Rauner accuses Madigan of adding “poison pill”
Tuesday, Aug 11, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller
* AP this morning…
The Illinois House returns Tuesday for what has become a weekly visit to the state Capitol during a summer-long budget standoff.
Democrats who control the chamber plan a committee vote on a plan adopted last week by the Senate to disburse $5 billion in federal funds despite having no budget.
An afternoon joint hearing is planned for two House appropriations committees - those governing general services and human services.
The wire service obviously didn’t read a House amendment added yesterday.
* As subscribers already know, the governor’s office ain’t happy. From a press release…
Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan and the legislators he controls are considering an amendment to SB 2042 – the bill appropriating money for the pass through of federal dollars, which as a clean bill would have no impact on the state’s budget deficit – that would increase General Revenue spending by nearly $600 million.
“Governor Rauner has supported and continues to support a clean federal pass through appropriations bill,” Rauner Spokesman Lance Trover said. “Unfortunately, Speaker Madigan continues to play games with taxpayer money and is trying to force through higher state spending with no budget.”
Tim Nuding, Director of the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget, issued the attached memo to the Governor’s Deputy Chief of Staff outlining that the line of spending included by Speaker Madigan is identical to the spending in the unconstitutional, unbalanced budget that the Democrat majority passed earlier this summer.
The Nuding memo is here.
* Speaker Madigan’s shop sent this out earlier today…
Illinois House Speaker Michael J. Madigan on Tuesday announced the House’s plan to make sure that programs serving children with disabilities and life-saving cancer screenings are included in a plan to spend federal dollars while lawmakers continue to push for a balanced approach to the state budget.
“Spending authority for 11 federally funded programs will be added Tuesday to legislation giving state agencies the ability to spend federal dollars on several vital programs during the current budget impasse,” Madigan said.
Madigan’s amendment to the $4.8 billion measure approved by the Senate last Tuesday adds funding for disaster relief, breast and cervical cancer screenings, funding for assistance to children with disabilities, and Meals on Wheels for homebound elderly residents, among other items. The amendment adds $1.56 billion in spending authority to the spending plan under Senate Bill 2042.
“After examining the legislation passed by the Senate, which Governor Rauner expressed his support for, we were contacted about additional programs of vital importance to the health and well-being of families across Illinois where the state and federal governments both provide funding. We believe funding for these programs, which can be delivered despite the lack of a state budget in place, is needed before the measure is sent to the governor,” Madigan explained.
The current version of the federal funds spending plan passed with bipartisan support in the Senate, and Gov. Rauner announced his support for the plan. Madigan expressed optimism the bill would have not only wide bipartisan support when the House passes the bill Wednesday, but support from Rauner, as well.
Emphasis added to show some of the GRF-funded items in the amendment.
- Triple fat - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:18 am:
Meals for shut-ins? We don’t need no stinkin meals for shut-ins.
- Just Me - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:18 am:
It’s all about getting that precious roll call.
- Very Fed Up - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:19 am:
The need for term limits could not be clearer.
- Honeybear - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:20 am:
Ooooh, Darth Arduin is gonna be stompin!
- Tournaround Agenda - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:21 am:
Madigan busts a window open for the hostages.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:24 am:
It will be clear to everyone if either Rauner or Madigan tries muddying a clean, simple bill with anything else that has not been mutually negotiated and agreed.
- @MisterJayEm - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:27 am:
“The Governor may reduce or veto any item of
appropriations in a bill presented to him.” — Ill. Const. 1970, art. IV, § 9(d)
– MrJM
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:27 am:
Governor,
This is what happens in divided government when the Executive alienates the Legislstive so much, that the easiest if easiest idea of a pass-through should go without a hitch…
… but, a budget, with a structured roll call months ago would’ve prevented all of this.
Why am I on this tact?
“Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan and the legislators he controls …”
Seriously? We’re still on this? Can’t the public messaging be just a tad less combative, and can the discussions between both parties resolve what is trying to be accomplished?
It’s coming down to;
Which hostages are going to be released by the Governor.
Period.
There should be ZERO poison pills, and the governor has the AV option if he, Rauner, wants to own the clean version if he really wanted to, but the trick bag is there, and it’s there not to poison, but to make the governor choose, especially when choosing puts enormous strain on state finances versus the funding of programs.
Super dissappointing. But, the governor is only a victim of not having passed and signed a budget, and, making a point that some hostages are just worth more until the heat gets too hot.
- walker - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:28 am:
Pretty strange to call continuing money for children with dsabilities and shut-ins a “poison pill.”
Still, Rauner is right that this isn’t the “clean bill” previously agreed to.
- thunderspirit - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:28 am:
The irony of the Governor’s office being upset with a “poison pill” amendment is rich indeed.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:29 am:
Half a loaf is better than no loaf.
Pass the clean federal pass through that everyone is already on board with, then take up the GRF funding issues separately.
Otherwise, Madigan jeopardizes the federal funding pass through while also inviting Rauner to start demanding his own amendments to the bill.
- Joe M - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:29 am:
==disaster relief, breast and cervical cancer screenings, funding for assistance to children with disabilities, and Meals on Wheels for homebound elderly residents, among other items==
If the Governor doesn’t want to fund all of those, can’t he use his line item veto to identify which ones he feels should not be funded?
- JackD - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:29 am:
Why is this a poison pill when funding the schools was not?
- Corporate Thug - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:31 am:
That ain’t a poison pill. Its the right thing to do. Free the hostages. They’re innocent in all this.
- So Sad - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:34 am:
It appears that Rauner is a wrecking crew. Does he just hate government?
Did voters want that?
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:36 am:
==can’t he use his line item veto==
Or he can expect an amendment of his own, similar to what Madigan is trying to slip in. Or rewrite it with an amendment of his own during the veto process. Or veto the entire thing while asking them to send him the clean, agreed version.
Or they can simply pass the clean, agreed to version and get that federal funding to people. The ball is in Madigan’s court now, and this bill can be clean or a conflict.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:36 am:
It could also be as simple as;
Bruce Rauner is afraid of the Amendatory Veto when it comes to budgetary choices and funding.
Even with the K-12 Ed Approp, it was a clean signature, and everything else was a clean Veto.
The Amendatory Veto is an unambiguous choice. That seems to scare Bruce Rauner something awful.
- blah - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:40 am:
== Formerly Known As… - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:24 am:
It will be clear to everyone if either Rauner or Madigan tries muddying a clean, simple bill with anything else that has not been mutually negotiated and agreed. ==
You’re assuming Madigan was a part of the “deal” in the Senate. Based on this move, it seems he was not. A deal between the Governor and only one chamber isn’t a deal between the Governor and the General Assembly.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:45 am:
So the House Democrats are willing to tank over $5 billion in federal funds with their “poison pill” amendment?
Who are the extremists again?
- How Ironic - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:47 am:
Morning Rich,
Bruce was quite upset today, as it seems that Madigan and his band of legislators are interfering with his latest Runaground ™ Agenda.
Today, Bruce’s beef lies with Madigan’s interference with his RTE (Right To Eat) initiative. Clearly, if these disabled seniors are able to withstand the punishing heat without the LIHEAP welfare, surely they can just order takeout. (BTW, Bruce always says give a man electricity for a day and he can run his AC. Teach him how to use a hand fan, he can stay miserable but alive for a few days at least!)
Bruce has already shown he’s willing and able to shoot the hostages, again if needed.
Best,
ck!
- Ghost - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:50 am:
calling care of the elderly a poison pill or an unaffordable expense is not going to win the Gov a lot of supporters.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:51 am:
- Louis G Atsaves -,
Rauner could be a hero. He could Amendatory Veto everything else but the federal pass-thru and save the day.
Governors have that pesky Amendatory Veto that Rauner is too scared to use.
- Louis G Atsaves -, is Rauner too afraid?
I’d probably be more “sympathetic” to the governing, but when I read, right out of the box…
“Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… ”
Ugh. That’s playing games, that’s not looking for solutions but also playing victim, which a governor should never feel like a victim… ever.
So, - Louis G Atsaves -, you’re against the AV option?
- How Ironic - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:52 am:
@- Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:45 am:
“So the House Democrats are willing to tank over $5 billion in federal funds with their “poison pill” amendment?
Who are the extremists again?”
Actually Louis it should read:
“So Gov Rauner and his extreme rigidity to dogma is willing to tank over $5 Billion in federal funds over BREAST AND CERVICAL CANCER SCREENINGS, FUNDING FOR ASSISTANCE TO CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES, AND MEALS ON WHEELS FOR HOMEBOUND ELDERLY RESIDENT?
Who is extreme again?
Really Louis? Maybe Rauner should film a video of him tossing puppies into an incinerator. That would be about as low as he has left to go.
Cutting off old people that are homebound, and can’t get food? You think that’s a ‘poison pill’? Really?
- Joe M - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:54 am:
I support funding the services that the amendment funds. But so many things from the budget have been funded, that pretty soon the amount spent may reach the amount of projected revenue. What will happen then to those programs and institutions that are still on the short end of the stick - because funding them will require new revenue?
Higher Ed, who Rauner already called for a 31% cut comes to mind. MAP grants come to mind. State allocations to cities and counties that Rauner already called for a 50% cut come to mind as services and institutions who in the end, may require more revenue being passed in order to get funded at all, once all of the projected revenue has been spent. Funding those areas may create some serious pressure points.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:55 am:
- blah - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:40 am:
==You’re assuming Madigan was a part of the “deal” in the Senate. Based on this move, it seems he was not. A deal between the Governor and only one chamber isn’t a deal between the Governor and the General Assembly.==
That is fine. If Rauner and Cullerton have agreed on a clean bill to help people, that is good news.
And if Madigan wants to negotiate a separate deal, that is fine as well. If Madigan gets an amendment, then Rauner gets an amendment. No problems there. The problem is if someone wants to sabotage a simple, clean bill that helps get this federal funding to people and only wants to demand things on their terms.
- Skeptic - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:57 am:
“- Louis G Atsaves -, is Rauner too afraid?” If you have to ask that, then it’s obvious that Rauner is not willing to “take the arrows” he said he’d take.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:58 am:
After all the testimony here about how a “deal is a deal” with Madigan and the trust factor is vital, and your word needs to be good and…..
It’s all a game of Stratego. This hero for a day routine we’re seeing is literally, literally killing us in the long run.
- LBJ - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:58 am:
Ah yes, another suicide vote for the House GOP. Blow your brains out again, ladies and gents! Hope Rauner doesn’t hang you out to dry again.
- Not it - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:59 am:
Didn’t Madigan’s spokesman tell us just a couple days ago this was just a dirty rumor?!?! It had to have taken a couple days to put this together. Lying to the media and public is never a good working strategy unless you have something to hide.
- Wensicia - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 10:59 am:
==funding for assistance to children with disabilities, and Meals on Wheels for homebound elderly residents==
Yep, pure poison.
- Xavier Woods - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:03 am:
A lot of people are forgetting that the initial Senate Bill is not a perfect bill. There are several instances where the state HAS to spend GRF in order to receive our Federal money through federal match or maintenance of effort. If we do not spend state money, we are obligated to return that federal money back to the feds. This bill addresses the needed state spending in order to receive our federal dollars. How is this a poison pill?
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:05 am:
Well said, @A guy.
This is a clean, simple way to help get that federal $ to people. It has bipartisan support in the House and Senate. This is a simple win for the state.
If someone wants to be ==extreme== by jeopardizing that or muddying a clean, simple win for the state, that is on their head. No one else.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:10 am:
- A Guy -,
If the Rauner Press Shop made it about Madigan going back on his “word”, then that would have my attention.
Starting out “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls…”…
… that just reminds me that the Rauner Crew wants to win the day, not improve the policies or discuss what may be framed much better. It’s as though if they stay off phrases or talking points, they feel their arguments aren’t strong. Yikes.
At least Goldberg seems to tries to be original…
- The Dude Abides - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:16 am:
Wow, items such as breast and cervical cancer screenings, aid to disabled children and meals on wheels for homebound elderly folks are now classified as poison pills. If the Rauner administration doesn’t feel that these items should be funded presently then the Governor could use his AV power to strike those items from the pill and sign the “clean” bill. Of course if he did that he would “own” those cuts. The Governor doesn’t want to own the cuts. Maybe he feels that if these folks can be allowed to suffer for a while eventually the Democrats will give in to his anti Union initiatives.
- Mouthy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:17 am:
Looks like the Speaker may have to run the state whether he likes it or not. Rauner seems to be too incompetent and obsessed to do so. This is nuts day after day…
- walker - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:17 am:
Let’s see how this plays out.
