40 Comments - girl friday - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 5:19 am: This is so typical. Hey Abby Ottenhoff, the two plans are similiar. - Ex-Newfie - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 5:44 am: I feel sorry for the Guv’s spokespersons. How will they ever get anyone else to hire them once he rides off into the sunset? What company wants to knowing hire a person who speaks with forked tongue. - Shallow Pharnyx - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 6:02 am: Abby, how can you say in one sentence you are unaware of the 1995 plan and in the next sentence emphatically declare the comparison of a plan you have no clue about is nothing like Blago’s current plan?? Duh?? - Slash - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 6:05 am: There is only one thing saving the taxpayers: the fact that the majority party controls spending, and the minority party gets screwed if a large spending bill gets passed by the majority. That gives the minority party every reason to play spoiler in cases like this. This is why I am non-partisan, and always support the party that is out of power. Being a free man (someone who does not rely on the state dole to support myself) I can afford this luxury. - DOWNSTATE - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 6:08 am: Also back in those days the Republicans talked across the isle instead of these closed door meetings with only 3 Democrats. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 6:17 am: Actually, Abby will probably have a line of head hunters stretching around the corner to get to her after November. We all know that private enterprise has no conscience either and will gladly accept someone who can so callously defend the company line. No matter what. Probably make $2 billion a year. - The original Bill - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 6:39 am: Abbey will be White House press secretary someday. Probably sooner than you think. - Six Degrees of Separation - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 6:53 am: It’s actually comparing a small apple to a bigger apple. But any good spokesperson will trot out the “apples to oranges” line to try and make a distinction. BTW, Abby has a promising career ahead of her. If she can fool even a fraction of the people with what she is forced to defend, the public relations industry will take notice, as several posters have already noted. - Name/Nickname/Anon - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 7:25 am: Nice. So Blago was against a capital bill before he was for one? Nice to see he’s been reading John Kerry’s playbook. - zatoichi - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 7:43 am: It must be “progress” when the Gov wants to “borrow” $4 billion to build roads and schools. How original. Will it all be paid for with future taxes and keno? Gov seems to forget the axiom that your past does come back at weird times. Now class and Abby, let’s look at apples and oranges: round fruit that grows on trees, makes juice, eaten raw or cooked, vitamins, 2″-6″ across, fiber, both in my mom’s fruit salad. Yes, they are very different. To be fair, Steve Brown, spokesman for Speaker Madigan rationalized the House Democrat’s plan to “borrow” up to $500 million to build schools as “a great way of holding down property taxes.” Thank God that $500M will never have to be paid for either. Being a speaker for someone, must be a fun job. - frustrated GOP - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 7:46 am: So the first one wasn’t big enough? Well, Now I understand, Democrats only vote for really big loans we can’t pay for, not smalle ones we only think we can pay for. I gald we got that cleared up. - Nick - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 8:42 am: I have a job for Abby - Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 8:44 am: If the two plans are so similar, and Blagojevich is a hypocrite for opposing it then and supporting it now, that also means that Republicans are hypocrites for opposing it now and supporting it then. Face it, we aren’t fighting over principles here. If I were Republicans, I would not want to go back to voters this fall and say I opposed $500 million for new school construction, when my best defense is “Rod voted against it 12 years ago.” Of course, Madigan knows that they are probably just dumb enough to vote against the bill, and that’s why he’s running it. Every suburban lawmaker who votes against this bill becomes a target in 2008, if they aren’t a target already. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 8:49 am: Name/Nickname/Anonymous 7:25: Nice. So Republicans were for a capital bill before they were against one? Nice to see they’ve been reading George Bush’s playbook — ON LEAKS. - Lovie's Leather - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 8:50 am: The top 5 reasons Blagojevich didn’t want the spending but wants it now… 5.) The democrats are in power now… 4.) He wasn’t gonna get a kick-back from it… 3.) It would not have raided the pension fund… 2.) This might give him an excuse to raise fees (taxes)… …And the #1 reason the Blagojevich wants the $4billion… 1.) Buying votes is the only thing he can do right…. - Lovie's Leather - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 8:52 am: Hey YDD…. the Repubs were for $361 million… not 4 billion… I know you are a democrat… and all that means nowadays is that you do not have a fundamental understanding of economics… - Retire Frank - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 8:53 am: This works both ways. Frank Watson voted for previous capital measures but is against this one. - Bass Man - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 9:04 am: I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again…this spending bill, “jobs” bill, whatever you wanna call it is nothing more than a cover for the Governor’s fiscal irresponsibility for raiding 1.2 billion dollars from the road funds. Now his schemes of robbing Peter to pay Paul will be FINALLY open to the citizens of illinois, and the press has to report it, because IDOT does NOT have the monies to match federal dollars, and we’re in a world of hurt. Get ready boys and girls, the summer is gonna get hot. - grand old partisan - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 9:25 am: YDD, Lovie’s Leather and Six Degrees are right. The point isn’t that they are similar; it’s that this one is