One year after illinois raised individual and corporate income tax rates, the state remains in a precarious fiscal position with persistent payment delays – and the situation is unlikely to significantly improve in the near-term.
The backlog of unpaid bills from the General Funds in the Comptroller’s office (ioC) alone stood at $4.273 billion at the end of this quarter – and that number only tells part of the story. Specifically, the total accounts only for what has been submitted to the Comptroller’s office for payment, and not what is being held by state agencies. For example, the Department of Healthcare and Family Services is holding an estimated $2 billion in Medicaid bills alone, which was not the case last year.
When those totals are combined with other obligations, including corporate tax refunds, employee health insurance and interfund borrowing repayments due to other state funds, the Comptroller estimates the backlog to be around $8.5 billion.
in addition, the level of unpaid General Funds bills is up several hundred million dollars since the end of last quarter, and has continually exceeded $3 billion over the last year. the cash flow situation is unlikely to improve in the near-term, as the state this year will make its pension payments with current revenues and not bonds, and Medicaid spending is projected to dramatically increase in the next six months.
* However, Gov. Pat Quinn’s budget office recently put the bill payment backlog at $7 billion…
* $3.5 billion in vouchers held at the Comptroller’s Office
* $2 billion in Medicaid vouchers held at agencies to manage payment cycle
* $0.5 billion in business tax refunds
* $1 billion in group health insurance premiums.
Since that was written earlier this month, vouchers held at the comptroller’s office have apparently increased by $700 million. So, there’s not much difference between the two.
* In other news, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker attempted again to deflect negative public opinion away from himself by whacking Illinois. Walker’s opponents just gathered a million signatures in a recall attempt, but Walker says Illinois is worse. Watch…
* As you can tell by the black banner at the top of this page, today is a national day of protest over stupid attempts by Congress to dangerously meddle with the 1st Amendment and the Internet’s functioning. Click here for more info about the legislation. I laid out my own opinion opposing the bill here.
I hate to take sides on issues, particularly federal issues, but this congressional meddling has to be stopped.
* Thankfully, US Sen. Mark Kirk just announced his opposition to the goofy proposal…
United States Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL) today released the following statement announcing his opposition to S. 968, the PROTECT IP Act.
“Freedom of speech is an inalienable right granted to each and every American, and the Internet has become the primary tool with which we utilize this right. The Internet empowers Americans to learn, create, innovate, and express their views. While we should protect American intellectual property, consumer safety and human rights, we should do so in a manner that specifically targets criminal activity. This extreme measure stifles First Amendment rights and Internet innovation. I stand with those who stand for freedom and oppose PROTECT IP, S.968, in its current form.”
* Sen. Dick Durbin has been a particular problem. He is listed as a sponsor of the legislation, which is supported by Senate Democratic leadership. But I talked to one of his top aides today who clearly signaled that Durbin is backing away from the bill. “It’s not a priority,” I was told.
I also asked a Durbin spokesperson to send me the Senator’s official position on this legislation. I’ll post it when it arrives.
You might want to call Durbin’s office if you get a chance today: (312) 353-4952. Please, be polite, but firm.
* There will be no Question of the Day today in observance of the national strike.
*** UPDATE 1 *** Another one comes out in opposition. From a press release…
Congressman Adam Kinzinger (R-IL) today issued the following statement on the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Protect IP Act (PIPA):
“The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and its Senate counterpart the Protect IP Act (PIPA) are two bills dealing with internet piracy and the toll it is taking on American jobs and content creators. Unfortunately, the way these bills are currently written does not ensure an open and free internet and that is not something I can support.
“American entrepreneurialism is vitally important to the economy and is something I believe we must protect by ensuring that ideas and content created here cannot be pirated through rogue websites based in places such as China. To do so we should bring representatives from all parties concerned to the table to address all of the major issues which have been presented; with an open and free internet being the central tenet to this debate.”
Congressional drafters essentially let Hollywood lobbyists write a bill that regulates the Internet. It was a very dumb idea.
*** UPDATE 2 *** Congressman Randy Hultgren’s chief of staff Jerry Clarke just called to say that Hultgren is also opposing the SOPA bill. Good for him.
*** UPDATE 3 *** From Congressman Joe Walsh’s Twitter feed…
Thank God twitter isn’t blocked today so I can tell you that I refuse to vote for #SOPA. #uncensored #StopSOPA
*** UPDATE 4 *** From Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky’s Twitter page…
Thank you all for the many calls today to #StopSOPA! I want you to know that I oppose #SOPA & will vote against it
When an issue can manage to get both Jan Schakowskyk and Joe Walsh on the same page, it cannot be ignored.
