Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Emanuel says Rauner is “his own worst enemy”
Next Post: I was actually being charitable
Posted in:
* Oy…
Catholic Charities "may soon be forced to close programs" like Lutheran Social Services, state owes CC $16M #budgetimpasse #RaunervMadigan
— Mary Ann Ahern (@MaryAnnAhernNBC) January 25, 2016
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:41 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Emanuel says Rauner is “his own worst enemy”
Next Post: I was actually being charitable
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Um.. yeah. Duh. Pain isn’t reserved for one charity. Major shakeups will be happening at any non-profit that works with the state. Period. There is no avoiding it as long as the “budget impasse” or the “Rauner v Madigan” or more appropriately named, “Rauner budget hostage crisis” is in effect.
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:46 am
If this is true, it will devastate senior services in Chicagoland. Catholic Charities are the primary gatekeepers for state funded providers of care. They determine whether a senior is eligible for services and often how much and what types of services they get. If they fold, most of the Chicago network will eventually go with them.
Comment by CCP Hostage Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:48 am
As soon as the conventional wisdom became that there will be no budget until the November elections are done, nonprofits that have been holding on, planning to get to Spring, had to start re-calculating. Credit lines are tapped out, other dollars can only be shifted so much. They just can’t hold on for another 9 months. I would suspect that LSSI, and now possibly Catholic Charities, are just a couple of many we will hear from in the coming weeks.
Comment by Montrose Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:49 am
Why are CC and LSSI so reliant on state gov funding?
Comment by Shoe Searer Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:50 am
===Why are CC and LSSI so reliant on state gov funding?===
They, and dozens and dozens of groups, large and small fulfill the role of state safety net where government can’t, and do it to assist the state with the state’s mission to society.
Ugh.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:53 am
“Why are CC and LSSI so reliant on state gov funding?”
Scale. Private philanthropy does not have the resources to serve the number of people CC & LSSI serve. Both get money from foundations and individual donors and fund raisers, but government funding provides scale. If you want to serve a large number of vulnerable individuals, you partner with the government.
Comment by Montrose Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:53 am
The long game hurts the Rauner Party of Illinois. Elections are decided by the middle not the extremes. Madigan is a lot smarter than Rauner.
Comment by Liberty Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:54 am
Wasn’t there a firm started by some connected Dems specifically to provide service providers and vendors loans under these circumstances? They front the money in exchange for collecting the late payment interest.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:57 am
“Why are CC and LSSI so reliant on state gov funding”
It’s not even about that. The gov owes CC $16 million for services provided. The government entered into a contract for said services. They’re breaking the contract and the consequences are severe.
Comment by Politix Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:57 am
==Why are CC and LSSI so reliant on state gov funding?==
Are you real?
Comment by AC Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:59 am
Shoe Searer, rather than provide services directly, Illinois contracts services out.
Comment by CCP Hostage Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:59 am
@- Shoe Searer - Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 11:50 am:
“Why are CC and LSSI so reliant on state gov funding?”
Because penny pinching tightwad “compassionate conservatives’ felt that contracting out the services is less expensive for the taxpayers.
Turn’s out…it’s waaaaaaaaaaay cheaper when the State doesn’t even honor the outsourcing contract.
Go back under your bridge, troll.
Comment by How Ironic Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:01 pm
I wonder if this is not Rauner’s plan all along, to cripple these programs so that the beneficiaries seek assistance elsewhere, out of Illinois. You know: “move or die”.
Comment by Colin O'Scopey Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:04 pm
The only thing that is keeping services for individuals with Developmental Disabilities from collapse are court orders that those services must be paid. Otherwise, many agencies would have already gone out of business. Making people with Downs Syndrome homeless is a bad practice.
Comment by Aldyth Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:05 pm
==Because penny pinching tightwad “compassionate conservatives’ felt that contracting out the services is less expensive for the taxpayers.==
Which conservative forced the government to contract with these groups?
Comment by Shoe Searer Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:10 pm
This madness has to end - but when and how? After all it is only the most vulnerable and deserving that are being impacted!
Who, or what programs and charitable organizations, will be next?
Comment by illini Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:13 pm
Time for CC and LSSI supporters who also supported BVR to call him out.
