Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Morning Shorts
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Lt. guv applicants listed *** Kirk on offense; LG updates
Posted in:
* Dennis Byrne is only about half right today…
Nice try, governor, but when you asked the people of Illinois how to balance the state budget, you got thousands of responses, but not one that I could see who said cut my services or raise my taxes.
Actually, a quick scan of just the front page of the governor’s budget website comment section revealed numerous pleas to raise taxes and fees on everyone, not just the rich. Here are a few…
* How about raising the driver’s license fee…
* Please pass HB 174 to raise revenue now.
* Increase income taxes.
* Raising user fees (driver’s license, car registration, etc)
As I’ve been monitoring the comment section for the past few days, however, I have noticed that almost nobody has demanded that their own pet programs be cut. The teachers are flooding the site demanding no cuts to schools - or even saying they want more money for schools - and pretty much everyone else is focusing on cuts to “the other”…
* KEEP THE TEACHERS AND THEIR UNION OFF THIS WEBSITE!! THIS IS FOR HARD WORKING TAXPAYERS, NOT FOR A BUNCH OF WHINY OVERPAID FUTURE MILLIONAIRES!
* Have all elected and appointed state officials take off one day per week with no pay just as companies are asking of their employees.
Byrne’s conclusion…
The truth is that much of what the state spends is for things that someone in Illinois wants. If we’re to come anywhere close to balancing the budget, it will require more than a debate over bigger cuts versus higher taxes. It will require a fundamental downsizing of our expectations of what we, ourselves, can milk from the government.
That’s a good point. And as I’ve said many times before, when newspapers and their employees start editorializing in favor of getting rid of their industry’s bigtime tax breaks, I’ll be far more inclined to take their other positions more seriously. Just about everybody has their fingers in the state government pie. And that’s a big reason why it’s so hard to do anything about the size of government.
…Adding… Several people are leaving budget-cutting proposals in comments. As with the state site, these are all aimed at other folks. We’ve had numerous posts here about ways to cut the budget. Your little cut ideas don’t interest me unless you propose cutting something that you depend on. I may start deleting these comments if they continue. Don’t waste our time.
* Related…
* Our Opinion: Sorting through budget thoughts
* Local lawmakers warn of deep school cuts
* Teachers pension fund earns 15% return
* Keep up push to end costly ‘free’ rides for seniors
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 9:21 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Morning Shorts
Next Post: *** UPDATED x1 - Lt. guv applicants listed *** Kirk on offense; LG updates
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Do away with the FOID card. Gun guys don’t like it or want it and you’ll save a few million.
Comment by Todd Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 9:28 am
Doesn’t the state charge for a FOID card?
Comment by well Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 9:38 am
I think the hysteria needs to be removed from the process. This problem needs to be approached with a calm, collected, and thoughtful, manner. It needs to be understood that it took many years to get into this position and we cannot get out of it in one or two years.
First, items that are a once in a lifetime opportunity must not be cut to where they affect those participating. ie; college educations, K-12 education, benefits to fixed income folks, the disabled, the mentally unwell, and children and womens shelters, etc.
Second cuts need to be made to benefits that prisoners get. These folks gave up their rights when they infringed on the rights of their victims. No color TV, no air conditioning. Road gangs need to be reimplemented. Work crews should go to Parks, state and city, and forest Preserves and do the work that staffs cannot do. I would like to know where the money that the Correctional Industries makes on their products goes. It a State Agency needs those products they should have to pay for material costs only. I know all the reasons why prisoners supposedly need color tv, dental work, air conditioning, pay for their work etc.; but in these times it can be cut.
Eliminate CDB for projects under $100,000.00. Why we have engineers and architects on staff, and then farm out minor jobs to outside AEs is ridiculous.
Eliminate requirement that state agencies have to go to State Garages.
Eliminate ALL benefits to illegal aliens.
Drug test all public aid recipients randomly. If they fail they don’t get a check.
Go through the whole budget with this same thought process and make intelligent cuts.
Then raise taxes for deficit reduction ONLY until the deficit is gone and all pension systems and providers are paid.
Comment by Irish Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 9:44 am
Yes it does. They recently raised the fee to double what it previously was.
Comment by NO JUSTICE Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 9:49 am
This is about who pays.
