Caterpillar Inc. will not be building its new North American plant anywhere in the state of Illinois, officials with the company told local leaders Tuesday, with part of the reason being continued concerns about the business climate in the state.
The company will instead focus on a location closer to its division headquarters in Cary, N.C., Peoria County officials were told in an email sent to them shortly after the close of business and later obtained by the Journal Star. The plant stood to bring with it from Japan roughly 1,000 jobs manufacturing track-type tractors and mini hydraulic excavators.
As you know, we have a site selection and business modeling team in place that has been reviewing a comprehensive set of criteria to determine the optimal location for this facility. These factors include logistics, port access, labor markets, supplier base, and governmental partnership opportunities. We have defined a very tight search area that is primarily being driven by logistics, port access, and proximity to our division headquarters in Cary, North Carolina.
As a result, we regret to inform you that your community is not a viable option for this particular project.
Please understand that even if your community had the right logistics for this project, Caterpillar’s previously documented concerns about the business climate and overall fiscal health of the state of Illinois still would have made it unpractical for us to select your community for this project.
Caterpillar intends to continue calling for long-term changes in Illinois and to offer help to the state as it works toward real and fundamental reforms that will position communities like yours to compete for future projects. While we understand this news is not positive for your community, it is our hope that you and your leaders will join us in our efforts to improve the business climate in Illinois.
Sixteen companies have notified the state they have cut or plan to cut nearly 1,800 jobs by the end of March.
At the top of the list: Hull House Association, which closed its doors last month after years of financial struggles. The social services agency laid off a total of 295 employees in January, more than any other company on the list.
Texting while bicycling? Apparently it’s a problem in Illinois, and one lawmakers want to make illegal.
State Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, has filed legislation that would prohibit bicyclists from texting while on the road, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
* So, “Illinois” doesn’t necessarily want to ban texting while biking. It’s just a bill introduced by a state Rep. ten days ago. The legislation has no co-sponsors as of this writing, so I’m not sure where they got the idea that “Lawmakers” are saying the problem is growing.
* This topic is one of my biggest pet peeves about Statehouse news coverage - and not just in Illinois. Somebody introduces a bill, often an incredibly goofy bill (although I’m not saying that Cassidy’s bill is goofy by any means) and then it generates big, hugely misleading headlines all over the place. Then the bill fails and everybody moves on like it never happened. Hey, I’m guilty of this myself. I try to avoid it, but I don’t always succeed.
* As it turns out, Cassidy’s bill passed the House Transportation Vehicles & Safety Committee this morning by a 5-4 vote. But the measure still has a very long way to go. It needs to survive a vote by the full House, then a Senate committee and then the full Senate. It could be amended numerous times along the way. Then it goes to the governor’s desk where it could be vetoed, AV’d or signed into law.
Cassidy’s bill might actually become a statute. I really have no idea, but neither did that silly headline writer five days ago.
* The first round of the “bills in committee” period is kind of like spring training. Hope springs eternal. Legislators, not unlike baseball coaches, are eager to turn their new prospects into shining stars. And we always see a bunch of news stories about those prospects, who are often never heard from again. It’s kinda fun to watch, but the games don’t really mean much in the end.
The House and Senate’s committee passage deadlines are both March9th. So, try to keep all the above in mind until then. Thanks.
* Gov. Pat Quinn leaked a few details about his upcoming budget speech yesterday…
Speaking before a packed City Club of Chicago audience, Quinn said he wants to cut Medicaid expenses by $2 billion, close tax loopholes that cost the state millions of dollars and examine changes to the public employee pension system that include raising the retirement age for workers.
Quinn said that when it comes to pension cost reform “everything must be on the table,” including lowering cost of living increases, hiking the retirement age and asking employees to pay more for benefits. He also wants to examine shifting some of the pension burden to universities and local school districts, saying they pay little or nothing toward the cost of retirement benefits for their workers.
The governor would not say whether he would support efforts to revamp the state’s pension payment structure, which requires the state to make larger contributions each year in what was supposed to be an effort to fund the system by 90 percent by the year 2045.
