* This AFSCME Council 31 handout to members was scanned by a reader and then converted to text. I’ve tried to correct most of the conversion errors. The original document is here…
Drastically reducing the group insurance benefit for state employees has been a priority for Governor Rauner since Day 1. Even before contract negotiations got underway, the Governor made cutting the state’s insurance plan a pillar of his budget proposal building $700 million in cuts to the group health plan into his budget. Even though his staff admitted in legislative testimony that changes would have to be negotiated with state employee unions, the governor is now demanding that legislators amend the collective bargaining law to ban negotiations over health care benefits.
At the bargaining table, Rauner is pushing for two radical changes to the group insurance benefit which could increase employee costs by thousands of dollars each year: He is proposing to drastically increase the share of the premium paid by employees and drastically increase the out of pocket costs when employees access healthcare.
Rauner wants to double the employee premium contribution to 40% of the cost for single coverage - and to 40% of the cost for dependent coverage too. By federal law, the cost for single coverage is capped at 9.5% of income. However, there is no cap at all on the premium contribution for dependent coverage. This proposal represents a significant change in a number of ways:
1. Currently employees pay a fixed dollar amount toward premiums that is specified in the contract. Moving to paying a percentage of the premium cost means that employee costs would rise each year based on any increase in the state’s healthcare costs.
2. Currently employees who make less pay a little less for health insurance, and employees that make more pay a little more. This proposal eliminates protections for lower paid workers, as everyone will be paying the same amount for group insurance.
3. Increasing the employee premium contribution from 19% (the current average contribution) to 40% puts Illinois outside the norm of other states. The national average for state employee premium contributions is 16%.
Rauner also wants to lower the insurance plan’s value and institute massive cost shifting onto employees through high out of pocket costs. The Administration is proposing a health plan with a 60% actuarial value. This means that on average, the health plan will pay 60% of allowable health care expenses, with the employee paying 40% of the cost through deductibles, copays and co-insurance.
• The current actuarial value of the Illinois group health plan is 93%. This mirrors state employee group insurance plans in other states. The average state government health plan nationwide had an actuarial value of 92% in 2013; the Midwest average is 93%.
• The Administration’s proposal does not include any specific changes to co-pays, deductibles, etc. Rather, it would delegate a committee to develop the new out of pocket costs based on its demand that employees pay a total of 40% of health care expenditures.
These proposed changes to health benefits would move Illinois from average to dead last when compared to other states.
• The Affordable Care Act (ACA) ranks plans as: platinum (best); gold; silver; bronze (worst). 60% actuarial value equates to “bronze” level coverage under the ACA.
• The average bronze level plan for an individual has a deductible of $5,400 and an out-of pocket maximum of $6,350. Bronze level plans would result in staggering and unaffordable cost increases for state employees. These plans have out of pocket costs at or near what is allowable under the ACA:
o $6,600 for single
o $13,200 for family
• 96% of states have a group health benefit that equates to an ACA “platinum” plan (valued over 80%).
• Only two states have “gold” level plans (valued at 80%)
• No other state has an employee health insurance plan with an actuarial value as low as 60%
* Hyperpartisan Democrats have been occasionally suggesting in comments that Gov. Rauner be recalled by voters. We’ve had even more today, so I feel I need to “front page” this topic.
Like all hyperpartisans, these recall enthusiasts are clueless.
The recall of the Governor may be proposed by a petition signed by a number of electors equal in number to at least 15% of the total votes cast for Governor in the preceding gubernatorial election, with at least 100 signatures from each of at least 25 separate counties.
15 percent of 3,627,690 total votes cast last year would be 544,154 signatures. That’s a whole lot, not to mention the 25 county requirement.
A petition shall have been signed by the petitioning electors not more than 150 days after an affidavit has been filed with the State Board of Elections providing notice of intent to circulate a petition to recall the Governor. The affidavit may be filed no sooner than 6 months after the beginning of the Governor’s term of office. The affidavit shall have been signed by the proponent of the recall petition, at least 20 members of the House of Representatives, and at least 10 members of the Senate, with no more than half of the signatures of members of each chamber from the same established political party.
Can anybody out there name 10 House Republicans and 5 Senate Republicans who would sign such an affidavit?
Ain’t. Gonna. Happen.
* Don’t clog up our comment section here with your goofy recall rants. You’ll be banned for life and forced to flee to a newspaper website, where nobody cares.
* I keep hearing this over and over about Sen. Mark Kirk…
He hasn’t had much of a filter on what he says in recent years. Whether that has anything to do with the stroke he suffered in 2012, I don’t know. It seems he was once more cautious. Now words just pop out of there.
Kirk has always had a mouth problem. That didn’t stop him from thumping his opponent five years ago. Underestimate him at your own risk.
I’m not making any excuses for his “bro with no ho” remarks. There are no excuses. But he’s apologized, so let’s move on to the question of whether he can hold his own against whomever the Democrats nominate.
Now, you may not agree with everything he said, but you have to admit that he was quite sharp and handled himself very well.
He has trouble giving long speeches (which don’t happen much in politics these days anyway), but he appears to have no trouble at all with answering questions.
* And here he is being interviewed at length not long ago by Bruce Dold at Elmhurst College…
Again, you may not agree with some of his statements, but he doesn’t look weak or ineffectual to me.
Kirk obviously needs to hold his tongue more often, but I think he’ll hold his own in the coming campaign, particularly with a potential opponent like this…
Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Andrea Zopp was one of 19 character witnesses listed to testify Friday in Springfield for her friend Quinshaunta Golden, who is facing a decade or more in prison for her role in a multimillion-dollar theft and bribery scheme involving government grants and contracts awarded by the Illinois Department of Public Health.
But Zopp — who’s seeking the Democratic nomination to challenge Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Illinois — said Wednesday, “I’m not going to be able to testify.
“The sentencing’s been moved countless times,” Zopp said. “I couldn’t make it work to go to Springfield. It’s an all-day trip. I couldn’t rearrange my schedule to make that happen.”
So much for the jobs-killer rep—when it comes to states that are growing new businesses, Illinois is among the top U.S. leaders.
The Land of Lincoln ranked No. 2 among states where businesses are being created the fastest, according to numbers released yesterday by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The number of business startups in Illinois jumped 4.7 percent in the fourth quarter compared with a year earlier. The only state beating Illinois was Massachusetts—home of Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology—whose fourth-quarter number rose 5.6 percent.
Education seems to be a common thread among the top business-creating states, said Robert Atkinson, president of the Washington-based Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, a research group that promotes innovation. […]
The density of young firms and population diversity, including an area’s ability to attract immigrants, are among the factors that helped some metropolitan areas and states stand out, said Arnobio Morelix, a research analyst who studies startups at the Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City, Mo.
Illinois fits that bill, aided by Chicago’s status as one of the fastest-growing cities for technology jobs, with a rapidly-growing tech community in River North.
One hundred fifty years ago today, the U.S. Army took possession of Galveston Island, a barrier island just off the Texas coast that guards the entrance to Galveston Bay, and began a late-arriving, long-lasting war against slavery in Texas. This little-known battle would endure for months after the end of what we normally think of as the Civil War. This struggle, pitting Texas freedpeople and loyalists and the U.S. Army against stubborn defenders of slavery, would become the basis for the increasingly popular celebrations of Juneteenth, a predominantly African-American holiday celebrating emancipation on or about June 19th every year.
The historical origins of Juneteenth are clear. On June 19, 1865, U.S. Major General Gordon Granger, newly arrived with 1,800 men in Texas, ordered that “all slaves are free” in Texas and that there would be an “absolute equality of personal rights and rights of property between former masters and slaves.” The idea that any such proclamation would still need to be issued in June 1865 – two months after the surrender at Appomattox - forces us to rethink how and when slavery and the Civil War really ended. And in turn it helps us recognize Juneteenth as not just a bookend to the Civil War but as a celebration and commemoration of the epic struggles of emancipation and Reconstruction.
By June 19, 1865, it had been more than two years since President Abraham Lincoln had issued the Emancipation Proclamation, almost five months since Congress passed the 13th Amendment, and more than two months since General Robert E. Lee surrendered his Confederate army at Appomattox Court House. So why did Granger need to act to end slavery?
A lawyer for former U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert on Thursday called leaks regarding the federal hush-money case against the Illinois Republican “unconscionable” and said he may ask the court to investigate.
Thomas Green, Hastert’s Washington, D.C.-based defense attorney, said during a status hearing in Chicago that he’s concerned information that’s been disclosed to the media may inhibit Hastert’s right to a fair trial.
“Something has to be done to stop these leaks,” said Green, who attended the hearing via telephone. “They’re unconscionable and they have to stop.” […]
Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Block told U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin that prosecutors also find the leaks “disturbing.” He said the government is “doing everything we can” to look into it.
There are always some leaks and some helpful “assistance” provided to “friendly” reporters. But the Chicago US Attorney’s office hasn’t leaked like this in my memory.
* Rep. Phillips is a sponsor of a “right to work” bill, and now we know why…
State Rep. Reggie Phillips made his feelings on the proposed right-to-work resolution clear Thursday, saying AFSCME members are “like ants” and asking his members to lock arms and support towns that pass the resolution.
Phillips, R-Charleston, along with State Sen. Dale Righter, R-Mattoon, spoke at the Charleston Chamber of Commerce’s legislative update lunch at the Unique Suites hotel. Phillips pointed to right-to-work and pension reform as two of the biggest topics state legislators are dealing with.
Phillips said he will ask Charleston city officials to resurrect the right-to-work resolution, rescinded by council members after union supporters packed council meetings to speak against it, and wants his constituents to support it.
Phillips noted he attended one of the council meetings in support of the resolution.
“There’s only 38,000 members in AFSCME (represented by the contract in Illinois),” he said. “You’d think there’s 38 million. They’re mobilized, like ants.”
Phillips said he wished Gov. Bruce Rauner and Phillips’ own supporters would have stood firm on the issue. The process of change may be painful but is necessary for the state, he said.
“Trust me, it’s like spanking a child sometimes,” he said. “The child doesn’t want to be spanked, but in the end it’s going to make them a better person.”
Conventional wisdom told us that our leaders would end their dog-and-pony shows when push came to shove, get together in the governor’s conference room at the Capitol and hammer out a compromise budget in which neither side gets all it wants but both sides can live with it.
But these are unconventional times. Rauner has been hurling insults at Madigan, who is doing a slow burn. What’s developing before our eyes is a nonviolent version of World War I trench warfare: Both sides dig in and prepare for a long, withering conflict.
“My staff will tell you that there were many times when I was governor, and particularly that first few months, I had a lot of thoughts about Mike Madigan, but I never said them publicly,” says Edgar, a Republican who served two terms in the 1990s. “I worked that out, and we got to be very good friends, actually.”
Edgar says the money Rauner is spending on campaign-style ads attacking Democrats is unnecessary and won’t lead to compromise.
“That could make it extremely difficult,” he says. “I hope that some private talks will resume.”
Edgar says it also doesn’t help when Democrats are comparing Rauner to disgraced former Gov. Rod Blagojevich. He says when he was governor, in the final weeks of sessions, everyone kept their opinions to themselves and got to work, and thinks that should happen here.
Edgar also says Rauner has to realize he’s not in the private sector anymore. Democrats, in turn, must realize they can’t do things the way they’ve always done them, calling it “a new day” in Springfield, Edgar says.
After careful thought and consideration I have decided to not seek re-election as Illinois State Senator for the 47th District in the 2016 election.
It is an honor to have earned the trust and support of so many people in Western Illinois and across the state. I will continue to work hard to represent and be a voice for my constituents in Springfield as I transition to the private sector.
Sincerely,
Senator John Sullivan
Sullivan, a Democrat, represents a heavily Republican district. He told me last night that he’s not resigning before the election. The Democrats, therefore, won’t be able to put anybody into the seat to give him or her a leg up. That’s gonna be a real tough one for them to hold.
Sen. Sullivan has justly earned great respect from both sides of the aisle. He’s a class act, and that’s why his GOP voters have kept sending him back to Springfield. It’s a “Sullivan district,” not a partisan district.
He’ll be missed.
…Adding… Some decidedly unclassy spin from the IL GOP…
Senator John Sullivan, a downstate Democrat in a competitive district, announced Thursday that he is not running for re-election in 2016.
Sullivan’s announcement is an early sign that the Democrats controlled by Mike Madigan are afraid of answering to voters after their repeated failure in Springfield.
In spite of winning re-election by nearly 13 points in 2012, Sullivan bowed out of his re-election campaign less than a week after Governor Bruce Rauner visited the district and challenged voters to hold Sullivan accountable for standing with Mike Madigan. In the November election, Governor Bruce Rauner won the district by more than 36 points.
As the 30-year House Speaker and Chairman of the Democratic Party, Mike Madigan has held a firm grip on Democrats in Springfield and has enforced loyalty at all costs. Sullivan knows that if he were to run for re-election, he would not be able to distance himself from Mike Madigan.
For the Democrat legislators who continue to stand against reform to business-as-usual in Springfield, Mike Madigan’s name will be next to theirs on the ballot in November 2016.
Sullivan has won every election since 2002 by wide margins. Sen. Sullivan won a close race in 2002, beating incumbent Sen. Laura Kent Donahue by 3 points (51.5% - 48.5%), but he has coasted to victory in every election since. (Illinois Board of Elections, Accessed 6/18/2015)
2004: Sen. Sullivan (D) beat Republican Tom Ernst by 24 points (61.8% - 38.2%).
2008: Sen. Sullivan (D) won re-election unopposed.
2012: Sen. Sullivan (D) beat Republican Randy Frese by nearly 13 points (56.4% - 43.6%).
Just three weeks ago, Sullivan blindly supported his Democrat party boss Mike Madigan by voting for a budget that was unbalanced by more than $3 billion. “House Democrats worked into the evening Tuesday to push through major parts of a new budget they acknowledge is at least $3 billion short in an effort to force new Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner to eventually go along with a tax increase to fill the deficit.” (Monique Garcia and Kim Geiger,
“Illinois Democrats Push Ahead With Budget That’s $3 Billion Short,” Chicago Tribune, 5/26/2015)
Sullivan voted to pass Madigan’s unbalanced FY2016 budget bill. (Illinois General Assembly Records, Accessed 6/18/2015)
Sullivan has taken $1,037,820 from Democrat Party committees controlled by Mike Madigan. (Illinois Board of Elections, Accessed 6/18/2015)
Last week, Governor Bruce Rauner visited Sullivan’s district and challenged voters to hold Sullivan accountable for standing with Mike Madigan. “[Gov. Bruce Rauner] said he wants people to get in touch with their representatives and ask them: “Are you for taxpayers or the Chicago political machine?”‘” (WGEM, “Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner Challenges Voters To Pressure Lawmakers,” WGEM.com, 6/11/2015)
Governor Bruce Rauner won Sullivan’s district by 36 points (65% - 29%) in the November 2014 election. The rural Western Illinois district covers all or part of 11 counties, including Adams, Brown, Cass, Fulton, Hancock, Henderson, Knox, Mason, McDonough, Schuyler and Warren. Governor Rauner won the district by 36 points and the most populous county in the district by 56 points (Adams, 76.4% - 19.3%). (Illinois Board of Elections, Accessed 6/18/2015)
“Plain and simple: Sen. John Sullivan is running from Mike Madigan. After voting for a budget that was unbalanced by $4 billion and accepting over $1 million from Madigan’s Democrat Party over the years, John Sullivan knows that he can’t justify his actions to his constituents. In the past, Democrats have voted with Madigan in Springfield and then distanced themselves to voters at home. But now, Governor Rauner is not letting Democrats like Sullivan get away with it. Countless Democrats represent districts throughout the state where Madigan is loathed by voters. By November 2016, these voters will know that a vote for a Democrat in the state legislature is a vote for the failed status quo controlled by Mike Madigan,” said Nick Klitzing, Executive Director of the Illinois Republican Party.