It is true that some Federal pass-thru funds were only initially granted based on the assumption that state GRF funding would also be provided. If that is any part of this amendment, then it is not “dirtying up” the Fed funding bill, it is making it work.
Willing to be disabused of my benefit of the doubt.
- walker - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:21 am:
If it is purely an add-on by Madigan, then the criticism is justified.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:23 am:
Also, this was not much of a negotiated bill to begin with. It is a Senate Dem bill. Rauner saw that it was clean, and he got on board.
==The Senate Democrats’ bill we discussed earlier today is now being supported by Gov. Bruce Rauner, according to his spokesman==
https://capitolfax.com/2015/08/04/rauner-admin-backs-senate-federal-approp-bill/
- Jorge - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:24 am:
I fail to see how feeding homebound and invalid elderly people is akin to the ubiquitous Rauner poison pill of destroying collective bargaining. AV’s aren’t all that difficult.
- Educated in the Suburbs - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:24 am:
===It could also be as simple as;
Bruce Rauner is afraid of the Amendatory Veto===
I’m going with, his Indiana attorneys still haven’t figured out it exists.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:31 am:
I guess the rumor was correct. This is a time when someone should tell the Speaker what he’s told Rich Miller once or twice, “your not helping.”
We’ll see how Cullerton reacts.
Of course, these items don’t mean the bill has to be vetoed. Rauner can be the hero in this by using his item veto power to delete the offending additions. Naturally, he’s not going to say that right now.
- jake - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:33 am:
If Rauner was interested in governing, and believing that the added spending is not in the State’s interest, he can do a line item veto. On the other hand, if he is still purely in campaign mode….
- Apocalypse Now - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:35 am:
=Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan and the legislators he controls are considering an amendment to SB 2042 – the bill appropriating money for the pass through of federal dollars, which as a clean bill would have no impact on the state’s budget deficit – that would increase General Revenue spending by nearly $600 million.=
Madigan and the Democrats are addicted to every increase spending like a drug addict addicted to the next high from his or her choice. AND who is the one who can’t be trusted on the budget? Madigan and the Democrats.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:36 am:
===AND who is the one who can’t be trusted on the budget? Madigan and the Democrats.===
Rauner’s proposed budget spent more than the projected revenues.
You’re welcome.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:37 am:
@OswegoWilly, are you telling me the only solution would be an amendatory veto that the Democrats would trumpet as starving home bound senior citizens?
Or the second option could be “this was not what everyone agreed to” and veto the entire thing, including over $5 billion federal pass through money.
This is Game of Thrones stuff. A game the House Democrats apparently can’t stop playing.
- How Ironic - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:39 am:
Well, this is quite a week for Rauner. Last week he was all against continuing WIC for mothers that were using formula for their babies.
Now he’s against helping children with disabilities.
What a swell guy.
- Loop Lady - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:44 am:
the reprehensible behavior by both men is truly shameful…
I don’t know how either of them can stand themselves….
Bruce thinks he’s King of IL and Mike thinks he’s the Messiah…
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:47 am:
A clean bill. That’s it. Apparently one party is simply unable to present one.
That tells me graft is so woven into the system, the system cannot work.
You can make a case for all social spending. No one is against health measures or aid to the poor and elderly. At least nobody sane is.
If you can’t get a clean bill spending someone else’s money, how could you expect one here? And the solution is to give these cretins more tax money to treat with an equal measure of respect?
The Speaker is flat-out wrong here. His mettle is being tested and he’s reacting utterly unethically. Make all the excuses you want. He’s cheating on what was agreed to.
Maybe this is the step to effective triangulation. He’s an equal opportunity chiseler.
- How Ironic - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:48 am:
@- Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:37 am:
“Are you telling me the only solution would be an amendatory veto that the Democrats would trumpet as starving home bound senior citizens?”
Yes, if Rauner really feels that strongly that he can’t accept $5 BILLION in federal funds, as long as the bill also helps needy senior citizens get food delivered SO THEY DON’T STARVE TO DEATH…then he should AV that piece out.
Be a man Bruce. Stand up for your convictions. Be the Gov, not some feckless wallflower afraid to ‘take arrows’. I think this would be an excellent ‘Bruce’s Last Stand’ moment.
Heroic Gov Rauner slashes funding for the sick and elderly, while preserving free motorcycle training classes. I think that’s something even the Trib Editorial Board could get behind. A real man of the people moment for the Admin.
- Elo Kiddies - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:49 am:
Previously agreed to… By who? Where did the House sign off on the Senate proposal, before reneging?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:49 am:
- Louis G Atsaves -,
You could have Goldberg meet with Democratic leadership and…
Sorry, it was teed up.
- Louis G Atsaves -
Campaigns are hard.
Governing is difficult.
Governing, sometimes, is about making tough choices. Heck, Candidate Rauner told me he was ready to make tough choices.
Here’s one, have at it.
With respect, - Louis G Atsaves -,
If the Press Shop wouldn’t have responded with “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls…”…
… I’d more than likely have much more sympathy, given the essential aspects of the pass-thru and what is at play with the add-on.
Rauner’s Crew is still trying to have Madigan “own” the duties, responsibilities, and choices of the Executive. “Why?” To win the day. Nothing more.
The idea that Goldberg might not be the best choice to broker, that analogy of “why” really makes the case of Rauner’s legislative problems; being combative.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:53 am:
=== Or the second option could be “this was not what everyone agreed to” and veto the entire thing, including over $5 billion federal pass through money. ===
Then Rauner owns the pain!!! He can be either a hero or a zero.
- Liberty - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:53 am:
This is brilliant on Madigan’s part. Rauner wants to inject poison pills in every bill, now he can have one.
- Anon III - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:55 am:
If there was agreement between the Executive and the Senate Leadership concerning the “clean bill,” and the SB is amended in the House as the Speaker proposes, then the amended SB has to go back to the Senate for another vote. What happens to the agreement then? Will there be a second vote in the Senate?
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:56 am:
=== That tells me graft is so woven into the system, the system cannot work. ===
Wow, you just can’t help but go nuts with the hyperbole. I agree with you that this is a Madigan misstep, but then you go jumping the shark again.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:58 am:
Willy, in all seriousness, I’m more than a little surprised that you’re strenuously defending the Speaker’s position on this. It would seem to run contrary to positions you’ve held in the past and based fairly severe judgement upon.