Illinois government is a bad value. It not only works poorly, lacks transparency, is dominated by the Four Tops, and hasn’t seen the needed turnover to clean the General Assembly - it is a bad value.
Raising taxes when government is working is one thing, raising taxes for this crappy, flea-bitten, scandal-filled, national embarrassment is another. We’ve watched two consecutive Illinois governors, and their aides, do perp walks into courtrooms. We watched deadlocked state government, ran by a single political party, fail to meet budget deadlines - repeatedly.
Even if the national economy didn’t tank - Illinois government sucks. So, at what point are we going to realize that giving it more money will only allow this rotten stinking corpse of a government to stay unburied? If any state deserves a revolution - it is Illinois’ long-suffering citizens who have been locked out of their government’s daily operations by two malfunctioning political parties.
This is about power too.
Not just for the Illinois Democrats who run everything, but for their supporters. Cutting government means filing divorce papers within these polyamorous relationships. No fiscal support for voting blindly democratic. No more nookie for sitting quietly for a slice of that dwindling economic pie. No more chit for chat.
The Democrats will not cut government, because it means cutting their own throats. Expecting the party that set this system up to now justify reducing it, is like expecting an 800 pound baker to stop tasting the chocolate icing.
So the Democrats are playing a PR game where they post the budget, and ask Illinoisans to volunteer to euthanize themselves. It feigns tranaparency and democracy. They know all along that this stunt will not produce anything they would take up in the GA. The intention here is to come up with some kind of political cover to justify raising our taxes without doing anything different or better.
Just more bad value.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 9:55 am
that’s a pretty standard conservative tactic: make cuts that cost government tons of money and claim that it will result in some mythical savings…
Comment by bored now Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 9:55 am
===Eliminate ALL benefits to illegal aliens.
Drug test all public aid recipients randomly. If they fail they don’t get a check ====
I’m assuming that you’re neither an illegal alien nor a public aid recipient. How about cutting something that benefits you directly? Didn’t you see the point of this post? Apparently not.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 9:58 am
Bored
unlike the liberal approach big give aways with no way to pay for them. We’ve had 8 years of that.
Comment by Fed up Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:04 am
When will the legislators understand that we have to cut existing programs and stop creating new ones? Rich, I know that you have written about this, but it absolutely amazes me that there are lawmakers out there coming up with new programs and of course new fees and taxes.
Some seem to think that they can somehow justify it by creating statutes to allow for new local programs with local fees and taxes and it does not pertain to or effect the state budget problem. The legislators need to begin to look at the budget problems in their totality, i.e., federal, state, and local.
It always comes down to whose ox is being gored, but let’s start by eliminating the constant barrage of new programs and new fees and taxes.
Comment by Crystal Clear Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:06 am
One woman said to tax her retirement. Hasn’t she paid taxes on her income originally?
Comment by PPHS Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:07 am
Look to see which individuals have a State pension plus an agency pay check. Cut either…and $ave. Do more with le$$ that way.
Comment by Common Cent$ Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:14 am
CC, do you have both a pension and a state check? How about coming up with something that you depend on?
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:16 am
State government is everywhere: roads, parks, schools, buildings, fire/police, prisons/courts, farms, medical, human services, transportation, food, employment. The list is endless and all this stuff interacts. The local day care provides services that allows low income mothers to hold a job to pay their rent. Decent roads get the food to local stores. Most people have no idea just how large the services the state offers because they only see a local sliver and usually only the part that effects them personally. And they especially have no idea how big a $12B hole really is because no other organization is large enough to cover an entire state. How do you explain a ‘pension’ to anyone who only sees a number on a piece of paper? The expectation is a check will come in the mail or direct deposit. The actual size, number, and issues related to a statewide ‘pension’ system is simply something very few people actually ever really see except what directly effects them.
Slash education money and how fast will property taxes rise? Whack human services and how many families will have to quit jobs to stay home and care for a family member who previously went somewhere for services? Easy to yell for cuts as long as it is for something that does not seem to directly effect you.
Comment by zatoichi Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:20 am
I am a state employee. I would NOT object to having my pension plan changed to defined contribution. I would also not object to 1) a gradual increase in my share of health insurance premiums (I can handle it a little at a time, but don’t spring a $150 a month or more increase on me all at once) 2) furlough days or a pay cut (I could handle up to a 5 percent cut OK; a cut of 10 percent or more would cause me serious hardship, but I would have to live with it); 3) an increase in minimum retirement age or a change in the rule of 85 — I expect to keep working until I’m too old, sick or dead to continue anyway.
Comment by Secret Square Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:27 am
What I depend on has been cut over the last eight to ten years. My Agency has suffered cuts beyond what others have endured. I would gladly go back to the levels we had five years ago or eight years ago. My staff has been cut in half. One of my sites is half shuttered. We are cutting hours to some of our programs because we do not have people to run them. I have two building that are falling in due to no money to fix them. Only one of our vehicles has under 120,000 miles on it. I have health care providers that are calling me about past due bills because the state hasn’t paid them in over eight months. Six of our main vendors that we depend on will not longer do business with us because of non-payment.
Comment by Irish Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:28 am
Cut out Quinn’s $$$ for passenger rail between Moline and Chicago - a little less than $100 million.
I live in the QC, but can live without this expenditure.
Comment by from QC Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:35 am
(Sorry, it loaded before I was finished)
And yet we have people who come and are upset when we don’t provide all the services we used to provide. And we cannot tell them that we are short staffed or underfunded.
Comment by Irish Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:35 am
QC, they’ll never cut the capital plan unless the funding totally crashes, so you’re just giving up a project that’ll almost undoubtedly be spent somewhere else.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:37 am
Our Pat (teachers pension article) is thinking of borrowing to meet the pension payment again for upcoming fy?
I’m starting to get that same ole same ole feeling…
Comment by cassandra Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:40 am
My prediction: Nothing will get done. We will get another half year budget because the Republicans will not support a tax increase and the Speaker will not allow the bill (HB 174) to be called and passed with (D) votes only. We will then get a governor campaign of Brady saying we do not need a tax increase and Quinn saying we do-a referendum so to speak.
I am not sure the Speaker cares who wins. I really don’t think he fears the (Ds) losing the house, so he will continue to be Speaker, and it might be to his advantage to have a governor of the other party in control when the inevitable tax increase finally passes.
In the meantime–We all lose
Comment by SIUPROF Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:41 am
I have no problem giving up the free rides that the previous governor tried to buy me off with….
Comment by erstwhilesteve Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:42 am
First, Pat Quinn missed the boat. He had an opportunity to cut all the Blago hirees that did nothing to promote services in the state and failed to do so. This is reason number one he has to go. He refused to take the first and easiest step to physcal sanity.
I love my little neighborhood school. But we have way too many schools in this state and the education system is incredibly inefficient. You can consolodate a lot of schools and save money. It will have to happen eventually and probably make a lot of us really mad, but this has to hurt a little, or it is going to hurt a lot.
Comment by the Patriot Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:47 am
I wonder how Byrne feels about paying state income tax on his social security and other retirement income.
Comment by Bill Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:53 am
==One woman said to tax her retirement. Hasn’t she paid taxes on her income originally?
==
On Social Security tax/contributions, yes. The FICA tax withheld from the employee is not deductible by the employee, so taxing her again when she receives what is, in effect, a recovery of her taxes is double taxing. However, most retirees recover their original contributions very quickly, and the remainder is previously untaxed income by any standard.
For other pension plans, she has not been taxed. The income from investments made by the plans is not taxed federally until distributed, and the original contributions are generally deductible. When the contributions were not deductible, the retiree is not taxed federally on the amount of any distributions that is a the return of the contributions.
Comment by Pat Robertson Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:57 am
I thought last evening’s Chicago Tonight, with 4 state senators, 2 each party, on the budget hole was instructive.
Trotter and Steans spent much time talking about changes to the pension system which they have to know would require a protracted legal struggle with AFSCME, and hence, can’t possibly occur in time to help this budget. The current contract doesn’t end until the end of June, 2012 and the guv has already agreed not to lay any union employees off until the end of June, 2011, so
the state has no leverage. Were they deliberately obfuscating or are they really that clueless.
Steans (Harvard, Princeton) wandered around between freezing pensions for existing employees, freezing pensions for future employees, and made assertions about constitutional protection of benefits but failed to clearly explain that some of those protections, as asserted by AFSCME, are debatable. Hide behind the consitution. The easy button. Dems are always ready to push that, especially in the service of a tax hike. Or perhaps Steans and Trotter are speaking for AFSCME? It sure felt like it.
