59 Comments - PublicServant - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 9:46 am: When I looked over the bill and the amendments, it looked like the original amounts were reduced across the board. Was that the result of the governor insisting on there being at least some percentage of across the board cuts in programs? - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 9:48 am: ===All House Republicans voted for the legislation except for Rep. Joe Sosnowski of Rockford, who was absent.=== “Who” in the SGOP is going to have ignorance to ask for dispensation on these two votes after the HGOP went 100%? Great way to be seen a having a “$&@#% problem” brought on to yourself. After 46 “green lights”, expecting 20 “green lights” might be …required… not by Cullerton, but by 46 HGOP Members. To the Action on the Bills, Very pleased something got done. We needed it, as a state. The politics of the structured roll call will be part of the fallout. MJM could have gone 14. MJM could even have gone 30. Extremes. All “bad”, all “good”, but going above 14, but below 30, and keeping “Tier 1″ targets off it, MJM got what he wanted, Rauner got what he mostly wanted, and Leader Durkin, again, proved to me how valuable he is in the HGOP Caucus, especially as it’s leader. No real surprises for me, but that doesn’t change one bit how pleased I am at seeing government and politics working, to getting something done. Well done. - Not it - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 9:52 am: I find it disappointing that this FY15 budget problem is 100% the responsibility of the Dems, yet they left the heavy lifting to the Republicans. Any respect I still had for the majority parties went right out the window yesterday. - PublicServant - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 9:57 am: @Not it - The Dems were angling to keep the tax rate a 5% to fix the problem, but Rauner asked them not to. No problem, Bruce…now it’s your problem. - hakuna matata - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 9:58 am: Not it… It’s time the Republicans got off the bench and play ball. For years they had the luxury to avoid voting on hot topic issues and blame the mess solely on dems. That chapter is over. - A guy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 9:59 am: Not, respectfully….wrong take. The HGOP hasn’t had to do any heavy lifting of any kind for over a decade. They had to prove to everyone including themselves that they could. It didn’t go by unnoticed by anyone. It was actually an opportunity for them. The HDs showed something too. There’s a roster of 14 who could be willing participants in good government going forward. With their leader’s blessing I’m sure. - anonin' - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:01 am: Ds could have solved issue in November if BVR had not whined about taking no action in veto. GOPies can have credit for all programs, services, early retirements, end of career windfalls that have piled up over the years. - Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:05 am: A pleasant surprise, even if a bit delayed. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:05 am: ===They had to prove to everyone including themselves that they could. === I think that’s exactly right. - Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:09 am: ==but Rauner asked them not to== So that is why the Dem House, Dem Senate and Dem Governor negotiated, passed and signed the budget they did way back in… May 2014. This budget was the result of trying to ensure re-election. Not Bruce Rauner’s infinite power. - Stooges - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:10 am: Transportation takes a beating in this deal, expect major encouragement from road contractors this fall to get a capital bill approved. - Langhorne - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:16 am: How much of a particpant was rauner? Did he do face to face w the tops lately, or was this delivered to him, more or less take it or leave it? - Juvenal - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:26 am: This is all inside baseball. No one is going to remember much of any of this after the FY 2016 budget. It is a hopeful sign for things to come, but don’t get overly optimistic. Voting to sweep funds that maybe, someday in the future will slow down road projects, is a lot easier than voting to shut off ventilators for kids. - Not it - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:28 am: Hakuna matata, then the Dems should have raised those taxes in January if thy truly felt that way. They created this budget mess (for FY 15 by passing a fake budget designed to get them re-elected), they should do more to own it. - Wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:30 am: Spring training for the GOP in the GA. Raiding funds aren’t the toughest votes. The games will count trying to make sense of the FY16 budget. - dixiechick - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:33 am: Good to know the HGOP has a real LEADER! - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:34 am: ===…the Dems should have raised those taxes in January if thy truly felt that way.