*** UPDATE 1 *** To streamline the debate, the House only allowed one proponent and one opponent to speak.
The House voted against the budget proposal, 5-107.
So, just five people say they want these cuts. But not nearly enough favor the tax hike extension.
On to the next turn in the road.
*** UPDATE 2 *** Targets were all “No” votes…
Crespo was joined by Madigan; Rep. Toni Berrios, D-Chicago; Rep. John Bradley, D-Marion; and Rep. Ken Dunkin, D-Chicago [were the only “Yes” votes].
So, the targets mostly voted against the tax hike budget, and they voted against the tax cut budget.
[ *** End Of Updates *** ]
* SJ-R…
The Illinois House could begin voting as early as today on a revised budget plan that would slash more than $3 billion from a budget proposal they approved just a week ago.
Rep. Greg Harris, D-Chicago, chairman of the House Human Services Appropriations Committee, said the votes could come as early as Friday, while another veteran House Democrat said the vote was definitely on. […]
Rep. Fred Crespo, D-Hoffman Estates, is chairman of the House General Services Appropriations Committee.
“I want to make sure that when we take those votes, people understand it’s not just cutting jobs. There’s going to be repercussions. People will feel the impact,” Crespo said.
Except Crespo has said he’s leaning against voting for the tax hike.
* Meanwhile, Madigan more than just hinted at the tax hike’s fate yesterday…
Asked about the Republican advisory amendment plan by Rep. Ed Sullivan, R-Mundelein, Madigan signaled the tax question was off the table because only 34 House Democrats Wednesday showed a willingness to back the tax extension. Sixty votes are needed to get the plan backed by Gov. Pat Quinn out of the House.
“I think as a result of yesterday, that’s pretty much moot,” Madigan told Sullivan.
Later, however, Madigan gave a conflicting answer when pressed by Rep. David McSweeney, R-Barrington Hills, if the tax-extension is dead for the spring legislative session, which is scheduled to end May 31.
“Mr. McSweeney, I don’t want to be quoted as the one who killed the governor’s proposal,” Madigan said.
That’s not really a conflicting answer.
Watch the live blog for the debate.
- wordslinger - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:18 am:
Doesn’t sound like a bluff. Twenty six votes is a heavy lift.
- Joe M - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:24 am:
Several of the bond rating agencies have said that Illinois’ failure to extend the tax increase would have negative implications on Illinois’ bond ratings.
Funny how those pushing for pension diminishments, constantly cited negative ratings from the bond rating agencies if pensions weren’t reduced. Yet many of those same folks seem to conveniently be ignoring the bond rating agencies when those agencies say failure to extend the income tax rates will lower our ratings.
- Bill White - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:29 am:
I have this sense that the IL GOP is going to find out what it’s like to be the dog that actually catches the bus it’s been chasing.
- Skirmisher - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:29 am:
Joe- No surprise. Self-interest is the only truth for an Illinois legislator.
- A guy... - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:30 am:
If it’s good for one, it’s good for the whole class when it comes to MJM. More and more, it’s looking like he never wanted it. So it shant be. Correcting myself from a day or two ago. It won’t get to 60. I may correct myself again if his mind changes. The class will go along with him whenever he pulls the ruler out.
- A guy... - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:31 am:
To the update: looks like they voted last night and recorded it this morning.
- Anon - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:32 am:
5 votes in favor. Folks, you have to be for something. Pick a lane and make a decision.
- Walker - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:35 am:
Those “No’s” on the tax rate extension, had better vote “Yes” on the spending budget with cuts that match the lower revenues. And not then immediately complain about how their opponents cut money to schools, and services to those in need in their own districts.
I’ll be holding my breath, waiting for some courage and honesty.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:38 am:
===…the IL GOP is going to find out what it’s like to be the dog that actually catches the bus it’s been chasing.===
Very good there.
Ok, no keeping of the income tax levels, no real movement for the drastic cuts needed, at some point being the “Dopes of No” and thinking that all this is on the ILDems, it will backfire.
Also, I am a bit confused as to what McSweeney was trying to accomplish. Is it that the “all powerful” Madigan IS killing the proposal, or acknowledging that 34 is not 60 IS killing the Governor’s proposal? More “gotcha” politics is what this process needs? Ok, got it.
- VM - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:39 am:
Wait, since the bill was sponsored by Speaker Madigan does this mean that Madigan gets the Century Club trophy?
- Walker - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:43 am:
OK so only 5 House Reps have the courage to vote for the lowered spending required to have a balanced budget with the agreed upon lesser revenue — while the majority of them, and perhaps all Republicans, will not support the tax revenue needed to provide those services.
