack of perceived ambition to use the office as a steppingstone could also be attractive qualities, several of the sources said.
In Springfield Thursday night, Pritzker said he'd likely make a decision by the end of July — prior to the first day that candidates in 2026 can begin circulating candidacy petitions to appear on the March primary ballot.
Lieutenant governors in Illinois are constitutional officers with few constitutionally ordained duties, the most important of which is to take over for a governor who is incapacitated, deceased, quits or is removed from office.
They can make the role their own, given their background and interests, which allows them to elevate specific issues; however, policy areas are also split under Pritzker's current structure among four deputy governors.
When she was selected, Stratton had a background in public safety and criminal justice, having served as an attorney and one-term member in the General Assembly.
Pritzker, at his Chicago campaign announcement Thursday, described Stratton as a 'state representative and discerning policy wonk who had slayed a pro-Rauner Democrat and was endorsed by Barack Obama.' In 2016, Stratton earned the backing of President Barack Obama over incumbent Rep. Ken Dunkin of Chicago, who received campaign help from allies of Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner and had assisted Rauner in his budget battles with Democrats.
'Juliana Stratton is a fighter for children and working families, and is now the first Black lieutenant governor of the state of Illinois,' he said, adding later to reporters that her successor has 'got to live up to the standard that's already been set by the best lieutenant governor our state's ever had.'
Pritzker, who was himself vetted as a potential running mate for Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential race, may also consider race and gender diversity on the ticket for the upcoming election, several of the strategists said.
But as a two-term governor in a blue state, Pritzker has the luxury of not having to make a choice under the usual constraints of seeking a political advantage, said Robin Johnson, a governmental relations, public policy and political consultant.
'He can afford to be a little more focused on just preserving his legacy, versus what other considerations might be in a normal campaign cycle' such as race or geography, said Johnson, who also is an adjunct professor of political science at Monmouth College in far west central Illinois.
The potential contenders to become Pritzker's next lieutenant governor have a range of work and lived experiences.
Given his current role, Manar has a deep understanding of the state's finances and budgeting process. He's also from downstate Bunker Hill, which would balance the ticket with the Chicago-based governor. At the same time, selecting Manar, who is white, would mark a departure from racial diversity at the top of the ticket.
When Mitchell, who is Black, was a deputy governor, he was a lead strategist on energy issues, including the state's 2021 climate bill. Since 2023, he's worked at the University of Chicago, overseeing government relations and other offices. Last year, Pritzker appointed Mitchell to the board of the Metropolitan Pier and Exposition Authority, which owns McCormick Place and Navy Pier.
Gordon-Booth, who represents the Peoria area, is an assistant House majority leader and last year was the top House negotiator for the state budget, though she was replaced this year by three other state lawmakers.
While appearing in Peoria for his reelection announcement Thursday, Pritzker was introduced by Gordon-Booth, and he referenced her when asked about whom he might pick as his running mate.
'There are some qualified people across the state. There's one right behind me,' Pritzker said in a nod to Gordon-Booth, according to WGLT.
'When you win, you gotta represent everybody and I know Jehan Gordon-Booth has done that in her job as state representative,' Pritzker said. 'Who would not want Jehan Gordon-Booth as a leader in this state?'
A west suburbanite, Hernandez, the first Latina chair of the state Democratic Party, is not a member of the administration but rose to lead Illinois Democrats with Pritzker's support.
Picking a downstater would be appreciated by regional Democrats, Johnson said. But it would not necessarily provide a big political boost for Pritzker as much of the region has shifted solidly Republican and leadership in some counties has pushed them to separate from Chicago and the suburbs.
Additionally, Johnson said he does not think Pritzker faces a political risk by selecting a white or male candidate to succeed Stratton, a Black woman, as his running mate.
'If anybody can do it, Pritzker can. I think he's shown in his appointments and his policies that he has helped the African American community and the Latino community quite a bit,' Johnson said.
Candidates for Illinois governor and lieutenant governor only recently began running as a team. For decades, candidates ran separately, at times creating some odd couplings.