*** UPDATE 5 *** Congressman Mike Quigley straddles the fence…
“Like many of my constituents, I share concerns on several key provisions that were included in the original SOPA text. For this reason, I fought against the DNS blocking authority and voted to remove this part of the bill during the Judiciary Committee markup. The White House later announced its opposition to this provision and Chairman Lamar Smith announced that it would be removed when the markup resumes in February. SOPA is far from finalized and still has 30 amendments under consideration that would drastically alter the language of the bill and its effect on open access to the internet. I encourage my constituents to continue to stay in touch with us with their thoughts as Congress considers this issue.”
If you want to call Quigley, his office number is: 773.267.6583.
*** UPDATE 6 *** Congresswoman Judy Biggert’s position statement via the Daily Herald…
“I do not support the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA),” she says. “Protecting the intellectual property of American businesses, artists, and entrepreneurs is critical to our economic prosperity. But in a digital age, that task has become far more complex. That’s why any new laws governing the web must strike a careful balance, preserve the full innovative potential of the internet, and ensure that legitimate online services aren’t subject to unnecessary burdens. Unfortunately, the current version of SOPA does not strike that balance. My hope is that both sides will work toward a better solution to protect American innovators from digital theft without the unintended consequences feared by many in the online community.”
*** UPDATE 7 *** From Congressman Don Manzullo’s communications director…
Rich,
I wanted to let you know that Rep. Manzullo is extremely concerned that the language in the Stop Online Piracy Act (HR 3261) would allow the possible infringement of free speech, and he opposes the bill.
*** UPDATE 8 *** From Congressman Bob Dold…
“I do not support the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in its current form. I am a strong advocate for protecting intellectual property rights, but I also believe we must protect our small and innovative businesses from unnecessary and potentially devastating burdens. I encourage all sides to come together to develop legislation that protects intellectual property while also preserving the innovative and valuable foundations of the internet.”
If you’re like most Americans, you’re probably scratching your head over the bizarre pardon spree Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour appears to have gone on during the final day of his political career.
Sitting where we do in Chicago’s suburbs, we recognize we’re too far away from Mississippi to understand everything that took place there or inside Barbour’s head, but at first blush, it appears to be a case of a governor pardoning 200 felons — including many murderers — almost whimsically.
In doing so, he may have violated a requirement Mississippi has for a 30-day public notice in advance of the pardons, and if that’s the case, as the state’s attorney general maintains, some of the pardons may be rescinded.
If the same thing were to happen in Illinois — and it’s more than possible that someday it could — the state would have no similar remedy, simply because the state has no similar restriction.
The Governor may grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, after conviction, for all offenses on such terms as
he thinks proper. The manner of applying therefore may be regulated by law.
* State law gives the Prisoner Review Board the power to review and recommend executive clemency decisions, but the governor has broad powers to decide whom to pardon.
There was, of course, a huge uproar in Illinois when George Ryan commuted the sentences of all prisoners on death row. But what Barbour did has dwarfed that because, unlike Ryan, he didn’t seem to follow any set logic…
Former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour defended his controversial pardons Wednesday, saying that although he understands the feelings of “vengeance” from the families of victims, those he released “deserve a second chance.”
Barbour granted nearly 200 pardons, including those to a handful of murderers, in his final days as governor.
“I understand, recognize and respect the fact that if you were injured by somebody, or if your loved one was killed, that there may be vengeance, there may be fear, there may be all these things,” said Barbour on CBS’s “This Morning.”
“A lot of guys aren’t going to be rehabilitated. These have been. They’ve redeemed themselves. They deserve a second chance,” he added.
According to CBS, eight of the men Barbour pardoned were convicted of killing their wives or girlfriends. And this isn’t the first time he did that…
Four years ago, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour was criticized for pardoning six men who had been convicted of killing their wives or girlfriends. And now, he’s done it again.
News of the pardons immediately sparked a revival of two lingering House bills in Jackson. One would bar those convicted of capital murder from working in the Governor’s Mansion, and the other would mandate public hearings before a felony offender could be pardoned by the governor, so that victims could have a say in the decision.
“It’s created a buzz in Mississippi, and not a positive one for Haley as he goes out,” says Professor Wilkie, who has counted Barbour as a friend since the sixth grade. “There’s a particularly good editorial cartoon in The Clarion-Ledger this morning that shows Haley in an airplane departing for Washington, flying over the state capitol and dumping these pardons and clemencies like so many bird droppings on the capitol.”
A Mississippi judge Wednesday evening issued a temporary injunction forbidding the release of any more prisoners pardoned or given clemency by outgoing Gov. Haley Barbour, whose actions created an uproar.
The pardons include four convicted murderers and a convicted armed robber who were released Sunday. The five now must contact prison officials on a daily basis as their fate is adjudicated.
The pardons are “a slap in the face to everyone in law enforcement and Gov. Barbour should be ashamed,” said state Attorney General Jim Hood.
The process of releasing 21 other inmates has been halted, said Hood, who sought the court order.
“The pardons were intended to allow them to find gainful employment or acquire professional licenses as well as hunt and vote. My decision about clemency was based upon the recommendation of the Parole Board in more than 90 percent of the cases,” Barbour wrote. “The 26 people released from custody due to clemency is just slightly more than one-tenth of 1 percent of those incarcerated.”