Meanwhile, the governor is looking to off-load some of the state’s pension costs. The state contributes $5.2 billion a year to pensions, but Quinn complains that only a fraction of that benefits workers directly under state control. Employees of state universities, community colleges and local school districts, for example, are in state-funded retirement plans.
He wants state universities and school districts to contribute, figuring if they have “skin in the game,” they’ll think twice about awarding generous benefits.
Quinn said the state can no longer afford to pay $15 billion a year for the Medicaid program, which provides health care for the poor. He wants to cut that by $2 billion, and amount he says lawmakers “shifted” over from last year’s budget by delaying payments.
Some options for restructuring the system are shrinking payments to hospital and doctors, reducing how many people are eligible and cutting benefits the state isn’t legally required to offer.
Rep. Greg Harris, D-Chicago, said even ending optional benefits would mean tremendous pain for some people.
“If you look at the services the federal government says are ‘optional,’ they are prescription drugs, they are long term care nursing homes, they are hospice care. So this is going to be horrible decision making,” said Harris, chairman of the House Human Services Committee.
Last year Quinn proposed cutting the state’s Medicaid budget by $600 million. The state Senate cut that to $300 million and in the House of Representatives, “Democrats and Republicans banded together and announced they would take ‘zero percent’,” Quinn said. He plans to triple down and try for a bigger cut.
What exactly will he cut?
Quinn said he would spell that out in his budget address in two weeks. But it involves changing the state’s Medicaid program into a “wellness system” instead of a “provider payment system,” he said. The problem he faces is that cuts to Medicaid can mean cuts to federal matching funds.
“We’ll ask the loophole lobby: ‘What’s more important, early childhood education for a 4-year-old or your loophole?’ We’ll ask: ‘What’s more important: Scholarships for somebody who’s deserving but can’t go to college without a scholarship or your loophole?’”
Speaker Michael Madigan on Tuesday outlined grim budget news to House Democrats who left a closed-door meeting predicting deep budget cuts, particularly in health care for the poor. […]
Madigan’s memos laid out scenarios for how much additional money could come in during the next budget year that starts July 1. If revenue grows a modest 2 percent, the state would collect an additional $568 million. If it grows 4 percent, which one lawmaker suggested is unlikely, the state would gain about $1.13 billion.
But the amount of new money isn’t likely to be enough to cover the increased costs of public worker pensions, which are expected to increase by $957 million. And that doesn’t take into account the desire to increase spending in the rest of the budget, especially on politically popular areas like education.
* More budget stuff…
* Washington State’s Medicaid Program Will No Longer Pay For Unnecessary ER Visits
* Chicago Ald. Joe Moore has been busily lobbying Senators on behalf of his own possible nomination to run the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. Many of the largest business groups in the state released a letter they sent to Senators last month opposing Moore’s nomination…
(W)e are teaming up to discourage the nomination and, if necessary, lobby against his confirmation to this critical state government position.
As background, Alderman Moore has been a member of Chicago’s City Council since 1991 and is probably best known for three big, public City Council battles: the Fois Gras ban, the Big Box Ordinance and the Chicago Clean Power Ordinance.
We believe that he’s not the right person for IEPA Director
• Chicago Power Ordinance — By championing the Clean Power Ordinance in Chicago, the Alderman showed his willingness to undercut an IEPA-negotiated agreement, create uncertainty in the regulatory process, introduce the concept of a city having greenhouse gas emission regulations and, most importantly, single out specific plants for specific regulations in an effort to treat them differently. His willingness to lead the charge on an ordinance with these ramifications is an example of what the business community often complains is over-reaching government interference and its negative impact on job creation.
• Product Attacks – The Alderman’s own website included attacks on the use of plastics, pesticides, fertilizers, and genetically modified (GMO) foods as harmful to health and the environment (note: these references have been recently removed from the website but hard copies are available upon request). Regardless of your own position on these issues, it should be generally recognized that the Chicago City Council is not the proper forum for them. This is another example of the Alderman being unable to exercise sound judgment as to appropriate use of government powers.
