108 Comments - Roamin' Numeral - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:02 am: ==The Illinois Policy Institute, a non-partisan and well-respected organization== Now that’s funny. - Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:02 am: - well-respected organization - Lost me. - Harry - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:02 am: Where did that other 15% go? Socialist Workers Party? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:04 am: Rauner hired away a great many IPI folk. The non-partisan “baloney” make Muir, you guessed it, shill-like. - Bored Chairman - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:04 am: He speaks the truth. - A girl - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:06 am: Still laughing at their opening line that they are non-partisan….. :p - Anonymiss - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:07 am: Lost me at the lede. - TinFish - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:09 am: Many, many public union employee millionaires? Really? - Steve - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:09 am: Those who contribute money to politicians don’t do it out altruism. Just a reminder. - Old and Tired - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:10 am: “Illinois taxpayers have made millionaires out of many, many public union employees” Name some. Out of the recently released list of state employees making 100k or more, only 1 in 5 were union- and virtually all of those were paid that much because they worked an extreme amount of overtime. Overtime which is now mandated by management because staffing levels are low. The unions have repeatedly advocated for increasing staffing levels. Clearly a hit-piece, which should be obvious from calling IPI “non-partisan and well-respected.” - Roland the Headless Thompson Gunner - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:10 am: “Fox News, an objective and non-partisan media outlet…” - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:10 am: As I understand it from recent pensioner articles, the state has made far more millionaires out of non-union members than members. - Honeybear - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:10 am: Roamin- you beat me to it. The article lost me at the first sentence. IPI non-partisan? IPI well-respected? I think this “sock puppetry”. Fine, sock puppetry it is. I admit, I am a public union millionaire. I got my millions through gaming the system and corruption. I, and my millionaire union colleagues are the reason why Illinois is in such a mess. WE DID IT! Hurray! We destroyed the state as we planned. Now we’re going to pivot, claim victim status and grab our pitchforks, which we already billed to the state, and start the socialist revolution! SOLIDARITY! - ZC - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:10 am: Weak argument. If you want to make anyone look in the pocket of anyone, look at how much money is spent by -one- side, and ignore any sums coming from elsewhere. It’s a junior-grade mistake frankly coming from journalists who write about money. It’s perfectly true that labor unions overwhelmingly donate to Democrats. Business on the other hand tends to split its donations more. But the total -amount- given by business, especially if you factor in not just direct political contributions, but the far greater sum spent on lobbying and “general influence,” far surpasses what labor does. What these numbers basically state is that labor does what nearly other powerful interest group in IL does - give to help put itself at the table, not to dictate outcomes. I’m pretty sure if you cornered any labor leader in IL and told him he could control what Speaker Madigan does, he would look at you in disbelief. - I-L-L - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:11 am: Why, when the Illinois Coal Association, or the Illinois Manufacturer’s Association, or hell, Bruce Rauner, donate money to politicians and receive favorable legislation and contracts it is called “freedom of speech,” but when working class people do it is “thinly veiled corruption”? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:11 am: ===Since 2002, public employee unions in Illinois have contributed $46 million in direct political contributions. Obviously, unions are not dropping that kind of cash on politicians because they have a pleasant personality. Clearly, it’s an investment and when you consider that Illinois taxpayers have made millionaires out of many, many public union employees, it was a good investment. Bad for taxpayers, but good for unions.=== “Since Rauner’s election up to days ago, wealthy Raunerites in Illinois have contributed $40 million in political contributions to Rauner’s own fund and pledges to the newly created ILGO. Obviously, Raunerites are not dropping that kind of cash on helping Rauner leverage the General Assembly because they have a pleasant personality. Clearly, it’s an investment and when you consider that Raunerites have invested $40 million to gain access to $30+ Billion, the many, many, millionaires out there want scaled back workers’ wages, it was a good investment. Bad for non-Raunerites, but good for Raunerites.” Better. - Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:11 am: “Interestingly, during that same time frame, from 2002 through 2014, the Democratic controlled General Assembly and Governors office enacted legislation creating a second tier pension system with reduced benefits as well as comprehensive pension reform, both vigorously opposed by organized labor.” Fixed that for you. - Frenchie Mendoza - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:11 am: Much like declaring war on “special interests” while being a “special interest”, the active declaration of “non-partisan” means you’re partisan. - Elmer Dudd - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:11 am: -The numbers are eye-opening to say the least.