* We can debate all day whether the absent Rep. Ken Dunkin was the solely responsible Democrat for the defeat of AFSCME’s “no strike” bill yesterday.
But he most surely was that person when it came to the bill which would’ve rolled back the governor’s administrative rule to dramatically slash the state’s child care assistance program. Gov. Rauner’s rule will block 90 percent of new program intakes by, among other things, lowering the maximum allowable income to just half of the federal poverty level.
All House Republicans stuck with Gov. Rauner yesterday and the bill received just 70 votes. So, if Dunkin had been doing the job he was elected to do, the bill would’ve passed, and it also probably would’ve been pretty tough to keep all the HGOPs off of that roll call when they saw it had enough support.
* From Sen. Toi Hutchinson’s Facebook page…
SB570 failed in the House today by 1 vote. 90% of previously eligible families are now without childcare subsidies. A parent who works full time at minimum wage now makes too much to qualify for childcare help. Keep in mind that the only way you qualify is if you work or are going to school. It failed today by 1 vote. My heart is breaking. I have no words. Thank you Representative Jehan Gordon Booth for being my partner in this. We have to live to fight another day.
As she pointed out, the bill is now on Postponed Consideration, so they can vote on it again. However, considering how difficult it was to get 70 Democrats to town yesterday (subscribers know more), without some GOP support this thing is probably going to remain in limbo for a while.
* I asked Emily Miller of Voices for Illinois Children and folks at some other groups why they didn’t put out a statement on the bill’s defeat yesterday and to please send me something I could use today. Here’s Emily’s response…
Hi Rich-
Sorry I didn’t get anything out earlier. I think that I was totally blown away by what happened, and I really did not see the failure of the child care bill coming. I never expected that child care would become such a partisan issue, and I needed to take a beat to figure out where we go from here.
The child care assistance program is a linchpin of the welfare to work program. It’s something that Republicans and Democrats have agreed on for decades. It’s common sense- If people to go to work and move off of welfare, you have to give them the tools they need to be able to do that. That means they have access to safe, quality child care.
Now we are left with the governor’s cuts intact. 90% of new applicants to the child care program will continue to be denied.
We are going to keep up the fight to get the governor’s office to roll back the devastating child care cuts on their own. We are going to continue to show lawmakers and members of the public that the cuts are ruining lives.
Child care is a necessary tool to keep low and middle income families out of poverty. We hope that lawmakers will come to their senses and pass a bill that saves child care in Illinois.
Emily Miller
Voices for Illinois Children
* And here’s the response from Illinois Action for Children…
Illinois Action for Children is disappointed and frustrated that SB 570, Amendment #1 fell one vote short of the required 71 votes yesterday in the House. The bill was introduced in response to Governor Rauner using his executive powers to enact emergency rules to significantly restrict access to the state’s IDHS CCAP; a program designed to support working parents’ access to quality care for their young children. The changes that went into effect on July 1st eliminate access for an estimated 90% of families otherwise eligible - families who are in desperate need for assistance to pay for child care when they are working or in an education or training program.
While we hope to work with Rep. Gordon-Booth to bring this bill back to the House for another vote, its failure yesterday means that parents who finally receive a long-sought job opportunity will be forced to turn it down, school-age children will likely go home alone instead of to a quality Afterschool program, and child care programs who are losing on average 25% of their enrollment to children aging out of the program (and going to school) will continue to close classrooms and programs. The infrastructure to deliver care that Illinois has invested millions of state dollars - in combination with federal funds - and which employs thousands of people will continue to crumble as a result of this failed vote.
It is a sad day when low-income children and working families are being held hostage in the Governor’s quest for his ‘turnaround agenda’ that has resulted in the worst budget impasse this state has seen in many decades. Child care has always been a program with bipartisan support because legislators know, regardless of party affiliation, that investing in our state’s youngest learners has an immediate return on investment for their working parents, and has a lifelong impact on a child’s success in school and in life. Investing in our children is vitally important to this state’s economy and its future.
I also asked Mrs. Rauner’s Ounce of Prevention Fund for comment, but haven’t heard back.
*** UPDATE 1 *** From Ireta Gasner, assistant director of Illinois Policy at Ounce of Prevention…
We are disappointed that the House of Representatives failed to pass SB570, legislation that would have reversed harmful changes to the Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP) put into place through emergency rulemaking by the governor’s administration. Vulnerable children and families were once again held hostage by the budget impasse and political stalemate in Springfield. We commend Senator Hutchinson and Representative Gordon-Booth for their leadership on this issue vital to children’s healthy development and our state’s economic future. Fortunately there are still several opportunities for our elected officials to do the right thing for working families:
1. First and foremost, we encourage Governor Rauner to rescind the eligibility changes that are locking 90% of previously eligible families out of the system.
2. We ask the legislature to seek another opportunity to legislatively rescind the eligibility changes.
3. We call upon the General Assembly and governor to work together to approve a fair, fully-funded budget that adequately funds vital programs like CCAP.
4. We urge the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules to vote against making the emergency rules permanent.
Every day this continues, families are being forced to choose between providing for or caring for their children, children are not receiving the quality early experiences they need to thrive, centers are unfilled or closing, and employees are losing their jobs. This must stop. We call upon all our elected officials, from the Governor to the General Assembly, to ensure the viability of families, communities and our state
*** UPDATE 2 *** Rep. Jehan Gordon…
What was often viewed as neutral ground in the budget making process, the Childcare Assistance Program, has unfortunately become a political football. It is incredibly disheartening to know that we could not get the requisite votes to allow thousands of poor, working families across the state access to childcare. Denying access to 90% of those previously eligible is just not the Illinois that I know. Falling one vote short is just unacceptable. We can do better. For that reason, Senator Hutchinson and I will continue to fight for working families, primarily women head of household, for their opportunity at one day having the American Dream.
- Dr X - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:25 pm:
Get those ads up and running now and pin it on Rauner.
So where was the Dem leadership in all of this?
- Touré's Latte - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:30 pm:
Does Rauner expect to add or lose seats next year? The ads are already writing themselves.