At least the Republicans, both better public speakers, stuck to basic talking points and didn’t meander. Lauzen made a point about the stimulus money–$9.4 billion amount about a third of the operating budget. How is being used to reduce the deficit? We really don’t know.
Comment by cassandra Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:01 am
===Lauzen made a point about the stimulus money–$9.4 billion amount about a third of the operating budget.===
Except a whole lot of that cash isn’t going to the operating budget.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:07 am
Yes, but it does provide opportunities for shifting
monies from programs that benefit from the stimulus to those that do not. I think the Obama admin was going to try and limit shifting, but I don’t think they were very successful.
Comment by cassandra Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:11 am
You’re quite wrong. The rules are pretty intense on shifting.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:12 am
**Yes, but it does provide opportunities for shifting**
No it doesn’t. Very little of it does. The education and FMAP increase money were basically the only real stimulus funds that could be used to address the budget issues. And those two things have protected programs and the budget in very significant ways.
Further, much of the stimulus funds that WERE connected to the budget were also attached to strict rules around prompt payment (on Medicaid dollars), no reduction in state spending (education, childcare), etc.
For Lauzen to pretend that there was $9.7B (in one fiscal year) in stimulus funds that would have addressed the budget issue is more than just a bit disingenuous.
Comment by dave Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:24 am
*Yes, but it does provide opportunities for shifting
monies from programs that benefit from the stimulus to those that do not. I think the Obama admin was going to try and limit shifting, but I don’t think they were very successful.*
There were/are also strict rules about supplementation. For many of the stimulus line items, you could not replace state funds with the federal funds provided via the stimulus. They had to be used on top of existing state funding.
Comment by Montrose Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:26 am
Actually, to further explain, I am not criticizing shifting. It’s our money too-it desn’t belng to Congress or to President Obama. We should be able to use it locally to respond to local needs and if there are ways to do that we should consider them. We should also appeal if we think the rules are too strict. We shouldn’t be using the money to hire more Democratic patronage hacks or plump up no-bid conracts for contributors. And in Illinois, that’s the problem. A big one.
Comment by cassandra Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:47 am
As a state employee I am willing to be a part of plans to reduce state costs. Our agency has been operating at budget levels of 2007 levels, I believe. This has put a noticeable strain on the services we provide but we are making do with what we have. Several staff here, including myself, have indicated a willingness to take furlough days. We have just been notified of the voluntary program and this will be something some of us will participate in, I think. While I am more concerned over structural, long term issues, I think these more noticeable, public kind of gestures have their place. It is important to remember that state employees agreed to increase their portion of the pension that occured some time after I began working at the state. I think that is something rank and file should consider, again. I am in agreement with secret square on most things, including the pension changes. I was in favor of the federal SSA changes that GW Bush was pusing as it meant changing the pensions from a defined benefit to the more current plans many in the private sector are involved in. Paying taxes on the health care insurance benefits are another possibility. Many in the private sector have to do this so it is only fair. Like SS, I would hope that these changes would occur over time, rather than all at once. However, being laid off usually doesn’t happen slowly, over time. Life is unfair.
I have little confidence that the pain would be spread evenly and “fairly” over those who would bear the effects of the changes. I know I benefit from the union that represents state employees. I can’t make the union change it’s stance and I won’t resign from my job in protest, either. I do wish there was someone in charge who was more interested in doing what is right for the great state of Illinois rather than the cynical, silly, suggestion box and the equally silly web-site soliciting applications for the lite gov. I suppose PQ can try to use it at one of his populist press conferences but I don’t expect anything of substance to come out of either of these gimmicks.
Comment by dupage dan Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:50 am
Minimum 25% reduction in State revenue sharing with units of local government. And yes, this would affect me personally.
First off, it’s a big enough reduction to make a difference. Secondly, I know from an up close viewpoint that units of local governments can make the hard cuts and reductions if they absolutely have to.
Not my preferred course of action by a long shot, but our options are few.
Comment by Judgment Day Is On The Way Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:51 am
Yet another misreading by Rich and this time of Dennis Byrne.
While many comments on the budget website do say “raise income taxes”, what they do not say is “raise MY income taxes”. In short, where are the comments that read “take more of my money” and “reduce the amount my employer receives”.
Now plunge back into the comments to find these.
