115 Comments - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:03 am: Spread the blame out and negotiations will begin/resume/restart. Blame one man only and the current status will remain in place. - Rauner - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:06 am: Rauner had his chance and has failed. - Rufus - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:07 am: “Ideology will always win over facts.” - Republican Primer. - Wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:08 am: Why’s that, Louis? Who has to “spread the blame” for these things to happen? Why is that necessary? Dont many people already “spread the blame?” Who are we waiting on? In short, what are you talking about? - DuPage - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:09 am: 9:06 was me. Need some coffee to wake up. - burbanite - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:10 am: Stop name calling and sending dead fish and maybe the talks will start. Rich did acknowledge that both parties share blame. - Skeptic - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:11 am: What I’ve read is that he wants to prohibit bargaining over wages, hours, pensions, etc…but what I heard in that video was he wants local control over whether to. Is that a flip-flop or is the former a mischaracterization? To the Post: Imagine your doctor recommends amputating your left leg but won’t talk specifics about how it will improve your health, and all the research you do on your own shows only marginal benefit. That’s what this is all about. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:13 am: ===Blame one man only and the current status will remain in place.=== Rauner is not a victim of taking the hostsges, nor should heat be removed, as Candidate Rauner reminded voters often; “Pat Quinn failed…” Bruce Rauner owns his decisions. “Stay the course”, “Hang in there” really means… …Rauner is choosing the pain. Rauner owns. - Me too - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:14 am: Skeptic, he still wants that. It is just that he can’t sell it as easily. - Mama - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:16 am: “Somehow, some way, we need to get our leaders to start facing reality.” Reality? Hello… we don’t do reality in IL. /s - Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:18 am: Why does Chicago get to have local control over collective bargaining but not the rest of the state? - qualified somebody nobody sent - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:18 am: Dear Gov. Raunger a .74% savings statewide IF the numbers compiled are accurate? This is what your entire union busting proposal will do? C’MON MAN! Do the job you were elected to do! Propose a REAL balanced budget and work the votes if you can, if not, sit down with the four tops TODAY and find out what can be passed (revenue increase). IT IS YOUR JOB AFTER ALL, RIGHT? - Niblets - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:19 am: The ROI is further diminishment of the power of working people. This is something that has great long term appeal to the 1%. - Mama - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:19 am: ==- Rufus - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:07 am: “Ideology will always win over facts.” - Republican Primer.== Rufus you must be a Dufus! - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:19 am: @wordslinger and @oswegowilly, you both think that Madigan and Cullerton have NO culpability over this budget impasse? None whatsoever? Not even a teeny little bit? Give. Me. A. Break. Go ahead. Pretend otherwise. - Very Fed Up - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:20 am: I’m probably in the minority but to be able to get term limit and gerrymandering ammendments on the ballot passed is worth a lot. To never again have a career politician like Mike Madigan infect this state. To have citizen legislators coming from competitive districts will put this state on a path to success for future generations. - Mama - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:21 am: ==The ROI is further diminishment of the power of working people. This is something that has great long term appeal to the 1%.== Should we allow the 1% to control the 99%? H- NO! - Norseman - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:22 am: “If I say it’s worth holding hostages, then it’s worth it.” Bruce - Rasselas - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:23 am: Don’t forget - every dollar ’saved’ under his proposal is a dollar out of some worker’s pocket. Cutting prevailing wage means cutting wages. And it’s not just the specific workers - employers have to compete in the marketplace to attract workers. If those workers can get prevailing wage on a covered project, employers not covered have to pay higher wages to fill their jobs. Prevailing wage props up the wages for all workers. Rauner is seeking to lower wages for workers, plain and simple, in order to save taxpayers pennies. - Joe M - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:24 am: ==Somehow, some way, we need to get our leaders to start facing reality.== The 5% income tax was a little closer to reality. The annual pension payment was made. The back pile of vendor bills decreased. We more or less had a balanced budget if we didn’t count the pension debt. But Rauner asked the General Assembly not to extend the 5% income tax rate. What reality is Rauner working with? - UIC Guy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:24 am: Rich, Thanks for doing this work and assigning numbers to the (projected, hoped for) savings from the changes that Rauner wants. The numbers are extremely interesting and revealing. Among other things, they suggest that Rauner is indeed (as some of us have suspected all along) driven purely by ideology [dogma], not by any genuine belief that the changes are needed. (And of course there are reasons to think the changes would be very bad for some people: here the numbers suggest that there would be no significant off-setting gain.) As usual, I don’t suppose that