Child care advocates thought they had avoided $400 million in threatened cuts to the state’s child care services budget after speaking with top officials in Gov. Pat Quinn’s office earlier this month. And the governor’s budget office then told a Senate appropriations committee that no such cuts were being planned.
But when Quinn unveiled his budget for next fiscal year last week, he listed a $350 million net cut in child care spending, according to House Democrats’ analysis of the proposal.
The child care folks aren’t the only ones who may be feeling double-crossed by Quinn’s new budget plan. Aid to the aged, blind and disabled is decreased by $15 million; mental health centers will see a $33 million reduction. The auditor general will take a $471,000 hit by reducing headcount and by cutting back the number of audits his office will perform.
Legislators also are not happy for many reasons, not the least being that Quinn waited until after his speech to sign legislation that would have made his spending plan illegal had he signed it before his budget address.
The bipartisan legislation requires the governor to use only revenues that are legally available to him at the time he introduces his budget. Since he didn’t sign it earlier, he wasn’t bound by it.
However, House Democrats say they expected Quinn to abide by it anyway, whether he signed the bill or not.
And according to House Democrats, Quinn’s budget uses about $730 million in revenues that would have been prohibited by their bill. Quinn unilaterally lowered the percentage of tax dollars earmarked for the corporate tax refund fund and decoupled the state from a federal tax depreciation law. Neither of those things have been approved by the Legislature.
There appears to be another $700 million or so in unapproved revenues in the budget, according to Senate President John Cullerton and the Senate Republicans. That cash appears to be coming from the governor’s proposed $8.9 billion borrowing plan, which also has not yet been approved by the General Assembly.
So, while Quinn says he made cuts of $1 billion and his total spending is $1.4 billion beneath the new annual spending caps that were put into the tax hike bill, his budget still is around $1.45 billion out of whack, unless and until the General Assembly approves those new revenue streams.
Cullerton canceled his traditional, post-budget-address media availability last week, claiming he had too many unanswered questions about the governor’s proposal to talk to reporters. Cullerton then urged the governor to provide more details.
And House Speaker Michael Madigan seemed determined last week to force the governor to abide by the new fiscal responsibility agenda that Madigan has been touting. Madigan said any new revenues ought to be used to pay down old bills, rather than fund new initiatives.
In other words, we probably can expect more cuts. Budget addresses are the starting point in the game of “Statehouse Give and Take.”
But here’s the problem: What the heck do many of Quinn’s allies have to gain from working to pass this thing? If Quinn had introduced a more honest budget that didn’t include the borrowing plan and the other phantom revenues, he could have gone to all the unhappy groups and said, “You need to help me pass those new revenue streams and then I can try to restore your budgets.”
Instead, human service groups and their legislative allies are furious at the outsized cuts aimed at them. Hospitals and nursing homes are up in arms over Quinn’s Medicaid reimbursement rate slashes. School districts are freaking out about a huge cut to their transportation budgets. So, why would they help convince the General Assembly to approve all that new money if they already knew the governor wants to cut them no matter what?
You’d think that would be an odd way of doing business.
Then again, public employee unions weren’t touched. Money for the state’s school fund actually will increase, even though transportation and other items were cut. Quinn also wants to add 950 new state employees. The unions representing those workers have been under fire in Springfield, even by Democrats, but they backed Quinn to the hilt last year, and he’s now protecting them.
That appears to be the bottom line.
* Here’s a roundup of some of what happened late Friday to this fiscal year’s budget. Subscribers know more. There was more to it than substance abuse cuts, but those groups were the best at getting the word out…
* Dramatic Cuts for Drug and Alcohol Treatment: The Illinois Alcoholism and Drug Dependence Association predicted that out of 69,000 drug and alcohol treatment clients, 55,000 will be released; more than 5,000 people are expected to be laid off.
* Quinn speeds up social service budget cuts: Sara Howe, who heads the Illinois Alcoholism and Drug Dependence Association, said she spoke with Illinois Department of Human Services Secretary Michelle Saddler this morning and confirmed with another official this afternoon that the cuts are “for real.” “We’ve seen it pretty bad. There were times we didn’t think it could get much worse. But today we’ve hit rock bottom,” said Howe. Many of the 50 private groups in her association stopped taking more patients Friday, she said.
* Substance abuse treatment groups brace for state cut news: “In our system, most of the clients — up to 80 percent — don’t qualify for Medicaid,” Moscato Howe said. “So when they say the system becomes Medicaid-only, it kills the system.”
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 6:12 am:
I imagine it must be difficult to translate Quinn’s rather scattershot communication style into a working budget document.
Still, once again, no one loses their job — on the state payroll at least — and that appears to be the bottom line, indeed.