- Liberty - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:30 pm:
“We need to build on the results of the 1996 reforms and continue to move welfare recipients into jobs and off the welfare rolls. This is especially important for single women and mothers, who continue to rely on welfare and fear that they cannot find a job or enter a training program because they need to care for their children. We endorse President Bush’s plan to extend the benefits of welfare reform by strengthening work requirements and promoting healthy marriages, and offering training, transportation, and child care services to help people become self-sufficient. Every American deserves a chance to know the pride of earning a paycheck and providing for his or her family.”
Source: 2004 Republican Party Platform, p. 82 , Sep 1, 2004
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:31 pm:
===As she pointed out, the bill is now on Postponed Consideration, so they can vote on it again. However, considering how difficult it was to get 70 Democrats to town yesterday (subscribers know more), without some GOP support this thing is probably going to remain in limbo===
… As Dunkin took picures in New York.
Like I said, it’s not going to be Madigan doling out punishment, it’s that Dunkin is going to be a pariah on his own, and Caucus justice will happen… naturally.
- Wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:32 pm:
On the bright side, there were no GOP “present” votes, so gutting what was once a landmark, bipartisan, welfare-to-work program is apparently something they all strongly believe in now.
- slow down - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:32 pm:
I have to assume the child care was not on her mind when Diana Rauner told us that Bruce had no social agenda.
- Linus - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:34 pm:
It truly is stunning that Repubs, who once championed this commonsense welfare-to-work approach, now are retreating from it in droves. They once said they wanted to cut back on cash assistance and instead promote work among poorer folks, who want to work. Now, it seems they’d rather the poor folks lose their jobs entirely. Once again: So much for the Governor’s claims to want to put more people to work. And so much for the similar claims of his legislative allies.
- old-pol - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:35 pm:
Keep in mind with Cook and Chicago tax increases hitting next year,Rauner will be even more popular for holding the line on taxes. The taxpayer revolt is just starting.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:37 pm:
Another win for the tax payers!
- Formerpol - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:38 pm:
“Agreed upon for decades”. That’s the problem right there. None of this is sustainable now. Everyone has to suffer cuts, no matter how great a program is or how many people it saves. That’s just reality.
The social safety net as we know it cannot continue. There are not enough tax dollars to be extracted from the working people in Illinois. Deal with this reality.
- burbanite - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:38 pm:
Yup, say what you will about 1229, Dunkin is going to have to answer for this one, no question. A sad day indeed.
- Juvenal - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:41 pm:
Congratulations, Maze Jackson.
- @MisterJayEm - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:41 pm:
“Everyone has to suffer cuts, no matter how great a program is or how many people it saves.”
Everyone will not suffer. Those with the most will not suffer. To pretend otherwise is the height of dishonesty.
– MrJM
- Demoralized - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:42 pm:
==Everyone has to suffer cuts==
Budgets are about choices. You don’t have to cut everyone. You prioritize spending.
I have to wonder about people such as yourself who so flippantly dismiss programs such as this and then tell people to just deal with it. What happened in some of your lives that you have so little compassion or caring for others? I see this attitude far too often and I just end up shaking my head and feeling sorry for people who have those beliefs.
- Precinct Captain - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:44 pm:
==but haven’t heard back.==
The Chair must not be around to talk in Diana’s stead.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:44 pm:
==or how many people it saves==
Also, do you know how asinine that sounds?
“Hey, this program saves people but sorry, tough luck. Can’t afford it.” Do you even read what you say?
- Democratic Response - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:44 pm:
- Formerpol - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:38 pm:
“Agreed upon for decades”. That’s the problem right there. None of this is sustainable now. Everyone has to suffer cuts, no matter how great a program is or how many people it saves. That’s just reality.
The social safety net as we know it cannot continue. There are not enough tax dollars to be extracted from the working people in Illinois. Deal with this reality.
Public problems call for public solutions. This isn’t about the “social safety net”. This is about how our society functions (or doesn’t function) in, to use your words, reality.
Programs like the CCAP are cheaper than the alternative. Incarceration, drug treatment, cops, public housing, all cost more money than letting someone go to work, and have their children go to a safe child care facility.
You may not like it, but that’s the real reality. Your right-wing talking points do nothing to solve the PUBLIC problems.
- Precinct Captain - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:45 pm:
Let’s cut through the density: THESE CUTS PUT PEOPLE OUT OF WORK! There will be less people working and less people taxes because of the governor’s actions.
- 360 Degree TurnAround - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:46 pm:
Does Governor Rauner have a comment on the failure to pass SB 570? Maybe something like this “We’d like to thank House Republican legislators for taking a courageous stance in stepping on poor children or not voting while daycare is being taken away from poor children.” Rauner continues, “Poor kids don’t need publicly assisted daycare, their parents should hire a nanny like my responsible rich friends”.
- sparky791 - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:46 pm:
Still waiting for the shared sacrifice from the upper 1%.
- Stuff Happens - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:49 pm:
This probably isn’t the place to say this, but I’m not actually sure what is.
How about allowing state employees to be licensed in the foster system through DCFS? The current laws say it’s a conflict of interest, but the requirement to go through a private agency isn’t always a feasible one (and sometimes costs a lot of money).
If they want to get kids in homes and ready for adoption before they age out, maybe revisiting some of these limitations would help.
- Wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:51 pm:
– A parent who works full time at minimum wage now makes too much to qualify for child care help.–
They should have taken up tennis as a child.
- OneMan - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:52 pm:
“everyone has to suffer”
Fundamentally those who use services will suffer most obviously when those cuts occur, those who don’t use those services don’t suffer the same way.
Granted everyone suffers some because of issues that occur because of cuts that impact the bigger society, but someone who gets a state subsidy for childcare is going to suffer a lot more for these cuts than I do.
People who use less government services and/or get less direct government assistance suffer less.
- William - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:54 pm:
Kudos to Emily and IAC for their professionalism….which could be a teaching/learning moment for Maze Jackson…probably not, but what do I know?
- Anonymous - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:56 pm:
Maybe they should be responsible, and not have kids, if they can not afford them!
- Juvenal - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:58 pm:
Congratulations are in order too for Leader Durkin.
I don’t think Tom Cross could have managed to convince every single Republican to vote against restoring child care.
The question is, what do they do now?
Because if those cuts are not restored, there are gonna be a lot of unhappy people in a lot of Republican districts.
Not to mention a lot of unhappy child care providers closing down their day care centers…meaning that even the people who can afford care will lose it.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 1:58 pm:
===Maybe they should be responsible===
Going back to school and/or work is responsible.
