It’s been clear from the beginning that Gov. Pat Quinn muffed his budget rollout.
Instead of stressing the billion dollars or so in cuts he made and the additional cuts he might be open to, Quinn has repeatedly stressed the need for a 50 percent increase in the income tax rate and has flatly rejected additional budget reductions.
Polling conducted for the Senate Democrats reportedly shows voters want the exact opposite approach. First, make the cuts, then increase taxes if and only if they are absolutely necessary.
So, Quinn hasn’t made it any easier to wrap up the General Assembly’s business by May 31 and balance a budget that has a hole somewhere in the neighborhood of $12 billion.
Senate President John Cullerton said last week he believed two of the three major issues facing the General Assembly were going quite well. You’d never know it by hanging out at the Statehouse, but he was more upbeat than I’ve seen him in weeks.
An ethics reform bill is beginning to take shape as Cullerton negotiates with the governor and the governor’s reform commission.
The public works “capital” bill is also moving forward, Cullerton said. The leaders have agreed to a basic outline of revenue sources, including increasing the sales tax on most alcohol; a sales tax expansion to include candy, iced tea and beauty products; privatizing lottery management and allowing Internet lottery ticket sales; raising various vehicle registration and licensing fees; legalizing video poker and using road fund money that is currently spent elsewhere.
The big problem, Cullerton said, is the budget. And he’s certainly right about that. I could tell you lots of stories, but I’ll just pass along one.
I spent some time last week with a liberal African-American state Senator from Chicago who has historically fought attempts to cut the budget, but has never been directly involved with the budget-making process. The legislator, who is virtually assured of reelection, stunned everyone in the room by announcing that the General Assembly ought to just pass a budget and go home without a tax increase, no matter what the deficit or damage might be. The legislator couldn’t be convinced otherwise, even by a highly respected Democratic budget expert who was also in the room.
When a liberal who represents a district chock full of people who depend on state government services starts talking like that, you wonder how they’ll ever solve this budget crisis.
The mushrooms, as rank and file legislators are often called, aren’t restless. They’re an apoplectic mess.
Legislators elect their leaders to protect them from the harsh realities of political life. Leaders raise most of the money, they run the campaigns, they help members write legislation to benefit their districts or make them more popular with the folks back home. And they protect members from tough votes.
Nobody has taken a truly tough vote in the General Assembly since maybe 1983, when taxes were raised during a terrible recession. They’ve been spoiled rotten, coddled and shielded at every turn by leaders who have ignored the state’s problems until everything finally exploded at once with a fury unmatched since the state government went bankrupt in the 19th century. Nothing has prepared legislators as a group for the horrific votes they face this month.
Cullerton says he sees the way forward. He believes he can cut a deal with the reform commission that will keep the good government types and the editorial boards off his members’ backs through the 2010 election, and iron out the details of a massive public works program to create jobs and mollify the unions. Easier said than done, I know, yet he thinks that’s all within reach right now.
But then, as Cullerton says, there’s that budget problem.
Quinn has made things even more difficult by caving in too quickly to unions representing teachers and state employees. He had demanded that the workers pay an extra 2 percent of their salary into their pension funds. The unions pushed back hard, so Quinn announced he was dropping the idea after being roundly booed and heckled during a raucous teachers union rally.
An experienced negotiator would’ve made the teachers and state workers sweat it out until the end of the legislative session, and then handed them the concession. Now, they want more out of Quinn and he has little to give.
* It’s always the greedy vs. the needy: When people talk about cutting government budgets, they don’t think about businesses like hers or the people she serves. They think if budgets are cut the fat will be trimmed. The patronage workers will be fired. The slackers will be shown the door. And wouldn’t that be great? But the world doesn’t work like that, and we all know it.
* Quinn wanting to cut aid to wineries but tax wine and liquor
* Pension reform in Quinn’s hands
* IEA: Teacher pension changes could cost us good teachers
* Hot line is healthy for state budget
* Some Chicago-area legislators say too much road money spent downstate
* Ill. ’supermax’ prison to get fresh scrutiny
* Illinois lawmakers hope construction plan on track
* $25, $26 billion, whatever it takes …
* Revenue first, spending second for capital plan
* Senate construction plan: Higher license fees, booze taxes and legalized video poker
* More state tax on beer, wine, liquor?
