PCB rejects Quinn’s petcoke emergency rules
Thursday, Jan 23, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* AP…
An Illinois pollution panel has denied emergency regulations to control piles of petroleum coke.
The Pollution Control Board made the decision on Thursday regarding statewide regulations proposed by Gov. Pat Quinn. The board’s decision means the rules will go through the longer, regular rule-making process. […]
Quinn wants to require storage terminals to immediately install dust-suppression systems and prevent storm water runoff. He also wants companies to fully enclose the piles within two years.
Industry officials say the rules would hurt Illinois businesses, and there’s no need for emergency action.
* Opposition to the rules was intense and broad…
Illinois business leaders say Quinn’s regulations would be unreasonably expensive and don’t need to be rushed into place. They point to last year’s deal on fracking, in which people on both sides of the issue took the time to sit down and hammer out a compromise.
The petcoke rules, for example, could affect other industries, such as trucking, rail, barges, refineries and power generation in unexpected ways, they said.
“We believe the IEPA can’t know how this will affect business,” said Tom Wolf, executive director of the Illinois Chamber Energy Council. “Without an emergency, why are we going through a process that lasts seven days? There’s no science behind it. Petcoke and coal can be stored safely. If groups and individuals want to bring forward ideas on how it can be done better, that is what legislation and rule-making are for. That’s what democracy is about. It’s not about seven days.”
26 Comments  
|
Question of the day
Thursday, Jan 23, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Gov. Pat Quinn has been getting a free ride lately because the Republican candidates are beating each other up. So, what stories about Quinn would you like to see here?
42 Comments
|
Today’s quote
Thursday, Jan 23, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* WLS…
At City Hall, a stink is being raised over medical marijuana regulation.
Some of the aldermen don’t like where the state is forcing the city to allow medical marijuana dispensaries and growing areas.
It’s basically in manufacturing districts and Alderman Carrie Austin is crying foul. “Very resourceful individuals in the City of Chicago might open up a bakery with some brownies! So, that bothers me!”
22 Comments
|
* Here we go again.
From 2011…
A group of drivers filed a lawsuit against Cardinal Logistics Management Corp. alleging that Cardinal misclassified drivers as independent contractors.
The drivers allege that they were employees, as opposed to independent contractors, and the misclassification allowed Cardinal to be relieved of the obligation to reimburse the drivers for any and all employment claims. The drivers also contend that Cardinal avoided giving them required meal and rest breaks, avoided keeping itemized wage statements and paying for workers’ compensation insurance.
The parties have reached a settlement which would require Cardinal to pay $3.75 million to create a settlement fund.
Cardinal Logistics Management Corp. was owned at the time by… you guessed it, GTCR Golder, Rauner...
“We are extremely pleased with Cardinal’s performance in growing the business profitably and we think the market for outsourced, specialized, high-intensity local fleet operations will continue to enjoy significant growth.
“Cardinal’s innovative capabilities and national infrastructure are ideally suited to create value for its clients in that arena,” said Dave Donnini, member of Cardinal’s Board of Directors and Principal of GTCR Golder Rauner LLC.
* From 2007, when the lawsuit was originally filed…
[Plaintiffs attorney] Jennifer Whipple characterizes the case as “one of the most blatant cases of deliberate misclassification” she’s ever seen. […]
The lawsuit claims that Cardinal directs and controls the work its delivery drivers perform, but has established an elaborate system and a series of documents to disguise the employer-employee relationship. For example, Cardinal requires the drivers to agree to provide their own equipment to perform deliveries, but also requires them to lease the trucks from the company and cover all costs, such as fuel and maintenance, the suit says. It also charges that as a condition of employment, the drivers are required to establish their own corporations or limited liability companies, which “serve no purpose other that to perpetuate and shield Cardinal’s scheme.”
The complaint stems from the specific case of Gerald Smith of Reno, Nev., represented by Whipple, who worked as a delivery driver for Cardinal, driving a Home Depot-labeled truck and wearing a uniform with both Home Depot and Cardinal logos from May 2004 to November 2006.
Smith worked eight to 10 hours a day, six days a week, receiving a weekly paycheck from Cardinal after the company deducted a substantial proportion of his earnings for expenses, calculated entirely by Cardinal, the suit said. All of his work was done at the company’s direction.
“This company ignores its legal responsibilities to its workers and is maximizing profits at the expense of its workers,” Whipple said. “It is illegal and grossly unfair, and we look forward to getting some justice for these drivers.”
* From 2012…
After a 15-year holding period, GTCR has sold Cardinal Logistics Management Inc ., a third-party transportation logistics provider with $325 million in revenue, to Centrebridge Partners, according to Jerry Bowman , president of Cardinal Logistics.
Terms of the deal weren’t disclosed..
Hat tip: William Kelly, who is a vehement Rauner hater. Still, those links don’t lie.
* By the way, GTCR bought Cardinal in 1997 and both were promptly sued by JB Hunt, which alleged Cardinal was trying to steal its employees and clients and attempting “blackmail.”
66 Comments
|
* Sen. Michael Frerichs has pulled his treasurer campaign announcement video off YouTube and replaced it with a new one.
The embarrassing move had to be made because Frerichs claimed in the original video that he had “led by example” by “ending free lifetime healthcare for legislators.”
Actually, Frerichs voted against that bill.
* Here’s the relevant clip from the original video…
* I asked Sen. Frerichs about his vote yesterday, and he got back to me today saying there’d obviously been a mistake.
He said he supported getting rid of free health insurance for elected officials, but the final bill, he said, “included everyone,” including university employees, so he couldn’t support it.