The alarm went off! We’ll lose Federal money for these programs. It appeared everyone was committed to a clean bill to pass through the money with a little bipartisan clean up added.
Then…as if on cue, the party that NEVER presents a clean bill proved they simply aren’t able to do it. Even after the spokesboy came out to call it a “rumor”.
This has got to be very difficult to defend. I’ve come to expect goofiness from HI. He posts scroll-bys. You on the other hand surprise me a little here.
- Curious Georgina - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:59 am:
So infuriating. State employees who work in federally funded programs are tired of not knowing how long and to what extent they can continue carry out the responsibilities of their jobs with no federal budget in place. A clean bill should be a no-brainer. I’ve generally sided with Madigan over Rauner during this whole mess, but this add-on by the Speaker is maddening. I wish these folks would grow up and stop playing these childish, political games.
- Miami - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:00 pm:
Not it at 10:59…exactly.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:01 pm:
+++Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:56 am:
=== That tells me graft is so woven into the system, the system cannot work. ===
Wow, you just can’t help but go nuts with the hyperbole. I agree with you that this is a Madigan misstep, but then you go jumping the shark again.++++
Norse, I’ve been observing for a few weeks that the Speaker’s rocker is out of alignment a bit. What’s so hyperbolic about this?
Is the Speaker not playing Russian Roulette with the Fed’s money? Apparently for political sport. How tough would it be to simply pass a clean bill on this?
Honestly dude, I believe it’s because he simply can’t. That is not sane judgement my friend.
- JackD - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:06 pm:
“Childish political games”: holding the sick and elderly hostage. Not to mention immoral.
- anon - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:06 pm:
=== Madigan’s amendment adds funding for disaster relief, breast and cervical cancer screenings, funding for assistance to children with disabilities, and Meals on Wheels for homebound elderly residents, among other items. ===
He is inviting the Governor to veto the bill over funding for those items. I wonder why the Governor does not use his line-item veto or just refuse to release the money?
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:07 pm:
- A Guy -,
You, and others are not comprehending, what you are reading.
It’s the Rauner response to a possible slam-dunk misstep that I’m trying to frame.
If framing the discussion is about “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls…”, then it’s really about choices in governing.
If the framing is about Madigan, himself, holding hostage an agreed clean pass-thru, then the dynamics change considerably.
It’s as though the Rauner Crew can’t help themselves. Sometimes answering the direct leads to the framing desired, as opposed to dragging out tired talkibg points to seem weak and useless to the job the governor has.
Go back. Read. I am also making a point of “ownership”. The Governor and the Crew he controls are more than willing to place blame, but refuse to see the opportunity to frame an easy discussion as to the need of not playing games…
… less the “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… ” unhelpful jargon.
- bluecollargal - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:08 pm:
From the Nuding memo - “This includes
$165 million for the State portion of the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, an amount identical to the appropriatio
n made for this program in the unconstitutional, unbalanced budget passed by the General Assembly in May
. These funds could be used to help
balance the budget.”
So disgustingly sad that we have a Governor who wants to balance the budget on the backs of poor seniors and families who need help with energy assistance. And this is the man who said he wants “to make Illinois the most compassionate state in America”. A real piece of work this guy is.
- anon - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:12 pm:
=== No one is against health measures or aid to the poor and elderly. At least nobody sane is.===
Rauner and the legislators he controls are opposed to the funding in this amendment.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:13 pm:
Willy, with due respect, you’re doing the cha cha.
- Not it - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:16 pm:
Bluecollargal: what is your solution to a balanced budget? Let me guess….a tax increase, huh?
I refuse to pay more taxes for more broken government.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:18 pm:
- A Guy -,
Nope,
“Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls…”
“That” isn’t about a poison pill.
- Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:20 pm:
If the Senate passes a bill, the Gov says he supports it… And all agree that it would free up $5B in federal funds… WHY muddy the water? Fight about the rest separately, with the federal money in hand. This was a strategic mistake by the Speaker, thinking he would force Rauner to act on the General Rev funds. If the GO doesn’t spin this around that the Speaker is stopping the $5b in federal dollars from being accessible - they must be asleep at the wheel.
- steve schnorf - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:23 pm:
This could be primarily an effort to box the Governor into vetoes, either total or line item, that look terrible to the public. But thinking about Rich’s post, I wonder if instead it is primarily an effort to tie up most of the GRF available based on the revenue projection. At that point new revenue (tax increase) becomes a narrow dollar for dollar debate on “how much do you want to spend on universities and community colleges, how much do you want to spend on MAP grants, etc” rather than a debate over the enire budget. interesting.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:26 pm:
Wow, guy, you’re questioning the Speaker’s sanity. Read what you’ve been putting down and tell me why I shouldn’t question yours. The Speaker may be making tactical mistakes which could lead to questions of his judgment, but questioning his sanity is wacko stuff.
To my original comment to you, do you know what “graft” means? How does that relate to this situation. Take a breath guy and enjoy how this one plays out.
- HangingOn - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:26 pm:
I can’t help it. Every time I see the phrase “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls” I picture Rauner sitting in his office with his foil hat on to keep Madigan from invading his thoughts. It’s gotten that ridiculous.
- bluecollargal - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:29 pm:
Not it. Great buzzword. “Broken government”. Are you willing to pay more taxes to help provide funding for low income energy assistance? Probably not. And yes, we do need a fair tax system in Illinois where those who make more pay more. Since the expiration of 2014 income tax rates, the top 3% of the state’s wealthiest earners — those with incomes over $200,000 — are getting almost 33% of the benefit (more than $1.2 billion). In the meantime, we balance the budget on the backs of low-income seniors.
- GA Watcher - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:33 pm:
Steve Schnorf is on to something. Another possibility is that the Speaker is trying to set up a swap of poison pills. He’ll remove his from SB 2042 if the Governor backs off the poison pill re collective bargaining and prevailing wage the Governor wants to add to SB 318, the property tax freeze/school funding committee bill.
- steve schnorf - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:39 pm:
At least one thing is clear to me. In spite of many of the comments on here, this has nothing to do with who cares about senior citizens and disabled children no matter how hard you try to make it so. These are strategic and tactical moves that are part of an effort to win a fight that has little if anything to do with this budget itself (remember, as far as GRF goes, the budget is about 95% in place already).