much larger. The one that Blago is proposing is 11x the size of the one he didn’t vote for in ’95. So perhaps Ms. Ottenhoff’s ‘apples to oranges comment is correct. Now the question is, why was Mr. Blagojevich opposed to the small, affordable apple 10 years ago, but now proposing a much more expensive, unaffordable orange right now? That seems much more hypocritical (and illogical) than what the GOP is doing. - Little Egypt - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 9:40 am: Our forked-tongue governor speaketh again. - VanillaMan - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 10:18 am: The problem we have with Blagojevich is that he didn’t work his way up to being Governor. He had been handed office through his father in law, and never appreciated it. He didn’t take time in any previous office to learn the ropes. After several years as a legislator, he had no bills written or laws passed. He seemed to have bided his time while Mell arranged for his next office promotion. As a legislator, Blagojevich’s record is embarrassingly unproductive. This easy way of attaining office caused him to get lazy. He didn’t pay attention. He didn’t worry about how his votes would follow him. He didn’t learn how to work with legislative leaders, even those of his own party. He didn’t have to. He found himself at the table with the big boys and knew he didn’t have to do the grunt work like they did. This easy success went to his head. He got sloppy. Knowing he didn’t earn the offices he got, he justifies his success by pretending he is inherently better. Blagojevich constantly refers to his ability to succeed without trying. He is above everyone else. He never had to play by the rules. It is easy to run as a guy who promises not to play politics as usual if you always succeeded without them. He had no real preperation to be a governor, and we deep down knew this when he was elected in 2002. We cut this guy a heck of a lot of slack, didn’t we? No matter how low we set the bar for him, he disappointed us. We gave him the benefit of a doubt as a newby, but he continued to dither. You come to a point in life when you have to either do it or shut up. As governor, Blagojevich reached that point. To his credit, for the past year, he has been trying to make up for this lost time. But Blagojevich has been a flop as governor, and since this election is about him, it is time we tell him he dithered enough. We gave him more than a fair chance and he has failed. This Capital bill merely shows how he failed once again when he was a legislator to learn how these things work. This guy is too lazy. - Levois - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 10:44 am: He can always say that he stood with the Democratic Party and for the taxpayers. And yet is asking for more money now than the Republicans needed then. This guy may be playing the game but he is so lousy at it. - DOWNSTATE - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 11:29 am: For the first time I am going to agree with Blago and his people.It is different today.He is trying to get re-elected using taxpayer money.See how easy that was. - The original Bill - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 11:43 am: It is really funny how you guys, especially Vanilla know so much more about government, politics, the legislature and life itself than our current elected governor. Have you ever been elected to anything? Have you ever balanced a budget other than your personal one let alone a budget with a structural deficit as well as a $5 billion actual deficit? During the governor’s 3 years in office we have seen a substantial raise in the minimum wage, education funding increased by over 2 billion dollars, access to health insurance for every child in the state, and many other programs that Repubs are now blocking, all without raising sales or income taxes. For you to get on here and call the governor lazy, dishonest and imply that he is naive to the ways of government or stupid is ridiculous and everybody knows it. Alexi is a guy who didn’t “work his way up” to constitutional office. Rod did. He will be re-elected with or without his family’s help. Try running for Governor, vanilla man, and then come back here and talk. Put up or shut up. - grand old partisan - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 12:40 pm: original Bill, Re-read your post. Now, think about it: We have a structural deficit – that is right. We have a $5 billion actual deficit – I don’t know the exact numbers, but I’ll assume that is accurate as well. Now, why in god’s name is the money going to come from to help pay off the deficit (which he wants to increase by $4 billion for the cap bill), AND increase education funding by 2 billion AND provide access to health insurance for every child AND many other programs that (thankfully) the Republicans are blocking – all while not raising sales or income tax? Where are the 11+ billion in budget cuts and/or new revenue streams that will help make this “more with less” fantasy a fiscally tenable reality? up or shut up. I’d hate to name-call, but either he is stupid and naïve, or he thinks we are. - grand old partisan - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 12:47 pm: excuse me, that should be “where,” not “why” - Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 1:33 pm: Lovie, Six Degrees, and GOP – The Republican’s proposed school construction program 11 years ago was $361 million. Blagojevich’s is $500 million. I’m not really good with inflation, but I think we’ll all agree that’s within the same order of magnitude. Lovie was right about #5. This is all about budget negotiations. The GOP isn’t opposed to this spending in principle. They just want to make sure that they get some candy along with it. Madigan wanted the same thing back in ‘95 when Rod voted No. It’s about forcing the other side to come to the negotiating table, and the Republicans are just being good partisans. I have great respect (and sympathy) for Abby Ottenhoff. But girl friday was right. Abby should’ve said “Your right. This plan is identical to the one Republicans supported just a decade ago. As a freshman lawmaker, Rod Blagojevich made the mistake of putting his party ahead of children, but he’s learned from his mistake. Now, he’s challenging Republicans to join him in putting the people of Illinois first.” Two wrongs don’t make a right. - The original Bill - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 