“My media team and I were talking about various reforms I had supported,” Frerichs said, “I think what happened is we saw the bill and saw the first version, which I had voted for.”
He did vote for the initial version, which was basically just an empty vehicle bill.
“We definitely misspoke, we messed up, we’re moving forward,” Frerichs said.
Oops.
* Making matters far worse, the legislation which Frerichs voted against was co-sponsored by none other than Tom Cross, Frerichs’ likely GOP rival. So, expect a Tom Cross press release in 3… 2… 1…
But, really, the goofiest thing about this mistake is that Frerichs has been running for treasurer for a year now. He’s had all this time to prepare the “perfect” official rollout and he blew it. That’s a seriously amateur mistake for a guy who claims to be running a top-notch campaign. There’s just no excuse for this stuff.
*** UPDATE *** Cross’ tracker was tossed out of Frerichs’ Chicago announcement event yesterday, but not before this video was taken of Frerichs taking credit for eliminating free lifetime health insurance for legislators…
Apparently, Frerichs dropped that particular line when he reached Peoria, which would be after I’d sent him an e-mail asking about the vote.
[ *** End Of Update *** ]
* Not everything else went smoothly for Frerichs on his big day, either. For instance, when asked yesterday about Senate President John Cullerton’s recent comments that Chicago pension reform is the session’s number one priority, Frerichs contradicted himself…
“There are many priorities out there, that is one of his,” Frerichs said.
Is it one of yours?
“In the treasurer’s office? No, the treasurer’s office is not in charge of pension reform. I think the things we need to focus on are making investments in our communities here in Illinois…” […]
Asked about Bruce Rauner’s criticism of Rutherford for not stepping up and taking a more central role in helping solve pension crisis, Frerichs said:
“The treasurer should be offering advice. We’ve seen the state going in the wrong direction”
Um, OK.
* Related…
* Ill. treasurer candidate hits incumbent on travel: Rutherford’s campaign spokesman Brian Sterling dismissed the criticism Wednesday, saying the treasurer is “very careful about mixing state and political business together.”
* Mike Frerichs kicks off Treasurer Campaign in Rock Island
* Candidate for state treasurer promises audit
63 Comments
|
‘Tis the season
Thursday, Jan 23, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Lots and lots of new bills are being introduced, so, as always, keep in mind that a bill introduction doesn’t mean that it’ll pass. For instance…
An Illinois driver who smokes while kids are in the car could get slapped with a fine under a proposal pending in the Illinois Senate.
The measure would make it a crime to smoke in a vehicle where a minor is present, punishable by a fine of up to $100.
Police wouldn’t be allowed to stop drivers for this offense alone, but they could ticket a driver for it if the driver is caught committing some other punishable offense.
A similar House bill didn’t even get out of committee last year. A resolution encouraging people not to smoke in their cars with kids present did pass on a voice vote, but it has no force of law.
* Back in 2007, then-Rep. Mike Boland got a lot of media attention for his own smoking ban in cars. His bill didn’t do so well…
While opponents whistled the sound of falling bombs, proponents argued passionately for anti-smoking legislation aimed at protecting the health of young children.
House Bill 1769 went down in flames Thursday, garnering just 18 “yes” votes while the 91 opponents cheered.
The bill would have prohibited smoking in a vehicle with children ages 8 and under.
Rep. Mike Boland, D-East Moline, sponsor of the bill, said he chose that age because children are in car seats until then. He thought it would simplify things for police officers.
Maybe this thing could move over time, or maybe it’ll just die like it always has. But a bill is just an idea at this point of the game.
26 Comments
|
* Daily Herald…
“Every school district and every college that gives a pay raise from this day forward needs to also pay the pension cost of that pay raise,” [Sen. Bill Brady] told the Daily Herald editorial board Wednesday.
The idea is a cousin of the controversial proposal to have school districts pay for all of teachers’ future retirement costs, which Brady opposes. Opponents say the so-called cost-shift could hamper local schools’ budgets and force cuts elsewhere.
Brady says school boards shouldn’t be allowed to raise salaries and foist the cost onto the state.
“We have no control over those pay raises.”
Unlike Speaker Madigan’s “cost shift” proposal, Brady’s would only deal with pay raise costs going forward, not full salaries, past and present, and pension debt.
It’s not a bad idea. One of the reasons Illinois got itself in over its head on pensions is that the state made itself responsible for funding teacher and university pension systems. The costs just grew too high, and the state has no control over those costs, other than paying its bills on time (which would’ve kept those costs from rising, but hurt other budget items, like schools themselves).
74 Comments
|
Guns, weed and the feds
Thursday, Jan 23, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Christian County Sheriff Bruce Kettelkamp responded to the new state rules forcing medical marijuana patients would have to surrender their FOID cards and concealed carry permits by saying carrying a concealed firearm after smoking medical marijuana is OK by him. He just doesn’t want people driving high…
“I just don’t think anyone should have their second amendment rights taken away from them because they’re on a prescription for a pain killer,” said Kettelkamp.
Kettelkamp is more worried about the people with driver’s licenses and medical marijuana cards, because he doesn’t feel there is an accurate way of testing drivers to see if they’re under the influence of marijuana.
“I don’t have many murders in Christian County,” said Kettelkamp. “But I have people killed in accidents, and that’s what really concerns me about somebody driving under the influence of marijuana. We’re not going to be able to detect that. There’s no way we can do a field sobriety test on an individual that’s under the influence of marijuana.”
Welcome to Downstate.
The proposed rules, by the way, are here.