Also, are you suddenly pro-choice?
- Crispy - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:00 pm:
As was pointed out here the other day, don’t the Rauner administration’s new rules violate federal guidelines? Are court challenges on the horizon (and if so, how much will the legal wrangling cost the state that “can’t afford” to lend a hand to poor people who want to work, and their kids?).
- late to the party - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:00 pm:
Not to start rumors, but I think Anonymous is really Rep. Ives.
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:02 pm:
The main problem I had with yesterday’s arguments about CCAP and “DON” scores was that, as always, there’s no wiggle room. It’s either A or B. Cuts or no cuts. Greg Harris and Jehan Gordon-Booth (with a previous assist from Toi Hutchison) stood there and claimed there couldn’t be cuts and that they didn’t want to make reforms. That’s not a principled stand. That’s just trying to keep the bus running even when it’s running on fumes. Greg Harris admitted on the floor that other states are trying to reform their home care programs and then in the same breath basically said he wasn’t interested in seeking similar reforms or changes. Seriously?!
- Linus - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:04 pm:
== Maybe they should be responsible, and not have kids, if they can not afford them! ==
There are a million things not quite right about this overly simplistic viewpoint. Here’s one of them: More than a few folks could totally “afford” to have kids a few years ago, before the economy went to hell. Some have lost jobs, were out of work for months or years, and feel relatively lucky to have been found new gigs - albeit with less earning power than before. Suddenly, they can’t “afford” kids the way they once did, and child care assistance is a life preserver.
If you don’t think this happens, or that it could happen to you or your relatives or friends or neighbors, just hang around a while.
- Tournaround Agenda - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:04 pm:
@Formerpol: The people of Illinois can’t afford to fund programs designed to keep people in the workforce and off welfare? Penny wise, pound foolish.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:05 pm:
==Maybe they should be responsible, and not have kids==
This support is to allow people to be able to work. I’m sure if they didn’t work you’d be shouting “get a job.” So, a program is out there to help them work and now you are shouting “don’t have kids.” Do you have anything whatsoever that is constructive to say or are you going to continue with your ridiculous drive bys?
- Cassandra - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:14 pm:
I’m surprised that the cuts were so draconian. A cut affecting, say,5 or 10 percent of current recipients would have been more understandable, although there will always be those (mostly Democrats) who claim that no social service cuts are acceptable, ever, no way, never. They may actually poison the discourse with their intractability.
Is there another part of this story? After all, there will be an income tax increase at least on individuals-both parties are in favor. Will some of the new monies be used to restore some cuts. We really won’t know until we have a budget, I suppose.
- Buzzie - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:15 pm:
Diana must be proud.
- benniefly2 - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:18 pm:
So a single parent who can’t afford rent and childcare on a full time, low wage job now has to quit and go on TANF. How is that saving the State of Illinois any money? It gets better, though.
According to the CCAP calculator, comically, if you are just on TANF , it looks like you are now considered to make a low enough wage so as to be eligible again for the State Child Care subsidy for when you have to go out and work your 20 hours a week or whatever to maintain TANF eligibility.
Brilliant!!!
- reasonable - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:22 pm:
watch for MJM in the shadows, yesterday was no fluke, i have no clue what he is doing but you know he is up to something.
- Mama - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:25 pm:
“So where was the Dem leadership in all of this?” The Dem leadership provided those 70 votes. How many votes did the Republican leadership provide? The answer is a big fat 0.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:26 pm:
Team Sleep - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:02 pm:
===The main problem I had with yesterday’s arguments about CCAP and “DON” scores was that, as always, there’s no wiggle room. It’s either A or B. Cuts or no cuts. Greg Harris and Jehan Gordon-Booth (with a previous assist from Toi Hutchison) stood there and claimed there couldn’t be cuts and that they didn’t want to make reforms. ===
You must really be SLEEP! I clearly remember Gordon-Booth saying let’s look at this issue in a bi-partisan way. Let’s reform it the right way, not through emergency rule. Wake up Team Sleep.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:27 pm:
- reasonable -,
Madigan didn’t have 71, he cut his loses, put the HGOP on the record.
That’s it.
Geez Louise, get a grip
- Lincoln Lad - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:28 pm:
Dunkin takes a hit on 570, but not on the labor override. If both were called again and Dunkin was added to the mix, 570 gets to 71. Labor gets to 69. MJM trying to put this on Dunkin is weak and not worthy of what once was the most powerful man in Illinois. That is slipping away in front of our eyes.
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:28 pm:
Anon - perhaps you and I were listening to different debates/arguments.
- Mama - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:30 pm:
“Maybe they should be responsible, and not have kids, if they can not afford them!” The difference between the ‘Haves’ and the ‘Have nots’ is Birth control pills.
- cdog - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:30 pm:
==The infrastructure to deliver care that Illinois has invested millions of state dollars - in combination with federal funds - and which employs thousands of people will continue to crumble as a result of this failed vote.==
…and still investing in my dear tax payer friends who are so black-hearted.
Check out the ExcelerateIllinois.com That is entirely funded by your taxpayer dollars. It has helped 1000s of children, families, teachers, etc., but I know that means nothing to your personal immediate needs.
Mr. Miller. Your point about are conservatives now Pro-Choice is a direct hit.
I really hope that Mr. Dunkin is ashamed of himself. His selfish action lacked any consciousness of moral responsibility to his “team.” He must have some ego.
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:30 pm:
Anon - also, their press conference on Tuesday included mostly rhetoric. At least that’s how I heard it.
- reasonable - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:30 pm:
if the dems had provided all the votes then the republicans would be off the hook, they provided a lot of votes but the GOP has to come forward when they don’t it shows how extreme they are and all the cuts are on them. the fact that madigan and those that he controls did not get it done and rauner and those that he controls stayed together and killed it is another interesting plot.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:31 pm:
Team Sleep… Just go pull the transcript. You will find what those of us listening know.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:32 pm:
===madigan and those that he controls ===
“Durkin and those he controls for Rauner”
Better
- reasonable - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:36 pm:
either way, i am not convinced that MJM messed something up and those votes yesterday are leading up to something.
- @MisterJayEm - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:39 pm:
“I also asked Mrs. Rauner’s Ounce of Prevention Fund for comment, but haven’t heard back.”
I hope you’re not holding your breath, Rich.
– MrJM
- MurMan - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:41 pm:
I swear, a nuclear bomb could go off in Chicago and there would be people on this blog that would say it’s all part of some grand Madigan power play and that we should watch for developments to see how it will help the Speaker. Dude is not all powerful
- steve schnorf - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:41 pm:
This had to be a far tougher vote for the House Republican caucus than 1229. They stuck together, potentially to the political harm of many of them, far more than 1229 might cause. I hate this particular cut, but too many of us on here dislike cuts to anything, including taxes. Someone earlier said we have to prioritize cuts, and generally I agree. But as shown in the exercise that Rich occasionally gives us, we normally can’t find a billion dollars in cuts that harms no one that we care about.
I was one of Governor Edgar’s staff who worked hard on this initiative: we considered it a vital part of welfare reform, and I think it still is. There was Republican support in both houses of the GA.
But we can’t just cut nothing. So, if not this, what then? Governor Rauner is forcing us to confront something we have too long avoided facing. It’s not pleasant, is it? I personally doubt that the Governor enjoys it any more than the rest of us. We keep saying, “do your job, govern”.
Well, this is governing, I believe governing more responsibly that we frequently have seen. And, eventually there will a budget. That action will give all time to re-evaluate what will have to be cut, and what might be spared the ax by bringing in new revenue. But don’t misunderstand, at the end, there will be cuts and those cuts will harm things many of us will wish could be spared. As I have said for years, not whether there will be pain, but how much, of what kind, and how will it be apportioned?
- Austin Blvd - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:42 pm:
It would be outrageous to blame Dunkin’ and let the Rauner/Radogno/Durkin’ Republicans off the hook.
To blame one and remain silent about the GOP members who don’t show up to vote or vote No or Present is outrageous.
- cdog - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:44 pm:
CCAP has weaknesses that could be fixed.
I personally do not agree with “relative care” except in 2nd or 3rd shift situations where there may not be openings in licensed homes or centers.
If “relative care” was discontinued, there would be many more disadvantaged children receiving quality early education. How much of the CCAP budget goes to non-licensed care? That would be an interesting number.
The differences ARE PROFOUND between a child going to Kindergarten that has pre-school experiences, and the child who has been hanging out on the couch.
The more high-quality young people we as a society can produce the better our economic outlook is.
- Austin Blvd - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:44 pm:
To blame Dunkin only is like blaming a player who dropped the last pass in a football game on a close loss.
Wrong mindset.
Time for GOP to step up.
- Clodhopper - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:45 pm:
Not only will there be less people working and paying taxes with the childcare assistant program being cut, same will apply if state employees are laid off, wages cut, on strike or whatever the outcome will be. No not everyone will suffer, but unless you have a crystal ball you never know who might need to be saved by the safety net. Just a thought…
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:50 pm:
MurMan +1
- Archiesmom - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:50 pm:
This was the saddest, most infuriating thing about yesterday. I was pretty much speechless. I hope Jehan and Greg are joining Toi in holding Dunkin responsible and making him feel some pain. Because a whole lot of kids and families will.
- reasonable - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:51 pm:
MJM does not need help and does not care what anybody thinks of him, but he has a plan and it may be right in line with what Schnorf is saying.
- Vanessa - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:52 pm:
” Maybe they should be responsible, and not have kids, if they can not afford them!” ——
Seriously??? This has to be the most ignorant thing I have seen today.
Just because you are financially stable and don’t plan on going broke any time soon doesn’t mean that the rest of the world is that way. Yeah you should plan for children, but what happens when you or your significant other loses a job? What then? Give your child to someone who can “afford” one?
- Is it just me? - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 2:58 pm:
I think I’ll use similar logic … I’ll quit my job so I can save all that money I’ve been spending on gas to get to and from work. That ought to work out to a net win, right? Just think of the savings!
- Niblets - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:05 pm:
This vote and some of the comments seem to be lacking any sense of compassion. I hope that those who would oppose this type of help can learn of compassion in the future. Most of us need some help at some time.
- Austin Blvd - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:09 pm:
Archiesmom-
Why do you insist on holding Madigan and Dunkin responsible when a whole caucus of Republican legislators voted No or weenied-out and didn’t vote at all.
You sound like the editor of the Chgo Trib or the owner of the Illinois Pollyanna institute.
- Arizona Bob - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:09 pm:
Why wasn’t there a “Dave” moment here? You know, the movie of a person impersonating the President where he sat down with his accountants and congressional leaders and found low value cuts in order to save homeless shelter funding?
Where were the “children lobbyists” in finding other places to cut in order to save these programs? Oh, I know. they were lunching with the education, trial lawyer and road lobbyists.
Couldn’t step on their toes, could they?
It’s time these lobbyists need to fight for their priorities instead of just trying to stick it to taxpayers.
But that would require real, insightful thinking and work instead of emotional pleas, wouldn’t it?
Perhaps that’s too much to ask.
Of course, “Voices” is more of a union advocacy rather than a children’s advocacy group (unions and the orgs they control pay their bills, just like Martire’s CTBA group).
I guess fighting for the kids in spending priorities would conflict with union interests, so the kids get kicked to the street….
- Midway Gardens - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:11 pm:
Rep Ives pushed for some verification that the parents were not able to take financial responsibility before the taxpayers are asked to do so. That seems reasonable. Well, to me not to the Democrats.
Listening to the override session yesterday, I lost a lot of respect for the them. Smiddy claiming the AFSCME bill had nothing to do with Rauner being governor, to the belief that a financial transaction tax would bring the state billions and solve all our problems. Incredible responses, either not willing to admit or really not knowing what the costs of the programs are. They didn’t seem to care what anything costs.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:11 pm:
===Why wasn’t there a “Dave” moment here? You know, the movie of a person impersonating the President where he sat down with his accountants and congressional leaders and found low value cuts in order to save homeless shelter funding?===
Because “Dave” is a movie?
- Austin Blvd - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:14 pm:
Dave? Dave’s not here.
- Archiesmom - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:18 pm:
Austin Bob, you have no idea who I am or what I believe, and obviously don’t read my comments on this site. And you certainly misconstrued my comment.
- Earnest - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:19 pm:
Schnorf, I think you’re too glass-half-full in calling this responsible governing. Responsible governing would have been presenting a budget with real numbers or engaging on the budget rather than hold hostages.