In 1968, when Republican Richard B. Ogilvie was elected governor, voters separately elected future U.S. Sen. Paul Simon, a Democrat, as the state's No. 2. It was the first and only time that the top two positions were held by politicians of opposite parties when the offices were separately elected.
Four years later, Simon made an unsuccessful bid for the Democratic nomination for governor and backed future Attorney General Neil Hartigan as his running mate. Simon lost the bid for governor to Dan Walker, but Hartigan went on to win the lieutenant governor's post and served with Walker.
The last person to ascend from the lieutenant governor position to the governor's mansion was former Gov. Pat Quinn in 2009, after then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich was impeached and removed from office.
Under the old system, the two men ran in separate primaries. Quinn, a former state treasurer, won the lieutenant governorship in 2002 on his second try, four years after he lost a primary bid for the office to then-Kane County Coroner Mary Lou Kearns by fewer than 1,500 votes.
During Quinn's time as lieutenant governor, he and Blagojevich were not close, Quinn said in an interview last week.
Quinn himself signed the law in 2010 that changed the separate primary elections after a scandal in which primary voters paired Quinn with lieutenant governor nominee Scott Lee Cohen, a pawnbroker and political neophyte who had previously been accused of failing to pay child support and spending money on extramarital affairs. Cohen later dropped out of the race, making his announcement during the halftime of the Super Bowl.
Before the current governor's first term, Quinn said, he recommended to Pritzker two top qualities in a governing partner: 'Honest and competent.' And open to ethics reform, he added.
While there may be a more straightforward path for the upcoming lieutenant governor, Quinn, who went on to win a full term, said he did not think he was on the way to becoming governor when he ran for the lieutenant governor spot.
'There was always jokes about that,' he said last week, adding: 'I don't think I ever would have been picked by a governor candidate when I ran in 2002.'
Tribune reporter Jeremy Gorner contributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
14 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Kathy Hochul's Chances of Losing New York Governor Election: Polls
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Governor of New York Kathy Hochul is up for reelection in 2026, and a new poll has found that she is leading a hypothetical primary race and hypothetical general elections, despite the majority of voters saying they want a new governor. A poll taken by the Siena College Research Institute of 800 New York State voters between June 23-26 found that 49 percent of Democratic voters would vote for Hochul in a primary between her, Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado, and Congressman Ritchie Torres. When asked whether they would want to re-elect Hochul or vote for someone else, 55 percent of people said "someone else." However, when pitted against hypothetical Republican candidates, Hochul polled ahead of her opponents. Governor Hochul has been contacted for comment via email. New York Governor Kathy Hochul speaks during a House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing, Thursday, June 12, 2025, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. New York Governor Kathy Hochul speaks during a House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearing, Thursday, June 12, 2025, at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo Why It Matters Opinions on Hochul largely fall along partisan lines, with 69 percent of Democrats approving of her, but only 18 percent of Republicans sharing the same view. This is likely due to her fighting the Trump administration on New York City's congestion pricing plan and on immigration. Hochul's race comes at a tumultuous time in New York Democratic politics. She is yet to endorse Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, distancing herself from his democratic-socialist stance and his opinions on Israel. What To Know The Sienna poll for a Democratic primary put Hochul against Delgado and Torres. Torres has not officially announced his candidacy for governor yet, and has said he would not run if Mamdani wins the mayoral race. Delgado was appointed by Hochul to his position in 2022, but is now primarying his boss. He did not name Hochul in his announcement, saying: "Listen, the powerful and well-connected have their champions. I'm running for governor to be yours." The Republican race is currently being won, per the same Sienna poll, by Congresswoman Elise Stefanik. Elise Stefanik leaving a House Republican Conference meeting with President Donald Trump on the budget reconciliation bill in the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. Elise Stefanik leaving a House Republican Conference meeting with President Donald Trump on the budget reconciliation bill in the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via AP Images Stefanik was originally President Donald Trump's pick to be Ambassador to the United Nations, but her nomination was pulled. She has raised millions for a gubernatorial run but has yet to make a formal announcement that she will be joining the race. Per the poll, she leads a Republican primary against Mike Lawler and Bruce Blakeman by 35 percent to Lawler's 18 percent and Blakeman's 7 percent. But, she loses a general election to Hochul by 24 points to Hochul's 47 points. What People Are Saying Elise Stefanik posted on X (formerly Twitter) about a fundraiser in New York: "I ask you all today to join us in this effort to SAVE NEW YORK and fire Kathy Hochul in 2026. This is about the people of New York. And it's going to take fighters all across this state to get this done." Kathy Hochul for Governor site: "As Governor, Kathy has taken decisive action to deliver immediate relief to working and middle class families and small businesses, beat back the pandemic, and accelerate New York's economic recovery. In addition, she has reaffirmed New York's position as a national leader in defending reproductive rights and in combating climate change." What Happens Next The New York gubernatorial race is not until 2026. According to the poll, 43 percent of people do not know, or have no opinion on, Stefanik, meaning that as more people get to know her, the polls will likely move.