* WICS TV also asked the Illinois State Police for an explanation of the FOID/carry ban for med-mar patients…
According to a statement from the agency, “possession of both a registry identification card and a FOID card is contrary to federal law.”
It should be noted that possessing marijuana, even while following all the rules of the new Illinois program, is also not allowed under federal law.
OK, I get that. You can’t do it under federal law. However, federal law also has some big penalties for growing, selling and smoking marijuana, whether medicinal or not, and Illinois has moved beyond that silliness.
* A federal suit over this issue was filed in 2011 after the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) issued a memo to all federal firearms dealers warning of severe consequences…
The memo says that “there are no exceptions in federal law for marijuana purportedly used for medicinal purposes, even if such use is sanctioned by State law…any person who uses…regardless of whether his or her state has passed legislation authorizing marijuana for medicinal purposes, is an unlawful user…and is prohibited by Federal law from possessing firearms of ammunition…..if you are aware that the potential transferee is in possession of a card authorizing the possession and use of marijuana under State law, then you…may not transfer firearms or ammunition to the person.” And indeed, Hauseur did not.
Wilson thinks that this BATFE policy violates her Second Amendment rights. With the help of Nevada lawyer Chaz Rainey of Rainey Devine, she filed suit in October in federal district court in Nevada against Department of Justice chief Eric Holder, the BATFE, and its acting director and assistant director.
As the suit says, “Ms. Wilson has never been charged with or convicted of any drug-related offense, or any criminal offense….Indeed, no evidence exists that Ms. Wilson has ever been ‘an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana….’ Ms. Wilson maintains that she is not an unlawful user of or addiction to marijuana….Nonetheless, Ms. Wilson was denied her Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms based solely on her possession of a valid State of Nevada medical marijuana registry card.” The suit argues the BATFE policy also violated her Fifth Amendment right to due process since it presumes she is a prohibited drug user arbitrarily.
36 Comments
|
* I asked all four Republican candidates and the governor’s campaign for comment on yesterday’s story by Doug Ibendahl about Bruce Rauner’s company’s involvement in some allegedly spectacular nursing home scandals. Dan Rutherford’s campaign politely declined comment “at this time.” Only Sen. Kirk Dillard’s campaign decided to weigh in. I didn’t hear back from anyone else, including Rauner’s campaign.
From a statement released by Glenn Hodas, who is Sen. Dillard’s campaign manager…
Yesterday’s stunning revelation about Bruce Rauner’s links to nursing home deaths and abuse, if true, is extremely disturbing. It shows how an obsession with profits can obliterate compassion and ethics.
At a bare minimum, the voters deserve a full explanation. Rightfully so, people all over the state this morning are asking, “Where is Mr. Rauner’s moral compass…does he even have one?”
And yet again, the steady drumbeat of controversies shadowing Rauner continues. One more story like this, and voters should ask Rauner to withdraw for the good of Illinois.
As we’ve said before, the problem with Bruce Rauner is not that he made a lot of money. Buts it’s how he made the money, and what he’s done with the money.
Discuss.
172 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
|
Comments Off
|
Rauner to amend disclosure reports
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Bruce Rauner’s campaign has agreed to refile its quarterly disclosure reports. As we’ve discussed before, Rauner has not been disclosing his individual staff members and salaries, but the Board of Elections has asked him to do so. From his press secretary…
We have filed our campaign finance disclosure reports in the same manner for four quarters, and the State Board has accepted those filings without issue. We are confident that we have complied with the Campaign Finance Act.
That said, the Board has now requested that we break out the salaries. We are honoring that request. We have no problem providing further detail regarding our expenditures, and we will provide that detail shortly.
7 Comments
|
Your medical pot or your gun
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I really don’t like this idea…
Patients who want to qualify for medical marijuana in Illinois would have to be fingerprinted for a background check and pay $150 a year — and give up their right to own a gun, state officials proposed Tuesday. […]
One new proposal states that a qualifying patient or caregiver may not possess a firearm, even if they have a state firearm owner’s identification card or concealed carry permit, and violators may be subject to sanctions by state police.
* I mean, I see the reason why, but I still don’t like it…
Todd Vandermyde, lobbyist for the National Rifle Association, said the NRA takes no position on the issue but that the rule seems to be an attempt to interpret federal law. A U.S. Department of Justice firearm application form asks if the buyer is “an unlawful user” of marijuana or other controlled substances.
Illinois regulations make clear that pot possession is still prohibited by federal law, and the state denies liability for damages arising from the program, including federal prosecution.
Ugh.
38 Comments
|
Question of the day
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Three of the four Republican candidates talk about how they’ll deal with Speaker Madigan…
On Wednesday, Brady, Dillard and Rutherford each said they had demonstrated their ability to work with Madigan and Democrats in the past without surrendering their principles.. “I know it might be a populist thing in the Republican primary to not admit that,” [Rutherford] said. “But the fact is they are the speaker and the president, you should be able to have a Sunday afternoon conversation, perhaps even have a meeting in one of the two’s offices.”
Dillard, of Hinsdale, said he sometimes gets criticized “in a Republican primary because I have worked across the aisle with Democrats to successfully move things along.”
He cited his work as chief of staff in the first year of GOP Gov. Jim Edgar’s administration in working with Madigan while keeping lawmakers in extended session and “the state didn’t come to a grinding halt.” Dillard, who also appeared in an early presidential campaign TV ad for then-Democratic U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, said his background showed he had the “bipartisan chops” to work with a “Chicago-led legislature successfully.”
Brady, the unsuccessful 2010 GOP nominee from Bloomington, repeatedly cited his lone support among the four contenders for a new state law aimed at eliminating the state’s $100 billion unfunded public worker pension liability over the next 30 years. Brady served on a special legislative panel that designed the law.
“I’m the only Republican candidate for governor who actually worked with the Democrats, convinced them that we needed meaningful pension reform,” Brady said. “That’s the kind of governor we need — someone who’s willing to take bold positions to work with the Democrats and make sure we pass them.”
* The Question: Regardless of the candidate you support, which of the four Republicans do you think would work most effectively with Speaker Madigan? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
surveys
29 Comments
|
Swinging at straw men
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Transylvania University…
It’s called hitting the ground running. “When I graduated in May, I never expected to be in national media by November,” said Transylvania University economics and international affairs grad Lyman Stone ‘13.
It’s been that kind of year for Stone, now working as an economist at the Center for State Tax Policy, an arm of the Tax Foundation in Washington, D.C., as he pursues a master’s degree in international trade and investment policy at George Washington University.
A photo posted next to the story has Stone smiling…
* So, why is a profile of a recent out-of-state undergrad relevant here?
Stay with me.
From a January 15th press release…
Illinois state Reps. David McSweeney, Ron Sandack, Ed Sullivan, Darlene Senger, Tom Morrison, Patti Bellock and Jeanne Ives, and State Sen. Michael Connelly will join other legislators on Wednesday at a press conference to express their concerns with the proposed progressive income tax in Illinois. A new report from the nonpartisan Tax Foundation has found that proposed changes would negatively impact the state’s ranking on the State Business Tax Climate Index. Illinois would be demoted from the 31st best climate in the country to 44thoverall, and its individual income tax rank would drop from 11th place to 33rd if it adopted the proposed progressive tax plan. The study also notes that the progressive income tax would affect many Illinois small businesses that pay taxes through individual income tax code.
The Tax Foundation’s Joseph Henchman, vice president of state & legal projects, and Lyman Stone, economist, will lead the press conference with a discussion of their findings. [Emphasis added.’
Um, the guy just got a Bachelors degree last year and he’s touted as an economist?
I thought you needed a “piled high and deep” for that designation.
* Americans for Prosperity rushed to point out the new study by the “economist”…
Recently, Lyman Stone, economist with the non-partisan Tax Foundation and Joseph Henchman, the organization’s Vice President of State Operations joined with Illinois lawmakers for a downtown Chicago press conference. There, the Tax Foundation unveiled the sobering findings of a recent study which shows the potential impact of the proposed progressive income tax.
* And the Illinois Policy Institute pounced immediately…
The Tax Foundation released an analysis of the proposal to dump Illinois’ fair, flat tax in favor of a progressive tax that would force people to pay higher taxes as their income increases. The conclusion was unsurprising: a progressive income tax would deliver a devastating blow to Illinois’ already struggling business climate.
The Tax Foundation ranks states based more than 100 different variables that fit into five broad categories: major business taxes, individual income tax, sales tax, unemployment insurance and property tax. The index ranks the general competitiveness of state tax systems – with 1st being the most competitive and 50th being the least competitive state tax system. A state with a ranking of No. 1 is considered the most competitive economically.
* To the study…
Illinois’ State Business Tax Climate Index score could fall to 44th, from 31st currently, if the proposed progressive income taxes are passed, which indicates a tax climate less supportive of economic growth […]
With the 2011 tax increases scheduled to sunset in part, and with the state budget still not structurally balanced, some policymakers may consider doubling down on bad tax policy. One proposal that has emerged in recent months is to consider a graduated, or progressive, income tax that would impose many additional rates on individual income.
For example, (HJRCA0033) would amend the state constitution to allow a progressive income tax.6 The plan includes seven tax brackets and a top rate of 9 percent, raising taxes on all income over $18,000.
* The citation the economist author uses is a link to the proposal itself. The full and complete actual language…
There may be one tax on the income of individuals and corporations. This may be a fair tax where lower rates apply to lower income levels and higher rates apply to higher income levels. No government other than the State may impose a tax on or measured by income.
Yes, some rates have been discussed in the media, but the legislative proposal itself makes no mention of them. So picking essentially random tax rates and plugging them into a tax climate score just doesn’t do it for me.
24 Comments
|
Grotesque ISRA paranoia has not yet subsided
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From an Illinois State Rifle Association press release…
URGENT ALERT - YOUR ACTION REQUIRED
ANTIGUNNERS TO HOLD PUBLIC MEETINGS ATTACKING CONCEALED CARRY
YOU MUST ATTEND TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT
Gun-grabbing State Representative Laura Fine will be holding a so-called “Public Meeting” on Wednesday, January 22, 2014 in Glenview, Illinois. Joining Fine in organizing the meeting is the extremely anti-gun Cook County State’s Attorneys Office along with the state’s most radical gun control organization, The Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence (ICHV).
Fine claims that this meeting is for the purpose of answering questions the public might have about concealed carry. In reality, the organizers plan to use the meeting to frighten the public and spread lies about the impact of concealed carry on public safety. Fine and the other organizers plan to use this meeting as a recruiting session for ICHV and as a platform to launch efforts to REPEAL CONCEALED CARRY during the 2014 legislative session coming up this spring.
DON’T BE FOOLED - Rep. Fine, the ICHV and the Cook County State’s Attorneys Office want to strip you of your right of self defense, and then come take your guns away.
ARE YOU GOING TO STAND BY AND LET THE GUN GRABBERS TAKE WHAT IS RIGHTFULLY YOURS?
Of course not. That is why you must stand up now and defend your rights! That is why we must flood Fine’s “Public Meeting” with solid supporters of the 2nd Amendment!
3 THINGS YOU MUST DO TO HELP PROTECT THE FUTURE OF CONCEALED CARRY AND PRESERVE ALL YOUR GUN RIGHTS
1. Attend Rep. Fine’s “Public Meeting” on concealed carry. The meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, January 22, 2014, 7:00 PM, Glenview Police Station, 2500 East Lake Street, Glenview. Please plan on being there at 6:15 to make sure that you get a seat. In the past, the gun grabbers have been known to close the doors early to stifle pro-gun voices. Be sure to wear NRA or IGold hats and t-shirts to the event. If you see the media there, approach them and tell them that you are a law-abiding firearm owner and that you strongly support concealed carry and the right to keep and bear arms. The gun controllers on the panel will surely attack the Second Amendment and your right to keep and bear arms. It is very important that you vigorously defend your rights and enthusiastically support your fellow gun owners when they speak out in defense of our Constitutional rights.
2. Pass this alert on to all your friends and family members…tell them to show up at the meeting as well.
3. Post this alert to any and all Internet bulletin boards or blogs to which you subscribe.
* Rep. Fine canceled the meeting…
“The meeting was a question-and-answer session, not a debate on the concealed carry bill,” said Fine, of Glenview.
“Elected officials around the state have been holding these meetings, more so for chambers of commerce because business people want to know how to abide by the law if someone walks into their place with a gun.”
Jim Patterson, Glenview village president, said he read the Illinois State Rifle Association’s posting.
“The wording is strong and by design wanting a conflict. The meeting’s intention was question and answer, not turning it into a debate and setting the stage for conflict,” Patterson said.
He also said the police community room’s capacity limit could be exceeded, and he asked Fine to reschedule the meeting.
Sheesh.
34 Comments
|
Sullivan may be right
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Illinois Radio Network…
If Illinois lawmakers want to extend the income tax increase beyond this year, their decision probably will come late.
This is the assessment of State Rep. Ed Sullivan (R-Mundelein):
“I don’t know that Speaker Madigan would like to put that out before an election, so this is all being driven by the election. If by some chance his candidate, Gov. Quinn, would lose, I think he (Madigan) would rather put that on the Republicans to figure that out,” he said.
If Gov. Quinn loses there will be huge pressure by many liberals in and out of the General Assembly to extend the tax hike indefinitely. But Sullivan has a pretty good handle on how Madigan usually thinks. MJM could very well just announce that the people have spoken and then toss this hot potato to whomever wins and maybe offer to work with him if and/or when he winds up in over his head - as long as he brings Republican votes to the table.
Your thoughts?
26 Comments
|
The great divide
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The Daily Herald looks at the vast disparity in suburban school property taxes…
The gap between the top and bottom suburban districts is vast. On one end of the spectrum is Rondout Elementary District 72 in Lake Forest, which will collect $30,381 in property taxes per student this year. On the opposite end is East Aurora Unit District 131, which has a property tax collection level of $2,816 per student, according to district budget documents submitted to the state.
“The main reason for the huge differences has to do with property tax wealth,” said Larry Joseph, director of fiscal policy at Chicago-based Voices for Illinois Children. “The heavy reliance on property taxes to fund schools combined with the weak support from the state just makes for very large fiscal disparities.”
Discuss.
31 Comments
|
*** UPDATED x1 *** Rate the Frerichs intro video
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I’m not sure why he’s doing it now, but after months of actively campaigning for office Sen. Michael Frerichs is “officially” kicking off his state treasurer campaign today with stops in Chicago, Rock Island, Peoria and Champaign…
“Over the past year I’ve visited almost every county in Illinois and have talked to thousands of business owners, farmers, students, and regular citizens who told me that they want a qualified, ethical, and proven reformer to be our next Treasurer. As a former County Auditor and current Certified Public Finance Officer, I offer my record of fighting waste and corruption in state government to the voters of this state and ask that they join me as we work to take back the Treasurer’s office for middle class families,” Frerichs said.
“The Treasurer’s office works on issues that are bedrocks to a thriving economy and stable middle class: college savings, infrastructure investment, support for small businesses, low-interest loans to our farmers, and directing how to invest the state’s $16 billion in pension funds. I pledge to bring accountability, transparency and competency to Illinois’ finances, and to put state investments to work to help build out the middle class,” Frerichs continued.
* Tom Cross welcomed him to the race…
llinois State Representative and candidate for Illinois State Treasurer Tom Cross today released the following statement in response to Democrat State Senator Mike Frerichs’ announcing his campaign for Treasurer.
“The tax and spend policies of Senator Mike Frerichs have made the situation in Illinois go from bad to worse. The unbalanced budgets, reckless spending and record-setting tax increases that Frerichs has been a part of have left our state struggling to meet our most important priorities, including funding our children’s education and ensuring the safety of our communities. The simple truth is Mike Frerichs cannot be part of the solution because he is a big part of the problem. It’s time for a turnaround and that begins with real reforms that honestly balance our budget and crack down on fraud and corruption. I’m ready to get to work for the people of Illinois and fix the failed Frerichs policies.”
* Rate Frerichs’ intro video…
*** UPDATE *** Sun-Times…
If you’re a campaign tracker for the opposition, don’t try to get into a Mike Frerichs press conference.
The Democrat was announcing his candidacy for State Treasurer this morning in Chicago when a campaign worker for the Tom Cross for Treasurer team showed up. (Cross is running in the Republican primary for the office).