And for anyone to say that their party members had “no input” to these spending bills, is straight up lying, since they participate and have influence on the appropriations committees.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:44 am:
===Correcting myself from a day or two ago. It won’t get to 60. I may correct myself again if his mind changes.===
Way to take a stand, lol.
Nothing is done until it’s done. Maybe the real question is finding 26 votes versus finding 60 votes with the cuts needed, it might be better to somehow find 26?
- PublicServant - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:46 am:
It would be nice if a vote could be more nuanced in that an explanation of your no, or yes would be required.
(1)No, because the tax hike must expire and damn the consequences.
(2 FKA’s take)No, because your budget cuts are only for dramatic affect, the cuts don’t have to be made where you say they must and/or not in the amount that you call for.
(3) Yes, because I agree that the cuts must be made where and in the amount stated in this budget given the revenues available.
(3) Yes, because the budget must be cut. I don’t care where, as long as I and mine got theirs, and get to keep it.
- wordslinger - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:57 am:
Any guesses on how many people get tossed out of work with $3 billion in cuts?
- in the know - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 9:59 am:
and three of the five are Speaker, Crespo and Bradley……..
- Walker - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:01 am:
A Guy: Now it’s all because Madigan really wasn’t for it in the first place? Or will change only when Madigan changes his mind? LOL
When are folks going to realize that Madigan is not all-powerful even within his own caucus? Is it some kind of mythical belief that comforts?
- Walker - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:16 am:
@in the know: and 3 of the 107 are Speaker, Crespo, Bradley.
- Formerly Known As... - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:17 am:
I like Public Servant’s idea. It would be great to hear more about the rationale behind each member’s thinking.
The only thing I might change is the wording of (2). More along the lines of, “No. Now that the posturing is done, let’s sit down and work through this together like we should have weeks ago.”
For example, I do not accept on face that the only option for Jesse White’s office is to suddenly eliminate the entire Capitol Police force, stop mailing reminder notices, close 25 offices and lay off 200 people - not when their 2015 budget would actually be $11 million more than their 2013 budget. Let’s take a look at that together, determine the best options for the public, and if that turns out to be the truth then my thinking may shift.
- Arizona Bob - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:19 am:
They had three freakin’ years to figure out how to budget for “only” a 25% income tax increase instead of a 67% income tax increase, and now it seems they haven’t done any serious planning and prioritization of state spending to follow the law.
Is anyone surprised?
THIS is the time for the GOP to come out with budget plans to give alternatives to the things that the Dems propose cutting like education, health services, and transportation infrastructure.
Since K-12 education takes up about half the discretionary budget, it’s time to get realistic about the foundation level calculation method fudged by the union dominated EFAB comittee appointed by Quinn.
The current system uses an empirical method that uses costs from a certain percentage of the schools that meet academic progress criteria. This skews the level higher because most of those are overpriced suburban schools. This was based on the Augenblick and Meyers methodology, which ALWAYS results in recommending more tax money from schools in the states for which they develop plans.
A more realistic approach would be to set market value for staff salary and benefits, staffing level at classroom, operations, administrative and maintenance levels, and develop a target of cost efficiency that must be met when establishing the foundation level on which state aid is based.
The “formula” should also be affected by the choices a district makes in overpaying and providing too generous benefit packages.
If a high school district can afford to pay $120 K for nine months to ALL 43 year old teachers with 20 years experience and 30 hours past their masters in the district, they certainly have enough resources to operate without any state aid, including transportation and special education. If they can afford to pay 93% of health insureance premiums for staff, they certainly don’t “need” state assistance.
It would be good if the EFAB committee, which is currently made up of the IEA president, the IFT president, a school superintendent for a district that receives more than their fair share of state air and a Latina funding activist, actually had equal representation from taxpayer watchdogs.
Since Quinn favors political spending over the interests of the taxpayers, that’ll never happen.
We also need to ammend the Education Labor Relations Act to prohibit strikes so that districts can balance budgets and pay fair compensation rather than excessive salaries and benefits they can’t afford but have no means to avoid under the current “strike for greed without limit” statutes in public education.
The GOP should protect those prudently run districts that just don’t have enough community money to provide a decent education, and those districts prudently and EFFECTIVELY educating economically challenged youth.
The GOP should bite the bullet and recommend cutting or at least delaying those “pork” capital projects, like the $33 billion Quinn capital program boondoggle, for all projects that have not yet had funding bonds sold. We have more needs than paying off bonds for high priced, low value construction.
We need to protect those programs for the mentally ill and the EXTREMELY cost effective home care programs. Cutting the few dollars family care providers receive for saving the state billions is reprehensible IMHO.
This is the time for the GOP to step up to set priorities in the best interest of the citizens of Illinois, and show they can manage state resources fairly and effectively.