- Without the “eye-opening” numbers here, is this news? People spending tons of money on their own interest to make sure they land a government contract. Me oh my, who’da thunk? - Johnnie F. - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:12 am: And in 2014 alone, wealthy republican 0.1 percenters contributed 46 million to a single republican candidate…Bruce Rauner. Democrat contributions over 10 years compared with republican conttributions over 1 year. Hmmmmm. - 340 East - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:12 am: $46 million over how many years? How much did Rauner just spend to buy the Gov’s mansion in one year? How much is he spending in the next 18 months? Kenny G talking about spending $60 million? This is why Southern Illinois looks the way it does, people like Muir. - Arsenal - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:13 am: “Bad for taxpayers, but good for unions.” Union members are taxpayers. - Bull Moose - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:13 am: This is so Orwellian, trying to convince folks that public workers are millionaires controlling the government, when in fact it is the Rauner crowd that are millionaires controlling the government. - a drop in - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:14 am: “Since 2002, public employee unions in Illinois have contributed $46 million in direct political contributions…” Koch brothers drop that in a weekend. - facts are stubborn things - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:14 am: If A then B if AB then %$#(*& Wow exhaustive research and undeniable conclusions! snark - Wordslinger - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:15 am: Is that a gag? - Old and Tired - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:15 am: Why is it an issue that unions donate disproportionately to democrats? The national Republican party has been at the forefront of attacking workers- and historically Democrats have been favorable to labor unions. This is a no-brainer, should the unions give money to Republicans just because they are republicans? Just look at Illinois- unions are throwing money at getting rid of Rahm, unions support Republicans that are now being targeted for replacement by Rauner (Brauer, Rosenthal). This argument is so insanely idiotic.Does anyone call the NRA “corrupt” for primarily giving to Republicans? - Jorge - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:16 am: Drive-by journalism. - Norseman - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:18 am: === Let me say again, I’m pro-union. === I feel his pain. I’m pro-Rauner. I just want him to recognize his war on middle class workers is hurtful to his corrupt soul and I want to save him from this eternal blight. - Arsenal - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:18 am: Also,we once again see that, for some people, unions are the participants in the democratic process that AREN’T allowed to fight for themselves. - foster brooks - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:22 am: When rauner and his pac quits contributing so will I. - Demoralized - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:22 am: ==The Illinois Policy Institute, a non-partisan== LOLOL. Stop with the non-partisan charade already. ==Let me say again, I’m pro-union.== Uh huh. If you’re pro-union I’d hate to see what you would say if you were anti-union. Why aren’t these idiots that decry political contributions from unions also outraged by the contributions of everyone else to politicians. I haven’t seen the IPI say one peep about the contributions made by businesses. They are a bunch of hypocrites. - BMAN - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:23 am: How does 46 million spread over 13 years and who knows how many political campaigns compare to 20 million pledged by Rauner to support legislators backing his agenda? Guess what it doesn’t! Don’t forget how much Rauner spent to become guv. - A guy - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:23 am: I’m neither pro-union or anti-union. They exist. In many cases their members are vehement in their support for what I would call very good reasons; work area protection, wage protection, fair bidding, working conditions, etc. I draw a line between labor and public service unions as to what their functions are in empowering and protecting their membership. Some jobs are inherently more dangerous and require special training and education. I understand the function and use for unions in many circumstances. There is no doubt in my mind that most unions have become the bastion of Democratic power and influence. There is equally no doubt in my mind that leadership is often at odds with the views or interests of membership. History tells me that you can trust neither management nor unions to show any real level of restraint, and we see the pendulum swing back and forth as way