The red-faced, snow-laden worker pamphleted from the sidewalk after he was kicked out.
21 Comments
|
Things that make you go “Hmm…”
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From a June 18, 2003 Koch Pipeline Company press release…
Koch Pipeline Company, L.P. (“Koch Pipeline”) announced today it will conduct Phase I of an open season for the Dakota Express Pipeline, a proposed pipeline to transport Bakken crude oil from western North Dakota to Hartford, Illinois and Patoka, Illinois. Koch Pipeline also intends to explore a connection at Patoka, Illinois, to the Eastern Gulf Crude Access Pipeline, which would be capable of delivering Bakken crude oil to eastern U.S. Gulf Coast refineries. Dakota Express Pipeline would begin service in 2016 with an expected initial capacity of approximately 250,000 barrels per day.
This project presents an opportunity for Koch Pipeline to meet the growing transportation needs required to support increased crude oil production in the Williston Basin. Koch Pipeline’s system is anticipated to provide a low-cost solution for shippers to access important crude oil demand centers.
* From a January 13th story in Progress Illinois…
Gov. Pat Quinn announced the state’s plans to push for emergency administrative rules for the management of petroleum coke, or petcoke, a thick, powdery byproduct of oil refining that can pollute the air and water.
“We want to make sure that every neighborhood in the state of Illinois is protected from the hazard of petroleum coke,” Quinn said at a press conference Monday afternoon. […]
Quinn delivered the announcement from the outskirts of KCBX Terminals’ 90-acre property, at 3259 E. 100th St., on the Southeast Side of Chicago. The company, controlled by the conservative billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch, temporarily stores petcoke along the Calumet River for a nearby BP refinery in Whiting, Ind. […]
“This particular neighborhood on the Southeast Side of Chicago has been hampered and hurt by this fugitive dust,” Quinn said. “It’s blown off of these mountains of petcoke, into the homes of good people who are trying to raise their children and make sure they’re healthy.”
* From a press release issued early this morning…
Ahead of Thursday’s “emergency action” being considered by Illinois Pollution Control Board against the storage and handling of petroleum coke, coal, and related bulk materials across the entire state, coalitions of job creators are refuting this potential action as detrimental to industries across Illinois affecting thousands of jobs and our state’s struggling economy. This action is being encouraged by Governor Quinn five months after an isolated incident where non-toxic petroleum coke dust blew over portions of the southeast side of Chicago during a windstorm; adding to the lack of rationale, the operator of that Chicago facility has since rectified the problem. The “emergency” being referenced is about politics, not good government.
WHO: Mark Denzler, Illinois Manufacturers’ Association
Tom Wolf, Illinois Chamber of Commerce
Mark Biel, Chemical Industry Council of Illinois
Jim Watson, Illinois Petroleum Council
Phil Gonet, Illinois Coal Association
WHAT: Media availability (via conference call)
WHEN: Wednesday, January 22
9:30 a.m.
* From a Bloomberg story this morning…
Koch Pipeline Co. called off plans to build a 250,000-barrel-a-day crude line to Illinois from North Dakota’s Bakken formation, where a shale boom has helped lift domestic production to the highest in a quarter-century.
Quinn singled out the Metro East region as a petcoke problem area in his remarks to reporters the other day.
22 Comments
|
Today’s Raunerpalooza
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From the “No Rauner” blog yesterday…
Tonight was supposed to be a live GOP debate on WGN TV and WGN Radio, 720 AM. But, again, Rauner chickened out. Bruce Dold, the editorial board editor of the Chicago Tribune, did an interview with Steve Cochran of WGN Radio today about the forum that was cancelled because of Rauner’s refusal to attend.
Dold likened Rauner’s skipping of key forums to the same behavior of another rich guy with lots of Chicago Democrat connections, Andy McKenna, from 2010. Dold said McKenna controlled the TV airwaves, like Rauner, but fell short of winning the nomination (he was third- behind Brady and Dillard).
The audio is here.
Not mentioned above is that Dold’s Tribune editorial board endorsed McKenna in 2010 and has been obviously leaning toward Rauner this time around.
* Meanwhile, after our post last Friday about how both Bruce Rauner and Michael Frerichs were not reporting the salaries of individual staffers, Frerichs filed an amended D-2 later the same day with staff names and payments to them.
No amendment has yet been filed by Rauner.
* And this is from Diane Ravitch’s blog…
I had a personal encounter with Bruce Rauner. Two years ago, I received the Kohl Education Award from Dolores Kohl, the woman who created it, a great philanthropist who cares deeply about the forgotten children and annually honors outstanding teachers. After the awards ceremony, Ms. Kohl held a small dinner at the exclusive Chicago Club. There were two tables, 8 people at each table. I sat across from Bruce and of course, we got into a lively discussion about charter schools, a subject on which he is passionate.
As might be expected, he celebrated their high test scores, and I responded that they get those scores by excluding students with serious disabilities and English language learners, as well as pushing out those whose scores are not good enough. Surprisingly, he didn’t disagree. His reaction: so what? “They are not my problem. Charters exist to save those few who can be saved, not to serve all kinds of kids.”
My response: What should our society do about the kids your charters don’t want? His response: I don’t know and I don’t care. They are not my problem.
This was not a taped conversation. I am paraphrasing. But the gist and the meaning are accurate.
70 Comments
|
Cross voted for it before he was against it
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Nina Totenburg reports on yesterday’s US Supreme Court hearing…
At issue: whether nonunion members can be required to pay fees to help cover the cost of negotiating a contract from which they benefit.