facts will do much to get in the way of the ideology, but it’s important to have them available and publicized as much as possible. - Gruntled University Employee - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:25 am: The only way you can insure even the 0.74% savings is if you legislate that the cost savings from lower wages is passed on to the customer and not pocketed by the Contractor. If you don’t, you end up in the same situation that the 2011 Work Comp legislation created. RTW is not about ROI, it’s about being “Business Friendly”. - Jocko - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:26 am: –eliminating the prevailing wage would’ve saved… a grand total of 0.74 percent of their property tax budgets== Can we get a Raunerite response other than “But…but Madigan!” - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:27 am: - Louis G Atsaves - 1) Rauner doesn’t have the 71/36 nor does he have the 60/30 to get what he wants, today. Rauner first chose a multi-million dollar Ad campaign against Madigan, that didn’t get Rauner closer. Rauner chose to Veto the budget, (a Rauner choice), and the harm of not understanding 60/30 or 71/36, a poorly thoughtout “Ad campaign”, and not funding his state agencies, all on Rauner. 2) See Gov. Edgar’s recent quotes to as to, with personal experiences, as my ready-read example. 3) Wasn’t shutting down the state part of “Shaking up” and “Bringing back”? Candidate Rauner said it was so. - Ducky LaMoore - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:27 am: ===Madigan and Cullerton have NO culpability over this budget impasse?=== You can blame them for a lot of problems. Not this. They are willing to work with anyone to solve the budget problem. The governor is willing to work with nobody. So, yes. It is ALL EVERY BIT the fault of the governor. PERIOD. - History Prof - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:28 am: While I appreciate the careful legwork of running these numbers down, it seems almost quaint of you to have taken the “turnaround agenda”seriously in this way. Slim reeds though they be, Republicans continually invent these kinds of red herring arguments and proposals not just to distract voters from the failures of supply side tax cuts for the wealthy over the past generation, but to distract themselves. Understanding our current slow rate of growth requires accounting for lack of demand. Lack of demand can only be explained by a broad lack of buying power. The historic loss of buying power can only be explained by falling wages in real terms. But to acknowledge the obvious would mean admitting that Reaganomics has been a huge failure, which no Republican can admit. This is why a “turnaround agenda” that came out of nowhere is suddenly and article of faith. Next week it will be the Gold Standard or some other kooky nonsense; mark my words. Nevermind that Edgar and Thompson both called B.S. on it; the Republicans in the G.A. will grasp at anything. To acknowledge the truth would be devastating. So they won’t. - lake county democrat - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:29 am: Very Fed Up beat me to it. How do you quantify ROI on political reform? Especially when the current system has given unions so much power that they almost picked the GOP nominee for governor, and came one vote away from severely limiting the negotiating power of the only non-gerrymandered elected official? And why does the principle of one-man, one-vote need to be quantified with ROI? People have died for that principle. - South Central - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:30 am: ==Spread the blame…== All this blaming, so childish in how long it’s going on. Adults take responsibility. How about the leaders Sread the Responsibility! …and no one gets to be called a leader until he or she steps forward to work. - Solid Dwight - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:34 am: Wouldn’t it be fascinating to know the “economic impact” that Rauner’s policies have had on Illinois? First, of course, comes his demand that tax rates be reduced in Jan. 1. Then we must factor in state employees showing up for work with no resources to go their jobs. Then we must calculate the interest IL will be paying vendors whose payments will be delayed. Then we must calculate the impact of those who have lost their jobs due to agencies not being funded. Then we must calculate the impact on childcare providers who lost business. Then we must calculate the impact of lost wages for those parents who had to quit their jobs because they lost childcare benefits. Then we must calculate the cost of unemployment benefits for all those no longer working due to this Governor’s policies. What did I miss? - Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:34 am: If Rauner’s policies are so extreme why are they being held up in committee and not voted on? Could it be that some are popular and force tough votes? Enough of the delay vote on it and if it doesn’t pass then they will at least be all on the record - Roamin' Numeral - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:34 am: Great column, Rich. In the whirlwind of Rauner vs. Madigan and Republican vs. Democrat, you’ve provided everyone with a clear, mathematical, dollars-and-cents example of why this is so ridiculous. Furthermore, you didn’t just blame one person, you spread the blame around to everyone who deserves it. Great work. - Wensicia - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:35 am: Buying a package of fish fillets as a joke for the mayor asking you to do your job is not an example of facing reality. - VanillaMan - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:38 am: Rauner doesn’t understand what it means to serve, only to own. So he cannot negotiate with other government leaders because he disrespects their values. He doesn’t care what the bottom line is - he believes in what he believes and doesn’t respect other opinions. After ten months of this man in office, I find it amazing that there are actually some Illinoisans who are still holding out hope that Rauner knows what he is doing. He doesn’t. - ottawa otter - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:38 am: Joe M. you hit the nail on the head. Rauner played demagogue with the tax hike…the reason Quinn lost was the tax hike. Now Rauner squirms, worms, dances, distracts but bottom line, he lied, Quinn was right, we needed the tax hike. It ain’t about turn around, it is about it you can’t confuse them with the facts dazzle them with your b.s. - Mason born - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:39 am: Willy and Word I’m Ashamed of you 2 Ashamed! Clearly Louis is stating that Rauner blaming everything that has happened since 12/03/1818 on Michael Madigan is preventing any kind of budget compromise. It’s obvious isn’t it? I mean everyone knows it’s easier to negotiate when you respect the other party as an equal. Louis is an accomplished attorney surely he wouldn’t propose slandering someone he has to reach a settlement with? Especially when the otherside holds the advantage? Oh wait I see he responded never mind the Farce is strong in that one carry on. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:43 am: ===”Rauner doesn’t have the 71/36 nor does he have the 60/30 to get what he wants, today.”=== This is true. Two other individuals have the 71/36 and 60/30. You know, the two other individuals who you refuse to acknowledge any wrongdoing here, or that they even exist in your arguments. They can peel off some of their votes to add to GOP votes and the impasse could end. But all of them have to sit down and start talking. All. Of. Them. They. Are. All. Responsible. For. This. Spread the blame around, there is plenty to go around. - DuPage Bard - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:44 am: Will the grown ups show up to actually legislate and govern? No? Then I guess it’s all name calling, campaigning and press conferences. When do we officially become DC? - Henry Francis - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:44 am: The Turnaround Agenda is not an economic agenda. Its goal is not to improve Illinois’ economy. It is a political agenda and its goal is to weaken the Democratic party. Attacking and doing everything possible to weaken organized labor has the goal of weakening the Democratic party. Same thing with term limits and redistricting. Why have we heard ad nauseam how corrupt (and how long they have been in power - over 100 years!) Madigan and his democratic cronies are? - Chicago 20 - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:44 am: Either change the proposal (perhaps to apply it to only smaller projects) or move along.- Rich, applying this turn around agenda proposal to “smaller projects” would have a catastrophic impact on the State’s economy. Are you really advocating a Death Swirl instead of a Death Spiral? Either way you’ll end up in the same place, with less revenue. From Eric Zorn’s column; http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/zorn/ct-prevailing-wage-debate-zorn-perspec-1028-jm-20151027-column.html But a substantial body of research suggests that the hoped-for virtuous cycle sparked by a repeal of prevailing wage laws is more likely to become a death spiral. “Eliminating prevailing wage would have broad-reaching negative impacts across the California economy,” said a report by Colorado State University economist Kevin Duncan issued earlier this year in response to a Rauner-like proposal in California. Why? Because if construction contractors pay their employees less or hire cheaper labor from elsewhere, the local workers are likely to spend less in the community, and more of them will end up on public-assistance programs. Duncan forecast a net loss of 17,500 jobs and a $1.4 billion hit to California’s bottom line. - Honeybear - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:45 am: Here’s what I believe the deal was between the ILGOP and Rauner done at the crossroads at midnight. Rauner will destroy the unions for himself (and the oligarchs) and for the ILGOP to take control of the GA. This will be the only goal of the administration. Perfidy and obfuscation will be the order of the day to hide the true and only goal. Deals at the crossroads at midnight are irrevocable. The deal was done. Now it plays out. Rauner will not fold. He has nothing to lose, either way it doesn’t matter to him. If he wins he get’s a great victory, if he doesn’t and the ILGOP dies in the process he still get’s their soul. If he loses he also has done irreparable damage to the social safety net making it ripe for profit. Ripe for privatization. (Buy it, Break it, Replace it for profit) Either way, he is winning. He doesn’t care about the damage. It is the way to profit. It’s funny, I always assumed that the Turnaround Agenda meant turning Illinois around to better times. Nope, not enough profit in that. It’s turnaround agenda towards breaking it where it can be replaced for the profit of a few. ILGOP made the deal at the crossroads for power, not for a better ROI. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:46 am: @Mason born: “Clearly Louis is stating that Rauner blaming everything that has happened since 12/03/1818 on Michael Madigan is preventing any kind of budget compromise.” I didn’t realize the current Speaker of the House was that old! Xronia polla Mr. Madigan! - Jack Stephens - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:46 am: @very fed up: Draconian cuts for Wealthy Welfare WERE on the ballot last November. Why doesn’t he support these cuts? - Term Limits - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:47 am: ==- Very Fed Up - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:20 am: I’m probably in the minority but to be able to get term limit and gerrymandering ammendments on the ballot passed is worth a lot. To never again have a career politician like Mike Madigan infect this state. To have citizen legislators coming from competitive districts will put this state on a path to success for future generations.