of correcting abuses which each side seems completely unable to avoid. Realities need to be recognized and adjustments need to be made regularly as things change. In an us vs. them atmosphere, it’s always going to be contentious. For quite some time, the lion’s share of the money has been Dem money on the union side. I think that’s what the author has truthfully pointed out. Seeing that advantage dissipate in this cycle has the unions and many Dems crying foul. It isn’t foul. It’s the pendulum. If both sides were limited to a maximum level of resources that could be put into these races (a nearly impossible task), we’d see the battle occurring on a better and different level. History has taught us that this is a very unlikely outcome. Even when it’s tried, both sides rush to corrupt it. - walker - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:24 am: “Unions: The Secret Fortress of Millionaires” I guess that’s why unions are pushing so hard for lower income taxes. - ash - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:24 am: “well respected?” By who? - hold on - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:24 am: So if you have received over $1 million in pension benefits, does that mean you are a millionaire—like if you got $50k/year for 20 years? Because otherwise, I’m confident that taxpayers didn’t make any union members millionaires. And if so, then I assume almost all working people are millionaires by the time they retire–if you make $25k/yr, over 40 years, boom you’re a millionaire. Greedy 1%ers - Anon III - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:24 am: IPI non-partisan? Of course, just as much as the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability. - Mama - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:25 am: ++The Illinois Policy Institute, a non-partisan and well-respected organization++ I gagged and coffee shot out my nose from reading that. OMG! Who do they think they are kidding? - Mama - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:26 am: ++- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:11 am: ++ You get an A+ for your report. - A Jack - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:26 am: I heard on the news that Aron Schock had 3.3 million in his campaign funds. I am fairly certain that didn’t come from the unions. - Cheswick - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:30 am: Started seeing red with this: “Illinois taxpayers have made millionaires out of many, many public union employees…” Let’s talk about people like Bill Cellini (sorry, man, you’re the first example that popped into my mind), who amassed major major wealth off the state during that time frame. - late to the party - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:31 am: OW, the Southern Illinoisan needs to hire you as an editor! - Carhartt Representative - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:34 am: ==The Illinois Policy Institute, a non-partisan and well-respected organization== The Cubs, a perennial power in the National League, are poised for another pennant run. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:34 am: AFSCME contributes to either political party and has been supporting candidates from both parties. Until the current governor, Republican governors did not publically condemn state employees, claim they were abusing Illinois, attack retirees for gaming vacation and sick days, or claim that the fiscal catastrophes facing our annual budget was caused by unions. Illinois’ largest city has been controlled by the Democratic Party since 1932. As Chicagoans moved out of the City and moved into the suburbs, they took along their party preferences. With 12 out of 13 million Illinoisans living north of I-80, Illinois reflects the political views of its citizens. For anyone to claim that unions were the source of the political support seen in Illinois over the past twenty years, they must be incredibly stupid. There is no political conspiracy needed to elect politicians in Illinois favoring the Democratic party. Anyone claiming otherwise is a dope. - A Jack - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:38 am: Doctors who are paid by the state might be in the millionaire category. But they would have probably made more in private practice. If the IPI were honest, they would pick categories of employees, remove overtime and then compare that to their non-public counterparts. If you can prove that a non-public employee that does what I do, makes less, then the IPI may have a valid argument. - Louis G Atsaves - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:39 am: 85% of $46 million in political donations went to Democrats over the past 12 years? I am assuming these are Illinois numbers. And I keep seeing polls and surveys that indicate that 35% to 40% of union members vote Republican. Exit polling last November showed Rauner receiving 41% of the votes of union households. Let’s forget for a moment that the author is quoting from the Illinois Policy Institute. Union member millionaires? Maybe a tiny few of them managed to pull that off, but that actually obscures a more major concern. If these numbers are in fact true, even if they come from the IPI, then the “union bosses” as Rauner likes to say, are not following the desires and wishes of their union membership when it comes to donating money to politicians. The donations should be more 35%-40% to