“This governor, Gov. Quinn, is a tool,” he said. “This state is an embarrassment. People are leaving in droves because of taxes and regulations. One man runs this state, and it’s not Gov. Quinn; it’s (House Speaker) Mike Madigan.”
* Yesterday, Treasurer Dan Rutherford attempted to explain why the Mitt Romney campaign was challenging Santorum delegate petitions signatures…
Several months ago the rules for placing Delegates/Alternates for Presidential nomination on the Illinois ballot were reaffirmed. No changes were made.
The law states that in order to be on the ballot the candidates for Delegate/Alternate need 600 valid, registered voters’ signatures from within that Congressional District.
Speaker Gingrich, Congressman Paul and Governor Romney’s campaigns filed slates of Delegates/Alternates in Illinois and all had over 600 signatures.
The Senator Santorum campaign in Illinois filed slates in 14 of the 18 Districts. Of the 14, only 4 had 600 signatures. No objection was filed for any District that had the required 600. One District had only 614 signatures and no attempt was made to vet signatures to bump them to be below the 600. There will be candidates for Delegate/Alternate for Senator Santorum on the ballot.
The 10 Districts that objections were filed had:
CD 1 356 Signatures
CD 2 179 Signatures
CD3 214 Signatures
CD10 422 Signatures
CD 11 378 Signatures
CD 12 261 Signatures
CD 15 250 Signatures
CD 16 222 Signatures
CD17 227 Signatures
CD 18 117 Signatures
As one can see, the minimum requirements are dramatically lacking.
The first day one could circulate a petition was October 8 and the rules were reaffirmed months before. All of the campaigns had the same amount of time.
No objections were filed for technical violations, strictly those that, on the face, did not have the minimum number of signatures.
As some commenters pointed out yesterday, the GOP nomination could very well be over by the time Illinoisans get to vote, and Romney would probably not want to needlessly make enemies here.
* And by the end of the day, everybody apparently agreed to drop their challenges and move on. From the Rick Santorum campaign…
Leadership from the Romney campaign (Dan Rutherford), Gingrich campaign (Bruce Hansen and Nick Provenzano), Paul campaign (Chris Younce) and Santorum campaign (Al Salvi and Jon Zahm) have agreed today to withdraw all petition challenges in Illinois against one another’s statewide and delegate petitions.
* And speaking of updates to yesterday’s stories, Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. released his own poll yesterday after Debbie Halvorson’s poll showed him ahead 48-35…
Halvorson said that with the incumbent polling so low, she sees a “path to victory” for herself, especially with so many voters in the district telling her they don’t like Jackson: “I don’t barely have time to get my name out and they say, ‘Oh, you’ve got my vote,’” Halvorson said.
But Jackson’s pollster says that after all the controversies he has been through in the last two years, to still have 61 percent of voters saying they hold a “favorable” opinion of Jackson, “I see a superhighway to victory.” […]
In her poll, Jackson won the initial ballot 44 percent to 30 percent.
Then they read the 496 voters positive messages about both candidates. Jackson still led Halvorson, Lake said.
Then they read negative statements about both candidates. They mentioned that the House Ethics committee opened an investigation of whether Jackson improperly used congressional staff to campaign for him to be appointed to the U.S. Senate.
After all that, Jackson still led Halvorson, Lake said.
Lobbying by Illinois lawmakers would be barred under a bill proposed by the Legislature’s inspector general, who monitors ethical conduct by state representatives and senators.
“Legislators should not be allowed to be paid to lobby on behalf of clients before any public body,” said the inspector general, Thomas J. Homer, who plans to introduce the bill within the next two weeks. […]
A spokeswoman for John Cullerton, the Senate president, who has registered in the past as a lobbyist, said that for now, Homer’s proposals are a matter for the Legislative Ethics Commission to consider.
“If legislation is filed, we will fully review the issues and implications of legislative action on this topic,” said the spokeswoman, Rikeesha Phelon.
Steve Brown, a spokesman for Michael Madigan, the House speaker, said Madigan would need to see the legislation before deciding whether to support it. “There are other provisions in state law that protected the public from wrongdoing, and that’s the goal here,” Brown said.
* There are just a tiny number of people who are doing this. The Chicago law is strict enough that much aldermanic contact can be considered lobbying, including doing zoning work. But an earlier report showed how the practice can be over the line…
A lobby report filed with the city shows Dan Burke was paid $5,000 to lobby City Hall for the Chicago Roofing Contractors Association, the local wing of the industry group that represents roofing contractors throughout the state.
In February 2005, Burke co-sponsored a bill backed by the association of state roofing contractors that sought to protect its member companies from competition. Burke said his sponsorship was not a conflict of interest, even though the measure, which passed, benefited his client.
Rep. Burke registered as a lobbyist for the roofing contractors in April of 2005, just two months after he sponsored their bill.
