Caterpillar Inc. will not be building its new North American plant anywhere in the state of Illinois, officials with the company told local leaders Tuesday, with part of the reason being continued concerns about the business climate in the state.
The company will instead focus on a location closer to its division headquarters in Cary, N.C., Peoria County officials were told in an email sent to them shortly after the close of business and later obtained by the Journal Star. The plant stood to bring with it from Japan roughly 1,000 jobs manufacturing track-type tractors and mini hydraulic excavators.
As you know, we have a site selection and business modeling team in place that has been reviewing a comprehensive set of criteria to determine the optimal location for this facility. These factors include logistics, port access, labor markets, supplier base, and governmental partnership opportunities. We have defined a very tight search area that is primarily being driven by logistics, port access, and proximity to our division headquarters in Cary, North Carolina.
As a result, we regret to inform you that your community is not a viable option for this particular project.
Please understand that even if your community had the right logistics for this project, Caterpillar’s previously documented concerns about the business climate and overall fiscal health of the state of Illinois still would have made it unpractical for us to select your community for this project.
Caterpillar intends to continue calling for long-term changes in Illinois and to offer help to the state as it works toward real and fundamental reforms that will position communities like yours to compete for future projects. While we understand this news is not positive for your community, it is our hope that you and your leaders will join us in our efforts to improve the business climate in Illinois.
Sixteen companies have notified the state they have cut or plan to cut nearly 1,800 jobs by the end of March.
At the top of the list: Hull House Association, which closed its doors last month after years of financial struggles. The social services agency laid off a total of 295 employees in January, more than any other company on the list.
Texting while bicycling? Apparently it’s a problem in Illinois, and one lawmakers want to make illegal.
State Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, has filed legislation that would prohibit bicyclists from texting while on the road, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
* So, “Illinois” doesn’t necessarily want to ban texting while biking. It’s just a bill introduced by a state Rep. ten days ago. The legislation has no co-sponsors as of this writing, so I’m not sure where they got the idea that “Lawmakers” are saying the problem is growing.
* This topic is one of my biggest pet peeves about Statehouse news coverage - and not just in Illinois. Somebody introduces a bill, often an incredibly goofy bill (although I’m not saying that Cassidy’s bill is goofy by any means) and then it generates big, hugely misleading headlines all over the place. Then the bill fails and everybody moves on like it never happened. Hey, I’m guilty of this myself. I try to avoid it, but I don’t always succeed.
* As it turns out, Cassidy’s bill passed the House Transportation Vehicles & Safety Committee this morning by a 5-4 vote. But the measure still has a very long way to go. It needs to survive a vote by the full House, then a Senate committee and then the full Senate. It could be amended numerous times along the way. Then it goes to the governor’s desk where it could be vetoed, AV’d or signed into law.
Cassidy’s bill might actually become a statute. I really have no idea, but neither did that silly headline writer five days ago.
* The first round of the “bills in committee” period is kind of like spring training. Hope springs eternal. Legislators, not unlike baseball coaches, are eager to turn their new prospects into shining stars. And we always see a bunch of news stories about those prospects, who are often never heard from again. It’s kinda fun to watch, but the games don’t really mean much in the end.
The House and Senate’s committee passage deadlines are both March9th. So, try to keep all the above in mind until then. Thanks.
* Gov. Pat Quinn leaked a few details about his upcoming budget speech yesterday…
Speaking before a packed City Club of Chicago audience, Quinn said he wants to cut Medicaid expenses by $2 billion, close tax loopholes that cost the state millions of dollars and examine changes to the public employee pension system that include raising the retirement age for workers.
Quinn said that when it comes to pension cost reform “everything must be on the table,” including lowering cost of living increases, hiking the retirement age and asking employees to pay more for benefits. He also wants to examine shifting some of the pension burden to universities and local school districts, saying they pay little or nothing toward the cost of retirement benefits for their workers.
The governor would not say whether he would support efforts to revamp the state’s pension payment structure, which requires the state to make larger contributions each year in what was supposed to be an effort to fund the system by 90 percent by the year 2045.
Meanwhile, the governor is looking to off-load some of the state’s pension costs. The state contributes $5.2 billion a year to pensions, but Quinn complains that only a fraction of that benefits workers directly under state control. Employees of state universities, community colleges and local school districts, for example, are in state-funded retirement plans.
He wants state universities and school districts to contribute, figuring if they have “skin in the game,” they’ll think twice about awarding generous benefits.
