Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Caption contest!
Next Post: Trump’s best point of the night
Posted in:
* AP…
A proposal bolstering Illinois funding for early education is now law.
Gov. Bruce Rauner signed the plan Thursday at an event with his wife, Diana Rauner. She runs an early education organization called The Ounce of Prevention Fund.
Under existing state law, 14 percent of grant money for early education was set aside for children up to age 3. Under the new measure, it eventually will grow to 20 percent.
* Both the governor and Mrs. Rauner were asked about the lawsuit that the Ounce had joined to force payment of state contracts to social service providers. Raw audio is here, but this is part of Gov. Rauner’s comment…
I don’t blame the agencies and the human services and the community leaders who are very frustrated by the process. I’m with them. I share their frustration.
* Mrs. Rauner…
I’ll just say that the Ounce of Prevention joined this lawsuit as a business decision to support and serve the organizations that we work with. And that was a decision that we made which I think is understandable considering the situation. I share the governor’s frustration with the lack of a balanced budget and structural reforms and hope that we can get to a position where all programs for vulnerable families are supported appropriately and all agencies are paid in a timely fashion.
That appears to be as close to an endorsement of the governor’s much-criticized “hostage” strategy as I’ve yet seen by her.
* Tribune…
But when the first lady was pressed to weigh in on whether too much damage had already been done to social services, the governor stepped to the microphone instead.
“There are many, many human services, many social service agencies supporting our most vulnerable families that have not received the support they deserve. And that’s a tragedy,” the governor said. Then he moved on to a new question.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 9:59 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Caption contest!
Next Post: Trump’s best point of the night
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
“And that’s a tragedy.” Must have stepped away from the microphone so we didn’t catch, “A tragedy of my making.”
Comment by Wednesday morning Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:02 am
Rich, I know you disagree. But Mrs. Rauner played an important, highly visible role in her husband’s campaign. She also is the director of a high-profile advocacy group. She is a public figure in her own right, and I believe she must take responsibility for the impact of her words and actions.
I don’t think it is appropriate for a family member to take a high-profile public position and then, when criticized, to slip back behind the “families are off limits” trope.
If you don’t want public criticism, stay out of the public eye.
Comment by Soccermom Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:05 am
Diana Rauner has lost any credibility as an advocate of Social Servives.
“OW! How can you say such hyperbole! That’s just wrong!”
Really?
The people hurt by her husband are nearly collateral damage and Diana Rauner explains the lawsuit is a “business decision” not a moral outrage or an obligation to those hurt by her husband.
Nope. Sorry. Doesn’t work THAT way.
Ounce of Prevention has a President that would frame their dilemma as a “business decision” not a crisis to the most needy of Illinois
If you are a Social Service group, advocate, “sponsor”, client..,
Diana Rauner is frustrated too… but reforming Illinois is more important than people.
Right Ron Sandack…
The Twitter is gone, but your tweet remains… just like…
“Bruce has NO social agenda.”
Diana Rauner wants the shredding of Social Services… It’s a “business decision” to pretend to care.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:07 am
I hope we can finally dispel the notion that Mrs. Rauner is some sort of innocent victim or bystander in all this. At the very least she is an enabler.
Comment by steward Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:09 am
She is no civilian and never has been. She’s a combatant posing as a non-combatant.
Which is…..(queue favorite word)
perfidy
Comment by Honeybear Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:14 am
So Ms. Rauner — an avowed democrat — is all-in for the decimation of collective bargaining in Illinois, too?
That’s a new one. But it’d be nice if someone pressed the point with Ms. Rauner. We know that “structural reforms” means the ability to decimate unions. I assume she knows, too.
I mean, what *other* structural reforms does she have in mind?
Comment by Formerly Known as Frenchie M Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:15 am
“There are many, many human services, many social service agencies supporting our most vulnerable families that have not received the support they deserve.” — Bruce Rauner, July 21, 2016.
“In Illinois there’s been a long-time history of what I would call social service, social justice, a bigger role for government in the safety net than in many other states. I think we can drive a wedge issue in the Democratic Party on that topic” — Bruce Rauner, September 18, 2012.
This is Rauner’s plan.
This has ALWAYS been Rauner’s plan.
– MrJM
Comment by @MisterJayEm Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:17 am
Mrs. Rauner’s position at Ounce put her in bounds right from the start. She’s now stated that she supports, at least personally, a turnaround agenda strategy of bleeding social service providers dry as part of forcing the opposition to their knees. She’s dismissed the lawsuit as purely a business, numbers decision, and not as a way to fight for the weak. If I were at Ounce, I’d be embarrassed to have her in charge.