My thought in terms of Republicans taking what might be an unpopular vote, which could be used against them in the next election: if a tree falls in the forest and has $20 million to drown it out in other noise, does it matter that it fell? Democrats will not only be outspent in the general, but maybe even in their primaries.
- slow down - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:22 pm:
Well I guess Diana Rauner has done her job now that her organization has released a statement critical of this cut. What more could she do? It’s not like she sold the rest of us on the idea that Bruce has no social agenda.
- Austin Blvd - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:23 pm:
Archiesmom-
Just keyed off your last comment. Sorry to misconstrue.
- Arizona Bob - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:25 pm:
A good idea, whether it comes from a union advocate in Oswego or a movie, is still a good idea.
A movie is really no different from a book or other means of making people think about solutions to problems, or ways to make things better.
Watch Fritz Lang’s “Metropolis” some time. It’s incredibly insightful about social issues and prescient about labor foolishly striking out in anger and hurting those closest to them. Too bad the rioters in Chicago, LA, and Baltimore never studied it.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:26 pm:
==Rep Ives pushed for some verification that the parents were not able to take financial responsibility before the taxpayers are asked to do so==
Umm, that’s sort of what the eligibility determination is for. That’s just a silly comment.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:28 pm:
AZ Bob:
I know it’s difficult for you but not everything is related to the union and not everything is corrupt.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:29 pm:
AZ Bob:
Isn’t “Dave” a liberal? lol
- Chicago Cynic - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:29 pm:
This is one of many disgusting and heartless outcomes of the governor’s strategy. I think Ounce needs to hire someone really, really, really close to the governor (like a bedmate) to get him to reverse course here.
- I Care - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:35 pm:
I manage the ONLY child care center in the state of Illinois in which 100% of our children are on the CCAP program. We have been at full capacity since 1972. That tells me that there is a very real need for this program.
The 90% cut is devastating. Just since July 1st, I had to tell 19 potential clients that they made too much money for the program….including a student that worked 20 hours a week at minimum wage. That is right, she made too much money.
To the person that made the comment regarding being “responsible and don’t have kids if you can’t afford them.’ That is, by far the most ridiculous statement on this entire thread. I currently have a mom with three children enrolled. She and her husband “afforded” children and she was a stay at home mom…..well, until he left her for another woman and refuses to pay child support until the court tells him he has to. Please tell me what irresponsible thing this woman did?
- Mod Dem - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:35 pm:
Probably not popular position but unionizing child care workers under SEIU under Blagojevich made a good program under the great leadership of Linda Saterfield a political program with both parties. That I respectfully submit is why you now see partisanship play out. People have right to unionize, but to paraphrase Oswego Willy, unionizing has consequences
- @MisterJayEm - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:36 pm:
The manifesto of Mrs. Rauner’s Ounce of Prevention Fund:
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:37 pm:
Steve - your post was much more succinct and well-put than mine. Thank you.
- Midway Gardens - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:38 pm:
Demoralized, I guess the representative is silly then. And the Democratic response wasn’t that it is in the eligibility guidelines (or even could be), it was some nonsense about the fathers being off at war. Taking personal responsibility and furthering education and work is a good thing. Making sure that Fathers take financial responsibility before coming to the taxpayers is a good thing too.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:39 pm:
===I guess the representative is silly then===
Well, there is that…
Just sayin
lol
- burbanite - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:40 pm:
Mr. Shnorf-Doesn’t this cut actually cost more though? Seems to me the loss of jobs for both those losing the day care and those providing the day care and the other subsidies they will need due to that loss of income will cost much more than the day care cost itself. Unlike politicians I do not think in terms of election cycles, I like to think long term and there I see a huge loss, a loss of potential upward mobility for the parents who are gaining education and work experience, as well as, the children themselves who will lose the prek preparation and who will see their parents at home wringing their hands wondering where the next meal will come from rather than seeing their folks head out to work every day. There has to be a better place to cut. Like all the levels of gov’t, duplicative services etc. I hear very little discussion on these types of cuts.
- Anon - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:40 pm:
Also lost in the cacophony over AFSCME was the failed override of the veto of HB 3507 (which Dunkin sponsored) despite only eight legislators opposing the bill. The result is that troubled, likely abused, and poorly educated wards of the state would be left to fend for themselves once they turn 18.
Most compassionate in the country.
- Responsa - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:43 pm:
Did anybody here besides me read Schnorf’s comment @2:41? It is an essential, thought provoking and important post.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:43 pm:
Midway:
If the eligibility guidelines aren’t there to determine need then what the heck are they there for? You can’t see how ridiculous that sounds?
As for father’s taking responsibility - OK. Good goal. And when they still don’t, then what? You stomp your feet some more and say the state shouldn’t get involved because the father won’t. Brilliant plan. I’m sure that’ll work out just fine.
Finally, you mentioned furthering education and working. Here’s a newsflash. That’s what this program is about. Providing child care so that these people can further their education and work. And yet you still seem to want to complain about it.
Unbelievable.
- sideline watcher - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:44 pm:
We haven’t closed a single tax incentive, credit, loophole yet. Not one. There are plenty of places we could find and save money that don’t all have to land on the backs of the poor. I’m just tired of that argument. WE HAVE BEEN CUTTING!:Anyone who relies in state grants over the last 10 years knows this. To say we haven’t cut anything and that there is no way to fix this is a willfully ignorant and cruel statement. The safety net has born a cruelly disproportionate share of restricted and reduced state spending. But I know there are some people that believe that every one is on their own. Good luck with that. Close some freakin loopholes, restore the tax and pass a budget. I just can’t believe that the entire Republican Caucus wants to go to the mat over childcare. Really? I understood the different political ideology over the labor bill. Two different world views. But childcare? They have taken a caucus position on childcare but not heroine, or slashing eligibility levels for community care. Blown away.
- walker - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:45 pm:
One of the worst decisions. My how the Republican mind set has changed. What they pushed for and negotiated as critical to”welfare reform” by moving people to work, now becomes unworkable. No one, except maybe Arduin and ilk, would rationally make this trade off. Cannot believe Rauner wants to stay with this. Get an agreed budget, fools!
- Norseman - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:46 pm:
=== Schnorf, I think you’re too glass-half-full in calling this responsible governing. Responsible governing would have been presenting a budget with real numbers or engaging on the budget rather than hold hostages. ===
Well said Earnest.
- Norseman - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:49 pm:
Demoralized, why do you continue to engage the troll from the desert? You’re trying to be reasonable and the troll doesn’t know the concept.
- Wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:50 pm:
Schnorf, if this action were part of a comprehensive fiscal plan, you might be able to sell it as just a painful cut.
But there is no comprehensive fiscal plan and spending is wildly out of control.
I’m afraid this is just further evidence of the ideological shift that has taken place within the Illinois GOP.
Welfare-to-work programs like this were championed by the GOP back in the day and drew Democratic support, not the other way around.
Yesterday, not one GOP vote.
- Emily miller - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:51 pm:
Arizona bob- fact checking is super hard, I know. But please, try it out.
- Linus - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 3:56 pm:
=== Schnorf, I think you’re too glass-half-full in calling this responsible governing. Responsible governing would have been presenting a budget with real numbers or engaging on the budget rather than hold hostages. ===
Agreed.
I have enormous respect for Steve Schnorf, his experience and his wise counsel. But I do not believe that the child care changes we’re seeing today are truly responsible governing or budgeting — not if they’re blocking 90% of once-eligible families from the program.
That’s indefensible.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:00 pm:
===Welfare-to-work programs like this were championed by the GOP back in the day and drew Democratic support, not the other way around.
Yesterday, not one GOP vote.===
This was the most sad about this whole “evolution”.
Difficult to reconcile, actually
- Roamin' Numeral - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:00 pm:
We have a billionaire governor telling poor kids to tighten their belts. Unreal.
And to all the people who think “we just can’t afford these programs anymore,” you’re wrong. Our personal and corporate income tax rates need to go up.
- CharlieKratos - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:08 pm:
Cutting child care is absolutely penny wise and pound foolish. The question is, why would Rauner target that? To show that he’s ruthless? To show that he doesn’t favor his wife’s programs? To target/hurt a specific Democrat (or, let’s face it, maybe even a specific Republican)? What is the purpose of this specific action?
- HangingOn - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:10 pm:
==not have kids, if they can not afford them! ==
Funny thing, when I had my daughter I could afford her. Then I left her father and suddenly not so much. Then she got brain cancer, definitely not so much. Temped full time when she wasn’t in treatments, part time when she was. Still made little enough working full time that I was on Link card, child care assistance, and medical card. Finally got hired on 2 years ago with the state, suddenly could afford her again. (though some months barely) Was I supposed to just pass her off to DCFS those times I couldn’t afford her so you wouldn’t have to worry about paying taxes? Oh, wait, kids that are left home alone because their parents have to work will end up in DCFS custody, which means more caseworkers needed and more money to give foster parents. Costs the state less to have the parents work and get child care subsidies.
Some people are doing the best they can with the situation they are in. Without a little help sometimes it can all fall apart. And remember, nobody is immune.
- Midway Gardens - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:11 pm:
Demoralized:
== If the eligibility guidelines aren’t there to determine need then what the heck are they there for? You can’t see how ridiculous that sounds? ==
If child support is being paid, it factors into the eligibility. But there seems to be no requirement to name the father and to make sure that he isn’t able to contribute.
== As for father’s taking responsibility - OK. Good goal. And when they still don’t, then what? You stomp your feet some more and say the state shouldn’t get involved because the father won’t. Brilliant plan. I’m sure that’ll work out just fine. == I’m not even wearing shoes today, so no stomping my feet. If you can’t get parental support, then the State should get involved. I didn’t say or even imply anything differently.
== Finally, you mentioned furthering education and working. Here’s a newsflash. That’s what this program is about. Providing child care so that these people can further their education and work. And yet you still seem to want to complain about it.== I’m specifically praising the goals of the program. But I support making sure that the State is the last resort rather than the first.
- Robert the Bruce - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:15 pm:
As a result of this, more people will (rationally) decide that they are better off working less and taking TANF instead. I’m skeptical that the overall budget savings are real once that is factored in.
- @MisterJayEm - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:16 pm:
The fact is that the governor delivered the pain to 90% families of that will apply childcare subsidies because he won’t consider additional revenue until he gets his anti-union wishes.
It doesn’t matter if the Governor “enjoys” his choice, it was still his choice.
Bruce Rauner chose to “apportion the pain” onto the young children of struggling families.
– MrJM
- bobby brown - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:18 pm:
Get those ads up and running now and pin it on Rauner.
So where was the Dem leadership in all of this?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????
if you call madigans “rule” leadership then you need to ask him, otherwise you need to bail on the dem party. they only care about the $$$$$ not the people..they use the people to stay elected.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:22 pm:
===Get those ads up and running now and pin it on Rauner. ===
LOL
Take a breath. The campaign is a long way off.
- Stuck on the 3rd Floor - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:23 pm:
Well, everyone here seems fine with the fact that prisons are so woefully understaffed that officers even HAVE the opportunity to work doubles for years prior to retirement, so that’s something to be considered.
- Stuck on the 3rd Floor - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:25 pm:
Disregard, wrong topic.
- Left Leaner - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:28 pm:
Two words re: Ounce = Weak. Statement.
- Juvenal - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:39 pm:
Schnorf:
If Rauner were a surgeon and the state budget were a patient, this would be an open-and-shut case of medical malpractice.
Heck, the press would be labeling him a butcher.
Yes, the patient needs surgery, but Rauner and his team are supposed to be professionals. We don’t excuse them for hacking the patient to pieces just because we all recognize that the patient needs to be cut somewhere.
Proposing budget cuts that force people out of the job market, drive people out of their own homes and into nursing homes at much higher costs…these are neither moral or fiscally responsible.
If Rauner can’t find more sound cuts on his own, then he probably needs to admit as the Civic Federation, Moody’s, and others have that we are gonna need more revenue.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:41 pm:
==If child support is being paid, it factors into the eligibility. But there seems to be no requirement to name the father and to make sure that he isn’t able to contribute.==
If he’s paying child support he is already contributing. These comments just get more silly.
==If you can’t get parental support==
What part of ELIGIBILITY determination do you not get.
==But I support making sure that the State is the last resort rather than the first==
OK. You win. Let’s just get rid of the eligibility determination since the concept seems to confuse some of you.