Quinn said the state can no longer afford to pay $15 billion a year for the Medicaid program, which provides health care for the poor. He wants to cut that by $2 billion, and amount he says lawmakers “shifted” over from last year’s budget by delaying payments.
Some options for restructuring the system are shrinking payments to hospital and doctors, reducing how many people are eligible and cutting benefits the state isn’t legally required to offer.
Rep. Greg Harris, D-Chicago, said even ending optional benefits would mean tremendous pain for some people.
“If you look at the services the federal government says are ‘optional,’ they are prescription drugs, they are long term care nursing homes, they are hospice care. So this is going to be horrible decision making,” said Harris, chairman of the House Human Services Committee.
Last year Quinn proposed cutting the state’s Medicaid budget by $600 million. The state Senate cut that to $300 million and in the House of Representatives, “Democrats and Republicans banded together and announced they would take ‘zero percent’,” Quinn said. He plans to triple down and try for a bigger cut.
What exactly will he cut?
Quinn said he would spell that out in his budget address in two weeks. But it involves changing the state’s Medicaid program into a “wellness system” instead of a “provider payment system,” he said. The problem he faces is that cuts to Medicaid can mean cuts to federal matching funds.
“We’ll ask the loophole lobby: ‘What’s more important, early childhood education for a 4-year-old or your loophole?’ We’ll ask: ‘What’s more important: Scholarships for somebody who’s deserving but can’t go to college without a scholarship or your loophole?’”
Speaker Michael Madigan on Tuesday outlined grim budget news to House Democrats who left a closed-door meeting predicting deep budget cuts, particularly in health care for the poor. […]
Madigan’s memos laid out scenarios for how much additional money could come in during the next budget year that starts July 1. If revenue grows a modest 2 percent, the state would collect an additional $568 million. If it grows 4 percent, which one lawmaker suggested is unlikely, the state would gain about $1.13 billion.
But the amount of new money isn’t likely to be enough to cover the increased costs of public worker pensions, which are expected to increase by $957 million. And that doesn’t take into account the desire to increase spending in the rest of the budget, especially on politically popular areas like education.
* More budget stuff…
* Washington State’s Medicaid Program Will No Longer Pay For Unnecessary ER Visits
* Chicago Ald. Joe Moore has been busily lobbying Senators on behalf of his own possible nomination to run the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency. Many of the largest business groups in the state released a letter they sent to Senators last month opposing Moore’s nomination…
(W)e are teaming up to discourage the nomination and, if necessary, lobby against his confirmation to this critical state government position.
As background, Alderman Moore has been a member of Chicago’s City Council since 1991 and is probably best known for three big, public City Council battles: the Fois Gras ban, the Big Box Ordinance and the Chicago Clean Power Ordinance.
We believe that he’s not the right person for IEPA Director
• Chicago Power Ordinance — By championing the Clean Power Ordinance in Chicago, the Alderman showed his willingness to undercut an IEPA-negotiated agreement, create uncertainty in the regulatory process, introduce the concept of a city having greenhouse gas emission regulations and, most importantly, single out specific plants for specific regulations in an effort to treat them differently. His willingness to lead the charge on an ordinance with these ramifications is an example of what the business community often complains is over-reaching government interference and its negative impact on job creation.
• Product Attacks – The Alderman’s own website included attacks on the use of plastics, pesticides, fertilizers, and genetically modified (GMO) foods as harmful to health and the environment (note: these references have been recently removed from the website but hard copies are available upon request). Regardless of your own position on these issues, it should be generally recognized that the Chicago City Council is not the proper forum for them. This is another example of the Alderman being unable to exercise sound judgment as to appropriate use of government powers.
• Aldermanic Record – Alderman Moore’s record includes taking on big issues that have generated attention for him and his positions. As alderman, that type of aggressive advocacy may have its place. However, the job of the IEPA director is an administrative position that is best done outside the limelight. It’s not a place to make laws, push personal agendas or single out companies or industries; it’s a place to administer policies and regulations. It seems as though Governor Quinn would be trying to put a square peg into a round hole when it comes to this nomination.
• Big Box Ordinance – The Alderman’s very public Big Box ordinance was a measure that put a narrow agenda over the interests of thousands of consumers. His belief in this kind of government intervention in the market while denying consumers access to retail opportunities gives businesses leaders great pause as to how he would run an agency that regulates businesses large and small.