=== Rauner asked, specifically, not to reinstate the income tax. Please keep up. Durkin then herded the cats, making sure that Rauner’s request for no increases in revenue in FY2015 and getting a “fix” AND getting 46 “green lights”, that made the Rauner request for FY2015 work, and the GOP did the heavy lifting to make it work. Rauner asked for inaction, cobbled a solution, got his Leader in the Chamber to carry the weight and freight. That’s Caucus politics played very well. - The Dude Abides - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:40 am: This is a start but more political courage will be needed to pass a FY16 budget that is actually balanced, not smoke and mirrors balanced. I am hopeful that the revenue deficit that has existed for a long time will finally be addressed. - A guy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:41 am: I did pick up that Rauner did have a meet with the HGOP prior to the vote if that helps answer a question further up. - scott aster - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:45 am: what a joke for the dems “we make a mess and you saps clean it up” I always thought Madigan was a classer Dem & leader than that to runway away from the mess his folks created. Who was dumb enough to auto sunset a tax increse…..just to get votes. - Not it - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:49 am: Oswego Willy, just because Rauner asked doesn’t mean the Democrats had to follow his bidding. My point here is the Dems created this FY15 mess on purpose, and they should help fix it. Someone else said their fix was another way, to which I responded they should have passed their fix then instead of voting no on the only fix put up for a vote. (Although I will concede the bill was sponsored by the Speaker which at least is something.) - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:54 am: ===Oswego Willy, just because Rauner asked doesn’t mean the Democrats had to follow his bidding.=== It was goodwill. It was courtesy. Rauner as Governor-Elect asked and was given, so at times like these, trust by both sides have a history. Trust. There was a long game being played with FY2015, and the payoff, House-wise, was yesterday. Trust, along with follow through. - walker - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:54 am: Juvenal has it. This fiscal move is over and mostly forgotten by the public in a week. On to the real issue, the 2016 Budget. Durkin ran with the ball, delivered, and looked good. That will carry forward. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 10:58 am: I’m glad we can all hold hands and sing kumbaya over a temporary fix relying heavily on fund sweeps to get us through until June. Let me know when the real work gets started on next year’s budget. - Anonymoiis - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 11:03 am: ==It was goodwill. It was courtesy== Please. It was passing the buck to the next guy so they could put the blame elsewhere. If their principles were so strong as you suggest, they wouldn’t have done what they did last year, and instead would’ve done what they believed should’ve been done. - Demoralized - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 11:04 am: ==They created this budget mess (for FY 15 by passing a fake budget designed to get them re-elected), they should do more to own it.== ==My point here is the Dems created this FY15 mess on purpose, and they should help fix it. == Umm, they did. You have to get over the old ways of the Republicans being able to sit on the sidelines. This was an opportunity for them to show they were ready to get in the game. They did so. It was a good first start. - Cassandra - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 11:04 am: Seems to be a win-win, for both parties, but do they have to pay back these swept funds. Or can they get around it somehow or postpone into the far future. Otherwise, could add to already significant 2016 budget woes. - Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 11:04 am: Since the Dem budget plan since last May, or at least last November, has apparently been ==Let’s listen to whatever Bruce Rauner says if he wins== then these 2016 negotiations will be a breeze. /s This budget was a massive disgrace and no amount of spin or shifting can change that. This budget is also now done and soon forgotten so Rauner is on his own for 2016. - Demoralized - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 11:05 am: ==but do they have to pay back these swept funds.== No. This isn’t borrowing. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 11:07 am: ===It was passing the buck to the next guy so they could put the blame elsewhere.=== Who asked for the buck. Rauner asked. Had Rauner not asked, and the Dems let it slide, your argument would have merit. The fact Rauner asked, that changed things. ===If their principles were so strong as you suggest, they wouldn’t have done what they did last year, and instead would’ve done what they believed should’ve been done.