- How Ironic - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:41 pm:
@- steve schnorf - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:39 pm:
“At least one thing is clear to me. In spite of many of the comments on here, this has nothing to do with who cares about senior citizens and disabled children no matter how hard you try to make it so.”
To the average citizen, they will see Rauner cutting funding for old people (if he were to do an AV). No matter how hard he tried to spin it about ‘Madigan’.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 12:42 pm:
Steve, as Rich says, you nailed it.
- Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:05 pm:
I believe John Cullerton is showing his willingness to compromise, and lead (to the ultimate benefit of the citizens of the State).
I hope Rauner regrets walking on the Cullerton press conference, and hope his quick acceptance of the Senate bill demonstrates that.
The House amendment demonstrates who is playing politics with what could be a positive step forward. Put another loss on the board, next to the leg pay raises.
Bad form, but all too much just “business as usual”.
- armchair pundit - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:05 pm:
This has always been about making Rauner make the tough choices he said he was going to make as governor. That has and will always be the long play as long as Rauner keeps this “Turnaround Agenda” facade going. The closer the state gets to that 32b mark, the more likely each straw will be to break the camels back.
- Timmeh - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:13 pm:
FKA 10:29: “Otherwise, Madigan jeopardizes the federal funding pass through while also inviting Rauner to start demanding his own amendments to the bill.”
Dare I say, starting points on a budget? I know it’s hard to ascribe good motives to Madigan, but this is still a branch to a drowning man. If Rauner really wanted to, he could take it and try to negotiate something decent out of it. Governors can do that. Next year can be a fresh fight with (hopefully) less on the line where you can get a little bit more. If he’s serious about “shaking up” Illinois, he might want to be a little more patient. He has 3 more years and 4 more months. There’s no reason why he can’t get a few gains in each budget cycle and win in 2018 with his money and campaigning skills. He can afford to have a little patience.
At some point, trashing both party’s reputations more in the state isn’t good for Madigan or the Democrats. People might blame Rauner ~more~ because of his anti-union agenda, but no budget reflects badly on everyone. That’s not good long term for the party who is going to be a majority most of the time for the foreseeable future.
- Say It Ain't So!! - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:16 pm:
Are all those people here wanting a “clean bill” for this going to be ok with a “clean bill” budget that does not include any of the Turnaround/Run Aground Agenda? I’m sure Madigan can agree to a “clean bill”, if it also applies to the budget.
- workerbee - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:33 pm:
Memo to insiders: it really IS about children, seniors and people who rely on the government to help them get to school, work and provide for their families. Sheesh!
- walker - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:36 pm:
A Guy: Somehow relating this to “graft” is a step out of reality. The rest of your points are well-made.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:43 pm:
==this has nothing to do with who cares about senior citizens and disabled children==
==These are strategic and tactical moves==
I think that’s the saddest part about all of this. These guys don’t care about the collateral damage.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:46 pm:
Norse, LOL, you question my sanity, my intelligence (or lack thereof), my sincerity and everything else. With some regularity. I interpret such things as collegial jocularity. Am I taking you too lightly? lol.
I don’t think the Speaker is lacking sanity. I do think he’s been knocked off rhythm and has shown some moments of being unglued a bit. Like this one. If it was a one-off, it would be one thing. But it’s becoming a little more regular. His behavior and tactics (measured in very small degrees) is off. It has been for several weeks.
A clean bill. He either can or can’t pass one that spends $5B in federal money. Today, it simply appears that he cannot. Is that not a defiance of logic? Really man.
As for me, I take your shots in stride. Now and again you offer reasonable food for thought. That’s the price of admission in my head. If I engage you, consider that a compliment from me. How nuts could I be?? lol.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:48 pm:
=== walker - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:36 pm:
A Guy: Somehow relating this to “graft” is a step out of reality. The rest of your points are well-made.===
Walk, come up with “any” other term to call what is being put on top of a clean bill for political gain or strategy. I’ll likely agree.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:49 pm:
Demo, you could not be more correct.
- steve schnorf - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 1:59 pm:
workerbee, saying it’s so, wishing it to be so, doesn’t make it so
- Anon - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:07 pm:
“Governor Rauner has not supported and continues to reject a clean” Illinois budget without his anti-worker, anti-middle class, anti-low-income turn back agenda.
- Niblets - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:17 pm:
It is indeed about seniors and disabled children.The entire runaground plan will be harmful to all of the states citizens that are not part of the 1%.
- dawn - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:20 pm:
I agree with Say It Ain’t So, why is so much more egregious than the Guv demanding that RTW or Tort Reform be put into the budget? (I’m not convinced the GA agreed the deal brokered by the Guv and Senate, BTW).
- @MisterJayEm - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:21 pm:
Words don’t mean whatever we happen to wish them to mean.
– MrJM
- JackD - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:25 pm:
steve schnorf: You may be right about what the players are doing but workerbee is clearly right about the result. Calling it collateral damage is just as obnoxious here as it is with the bombing of civilians. Well, maybe not as obnoxious but obnoxious enough.
- JackD - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:28 pm:
steve schnorf: my apologies. You didn’t call it collateral damage.
- Anon - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:31 pm:
I think Rauner doesn’t care about the collateral damage. He said he is the baddest enemy anybody can have. That alone says enough to me about Rauner.
- dawn - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:32 pm:
@a guy- “legislating”. However the rub is, the Guv can leverage his veto in order to balance out any portion of the bill he deems inappropriate. That’s how this all works.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:39 pm:
Well, if Madigan wants to louse things up, this is a great way to do it. Some of the apologists here are sick with the excuses they are making.
- Say It Ain't So!! - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:40 pm:
Yeah, he can veto the whole thing. But then he is on record as vetoing for the second time funding for disaster relief, breast and cervical cancer screenings, funding for assistance to children with disabilities, and Meals on Wheels for homebound elderly residents. I guess if that’s the type of compassion he wants to show… go for it. It will be brought up repeatedly if he ever runs for reelection or chooses to run for a higher office.
- Wordslinger - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:43 pm:
Graft? Where’s the graft?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:46 pm:
=== It will be brought up repeatedly if he ever runs for reelection===
The election is three years away.
