Your post-debate moment of Zen
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I just did a quick read-through of the comments on the Rauner vs. Quinn at the IEA event post. You guys did a tremendous job. I’ll bet you’re all still kinda keyed up, so here’s something to chill everybody out before the weekend.
Oscar the Puppy and I have been playing a fun new game recently…
5 Comments  
|
Question of the day
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* NBC 5…
A bill preventing the use of police ticket quotas passed in the Illinois Senate Thursday in a 57-1 vote.
The legislation would prevent ticket quotas at any state, county and municipal police departments. It also states that departments would not be allowed to evaluate an officer’s performance based on the number of citations they issue.
The bill had the support of 19 sponsors in the Senate, including Sen. Kirk Dillard. The Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police, however, fought the measures.
* SJ-R…
Republican Sen. Tim Bivins, the lone “no” vote, said the bill would give the small percentage of officers who don’t want to do their jobs incentive to slack off.
Bivins, a former sheriff in Lee County, said that if the bill passes, it would take discretion out of the hands of management and could be the first step toward “circumventing the collective bargaining practice that exists.”
But Manar argued that officers need more discretion, calling the bill “necessary because a quota takes away from a police officer’s ability to use good judgment.”
He also said local governments are often tempted to use law enforcement quota policies as a way to raise revenue.
* The Question: Have you ever experienced a traffic ticket situation where you believed the police officer didn’t have the discretion to issue a simple warning? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
panel management
34 Comments
|
Not taking the bait
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The best way for the Democrats to use this “voter suppression” amendment to gin up turnout is to hope that somebody, somewhere trashes it and they hype that negative comment in hopes of angering their base. The Republicans have mostly refused to take the bait so far. Sun-Times…
Without opposition, House Speaker Michael Madigan’s plan to amend the Illinois Constitution to ban voter-suppression tactics passed the Senate Thursday.
The measure, which needed 36 votes to pass in the Senate, cleared the chamber 52-0 and will appear on the November 4th ballot after having passed the House earlier this week. […]
Sen. Matt Murphy, R-Palatine, said this would allow voters “unfettered access” to exercise their voting rights.
“We take seriously that fundamental, quintessential concept of the right to vote,” he said. “We can send a message and make clear with this bill right here that it doesn’t matter what your surname is, if you have earned that right to vote, you will not be impeded in any way in exercising it.”
* Even tea party Sen. Kyle McCarter held his tongue…
“We’ve heard the stories from around the nation of states implementing laws specifically to limit the right to vote,” said Sen. Kwame Raoul, D-Chicago. “This is definitely intended to discourage voter ID laws because of their disparate impact.”
Statistics have shown the poor, elderly and minority voters are less likely to have the photo IDs needed in some states in order to vote.
“In the county where I reside, we’ve had issues,” said Sen. Kyle McCarter, R-Lebanon. “If a (photo ID) is not available, we should make it available. I firmly believe we should have a voter ID law that does not discriminate.”
McCarter did not vote on the amendment.
* Meanwhile, a handful of liberal Democrats were crushed in the House yesterday…
Spurred by a gun-rights activist’s scrape with the law, the Illinois House voted Thursday to block state conservation police from going into someone’s home or onto their yards to enforce state hunting laws without search warrants.
The measure sponsored by House Minority Leader Jim Durkin, R-Western Springs, arose after National Rifle Association lobbyist Todd Vandermyde was cited last December by Department of Natural Resources police on private hunting ground. […]
(S)tate Rep. Ann Williams, D-Chicago, another gun-control advocate, rose up to raise questions about the precedent the House was setting with the issue and voiced concern about any similar, potential efforts to water down safety components of the newly enacted concealed-carry law, which Vandermyde helped draft.
“I don’t think the best genesis for changing those laws is something that stems out of a violation,” Williams said.
House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie, D-Chicago, Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, D-Chicago, and Rep. Robyn Gabel, D-Evanston, were the other “no” votes on the legislation, which Durkin said was supported by state conservation police.
The bill passed 102-5.
21 Comments
|
Tone it down, please
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* You may have read this advertorial yesterday…
Uber’s lies and deception over the last month are an affront to Representative Zalewski and the entire General Assembly. Uber’s representatives, including their Worldwide Director of Policy, participated in lengthy negotiations. Uber, in writing, requested 13 changes to HB 4075.
All 13 changes have been addressed.
Eight changes were fully accepted.
Four changes were addressed through a part-time / full-time compromise for drivers.
The final change was negotiated by Uber, the Illinois Insurance Association and Illinois Trial Lawyers Association.
We were under the impression from the negotiations that the deal would be acceptable to Uber.
* Uber did, indeed, get just about everything it wanted in those negotiations. But it’s now hyperventilating to the media after the House passed the negotiated bill. Sun-Times…
The Illinois House voted 80-26 on a proposal that would require all ridesharing companies to conduct driver background checks, safety training and have commercial liability insurance. Ridesharing drivers would be restricted from using taxi loading zones. Those drivers logging more than 18 hours would need registration plates, a chauffer’s license, and vehicle safety inspections.
Ridesharing companies would still be allowed to use price surging, or raising prices in times of high demand. […]
“The passage of HB4075 in its current form destroys thousands of jobs in Chicago, slashes income opportunities for Chicago’s rideshare drivers, and effectively shuts down uberX in Chicago,” said Andrew Macdonald, Uber Chicago general manager, in a prepared statement.
“Today is a win for the corporate taxi special interests and a loss for the thousands of Uber users in Chicago who banded together in short order to save ridesharing in Illinois and were effectively ignored,” he said.
…Adding… Rep. Mike Zalewski and the cab companies are right about this point…
Zalewski told WBEZ that Uber’s lobbyist in Springfield, attorney Michael Kasper, supported the idea of bifurcating drivers into different regulatory categories depending on how much time they work. “I can only negotiate with who Uber tells me to negotiate with,” he said, “and their representatives were willing to negotiate on this point.”
But almost immediately after the bill passed, Uber denied that it was consulted in the crafting of the bill. “Uber has not signed off on a proposal that bifurcates drivers,” said Andrew MacDonald, Regional General Manager of Uber Midwest. Lyft issued a similar statement: “Bifurcating drivers into two groups was not a compromise and we did not support this model in conversations with the bill sponsors.”
“That’s an outright lie,” said Pat Corrigan, a Principal at Yellow Group and representative of the Illinois Transportation Trade Association, which includes nearly all of Chicago’s taxi companies. “We talked to Uber representatives, including Michael Kasper, their lobbyist, over the weekend in an attempt to understand how we could satisfy their wishes.” Kasper did not respond to an e-mail by posting time.
* Look, bills are never perfect. And the ride sharing companies could still ask for changes in the Illinois Senate. But it’s not a bad deal at all and that hyperbole from Uber just looks like crazy talk.
But it’s to be expected, I suppose.
* From an Inc. profile of Uber CEO Travis Kalanick…
[Uber] also has an aggressive culture and growth strategy set by a CEO who is so headstrong, so enthusiastic, and so combative in defense of his big idea that he is at risk of seeming like a parody of today’s tech entrepreneur–up to and including having a thing for Ayn Rand. You hear a lot about tech companies shaking up staid industries, pushing past slow, complacent competitors. This is the next phase. This is Silicon Valley’s cult of disruption taking on city hall. […]
When quiet negotiations with city officials don’t seem to be getting him anywhere, he has a tendency to lash out, often by implying that the people standing in his way are corrupt. […]
Kalanick does his part to bait his critics. He can be at times comically grandiose and un-self-aware. When I ask him why he left angel investing (which he was doing after selling Red Swoosh) to run Uber, his rambling, five-minute answer includes two hyperbolic claims, a mixed metaphor (”It’s so complex all you can do is swim in uncertainty”), childish whimsy (”that is my happy place”), and, believe it or not, an unironic Braveheart reference.