Republicans and 60%-65% Democrats under these circumstances. - PrairieFire - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:39 am: == a non-partisan and well-respected organization == O rly?? Since when? I want me some of that kool-aid. - Cold - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:41 am: You can tie the surge in anti-union and anti-public sector propaganda to Citizens United which left unions as just about the only organized group entitled to spend like corporations. - Sunshine - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:42 am: Golly….I’m shocked at this revelation….shocked! - Name Withheld - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:43 am: === Illinois taxpayers have made millionaires out of many, many public union employees === Said the man who’s a member of the $140,000 wine club. - Name Withheld - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:44 am: Sorry - equated IPI with Rauner. My bad. - Minnow - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:46 am: Well guess I missed the appointment of the Director of Propaganda! We’ve gone from Squeezy to Sleazy. Sheesh!! - S.IL Guy - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:51 am: Maybe Muir is just trying to use his influence with the new administration to keep his contract with the DuQuoin State Fair? - james the intolerant - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:54 am: How much have the “pro-taxpayer” Griffin types donated just in the gubernatorial and mayoral races alone? Probably half-way to that $46M mark. - Honeybear - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:54 am: I just read that report. ASFCME which the report admits has the largest number of state employees only contributes 5 cents of every dollar it recieves to political causes! HOW IS THIS INFLUENCE? Most is spent on representation of employees. - Mister M - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:54 am: As a past Illinois government agency manager, I can offer two observations: 1) When going into “negotiations” with the unions (handled by CMS), it seemed as though from the state side it was all “give” and no take. We would be asked to prepare things we would like to see gained, but those went into a sink-hole somewhere. Moreover, in employee discipline situations, line management was most always in a defensive position, even from upper (political) management. 2) With that said, the more that poplitical appointees exerted influence in line management functions, in furtherence of patropnage and other political interests, the more that line managers were open to union coverage for themselves - to finally get some increases in pay - long denied, but also to gain protection from political personnel retaliations if not singing the “company” tune loud enough. So, what is needed is true negotiations where the union political clout is not a factor, along with union coverage of all but political appointees - this along with keeping those appointees within the legal “high-level policy-making” boundaries intended by the Rutan decree. - MrJM - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:55 am: The good news is that Uihlein, Griffin and Rauner aren’t special interests. They pinkie swore they ain’t! – MrJM - anonin' - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:57 am: Show of hands Any Magoo who thinks IPI is non-partisan and highly respected get the rightie up. In reality they are a Rauner rented fog machine that struggles to stay afloat - LINK - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:57 am: Just an observation but I find it interesting that this appeared in the Southern Illusion which is based in “Bloody Williamson County”… - Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:58 am: Good Grief ! Please Kent, Please! Write to Jim Muir and give him the straight story, ALL the facts, and demand that he also report the complete basis of influence in Springfield, as well as D.C. Even excluding the Rauner/Griffin/Uehline monies, the math doesn’t lie. How about Jim Muir writing about how ComEd/Exelon made MILLIONS of dollars in profit (not revenue, but profit) EVERY WEEK after ‘lobbying’ the GA for special consideration. Did their contributions border on ‘veiled corruption’? I guess it depends on who’s editing his stories. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:59 am: To the Update, ===Since 1/1/2002 Rauner ($40 million) Griffin ($17.1 million) and Uihlein ($7.8 million) have made $64.9 million contributions (not all to statewide and legislative races, but most of it, and most of it to Republicans).=== That’s $64.9 million. Three individuals. Have we all forgotten Mr. Griffin’s belief the wealthy don’t have enough influence. Influence of three at the tube of $64.9 million. I have said, use the search key, that unlimited money is a-ok with me, but with complete and full sunshine. No hiding. You want to donate $100 million personally, do it. I have zero beef, if it’s 100% in the sunshine. You want to drop nine figures, put your name on it, all good. Mr. Muir is a shill. It’s comically packaged as “fair”, but, you guessed it, he’s still a shill. (tips cap to - Mama - and - late to the party -) - Diogenes in DuPage - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 10:59 am: We’ve got to put an end to this level of donation to politicians by government unions so that only our donations are the ones buying