My guess is that Radogno, Durkin, and Rauner will pass on this opportunity to show they can make better spending choices than the Dems. Sad.
- PublicServant - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:25 am:
Weren’t Republicans on the Appropriations Committees, FKA? Wouldn’t that have been the time for them to sit down like adults and offer alternatives then? What venue would you like them to use?
- Formerly Known As... - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:26 am:
That, of course, would assume you have willing partners on both sides who wish to be part of a constructive dialogue.
- Walker - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:29 am:
My mistake, sorry.
Crespo, Bradley, Berrios, Dunkin, Madigan were “Yes” votes.
- Formerly Known As... - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:31 am:
PublicServant - they are indeed, under the leadership and constraints of the majority party. Which begs the question: Where is “Plan B” or even “Plan C” from anyone?
It is a mistake to assume I heap all the blame for this on “Darth Madigan” or “those darn Democrats”. All parties bear responsibility here, though the super-majority controlling every branch of government obviously bears more of that burden in my eyes.
- Formerly Known As... - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:38 am:
PS - the process was also set back by the Governor’s unusually lengthy delay in unveiling his budget proposal. We are trying to do more with less time on both the front and back ends of this, which is a complicating factor.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:42 am:
===A more realistic approach would be to set market value for staff salary and benefits, staffing level at classroom, operations, administrative and maintenance levels, and develop a target of cost efficiency that must be met when establishing the foundation level on which state aid is based.===
Um, - Arizona Bob -, the school boards and the teachers’ unions, by district decide the teachers’ salaries, the school boards decide administrative costs.
This Dopiness on Teachers is borderline pathetic. Not everything is teachers, teachers’ pensions, or unions.
- Mason born - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:47 am:
These politicians have spent years teaching the citizens of IL that they can have Low taxes and High spending. Primarily by using the Pensions as a no limit Credit Card. The majority of Citizens in IL were Dopes and bought it hook line and sinker.
Well now they are stuck. They have tried to skip paying the “credit Card” and i suspect they know that will get tossed by Supremes. They now have to either Bring Taxes up to Spending or Spending down to Taxes. The citizens they duped for years won’t like either. They are victims of their own “success.”
In an adult world we would attempt to meet in the middle on both. Some painful cuts and increased taxes to bring both in line. However then both sides would be T’ed off.
I suspect that in the end something will get us past November 4 and the lame ducks will make the Increase Permanent.
- PublicServant - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:48 am:
I’m getting your nuance FKA, but even if it’s the Dem’s dancehall, if you’re asked to dance, you should either accept or reject the offer. I’ve seen the Dem’s ask, but it looks like Baby’s content to sit in the corner and complain about the Dem’s danceshoes, without really responding to the offer at hand.
- PublicServant - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:05 am:
Mason, I think you’ve hit the nail on the head.
- Steve Brown - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:07 am:
No sure how it developed, but the report that there could be another budget vote today is in error.
- Rod - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:09 am:
The problem with this vote is HB 3792 supposedly complied by Rep Crespo (Hoffman Estates) was not a real budget. There were lines cut that would cost the state more money than the cuts would save because of Federal matching funds, and there were also lines cut that might violate court enforced settlement agreements.
I suspect but can’t prove that Governor Quinn’s budget outline he called “not recommended” was the basis for this charade. I do not support the idea of cutting the state budget as opposed to extending the current income tax rates.
But this approach is not at all serious, so advocacy organizations will look at various lines in HB 3792 and say OMG look at this, when in fact if this was a real budget they might look better or worse depending on matching funds, court orders, and federal mandates.
This is all very unfortunate and now I can go away for the long weekend and forget about this.
- Anon - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:12 am:
AZ Bob is right about one thing: Republicans should propose their own budget sans the $1.8B from the expiring tax hike. I welcome Rauner and the GOP to intruct us about making spending cuts less painful.
- Formerly Known As... - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:14 am:
It sounds like we may have seen some very different things in terms of being asked to dance or even let into the dancehall, PS, but I largely agree with you on one point:
To me, even if you aren’t invited to dance, you get up and show everyone in the dancehall who the better dancer is. Make it crystal clear to anyone who can see and hear for themselves. Then, maybe, it becomes your dancehall.
- Anon - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:16 am:
== Did the Speaker get the Century Club trophy? ==
He doesn’t count when it comes to the traveling trophy. Besides,Dunkin has won it so often it shoud be renamed after him.
- A guy... - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:21 am:
==== Walker - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 10:01 am:
A Guy: Now it’s all because Madigan really wasn’t for it in the first place? Or will change only when Madigan changes his mind? LOL
When are folks going to realize that Madigan is not all-powerful even within his own caucus? Is it some kind of mythical belief that comforts?====
Walk, I’ll probably never realize that. How mythical is it?