Comment by Handle Bar Mustache Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:14 pm
=== - Shoe Searer - Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:10 pm:
==Because penny pinching tightwad “compassionate conservatives’ felt that contracting out the services is less expensive for the taxpayers.==
Which conservative forced the government to contract with these groups?====
This happened in the 1970’s and 1980’s. It was a long time ago.
Comment by Try-4-Truth Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:14 pm
Separate state and church
Comment by Joel Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:14 pm
CCP Hostage- If Catholic Charities goes down it will take down the Metro East. Dear God that’s our cornerstone. Okay for months I have been saying that only Gala/ball charities will survive ( meaning those with gala’s and balls ergo ones with large private donors). Well it looks like I was wrong. If Catholic Charities is out then we’re going to go down really really fast. This makes me want to check with my friends at Urban League. Oh colleagues on capfax, I can’t emphasize how bad all of this is. This is going to snowball fast. We’re talking loss of life very soon here, very soon. I pray there are journalists still out there to record it and make it known. Thank you once again Rich. Keep throwing elbows. You’re one of the only voices left. How can they foul you out now? Get aggressive. Those suffering will not be heard otherwise. Politics is YOUR GAME RICH! You know Rauner was smarting from the three pointer you just put out. It was ALL NET! 1.4% is narrative that is going to kill him in March. Keep sinking em Rich! I know real journalists aren’t supposed to pick sides but be impartial. Different world Mr. Miller. Use your strength for those people who are suffering. Keep playing for their team.
Comment by Honeybear Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:17 pm
==Because penny pinching tightwad “compassionate conservatives’==
Yes. You see, we prefer to give our money directly to charitable organizations rather than have it taken by law and disbursed by the General Assembly, the Great Caretaker of funds for the needy.
Perhaps if enough others felt similarly, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Comment by Shoe Searer Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:17 pm
This is just brutal.
Comment by DuPage Bard Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:18 pm
“Separate state and church”
If you want to start a non-sectarian/Jewish/Muslim/Whatever-based charity and contract with the government to provided needed services, knock yourself out. No one’s stopping you.
Plenty of people here have already explained why these arrangements exist; maybe you should read before commenting.
Comment by Nick Name Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:22 pm
@Shoe Searer,
“Perhaps if enough others felt similarly, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.”
Get. A. Clue.
You can’t have it both ways. If you want better ‘value’ for the taxpayer, you sub it out to an organization that provides social services for less money.
Then you have to pay for the services rendered.
For your second point, there isn’t enough charitable giving to support the level of need in the community. If there were, then it would be covered.
The fact is (despite that deep, deep feeling that you have that somehow, someway these folks are just getting rich off the welfare rolls) these folks need help. We either give them a hand up, (through child care assistance, drug addition treatment, job training post jail and the list goes on) OR we pay higher through increased reliance on other support programs, jail, etc.
But whatever. This will fall on your deaf ears, as you congratulate yourself on how witty you are, particularly on making sure those that need assistance don’t get it.
Comment by How Ironic Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:29 pm
===maybe you should read before commenting. ===
That’ll never happen.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:30 pm
=== - Shoe Searer - Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:29 pm:
==If you want to start a non-sectarian/Jewish/Muslim/Whatever-based charity and contract with the government to provided needed services==
Why is the State a pass through? I see two options:
- People must have the necessary funds taken by law from them to help the needy because they wouldn’t give it voluntarily
- State govt inserted itself where not needed and crowded out a significant portion of private giving through taxation for the very same beneficiaries. I.e. the State made itself necessary.===
Ok, I’m trying not to lose my temper. These social service agencies exist to solve public problems. My agency serves senior citizens. Our whole point is to keep our clients out of long-term-care facilities. If we are sucessful (which we are. As a matter of fact, very successful with data to back it up) our services save the taxpayers double the public investment that we get. See, it works. This isn’t about taking care of poor people. We serve a public good, and save the taxpayers money.
Pick up a book, read, and get yourself informed. You are making yourself look bad.
Comment by Try-4-Truth Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:34 pm
Shoe Searer, ask Jim Durkin.
Comment by Dawn Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:41 pm
“Yes. You see, we prefer to give our money directly to charitable organizations rather than have it taken by law and disbursed by the General Assembly, the Great Caretaker of funds for the needy.
Perhaps if enough others felt similarly, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.”