- burbanite - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:47 pm:
So where was the Dem leadership in all of this?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????
“if you call madigans “rule” leadership then you need to ask him, otherwise you need to bail on the dem party. they only care about the $$$$$ not the people..they use the people to stay elected.” You do realize this is a thread about how the Madigan and the legislators he controls, did not in fact override the veto right? However, the Republicans all voted in unison. Who exactly is ruling who? And, the Dems only care about the money and not the people? What do you think, the legislators are getting subsidized daycare? Huh? The Republicans certainly don’t care about the money as shown by the tons they threw around in campaign materials leading up to yesterday.
- DPGumby - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 4:54 pm:
I usually agree w schnorf, but certainly a swing and a miss this time. word is correct that swatting at single targets like this and the state museum is not governing or addressing the type of restructuring a complete budget needs and that Brucie is constantly whining about,but not producing. his concept of governing makes Frank Underwood look like a statesman.
- Keyser Soze - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 5:05 pm:
What did working mothers do before government supported child care? Mine relied on neighbors, relatives and friends. It got the job done.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 5:13 pm:
==Mine relied on neighbors, relatives and friends.==
Problem solved. Nobody ever thought of that. End the program. We’ve had a flash of brilliance here to solve the problem.
Wow. You really think the solution is that simple? Please.
- Last Bull Moose - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 5:25 pm:
Subsidized childcare was part of the Gingrich / Clinton plan to move people from welfare to work. And it was a huge success.
Is the fact that 50 percent of all births are paid for by Medicaid a problem. YES! Half of all kids are born into poverty. A society wide effort to change behavior is a good idea.
Harming families today is not a good idea. Separate the two issues.
Good news is that the percentage of kids in Illinois born to teenagers is about 8. Down from 20 percent when Igraduated from high school.
- MurMan - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 5:41 pm:
===Well, this is governing, I believe governing more responsibly that we frequently have seen.===
I agree with much of what you said Schnorf, but you lose me with the line above. Authorizing $100million in tax credits for corporations and then imposing devastating cuts to child care is not responsible government. Budgeting and responsible government is about priorities. The governor’s priorities are out of whack, to say it nicely.
- Cassandra - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 5:46 pm:
I’m not convinced this is over-no budget yet.
But is there a federal tax break for child care?
And do these subsidies go only for licensed child care facilities or for informal family or neighborhood arrangements as well. How many state bureaucrats are being paid to run this program-what are administrative costs. Are any of the slots in the licensed facilities free, and how is eligibility determined. Can those whose subsidies are being cut be prioritized for any free slots. Are there other funding streams than the state of Illinois taxpayers. And so on. Time to start doing some work, child care bureaucrats.
If a substantial percentage of these funds are being used to fund local informal arrangements, I suppose we’d have to consider if this is the best use of day care funds. Can federal funds be leveraged to create more licensed slots. Have any of our highly paid policymakers bothered to find out.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 6:18 pm:
Murman, I think you missed the question in the post that if we don’t cut this then what should we cut.
- burbanite - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 6:36 pm:
There are some non profit and/or christian based daycare’s that charges less than market, have scholarships etc. But they do still have to pay their employees. There are other programs like the YWCA that will provide subsidies for daycare in certain circumstances. However, not nearly enough to address the need, and as a donor to a daycare that does this, I am also a taxpayer. I have no problem with a tax increase for programs like this and LIHEAP, what I do have a problem with is paying more in taxes so large corporations can get tax breaks and we have to pick up the slack.
- steve schnorf - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 6:38 pm:
I know most of you don’t agree with my position on this, but I’m pretty much willing to bet that when the budget is all said and done, child care doesn’t end up with anything close to a 90% cut, just as I’m willing to bet state universities don’t end up with no state funding, or that there wiki be no funding for MAP grants. This isn’t pleasant, but the cold hard truth frequently isn’t . How many of you believe that final budget discussions will end up with enough revenue available to avoid all cuts? I said I hate this cut but it is intellectually dishonest of me (and you) to protest any and all cuts. I have to wait until it’s done before I can evaluate the decisions that have been made. So far this is process, and as I’ve said so many times on here some are going to be hurt. Any other analysis is fancy. You’re welcome to not like that, you’re welcome to despise me as the messenger, but that won’t change the outcome.
- steve schnorf - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 6:39 pm:
Fantasy not fancy
- steve schnorf - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 6:47 pm:
Word, I think these are the sorts of actions that will finally lead us to a budget, one that will avoid or soften many of the cuts we hate to see happen. I hope I’m not wrong: I don’t think I am. I don’t believe the Governor wants to destroy the child care program anymore than you or I do.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 6:51 pm:
- steve schnorf -
Actually I agree with you.
=== …child care doesn’t end up with anything close to a 90% cut, just as I’m willing to bet state universities don’t end up with no state funding, or that there wiki be no funding for MAP grants. This isn’t pleasant, but the cold hard truth frequently isn’t .===
Absolutely. Totally agree.
My issue? With no road map, today, to figure out the actual priorities (read: actual dollar amounts), I think many, and I’ll include myself, wonder/worry what budget magic are we really talking about when those priorities are singled out and made “real”.
There will be deep cuts, there will be mild cuts. There will be revenue, no doubt, but no way will revenue get things close to balanced.
Wish you were in the “room”, and until Rauner has a very clear, and very honest document of spelled out priorities, anxiety will be the order of the day, but I know the cuts and the revenue, both, are coming.
With respect as always, OW
- @MisterJayEm - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 7:38 pm:
“I know most of you don’t agree with my position on this, but I’m pretty much willing to bet that when the budget is all said and done, child care doesn’t end up with anything close to a 90% cut, just as I’m willing to bet state universities don’t end up with no state funding, or that there will be no funding for MAP grants.”
• I’m sure that the children and families taking the hit today will sleep soundly tonight due to your assurances that this will one day pass.
“This isn’t pleasant, but the cold hard truth frequently isn’t.”
• Cold hard truth: Bruce Rauner asked that the legislature allow the personal income tax rate falling from 5% to 3.75% and the corporate tax rate from 7% to 5.25%. Bruce Rauner asked for our revenue problem.
“How many of you believe that final budget discussions will end up with enough revenue available to avoid all cuts?”