It’ll be forgotten by then.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:08 pm:
==Some of the apologists here are sick with the excuses they are making.==
I’ve not seen any apologizing. Only a suggestion that he AV what he doesn’t like. Does it need to be a clean bill? Sure it does. But he can make it a “clean” bill if he wants all on his own.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:09 pm:
==This is brilliant on Madigan’s part. Rauner wants to inject poison pills in every bill, now he can have one.==
When it ruins the bill we can all blame Madigan for ruining it, just as we do Rauner in comments when that happens.
And Madigan can own responsibility for ruining all that funding for people who need it.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:13 pm:
===And Madigan can own responsibility for ruining all that funding for people who need it.===
- FKA -, with respect,
That response, and the Rauner “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… “, is exactly why the combative relationship exist. It’s up to the Governor to move off “winning the day” and snarky letters (which are enjoyable as much as unhelpful) and forge and cobble a working relationship.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:17 pm:
People often comment on governing and ==choosing==.
Right now, there is $5 billion heading to WIC, substance abuse treatment, homeless veterans and so on.
The only ==choice== to be made is whether Speaker Madigan meddles with that. If he chooses to leave this bipartisan, clean bill bipartisan and clean, many people will benefit. If he chooses to muddy the bill or try using it to hit the Governor, he jeopardizes what should be a simple ==win== for the state and many people.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:20 pm:
There was a clean bill.
Now there isn’t.
The Speaker made it muddy.
There’s $5B in Federal money being risked.
Everything else (while important) is beyond the scope of the true argument here.
The Speaker appears to be unable to pass a clean bill. That isn’t good for anyone.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:22 pm:
OW, also with great respect,
I think this is a chance for them to all do a simple and positive thing for the state, to take a step towards that working relationship. Cullerton brought it up, Rauner saw that it was a good thing and jumped on board without making any demands or trying to leverage it, and both parties can see this as a way to help people.
I do not think anyone has to ruin it or ==own== it as a failure, unless they start making unilateral demands and inserting poison pills. This is a chance for them to all own a ==victory== together, which is why the Madigan move concerns me.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:24 pm:
- A Guy -
Then the governor can teach “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… ” a lesson with an AV, something only a governor can do.
A budget, passed with a structured roll call months ago would’ve stopped all this. But, Union-Bustin’ needs a hero too. Hostages need to be held.
Governing is difficult. Rhetorically antagonizing makes it almost impossible.
- Huh? - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:25 pm:
One man’s poison is another man’s food.
I know from working for the State as well as county government, that there are many funds that require a state/local match on order to qualify for the federal funds.
Could it be that Mr. Madigan knows more about the funding requirements than the governor? Could it be that Mr. Madigan is trying to leverage even more federal money than just the straight pass through money?
As others have so well noted, the governor has the option of the AV. He can selectively approve parts of the bill and delete others. His choice.
Tactics are doing something when you know what to do. Strategy is doing something when you don’t know what to do.
The governor doesn’t know what to do, so all he can do is veto the bill out right.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:27 pm:
===… which is why the Madigan move concerns me.===
It concerns me too. Really concerns me.
I’m not rooting for this continuation in any form. Period.
- Ghost - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:31 pm:
Schnorf 12:23 comment. This is Madigan its probably all of that as the intended goal.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:35 pm:
=== Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:24 pm:
- A Guy -
Then the governor can teach “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… ” a lesson with an AV, something only a governor can do.===
Willy, c’mon. That’s an embarrassing response. A clean bill isn’t to me a “teaching moment”.
But it’s sure become a learning one. Our Speaker “can’t” pass a clean bill. That’s a very serious defect.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:36 pm:
===dawn - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 2:32 pm:
@a guy- “legislating”.===
Sorry Dawn. It was “legislated” already. Now it’s being negatively amended. Try again. Your answer is wrong.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:40 pm:
=== Our Speaker “can’t” pass a clean bill. That’s a very serious defect.===
Sometimes, the Tweets, the mocking letters, the “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… “, the $2 million Ad campaign, the lack of trust…
Sometimes, it comes back to bite those who refuse to do the job they’re elected to do.
Rauner ain’t “a babe in the woods” on this. Unless, unless you think using that AV makes Rauner a victim of the tool of the office. Kinda reapin’ - sowin’ thingy goin on(?)
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:41 pm:
“Our Speaker ‘can’t’ pass a clean bill.” As to Rauner can’t present a clean bill.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:44 pm:
Timmeh 1:13 - very, very well said. imho, Rauner has also been too quick in drawing the battle lines, and Madigan has been too slow in evolving from his battle hardened tactics.
They need to accept that no one can win via attrition, as they are both willing to wait each other out, but both would emerge wounded.
- Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:48 pm:
The Speaker muddied up a compromise position put forward by a fellow democrat that would have impacted the citizenry positively via access to federal dollars. Don’t muddy it up more by spinning this into something else. It is ugly, and uncaring politics that is all about demonstrating power. I don’t respect that. I respect the Senate’s attempt to do the right thing.
- Say It Ain't So!! - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 3:58 pm:
What is the Right Thing in regards to funding for disaster relief, breast and cervical cancer screenings, funding for assistance to children with disabilities, and Meals on Wheels for homebound elderly residents? Is the Right Thing to provide the funding necessary or is the Right Thing to continue to leave them hanging with no funding at all or is the Right Thing to cut their funding? If it should be funded, then why not now? Why continue to wait? Is waiting to fund these the Right Thing?
- Just Me - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:02 pm:
From last week’s blog:
A spokesman for the House Speaker said he wasn’t aware of any such plans. A source close to Madigan says there’s been no final decision. Madigan said yesterday that he would amend the bill, but indicated it would only include suggestions (from agencies and the governor’s office) for federal funding lines missing in the Senate’s bill.
They really need to keep that bill as clean as possible.
*** UPDATE *** Steve Brown just called and said he asked the Speaker about this rumor and Madigan said he didn’t know anything about it. “That’s news to us.”
Everybody needs to just calm the heck down and take a breath before firing at each other.
- Juvenal - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:02 pm:
It sounds like, just as with McPier, Rauner goofed again.
If they had managed to get the bill right the first time in the Senate, the Rauner administration wouldn’t have had to come to Madigan to ask for an amendment.
But once you open the door to amendments, the door is open not just to your changes.
This is Lawmaking 101.
- Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:04 pm:
Let the $5B in pass through dollars move. Don’t muddy it up. That’s the right thing. Argue and fight over the rest, but using political ploys and tactics that interfere with the pass through federal dollars doesn’t help anyone.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:06 pm:
==I’m not rooting for this continuation in any form. Period.==
I’m with you, Willy. Fully.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:15 pm:
=== The Speaker muddied up a compromise position put forward by a fellow democrat that would have impacted the citizenry positively via access to federal dollars. ===
There are a lot of citizenry still negatively affected by petty politics even if a clean bill passed. With most of the budget now operating under a continuing approp or it’s court order version, there is a sad likelihood that these folks will suffer for a much longer time.
Something has to be done to move things along. Trying to do something on this bill that Madigan didn’t negotiate doesn’t bother me. Being deceptive about it does bother me, but that is unfortunately SOP down here.
We’re not talking about a huge amount of GRF funding and not all the $5 billion in federal is a risked to be lost. Even if that was so, it would serve as a much needed pressure point to help get us out of budgetary purgatory.
Rauner doesn’t want to give Madigan a win so he’ll threaten a total veto and blame Madigan. Madigan doesn’t care because vetoes belong to the Governor. The Governor will get blamed by the constituencies regardless of Madigan’s amendment. Rauner can please some people with an Item Veto.
In a tinfoil hat comment, what would be even better if the governor called up the four tops and Da Mayor and fly them out to his Montana ranch and stay there until an agreement has been reached.
- Wordslinger - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:19 pm:
Lot of hysterics here. What’s the freak out about using the amendatory veto? There’s a reason it’s there.
The governor has already vetoed this federal money once before. Now he’s getting a second chance to get it right by using all the tools of his very powerful office.
He’s in the wrong line of work if he can’t take a little heat.
- dawn - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:22 pm:
@a guy–obviously legislating is still going on because the House is going to pass a bill with an amnendment that includes funding for children with disabilities and cervical cancer screenings.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:24 pm:
FKA and Willy, you can add me to that list.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:25 pm:
==because the House is going to pass a bill with an amnendment that includes funding for children with disabilities and cervical cancer screenings==
An amendment the Speaker’s spokesman recently denied would be occurring.
So, if Madigan gets to unilaterally add amendments, what does Rauner get to unilaterally add? A property tax freeze?
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:27 pm:
===dawn - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:22 pm:
@a guy–obviously legislating is still going on because the House is going to pass a bill with an amnendment that includes funding for children with disabilities and cervical cancer screenings.===
You’re absolutely right Dawn. Legislating is still going on…..when it shouldn’t be.
The $5B from the feds has a targeted purpose. It’s intent isn’t to leverage it for political purposes. It’s to get the money to the place it was appropriated for.
No matter what the rest of it’s for, noble or not, it has no place in this bill.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:35 pm:
===No matter what the rest of it’s for, noble or not, it has no place in this bill.===
Gov. Rauner will have the opportunity to Amendatory Veto, then continue the petty “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… “, while no one but Rauner has the ability to AV legislation.
What are you afraid of - A Guy -, it’s just an Amendatory Veto, pretty simple move by any Governor.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:38 pm:
=== What are you afraid of - A Guy -, it’s just an Amendatory Veto, pretty simple move by any Governor. ===
Tim Nuding can prepare the item veto message in his sleep. That’s presuming Rauner wants to utilize an Illinois expert.
- Wordslinger - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:44 pm:
–What are you afraid of A Guy–
Same thing every GOP legislator has been for 20 years — a tough vote, a heavy lift, accountability, actual governing.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:46 pm:
Willy and Norse.
Me? I’m not afraid of anything. What I find rather incredible and amusing is that you’re defending the Speaker who by all accounts here (CF), the foremost authority on truth and accuracy, lied through his teeth (and Mr. Brown) in stating that a clean bill was forthcoming.
Do you really think this is what the AV was meant for? Is there a great big partisan argument out there about the clean version of this bill that only you 2 have seen or heard?
We’re in the land of silly here. Dump the amendment and pass a clean bill. Isn’t that the best and most expedient way to do this?
Your AV argument excuses the Speaker from terrible legislative behavior. As worked up as the both of you get when it’s the other way around, can you reserve even a little contempt just to keep up appearances? lol
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:48 pm:
=== Wordslinger - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:44 pm:
–What are you afraid of A Guy–
Same thing every GOP legislator has been for 20 years — a tough vote, a heavy lift, accountability, actual governing.===
Except this wasn’t a tough vote or a heavy lift or even accountability or actually governing, O wise Slinger of Words.
It was a simple procedural vote.
Everyone should be afraid when you can’t even pass those. yikes.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:55 pm:
(Heavy sigh, closes eyes)
- A Guy -,
Rauner’s reaction to the move?
“Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… ”
The Rauner Press Shop is continuing the pettiness. There wasn’t outrage at the Speaker keeping his word, no. The outrage is to “win the day” against, you guessed it, “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… ”
I have NO time for a response that is so canned, it misses a mark as big as a Trashcan Van.
So…
If the response is “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… ” IS the tact, not the framing of the discussion towards actual governing… then I’m going to be in the camp;
All sides stop.
Be a Governor, AV the bill.
Stop the unneeded rhetoric forcing the governor to have to be in a position to AV things that are, you guessed it, tough.
Enough with ignoring what is “interpreted” by you - A Guy - and ignoring the verbiage the Governor’s Press Shop is using to ignore a slam dunk, but pushing to exacerbating and trying to “win the day”.
That’s part and parcel as to the “why” this is happening, and choices have consequences.
So, “enough”..,
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 4:58 pm:
=== Do you really think this is what the AV was meant for? ===
No. The AV was meant to correct minor problems in substantive legislation. Thompson was the first to use it to do major revisions of bills.
Now, this is exactly why an ITEM VETO or REDUCTION VETO was created. There’s nothing in the constitution that says the governor can’t use it if the appropriation item was inserted because of political games or inserted after some misrepresentation.
Guy, you’re missing the point. Attacking Madigan may make Rauner and his supporters feel giddy, but it doesn’t move the FY 16 budget football forward.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:01 pm:
And apologies - Norseman -
Item Veto, not AV.
See why I would’ve needed you around. The gaffes I woulda made.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:01 pm:
Willy:
Amendatory veto and move on.
- Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:02 pm:
-OW-
“Enough” is correct. Your spin on this one fails. Let the Cullerton bill move cleanly. Don’t muddy it up. Should have listened to him on pension reform too. Rauner wasn’t even on the scene then.