2:02 pm: Whatever…..we are outta here for 2 weeks…………….YESSSSSSSSSS!!!! - DOWNSTATE - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 2:06 pm: The only thing the gov. is doing is trying to get re-elected with borrow and spend programs.Just like pre-school is now proven to not do what it is suppose to do.Go to the Illinois Policy Institute and read for yourself. - grand old partisan - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 2:11 pm: YDD, I think you are getting confused and comparing the wrong numbers. $500 million is the amount that Madigan – not the Governor - is proposing we borrow for school construction. $368 million is the amount that the GOP proposed borrowing for schools and cap projects in ’95. $4 billion is the amount that the Governor proposed borrowing for schools and cap projects last week. Senate Republicans voted down the $4 billion, prompting public criticism by the Governor. The $500 million is not the Governor’s proposal, and has not yet me put to a vote. So, I think our collective point still stands. The Governor, while in the GA during a Republican Administration, voted against $368 million for schools and cap projects, for whatever reason, but not expects the GOP to swallow a plan to borrow 11x that for schools and cap projects. - SenorAnon - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 2:24 pm: “Go to the Illinois Policy Institute and read for yourself.” Yes, indeed. Because any organization that boasts the likes of Greg Blankenship, Jill Stanek, Pat O’Malley and Grover Norquist on its board, and then has the temerity to call itself “non partisan” should be taken at face value. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 2:26 pm: Downstate - Is that the same Illinois Policy Institute that said Judy Baar Topinka was more likely to raise taxes than Rod Blagojevich? If you read their report, it seems to me they actually support universal pre-school, they just want the program to be more flexible. Oddly, the author of that analysis isn’t listed on their staff. Here’s the resume of their in-house education expert, Michael Van Winkle: Michael Van Winkle is a Policy Analyst for the Illinois Policy Institute specializing in the areas of fiscal and educational policy. Mr. Van Winkle has a degree from the University of Illinois-Chicago and attended Graduate School at the University of Chicago [ed. note: notice, it didn’t say he earned his degree. He founded and managed the Obama Truth Squad in August of 2004….. According to the University, Mr. Van Winkle graduated from college in 2002. My only guess is that his recent matriculation qualifies him as an education expert. His work for Alan Keyes certainly doesn’t qualify him. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 3:34 pm: GOP — I guess I am confused, because I understood that the $361 million proposed in 1995 was for schools only. Can you link me to the bill? My understanding is that $500 million for schools is what the Governor proposed in his budget address. We can talk about the other projects all you want, but I think most people understand that the longer we go without passing a capital development plan, the bigger our list of capital demands goes. But for Republicans to claim they are against borrowing on principle is absurd. In 1999, these same lawmakers were salivating over the opportunity to borrow billions for Illinois FIRST. - grand old partisan - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 3:49 pm: YDD, I’ll try and find those links. In the meantime - if that was your understanding, then are you saying that the Herald article is incorrect? I mean, no offense, but I thought it was pretty clearly laid out there. - grand old partisan - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 3:56 pm: YDD, I can tell you right now that the Gov’s budget address did not contain a proposal for $500 in borrowing for school construction. He proposed the creation of a $420 mil trust fund, but no borrowing. - anon - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 4:12 pm: Yellow Dog, As the story clearly says the 1995 plan was for “roads, universities and dilapidated state prisons the ruling Republicans wanted.” There are no links. It was 1995. If you’d like to check for yourself, go to the legislative archives in the Capitol building. First you’ll want the legislative digests for that year. It’s SB 1149. The vote was May 12, 1995. Then you go to the journals from the 89th General Assembly to find the roll calls from that day, and finally you consult the microfilm for the actual transcripts from the debate. Have fun. - DOWNSTATE - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 4:46 pm: YYD what is your function for the Democratic party no one not even your arch enemy Karl Rove reads or studies party policy like you.You do have another life don’t you?Just like I said before it is all politics it does not have to do with any of us.The repubs wanted the dems on record as borrow and spend and the dems wanted the repubs on record as being against schools and jobs and if you believe any else you need to shut your computer off and see the other world. - Ethel - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 5:44 pm: The current capital plan will do nothing to fix leaking roofs, or make necesary repairs at mental health facilities, correctional centers, state police headquarters, HPA sites or parks. All those facilities will continue to deteriorate - just as they have since the current administration took office. This bill is all about schools and roads - there is nothing for all the other state-owned and occupied facilities. - Gregor - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 7:14 pm: When the Governor’s mouthpieces start flapping their gums to try and spin his latest goof into a positive, all I can picture in my mind’s eye is that guy From Desert Storm that was the official Iraqui spokesman, “Bagdhad Bob”, I think the press nicknamed him. They are all just about as believeable as that guy. No credibility. - OAD - Tuesday, Apr 11, 06 @ 7:24 pm: This bill calls for 10.2 million for Rochester dist 3a for new buildings. They don’t need it as bad as many very rural or very urban districts do. They have a rich and _growing_ tax base, due to ‘white flight’ from Sprignfield. If they want it, they ought to fund it themselves; let the money be spent where it can do a lot more good. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.