“That’s part of me, that freedom fighter in me,” he says. “It’s like Braveheart. Like, ‘freeeeeduuuuuuuuum.’ ”
I strongly defended Uber last month when the taxi companies came after it. Their original bill was grotesque. This bill is far from that.
8 Comments
|
Rauner offers preview of today’s IEA forum
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* We’ll have live video coverage today at 2 o’clock of the Illinois Education Association’s forum featuring both Gov. Pat Quinn and Bruce Rauner, so make sure to check back.
Rauner’s campaign put out a preview release today and Illinois Review provided a good summation of the candidate’s expected talking points…
“Bruce has pledged to increase education funding as governor. He believes education is the most important thing we do as a community and should be the top priority in Illinois,” a campaign statement says.
Secondly, Rauner is “personally devoted to the cause.” Rauner has invested time and resources to improving education in Illinois by leading the Chicago Public Education Fund, which helped more teachers achieve National Board Certification, and he has personally funded a Chicago program aimed at financially rewarding the best performing principals,” the statement says.
Rauner also claims his investment firm has helped the Teacher Retirement System by producing “tremendous results.” The Rauner campaign points to comments made by Governor Quinn’s own spokesperson concerning GTCR, an investment firm Rauner founded. […]
Rauner will remind the teachers that their IEA President Cinda Klickna Led Motion to Invest in GTCR back in 2003. […]
Rauner will pitch that he wants teachers to control their retirement savings - rather than leave it in the hands of “union bosses,” something he’s likely to leave unsaid in his sales pitch.
No kidding he won’t. The phrase “union bosses” appears nowhere in the press release. Here’s what it said on that topic…
Bruce believes teachers should be able to keep the pensions that they’ve honestly accrued, but moving forward they should be shifted into a defined-contribution style system that puts teachers in charge instead of the politicians.
“Politicians” are now the targets.
26 Comments
|
About that crime victims’ amendment
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Back in 1992, Illinois voters approved a new constitutional amendment…
SECTION 8.1. CRIME VICTIM’S RIGHTS.
(a) Crime victims, as defined by law, shall have the following rights as provided by law:
(1) The right to be treated with fairness and respect for their dignity and privacy throughout the criminal justice process.
(2) The right to notification of court proceedings.
(3) The right to communicate with the prosecution.
(4) The right to make a statement to the court at sentencing.
(5) The right to information about the conviction, sentence, imprisonment, and release of the accused.
(6) The right to timely disposition of the case following the arrest of the accused.
(7) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused throughout the criminal justice process.
(8) The right to be present at the trial and all other court proceedings on the same basis as the accused, unless the victim is to testify and the court determines that the victim’s testimony would be materially affected if the victim hears other testimony at the trial.
(9) The right to have present at all court proceedings, subject to the rules of evidence, an advocate or other support person of the victim’s choice.
(10) The right to restitution.
(b) The General Assembly may provide by law for the enforcement of this Section.
(c) The General Assembly may provide for an assessment against convicted defendants to pay for crime victims’ rights.
(d) Nothing in this Section or in any law enacted under this Section shall be construed as creating a basis for vacating a conviction or a ground for appellate relief in any criminal case.
There was a lot of false or misleading info in comments yesterday about the new constitutional amendment, which will go before voters this November. So, let’s clear up a few things.
* The big compromise back in 1992 was that no “enforcement” provision would be put into the Constitution. The enforcement provision in state statute doesn’t give victims any standing.
From the Marsy’s Law website…
Why is a constitutional amendment necessary?
The Illinois Constitution currently guarantees crime victims certain rights, but these rights are technically unenforceable, making them ineffective and weak… Illinois is the only state that actually bars the enforcement of victims’ rights.
* When the attorney general’s office held discussions on this topic a few years ago, it was decided that the best way to proceed was through another constitutional amendment. This is from AG Madigan’s office…
Illinois has both a constitutional and statutory Victims’ Bill of Rights. Article I, Section 8.1 of the Illinois Constitution states that “nothing in the section addressing the rights of crime victims or any law enacted under the section shall be construed as creating a basis for vacating a conviction or a ground for appellate relief in any criminal case.”
Consequently, victims who are denied their rights have no redress because the denial is literally not subject to any kind of review. Because the problem lies with the Constitution, the only way to correct it is via constitutional amendment.
* The Illinois State Bar Association was opposed to a similar effort two years ago and testified against it. The group opposed it this year, but didn’t testify. They weren’t even in the room during the two public hearings. That’s usually Statehouse code for “we got the best, least offensive deal possible.”
* The new amendment gives victims some more rights, including…
The right to be heard at any post-arraignment court proceeding in which a right of the victim is at issue and any court proceeding involving a post-arraignment release decision, plea, or sentencing
They also would now have the right to be notified of the conviction, sentence, etc., instead of just the right to the information.
* There’s also this…
The right to have the safety of the victim and the victim’s family considered in denying or fixing the amount of bail, determining whether to release the defendant, and setting conditions of release after arrest and conviction.
* But while the victims are given standing, there are clear restrictions…
The victim has standing to assert the rights enumerated in subsection (a) in any court exercising jurisdiction over the case. The court shall promptly rule on a victim’s request.
The victim does not have party status. The accused does not have standing to assert the rights of a victim. The court shall not appoint an attorney for the victim under this Section.
Nothing in this Section shall be construed to alter the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the prosecuting attorney. […]
Nothing in this Section or any law enacted under this Section creates a cause of action in equity or at law for compensation, attorney’s fees, or damages against the State, a political subdivision of the State, an officer, employee, or agent of the State or of any political subdivision of the State, or an officer or employee of the court.
These are all quite reasonable changes and that’s why it was overwhelmingly approved by both chambers.
* And, believe it or not, big kudos go to Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez. Alvarez led the charge against this effort two years ago, but when changes were made and AG Madigan convinced her to switch positions she forcefully argued for the new draft. She even reportedly convinced DuPage County State’s Attorney Robert Berlin to back off his opposition. Berlin also hotly opposed the effort to amend the Constitution two years ago.
18 Comments
|
Culture wars alive and well in GA
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I have no idea why she called this bill yesterday when 20 members were absent from the chambers…
A bid to block therapists from engaging in “conversion therapy” with gay, bisexual and transgender youth in order to make them heterosexual failed Thursday in the Illinois House.
The measure, proposed by Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, lost on a 44-51 roll call despite her plea to colleagues to stop gay, bisexual and transgender teens 17 and under from being “horribly and humiliatingly abused.”
“This treatment plan causes depression, causes suicidal actions and is incredibly harmful to children,” said Cassidy, who is openly lesbian and one of the lead architects of Illinois’ same-sex marriage law.
“The practice of conversion therapy is dismissed by every major scientific organization and should not be utilized. There’s not a single scientific basis for one’s sex orientation being a disorder,” she said. “We need to protect our children.”
* The Illinois Family Institute was overjoyed…
In an article last month on this issue, IFI’s Laurie Higgins pointed out that the “ultimate motivation behind this legislation is to promote the Leftist assumptions of adult homosexuals who seek to wipe disapproval of homosexual acts from the face of the planet even if doing requires deception, harms children, undermines parental rights, and corrodes fundamental First Amendment speech and religious liberty.”
In a remarkable display of rhetorical excess, Cassidy argued that minors who desire to change their unwanted same-sex attraction through counseling are “horribly and humiliatingly abused.” It boggles the mind that Cassidy would expect her colleagues to believe that every counselor who helps minors with unwanted same-sex attraction “horribly and humiliatingly” abuses their young clients. Further, Cassidy expected her colleagues to believe her without any conclusive studies to support such an outlandish claim.
It defies logic that “progressives” believe that gender-confused minors should be able to receive treatment to change their unwanted “gender identity” but not their unwanted sexual preferences.
* Meanwhile, Rep. Cassidy did pass a bill yesterday recommended by Illinois’ Bullying Prevention Task Force. Illinois Review’s take…
Rep. Cassidy said that the ban on bullying was needed because of students with disabilities being “tortured” and biracial students being “attacked.” Cassidy said, as she called for the House floor vote, that she was bullied as a student, not because of being a gay student, but because she held strong religious convictions.