• Experience – Alderman Moore does not have experience running an organization as large as IEPA. An Alderman typically has three to five staff to manage with a small office budget. The IEPA has more than 800 employees and an annual budget of more than $300 million. Unlike previous IEPA Directors who have all been well versed in the state’s Environmental laws, Alderman Moore’s only environmental experience appears to be advocating for the Chicago Clean Power Ordinance and work with the National League of Cities’ committee on land, air and water.
“I think they ignore the fact if you look at entirety of my record as a public official I take a very balanced approach,” Moore said.
Moore defended the Clean Power Ordinance, saying emissions from the power plants affect every ward in Chicago.
“There have been documented adverse health effects. The emissions from those power plants are carried throughout the city of Chicago and the region. … I think that’s really what this is all about. It’s not about my qualifications.” […]
“I think they have very little to worry about,” he said. “I think political experience is also very important. You need to work well with the state legislature. As a legislator myself, I understand the importance of that.”
The Illinois Chamber, the Manufacturers, the NFIB, the Pork Producers, Chemical Industry Council, Petroleum Marketers and others signed the letter.
* This statement was released yesterday and I didn’t see it…
“The swelling in Senator Kirk’s brain has subsided and this morning we were able to reattach the portion of his skull that had been removed following his stroke. This is an important milestone in his recovery and a step toward the next phase, rehabilitation. He remains in good condition,” said Richard Fessler, MD, PhD, neurosurgeon at Northwestern Memorial Hospital and professor of neurological surgery at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.
The news just keeps getting better. My father had a stroke a while back, so I know recovery takes time and there can be setbacks along the way. We shouldn’t celebrate quite yet, but we should definitely be encouraged by this news.
A newly retired state representative who shepherded two utility bills through the House in 2010 and 2011 landed a new job last month as the utilities’ lobbyist, a practice government watchdog groups say should be banned.
Former state Rep. Kevin McCarthy, an Orland Park Democrat who served 14 years in the Illinois House, retired in late December after sponsoring the controversial ComEd “Smart-Grid” legislation and, the year before, a much-debated bill AT&T wanted. On Jan. 26, McCarthy filed paperwork with the Illinois Secretary of State’s Office to serve as a lobbyist under a new firm he created, KMAC Consulting. He lists two clients so far: AT&T Illinois and its affiliates, and ComEd.
The practice of state lawmakers becoming lobbyists after retiring is not uncommon. Government reform groups have criticized the practice because they say it creates a perception elected officials are serving their own interests, rather than the public’s, when they collect a paycheck from firms whose interests they aided through legislation. The lobbying rail at the Illinois Capitol in Springfield includes at least a dozen former lawmakers on any given day.
“The problem is they know the inside game,” Illinois Campaign for Political Reform Executive Director Brian Gladstein said. “They know who the people are pulling the strings. They have the relationships with the people who can get a bill passed.”
Gladstein’s organization tried for several years to slow the so-called revolving door of lawmaking to lobbying through legislation that would require a lawmaker to wait six months between leaving the General Assembly and registering as a lobbyist. The bill died after failing to garner enough support from legislators.
I told subscribers about McCarthy’s pending ComEd lobbying when he stepped down.
ICPR’s proposed six-month ban on lobbying wouldn’t do a whole lot in some cases. For instance, if a legislator retired at the end of the May 31st spring session, he or she could start lobbying well before the next spring session began.
* The Question: Should legislators be banned from lobbying for six months to a year after they leave the General Assembly? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please. Thanks.
* Not sure how much posting there will be today, but this is a good way to keep track of today’s session and committee hearings. Watch live House video here, Senate video here. Blackberry users click here…
The photo sent from the Kevin Burns campaign for Kane County chairman shows county auditor candidate Laura Wallet, coroner candidate Rob Russell, 33rd State Senate candidate Karen McConnaughay and a smiling U.S. Rep. Randy Hultgren on a Huntley constituent’s porch.
They were campaigning together Jan. 28 for the March 20 primary and all got a ride on Burns’ campaign bus back to their cars, Burns said.
And the news release from the Burns campaign stated that Hultgren told voters Burns was “the best candidate for this important office” of county board chairman. Burns is currently Geneva’s mayor.
Then this weekend, Hultgren, R-Winfield, endorsed Burns’ opponent, State Sen. Chris Lauzen, R-Aurora, at Lauzen’s winter barbecue fundraiser on Saturday.
