34 Comments - How Ironic - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:05 pm: I think it would be an intrusion on the Governors authority. The Senate and House each have their own budget shop. The Gov should be able to hire/fire whom he wishes to run his own budget shop. I see this as a blatent power grab. - Small Town Liberal - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:07 pm: I voted yes, but I’m leery of seeing budget directors end up not getting confirmed and shuffled around, I think having someone new take over midstream could create a lot of problems. I also like Vaught and would hate to see him out of the job because Cullerton doesn’t like him. - Cal Skinner - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:08 pm: The Budget Office does not report to the Senate. It reports to the Governor. If the Senate does not like what the Budget Director does, it can re-write the budget. If the Senate does not approve of the Executive Budgeting process mandated by the 1970 State Constitution, it can attempt to amend the Constitution. Prior to that a Joint Committee of the legislature wrote the budget. - Yellow Dog Democrat - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:10 pm: === Opponents say the governor ought to be able to pick whomever he wants to run the budget office. === Who are the “opponents”? David Vaught and Pat Quinn? Seriously, given how closely the budget director has to work with the legislature, it is BEST to establish a relationship of trust and cooperation upfront, and make sure the Executive Branch understands that appropriations are the authority of the legislature. A confirmation hearing would establish that. - Fed-Up - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:14 pm: This proposal would open the position up to all kinds of political chicanery. Just let it alone. The system isn’t broken - don’t try to fix it! - Ahoy! - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:15 pm: remember Fylan? (spelling?) - Michelle Flaherty - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:19 pm: If GOMB wants to remain a stand alone agency — Yes, its director should be reviewed like all other stand alone agencies. If Quinn wants to abolish the agency and roll the director in as a deputy gov for budget, then no. - 47th Ward - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:19 pm: I voted no, simply because I think Cullerton is taking advantage of a weak governor to grab more power from the executive and put it in the legislative branch. Separation of powers and all that. YDD is right, the GA is in charge of appropriations. But that’s only half the budget, so there’s no reason for the executive to cede his control in the budget process. And yes, it is management as well as budget, but given how management is the key executive function, the Governor must be able to appoint managers who will carry out his policy. That starts with OMB, which should remain a perogative of the Governor. Put it another way, does anyone want to force Governor Dillard to get Cullerton’s approval of his pick for OMB? In an alternate world, would we have wanted Dawn Clark Netcsh to get her OMB pick past Pate Philip? This is a constitutional power struggle, and I’m siding with the executive branch on this one. - Just sayin - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:20 pm: Yes, this position should require Senate confirmation. If the Director is doing a good job, then confirming him shouldn’t be an issue. Aren’t all the other positions in the Governor’s cabinet subject to Senate confirmation? - Reluctant - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:21 pm: Although I think that the current Budget director is financially irresponsible and should be replaced for that reason alone, the Governor should hire this person and it should not be subject to senate confirmation. - Ghost - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 1:59 pm: This position influences government operation more then any director or agency secretary. It should absolutley be a confirmed position. OMB covers all hiring in the state not to mention oversseing agnecy spending and operations. If we confirm directors etc then we should this position as well. I would not that the statement it should not be subject to confrimation because the Gov should be free to pick who he wants is apples and ornages. the Gov is free to pick whoever he wants, its just the GA operates as a backstop to make sure the power of the office is in the hands of osmone qualified, just like an agency director. - wordslinger - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 2:00 pm: I voted yes. YDD nailed it pretty good. If the principle of Senate confirmation is applicable for less critical agencies, it certainly should be here. - Colossus - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 2:15 pm: I was all set to fight about the GOVERNOR’S part of the title, but the official listing for the agency on the SoI website is “Management and Budget, Office of”. I voted no in my haste, but can agree that if it’s a stand alone agency, there should be Senate approval. If GQ doesn’t want to deal with it, let him roll the agency back under his Office. - JustaJoe - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 2:19 pm: I voted “Yes”, although I wonder what difference it makes. Didn’t Tim Martin serve almost a full term before he was grudgingly confirmed as Transportation Secretary? - steve schnorf - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 2:35 pm: I may be the only person posting who has been a Governor’s budget director. Emphatically “No”. Not any more than the Governor’s policy director, his