In Illinois 10 years ago, 28,000 home health workers who care for adults with disabilities approved a union. Since then, hourly wages have nearly doubled, the workers now receive regular training, and they have health insurance. The state says as a result, the workforce has been stabilized and professionalized, and the government has saved money by keeping adults with disabilities in their homes.
Some workers, however, object to paying what is known as “fair share” fees. That is, even though they haven’t joined the union, they are required to pay their fair share of the costs of negotiating and administering a union contract they benefit from. The Supreme Court has long allowed such fees to prevent nonmembers from free-riding on union members’ dues. But in recent years, some of the court’s conservatives have suggested they may be prepared to reverse this long-established principle. And Tuesday’s case presents that opportunity.
The state says it actually has saved $632 million by creating a stable workforce to care for adults with disabilities in their homes instead of nursing homes.
One of the questions before the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday is whether non-union members must pay for negotiating a contract they benefit from. […]
And the workers and their patients say the union has transformed a program that previously had been hobbled by rapid turnover.
“I have a son that has cerebral palsy,” said Flora Johnson, a home care worker who serves on the union’s executive committee. “They tried to get me to institutionalize him years ago. But by the union coming in, he got a chance to stay home with his family.”
* LA Times…
In its lawsuit, the right-to-work attorneys portrayed the arrangement as a questionable deal between state Democrats led by former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and union officials. Alito picked up on the theme.
“Gov. Blagojevich got a huge campaign contribution from the union and, virtually as soon as he got into office, he took out his pen and signed an executive order that had the effect of putting $3.6 million in the union coffers,” Alito told U.S. Solicitor Gen. Donald Verrilli Jr., who joined in defending Illinois. The judge was referring to the $3.6 million in dues paid to SEIU after home-care providers were organized.
Verrilli denied that partisan politics were at play, noting that a “large bipartisan majority” of the Illinois Legislature voted in favor of the decision to extend union bargaining rights to the home-care providers.
The measure passed 51-2-5 in the Senate (Barack Obama voted “Present,” Dan Rutherford voted “No” and Kirk Dillard voted “Yes”) and 115-0 in the House.
* But Gov. Quinn expanded the scope of that legislation with an executive order in 2009.
In 2009, Governor Pat Quinn issued an executive order directing the State to recognize an exclusive representative for the Disabilities Program personal assistants, if a majority so chose. In a mail ballot election, however, a majority of the approximately 4,500 Disabilities Program personal assistants rejected representation by any union. Nevertheless, a union can request new elections in the future, and, under Illinois labor law, may bypass an election altogether if it collects a sufficient number of union cards from the personal assistants.
In 2010, personal assistants from both groups filed a two-count complaint against the Governor and the three unions involved. The Rehabilitation Program plaintiffs claimed that the fair share fees they were required to pay violated the First Amendment by compelling their association with, and speech through, the union. The Disabilities Program plaintiffs argued that although they did not yet pay fees, they are harmed by the threat of an agreement requiring fair share fees. The district court dismissed the Rehabilitation Program plaintiffs’ claims for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. It dismissed the Disabilities Program plaintiffs’ claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because they lacked standing and their claims were not ripe.
The Seventh Circuit Decision
Writing for a unanimous panel, Judge Manion held that, with respect to the Rehabilitation Program plaintiffs, the fair-share fees withstand First Amendment scrutiny, in that they are, for First Amendment purposes, identical to the fees upheld by the Supreme Court in Abood v. Detroit Bd. of Educ.
Note that personal assistants from both groups of personal assistants have filed suit. Why is that important? Well, let’s revisit Tom Cross’ press release from yesterday…
“I believe forcing Illinois home-care workers to join a union and pay labor dues against their will violates both their right to free association and freedom of speech. For too long, the leadership in Illinois has focused on rewarding special interests as opposed to making common sense decisions that are fiscally prudent and defend core individual rights. It is not the job of state government to pick winners and losers, in this case seeking to bolster falling union membership; instead, elected leaders must put the common good before all else. My hope is the Supreme Court hears the arguments in this case and comes to the conclusion that Illinois’ actions are unconstitutional and cannot be allowed to stand.”
From the bill Rep. Cross voted for in 2003…
Provides that a labor organization recognized by Executive Order to represent personal care attendants or personal assistants shall be the exclusive representative of those individuals.
19 Comments
|
It’s just a bill (Part 42,967)
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Buzzfeed…
A Republican state senator in Illinois introduced legislation Tuesday to repeal the state’s new marriage equality law, which takes effect this June.
But with a Senate and House controlled by Democrats — who just voted in favor of marriage equality in November — and a governor who pressed for equal marriage rights in the state, advocates say Sen. Kyle McCarter is simply playing to his base of conservative Republicans.
McCarter introduced Senate Bill 2637 to repeal the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, which passed last fall, and amend the state’s marriage statute to redefine marriage as between one man and one woman. […]
“This is just politics,” said Anthony Martinez, executive director of The Civil Rights Agenda, an LGBT rights group. “It’s an election year in Illinois and whenever that happens there’s always legislators who introduce legislation that will really go nowhere, but appeals to their base and I think that’s exactly what he’s done here.”
McCarter is McCarter. None of his Senate bills passed the Senate last year. That one ain’t gonna pass, either.
Personally, I really like the guy. I mean it. He’s a whole lot different back in the district than he is in Springfield. He listens, is considerate and can even be humble - qualities he doesn’t often display at the Statehouse, which is too bad, if you ask me.