Comment by TD Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:19 am
==But when the first lady was pressed to weigh in on whether too much damage had already been done to social services, the governor stepped to the microphone instead.==
That pretty much sums up the whole situation.
Comment by Joe M Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:19 am
Diana Rauner sleeps just as well as Bruce Rauner when it comes to the conplete destruction of Illinois’ social services.
Diana Rauner just told us so.
Ron Sandack sleeps well… on weekends.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:19 am
==But when the first lady was pressed to weigh in on whether too much damage had already been done to social services, the governor stepped to the microphone instead.==
I wish the questioner had stepped in to say “My question was for Mrs. Rauner.”
Comment by Robert the Bruce Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:19 am
When Rauner stepped in front of his wife to take the mic, he pulled a Sandack! (For context, I think that was the June 8, 2016 LiveStream event.)
Comment by Anon221 Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:21 am
Wait. Mrs. Rauner supports her husband?
Comment by Roger Dorn Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:21 am
Maybe Ounce of Prevention doesn’t realize their President isn’t about helping… but about hurting as many as possible… as a business decision.
I guess it’s up to Ounce of Prevention to come to terms with a President looking out for the Turnaround Agenda instead of Ounce’s Mission?
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:23 am
I never doubted for a minute that Mrs. Rauner is completely supportive of her husband’s agenda and tactics to achieve the union busting reforms he insists upon. The tragedy is they both think his agenda is worth this pain felt by so many.
Comment by Wensicia Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:23 am
“As the President of Ounce of Prevention, I’m 100% behind the mission of Ounce, unless it’s in conflict with Bruce’s Turnaround Agenda and squeezing the beast. Then the Mission of Ounce isn’t as important. Sorry” - Fake Diana Rauner.
“Fake” Diana Rauner… heh.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:27 am
A conflict of interest, by any name, is still a conflict of interest. This fact is underscored by the level of equivocating in Mrs. Rauner’s statement. At some point, she will need to make a choice. It looks like that time is now.
Comment by Valerie F. Leonard Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:27 am
Dr. Rauner is also not taking a salary at her post at Ounce. If she retains her post, then she (and the reforms she supports) must be worth the investment. She stated that Ounce enjoined the lawsuit to support those organizations that Ounce partners with, not, evidently, because Ounce is hurting, too??? If those partners are gone, does that mean “more soup for you(Ounce)”???
Comment by Anon221 Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:32 am
At this point, Diana’s admission is really an ultimatum to Ounce of Prevention?
Bruce Rauner loves him some retaliation…
Plus, if Diana Rauner’s position is now at “Prop Status” to decimate all Social Services… Can Ounce… afford… not to go along with the charade?
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:35 am
Not a civilian anymore, if she ever really was. Also, what a creepy relationship dynamic displayed here.
Comment by Crispy Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:46 am
I’m not worried.
Diana Rauner will just say… You guessed it…
“I donated millions”.
I can’t wait.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:48 am
Quick Lance….Draft another e-mail apologiz’n this time for Mrs. Rauner’s hasty comments.
Comment by Johnnie F. Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:49 am
Probably gonna be moderated AGAIN, but this is oh-so accurately called the banality of e–l. Pretty, smiling, appears socially presentable, and provides the perfect screen to hide the death and destruction going on because of the actions of our leader.
Comment by Groundhog Day Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:55 am
So we finally have it, its money over people for Diana Rauner.
“You know how much your soul’s worth?
Your soul’s worth about as much as you can get on Wall Street, my dear…”
“Money Beats Soul” -James Douglas Morrison
Comment by Jimmy H Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 10:59 am
No surprises here, merely evidence of what many already thought.
Due to the new legislation, Ounce is in a position to reap significant economic rewards. I firmly believe that ther is a clear conflict of interest for Mrs. Rauner now. Truly undeniable by an honest person. She needs to step down from Ounce.
It is horribly disappointing that a so called Social Services/child advocate would actually support injuring our most vulnerable.
Comment by JS Mill Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 11:01 am
Thanks, Mr. JM.
And OW, we are not “collateral damage” cuz that is accidental. See Mr. JM’s comments. Hostages cannot be collateral damage, as any injury to us is intentional. At this point the hostage takers are sending severed limbs in the mail to force payment of the ransom. It’s sick.
