* Press release…
House to Hold Committee of the Whole on Rauner’s DCEO Proposal
WOODSTOCK, Ill. – State Rep. Jack Franks, D-Marengo, will chair a House Committee of the Whole hearing on Tuesday to examine Gov. Bruce Rauner’s plan to restructure the Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity (DCEO).
“The governor has proposed a significant change to the makeup of DCEO and how millions of taxpayer dollars are spent,” said Franks, who chairs the House State Government Administration Committee. “It’s important that we study other states’ experiences with public-private partnerships and get details about the governor’s plan before we act so that we don’t trade one unfair, unaccountable system for another and to ensure there are safeguards in place for the use of taxpayer dollars.”
In April, Governor Rauner proposed the partial privatization of DCEO, Illinois’ executive branch agency tasked with attracting new employers and advancing the commercial interests of Illinois businesses. Under the governor’s proposal, a new entity called the Illinois Business and Economic Development Corporation would form a public-private partnership with DCEO and make taxpayer-funded grants to assist with job creation and economic growth.
Franks, a longtime advocate of reforming DCEO’s system of awarding taxpayer-funded grants, sought the Committee of the Whole to provide legislators an opportunity to learn more about how Governor Rauner’s proposed corporation would be set up and operated and ask what plans are being made to ensure that taxpayer dollars would not be misused, as has happened in other states with similar public-private economic partnerships. Franks has previously proposed eliminating DCEO entirely and returning the cost savings to Illinois employers through a reduction in the corporate income tax rate.
“Based on other states’ experiences, many people, including myself, have concerns that state funds could be misused without strong, built-in transparency measures and significant oversight,” Franks added. “I look forward to an informative hearing and the opportunity to work together to develop meaningful reforms that will help improve Illinois’ economy and create jobs.”
The House Committee of the Whole hearing on DCEO reform will be held on Tuesday, June 16 at 2 p.m.
The HDems have repeated pointed to Wisconsin’s failed experiment as a reason to be skeptical of the governor’s plan. The Rauner folks point to oversight within their proposed bill that would’ve prevented those problems.
- Albany Park Patriot - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 2:35 pm:
The entire POINT of Walker’s reorganization, as Rauner seeks now, was to avoid oversight. And hence the scandal after scandal.
- Georg Sande - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 2:59 pm:
This promises to be a serious and in-depth inquiry. Expect a balanced group of speakers. #LOL
- Liberty - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 3:00 pm:
I like Frank’s plan to close DCEO and reduce the business tax. Let the free market work.
- Ahoy! - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 3:18 pm:
I’m not sure there is anything the Wisconsin public-private partnership is dealing with that DCEO isn’t already dealing with, crony capitalism, gross mismanagement, etc, these are all things DCEO have been synonymous with during Blago & Quinn. Right now DCEO is a train wreck and with the right structure and safe guards a public-private partnership would make a lot of sense, especially since their not abolishing DCEO, just changing the management structure where business development is less bureaucratic.
In the end, no matter what, it all will come down to good management if it stays the same or advances under Rauner’s proposal.
- Ahoy! - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 3:22 pm:
I’m also going to guess that Frank’s has not done the math on how much businesses would save on their taxes if state funds for the Department were eliminated. There is a lot of federal pass through and the legislature would just spend the Illinois money somewhere else.
Either way, passing workers comp reform is more important than anything the state does with DCEO.
- Short Bus Rider - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 3:24 pm:
Another one-sided sham committee mockery. One side is as guilty as the other in this debacle, suck it up buttercups we’re dealing with peoples lives here. That being said I tend to side with BR, simply because the dems solution to every thing is give it away and raise taxes. Saw this on facebook pretty much sums it up, I support helping the needy, I oppose funding the lazy.
- Arthur Andersen - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 3:26 pm:
Darn, I’m going to be committed elsewhere tomorrow and will have to miss the live action. Help old AA out tomorrow with plenty of commentary, please?
- Honeybear - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 3:27 pm:
Is this an olive branch to Gov. Rauner or yet another public nose swatting by the house? I am very synical about the corporation achieving any transparency. With the current group managing DCEO I doubt they could even run a lemonade stand which leads me to believe they would hire more “experts”. ie. venture capital vampires to suck the state dry.