…”scene”
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:03 pm:
- Lincoln Lad -,
Are you afraid of an Item Veto?
Why?
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:06 pm:
Willy, no problems. As a former staffer, I’m just a little stickler on procedures.
- Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:07 pm:
Your fellow leader has sought to break the ice. The gov embraced it. Trying to force an item veto is taking middle ground and trying to score political points. That is not the fiduciary responsibility of an elected official. Stop playing games.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:11 pm:
- Lincoln Lad -,
Just think…
Had the Press Shop said that, instead of starting with “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… ”
Rauner’s Crew framed their response at the political level, not the governmental level as you did.
Big. Difference.
Very telling too.
So, now the Governor can Veto the parts he doesn’t want… the blame “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls… ”
Ugh.
- Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:22 pm:
Weren’t they reacting to the Speaker amending the bill?
Didn’t the gov move to accept the Cullerton bill?
Aren’t John Cullerton and the Gov trying to protect the interests of the State in this specific case?
If you agree with those three - who’s left to muddle it?
Can’t defend this Willy.
And BTW, I don’t like the way either side has handled the budget process, that’s why you don’t muddle a positive step forward to make some progress.
It’s a mistake.
- A guy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:23 pm:
The press shop?
Are we really going to get caught up there? Oy.
Fellas, and Ladies, I don’t think there’s anyone “giddy” about this as a big W for anyone. It isn’t. It’s a simple pass through procedural vote that shoulda just happened. 2 leaders and their entire chamber got it. Didn’t they?
Now this. Not giddy at all.
- RNUG - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:23 pm:
== There’s $5B in Federal money being risked. ==
Madigan is showing Rauner what REAL leverage is.
- Enviro - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:29 pm:
Voters can see that Madigan is doing the right thing by helping the poor, the disabled, and the elderly.
“The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.”
― Franklin D. Roosevelt
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:29 pm:
===Madigan is showing Rauner what REAL leverage is.===
- RNUG - “wins”
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 5:39 pm:
I’m not rooting for this continuation in any form. Period.
If it can’t be understood what I’m saying in regards to the “why”, I can’t help you.
The Governor can now Veto the other parts.
It’s up to him.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 7:01 pm:
==Madigan is showing Rauner what REAL leverage is==
Respectfully, some here are supporting the exploitation of this for leverage (not necessarily @RNUG, but some other comments). That mindset is what has gotten things to this point.
If all we care about is leverage in every situation, this standoff will continue will each of them trading blows for months. This is not about leverage. This is about a clean, simple way of helping the needy that is unnecessarily being exploited by one person even after his office publicly stated this would not happen.
When leverage is more important than helping people, you are losing perspective.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 7:05 pm:
- FKA -,
Speaking for me,
This is a “moment” albeit I’m not pleased how this all has been going, where Madigan is showing what real leverage is…
… by forcing Rauner to make a choice, a real choice.
Rauner’s U-Turns just fizzled into bluffs in the end, or worse, with McPier, a lack of governing by not understanding what consequences can happen with an action.
I’m far, far from cheering, but this is the real deal leverage. Rauner’s has been leverage, until it wasn’t.
- Norseman - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 7:12 pm:
=== When leverage is more important than helping people, you are losing perspective. ===
FKA, I’m glad to see this is your view. Then you’ll join us in condemning Rauner’s efforts to hold the remaining budget hostage to achieve his anti-union initiatives.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 7:18 pm:
As Dem State Rep Anna Moeller said last year
==And I know that it sounds good to bash Mike Madigan. I’m not a huge fan of his either. I think we can all agree he has served for far too long in the Illinois House.==
It is beginning to appear she is right.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 7:23 pm:
- FKA -, with respect,
http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/elgin-courier-news/news/ct-ecn-moeller-quote-st-0806-20150810-story.html
“I don’t agree with Speaker Madigan on everything — just as I don’t agree with my husband on everything either — but I do agree with his efforts and support him during this budget impasse to fight for worker’s rights and middle class families, funding for senior services, the disabled, health care for those who need it and affordable child care in Illinois,” (Rep. Anna) Moeller said.
More recently. I response to that quote.
With respect.
- Wordslinger - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 7:24 pm:
I’m not seeing leverage here.
Rauner has already vetoed all this stuff once before for being “unbalanced.” House GOP members already have voted “no” or “present” on this for presumably the same reasons.
What’s the difference now? They can say the same things.
So if this amended bill is passed and goes through conference as is, the governor uses item or reduction veto and shapes the bill as exactly as he wants it.
Every governor since Ogilvie has done that without going apey. It’s tremendous gubernatorial power.
Why the hysterics?
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 7:35 pm:
OW, I hope my 7:34 comment shows.
As for Rep Moeller, I just read that story before sharing that quote. It is good she walked that back some. Thanks for posting it.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 7:40 pm:
- FKA -,
The only reason I actually did put that in s comment, was the point that this schism, between Madigan and Rauner, has had many people recalibrate and that has made the divide between two distinct groups clearer…. and the gap between them, even wider. If it’s “us or them” like this type of maneuver, where will common ground be found in the end?
Hope that clarifies my thoughts and intent. Respectfully.
- JackD - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 7:47 pm:
Wordslinger: why all the hysterics? He doesn’t want any personal responsibility for the hardships suffered by those being denied funding. I wonder if he would object to their being called hostages.
- Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 8:56 pm:
I would expect him to veto it, and point out he was prepared to sign the original bill put forth by Democratic Senate President John Cullerton. I think he’ll then step back two or three paces and harden his resolve to not compromise. The opportunity for something positive will be lost, the likelihood of compromise diminished, and as others have clearly said in other posts - it will be because we are playing politics with the lives and needs of others in a battle of wills and egos.
- Wordslinger - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 9:28 pm:
LL, that would be the dumbest thing possible to do.
The governor will use his item and reduction veto to craft the bill however he wants it, like every governor since Ogilivie as done. That ain’t rocket science.
- Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Aug 11, 15 @ 11:42 pm:
OW, it is late now, but thanks for expanding on what and why you’re thinking what you do on this. Buenas noches.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Aug 12, 15 @ 6:49 am:
- FKA -,
Glad I was able to clarify, and thanks for the kind words.
OW
- Formerly Known As... - Wednesday, Aug 12, 15 @ 10:16 am:
Glad you saw that, OW. Cannoli all around!