Los Angeles Times
14 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
From Trump to Newsom, litigious politicians declare open season on news orgs
Critics of President Trump may have cheered the defamation lawsuit filed by Gov. Gavin Newsom against Fox News for giving the White House a spoonful of its own litigious medicine. Newsom is suing the conservative-leaning network alleging it intentionally distorted the facts in its reports on the timeline of the governor's conversations with Trump amid the deployment of the National Grard in Los Angeles during immigration raids in the city. But legal experts are concerned that it may just be the bipartisan escalation of an ongoing trend: use of defamation suits as a political weapon. The tactic, largely used by Trump and his allies until Newsom's salvo, has put the media business and its legal defenders on high alert. 'There has been an outbreak of defamation lawsuits over the last 10 years since President Trump came on the scene and threatened to open up the liable laws,' said Ted Boutros, an attorney with Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher in Los Angeles. 'It has been remarkable and has a chilling effect on speech.' Trump has aggressively used the courts to punish media outlets he believes have crossed him. Trump extracted $15 million from ABC News after George Stephanopolous said the president was convicted of rape rather than sexual abuse in the civil case brought by E. Jean Carroll. He's pushing for a massive payment from CBS over a '60 Minutes' interview he claims was edited to make former Vice President Kamala Harris more coherent. Although CBS denies Trump's claims and 1st Amendment experts say the case is frivolous, the parties are reportedly headed for a settlement. Trump is also continuing his lawsuit against the Des Moines Register over a poll that showed him losing Iowa in the 2024 election, moving it to state court Monday after the case appeared to be faltering at the federal level. Trump hasn't stopped there. Last week, he threatened CNN and the New York Times with legal action over their coverage on an early intelligence report that said the military attack on Iran's nuclear program had only set it back a few months. On Monday, Tom Homan, Trump's chief adviser on border policy, called for the Department of Justice to investigate CNN for reporting on the existence of an app that alerts users to ICE activities. 'We have crossed over into a new world,' said Lee Levine, a retired 1st Amendment attorney whose clients included CBS News. 'Everybody has taken note and tried to position themselves the best that they can to weather the assault.' Newsom, a contender for the 2028 Democratic presidential nomination, took his shot last week with a suit alleging Fox News intentionally manipulated its coverage of a late-night June 6 phone call he made to Trump. Trump later falsely stated on June 10 that the two were in contact 'a day ago,' while Newsom asserted they never spoke after June 6. Newsom's lawyers allege in the complaint that by making the call seem more recent, Trump could suggest they discussed the deployment of troops to Los Angeles, which they had not. The governor's legal team alleged the conservative network's coverage covered up Trump's false statement that the two had spoken on June 9 while a banner on the bottom of the screen said 'Gavin Lied About Trump's Call.' The suit asks for $787 million — the amount Fox paid Dominion Voting Systems to settle its defamation case over false statements — if Newsom doesn't get a retraction and on-air apology from host Jesse Watters who presented the segment on the calls. (Fox News has called the suit a publicity stunt and said it will fight it in court.) Andrew Geronimo, director of the Dr. Frank Stanton First Amendment Clinic at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, believes Newsom's actions are tailored to get the public's attention rather than that of the court itself. Newsom has been aggressive in his efforts to combat misinformation disseminated by right wing media outlets, and the lawsuit clearly turned it up a notch. Experts say high-profile politicians have the ability to get their message out without going to court. 'The idea that there is this dollar amount in the millions that they've been damaged by the reporting rather than coming out there and account the facts straightforwardly I think is sort of laughable,' Geronimo said. The calls for possible legal actions against journalists reporting on information leaked by government officials, as is the case in the Iran intelligence stories, is considered a far more troubling development. The long-term danger is that the suits can ultimately weaken laws that protect press freedoms, such as the ability to publish government information as long as it was obtained in a lawful matter. 