- JS Mill - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 3:38 pm:
=I like Frank’s plan to close DCEO and reduce the business tax. Let the free market work.=
LOL! In a real “free market” there is no corporate welfare or government (taxpayer) funded incentive programs.
If you are going to take a stand for the free market, at least take a real one. Sheesh!
- Judgment Day - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 4:17 pm:
“I’m not sure there is anything the Wisconsin public-private partnership is dealing with that DCEO isn’t already dealing with, crony capitalism, gross mismanagement, etc, these are all things DCEO have been synonymous with during Blago & Quinn. Right now DCEO is a train wreck and with the right structure and safe guards a public-private partnership would make a lot of sense, especially since their not abolishing DCEO, just changing the management structure where business development is less bureaucratic.”
—————
Comparing DECO under Blago and Quin to a train wreck is an grievous insult to the average everyday train wreck. I’m surprised the International Association of Train Wrecks hasn’t already demanded a formal apology.
Having had to deal with DECO on a small scale over the last 5-6 years, it was a constant source of amazement to me regarding how poorly prepared DECO was for pitching the benefits of Illinois.
I’ll give a real practical example of something that really needs to be setup and built. It’s not easy work to build, but it can be done. In fact, there are some commercial versions already out there.
Build a web database for every (I mean all of them) Interstate exchanges throughout all of Illinois - I-55, I-39, I-294, I-80, I-57, I-94, etc.
You want to know everything Commercial/Industrial for a 2 mile diameter of each exchange. Transportation, taxing districts and tax rates, what’s already built up, “Access To/From”, property characteristics, etc.
Basically create a data repository based on the location of all our Interstates.
I actually pitched this idea to some folks at DECO a while back. Big mistake. Living proof that there was no intelligent thought alive and well in that bureaucracy.
- Big Muddy - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 4:45 pm:
Poor House members. Forced to listen to Franks drone on and on. Very cruel move by Madigan.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 5:13 pm:
Read the mess in Wisconsin.
Concerns are warranted.
Illinois’ ethics act would not apply to this new private corporation charged with handing out tax breaks.
Franks suggestion is a good one, and I hope he quotes Ken Griffin repeatedly on the notion of government incentives.
- Six Degrees of Separation - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 5:54 pm:
Build a web database for every (I mean all of them) Interstate exchanges throughout all of Illinois - I-55, I-39, I-294, I-80, I-57, I-94, etc.
Including the imaginary ones along the Illiana.
- Langhorne - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 6:36 pm:
if the rauner folks didnt walk away from their bill, and really wanted to defend it after wisconsin revelations, they should have worked it. Ya know, hearings, testimony, witnesses, amendments, and VOTES. Even if it was just the repub votes. Even now, they could put the idea in the form they want for the committee of the whole, and let the dems vote it down.
Oh wait, that means rauner has to compete for his ideas within the legislative arena, and legitimates that process. But rauner doesnt want that. He wants crisis = leverage. Cue the ads.
- RNUG - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 7:51 pm:
== Saw this on facebook pretty much sums it up, I support helping the needy, I oppose funding the lazy. ==
If you seriously mean this and want to try to root out any fraud / waste, then the State is going to have to hire a lot more case workers. With the case loads right now, each person receiving aid gets between 20 and 40 minutes attention a year. That’s barely enough time to check off the boxes on the forms.
- Property of IDOC - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 9:22 pm:
RNUG @ 7:51pm
You know the caseloads are unmanageable , but since when has any State employee been charged with simply doing the job they were hired for ? I have yet to do ONLY my hired position, and I started @IDOC in 2001. It’s always “do more with less”, no acknowledgment of the extra service, and don’t let the door hit you…if you don’t like it. The public thinks it is all gravy, but we work for every penny, and then some.
- RNUG - Monday, Jun 15, 15 @ 9:45 pm:
Yep. That’s my point. It takes time and money if you want to deliver services properly targeted to just the people who qualify for them. It takes even more time and money if you ant to try to move people out of the system to be self-supporting / self-sustaining. If you’re not willing to spend the money for the staff to do it properly, then you have to accept whatever level of fraud and abuse that occurs.
Heck, a lot of the people receiving services understand how to work the system better than the people running it; we should hire some of them to sit on the other side of the desk.
But part of the problem is anywhere from 50% to 90% of the money is for federal programs, so there isn’t that much state level incentive to root out the fraud / abuse. So ends today’s lesson in why the federal caseload budget has expanded exponentially.