- Arizona Bob - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:25 am:
@OW
Listen, Dopey, I was talking about the methodology of the EFAB calculating the educational foundation level, NOT the negotiation of salaries and benefits at the local district level.
Maybe you should start reading the posts before you try to start thinking up snarcy answers.
Do you REALLY know nothing about the process by which the foundation level, the basis for state school funding in Illinois, is determined?
Maybe you just ought to keep sniping from the weeds, OW, and let the adults add to the discussion here.
- In the Middle - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:32 am:
The word of wisdom has always been: Don’t bet against the Speaker.
Generally, I agree, but Madigan has a poker face like none other. No one knows when the man was truly defeated, bluffing, or got what he really wanted.
There’s just this narrative that he’s all-powerful spun into whatever happens.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:39 am:
- Arizona Bob -,
What cracks me up about you is this never ending push against unions and teachers, and no matter the subject, the teachers’ salaries and pensions and administrators are the main culprit. Adults can think for themselves and see other conclusions, kids only see how their solution can be made to seem intelligent to any problem.
Blaming teachers in Illinois doesn’t work. Making Illinois a Right to Work state is not happening any time soon. Please learn.
- Formerly Known As... - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 11:41 am:
The flip side of that, of course, is that if you own the dancehall it is not good enough to simply shake your head and blame others for not dancing with you or not paying higher admission prices.
You still have an obligation to run things as well as you can for the people you serve, even if your first plan goes awry. If people won’t pay higher admission prices, a good steward will find better options than bluntly threatening to turn off the air conditioning and water supply on customers. That’s a good way to go out of business. My daily quota for analogies is now fulfilled lol.
- Skeptic - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:04 pm:
FKA: Throw in a sports analogy with the dance hall, and I think you’ll hit the trifecta!
- dupage dan - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:09 pm:
What Mason born said @ 10:47am.
And the likelihood this will ever change in any fundamental way is……nil. We get the gov’t we deserve.
- Formerly Known As... - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 12:23 pm:
I’ll work on that for Monday, @Skeptic lol. Maybe a racing analogy in honor of the Indy 500? @Oswego Willy already has golf locked up with “Two-Putt”. Enjoy the weekend.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 1:26 pm:
===@Oswego Willy already has golf locked up with “Two-Putt”.===
I keep calling, but all they say is, “Willy, Rep. Cross has your numbers. If he wants to golf, he’ll call you.”
At least Sen. Brady offered… just sayin’.
To the Update,
===So, the targets mostly voted against the tax hike budget, and they voted against the tax cut budget.===
The cobbling of 60 for anything may be done one of two ways;
Encouraging the GOP House members to vote for “something”
Or, getting some targets to vote for a compromise that Durkin won’t fully attack.
Both those options are like unicorns right now, but what else is there today?
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 2:06 pm:
Mason Born Fans:
Not to disagree with Mason entirely, but:
Compromise is over-rated. A solution is not equitable or sound simply because it is in the middle or everyone is happy.
In fact, anyone with even a passing knowledge of game theory knows that the Middle Groud argument only encourages both sides to take more extreme and entrenched positions.
As for the budget cuts, this might be worth a shot: vote on each of the not recommended budget reductions as an agreed bill list, giving
members the option of opposing individual cuts, and see where that gets us,
- JackD - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 4:19 pm:
The Tribune today says the Republican legislators offered suggestions for cuts and that the Democrats should consider adopting some of them. Of course the Trib doesn’t say what, specifically, the suggestions were and criticizes Madigan for “scarifying” the populace with possible cuts. Rauner? He ain’t talking’. That could only get him in trouble. Does anyone know where to find the Republican suggestions the Trib refers to? I mean since the Trib doesn’t want to tell us. That would be too much like reporting. Besides, it might be scarifying.
- Demoralized - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 4:29 pm:
@Arizona Bob:
What “market value” for staff salaries and benefits would you set? I’m guessing, given your absolute disdain for teachers that it would be as close to $0 as possible.
You love to pontificate and show us all how smart you are. Unfortunately you are only smart in your own mind. Your ramblings are hilarious and usually without much merit. They are mostly those of an angry guy with nothing productive to add, but certainly full of all the things you hate.
Do us all a favor and throw Illinois once and for all into your trash heap (since that’s how you view it anyway) and concentrate on the perfect on-goings of Arizona. We’d all be happier.
- Demoralized - Friday, May 23, 14 @ 4:35 pm:
To the Democrats and Republicans against extended the current tax rates: this is the kind of budget you will get. It’s time to stop being two-faced and either vote for the tax rate extension, vote for a budget with big cuts, or come up with another plan.