== That is very poetic, but can you figure out a lyrical way to mention how your fresh faced citizen leaders will be even more controlled than they are now by party leaders and lobbyists, who are unelected and have no term limits? - walker - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:48 am: The ROI on this issue, as shaky and small is it is, is the most solid forecast available of any of the eight Turnaround Agenda items. The direct impact on the state budget itself, when using locally available savings to help justify a property tax freeze, is zero. Any state-level savings would only occur if the state can use these forecasted local savings to justify lower distributed funds. ROI on the “business friendly environment” items like tort reform, workers’ comp, and DCEO: very hard to estimate in terms of impacting numbers of companies and jobs deciding to stay or go, or come to Illinois. Some potential positives, some day, but how much and when? ROI on lower business and personal taxes? What studies have been done show very minimal changes in state economies if any, at the rates we’re talking, nowhere near what the ideologues like IPI and Rauner’s own “Blueprint” claim, and won’t be happening in Illinois any time soon. Term limits, remapping, and other “good government” items won’t have any impact until 2022 and later, and that impact is just as likely to encourage more spending by GA members to respond to donors and constituents, as it is to cut spending. Not to say they’re bad things to do. Just that their “returns” are not financial, but could be in public trust, over the long term. In short to make his point, Rich rightly picked Rauner’s best-case ROI item, and even it comes sadly short. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:50 am: ===Two other individuals have the 71/36 and 60/30.=== Governors own the budgeting process. Governors are crafting budgets to give monetary value… to their beliefs, whst their Administration values, and where governors want the state heading, by a passed document placing value on the levers to move the state in their visions of state government. It’s a governor’s responsibilty to get a passed budget for HIS state agencies. Seriously, - Louis G Atsaves -, if Bruce Rauner lacks, just say so. - Wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:53 am: Louis, try reading posts for comprehension, including your own. I didn’t mention any names. I was trying to make sense of your claim that “spread the blame around and negotiations will start.” Who do you think needs to do that? Why would that start negotiations? I don’t understand. Or was that just a meaningless platitude? You’re obsessed with “blame,” Tell you what — I’ll take the blame for, whatever. Feel better? Will that start negotiations? - Chicago 20 - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:54 am: - Gruntled University Employee - “The only way you can insure even the 0.74% savings is if you legislate that the cost savings from lower wages is passed on to the customer and not pocketed by the Contractor.” Legislation that lowered the McCormick Place workers wages didn’t reduce exhibitors costs. Since the McCormick Place reforms exhibitors costs have doubled, tripled and quadrupled. Audits are required by the reforms are so severely restricted that even the auditor acknowledges the futility. - Mason born - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:56 am: Louis Exageration to prove a point. In this case that the governor has blinders on and has blamed Madigan for every perceived sin he can think of including his own incompetence. Why did the courts have to order state employees paid? Because Rauner and co. weren’t competent to line item the budget. If you attempt to use logic it’s pretty ludicrous Rauners attempt to shift blame even for his own actions. At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if he blamed Madigan for the 1818 compromise. Good lord my boys took more responsibilty in preschool than Rauner does. - Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:58 am: The Dem leaders did not extend the tax hike under Quinn (something PQ campaigned for) because the Speaker believed he’d lose his super majority in the district elections. The needed revenue was bypassed for legislative power in the House. Of course Rauner didn’t support a tax increase while campaigning (no surprise). Now that the super majority was held, and a Republican was elected Governor - the effort to diminish that Gov has been priority one. If the Dems want a revenue increase - put a bill on the Gov’s desk. He’ll blame the Dems, of course. The Dems will have the opportunity to hang the tax increase on the Gov at election time. That was the plan all along - so just do it already. If he vetoes it, then you have the visual you want to make him ‘own’ the social service failure. Either way, the Gov will own the increase or own the failure. Just do it already, with that super majority that was at the heart of all this long ago. - justacitizen - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:59 am: If prevailing wage is so insignificant, why haven’t the Dems proposed applying it to smaller projects to compromise as Rich suggested? - GraduatedCollegeStudent - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:59 am: ===Very Fed Up beat me to it. How do you quantify ROI on political reform? Especially when the current system has given unions so much power that they almost picked the GOP nominee for governor,=== Welcome to the magic of low turnout elections. The “silent majority” might want to consider stopping by the polls next time. ===and came one vote away from severely limiting the negotiating power of the only non-gerrymandered elected official?=== It also severely limited the negotiating power of the union by taking away their “nuclear option” as well, but hey, narratives… === And why does the principle of one-man, one-vote need to be quantified with ROI? People have died for that principle. === I’m going to assume you never sat in on a political science class. That said, where do you think the concept of “strategic voting” came from? More seriously though, any remap plan that promises to “respect the territorial integrity of geographic units” is going to be just as prone to gerrymandering and disproportionate representation as the current setup. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 9:59 am: @wordslinger, I comprehend just fine. For months Mr. Madigan has been finger pointing. Haven’t you noticed? Keep pretending. - Arsenal - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:01 am: ==If the Dems want a revenue increase - put a bill on the Gov’s desk.== Not the issue. The issue is that the Governor refuses to even TALK about the budget until his Mystery Box of reforms is passed. - Name Withheld - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:02 am: “Especially when the current system has given billionaires so much power that they bought the GOP nominee for governor” Fixed it for you. - Arsenal - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:04 am: ==Especially when the current system has given unions so much power that they almost picked the GOP nominee for governor== I will forever love the idea that unions trying to have a say in politics is ipso facto evidence of corruption. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:04 am: ===The Dem leaders did not extend the tax hike under Quinn (something PQ campaigned for) because the Speaker believed he’d lose his super majority in the district elections.=== Did you forget that Gov-Elect Rauner also asked for it expire? The election was over. Rauner asked for the expiration. Try, just try, to be honest. Thanks. - Gruntled University Employee - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:09 am: Chicago 20 =Legislation that lowered the McCormick Place workers wages didn’t reduce exhibitors costs. Since the McCormick Place reforms exhibitors costs have doubled, tripled and quadrupled. Audits are required by the reforms are so severely restricted that even the auditor acknowledges the futility. = My point exactly, thank you for the example. The problem Prevailing Wage has helped create is an “us against them” mentality by the people not covered by it. It’s an “if I cant have it, no one should” mindset by rank and file labor, heavily fueled by Management. - 32nd Ward Roscoe Village - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:09 am: A little off topic but related: I filed my individual income tax return October 14 and was getting a 4-figure refund. I thought I would be waiting in line like everyone else and it would awhile before I received it. The refund was deposited in two weeks, and that is even filing a paper return, not electronically. I guess they don’t want a lot of taxpayers complaining about refunds. - Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:15 am: - OW - Of course Rauner asked for it to expire, what Republican runs on increasing taxes? Don’t try to tell the readers of this blog that the Dems are holding back a revenue increase because of a republican campaign stump speech. Try, just try, to see that today’s issues are a result of the unwillingness to do what needed to be done when PQ was governor and would have signed into law the extension of the tax increase everyone knew was needed. You want honest? The only reason the tax increase carried a sunset provision was the Speaker’s belief that without the sunset provision he would have had issues at election time in the districts in the previous election. This all was born in the desire for gaining and holding a super majority in the House. - Wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:18 am: The comptroller puts the gap between projected FY16 GRF revenues and mandated spending at about $6 billion. That doesn’t include the billions in usual social service and university spending that is currently out in the cold. It’s lunacy to talk about obtuse structural reforms with no credible ROI when willfully inflicting that kind of damage. Unless, of course, the plan, is to radically “structurally reform” the state out of the social services and university funding business. I suspect that’s the case. The deficit already is enormous. The governor has signaled he’s not willing to deal until January, more than halfway through the fiscal year. Paint me a picture where you close the GRF deficit and social services and unis get made whole on what they’ve already lost? The arithmetic is unforgiving. The same is true for local governments dedicated revenues. Each passing day, the pressure mounts to change the law and sweep those funds for GRF now and going forward. That’s the real “structural reform” the governor is pushing, using a willfully contrived GRF deficit to greatly reduce state funding for social services, higher education and local governments. Rather than a “Turnaround Agenda” it should be called “A Return to Normalcy.” - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:20 am: ===Don’t try to tell the readers of this blog that the Dems are holding back a revenue increase because of a republican campaign stump speech.=== Read what I wrote, exactly as I wrote it; “Did you forget that Gov-Elect Rauner also asked for it expire? The election was over. Rauner asked for the expiration.” Please, try, try to be honest. ===The only reason the tax increase carried a sunset provision was the Speaker’s belief that without the sunset provision he would have had issues at election time in the districts in the previous election.=== Then Gov-Elect Rauner should have stayed silent instead of asking, as Gov-Elect, after the election, (both facts you conveniently ignore) that the tax increase expire. The Democrats obliged. Can’t re-write what happened. Sorry. - Juice - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:23 am: A few points on this topic. First, two things about the study that I think diminish Rich’s ROI (and I’m not saying the study is wrong, just think these need pointing out). One, if you look at what is driving the average, it was building in 2002 and 2003, during Illinois first. Actual spending today is far less than it was during that time and earlier. Two, a lot of these projects are bonded out, so you would not see annual savings, but the savings would be amortized over an extended period of time. LCD, I really can’t believe you are buying all this political reform stuff hook line and sinker. If the Governor was offered his anti-Union stuff, he would drop redistributing and term limits like a bad habit. That is just the lipstick on the pig to keep the editorial boards happy that he is fighting for the populist stuff. Justacitizen, it’s important to remember that the Governor has said that he wants prevailing wage changes because that is what allows the property tax freeze to happen. Granted, I think the property freeze is also the lipstick on the pig, because there are many other ways to bring about property tax relief if that was his actual objective. But it’s not. He doesn’t mind making people pay higher taxes, as long as his friends get to make more profits. - Juice - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:24 am: Redistricting. Auto-correct. - GraduatedCollegeStudent - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:24 am: ===Of course Rauner asked for it to expire, what Republican runs on increasing taxes? === IIRC Jim Edgar did. - VanillaMan - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:24 am: The Turnaround Agenda is not based upon serving Illinoisans. It is based upon taking from Illinoisans. The reason Rauner didn’t campaign on it, was because it is asking Illinoisans to slit their own throats. Rauner has NO MANDATE for it. As a matter of fact - he tried to get his little counties to support it - and he failed miserably. Rauner proved to everyone that his Turnaround Agenda is unpopular to even the parts of Illinois which overwhelmingly voted for him. Rauner bled himself dry by chasing after his RTW fiasco. It is the height of foolishness to negotiate with a failing governor with no mandate and no political power outside his own wallet. It doesn’t matter the parties. It doesn’t matter the personality. Bottom line is basic political power - Rauner blew himself up, and refuses to acknowledge it. Rauner is like the castle guard in the Monty Python movie who has no limbs, but still claims he can do his job. - forwhatitsworth - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:25 am: === Understanding our current slow rate of growth requires accounting for lack of demand. Lack of demand can only be explained by a broad lack of buying power. The historic loss of buying power can only be explained by falling wages in real terms.=== Best explanation yet as to why Rauner’s plan is not really about improving Illinois’ economic health. - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:33 am: Beside the minuscule savings that elimination of the prevailing wage would bring to school districts, there’s no reason to think that widespread wage cuts wouldn’t further hurt the economy, when even more workers have less money to spend. Here’s an article about the problem of wage stagnation in today’s economy. Per the article, managers are being rewarded for keeping labor costs low, and merit pay systems have downsides if there’s large-scale pay stagnation. Wages as a share of corporate income are the lowest since 1951 (per the article). http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/sunday-review/the-mystery-of-the-vanishing-pay-raise.html?referer=https://t.co/AeLxTfZiSJ It is in this economic environment that we must consider policy decisions. How can we have a decent economy if policy makers keep passing laws that diminish economic security and strength for the gain of worse-paying jobs? As some mention, there’s a political element to Rauner’s and other right wing corporate leaders’ policy ideas–to weaken the opposition party. Something to consider is if public unions are crippled, and trade unions don’t recover, who can even begin to compete with the massive money that Rauner, the Kochs and their allies put into politics? - Mason born - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:36 am: Louis Seriously?? — I comprehend just fine. For months Mr. Madigan has been finger pointing. Haven’t you noticed?– Serious question what do you call what Rauner has beem doing since election night? I won’t hold the campaign finger pointing against him that is election politics but really? I’m afraid sir you have a serious lack of self awareness you might want to get that checked out. - walker - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:38 am: Does anyone here actually think Rauner would be willing to quickly negotiate a balanced budget if only he got remapping reform and term limits? - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:41 am: @Mason born, thus my comments about how the blame needs to be spread around. Because all three deserve to be blamed. If you don’t feel “blame” is the appropriate word, then ridicule the three until they start talking and resolve this. The election is over Mr. Rauner, Mr. Madigan and Mr. Cullerton. Thank you @Mason born for proving my point. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:46 am: - Louis G Atsaves - Governors own. “Pat Quinn failed… ” Countless Jim Edgar quotes, a former governor no less, have Rauner owning. Rauner refuses to fund his state agencies, continues to personally embarrass the President of Ounce of Prevention, after she personally vouched for him, and Rauner vetoed a budget, and as of yet, hasn’t run a budget of his own… … as those defending Rauner, like you… tell Rauner to “Hang in there”… and hanging in there, literally, means own ing a choice to hang with. Period. “Hang in there, Governor Rauner, you own this choice!” - Secret Square - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:52 am: “he also has done irreparable damage to the social safety net making it ripe for profit. Ripe for privatization. (Buy it, Break it, Replace it for profit)” Which makes this development even more interesting: http://www.sj-r.com/article/20151103/NEWS/151109908/10511/NEWS?rssfeed=true “The state of Illinois is launching a pilot project of a public-private partnership that would have investors pay for services to people in need…” - Chicago 20 - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 10:52 am: -Juice- There is no ROI, instead there is a loss of investment in tax revenue. Numerous academic studies have found the same conclusion. Repealing prevailing wage laws don’t save the taxpayers any money, but the workers are paid less. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/zorn/ct-prevailing-wage-debate-zorn-perspec-1028-jm-20151027-column.html - Juice - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:02 am: Chicago 20. Don’t disagree. Just trying to be nice and give Rich the benefit of the doubt. - ottawa otter - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:09 am: Well, maybe my sample is small, LaSalle County, but these here parts all we heard was the anguished screams over the 67% tax increase and that it takes a business man to run the state and roll bank the increase. Rauner campaigned on it. Quinn was defeated on it. A rerun of Ogilvie-Walker. This is bait and switch, I promise to take away the hike but end up taking over union rights. I knew the reduction wouldn’t work and was equally certain Rauner and company would wriggle out of the campaign promise. - Mason born - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:19 am: Louis On That point we agree. Until something huge happens to affect all three and shine a statewide if not nationwide spotlight on this stupidity nothing is going to change. That being said it was hard to get that from your previous comments I’ll work on my reading comprehension. Do you agree that Madigan cannot give Rauner the turnaround agenda even if he wanted to? Can’t get the votes from his people. Do you agree that Rauner has fenced himself in to where anything less than the turnaround agenda is a defeat? If we accept those two points than it’s pretty obvious it doesn’t matter whose fault it is or was. Either both sides lose or we continue in this mess. If Rauner gets anything out of this do you think he will repeat this with fy17? - Honeybear - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:19 am: God Bless you Secret Square! Bingo! There it is, there it is. Buy it, Break it, Replace it for Profit in action. - Wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:20 am: – People have died for that principle.– LCD, is that a gag? People have died for redistricting reform? Do you really think redistricting reform is the holdup here? You can’t be serious. It’s pretty whacked-out to equate Rauner’s agenda with the civil rights movement, don’t you think? - lake county democrat - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:22 am: Juice - I’ve previously commented about Rauner’s cynicism as to redistricting. I think he means it about term limits - why shouldn’t he, in Illinois it would likely inure to the GOP’s benefit (so would redistricting but not nearly as much). Doesn’t change a thing: the overwhelming majority of voters want political reform. The Dems aren’t rushing to say “drop the anti-union stuff and we’ll talk.” Review the history of political reform discussions on this site and you’ll see it amounts to terse lip service by the Madigan genuflectors along with taunts of “go win an election” (which obviously they didn’t mean). Grad School - if in those political science classes they teach you that if voters want something they shouldn’t just elect a person who can bring immense pressure to get it and then keep the pressure on that person to do it, but instead should shrug and take up Quixote like efforts instead, you’re at the wrong school. As for the bargaining power….yeah, in a sluggish economy with a hostile voter atmosphere and a more hostile governor, unions were really giving up a “nuclear option” by agreeing to mandatory arbitration for Rauner’s term in office. Guess that’s why every newspaper in the state went ballistic over the bill. - walker - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:24 am: Hate to look back, but it’s wrong to say that the tax increase was temporary because MJM wanted to protect his supermajority. First overall, he likes to maintain a healthy vote advantage in the House, but having a nominal but unusable “supermajority” does him as much harm as good. It allows the GOP to opt out of everything with an easy excuse. He probably prefers a couple of votes short a supermajority as optimal for his operations. Second, the “temporary” had as much to do with getting Republican votes as Democratic ones. There was a general belief that it couldn’t have gotten anywhere near the required votes as permanent, regardless of the actions of any leader. (too bad IMHO) It is equally disingenuous to claim that the tax increase was allowed to expire primarily because Governor-elect Rauner asked that it do so. It was scheduled to expire, and only if Quinn had won the election, might the Dems have been willing to reinstate it. Even that would have been a stretch to pull off. With Rauner as Governor-elect, it became his barge to tow, and he was clearly not ready or able to do anything of the sort at that time. It was the election result itself that was the deciding factor. - Skeptic - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:29 am: “If prevailing wage is so insignificant,” why hasn’t the Governor dropped the issue? - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:34 am: ===It is equally disingenuous to claim that the tax increase was allowed to expire primarily because Governor-elect Rauner asked that it do so. It was scheduled to expire, and only if Quinn had won the election, might the Dems have been willing to reinstate it. Even that would have been a stretch to pull off. With Rauner as Governor-elect, it became his barge to tow, and he was clearly not ready or able to do anything of the sort at that time. It was the election result itself that was the deciding factor.