* Along the same vein, the Champaign News-Gazette recently profiled a bed-and-breakfast near Paxton which is doing banner business since it was hit with a civil rights complaint for refusing to host a civil union ceremony. The owner says the same ban will apply to gay marriages, and he wants some legal protection…
State Rep. Josh Harms, R-Watseka, is among the lawmakers pushing for a change.
Harms said he voted last year against the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act because, among other reasons, “businesses will be forced to host, cater or otherwise serve gay weddings, even if their religion forbids it.”
Harms said he had planned to draft legislation to protect “the rights of those individuals and businesses that have religious objections to gay weddings,” but he has since narrowed the focus of the proposed legislation. Harms said he now is working to draft a bill that would expand the law to “protect all entities controlled by the church” — specifically, private schools affiliated with churches. […]
“I think (the legislation protecting business owners) will be a hard sell,” Harms noted. “I’ve been talking to some other reps about carrying the other one that will give a personal objection exemption (to business owners). But I think it will be very hard to get through (into law).”
When even Josh Harms won’t touch the issue, you know it’s radioactive.
* Sen. Jason Barickman, who voted for gay marriage, says he might consider supporting Harms’ legislation tightening up language on religious institutions, but the private business stuff will not get his backing…
“As far as the bed-and-breakfast goes, their ability to turn away same-sex couples is prohibited by the Human Rights Act,” Barickman said. “They are unable to say ‘no’ to a same-sex couple not because of the same-sex marriage law that just passed, but because of the anti-discrimination law that passed long before Rep. Harms and myself were in the legislature.”
Exactly right.
* Also from the News-Gazette story…
The TimberCreek website lists Walder’s position against same-sex marriages and civil unions.
“If you go to http://www.timbercreekbb.com/history, towards the bottom of the page you will find what I believe and how I look at the issue. It is posted there for the world to see,” Walder said.
* From the bottom of the business’ “history” page…
America was built upon a foundation of religious liberty and Judeo Christian principles. This heritage is engraved in federal buildings all over our Nation’s Capitol. It is printed on our money. It is enshrined in the United States Constitution which guarantees the freedom of religious expression. But now it is under assault by well-funded homosexual activists who demand we surrender religious liberty to their new definition of marriage. President Obama has been deceived into embracing this far-left agenda. Even IL Governor Quinn is marching down this same path of perversion. As Christians, we should absolutely love individuals ensnared in homosexuality, but we should not and cannot condone any part of it because the Bible condemns it. The Creator of the Universe is no one to defy.
Homosexuality is a behavioral choice which has been historically viewed as immoral, sinful, and an abomination to God in Judeo Christian belief for over 6,000 years. This lifestyle can be adopted and abandoned. Yet it is being championed as equal to immutable human characteristics such as race, color, gender, creed, age, and national origin. It uses anti-discrimination laws as a bully club when dissenting Americans disagree with men trying to marry men, women marrying women, men changing to women, and women changing to men. It basically says that God is confused by marriage, family, and sexuality and that we need to correct his mistakes.
We politely disagree. God is not confused. His Word clearly illustrates and declares that marriage is between one man and one woman. It also labels homosexuality as an abominable sin throughout the Old and New Testaments. God’s Word is the ultimate authority, infallible, and unchanging. It is the same yesterday, today, and forever. His Word cannot be changed by a vote of the Illinois General Assembly when it passed the Civil Unions Act or the Gay Marriage Bill. Marriage is only appropriate God’s way. Sexuality is only appropriate God’s way.
Consequently, we cannot host civil unions or gay marriages at TimberCreek Bed & Breakfast. It is not an issue of fairness or equality, but an issue of right and wrong. We cannot be part of what God condemns. Be assured that we are not lawless, hateful, judgmental, bigoted, or activists by any definition. We did not initiate the present controversy. We are not the ones who voted to change the 6,000 year-old definition of marriage. We are just small business owners trying to be consistent in following God’s Word and living it out practically in our lives. And we are not alone.
Um, you call gay marriage a “path of perversion,” an “abomination” and a “bully club” against dissenters and then you say you “politely disagree” with its backers?
47 Comments
|
Today’s numbers are lousy
Wednesday, Jan 22, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The Pew Charitable Trusts has a new interactive analysis of state fiscal health and, of course, Illinois isn’t doing well at all. From an e-mail…
Rich,
Just in time for the start of the Illinois legislative session next week, The Pew Charitable Trusts has launched a new interactive featuring 50-state data on key fiscal, economic, and demographic indicators. Fiscal 50: State Trends and Analysis also features insights and analysis from Pew experts in five core areas of fiscal health: revenue, spending, economy and people, long-term costs, and fiscal policy.
Fiscal 50 launched with six key indicators of state fiscal health, and will be updated with additional indicators, fresh analysis, and new data over time. Our first six indicators are: 1) tax revenue, 2) federal share of state revenue, 3) change in state spending over the past 20 years, 4) employment to population ratio, 5) debt and unfunded retirement costs, and 6) reserves and balances. These indicators were carefully selected to illustrate macro fiscal and economic trends that encourage policymakers to think outside of the annual budget bubble and focus on long-term fiscal issues.
The interactive offers state-by-state comparisons on each of these indicators, so you can quickly see which states are leading and which are lagging behind. The tool also allows you to compare state data to a national benchmark.
For example, in the “Reserves and balances” indicator, you can quickly see that, in fiscal year 2013, Illinois had sufficient reserve funds to operate for just 0.4 days, compared to a national average of 20 days. Of all of the states that report this figure, Illinois had the lowest amount of reserve funding.
Emphasis added for obvious reasons.
24 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
   
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|