Your individual donations to charities you care about is admirable. Correct me if I am wrong, but I would guess that you appreciate government policy that allows you to reduce your tax bill as a result of your private charitable donations.
The fact of the matter is, government plays a critical role in ensuring the most vulnerable in our society have services that afford them the opportunity to live with dignity and respect. It is embedded in the preamble of the Illinois Constitution that a Illinois government is to work towards the elimination of poverty. We work towards this common good through both substantive policy and the use of tax dollars to support programs like those of LSSI and CC. It is not an either or proposition. It is both and. So, please continue to both contribute to the charities you care about privately and support Illinois finding a solution to our budget crisis that serves the needs of the vulnerable in our society.
Comment by Montrose Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:45 pm
Those of us who care need to double up our donationsxand volunteer time.
Comment by Let'sMovetoNorthDakota Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 12:55 pm
Letsmovetonorthdakota- good comment. Problem is that I think that most people who care are donating and volunteering as much as they can. The problem is that those folks are going to get overwhelmed and develop caregiver burnout. We can’t keep fishing people out of the river. Those who can need to get upstream and stop the person throwing them in in the first place. Rauners refusal to govern until his TA is put in place is plain and simple extortion. The fact that he bet the fate of the GOP on his success was his mistake not the little old lady without senior services. Mrs. Jones is not going to get meals on wheels soon. It’s not her fault.
Comment by Honeybear Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 1:10 pm
Churches do the government’s work because GW Bush thought it was a good way to dismantle the safety net and expand the control of his base.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jesus/president/faithbased.html
It’s wrong, but it is the system we have.
This Governor doesn’t care about expanding the power of the Republican base. So, he doesn’t care about funding the less-expensive, back-of-the-envelope, private-donation-subsidized version of his state’s responsibilities to its citizens.
He wants to turn a profit. That’s his business.
Flipping companies and extracting tax dollars is the only thing he’s ever really done well.
That is why this was set up in the first place and that is why it is happening now.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 1:27 pm
Looks like the house will be have to be burned down before it can be saved. Democratic lawmakers are causing pain and suffering for no reason. Public unions are political organizations that have no business in Government. The Supreme court is about to put a dent in them and the Democrats are on the wrong side of destiny causing undo pain and suffering.
Comment by concered citizenL Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 1:33 pm
===the wrong side of destiny===
And who’s “destiny” would that be?
Comment by Way Way Down Here Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 1:42 pm
Joel and Shoe Searer,
The Archdiocese of Chicago spends millions of dollars each year on social services operated through catholic charities. All funded by Parishioners via an annual appeal campaign. In addition, all Parishes contribute to community food pantries and other local charities in and near their parish. Also, many parishes have Knights of Columbus Councils that operate are separately from the parish and contribute money and time to many charities. The fact that the City, County and State fund social services through the Archdiocese is because the Catholic Church has been delivering these services the Chicagoland area for well over a hundred years and have a structure for delivering these service efficiently. Please note that the Church is a NON=PROFIT organization and does not make money off these contracts, in fact, the Church supplements the delivery of these services.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 1:42 pm
Please note that Catholic Charities is not one state-wide organization. What may be true for Chicago Catholic Charities, is not necessarily the case for the other diocese in the state. Hence, the item by Ms. Ahern is likely not related to the Central Illinois Catholic Charities
Comment by Downstate Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 1:43 pm
The destiny is for public unions to further fade, and free the people of Illinois to be run for the tax payers, and not for public employees and all who benefit from the public dole.
Comment by concerned ctizen Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 1:49 pm
To my post on another thread today - the State of Illinois has contracted with a local church based social services organization to provide services to developmentally disabled and at risk youth ( up to the age of 21 ) and is providing at least 90% of the funding used to run the programs they administer.
We are talking about 40 youth and probably twice as many professional, administrative and supportive staff.
Comment by illini Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 1:53 pm
illini- Consent decree most likely is where their funding if continuing to come from:
http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20160121/news/160129698/
Comment by Anon221 Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 1:58 pm
Yes, illini, and it was explained to you that the state contract was likely made in order to comply with Ligas v. Norwood.
What’s your point?
Is it that nonprofits do work that is a basic responsibility of government?
That’s been established.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 2:01 pm
Sad. I hope every IL voter realizes that losing these services affects us all.