'With everything the U.S. Supreme Court has been doing lately, all of these press protections could be on the table,' Geronimo said. 'Journalists for years have relied on Supreme Court case law that, if someone leaks something to them, they can publish it as long as they did not participate in the illegal collection of it.' The chilling effect could be particularly acute for large publicly owned media companies that have business before the government. It's unlikely that CBS parent Paramount Global would settle over '60 Minutes' if it did not have an $8 billion merger deal pending that requires approval of the Federal Communications Commission now led by Trump appointee Brendan Carr. 'The fusion of libel suits and government officials in office is a pernicious development,' said Boutros. 'When you have the president of the United States... wielding defamation suits when they have some degree of power over those companies that they can assert, that puts the companies in a terrible position.' It also puts more strain on the legal system. While Trump and Newsom are getting headlines, Boutros noted there are similar politically motivated defamation cases coming in with 'useless claims that we have to litigate.' 'It's costly for people who are just participating in a public debate,' he said. 'We'd rather have less business and more freedom of the press.'
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DC becomes Republicans' favorite target — again
Republicans who've made a habit of using their power over DC to undercut progressive policymaking are mounting a new push to rein in the capital — and this one may have legs. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., told Semafor that he is inclined to support a House-passed bill that would bar noncitizens from serving in local office as well as voting locally in the city lawmakers call a home away from home. The bill passed the House with 56 Democratic votes in June. 'Voting in American elections should be limited to American citizens,' said Fetterman, whose wife Gisele became a US citizen in 2009. 'I say that as a guy that's absolutely very pro-immigration. The opportunity to vote, that should be for American citizens.' A similar ban passed the House last year with support from two Democrats who've since ascended to the Senate, Arizona's Ruben Gallego and Michigan's Elissa Slotkin. While it's not clear if they'd change their votes this time, should it come to the Senate floor, support from those three Democratic senators would put the GOP closer than ever to the 60 votes needed for passage. Congress has substantial constitutional power over DC, which Republicans frequently deploy to undermine the city's elected government — and point a finger at unpopular leftwing policies. After the GOP took back the House in 2023, it reversed a criminal justice reform passed by the DC council. Local Democrats expected then-President Joe Biden to veto it; he signed it into law. Democratic control of the Senate had, until this year, stalled action on other Republican-passed legislation to rein in the DC government. But under complete GOP control of Washington, the capital's government has taken further hits. A stopgap government funding bill slashed $1 billion from the DC budget, and the House GOP continues to decline to take up a Senate-passed fix. Then this month, as the Senate focused on President Donald Trump's tax-cuts bill, House Republicans passed a trio of proposals that would force DC to cooperate with Trump's immigration enforcement, scrap another police reform, and remove noncitizens' local voting rights. Senate Majority Leader John Thune's office did not return a request for comment on the chamber's timetable for taking up the House-passed bill. Republicans sold the noncitizen voting ban as a defense of DC citizens' rights. The city's rules don't affect voting in federal elections, which has long been limited to US citizens. But for the GOP, they raised the possibility that some Americans might be out-voted in DC elections by people who were neither born here or naturalized. 'The right to vote is a defining privilege of American citizenship,' said House Oversight Chair James Comer, R-Ky., during the bill's markup this month. 'Diluting that right, to its non-citizens, whether here legally or illegally, undermines the voice of DC residents.' The bill's proponents described reform as not just necessary but politically popular, and a mistake for Democrats to vote against. 'Once again, Democrats are taking the 20% side on another 80-20 issue,' said Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas. 