@cassandra
You could just use the Recovery.gov website to track the stimulus spending. A lot of it looks ridiculous to me, but some of it appears rather effective. In terms of reducing the deficit? That’s a good one.
Here’s an example of how big government spends your money.
The CHA has a property in Chicago known as the Pomeroy Apartments. It is a 120 unit building for seniors. It has been closed for years. In 2003 the CHA spent about 1.1 million for facade repairs. In mid 2009 about a million dollars was awarded to also rehab units in the building. The stimulus dropped another 18 million on the property to “green” it in 2009.
There is probably additional spending if I keep digging, but right now the tally is $166,666.67 per unit. It’s approaching the median sales price for residential units in the area.
Comment by Brennan Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:52 am
Brennan, since everyone but retirees and the poorest of the poor pay state income taxes, it’s pretty safe to assume that “raise income taxes” means “raise my taxes.” Sheesh.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 11:54 am
I am a state employee and, like Irish, my agency has been cut in half and nearly made non-functioning by the lack of capital and personnel budget. So, we have already been hit by cuts that greatly affect me. However, I do think the pension needs to be looked at. In this day, it is unreasonable to expect free health insurance for the rest of your life (after 20 years of service). Most retirees spend a portion of their income on insurance and it seems reasonable to ask state employees to do the same. However, absolutely nothing should be done to any of the state retirement systems until the legislators’ system has been brought in line with the others. You never hear them complain that THEIR system is loaded with perks that other people don’t get, do you? And yet, they can retire with just 8 years of service. (Correct me if I am wrong, Rich) Plus, their pay is based on the last year of salary - mine is the 4 highest of the last 10. They need to reform their own pension system before they continue complaining about the rank and file employees.
Comment by lincolnlover Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 12:02 pm
*There is probably additional spending if I keep digging, but right now the tally is $166,666.67 per unit. It’s approaching the median sales price for residential units in the area.*
Just because affordable housing is structured so it is affordable to low-income families, that does not mean it is any cheaper to build/rehab. You are going to find that amount per unit and up for any new or rehabbed affordable housing project in the metro area. Actually, the $166,666.67 is cheap.
Comment by Montrose Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 12:03 pm
Rich - maybe you need a Question of the Day that asks what state services/programs are most important to you and where you would make major cuts in them. My church’s budget is a diaster too and I told people if they wanted cuts restored they had better say what else had to be cut to get the money. Which points to it’s not just politicians that can’t make cuts. All the groups I belong to have just as much trouble.
Comment by formerGOPer Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 12:14 pm
What would I sacrifice? I’ve had no raises in the past 6 years. I’ve taken 7 furlough days in the past 8 months, my income has dropped 4% and you know what, it didn’t hurt that much. The problem is that ALL employees aren’t forced to do it. Pension - I’d be more than willing to pay more contribution and pick up at least part of health insurance after I retire. I hear many union members say they’d be willing to make sacrifices but would like uniformity.
Comment by Merit Comp Slave Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 12:48 pm
I have two kids in public high schools and one in a state university, but I fully support cutting education spending.
Just give us the power to limit raises and benefit increases to available funding increases, and take away the damaging advantage of allowing staff to strike in public sector jobs.
We’ll take care of the rest.
When I did public sector design work, my fees were usually based upon a percentatge of the total construction cost of the project.
When the project costs were high because of over inflated “prevailing wage” rates, I made more money for no more work than if the project was built at market labor rates.
I still say end the prevailing wage mandate on all non-Federal public work.Unfortunately, you can’t get around Davis Bacon on Fed jobs.
My Dad (92) uses the PACE pick up system, which is an EXTREMELY expensive means of transportation.
I say cut the program. I’ll take the extra time to take him where he wants to go when he would have used PACE.
I have a number of tenants on public pensions. I say limit the increases every year to rate of inflation, even though it means there is less money available for my rent.
It’s very affordable housing, but I always consider ability to pay, not just market values, when I make rent decisions.
I’m willing to moderate rent increases to compensate.
I’d have a moratorium on rent increases if it weren’t for skyrocketing school real estate taxes to fund ridiculous raises and pensions!
A large percentage of us looking to cut are willing to do it even if it’s not in our personal best interest.
How many of the government “takers” can say the same?
Just take a look at the number of public unions that are quite willing to let their brothers and sisters be fired instead of reducing pay to keep them working and you’ll have the answer to the question!