Comment by TD Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 2:01 pm
Sad that people would knock a faith based organization like Catholic Charities or Lutheran Social Services because of a secular ideology. These organizations have extremely low overhead. I don’t think it is possible to do this work for less money. Some well known “charities” that I will not name have CEO’s that have 7 figure compensation packages.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 2:01 pm
=== - concerned ctizen - Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 1:49 pm:
The destiny is for public unions to further fade, and free the people of Illinois to be run for the tax payers, and not for public employees and all who benefit from the public dole.====
You should be “concerned” you you don’t understand how government works.
Are there no “public goods”? What is the role of government?
And, the civil service system that exists today (unions and all) is there because the previous system was abused by public officials for decades (and longer).
If you want the government to work for the “free people of Illinois”, then you would want unions, collective bargaining, and civil service protections. Unless you enjoy the spoils system? Governors Blagojevich and Ryan would be proud of you.
Comment by Try-4-Truth Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 2:03 pm
Considering that support to CC and LSSI is essentially outsourcing work that the Government would otherwise need to do, one would think that Governor Ahab would take care of them. But you just go on hunting that whale, Ahab, while your ship falls to pieces around you because pitch and nails are Union made.
Comment by RIJ (formerly PolPal56) Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 2:22 pm
CC: 1:49
Destiny. Got it now. Kind of makes me want to channel my inner Gene Wilder.
Comment by Way Way Down Here Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 2:39 pm
I fear not only for the people served by LSSI and Catholic Charities, but their staff, many of who are in moderate to low-paying jobs themselves and will need the same services that are now being cut. And losing Catholic Charities will crush the WIC program in the Chicago area.
Comment by Uptown Rooster Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 2:45 pm
“Public unions are political organizations that have no business in Government.”
Better get rid of political parties too then.
Comment by Nick Name Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 2:45 pm
===Why are CC and LSSI so reliant on state gov funding?===
Are there no prisons? No workhouses?
Comment by Carhartt Representative Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 3:02 pm
I’m generally a strong advocate of separation of state and religion, but the posters pushing that issue in this thread are distracting from a much more important and ethically pressing issue that is not limited to faith-based social services contractors. Attacking groups that don’t proselytize and that do an admirable job providing services does not help your cause. With respect, I advise to zip it.
Comment by X-prof Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 3:03 pm
-Anon at 1:42-
I am not questioning why CC or LSSI exist. In fact, I wish they and others completely displaced any state government agency involved in this area that operates under the fantasy that is the most efficient conduit to care for the needy. I am asking how we got to the point where money first needs to flow to the GA before coming back to these charities and other local organizations via contract.
One response will be “because there aren’t sufficient donations”. Why is that? One possibility I mentioned was that the state has to step in simply because people just don’t care enough. That money has to literally be taken from all of us to care for these people because we would not do it on our own. I think long-term it would be greatly beneficial for the “State” to say — we’re out. The care the needy get is determined by what you all give voluntarily and the solutions you devise. I think it would make the problems much more visible and immediate to communities and citizens, and more creative and effective long-term solutions would be crafted. Instead, we have the State do it, and most remain entirely detached save the % of taxes that goes towards these services.
I actually think it is less that the State had to step in, and more that the State chose to because hey, what shouldn’t the State control. In doing so, it increased the detachment of the comparably well off from the needy in communities, and also displaced much of the giving that otherwise would have occurred had everyone felt more responsibility.
I know many need the nearest fainting couch at the thought of a State gov with less authority and control. “How ever will the needy be taken care of if not for the State?” Look in the mirror.
Comment by Shoe Searer Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 3:15 pm
If it weren’t for the courts ordering some payments, there would be a lot more providers doing the exact same thing. That’s why I cringed when Rauner griped about getting out from under the court consent decrees.
Comment by Earnest Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 3:17 pm
“I think long-term it would be greatly beneficial for the “State” to say — we’re out. The care the needy get is determined by what you all give voluntarily and the solutions you devise.”
Your “beneficial” theory was tested in the first half of the 20th century. It resulted in senior citizens living without heat and malnourished American children.
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 3:31 pm
==I actually think it is less that the State had to step in==
Then you thought wrong. Ask the social services network if they have the capacity to handle the needs out there and they will tell you no. That is why the state is there. Caring for it’s most vulnerable citizens is a central role of government.
==“How ever will the needy be taken care of if not for the State?” Look in the mirror.==
That’s nice. Wouldn’t we all like it if people provided enough resources on their own to support these organizations. But, they don’t. Wishing they did isn’t helpful. If you think the state collecting less taxes will increase giving then I’ve got some oceanfront property here in Illinois to sell you.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 3:35 pm
@- Shoe Searer - Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 3:15 pm:
I’m willing to bet a substantial portion of my income that you’re the same guy that bleets relentlessly about how much prisons cost, why drug abusers go to hospital ED’s instead of treatment centers, poor people use food stamps while they are gainfully employed at Wal-Mart for $10/hr, how people that use child care subsidies should ‘not have kids if they can’t afford them’. et el.
Again. Get. A. Clue.
I wish there was a pot of gold at the end of each rainbow. Guess what…there isn’t one. Just like there are not enough people that donate to charity.
Maybe you ought to bone up a bit on Luke 10:25-37. Stop walking by, and instead let these folks provide the necessary care to people in real times of crisis.
Your outrage is sickening.
Comment by How Ironic Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 3:36 pm
Shoe Seaer- “In doing so, it increased the detachment of the comparably well off from the needy in communities, and also displaced much of the giving that otherwise would have occurred had everyone felt more responsibility.”
***
OK, Shoe, Rauner pulled the plug on funding on these social service providers. Then pain is here and it is real. Tell me, where are the “comparably well off” at in filling the hole left behind?? When Teen Reach was cancelled at the Rauner Family YMCA, did the Rauner Family step in and fund the program?? Here’s you chance to prove us all wrong.
Comment by Anon221 Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 3:42 pm
Shoe Searer makes me nostalgic for the good old days when the grande dames of the Beef Trust Bourgeoisie fed, clothed, and gave adequate medical care to every immigrant family back of the yards.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9807E6DE1330E233A25750C1A96F9C946196D6CF
Golly, government does nothing but get in the way.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 4:02 pm
Shoe Shearer, you’re willfully clueless.
Catholic Charities, LSSI and others are vendors to the SOI, they have contracts to run programs and provide services that were formerly performed by full-time state employees with health benefits and pensions.
It’s called privatization. It used to be big in some circles.
It’s a reason why the SOI has the lowest per capita state employee count in the country.
You down with that, Philosopher King?
Or is the game plan to move from public programs to private programs to no programs?
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 4:03 pm
===Or is the game plan to move from public programs to private programs to no programs?===
Bingo.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 4:04 pm
I know I’m a broken record on this today, but I don’t think it’s just no programs (though it is partly that). It seems to also be about a for-profit gold rush.
Comment by crazybleedingheart Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 4:15 pm
The Catholic & Lutheran Priests should tell their flock not to vote for Rauner in the next election.
Comment by Mama Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 4:41 pm
All the “thousand points of light” going out one by one…
Comment by morningstar Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 4:47 pm
Day after day, as this continues, I have to wonder how this will stop and who will stop it. We’re aware that the governorship is not a dictatorship; this TA came from nowhere–it certainly was not a huge platform from which Rauner was elected! So what does it take to stop this horrible, embarrassing, heartless attack on Illinois citizens? Are there really people in this state who are cheering on more hardship? What will it take? Don’t say meeting the governor’s demands. I seriously believe that most people aren’t staying up all night worried about unions and collective bargaining rights. At this point, they’re all worried about their own household stability in this crazy state with a reckless governor.
Comment by AnonymousOne Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 4:48 pm
Honeybear, keep reporting all the lives that are being harmed by Rauner’s budget impasse. People need to hear it.
Comment by Mama Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 4:52 pm
==”- Try-4-Truth - Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 2:03 pm: ==
Good one!
Comment by Mama Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 4:59 pm
What does it take to stop this? A little give from Rauner, a little give from Madigan, and a large departure from their current win-at-all costs approach.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 5:52 pm
I don’t think Bruce gets the not for profit thing.
If the same services were contracted to a for profit corporation we would not be seeing cutbacks.
Charity has its place in Bruce’s world view but social good over profit is the real threat to the corporate masters.
Comment by Bumble Bee Monday, Jan 25, 16 @ 8:58 pm