legislative director, or anyone else on his personal staff. This is a classic area where the Governor should have unfettered authority to pick his staff, and should live or die on how ell he picks. - Sportsman - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 2:39 pm: OMB Director should absolutely be confirmed by the Senate to establish a working relationship of trust, transparency, and accountablity. - Narcissism - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 2:42 pm: Maybe Cullerton can wave his magic wand again and install billion dollar slot machines. I’m sure Brady would vote for that too! Is Illinois going to deal with the budget reality or keep playing political games? - Anon insider - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 2:54 pm: putting someone under this type of requirement will always raise loyalty issues as well as prevent them from doing what is right vs. what they are pressured to do. Sentate Confirmation is a joke. Nothing is ever done in the open. If a person is scheduled for a hearing, all the discussions and trades have already happened. Confirmation Hearings are simply a rubber stamp and the public never gets an honest reveiew. Just another power grab by Cullerton because Quinn wouldn’t hire who Cullerton wanted. - been there - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 3:11 pm: Maybe Steve Schnorf will tell us what he thinks? Hello, Steve? - D.P. Gumby - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 3:12 pm: I vote no and agree w/ Schnorf & Skinner - been there - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 3:14 pm: Sorry, I spoke too soon. Thanks, Steve. - Anonymous - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 3:42 pm: No. Unless the governorr can pick members of COGFA. Perhaps the name should be changed to Bureau of the Budget as it was pre- Blagojevich. I’m not sure what actual management GOMB does anyway. - Excessively Rabid - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 4:02 pm: Don’t know, but if the budget office can be GOMB, there must be a way to rename DOC POKE. (After Gumby and his horse Pokey, in case that’s obscure). - POC - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 4:46 pm: Vaught has a terrible, terrible record of dealing with the concerns of African-American, Asian, and Latino concerns with budget and appointments. Look at his treatment of Michelle Saddler and her deputies. He comes from a place in Southern Illinois where these issues do not matter. Having to have some level of accountability to the elected officials representing these communities would probably be very helpful for his education in what it means to represent all of Illinois! - Retired Non-Union Guy - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 5:15 pm: Yes, as a supposedly independent agency the head should have to be approved by the Senate. After all, don’t agency heads have to be approved? And isn’t that what we’re talking about, in effect, an agency head? - Not a Newcomer - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 5:24 pm: No vote here, the G.A. has their own budget shop, and there is also a separately elected Comptroller. Both offer sufficient checks and balances to GOMB as is. - maddem - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 5:30 pm: Never thought I’d say this, but Cal Skinner is right. - Well, Well, Well. - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 5:40 pm: Little Lewbowski questioned me on this the other day, suggesting that the Illinois web site shows Vaught working at GOMB, not UIUC. I don’t dispute that Vaught works at OMB; my contention is that he’s paid on UIUC warrant, along with a lot of other folks working for the Governor, and I want to know why. As for the question at hand, I don’t care whether the Senate does or doesn’t confirm this sort of position, but it would create a forum where Lewbowski and others could discover the line item truth about Vaught’s salary and start to ask why. - J - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 5:54 pm: Well x 3, you’re on crack. Vaught is paid by OMB. - Reply to POC - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 7:13 pm: POC - you obviously don’t know Vaught. Reach out and ask him about his background in the struggle against racial discrimination. I think you’d be quite surprised by what you found out. Do you deserve to be judged by where you come from? - x ace - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 8:49 pm: NO - If it is an Executive Branch advisory position , then the Legislative Branch should not have any say whatsoever. The Concepts of Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances have been eroded , but are integral to our system of government. If the Gov wants to use a dummy or a scholar to advise hm , it should be his choice. - Soccertease - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 10:18 pm: Steve Schnorf, technically GOMB is a state agency and state agency directors are approved by the Senate so GOMB’s director should be required to be approved by the Senate. I agree with the Retired Non Union Guy. - Liandro - Thursday, May 26, 11 @ 11:36 pm: I’m a tentative no; the Senate gets their confirmation vote on the budget itself…or modify it, recreate it, etc. A Gov needs unfettered ability to craft his policy, just as legislators craft their own whether or not the Gov likes it. I put tentative, though, because no doubt there are many nuances I’m not seeing. - Quiet Sage - Friday, May 27, 11 @ 12:21 am: Why is Cullerton trying to cut down and embarrass Quinn at every opportunity? What is really going on here? Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.