“The fact that the bill’s sponsors and the ACLU have refused to ensure the rights of students and school employees to opt-out of ‘programming’ and ‘training’ that promote ideas that conflict with their personal and/or religious beliefs reveals the real goal,” Illinois Family Institute said in a statement issued after the bill passed.
That goal, IFI says, is to use public education to promote unproven, non-factual beliefs about the nature and morality of homosexuality and “transgenderism.”
* And quite a large number of pro-life legislators opposed a bill that would increase protections for pregnant mothers in the workplace…
The bill, which moves now to the Senate, requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for pregnant employees, if so requested, unless the employer can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the business’ ordinary operation.
Also, it would be considered a civil rights violation if an employer denies employment opportunities or benefits to a pregnant woman, or takes adverse action against an otherwise qualified job applicant or employee. The employers may not require an employee or job applicant to accept an accommodation offered or force that employee to take leave.
State Rep. Jeanne Ives (R-Wheaton) said that she was pregnant twice while serving in the military, was provided numerous considerations while expecting and understood the need to make accommodations for pregnancy. However, the mother of five was concerned about a possible rise in litigation the bill would fuel.
* More…
Flowers’ bill would make employers permit frequent bathroom breaks, water breaks, seating, assistance with manual labor, less physically demanding duties, adjustment of the work schedule, time off to recover from childbirth, leave and break space for breast feeding. […]
Rep. Ron Sandack, R-Downers Grove, who voted against the legislation, said “no one’s against pregnant women” but said the bill goes too far.
“It’s problematic because it expands rights beyond what’s already provided in federal law,” he said. “It has many undefined terms that could be abused.” […]
But Flowers said litigation didn’t erupt in California after it enacted a similar law.
25 Comments
|
Turning a corner?
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* We still have a long way to go, and if the pension reform law is struck down all heck is gonna break loose. But good news shouldn’t be ignored. Paul Merrion at Crain’s…
On its latest sale of $250 million in long-term debt, the state got much better interest rates than just a few months ago on a similar package sized at $1 billion.
Bank of America/Merrill Lynch had the winning bid [yesterday] with an overall interest rate of 4.08 percent on the general obligation bonds, compared with 4.46 percent interest a small group of investment firms agreed to pay on a $1 billion bond deal in February.
Since then, the state’s worst-in-the nation credit rating hasn’t changed, but Gov. Pat Quinn issued a five-year budget plan and called for a continuation of temporary income tax hikes that were supposed to start phasing out next year, which the credit rating agencies embraced. […]
The difference between the current rate for AAA-rated borrowers and the state’s interest rate this week was about one quarter of a percentage point less than it was in February for bonds maturing in 2029. That works out to an 18 percent reduction in the yield penalty to Illinois.
* Meanwhile, Standard & Poor’s took a look at both the governor’s “recommended” budget and his “not-recommended” budget. The ratings agency obviously doesn’t care for the not-recommended budget, which doesn’t include a full year’s worth of revenue from the tax hike…
The state achieves budget balance in the not-recommended budget with $2 billion of proposed spending reductions. Total expenditures under that scenario are $29.4 billion, or 6.5% below fiscal 2014 spending levels; total and expenditures and transfers would be $34.6 billion, or 5.6% below 2014 levels. Spending reductions would be across the board in broad program areas excluding debt service, pensions, and most of the Medicaid program. Pension costs in the budget do not include the impact of recently enacted pension reform; the costs are budgeted at $6.2 billion, or 4.3% above fiscal 2014. Education funding under this scenario would decline about $1 billion and other general program areas also decline significantly.
We believe that the not-recommended budget could weaken structural alignment for Illinois.
That last line could be bigtime political ammo for Gov. Pat Quinn against those, like Bruce Rauner, who want to allow the tax hike to expire.