=== Oh, I’ll give you that, but that’s not the issue; The issue was the “why” they didn’t fix it, and the answer is Rauner asked them not to. - John Parnell - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 11:45 am: How many downstaters voted to take all the road fund money out of the fund? It seems to be a very bad vote for them. The suburbs and Chicago are always taken care of on the road programs. - nona - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 12:03 pm: It’s true the FY 15 budget was balanced only with smoke and mirrors. But Rauner’s proposed FY 16 budget is even more out of balance than the last Dem budget that the GOP complains about. We will see in the next few months whether Republicans truly want a balanced budget. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 12:10 pm: - John Parnell -, The fallout for the 46 GOP members is what it will be. The fallout for the 20+ Dem members won’t have the GOP hammering them on the votes. The Tier 1 Dems targeted by the HGOP were “no” on both. Plus Rauner isn’t the Dems’ Governor. GOP GA members will be saddled more with Rauner overall. The FY2016 fallout and structured roll calls will dictate more, and Leader Durkin proved he can bring 46 (47) votes when he needs to. Heavy lifting, good or bad, brings scrutiny. - A guy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 1:09 pm: ===The fallout for the 20+ Dem members won’t have the GOP hammering them on the votes. The Tier 1 Dems targeted by the HGOP were “no” on both.=== Just saying here: “they voted against the fix they’re colleagues agreed to in a bi-partisan way even after they voted for the sham budget in the first place”. Those Tier 1’s aren’t completely off the hook. There are Dem colleagues who will be cited as heroes and statesmen for doing the courageous thing, while Rep. XXXX opted to keep kicking the can down the road. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 1:26 pm: ===Those Tier 1’s aren’t completely off the hook. There are Dem colleagues who will be cited as heroes and statesmen for doing the courageous thing, while Rep. XXXX opted to keep kicking the can down the road.=== If it were that easy, the vote would’ve been 117-0… The Tier 1s will run against Rauner. Districts are different then statewide. I trust MJM’s thoughts on saving Mushrooms… - Pot calling kettle - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 2:26 pm: To pretend that the 2015 budget was not impacted by the wishes of the voters is silly. The Dems knew what the voters wanted, and they provided. Let the taxes go down and keep the services the same. Imagine a vote to keep the tax rate up or to cut services. What would the voter response have been? What would the Repubs have campaigned on? Everyone owns a piece of this and everyone needs to participate in the fix. - Cassandra - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 2:43 pm: And, I would note, the Dems knew the “special” funds were there for the sweeping. So it wasn’t all that risky. Repubs knew too. That’s the problem with “special funds.” Everybody knows they are there. Moral hazard. - Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 2:58 pm: Rauner’s words made no difference here. This was set in motion months before his comments in December and was structured to occur regardless. Democrats took a clever risk last May. Any party in their place at the time might have been enticed to do the same. Passing a 2015 budget that postponed the reckoning until after election day was their easiest option. Reelection comes first. Instead of raising taxes or additional cuts, they borrowed Blago’s budget tricks and blew an even deeper hole in the next budget. If Quinn wins, the tax increase gets extended during veto session and the 2015 shortfall is irrelevant. If Rauner wins, he gets this as a welcome gift, shares blame for any ==fix== and has a few bruises before settling in. - History Prof - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 2:59 pm: I’m new to this, but Pot calling kettle seems to sum it up quite rightly. There is no way the Dems could have raised taxes and cut services with no G.O.P. cover. If we contend that they should have and that that would have been the courageous play, than it would follow that the courageous play for Republicans would have been to vote for it as well. But they would not have, and here we are. The reason MJM allowed Rauner to be elected was to break precisely this logjam. Time will tell whether it was the right move. So far, so sort of good. The Republican bluff is called. Let’s see their balanced FY 16 budget! We’ll see if the Governor and the Republican caucus understand the situation when it comes to “raising revenue” next year. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 3:10 pm: ===The reason MJM allowed Rauner to be elected was to break precisely this logjam.=== Madigan didn’t allow anything. He’s not all powerful. Ugh. - History Prof - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 3:17 pm: Oswego, Sure, not all powerful. Rahm had something to do with it as well. But for a number of reasons a Rauner mandate, as I think you already know, is questionable. Durbin out-polled Rauner. That’s a lot of split ballots. And ballot initiatives that fly in the face of everything Rauner stands for passed overwhelmingly. So it seems reasonable to assume that a united Democratic push would have led to a different outcome. I apologize for the rhetorical overstatement but I still think on the merits it’s a Democratic playing field in Illinois. The Governor has a lot of actual money behind him, so we will see. But my rhetorical money is still on MJM. Or do you see that differently? - James - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 3:32 pm: I thought the Speaker did good work here coming up with the 2.25% number and selling it quietly, in the midst of the din. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 3:34 pm: Couple thoughts; It’s a 10/8 split in the House Congressional delegation, we split our Senators. Of the 3 contested starewide races, 2 were carried by Republicans. The GOP didn’t field a credible candidate for AG or SOS. All that said, Rauner beat Quinn. MJM and Cullerton lost one seat. The politics of the jet wash of $90+ million spent on the Guv’s race was a stand alone effecting little and ignoring quite a bit. Rauner is gambling his numbers statewide (macro) will hold up to the districts’ leans (micro) in policy. That’s the politics at play here, and the $20 million. I’d bet on MJM in the micro, but we’ll all see how the Rauner Crew goes about getting 60 votes and 30 votes for FY2016 before deciding who has who where. Fair? - History Prof - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 3:43 pm: Oswego, Your short hand is still a bit fast for a newbie like me. Only one Senator was up this time and it was not a presidential year, so . . . I’m not sure. Quinn was a weak candidate, and, to my point, was not fully supported by the Speaker or the Mayor. But what you say about Rauner seems fair. You know more than I: Do you think he will try to avoid tax increases and balance with cuts alone? And if not, will he get the Republicans to vote for a tax increase? And if not, what will MJM and Cullerton then do? - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 3:50 pm: Also, Durbin-Oberweis, that was never going to be as close as Quinn-Rauner. Frerichs-Cross, as close as that was, could have made a clean sweep of the Statewides, but the jet wash of $90+ million in the governor’s race made Cross’ attempt to try to define himself after Frerichs got on the air, and stayed there an uphill ask. It wasn’t Rahm, or Dem leanings, or even Rauner doing so exceptionally well, breaking the needed percentages, but it was Rauner, it was Quinn, and it was baking a Rauner cake, that had little good or bad impact on much else. If Rauner, Madigan, and Cullerton keep structuring structured roll calls protecting Tier 1 targets for MJM and Cullerton, it will be the GOP GA members and Caucuses who may feel the wrath most come 2016. - History Prof - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 3:54 pm: Oswego, If I understand you correctly, and I’m still not sure I do, we are in substantial agreement. The Thank you for your patience. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 4:01 pm: - History Prof -, I’ll answer these out of order, hopefully to clarify my thoughts; ===will he get the Republicans to vote for a tax increase?=== Rauner made it clear he wants tough votes for what he wants. The success of Durkin to put 46 “green lights” up showed that Rauner and Durkin in the House can deliver the GOP Caucus votes. ===Do you think he will try to avoid tax increases and balance with cuts alone?=== Rauner’s Crew have shown they can count noses, the trick is going to be can they horse trade enough to maybe not raise revenue to get to 60 and 30, or how close they can get to small revenue increases to get to 60 and 30. We will know by June-ish, but either way, the GOP GA members will have to carry the freight, and that’s tough come 2016. ===And if not, what will MJM and Cullerton then do?=== If yesterday is any indicator, they will slow play all this to get a bargain, including Max protection for Tier 1 Targets and heavy lifting by GOP members, and then Rauner will work to max his result within those Caucus parameters and votes. Hope that helps. - Rod - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 4:01 pm: I would say HB 318 and 317 represent something of a recognition on the part of Speaker Madigan and President Cullerton that they do not have either the votes or the political inclination to attempt to force an increase in revenue at all over Governor Rauner’s objections and the anti-tax vote of the last election. The FY 16 budget deal could be done in a similar manner and some will not be cut who might have been cut and others will be cut. It will be a complete inside deal hopefully completed on May 29 so mercifully Rich and other reporters along with hundreds of lobbyists do not have to work that weekend or longer. This entire idea that there was some type of revolt among Democrat Senators in relationship to the evolving deal that brought about HB 318 and 317 may have limited truth to it in my opinion. Both Senator’s Steans and Kotowski are co-sponsors of HB 318 in the Senate and they were the public face of the so called revolt. President Cullerton and Speaker Madigan absorbed the concerns of the Democrats and proceeded to provide Governor Rauner with aggregate every dollar he requested to be shifted, but the sources of the funds were changed. Some of the concerns about who should and should not be a loser were incorporated in these bills, but many more of the concerns were not I suspect. Supposed