Comment by Pawn Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 11:12 am
“Under existing state law, 14 percent of grant money for early education was set aside for children up to age 3. Under the new measure, it eventually will grow to 20 percent.”…Does that mean that grant funding for children 3+ will decline 6%? Did anyone ask?
Comment by NoGifts Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 11:19 am
== This is Rauner’s plan.
This has ALWAYS been Rauner’s plan. ==
I can’t add anything that MrJM hasn’t.
Comment by thunderspirit Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 11:21 am
- Pawn -
With great respect,
You’re not collateral damage, but the argument as to what is going on is being won by Rauner.
Sometimes me pointing that out that way… isn’t a slip of the keyboard…
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 11:25 am
Pretty sure they won’t be running the ‘I’m a Democrat and I support him’ commercial next election. Have to come up with some other equally bogus lie (such as the ‘no social agenda’).
Comment by Not quite a majority Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 11:45 am
- Pawn -
To clarify, respectfully.
Diana Rauner and her position in Social Service circles and her role at Ounce of Prevention, and marry (no pun intended) that to her role as Illinois’ First Lady….
What Diana Rauner did, with that quote, was completely undercut Social Services languishing, by making frivolous the idea that a “business decision” is her thinking, because, the “collateral damages” of supporting the Turbaround Agenda is more important to Diana Rauner, and reluctantly(???) a “business decision” was made to sue her husband.
That’s my point with my purposeful description (at times) to pass on, as I do, what is the reflective response or even the presented response Social Services is facing.
Diana Rauner isn’t “there” for Social Services. Her choice of words make clear that a “business decision” is not helping people, but a “necessity” and a necessity of the collateral damage for an agenda Diana Rauner supports.
Wow, that’s just cold by Diana Rauner.
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 11:47 am
It’s nice that Mrs. Rauner is a team player.
On a side note, in Illinois, Donald Trump is the best thing that happened to Bruce Rauner.
On the other hand,Trump’s Ascension could be a national story. Look what happens to a state that elects a business “leader” with no government experience — a business leader who “never fails” and is a tough “negotiator”.
The wheels came apart in Illinois, and they will surely come apart at the national level.
#Lessonslearned, #historywillrepeatitself
Comment by Winnin' Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 11:53 am
Oh man, she drank the Koolaid…
Comment by State Worker THX 1138 Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 12:27 pm
Can the doctor articulate how structural reforms are a critical part of her organization?
Comment by Rabid Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 2:09 pm
Ice Cold. “Business Decision”
Diana doesn’t have a social agenda either.
Comment by northsider (the original) Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 2:18 pm
OW, please explain w2hy the Rauners want to decimate all Social Services?
Comment by Mama Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 3:41 pm
“Nothing personal, Tessio. It’s just business.”
Comment by Nick Name Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 3:41 pm
Mama, I don’t think the Rauners WANT to destroy (not decimate since that means down by a tenth. The destruction is more than a tenth. Sorry pet peeve.) the social social services. It is simply a result of the hostage situation. Here’s my belief based upon 1) having actually been wealthy at one time AND conservative AND unaware privileged. I believe that the wealthy preserve their privilege by protecting it in various ways simultaneously deluding themselves the effects and responsibility for their actions. Example. My sister in law is a terrible parent. She is narcissistic and 1% elite to the core. She is in investment banking. Her kids are shear horrors. Yet she ignores them literally as if they don’t exist. She simple continues to carry on her conversation as if her 5 year old didn’t just toss her red cool aid drink on the carpet. My spouse and I horrified go into immediate action mopping it up with our napkins while sister in law actually looked annoyed that we were no longer sitting at the table eye to eye. I swear to God it’s true. Now she is an extreme case but do you get what I’m saying?
I believe that people on that level CAN have trouble seeing reality especially when it reflects poorly on themselves or their choices.
They simple look the other way. The Rauners might think that social services will work it out, or like Rodogno that the lack of money will actually be good for them, “shake them up”, maybe instill some discipline in them. They can’t in any way self blame or accept that they have cost thousands of jobs and effected over a million people. Truth be told we all have trouble accepting reality in varying degrees. I get it. But with the Rauners, the consequences are horrific.
Comment by Honeybear Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 4:28 pm
- Mama -
Bruce Rauner’s ideology goes back to the shutting down the state and pitting Labor versus Social Services sand forcing to the Nth Degree Democrats to choose.
Save social services, and destroy labor… or both will be destroyed, social services first.
Diana Rauner believe this is good now too…
The rest, Rich has, you can search it…
But that’s it in a nutshell
Comment by Oswego Willy Friday, Jul 22, 16 @ 4:43 pm