* S&P isn’t overly thrilled with the recommended budget, but they do appear to prefer it…
The recommended budget could contribute to enhanced structural alignment due to less severe spending reductions needed to achieve balance, but it still relies on nonrecurring resources, such as the interfund loan, as well as continued progress on Medicaid reform and other cost containment measures.
* And while expressing some constitutional and other reservations about the recent pension reform law, S&P wrote “we believe it would provide significant budget relief and substantially improve funded ratios over time.”
* There was also this historical perspective…
On many levels, Illinois’ credit quality is a study in contrasts. In our opinion, despite a long history of structural budget imbalance and weak pension funding levels, the protections for general obligation (GO) bonds are strong. Even during the Great Recession’s depths, when liquidity was extremely strained, the state’s commitment to bondholders was steadfast, in our view, and remained a policy focus. The recent pension reform further highlights this, with specific statutory provisions that subordinate pension payments to debt service. We believe the provisions relating to GO debt are longstanding and strong in supporting the priority of payment for debt service.
Illinois does not have to deal with constitutional or statutory revenue limitations, has what we consider to be a broad and diverse economy with above-average wealth levels, and has flexibility to adjust spending levels. However, despite these strengths, structural imbalance has been a regular feature of its budget position for many years.
* But…
Although the state has implemented improvements in budget and financial management practices, they have not been robust enough to offset the sluggish economy and the accumulated structural budget deficit. Illinois’ budgetary performance, rising unfunded pension liability, and legislative inaction on many fronts contributed to a pattern of credit deterioration since 2008; as a result, we have lowered our rating four times. This is at odds with the state sector’s credit performance as a whole. Only time will tell which path credit quality moves. As such, our developing outlook best reflects the state of Illinois’ credit quality, in that it might improve — or get worse — in the next two years.
* Related…
* Cullerton: ‘I confess: I like Illinois’
25 Comments
|
Rate the new Rauner ad
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Diana Rauner…
Hi.
The response to the TV ad we released last week has been great. The ad was a lot of fun for Bruce and me to make.
But I wanted to share a little more about why I think Bruce will make an excellent governor for every Illinoisan.
Watch here: bit.ly/1eot4vD
I hope you enjoy our new ad.
And if you’re interested in volunteering for the campaign please click here.
Thank you for all that you’re doing to bring back Illinois.
Diana
* Rate it…
…Adding… I forgot to include the cable buy stats. I don’t have the network buy info as of yet…
Citizens for Rauner
Republican candidate for Governor of Illinois
Agency: Access Media, Los Angeles
Total schedule: $82,256
Flight Dates: 4/11/14 - 4/17/14
Networks: BRVO, FOOD, HGTV, TVL, USA
Dayparts: 9A-4P, 4-7P, 7P-Midnight
Syscodes / zones / $ by zone
5170 / Chicago Interconnect / $68, 880
9804 / DirecTV / $7,917
9810 / DISH / $5,459
90 Comments
|
“Whatever it is, you look good”
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Here’s something you won’t see every day, particularly from me.
I came up with what I thought was a pretty good column idea for Crain’s Chicago Business. My editor, Tom Corfman, liked it and gave it a green light.
But then I wrote myself into a hopeless corner. That happens sometimes. It’s never pleasant. I worked on it and worked on it and thought I fixed it, but Corfman didn’t think I had. I read it again and realized he was right.
Uh-oh.
I labored over some revisions, but unbeknownst to me, Corfman also put some effort into it. His revision was far better than mine so we went with his changes.
* I usually hate it when somebody else touches what I write, unless it’s a typo or something like that. But I gotta give props to Corfman here. He made this column work…
For the past few years, whenever I’d get a haircut I could always count on people asking, “Have you lost weight?”
In reality, I’d probably gained weight and I would sometimes say that. “Well, whatever it is, you look good,” I’d hear.
For the past couple of months, though, folks have been telling me they loved my new haircut.
But I’ve been telling them, I’ve only had one haircut in three months. “Well, whatever it is, you look good,” they’ve been replying.
I couldn’t figure out why so many people loved my nonexistent haircut until it finally dawned on me that I’d…
Go read the whole thing.
17 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
   
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|
