Capitol - Your Illinois News Radar » An unusual request for bipartisanship
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      Mobile Version     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
An unusual request for bipartisanship

Wednesday, Nov 27, 2013

* Senate President John Cullerton was in Quincy earlier this week and was asked by the local media about a new capital bill. Money from the last capital bill is just about all spent, and infrastructure needs persist. Cullerton said he’d be in favor of a new proposal next spring, but only with certain conditions

“As long as Republicans are willing to sit down and talk about those things I am as well,” Cullerton said.

He said one hurdle would be coming up with revenue to pay off bonds to cover the construction projects. The 2009 capital program relied on liquor taxes, gambling revenues and other fees or taxes. It gained Republican votes, but tax increases have generally been opposed by the GOP.

“We have to pass it out of both chambers. There’ll be a governor’s race going on. We’d have to have bipartisan support, perhaps even from the two people running for governor,” Cullerton said.

“If that can happen and the politics can be put aside, even though it’s an election year, it’s something that I’d be very much in favor of.”

Getting both legislative parties involved in a capital bill negotiation isn’t extremely difficult because just about everybody wants infrastructure upgrades for their districts. But convincing both gubernatorial candidates to sign off on a capital bill and its funding mechanisms would be quite something to see.

- Posted by Rich Miller        

  1. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 9:42 am:

    Can’t see it happening.

  2. - walkinfool - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 9:44 am:

    Less a request, than an accurate sharing of responsibility when it doesn’t get done.

    We just ain’t got the money, or the means to pay off more debt.

  3. - Darienite - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 9:45 am:

    ==Can’t see it happening.==
    At least until after the election.

  4. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 9:46 am:

    About February 2015, this will get huge support. The next 14 months or so, it may be difficult to cobble 30 & 60, even with bipartisan support.

    Tough sledding…

  5. - Bob Gough - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 9:55 am:

    Video of his remarks here:

  6. - Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 9:56 am:

    === The 2009 capital program relied on liquor taxes, gambling revenues and other fees or taxes. ===

    Those revenue sources haven’t disappeared. They are still in full effect.

    If that revenue isn’t going towards funding another capital bill, where will it be diverted instead?

    We developed funding sources for a capital bill in 2009. Those funding sources are still there. Why would we suddenly need additional, new ones?

    What am I missing here?

  7. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 9:58 am:

    –What am I missing here?–

    Those revenue sources are dedicated to paying off the bonds that were issued.

  8. - Norseman - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 10:08 am:

    Willy, are you up to participating in the negotiations?

  9. - Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 10:09 am:

    @wordslinger - thanks for the reply, as usual. Perhaps you can help me a bit more?

    I understand the general principle. We sell bonds and then use the immediate proceeds from those bonds to finance our construction efforts while we pay off those bonds.

    For example, that lets us start a 5 or 10 year construction project immediately and pay off that debt as we work. It makes sense.

    What I don’t understand is why we can’t just repeat the same process again this time around?

    The bonds for that particular 5-10 year project should have been paid off by now, and those revenue streams freed up for new projects, right?

    Unless we’re mortgaging ourselves to the hilt…

  10. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 10:14 am:

    ===where will it be diverted instead?===

    The revenue won’t be diverted, the money will be used to pay off bonds.

  11. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 10:15 am:

    Thanks for the video, Mr. Gough.

  12. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 10:15 am:

    - Norseman -,

    “I would look forward to working with the four leaders, and do my share of the lifting, ensuring a bipartisan Capital Bill. Doing what needs to be done is not a Democrat or Republican ‘thing’, it’s an ‘Illinois’ thing, which also includes a logical and sound way to pay for the improvements, with agreement. I look forward to doing my part, and whatever I need to do.”

  13. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 10:15 am:

    FKA, I believe some of the bonds in question are 20 year.

  14. - PoolGuy - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 10:21 am:

    it was a nice thought. now go home and get your shine box

  15. - Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 10:46 am:

    Thank you, @wordslinger.

    There is a good breakdown here:, among other sources.

    My confusion comes into play by viewing this from a “household” perspective. I know I have to pay my mortgage and home equity loans off before using that money to pay something else.

    In this case, it sounds like the state’s mentality is to take out a 30 year mortgage for a house.

    Then an equity loan for rehabbing the house, before the mortgage is paid off.

    Then another equity loan for overhauling the driveway, landscaping and kitchen appliances.

    All before the mortgage or first equity loan is paid off.

    From a financial perspective, that just sounds absolutely crazy. Maybe that’s just the way things work, but it doesn’t seem sustainable.

    I assumed the state’s mentality was more along the lines of: identify a project –> fund the project with bonds –> complete the project work –> pay the bonds –> use the newly freed money to pay for another project.

    As the bonds and projects budgeted for 10, 20 or even 30 years ago are completed and paid for, those revenue sources should be coming free to use for new projects.

    It just seems crazy to take a 30 year mortgage, then another and another and another, before you have any of them paid off.

    From a family, personal and business mentality, the guiding principle is usually somewhat opposite: pay off the first mortgage, then you can use that money to take out another one.

    Regardless, thanks again to @word, @Rich, and anyone else who cares to weigh in. Happy Thanksgiving to one and all.

  16. - Plutocrat03 - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 11:01 am:

    “If that revenue isn’t going towards funding another capital bill”

    It’s obligated for a long time, probably 30 years. You want more bonds? Then you have to commit to a new revenue stream. Revenues from expiring bonds are not likely large enough to allow the issuance of new bonds, not to mention that the state is short of funds for everything else.

  17. - Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 11:22 am:

    This November 18 Washington Post piece on Chicago is a good example of my concern and confusion:

    “Already, the city is paying more interest than it is repaying principal on general obligation bond debt. But those extra payments pale in comparison to the money the city has already allocated — and now owes.”

    I knew things were getting bad.

    But for all the criticism and trashing politicians take, I never fully believed they could be so short-sighted, selfish and ignorant when planning for the future of those they lead.

    Crazy. And reckless.

  18. - Sinking Ship - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 12:54 pm:

    Borrow and spend. Borrow and spend. When will it ever end?

  19. - PoolGuy - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 1:57 pm:

    unless you want roads, buildings, bridges, locks and dams, schools to crumble and fall apart. “when will it end?” never…

  20. - Arthur Andersen - Wednesday, Nov 27, 13 @ 2:57 pm:

    Good analogy, FKA. Happy Thanksgiving, AA

Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.

* How Jason Van Dyke's projected 96-year sentence wound up being 81 months
* Pritzker campaign official pushes back hard against latest lawsuit
* Reader comments closed for the holiday weekend
* Question of the day
* Pritzker orders "comprehensive review" of problems, opportunities at state veterans' homes
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - This just in...
* It's just a bill
* "Trooper's trooper" laid to rest
* RNUG: Vallas' plan "appears to make Chicago's pension problem manageable"
* Because... Chicago!
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Update to this morning's edition
* What's up with this lawsuit threat?
* It's Time To Put Our Progressive Values Into Action
* Money isn't yet flowing toward Burke's challengers
* Lock up your guns and vaccinate your kids!
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Yesterday's stories

Visit our advertisers...








Main Menu
Pundit rankings
Subscriber Content
Blagojevich Trial
Updated Posts

January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005


RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0

Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller