Madigan explains himself
Monday, Aug 3, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The House Speaker penned a rare op-ed for the State Journal-Register over the weekend…
Solving the fiscal challenges of Illinois requires a balanced approach.
That is why I pledged to work cooperatively and professionally with Gov. Bruce Rauner. I will keep that pledge and continue working to ensure the governor and the Legislature come together in moderation to help Illinois’ middle class and other struggling families.
In addition to that pledge, I stated that the number one issue facing Illinois was the budget deficit. That has not changed.
In February, Gov. Rauner proposed a budget that was not only billions of dollars out of balance, but also cut the medical care services of the elderly, the disabled and struggling families through Medicaid by $1.5 billion, services for victims of child abuse, and the nursing home care of thousands of frail elderly residents.
But the state cannot rely on cuts alone to solve its $4 billion deficit. Eliminating the budget deficit will take a balanced approach that includes both spending reductions and new revenue.
Legislators did not agree with the governor’s unbalanced approach, so we passed a plan that included hundreds of millions of dollars in spending reductions while protecting middle-class families and others who struggle by increasing funding for schools and preventing damaging cuts to public safety and services for the elderly, children and the developmentally disabled.
In addition to approving hundreds of millions of dollars in spending reductions, House Democrats opposed increasing lawmakers’ pay. In the budget we passed, legislators’ pay was frozen at the same level as last year. However, despite the Legislature’s intentions, when the comptroller made it clear that she planned to provide a pay increase to lawmakers, we took action to make clear that we opposed an increase in lawmakers’ pay.
Go read the whole thing and let us know what you think.
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:09 am:
I wish he would have spelled out the details of Rauner’s demands.
- Norseman - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:09 am:
Interesting spin on why they waited to pass a bill on the salary increase.
- Beatgrunt - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:11 am:
New revenue thrown out there but not called a tax increase. If they would have agreed to make that temp increase permanant we would not be in nearly the hole we are. No one wants to own what must be done.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:13 am:
It’s a well thought piece.
It would be much more inpactful if the COLA increase hadn’t festered as it did, allowing the appearance of the blowback being the catalyst of the COLA vote, an apparent” reactionary move.
- Politix - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:14 am:
The lack of specifics made this a tedious read.
- Not Rich - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:16 am:
Politix: You mean like the lack of specifics from the Gov? Still waiting for him to file his budget..
- A guy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:22 am:
Not defending the Governor’s budget here, but….
This thing absolutely drips…
It’s odd.
- Altgelds Ghost - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:23 am:
Madigan is not serving well as the messenger in this fight. He claims that he has pledged to work cooperatively with Rauner, yet no one believes him. He has a decent message, but a different member needs to start delivering it and use more plain spoken language to clearly connect Rauner’s turn around agenda with the negative impacts so many of us believe would come if it were passed
- Middle class mel - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:24 am:
The need to override Rauner on the arbitration bill. Its a fair way to settle labor issues with a neutral party. Then sent him the pension Chicago casino bill and see what Rauner does with it These are good bills. Thirdly form a revenue generating committee with half dems and half republicans that way everyone will be equally responsible for the outcome. Give some on workers comp reform. Rauner needs to knock off the public bashing retoric as does Madigan. It is very counterproductive.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:30 am:
Vague apologia that adds little to the debate.
Why did the legislature send a budget that contained more red ink than Rauner’s? He doesn’t say, other than using platitudes of “saving the middle class.” Will adding to their tax burden also “save” the middle class and reduce the deficit?
It was the Comptroller’s fault that the legislators would have or did receive an automatic salary COLA? Darn that Comptroller! She too pushed to have state employee wages paid. Darn that Comptroller! Ruined the Speakers plans to bring Illinois government to its knees while blaming Rauner?
After dragging the Chairman of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission to Springfield for two separate dates of informative testimony about that agency annual report, Madigan still cherry picks a few numbers and pulls them out of context to claim there is no Illinois comp problem, and ignores the rest of the report and numbers.
At least we now know who is out of touch amongst the ruling class in Illinois: it isn’t the “billionaire.”
- Abe the Babe - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:33 am:
Poor response.
Job #1 if you are a democrat is to shed light on what the Gov is holding up the budget for. Madigan didn’t even mention the specifics and his general description of proposals “that hurt the middle class” wasn’t mentioned until the end.
Weird and not effective.
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:36 am:
This may sound good, but the reality is that Rauner’s intransigence on his Turn Around Agenda was met by an equally immovable force led by Speaker Madigan. Neither side has made any substantial movement to compromise in the middle.
I am not taking sides, but interested Illinois citizens are denied the political middle ground that I suspect is the real base of American voters.
- Jimmy0 - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:41 am:
Correct me if I’m wrong but when I watched the news about the democrats sending him the budget that they knew was out of balance it was so he could find revenue or make cuts when necassary right? Nobody wants to take this tax hike but couldn’t the millionaires tax, la salle street (Governor Rauner owns a stake in the merchantile exchange) shoot even the sugary drink tax help take the burden away from that tax hike?
- Nick Name - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:45 am:
He says some good things but his silence on the GA’s utter failure to adequately fund the pension for decades is deafening. This is by far the most frustrating thing about Madigan.
- Lincoln Lad - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:46 am:
Wow. Who thought this op-ed would help the Speaker’s position? If anything, it demonstrates that the Speaker may have met his match. This will reinforce the Rauner camp and cause them to dig in even more - it clearly indicates that they are winning the personal battle.
- PublicServant - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:46 am:
===interested Illinois citizens are denied the political middle ground that I suspect is the real base of American voters.===
I suspect you’re wrong.
(1) If you were correct, the Democrats would not control both branches of the legislature and not in the numbers that they do.
(2) Meeting in the middle would imply that both sides are equally extreme in their relative positions. That is not the case. The Democrats, if anything, have moved slightly right, while the Republican Party has been taken over by the Extreme Right Wing.
(3) Rauner hid the anti-union, turnaround agenda to get elected. If he didn’t, Pat Quinn would still be governor. You don’t meet someone halfway, when they didn’t define where they stood, and where there would be absolutely no compromise on until after the election.
- Lincoln Lad - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:51 am:
-Public Servant-
Hid the anti-Union agenda?
From who? Rauner’s anti-Union agenda was the primary reason Quinn thought he would win!
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:54 am:
Hid the anti-Union agenda?
From who?
Everyone, starting April 2014.
You’re welcome.
- Loop Lady - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 9:58 am:
What Limcoln Lad said…
Madigan looks weak to me for the first time ever…
He cannot deflect a huge responsibility for this mess…
- Abe the Babe - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:00 am:
This isn’t hard. Dems Simply need to highlight, in campaign like terms, the absurdity of damaging the social safety net so that employers have more power over their workers.
It’s throwing troubled, indigent people out on to the streets so that workers can be paid less.
This would be a DC campaign’s dream scenario.
- Hoping for Rational Thought - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:03 am:
There is more rhetoric than truth from BOTH sides. Neither side has offered a balanced budget. NEITHER! Rauner relied on much deeper cuts and no revenue but his pension savings were fictional. The Dems passed a budget with more modest cuts but no revenue to fill the gap. NoBODY HAS DONE THERE JOBS HERE. Dems are delusional if they think they will pass a bipartisan tax increase without compromising on other issues with GOP. If this was really about the Dems doing the right thing they would vote for the tax increase and not worry about the election. If they weren’t afraid of Rauner funding opponents this probably would have been done already. Rauner/GOP need to realize that Dems can’t compromise as far as is being demanded. Heck even most GOP legislators won’t vote to take all power away from public employee unions. Focus instead on maybe taken pensions out of the collective bargaining arena, maybe some limits on healthcare, and loosen the stranglehold AFSCME has on hiring and promotions. It needs to be a lot less than what is being asked for now. There is a middle ground if they move conversations out of the blue room.
- Langhorne - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:07 am:
It was an OK op ed piece, to show he wants to be reasonable. It is not the place for a staff analysis breaking down details of bills, point by point.
- Abe the Babe - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:15 am:
== It is not the place for a staff analysis breaking down details of bills, point by point.==
Who said anything about an analysis? He could have at least listed them.
The Dems need to tell the public exactly what is holding up the budget. Rauner and company are doing it every day. “the Dems are refusing to Reform government”. There’s a reason Rauner and his allies don’t ever mention the reforms. The dems need to exploit the unpopularity of these proposals.
Madigan’s numbers are so bad that convincing people that he’s “reasonable” is a poor strategy. Focus on the Gov and those proposals that don’t have a majority vote in either chamber (let alone public support).
- Earnest - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:21 am:
I find it odd–seems more about campaigning than resolution. How on earth did Rauner’s anti-union agenda become the elephant in the room that no one, including Madigan above, talks about? That being the actual stumbling point to all of this, I’m not sure why it isn’t front and center in the debate and being pushed by Democrtats.
I can understand why Rauner keeps it under the radar–it was never mentioned among the very specific items included in the three mailers I received last week. It was good to see it included in his memo to the legislators though, even if somewhat buried.
- Lincoln Lad - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:24 am:
With Mitch Daniels and Scott Walker on each of his shoulders, I guess everyone thought Rauner would be anything but anti-Union.
OK then.
With unions funding Dillard in an effort to derail Rauner in the primary, we thought that was because the unions just liked him.
OK then.
If anyone thought Rauner would not be anti-Union, you were deluding yourself. It was obvious, it was a given.
No do-overs if you voted for him after deluding yourself. You wanted to blame Quinn for the Speaker’s pension reform mandate. You got what you asked for.
- Ghost - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:30 am:
I suppose its better then ” its on like Donkey Kong”…. It fails overall. Rauner has been hiding his cuts to the middle class but not explicitly saying he is looking to cut wages for construction workers, and remove minium wage laws for construction and cut state salaries. Here was an opportunity to spell out the cuts that dmg the kiddle class and he didnt. Rauner and madigan both claim they are for the middle class. But neither explains the details. So fail on the opportunity to show how he is allegedly hellping the middle class
- VanillaMan - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:31 am:
Madigan professionally explained himself. If professionalism is important to you, there you go. If you prefer blood sport politics and gladiator type rhetoric - you got the Rauner Twitter Trio, doing beer keg stands with their shirts off, and flexing their pale beer bellies.
Gentleman Madigan look pretty tame by comparison.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:35 am:
- Lincoln Lad -,
Point out a TV, a speech, a remark, spevifically after the Primary that Rauner speaks to the anti-Union rhetoric, at this level.
Take your time, lol
- Robert the Bruce - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:41 am:
“I pledged to work cooperatively and professionally with Gov. Bruce Rauner.”- made me laugh.
But he does a decent job of arguing that he’s the reasonable one of the two.
- anon. - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:46 am:
It isn’t just Madigan’s (now vetoed) budget that is unbalanced it seems he is too.
- Lincoln Lad - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:52 am:
-OW-
“After the primary” - i think you’ve made my point for me.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:56 am:
- Lincoln Lad -.
That Rauner hid his anti-Union agenda. Conpletely. After getting the nomination, Rauner hid his Union feeling, lol.
That’s your point?
- Mama - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:12 am:
I expect this to be Madigan’s last op-ed for the State Journal-Register.
- Skeptic - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:15 am:
Lincoln Lad: So you’re suggesting that non-GOP voters should have paid attention to the policy positions in the GOP primaries too? (I suppose if they had, they would have seen Rauner for the anti-union flip-flopper that he is, but I digress…)
- walker - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:17 am:
Not much there to chew on, but no harm done either. Better than remaining silent.
Just about as good as Rauner’s letter to legislators.
- lake county democrat - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:34 am:
Dear Mr. Speaker:
Please explain how redistricting reform “runs counter to the core beliefs of Democrats and Republicans.”
You friend,
LCD
- Daniel Plainview - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 11:41 am:
- After dragging the Chairman of the Illinois Workers’ Compensation Commission to Springfield for two separate dates -
Dragging? Gosh, it’s a shame she has to actually work for that $125k salary.
- Anonin' - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:12 pm:
M/Ms LCD:
the remap ideas being pushed by TeamBungle generally pay little more than lip service to complying with the Voting Rights Act. So this looks like a path to be tied up in court a long time.
Oh and can YOU explain this remap idea improves prosperity in IL?
While we are here perhaps someone can explain how competitive districts really help….please skip the been there too long and picking voters… most states see competitive races as those where winner votes like a scared child (i.e. not a problem solver) It does look a way for the billionaires to drop in more robots to help line their pockets
- Formerly Known As... - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:13 pm:
==we took action to make clear that we opposed an increase in lawmakers’ pay==
And the timing of that action will now either force Senate Dems to oppose you and be stuck supporting an unpopular pay increase, or the AG to sue over the GA’s ==blatantly unconstitutional== actions.
- walker - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:14 pm:
LCD: Good comment, absolutely right on that one
What might be true is that redistricting reform runs counter to the principles of both the Democratic and Republican parties. They both look to remapping for partisan advantage.
- Lincoln Lad - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:28 pm:
-OW-
My point is that Rauner was clear what he was about, the fact that he didn’t include this or that in his after the primary ads doesn’t mean he changed his view. His campaign focused on shaking up Springfield, and he’s certainly done that. Campaigns always simplify message to things the uninformed can understand and relate to. Readers of this blog should not be considered uninformed; I think they pay attention and know more than the simplistic messages campaigns carry. Rauner was anti Union before he ran, while he ran, and still today, the followers of state politics have to know that.
- JS Mill - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:41 pm:
=At least we now know who is out of touch amongst the ruling class in Illinois: it isn’t the “billionaire.” =
You are right. Rauner is not out of touch. He just doesn’t care much about the average every day kind of person. Neither does Madigan for that matter. Hubris all around.
But you can go on believing your guy cares and has his finger on the pulse of the needs and cares of everyday people.
I am not fooled by either of them.
- JS Mill - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:43 pm:
= His campaign focused on shaking up Springfield, and he’s certainly done that.=
He may have changed the balance of power but he most certainly didn’t shake things up in the way his slogan implied.
He continues the practice of cronyism and is in no way focused on what is good for the middle class. Same as the previous power structure, just maybe more blatant.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 12:49 pm:
===Campaigns always simplify message to things the uninformed can understand and relate to.===
This is priceless.
So the “uninformed” are the “low information voter” in your lil school play? lol
===Readers of this blog should not be considered uninformed; I think they pay attention and know more than the simplistic messages campaigns carry.===
Your point is since the blog knew the hiding of the anti-Union jargon was a sham and calling Rauner out on it… The blog’s fault. Your lil school play gets better and better.
Attention, attention please;
===-My point is that Rauner was clear what he was about, the fact that he didn’t include this or that in his after the primary ads doesn’t mean he changed his view.===
Rauner hid it, but… we at this blog knew better. How do I know - Lincoln Lad - thinks this?
===Campaigns always simplify message to things the uninformed can understand and relate to. Readers of this blog should not be considered uninformed; I think they pay attention and know more than the simplistic messages campaigns carry.===
Low information voters weren’t smart enough…
===Rauner was anti Union before he ran, while he ran, and still today, the followers of state politics have to know that.===
Except that “I’m not anti-Union, just anti-Union boss.
Rauner is a victim of his controlled silence.
End scene.
- Wordslinger - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:13 pm:
LL, you should wait at least a year or so before revising history.
The governor explicitly said during the general election campaign that anti-union measures were “not a priority.”
After he was elected, they became the top priority.
What do you call that?
- MurMan - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:17 pm:
https://capitolfax.com/2015/07/23/memory-lane/
Read this post from Rich from a couple weeks ago… Clearly Lincoln Land did not “go read the whole thing” as Rich requested. If he had, he would realize that his whole ‘Rauner always ran as anti-union’ argument is bull plop.
Maybe read the whole thing this time before commenting again: http://wuis.org/post/governors-top-priorities-message-message-message
A key excerpt from the above article:
===Less than a month before last November’s election, Illinois Radio Network quoted Rauner saying, “Pushing any specific labor regulation is not my priority at all.” A few months later, after he’d taken the oath of office, Illinoisans learned right-to-work zones were a priority after all.”===
Land of Lincoln, correct me if I am wrong, but I think you just got schooled. Try to keep your partisan rants in line with the reality.
- Pete - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:19 pm:
the absurdity of damaging the social safety net so that employers have more power over their workers.
___________________________________________________
“We the People” are the employers for this round of debate. The current debate is when you have one dollar to give, and you have to chose between the Social Safety Net and the Worker? Where does that dollar go? Ideally the state would not be in debt, and the pensions for the Worker would have been paid. The wages the workers are receiving would have been competitive and the employers “We the People” would be on the winning side.
Unfortunately we have debt all over the place. We gave two dollars away when we only had one. We promised and borrowed from the workers while giving to the social safety net. Now we still have to pay the worker (1$), fund the social safety net (1$), and pay back the workers with unearned interest (1$ + lost interest).
So the damage has been done. For DECADES Illinois has tried to squeeze ($3+) more from ($1) less.
It’s time that the state of Illinois return as a flagship and set a precedent that results in leadership. Our Government requires that this process proceed as a check and balance. It’s refreshing to have both sides of the debate presented.
- MurMan - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 1:35 pm:
===It’s time that the state of Illinois return as a flagship and set a precedent that results in leadership. Our Government requires that this process proceed as a check and balance. It’s refreshing to have both sides of the debate presented.===
With respect, Pete, I have no clue what you are talking about. Your post seems to imply that you think IL should have raised taxes decades ago to pay both pensions and the services tax payers want. I agree there, but after that you lose me.
Its not only one side saying we need more revenue. Rauner s not going to cut taxes. He is going to raise taxes. He needs revenue. His own budget shows that. This impasse is about the fact that Rauner wants to hamstring the Unions as a condition of putting GOP votes on a tax increase.
From where I sit, this Debate is not about balanced budgets and it’s certainly not about cutting spending vs new revenues.
Please enlighten us. What is the “debate” that you see both sides representing in Springfield?
- Arthur Andersen - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 2:02 pm:
I dunno. I thought Brownie wrote a pretty good letter.
- Lincoln Log - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 2:51 pm:
I’m missing something.
I knew Rauner was against labor from the first day he surfaced. Readers here seem to what to treat that like a flip flop or some kind of hidden agenda. It wasn’t.
Saying it has been some top priority since he’s been in office doesn’t seem accurate to me - I think the top priority has been to weaken MJM, and focus on the failure to budget properly.
I agree with Lincoln Lad, and don’t get the nerve he seems to have stepped on with some of you today.
- Loop Lady - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 2:58 pm:
Ok, how many times has Madigan resorted to explaining his m.o.? Right. Bruce may be backing him into a corner, but the Unions are going to demand protection from pols on both sides of the aisle.
Rauner should decide which issue he wants a win on the most, and go after it.
He can’t win on all of his turn around agenda, but this is a guy the worst winner takes all attitude in a political neophyte I’ve ever seen…
- Wordslinger - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 3:10 pm:
LL, you choose to pretend that the governor did not say before the election that “pushing any labor legislation is not a priority at all.”
Or, you understand that he was lying then and that doesn’t bother you.
- Sue - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 3:46 pm:
Mike Moderation Madigan and the Governor have more in common then the Speaker admits-they both proposed budgets which were billions out of balance
- MurMan - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 3:50 pm:
Lincoln Log, in addition to what Word just pointed out, you also apparently missed the first 2+ months of Rauners administration where his sole effort was touring IL giving speeches in support of his Turnaround agenda instead of governing. Right to work was his primary agenda concern back then. The Rauner admin was also pushing for localities to pass resolutions in favor of right to work and turnaround agenda. Remember the right to work round up from Rich? It lasted at least a month. Rauner only focused on taking down Madigan after it was clear the Dems would not help him bust unions. If MJM would have agreed to bust unions, I’d wager the Rauner would donate to his PAC instead of trying to destroy him…
Either way, it’s clear that you missed a lot.
- MurMan - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 3:56 pm:
As an aside, while thinking about Rauners first months in office I couldn’t help but realize that IL GA made huge progress while he was not in Sfield. (Police reform & anti-gay therapy to name a few) As soon as the Governer came to town and tried to actually govern the whole state ground to a halt. Crazy coincidence…
- Enviro - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 4:06 pm:
== This is the seventh consecutive year the House has voted to cut legislators’ pay by rejecting a cost-of-living increase. ==
In the article Madigan also points out that the governor’s proposals will hurt middle-class families in Illinois. Rauner’s agenda would reduce wages and the standard of living of middle-class and all struggling families. This is an agenda that runs counter to the core beliefs of Democrats and Republicans. This is what the governor’s anti worker agenda would do to Illinois citizens.
Madigan’s message can also be found here:
http://www.illinoisobserver.net/2015/08/03/madigan-rauner-budget-billions-dollars-balance/
- Anonymous - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 4:19 pm:
Rauner hid his anti-union agenda? What was there to hide? After the unions mobilized in the primary and millions of dollars were spent on commercials using his anti union rhetoric, anyone paying attention knew he disliked unions.
- Wordslinger - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 4:27 pm:
Candidate Rauner, Oct. 17, 2014:
“Pushing any specific labor legislation is not my priority at all.”
What he was hiding, days before the election, was his whole agenda, his reason for wanting the job.
- Lincoln Lad - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 5:25 pm:
I’m with Anonymous…
Rauner’s stance and the unions desire to keep him from winning for that reason couldn’t have been more obvious.
Why so many are so intent as framing it as some kind of surprise/cover up/ulterior motive is beyond me. Maybe they were remembering Scott Walker - no that can’t be. Maybe it was Mitch Daniels - no that can’t be either. If it isn’t clear to all that Rauner is in that club, and always was - you might just want to write less, and read more.
- MurMan - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 6:52 pm:
Lincoln Lad. You addressed none of the evidence I provided. Runner lied to the public during the general election about his Agenda. That’s a fact. I’m not “framing” the issue that way.
Yes, astute political observers knew Rauner was anti-union, but to the average voter Rauner was just a business guy fed up with politics as usual that would shake up Springfield without attacking unions. Why did they think that, because Rauner would talk about his agenda and lied about not making labor issues a priority.
So again, try basing your partisan rant on reality.
- MurMan - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 7:00 pm:
And I know and knew Rauner was anti Union. It is partially the voters fault that they were not aware of Rauner’s true motives, but I’d say it’s more Rauner’s fault for lying to voters during the general about his agenda.
- RNUG - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 7:33 pm:
== Rauner was anti Union before he ran, while he ran, and still today, the followers of state politics have to know that. ==
== After the unions mobilized in the primary and millions of dollars were spent on commercials using his anti union rhetoric, anyone paying attention knew he disliked unions. ==
But most people don’t follow State politics / don’t pay attention; they just tune in during the last 45 - 90 days of the election cycle. So the average voter didn’t have a clue about Rauner’s anti-union agenda until Rauner started his post-election crusade.
- RNUG - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 7:38 pm:
== The current debate is when you have one dollar to give, and you have to chose between the Social Safety Net and the Worker? Where does that dollar go? ==
Well, the IL SC has said the pensions HAVE to be paid, just not exactly how, but it wouldn’t be smart to skip the pension fund payments. And between Federal consent decrees from previous Federal court cases and the recent State court orders, there isn’t a choice on about 80% of the budget / 90% of the projected revenue.
Given the above, the math is easy. Quite frankly, the only discussion / debate is over how much taxes get raised and who gets the blame for it.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 8:15 pm:
===And between Federal consent decrees from previous Federal court cases and the recent State court orders, there isn’t a choice on about 80% of the budget / 90% of the projected revenue.
Given the above, the math is easy. Quite frankly, the only discussion / debate is over how much taxes get raised and who gets the blame for it.===
That’s as close as concise as it gets right now.
It’s well said, but the discription is bad news… And as real and raw as honest as anything.
Much respect, as always.
- Wordslinger - Monday, Aug 3, 15 @ 10:13 pm:
To piggyback on what RNUG wrote, the remaining “leverage” the governor has with the budget has resulted in real-world consequences reported just on this blog today:
– Catholic Charities has laid off 40 employees and closed two shelters.
– CEDA has furloughed 200 employees and will layoff 50 more next week while 50,000 poor women and babies will lose FEDERAL funding for formula.
That’s just today, just here, 290 people out of work, homeless thrown into the street, and tens of thousands poor babies without food because the governor wants to clip the unions and lower incomes wherever he can.
Guess what tomorrow is going to bring? More of the same. And the next day. And the next day.
If Rauner is willing to take that kind of heat, he sure hasn’t shown it up to now.
One thing’s for sure — he ain’t like any governor we’ve ever seen before.
When Blago was shaking down the baby cancer hospital, all he wanted was a $25K campaign contribution.
Rauner is holding hostage nutrition for poor babies in order to take food off the table for tens of thousands of workers all over the state.
- Redux - Tuesday, Aug 4, 15 @ 8:30 am:
Good debate but point not raised that the major mainstream media outlets were fully in the bag for Rauner. He got away with lying about his true anti-middle class / anti-labor at any cost agenda because it was an agenda the major newspapers shared his agenda. Both the Trib and Suntimes ed pages served as Rauner campaign lackeys. Anyone remember Dave McKinney? Add that to 50 billion Rauner TV commercials. Thus “low information voters” had no real chance to become well informed, even if effort was expended.
- Pete - Tuesday, Aug 4, 15 @ 10:27 am:
The debate I’m referring to is:
Pay as we go versus kick the can do.