Comment by PalosParkBob Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 1:12 pm
Since members of the General Assembly are only “part time” employees, their support staff should also be only part time - seasonal. Why are the Springfield secretaries and district office staff paid full salaries to read books over the summer?
Also, I think it would be a good idea to allow state employees to opt out of the pension. Right now you are not allowed to opt out (so far as I understand). I would prefer not to be a part of the pension - I don’t trust it will be there when I retire, I don’t plan to work for the state for any longer than a few years and my salary is so low that it really cuts into to my take-home pay.
Comment by Jean Weaver Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 1:19 pm
=== The Democrats will not cut government, because it means cutting their own throats. ===
@Vanillaman
Are you completely divorced from reality?
Democrats have successively trimmed state payrolls just about every year since 2003.
Last year’s budget included $2 billion in spending cuts, unless I’m mistaken, many of which targeted lawmakers’ “pet” projects.
Governor Quinn’s budget proposal this year includes another $2 billion in cuts, unless I’m mistaken.
Quinn has been bashed by the teacher’s unions - which supported Hynes - for favoring pension reforms.
When Madigan proposed creating a two-tiered pension system, every single Democrat voted for it in Executive Committee and every single Republican voted against it.
Finally, I don’t know how you or anyone else can rationally complain that Illinois state government is a “bad value.” We have one of the most efficient Medicaid systems in the country. The lowest income tax rate of any state with an income tax. And one of the lowest overall tax burdens.
Its like complaining that your car doesn’t get 300 miles to the tank when you only fill the tank up half way.
If you want to know who to blame for the $13 billion deficit, voters should look in the mirror.
We have CONSISTENTLY told lawmakers over the last decade to spend more money on Education, on Health Care, on Roads and Infrastructure, on Public Safety, on Clean Air and Water, BUT don’t raise our taxes.
That’s exactly what they did, and that’s exactly how you end up with a $13 billion deficit.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 1:28 pm
YDD,
=Democrats have successively trimmed state payrolls just about every year since 2003.
Last year’s budget included $2 billion in spending cuts, unless I’m mistaken, many of which targeted lawmakers’ “pet” projects.==
By democrats, do you mean RB? Was that the same budget wonderkind who pushed thru free bus rides for seniors? Those “pet” projects you mention were stripped from lawmakers who had the temerity to take on the entrenched power structure in Illinois (RB & MJM), not because the projects were wasteful. Remember?
We here in the front lines of state employment are the ones who have taken the brunt of reduced funding that was denied the agencies. We have done a fairly good job with the reduced funding. I agree that some voters have to look at themselves about their increased demands. However, that seems to be a logical extension of this being a blue state. With the exception of Bill Clinton, there are few democrats who have voted a reduction in spending on the social safety net (medicaid being one HUGE ticket item for state governments). You’all go hand in hand. Since I no longer vote for democrats, I will respectfully decline your nomination of myself as a part of the problem.
Comment by dupage dan Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 2:10 pm
“Since members of the General Assembly are only “part time” employees, their support staff should also be only part time - seasonal”
Are you assuming that state reps/senators never get phone calls, letters, e-mail, personal inquiries or requests for help from their constituents, at any time other than session days? Do these requests magically cease on the last day of session and wait until January to start up again?
Comment by Secret Square Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 2:11 pm
I really believe M. Madigan is already laying the groundwork for the 2014 election. Whoever wins this year will have to make so many unpopular choices in both tax increases and budget cuts that they will be fataly wounded for 2014
Comment by fed up Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 2:15 pm
I too am a state worker and having my salary cut would be the way I would like to contribute back to the state. Maybe 8-10%. Make it across the board cuts to all state workers, univ. faculty/admin/academic professionals, everyone. While my 10% won’t equal a ton, some of the others like those making upwards into the $300,000 range will be significant. Unfortunately, there aren’t a ton of jobs on the upper end to make a huge dent, but it’s a start.
I like others on this blog are members or fair share members of unions which we can’t get out of unless we quit which at this time, I can’t do.
I would rather take the pay cut than to give up benefits but if I don’t have the 10% cut then I would be willing to either contribute more or just take away the benefits for anyone over $30,000.
The poorest of workers, however, shouldn’t see a 10% decrease in their pay or benefits as a lot of those people are supporting families. Maybe a 3% decrease of pay. Leave the benefits alone.