guarantees to school districts may turn out not to be worth much, but we shall see what the reality of the $97 million pot of money to help school districts that might be harmed by the cuts that come in the middle of the school year turns out to be. Presumably the Speaker’s staff verified Governor Rauner’s shortfall estimates for FY 2015 because in January of 2015 they were about $100 million lower than the $1.6 billion being used today (see Illinois Government News Network, “Readout of GOMB Meeting with Agency Chief Financial Officers,” news release, January 14, 2015.) While there is much applauding on this blog that a pragmatic deal was worked out, this deal could very well strategically destroy any hope of many Democrats of forcing the revenue issue on Rauner and something very close to the full scope of Governor Rauner’s cuts could be unleashed as part of a FY 2016 budget compromise. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 4:05 pm: - History Prof - It’s all good. Lots of moving parts, yesterday, however, was a great sign for the state to get something through, how much damage the GOP GA will have to take on after this session is said and done, that’s really unknown right now. - A guy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 4:15 pm: There will be more revenue from…..? There’s a blank to fill in with one or more sources, but I believe the first part of this sentence is unquestionably true. - Wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 4:21 pm: “Republicans will not be supporting any new revenues this session,” said Rep. Durkin, 3-16-15. - History Prof - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 4:28 pm: Wordslinger, Do you think they can hold to that even if the court strikes down pension reform? That’s a lot of cuts. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 4:35 pm: ===“Republicans will not be supporting any new revenues this session,” said Rep. Durkin, 3-16-15.=== Yep. Talked himself into a corner. I believe Durkin, but I also believe Durkin will walk it back if need be, now, if Rauner trades off the revenue. I 100% believe Durkin, today, but yesterday makes me think trading off of trust is… possible? - Mama - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 5:00 pm: Why two separate bills (HB 318 and 317) instead of one? - Rod - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 5:28 pm: Yes Mama there were two bills, Rich post a link to them both yesterday if I recall correctly. - Wordslinger - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 6:01 pm: HP,Rauner’s proposed pension “savings” are unrelated to SB1. He made the up on his own. There are billions of new revenue already in Rauner’s proposed budget. Tne problem is that it’s imaginary. The only way it comes close to working is if the GA plays along and shorts the pension contribution by $2.2 billion. The proposed grabback from local governments would also be new revenue. Tne sweeps just conducted for FY are new revenue. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Mar 25, 15 @ 6:16 pm: - Wordslinger - is Spot On, no surprise. If there is any lesson the FY2015 vote and how it shook out, one might be that if a deal can be cobbled together to pass, that deal could be based in reality not magic. The flip side of that would be that the FY2016 will be 10X harder because many of the GOP taboos will have to be added to make the budget actually work; Revenues being first and last. Those GOP “green lights” will be tougher to light, but they’ll be lit, causing damage for 2016. That phony budget today, why not vote “green” it’s not based on truth… - History Prof - Thursday, Mar 26, 15 @ 8:12 am: Dear Oswegao, I’m still a bit confused about some of what you were saying yesterday. You said “Durbin-Oberweis, that was never going to be as close as Quinn-Rauner.” But doesn’t that go to my point that this was not an anti-tax election? If Dems in the House PERCEIVE this to have been an anti-tax election, well, perception becomes the reality. But I still don’t see it. And then we have a ballot initiative that advises the legislature to increase the tax on income greater than one million dollars to provide additional revenue to schools.”j Never mind the practicality and constitutionality of that, it does give the sense of the electorate. So it still seems that Rauner is an accidental Governor who took advantage of money and a demoralized Republican establishment, AND the tacit acquiescence of Rahm and Madigan to land in the Governor’s mansion. If Cullerton gets the timing right on pushing for revenue over cuts, he has a good chance, doesn’t he? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 26, 15 @ 10:21 am: - History Prof -, The Rauner-Quinn race with $90+ million being spent, it’s a stand alone race. Taking anything of policy or governing within thsy vacuum would be ill-advised. Rauner isn’t an Accidental Governor. Pat Quinn, six years ago, was an accidental governor. ===…AND the tacit acquiescence of Rahm and Madigan to land in the Governor’s mansion=== What do you base the MJM part on? I don’t remember MJM even remotely giving in, politically, to Rauner. If you have a political strategy example, please… Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.