'The American people do not want illegal aliens voting. They shouldn't be here to begin with.' For some local politicians, the legislation would hit home — in a very big way. Last year, for the very first time, Mónica Martínez López decided to run for office. Born in Mexico City, she had lived for a while in DC's Brookland neighborhood and gotten involved in the Vision Zero initiative to end traffic deaths. When her member of the Advisory Neighborhood Commission moved away, Martínez López ran for her seat. By a 734-341 vote margin, she won. The House bill would remove Martínez López, along with fellow ANC member Jingwen Sun, from the voter rolls and from their posts on the commission. 'It's another example of the lack of self-determination for our city,' Martínez López told Semafor. 'The close to 1,000 neighbors/residents who registered to exercise their right to participate in local electoral processes now face the limits of Home Rule that US citizens who live in Washington DC have long faced.' Sun, who ran for council while having a green card but not citizenship, said that he would stay in the city and keep up his work, even if his vote and job were erased initially. 'I'm pretty positive that I will speak to the DC council and mayor, and run for ANC again, whenever the time comes that I become a US citizen,' Sun said. Democrats have conducted a somewhat circular conversation about how their party needs to change, less about specific policies than about a battered 'brand.' What sort of policies could they moderate or jettison, if they wanted to move right? On paper, noncitizen voting could be sacrificed without much downside for the party. The few hundred people who take advantage of it in DC can't support the party in any other way (federal voting, donations) unless they obtain citizenship. Non-citizens are often less progressive than the Democrats who give them the franchise — as we saw three years ago in San Francisco, when opponents of left-wing school board members registered recent immigrants to help recall them. So why would a majority of congressional Democrats vote with DC? They feel solidarity with the city's residents, whose progressive votes are undermined whenever Republicans run Congress. Some of them, in seats that are too blue to become GOP targets, are comfortable defending the concept that people who raise families and pay taxes in a city deserve some say in who runs their local government. But other Democrats are less eager to make a stand for that idea. Which makes it a soft target for Republicans. The House-passed bill has vocal Democratic opponents, and it's still an open question whether it would get the necessary seven votes needed to overcome a filibuster — and that's assuming all Senate Republicans vote in favor. DC Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton and Rep. Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., argued against the measure on the House floor in June, making the case that Republicans were being hypocrites and hurting American citizens as well as non-citizens. 'Republicans claim that voting is a core right for the privilege of American citizenship,' Frost said. 'Republicans have fought tooth and nail to defeat legislation that would give the American citizens who reside in DC voting representation in the House and the Senate.' Frost, like voting reform advocates in DC, pointed out that other cities let non-citizens vote in local elections, and that there was some history — not recent, but real — of letting people vote in US elections if they weren't yet Americans. That was at the heart of the reasoning when DC's city council first passed the measure. 'The idea clicked for me when I realized DC has many people who live here, pay taxes, work locally, and don't have a voice in even their local government,' said Charles Allen, the DC council member who chaired the committee that approved the voting amendment. 'My colleagues and I make decisions every day that spend their tax dollars and impact their work,' he added. 'If they can prove they live here, why shouldn't they have a say locally?' In the Austin-American Statesman, Tony Quesada an investigation into noncitizen votes in Texas, which proved less than promised. 'It turns out that a bunch of those people were naturalized citizens who were labeled possible noncitizens based on outdated — i.e., false — data.' For NPR, Mikaela Lefrak into how many noncitizens take advantage of these open systems, and how the people who control the rolls prevent fraud. 'They know that one slip-up, like a presidential ballot being mailed to a noncitizen, could end up on the national news.' In The Washington Post, Olivia George and Meagan Flynn to the DC elected officials who'd have to resign if Republicans passed this into law. 'The repeal would force special elections for those seats [and] the unpaid positions could remain vacant, leaving residents without representation.'