* Lawmakers look to booze for budget fix
* State taking gamble on video poker deal?
* Take a stand against legalized video poker
* Time to stop trying to mandate slots
- Team America - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 10:29 am:
It’s interesting that by the time the Herald printed its editorial hammering Senator Terry Link on his proposal to force slots at Arlington Park racetrack over the objections of Arlington Heights, Link had already backed off somewhat on the idea. Either the Herald found out late and had nothing else to print in that space on Sunday, or it doesn’t trust Link not to still find a way to thwart the desires of the ‘host’ municipality when it comes to his obsessive quest to expand gambling. The Herald endorsed Link’s GOP opponent Keith Gray (as did the Trib) last election, so there is no love lost there.
- wordslinger - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 10:39 am:
It’s a bit flabbergasting that the case hasn’t been made on what the state is facing with a Doomsday Budget. It certainly will include massive cuts to K-12, HFS, Corrections, etc. That means layoffs of teachers around the state and cuts in benefits. Catching up on bills? Forget it.
The governor needs to put a sense of urgency behind this and sell it.
- Scooby - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 10:50 am:
I thought the feds at the Justice Department put out a letter that said that state’s could not legally privatize the lotteries? Did somebody find a loophole?
- Scooby - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 10:51 am:
Hmm, meant “states” not “state’s”. Sorry.
- Cassandra - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 11:25 am:
Quinn seems to be so confident that he can force a regressive income tax increase on Illinois’ middle class that he hasn’t even bothered, as we learned last week, to get rid of more than a few of Blagojevich’s patronage hires and appointments to boards and commissions. As I understand it, for example, Blago’s former babysitter is still on the civil service board. State agencies teem with former Blago appointees, many of whom do work which, if it’s necessary at all, could be done by a lot fewer of them. State office buildings are kept open to justify more administrators than are justified by the work to be done.
Quinn arrogantly refuses to consider a temporary tax increase as well. Now, we all know that a temporary increases is more than likely to become permanent. But Quinn is so certain of his rectitude…or so compromised by greedy Democrat
pay to players and patronage hacks….that he won’t even have the discussion. He has never expressed the slightest concern for the impact of a tax increase on real people during a major recession. He doesn’t care.
And those cuts—what are they exactly. Are they real cuts. Or are they cuts in what the state “might” have done if it had the cash.
This is a negotiation and taxpayers should not
cave the way Quinn did with the teachers unions.
The stakes are high. We are giving future politicians in one of the country’s most corrupt states billions extra to play with in future decades. There is no reason to believe they will use it well or use it honestly.
- Ghost - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 11:51 am:
Scooby, the feds indicated that the state can hire a private company to operate the lottry as long as the State remains in ultimate control. As I recall there are other states who use a similiar system.
Kadner makes an excelent point in his article: “When the cuts come, the nephews and the slackers are not the first to lose their jobs. Often, the first to go are the hardest workers who have no friends in top management. No political clout.”
These cuts, and firings proposed by madigan, ultimatly remove those wthout clout.
There is not much to cut, many agencies need to increase headcount, such as DOC and DCFS.
- VanillaMan - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 11:52 am:
Yes, Quinn muffed it - but he isn’t alone. Everyone who believes that Illinois doesn’t have too much government is also muffing it. Quinn and his Party has assumed that what state government is doing, is supposed to do. The situation has gotten out of control over the past decade. In the best case scenario, yes, the state budget doesn’t have a lot of fat - but if it is really all muscle - it is still too big to support. You cannot tax us out of this problem without damaging Illinois more than whatever benefits can be done via state government.
This is what has happened in other high tax states. They are not necessarily in debt because they are being wasteful or inefficient - they are in debt because there is a limit to how much you can tax citizens before you hurt more than help. The governments are simply too big to support.
We got here by believing that “someone has to help”. So, we have decided to tax the hell out of one another in order to do something noble and good. Fine - but you have to also recognize that there is a limit.
With the current economy, we have hit a wall. Government can no longer grow - as a matter of fact, it needs to shrink in order to be supportable. We are seeing many ideas regarding alternative funding solutions for big governments. We have allowed gambling, we have allowed booze, and now California, and even here in Illinois, some are discussing raising revenue by legalizing marijuana. However, by focusing on the revenue hopefully generated by legalizing and taxing these vices, proponents are not adding up the extra costs that easily offset the funds raised. If California legalizes pot, it will lose - not gain - in fiscal support. The societal costs will outstrip any benefits.
We have to stop reaching for governments as a solution to societal issues. We have understandably been doing this for decades as our other social organizations have been cannibalized by politicians reacting to societal demands via government action. There were, and in some places, still are, non-governmental organizations that addressed community issues. It has become too easy to demand that our governments do what was once done by each of us via community neighborhood groups.
Now we are stuck. Demanding that those of us who want to return to smaller government lable each and every budget cut is a disingenuous argument in order to silence us. Big government proponents want small government supporters to play their big government political games as they bludgeon critics with claims of heartlessness as they parade the beneficiaries of their social programs. They call those of us who recognize the economic damage done by big governments as “people who say nothing but, “no”".
They refuse to see a fundamental fact - there are tough times in which to stop government growth, and there are times when government growth can be supported during a booming economy.
This year, as in the recent past, we are not experiencing booming economics to offset the negative impact experienced by Illinois citizens when state government takes too much from them. Citizens are hurting. Tossing more government aid, and taking more in government taxes, hurts - not helps. Big government supporters justify this vicious circle, yet refuse to admit that we are spinning in a vicious circle.
Cut the budget, then let’s talk. Not a dime more until then.
- Cassandra - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 12:48 pm:
DCFS could increase frontline headcount now by reducing the number of superfluous managers and administrators–lots of them, many connected–and transfer the headcount to the front lines. Caseworkers don’t need three or four layers of middle managers to oversee their work. They are professional adults.
This is the kind of approach you won’t see in a doomsday budget.
- Ghost - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 2:00 pm:
==== but if it is really all muscle - it is still too big to support. You cannot tax us out of this problem without damaging Illinois more than whatever benefits can be done via state government.====
This from the same person who said we should increase penalties and prison sentences. It is incongrous to argue against bigger governemnt while arguing for bigger government.
Your argument here is we should get rid of things even if wer need them, because people should not have to pay for needed services.
So then lets get rid of the Dept of corrections. there is 1.3 billion. next lets get rid of the Illinois State police, since we cant afford prisons, regardless of the benefit, we wont need to enforce the laws or have crime labs. There is another 450 mill.
We can get rid of the bridges and roads, who wants to travel in the lawless state with no corrections. That would net us a nice 3 bill.
Makes good sense, eliminate governemtn because we do not want to pay for it, regardless of benefits it provides to the accumulation and earning of income. After all, our jobs, buisness etc would work just fine producing money for us without the exisitng (big) government. And if we call it Big, then we do not have to explain why we do not want to pay its costs.
- Team America - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 2:05 pm:
Just to set the record straight, Keith Gray pointed out to me that in fact the Herald endorsed Link, not Gray, although the Tribune and News-Sun went for Gray. So my bad, and I fixed that on my blog as well. But I bet the Herald wishes it could get a do-over.
- VanillaMan - Monday, May 18, 09 @ 4:35 pm:
Ghost - you must be having an off day. I haven’t read such nonsense from you in a long time. You are creating straw-man arguments, claiming I supported these lunatic statements, then knocking them down.
The ideas you claim I support, I do not, and have never supported. You silly blogger!
As a matter of fact, no one supports the silly ideas you claim I support.
Now take your medicine. I go off my meds occasionally too. Concerned Observer helped me out a couple weeks ago. Now I am helping you with this intervention.
Did you bump your head?
- doomsday - Tuesday, May 19, 09 @ 12:08 am:
Why would a doomsday budget cut the prisons like Sheridan that actually reduce recidivism and are model programs around the country, instead of Tamms an prison that is targeted internationally for human rights abuses and only has 250 people in it anyway? Can someone explain that to me? And don’t tell me that they have to keep Tamms for “security”–there are secure cells in every IL prison, such as all the seg cells, and all the death row cells. That super-max was built for EXTRA punishment, and it is the most expensive per prisoner, and we just can’t afford it right now. Let’s go back to regular punishment and save some money. Or why not doomsday a big dilapidated prison? Why not go back to Stateville and try that again?