influence. Our positive, power, and status are clearly more important. - Diogenes in DuPage - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:01 am: positive –> positions - Anon - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:02 am: Rich, you forgot to say [The following is a paid advertisement] - Wordslinger - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:04 am: – seeing that advantage dissipate– Guy, what are you talking about? Are you under the delusion that unions have been outspending corporate interests in elections? - tberry - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:16 am: What everyone is ignoring is that all union money originates with the taxpayer. The state collects taxes and pays employees who fund unions who then elect state officials who will then continue this “corrupt bargain”. If a private business makes use of funds a taxpayer disapproves of he/she can boycott the business or elect new directors to manage the business differently. Anyway, there is an option as to whether or not to fund private businesses. A taxpayer has no option but to fund unions (indirectly) even though he/she does not approve of their activities. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:18 am: - tberry -, What is the purpose of Fair Share, and where does that Fair Share money go? - Rich Miller - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:28 am: ===A taxpayer has no option but to fund unions (indirectly) even though he/she does not approve of their activities.=== Goodness, but you are an idiot. If a state employee uses her salary to fund her own abortion, should I be able to object? - Anon - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:31 am: Rich, you forgot to add the tag line at the beginning: [The following is a paid advertisement] - Norseman - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:32 am: Excellent response to the idiot, Rich! - former southerner - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:32 am: -therry What you are ignoring is the business enterprise collects money from customers and clients to fund its lobbying efforts AND in many product categories it is easier to move to another state to avoid funding that hated state union than it is to avoid doing business with a given conglomerate. During the cold war days I used to be perplexed as to how easily Soviet citizens were taken in by propaganda but the same techniques seem to work pretty well over here. - A guy - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:32 am: === Wordslinger - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:04 am: – seeing that advantage dissipate– Guy, what are you talking about? Are you under the delusion that unions have been outspending corporate interests in elections?=== Are you stating that there are “no” elections where unions aren’t dramatically and disproportionately providing the financial support? Didn’t think so. - Demoralized - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:33 am: @tberry So you should be able to have a say in everything state employees spend their money on. Because that’s essentially what you have argued. - ArchPundit - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:35 am: ===Because that’s essentially what you have argued. Because that’s what you have argued. Fixed that for you. - Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:36 am: tberry- All “pay to play” money starts with the taxpayer, too. - Apocalypse Now - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:42 am: =Hi Rich, A little perspective on the IPI Public Sector Union Contributions story. Since 1/1/2002 Rauner ($40 million) Griffin ($17.1 million) and Uihlein ($7.8 million) have made $64.9 million contributions (not all to statewide and legislative races, but most of it, and most of it to Republicans).= Wonder if Mr. Redfield had done just a wee bit more searching and found out who the top three contributors to the Democratic candidates were from 2002 to 2014? How much did top 3 contributors donate to the Democrats during that period? Like Mr. Redfield I haven’t had the opportunity to look, but I would guess based on prior elections and contribution reports its in the multiple millions of dollars. - Concerned - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:42 am: tberry using your analogy means every thing a state employee buys belongs to the state. Do stats employees need to go through the state bid process to buy anything. Do we need to get taxpayer approval to buy toilet paper? You. Are. A. Dope.! - How Ironic - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:42 am: @tberry: “The state collects taxes and pays employees who fund unions who then elect state officials who will then continue this “corrupt bargain”.” I agree. From here on out, state employees should only be paid in “Illinois Money”. Essentially, the state should set up a process where all employees are paid in wooden coins, that can only be used at “Illinois Stores”. These stores would ONLY stock merchandise that has been voter approved, and vetted by private companies that would bid for the business. As a second benefit, when times are tough (like now) the company store can just raise rates sky high to in effect ’squeeze’ the worker out of any raises or the like. You are brilliant sir. Brilliant. - Rufus - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:44 am: So we are demonizing unions for exercising their First Amendment rights? (so deemed by the U.S. Supreme Court.) So how do we “fix” a system that is based on First Amendment? - South of Sherman - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:46 am: tberry — after the state pays those workers, it’s no longer taxpayer dollars. It’s the worker’s dollars. But if you’d prefer to stick with your “logic,” then Rauner is also trying to stack the deck with taxpayer dollars — the millions and millions he made off of public pensions. - Person 8 - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:48 am: - a non-partisan - Article must have been written in Colorado. - Juvenal - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 11:52 am: === Not anti-union, pro-taxpayer === It is a false dichotomy. 