The endorsement caused a bit of a dust-up, as Burns said he was “taken aback” by the apparent about-face. But according to Lauzen, there is no about-face. Lauzen disputes that Hultgren said anything like Burns was the “right man for the job,” which the release claimed Hultgren had said.
“While I respect Randy’s right to do what he wants,” said Burns, “I was obviously taken aback by this action. It was only last week he told voters we encountered in Huntley that I was ‘the right man for the job,’ so you can understand my surprise when I read the news.”
According to Burns, Hultgren did not contact him to tell him about his switch until late this afternoon. “I spoke with Randy, and he said, ‘I hate doing this. I absolutely hate it. This sucks.’ ”
* It’s not inconceivable to think that a highly contentious Daily Herald editorial board interview of both the candidates might also have played a role…
By including a statement that he [Lauzen] is a pro-life, pro-marriage candidate who supports, “honest, competent administration,” the gloves came off.
“Chris obviously hates homosexuals, is afraid of women and believes that only he has the answers to everything,” Burns said. “That’s sad.”
“Are you joking?” Lauzen responded.
“No, I’m not joking,” Burns replied. “I’m dead, fricking serious.”
U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. said Monday that he did not violate House ethics rules when he had a longtime friend and fundraiser buy a plane ticket for a woman who had a secret relationship with the congressman.
Jackson likewise defended his actions amid an ongoing House Ethics Committee investigation into allegations that the same fundraiser was part of a scheme to raise $1 million for convicted former Gov. Rod Blagojevich in return for the governor appointing Jackson to the U.S. Senate.
The 17-year congressman’s remarks came during an often contentious appearance before the Chicago Tribune editorial board with his March 20 Democratic primary opponent, former U.S. Rep. Debbie Halvorson, who said the House investigation was keeping Jackson from doing his job.
Jackson’s response to the ethics concerns raised new questions when he was asked about his extramarital relationship. He noted he had apologized to “my absolute best friend, my wife,” Ald. Sandi Jackson, 7th.
Jackson apparently interrupted Halorson during the debate and she scolded him for it…
Caption?
* And Republican Congressman Don Manzullo has a new TV ad. Rate it…
Spurred by a Tribune report documenting an explosion in Taser use by police, a state legislator from Chicago is pushing a bill that would force local police departments to inform the state of every shock an officer delivers to a civilian.
The proposed law would compel officers to report details of any use of a Taser or other electroshock weapon, including information about the incident that led to the weapon’s deployment and whether the subject was armed, aggressive or intoxicated. Officers would also be asked to report the race of each person shocked by one of the devices. […]
In Chicago, where Taser use mushroomed after hundreds more officers were armed with the weapons, police logged 853 uses in 2011, a fivefold increase over 2008, according to figures compiled by the Independent Police Review Authority.
Davis’ bill faces opposition from the Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police. The measure would force an “unfunded mandate” on local police departments, many of which don’t have the money for software or computer systems that might be necessary for the tracking effort, said Laimutis Nargelenas, a lobbyist for the organization.
* The Question: Do you support this concept of compelling the police to report Taser usage? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please. Thanks.
When ousted 36th Ward Ald. John Rice started a new job recently in Gov. Pat Quinn’s administration, Rice said he did not rely on clout but rather applied for the $84,420-a-year position after seeing it posted online.
But Rice’s job application was not filed until the same day he started his new job with the Illinois Department of Transportation in November, according to state records obtained by the Chicago News Cooperative. And the management opening was never posted, the documents show. […]
Rice’s hand-written application was dated Nov. 21 – the same day that his appointment became effective.
One of three references that Rice listed on his application was Mark Altman, a Chicago Fire Department captain who was accused of assaulting a police officer as police and fire marine units rescued two men from the Chicago River in November.
Gov. Pat Quinn’s office has denied the governor was involved with the hiring. IDOT blamed Michael Stout for the decision. Stout, who has since resigned, denied he hired Rice.
* Way back in 1980, this is how Quinn’s tenure during Gov. Dan Walker’s administration was described…
“His only problem was that he loved power and was vicious in doling out patronage and taking it away. He is not politically naive.”
* If true, this potential budget cut could indeed be devastating for that Peoria program. But WMBD may have crossed the line into outright activism with this story…
A vital program for kids with autism could be the next victim of Governor Quinn’s budget ax. […]
He’s expected to propose major cuts to The Autism Program of Illinois, or TAP. It’s possible the program could even be eliminated all together.