- PublicServant - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 6:43 am:
Earth to Quinn: No new hires…
Earth to Quinn: No new borrowing. Use the borrowing to pay off overdue bills that we’re paying 12%-24% interest on already…
Earth to Quinn: Cut current spending…repeat, Cut current spending…
Earth to Quinn: Pay your bills like we do. That is all…
- waitress practicing politics. . - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 7:30 am:
Challenge to substance abuse treatment centers:
What are the statistics regarding outcomes of treatment? How many clients do you have? How long have they been receiving treatment? What percent are “cured”? How much of your budget is on Admin costs? Just sayin’
- Secret Square - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 8:59 am:
If all the individuals and groups who have been, and continue to be, stiffed by the state — AFTER having their taxes increased to boot — were to organize their own protest march on Springfield, I’d bet it would be as big or bigger than the one in Madison…
- zatoichi - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 9:36 am:
Noticed in Quinn’s budget that many state operated facilities under DHS got sizable increases. Must be planning on taking many more people in from the groups that will be stopping services after being cut. Wonder how long it will take for ERs and jails to fill up with people no longer getting services before some bright bulb decides something needs to be done?
- Just the Facts - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 10:16 am:
A couple of points - the refund fund percentage is set by statute to there has to be legislation to lower the percentage. Also, the revenue department currently takes the position in their tax forms that the state has not decoupled from federal bonus depreciation. As a result, it would appear that they would also need legislation to decouple or they would have to reverse current policy and survive a legal challenge to the reversal.
- dupage dan - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 10:43 am:
=Legislators also are not happy for many reasons, not the least being that Quinn waited until after his speech to sign legislation that would have made his spending plan illegal had he signed it before his budget address=
Pat Quinn - our great governor. Open honest gov’t. No games, here, folks - just honest Pat. This kind of action shows a cynical side of Quinn that I think many people are surprised by. He is playing a game. It can only mean that he intends to spend far higher than was promised earlier with no worries about exceeding the limit imposed in the legislation.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 1:36 pm:
Where are the Quinn supporters today?
- Cincinnatus - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 2:01 pm:
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 1:36 pm:
“Where are the Quinn supporters today?”
Wisconsin?
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 2:50 pm:
==Still, once again, no one loses their job — on the state payroll at least — and that appears to be the bottom line, indeed.==
Setting the new hires aside (b/c that part of the budget is just stupid save maybe the prison guards) it’s hard to get rid of employees when they have a guaranteed agreement of no layoffs through June 30, 2012.
- Montrose - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 2:57 pm:
“Where are the Quinn supporters today?”
Working every ward in Chicago.
- cermak_rd - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 3:47 pm:
Maybe the state just can’t afford all these programs at this point in time. So some folks will have to scrounge up alternative childcare (it hurts, but it is the price of having children). Maybe some addicts won’t get treatment. I’d like to see some stats on how many people who go through state funded treatment ever actually get cured. I have a perception that there’s a lot of rescidivism there. It would be nice to know if that is a perception backed up by truth. And frankly, addicts are among the least sympathetic groups of people out there. I don’t believe in kicking folks when they’re down, but when the state can’t afford it, I’m not sure it ought to be offering a hand up that might not even help.
- Anonymous 9 - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 4:38 pm:
In reference to a prior post, yes, it is difficult to be sympathetic towards addicts. And recidivism in substance abuse treatment is a fact. After all, there is no cure. But keep in mind that if funding is cut, there will be a ripple effect - treatment centers will close, which means people will lose their jobs. This in a time where there are no other jobs to be found. Job loss will lead to more people on unemployment. And let’s not forget the obvious, if addicts aren’t given treatment opportunities, they will continue to use, and steal, and likely kill themeselves or others in the process. They’ll be locked up and that in turn will cost the state more money. How much do you think it costs to jail someone compared to providing outpatient treatment for them? This is a devastating situation with no happy ending for any of us!
- cermak_rd - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 5:00 pm:
Aren’t most of the people who do these jobs mental health care professionals who can be expected to land on their feet and get other jobs in the private sector? In fact, aren’t a great many of them contractors in the first place who do some business in the private sector? Granted some of the adminstrators and clerical workers will lose their jobs, and I empathize, but things are tough all over. If a great many of the users are already relapsing, aren’t they begging, cheating and stealing to feed their habits now and don’t some of them wind up in prison now, frequently due to acts of violence? How much more will that increase without state funding? If it’s less than the amount of the funding is that worth it?
- Bill - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 5:18 pm:
==Working every ward in Chicago.==
At least they have their priorities straight.
- zatoichi - Tuesday, Feb 22, 11 @ 8:51 pm:
Cermak, what is the basis of your statement: “In fact, aren’t a great many of them contractors in the first place who do some business in the private sector?” Contractors? Maybe the psychiatrists are but the case workers, social workers, drivers, overnight staff, personal assistants and many more are regular full-time employees. But hey, drop those mental health services because they simply are not needed. Far better to have the people they serve end up in the ER, a nursing home, state facility, or jail at many times the current cost. That’s where they were 30 years ago, so lets go back to that.