1 in 9 Illinois adults is either paying into a public sector pension or receiving benefits. Include their spouses and dependents, and the share of taxpayers who benefit directly from the public pension system grows even further. Start considering all of the union members who work for companies whose contracts are part of the state budget - schools are some of the utility companies’ best customers - and your definition of “public employee union” grows even further. You cannot gut the benefits of 1/3 to 1/2 of Illinois families without creating dire consequences for the state’s economy. - VanillaMan - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:03 pm: Obviously, unions are not dropping that kind of cash on politicians because they have a pleasant personality. Anyone capable of writing that sentence has a serious problem not caused by unions, politicians or campaign donations. - Wordslinger - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:09 pm: Guy, instead of fact-free rambles, why don’t you do the reading? Try the update from Redfield for starters. - mythoughtis - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:17 pm: ==What everyone is ignoring is that all union money originates with the taxpayer. The state collects taxes and pays employees who fund unions who then elect state officials who will then continue this “corrupt bargain”. If a private business makes use of funds a taxpayer disapproves of he/she can boycott the business or elect new directors to manage the business differently. Anyway, there is an option as to whether or not to fund private businesses. A taxpayer has no option but to fund unions (indirectly) even though he/she does not approve of their activities. == State employees get paid to do a job. Just as you do, just as employees of private sector organizations do. Just like when I worked in the private sector, I owe my employers (in this case, the taxpayers) an honest days work in return for my paycheck. That’s it. I don’t have to ask you where I can spend that paycheck. I don’t have to tell you what I did with that paycheck. You sound like one of those people that also wants to dictate where municipal workers live because you think they should return part of their city paycheck back to the city as a kickback for getting hired. - Old and Tired - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:35 pm: I love the Raunerites who try to say things like: “40% of union families vote Republican, but 85% of union money goes to democrats. The unions aren’t responding to the will of their members!” This is probably the stupidest thing I’ve read. A democracy isn’t: “20% of people want this, so let’s give 20% of our donations to that cause.” Democracy is 50%+1 deciding on a course of action and the whole group executing that course. So, union voters aren’t a monolith- some vote R, some vote D. But even those R’s are still staying with the union- just because not everyone is a one-issue voter doesn’t make the unions somehow “corrupt.” - Obama's Puppy - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:37 pm: He lost me at IPI being a “well respected non-partisan organization” did you really need to read anything beyond that? - Grandson of Man - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:41 pm: “Let me say again, I’m pro-union.” Rauner and the IPI are one. It looks like the IPI literally writes Rauner’s policy and talking points. “Since 1/1/2002 Rauner ($40 million) Griffin ($17.1 million) and Uihlein ($7.8 million) have made $64.9 million contributions (not all to statewide and legislative races, but most of it, and most of it to Republicans).” How did they do that? Weren’t they taxpayers being crushed by unions? - Roadiepig - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:42 pm: thereby-this “corrupt bargain” (a Raunerite talking point) is based on Union member using “taxpayers” (another Rauner talking point - gov workers aren’t “taxpayers”) money to leverage benefits. The way you see it I guess is that the money that those nasty Union members get paid is a gift, and that they provide nothing for the corrupted cash they receive. Once someone provides labor, they should be able to be paid properly for said work. Having an entity to defend them in disputes and to bargain for there livelihood with dues paid from their take home pay isn’t corrupt- it’s their right. If they don’t want 5 cents of every dollar used for political campaigns they used to opt for fair share payments instead ( but Rauner’s actions have caused many of their to choose full share, if depots are true). - Arsenal - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:47 pm: @ Old