I am one of those who make over $30g so this would affect me.
Other things the state does doesn’t affect me personally so I will leave that alone - of course except taxes. I don’t really take advantage of other benefits.
Comment by Univ. Kid Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 2:21 pm
If you want to know who to blame for the $13 billion deficit, voters should look in the mirror.
I know your mantra here. Your bottom line is that no elected official should be held responsible for their poor decisions because everyone who voted for the poor smuck is actually the cause.
That’s spreading the blame around enough to avoid any accountability or responsibility which will keep us from ever getting decent government.
Comment by VanillaMan Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 3:08 pm
To lower the budget, I would scarifice my state legislators from having to attend session from January through May. This way we can reduce per diums and salaries. Perhaps a system similar to Texas would help with the budget deficit; its legislature is in session every other year. Or simply shorten from January - February. Also, veto Veto Session. Again, money saved. Additionally, let’s cut legislators salaries too. Or perhaps they can take furlough days like state staff.
Comment by 2010 Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 3:25 pm
Raise my income tax. I’m paying 3%, I could pay 5%.
Comment by Cheryl44 Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 3:33 pm
@Vanillaman
I’m not suggesting that no elected officials should be held accountable. But before you lead the village to storm the castle, let’s remember we’re the ones who built the monster.
Let me refer you to the Paul Simon Institute:
“Overwhelming majorities of registered voters in Illinois believe the governor and the General Assembly could solve the state’s budget problems by cutting spending, but they oppose reductions in areas that comprise more than 90 percent of General Revenue Fund Appropriations.”
The problem isn’t — as Rich stated — that voters don’t want their own favorite programs cut. The problem is that voters don’t really want anything cut. Except for the early release program, which actually saved us money, and “waste”, which is the apparent ‘dark matter’ of the state budget…compromising the overwhelming majority of mass, but completely undetectable.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 3:45 pm
PPHS said (- Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 10:07 am):
“One woman said to tax her retirement. Hasn’t she paid taxes on her income originally?”
That depends. My retirement money comes out of my paycheck pre-tax and I’m not paying on what the (private) university puts in. But I except to pay taxes when I’m retired and living on that money.
Comment by Cheryl44 Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 4:30 pm
Cheryl44 just gave me an idea.
Since many people are eager to give their money to the state, why not start collecting now. The IL Department of Revenue can create a website to collect donations, or get approval by the taxpayer to begin deducting more state income tax from their checks. Of course, nothing is stopping folks from writing a check voluntarily and sending it now.
Comment by 2010 Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 4:30 pm
Actually, I would start at each Agency and start cutting and re-arranging at the top. They cut the union or employees that make less than $50,000. and turn around and hire more PSAs or SPSAs at $80,000 plus for doing the same jobs. Proof of this was printed by the SJR/Bernie concerning a Director’s cheif of staff…aka “special assistant” that slid into the union prior to the primary and has been holding the union job since November. If they had working managers it would be different, but our agency they are just sitting figure heads.
Comment by NO JUSTICE Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 4:35 pm
MC “slaves” always say they received no raises for 3 or more years. The agency I used to work for received no raises, but received $5,000 plus BONUSES. Go figure.
Comment by NO JUSTICE Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 4:37 pm
I will gladly pay two pennies on the dollar more in income tax to the state, plus sales tax on the few consumer services I utilize, in return for a state and city that are not laying off teachers, eliminating buses and trains, can’t hire enough police, closing libraries etc.
Comment by Reality Check Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 5:02 pm
Raise the state retirement age. decrease state paid days off-eliminate 12 sick days a year and make it none. eliminate personal days. Make state employees take their vacation time or lose it each year. (yes I am a state employee)
And somone ask Auditor General Bill Holland for ideas. His office sees all kinds of waste and I am sure would have some viable suggestions.
Comment by really? ? Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 6:47 pm
I feel guilty that I don’t want the program I utilize cut - Child Support Enforcement Program. I would rather have a tax increase than to let this program fall. It scares me to think what my children’s lives would of been like without it.
Comment by Can't Say My Nickname Tuesday, Mar 2, 10 @ 7:56 pm
No Justice - Nope no bonuses either, at least not for me. Guess I don’t know the right people.
Comment by Merit Comp Slave Wednesday, Mar 3, 10 @ 11:58 am