• Aldermanic Record – Alderman Moore’s record includes taking on big issues that have generated attention for him and his positions. As alderman, that type of aggressive advocacy may have its place. However, the job of the IEPA director is an administrative position that is best done outside the limelight. It’s not a place to make laws, push personal agendas or single out companies or industries; it’s a place to administer policies and regulations. It seems as though Governor Quinn would be trying to put a square peg into a round hole when it comes to this nomination.
• Big Box Ordinance – The Alderman’s very public Big Box ordinance was a measure that put a narrow agenda over the interests of thousands of consumers. His belief in this kind of government intervention in the market while denying consumers access to retail opportunities gives businesses leaders great pause as to how he would run an agency that regulates businesses large and small.
• Experience – Alderman Moore does not have experience running an organization as large as IEPA. An Alderman typically has three to five staff to manage with a small office budget. The IEPA has more than 800 employees and an annual budget of more than $300 million. Unlike previous IEPA Directors who have all been well versed in the state’s Environmental laws, Alderman Moore’s only environmental experience appears to be advocating for the Chicago Clean Power Ordinance and work with the National League of Cities’ committee on land, air and water.
“I think they ignore the fact if you look at entirety of my record as a public official I take a very balanced approach,” Moore said.
Moore defended the Clean Power Ordinance, saying emissions from the power plants affect every ward in Chicago.
“There have been documented adverse health effects. The emissions from those power plants are carried throughout the city of Chicago and the region. … I think that’s really what this is all about. It’s not about my qualifications.” […]
“I think they have very little to worry about,” he said. “I think political experience is also very important. You need to work well with the state legislature. As a legislator myself, I understand the importance of that.”
The Illinois Chamber, the Manufacturers, the NFIB, the Pork Producers, Chemical Industry Council, Petroleum Marketers and others signed the letter.
* This statement was released yesterday and I didn’t see it…
“The swelling in Senator Kirk’s brain has subsided and this morning we were able to reattach the portion of his skull that had been removed following his stroke. This is an important milestone in his recovery and a step toward the next phase, rehabilitation. He remains in good condition,” said Richard Fessler, MD, PhD, neurosurgeon at Northwestern Memorial Hospital and professor of neurological surgery at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.
The news just keeps getting better. My father had a stroke a while back, so I know recovery takes time and there can be setbacks along the way. We shouldn’t celebrate quite yet, but we should definitely be encouraged by this news.
A newly retired state representative who shepherded two utility bills through the House in 2010 and 2011 landed a new job last month as the utilities’ lobbyist, a practice government watchdog groups say should be banned.
Former state Rep. Kevin McCarthy, an Orland Park Democrat who served 14 years in the Illinois House, retired in late December after sponsoring the controversial ComEd “Smart-Grid” legislation and, the year before, a much-debated bill AT&T wanted. On Jan. 26, McCarthy filed paperwork with the Illinois Secretary of State’s Office to serve as a lobbyist under a new firm he created, KMAC Consulting. He lists two clients so far: AT&T Illinois and its affiliates, and ComEd.
The practice of state lawmakers becoming lobbyists after retiring is not uncommon. Government reform groups have criticized the practice because they say it creates a perception elected officials are serving their own interests, rather than the public’s, when they collect a paycheck from firms whose interests they aided through legislation. The lobbying rail at the Illinois Capitol in Springfield includes at least a dozen former lawmakers on any given day.
“The problem is they know the inside game,” Illinois Campaign for Political Reform Executive Director Brian Gladstein said. “They know who the people are pulling the strings. They have the relationships with the people who can get a bill passed.”
Gladstein’s organization tried for several years to slow the so-called revolving door of lawmaking to lobbying through legislation that would require a lawmaker to wait six months between leaving the General Assembly and registering as a lobbyist. The bill died after failing to garner enough support from legislators.
I told subscribers about McCarthy’s pending ComEd lobbying when he stepped down.
ICPR’s proposed six-month ban on lobbying wouldn’t do a whole lot in some cases. For instance, if a legislator retired at the end of the May 31st spring session, he or she could start lobbying well before the next spring session began.
* The Question: Should legislators be banned from lobbying for six months to a year after they leave the General Assembly? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please. Thanks.