and Tired- and for another thing, if the Union really isn’t representing its members, its members have a mechanism to fix that. Why do we need Big Daddy Big Government to come in and save them? Whatever happened to personal responsibility? - Roadiepig - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:47 pm: My last post was to tberry. Damn spellcheck. - AnonymousOne - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:56 pm: Oh my. They’d have everyone believe that unions are the only ones who have any kind of candidate preference and donate. No one else does? And furthermore, people really, really need to get off of this bizarre thinking that taxpayers are not people who belong to a union. If you work, I believe you are a taxpayers, correct? - I B Strapped - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 1:08 pm: OW @10:11A- Much more Bleepin’ better! - Roadiepig - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 1:16 pm: How Ironic- please don’t give our governor and ideas ( “Illinois Dollars” for state employees). Just think- he could also stock the government employee stores with only products made by companies he has purchased. Oh ,wait- that won’t work, because… - A guy - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 1:25 pm: ===Wordslinger - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 12:09 pm: Guy, instead of fact-free rambles, why don’t you do the reading? Try the update from Redfield for starters.=== I’ll do that Sling. Here’s your for starters. Get up off your Barco-lounger and go pound on doors for 6 hours every weekend day for a candidate with a few thousand bucks running against an IEA or Labor Supported opponent. Then tell me how unions are “always” outspent. That hasn’t been my experience. - How Ironic - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 1:44 pm: @A Guy: “Get up off your Barco-lounger and go pound on doors for 6 hours every weekend day for a candidate with a few thousand bucks running against an IEA or Labor Supported opponent. Then tell me how unions are “always” outspent. That hasn’t been my experience.” Oh yeah…I can beat your anecdotal story with another! I imagine if you are a candidate in Winneteka, Oak Brooke, Hinsdale, or New Trier the exact opposite of your story occurs all the time. Anecdotes are not good policy makers. In fact they are terrible. - chi - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 1:47 pm: Thank you Old and Tired… I may not be in favor of Concealed Carry, but it sure appears to be 100% legal. And I may think religious organizations should pay property taxes, but the taxes I pay are still covering their share… - nona - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 1:49 pm: It is only contributions from unions that are suspect, in the eyes of IPI and their guy in the mansion. Contributions from business and billionaires, by contrast, aren’t considered problematic. - Wordslinger - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 1:50 pm: Guy, you make no sense. The statewide money split is 60 percent business, 25 percent labor. You understand that 60 is more than twice as large as 25, correct? The fact that your candidates can only raise ” a few thousand bucks” in that environment speaks to their lack of support from anyone, and is no one else’s fault. But your victimization is duly noted. - forwhatitsworth - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 2:36 pm: Just wondering … What makes a person a millionaire? … especially those many, many public union employees? - Buzzie - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 2:43 pm: Muir just auditioning for a job in the Rauner administration. - JS Mill - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 3:06 pm: =Clearly, it’s an investment and when you consider that Illinois taxpayers have made millionaires out of many, many public union employees,= I have to get in the union then. I ma missing out! - Enviro - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 5:30 pm: ==It has to do with a system that is badly broken and borders on veiled corruption. It’s a system that has to be fixed, period.= The power of the super wealthy to influence government policy with huge campaign contributions has resulted in great income inequality between the top .01% and the 99.99 %. An unfair share of the nation’s economic growth over the past 30 years has gone to the top .o1%. The top one hundredth of one percent make an average of $27 million per household. The average income for the rest of us? $31,244. It isn’t the unions who have the most political power, it is the very wealthy and the corporations. - Fairworld - Thursday, Mar 19, 15 @ 9:21 pm: I guess Mr. Muir forgot that Union Workers pay taxes too! So I guess that would make them uh….Taxpayers! - 340 East - Friday, Mar 20, 15 @ 12:24 am: Rauner has a tiny pen. Is. - Sesser voter - Friday, Mar 20, 15 @ 1:04 am: Jim Muir pro union not at all. Ask him about his no bid $170,000 contract in Sesser signed a few weeks before the new admin took over. Good old boy at its best. - Thomas Stell - Friday, Mar 20, 15 @ 7:27 am: No matter how.much or who is complaining concerning unions . Everyone has just one vote. Unions fight daily in all courts.for.all workers, union, non union and when they cant afford to fight for the middle class, union, non union workers will.be working without.protection . Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.