• I don’t recall anyone making such a suggestion.
“I said I hate this cut but it is intellectually dishonest of me (and you) to protest any and all cuts.”
• Fortunately, you’re the only one talking about “any and all cuts”.
“I have to wait until it’s done before I can evaluate the decisions that have been made.”
• Spoiler: In the long run, we’re all dead.
“So far this is process, and as I’ve said so many times on here some are going to be hurt. Any other analysis is fantasy.”
• Thank goodness we’ve abandoned the fantasy that the everyone will share the pain of Rauner’s cuts. Everyone won’t. “Some are going to be hurt.” And only some.
“You’re welcome to not like that, you’re welcome to despise me as the messenger, but that won’t change the outcome.”
• I don’t despise you. Not at all. I do think it’s a shame that you pretend that Bruce Rauner’s hands are tied. And that you pretend that Rauner’s choice to hammer 90% families in need of childcare subsidies was inevitable rather than unnecessarily cruel.
– MrJM
- Wordslinger - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 8:53 pm:
Schnorf, I hope you’re right, but I’m not so sure.
As we’ve seen, the governor has sought to fund other priorities absent a comprehensive budget agreement, including that $100 million tax credit package to the likes of Capitol One and EBay.
Some emergency rules requiring some sort of measurable ROI on those credits might be in order, if budget balancing is the goal.
- steve schnorf - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 8:59 pm:
MrJM, I don’t pretend his hands are tied. If he so chose he could wake up tomorrow morning and decide to ask the General Assembly to raise the income tax to 6% and pass a budget avoiding any budget cuts and adding more money to k-12 education and other programs, just as Speaker Madigan and President Cullerton could wake up and decide to abandon any opposition to the Governor’s turnaround agenda. But those things aren’t going to happen! Nothing close to those things are going to happen Everyone on here could describe what they think ought to happen or what they wish would happen, and we would have a hundred or more opinions to read. That’s not what I’m trying to do. I’m trying to make my best effort to understand what is going to happen, and there really aren’t a hundred options.
I don’t have any fantasy at all, never have had, that all are going to equally share the pain of cuts. I don’t know why you think anyone should. As I’ve very often said on here, the only real questions are how much pain, of what kind, and upon whom it will be imposed. Those are the decisions that are going to be made when the budget finally comes together. And by the way, the cuts will be part of a budget voted on and approved by both houses of the General Assembly, with Democrats and Republicans voting for them.
Bruce Rauner didn’t ask for our revenue problems as you state, the structural imbalance has been growing for many years. We would still have a structural imbalance if the temporary tax increase hadn’t expired. The only real difference in that in the past that fact was frequently ignored and now it isn’t being.
I won’t end up agreeing with all the cuts that are made. No one will. But I agree with the Governor’s position that cuts must be made. I’ve said that I wouldn’t be doing it the way he is, but I agree with him that some actions badly need to be taken to improve the state’s economic climate and I understand why he’s doing it the way he is. He knows that if revenue happens first, it’s much less likely that anything on his list of things needing to be addressed will happen.
You want results radically different than that, I seriously suggest you wish on the Evening Star. That’s by far your best chance.
- steve schnorf - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 9:07 pm:
Word, I think almost all of us agree with the need for a more realistic analysis of the results of the economic subsidies the state offers to businesses. I know I do. As you know I’ve long said I think state revenues need to be increased and that I am absolutely in favor of me paying more state taxes.
Honestly most of the spending the Governor has allowed to or helped happen is for funding for things to keep the state functioning, such as k-12, employees salaries, etc. The $100 million is an outlier.
I hope I’m right too.
- Cassandra - Thursday, Sep 3, 15 @ 10:20 pm:
I’m still wondering what percentage of these day care monies go to pay grandma or the lady across the hall vs. a licensed day care home or center.
And if it’s a large percentage, was that the intent. Because if it’s just a matter of issuing checks to be a relative, why do we need a day care bureaucracy to do that. Use the tax code or send the parent a check.
- Daniel Plainview - Friday, Sep 4, 15 @ 6:46 am:
- this is governing, I believe governing more responsibly that we frequently have seen. -
Keep cashing those checks, commissioner.
This is a dorm room, Randian fantasy being played out by someone that’s never known a thing about going without.
- Jack Stephens - Friday, Sep 4, 15 @ 7:42 am:
@daniel 6:46am:
Thank you. You hit the nail on the head.
Bruce has no clue what it’s like to be in your mid 50’s and lose your job, to be standing in the supermarket with a Link Card looking at something on sale and trying to figure out if you can afford it. Just a little while back gas cost $4 a gallon. Maybe your lucky enough to have a minimum wage job ($15,080.00) a year to feed your family of 4.
Well at least Bruce can make himself feel better talking to his life partner because they are a “democrat”.
- Anonymous - Friday, Sep 4, 15 @ 8:01 am:
Why don’t the governor lead the way taxing the 1% show us your sacrifice so we can follow the leader
- Anonymous - Friday, Sep 4, 15 @ 8:10 am:
The managment style of fear and itemization needs to be replaced by leading by example
- Anonymous - Friday, Sep 4, 15 @ 8:15 am:
Governor do you like sleeping on the couch?
- sideline watccher - Friday, Sep 4, 15 @ 8:22 am:
Cassandra: the majority of the money does not go to pay for informal child care arrangements. However those are needed for people who work non traditional hours. I don’t think there would be this much uproar if there had been a 5 or 10 percent cut and it was structured to not hit children as hard. but 90% is indefensible. The point of the bill was that if there are policy changes to be made to the ccap program, they need to be made in the light of day in the regular legislative process or rule making process. This was done unilaterally with absolutely no public, parent, or provider input on how devastating this action would be. No one is saying that there couldn’t be reforms. A cut is not a reform. Oh and lets not forget that the woman on staff who said the cuts would be devastating has been fired.
- Anon. - Friday, Sep 4, 15 @ 8:32 am:
Don’t tell me that Dunkin doesn’t care for kids. He filed a joint resolution yesterday (HJR 95) saying nice things about the “We Don’t Serve Teens” initiative. How much more caring and engaged can he be?
- @MisterJayEm - Friday, Sep 4, 15 @ 2:03 pm:
“I understand why he’s doing it the way he is.”
So why did Rauner target subsidized childcare?
– MrJM