The autism program at Easter Seals of Central Illinois gets money from TAP. If money is completely cut off, it would mean layoffs and a blow to services for the families Easter Seals serves. […]
Easter Seals is asking you to take action. It wants you to send letters to Governor Quinn asking to keep the funding.
The station then supplied a link to a webpage that allows people to send letters to the governor.
* Roundup…
* Editorial: State’s eavesdrop law should be changed
* Sheriff’s office criticizes new cemetery rules signed by Quinn: “The individuals that did the horrific tragedy at Burr Oak, the way that this language is currently written and passed and signed now, would allow them to come back to work at Burr Oak without any questions,” said Frank Bilecki, a spokesman for Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart.
* Illinois to extend immunity for drug users who report overdoses: The measure is meant to address scenarios in which friends let friends die from overdoses rather than risk being arrested themselves for drug use after calling for emergency help.
* And here’s a ScribbleLive feed. I’ll post some background stories in a minute or two for those of you who need to get up to speed on the issue. Blackberry users click here…
Depending on the other components of a pension bill, Cullerton said, the state could also consider revising its current goal of having the pension systems funded at 90 percent by 2045. That level was “artificially determined in 1995,” he said.
“I always thought 80 (percent) was the acceptable percentage,” Cullerton said. “A hundred percent would be if everybody retired on the same day, that’s how much money you’d have to have. Well, that doesn’t happen.”
As long as the state wasn’t also responsible for paying the interest every year on that remaining 20 percent unfunded liability, the idea would significantly lower the pension payments. I’m not sure how it will be received at the Statehouse, but this is a start.
The idea is intended to be one component of an overall pension reform plan, which could also feature concessions by public employee unions in exchange for some sort of mechanism to make sure the state pays what it owes to the systems, said Cullerton, a Chicago Democrat. […]
One approach to the problem could be giving pension payments priority over other state obligations, similar to the status now enjoyed by bonds the state issues, Cullerton said.
This is not something that can be negotiated with the unions during collective bargaining. The state Constitution’s “contract” on pension benefits is with individuals, not collectively. And the mechanisms he’s referring to aren’t quite clear yet. Subscribers know a little bit more, but this isn’t going to be easy, either.
* Gun-owner rights supporters thought they had a shot at winning this federal case. No such luck so far…
U.S. Judge Sue Myerscough wrote in an opinion issued Friday that the Second Amendment is narrow and merely gives citizens the right to possess lawful firearms in the home.
Four citizens and the Second Amendment Foundation Inc. and Illinois Carry — both pro-gun lobbying groups — filed suit in May 2011. They argued that Illinois laws that prohibit people from carrying guns in public, whether concealed or not, violate the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Myerscough, however, found no constitutional problem with the state laws.
“The United States Supreme Court and the Seventh Circuit (Appellate Court) have recognized only a Second Amendment core individual right to bear arms inside the home,” Myerscough said in her ruling. “Further, even if this court recognized a Second Amendment right to bear arms outside of the home and an interference with that right, the statutes nonetheless survive constitutional scrutiny.”
* An appeal is already in the works. From a press release…
In her ruling, Judge Meyerscough stated, “This Court finds that the Illinois ‘Unlawful Use of Weapons’ and ‘Aggravated Unlawful Use of a Weapon’ statutes do not violate Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights. The United States Supreme Court and the Seventh Circuit have recognized only a Second Amendment core individual right to bear arms inside the home. Further, even if this Court recognized a Second Amendment right to bear arms outside of the home and an interference with that right, the statutes nonetheless survive constitutional scrutiny.”
In response, [Second Amendment Foundation] founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb suggested the judge’s ruling defies common sense.
“We look forward to winning this important case on appeal even if it means going back to the United States Supreme Court for a third time,” Gottlieb stated. “The Second Amendment does not say, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed except outside your home or that it only applies inside your house. We don’t check our constitutional rights at the front door.”
Judge Myerscough denied SAF and its co-plaintiffs a preliminary injunction against two laws in Illinois that make it a crime to carry loaded firearms outside the home for personal protection. Instead, she supported the state’s motion to dismiss the case.
Discuss, but keep your tempers cool, please. Let’s not let this get outta hand. Also, as usual, no drive-by comments and bumper-sticker slogans. Elevate yourselves or go somewhere else.