=== Yep. Agreed. That’s why I clearly say the Democrats “obliged” abd filling IG up with; “Then Gov-Elect Rauner should have stayed silent instead of asking, as Gov-Elect, after the election, (both facts you conveniently ignore) that the tax increase expire.” Rauner overplayed a position he didn’t need to overplay. The Democrats obliged. It was a gift. It was also an error by Rauner’s Crew to give that cover. It doesn’t make it “less true” that a Gov-Elect Rauner asked abd the Democrats obliged, also putting a great deal of heat on Rauner to nudget for less revenue. It was a Rauner calculated gamble. Democrats will raise taxes. How has that gone? - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:35 am: “That’s why I clearly say the Democrats “obliged” and followed up with;” Apologies - Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:39 am: -walker- Completely agree with everything you’re adding. Appreciate as well thoughtful input that expands understanding for all who take this stuff seriously. Too often comments push hype and talk points instead of meaningful discussion. Thanks for taking chiming in. - Lincoln Lad - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:41 am: …taking time and chiming in. - Wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:45 am: The tax increase did not have 60 House Dem votes last year when Quinn said he would sign it. Why would it have more Dem votes with Rauner as governor? That makes no sense. - Juice - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 11:48 am: Adding a third point to Walker. When the tax increase passed, the Speaker was one shy of the super-majority, so it wasn’t there to protect. And he had just lost six seats. (Sky point for Walker). - Juice - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 12:05 pm: And LCD, less than one third of the GA have been in office for ten years or longer (not taking into account announced retirements). Granted, some of those members are duds, but some are some of the more thoughtful and knowledgable members there. So how is a constitutional amendment that won’t even be on the ballot for over one year, that impacts less than one third of a branch of government that is one third of the Government and will not actually have any sort of Governmental impact until 2027 worth holding social services and higher Ed hostage. I mean by then, Donald Trump will have already completed his second term as our collective overlord. No way is the Governor actually holding out for that. - Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 12:25 pm: Amen to that. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 12:30 pm: @Mason born: ===”Do you agree that Madigan cannot give Rauner the turnaround agenda even if he wanted to? Can’t get the votes from his people. Do you agree that Rauner has fenced himself in to where anything less than the turnaround agenda is a defeat?”=== They both have painted themselves in opposite corners of the same room. They need to blame themselves, then put their Big Boy Pants on and ruin their paint jobs for the good of Illinois. Term limits and redistricting seem to be wildly popular with voters. Freezing property taxes also falls into the same category. To a lesser extent, Workers’ Compensation and Unemployment Insurance reforms also seem more popular than unpopular. Yet the will of the public, which included a few referendums last election that the Democrats never took action over, continues to be ignored in favor of desperately maintaining the status quo. A more responsive government to the people that elects it may lead to an economic renaissance, although I have to remember that this Illinois and we would most certainly screw all of that or part of that up. Comp and unemployment are serious business concerns. Freezing property taxes also falls into that category. That Rahm rascal must know it is coming because he hammered through a huge property tax increase just last week. The Turn Around Agenda is being portrayed as being crazy, out of touch and a menace to this State. I sincerely doubt that Michael Madigan, with all of his political skills, would suddenly find himself being powerless and run out of town if that Agenda finds it’s way to enactment. He survived in the past and prospered and I would expect him to continue to do so. With that said, all that is left is the High School Drama stuff that demeans our state. - lake county democrat - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 12:36 pm: Juice - those are different arguments. I’m against term limits myself (though not strongly). But the polls consistently show overwhelming support for them - it’s a sickness of the state’s democracy that there’s no other way to get a vote on them. As for the merits: a big part of the argument for term limits is that it forces the leadership to turnover. It’s not just anyone who has been there for more than 10 years or longer. And some would say 33% over 10 years is pretty bad, not pretty good. It’s also argued that you detract from the advantage of name recognition and voters will more thoroughly evaluate candidates because of the turnover. In any event, you can make at least a valid claim that politicians seeking to keep a long-term/I’ll-leave-when-I-want career open are more subject to special interests (you can make a valid claim that term limits will have the opposite effect too, but those believing the former would find it worth fighting for). The “hostage” language leaves me cold - Ted Kennedy and Walter Mondale tried to do exactly the same thing to Richard Nixon for campaign finance reform. If the Democrats want to end the suffering to higher education and recipients of social services, they can pass their own budget - they just are either unwilling to pass a fair one or think the voters are too dumb to credit them if they did. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 12:47 pm: ===Freezing property taxes also falls into the same category.=== - Louis G Atsaves - Why do you seemly always forget the destroying of collective bargaining and prevailing wage when you talk of property taxes? An… “oversight”… on your part? - Chicago 20 - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 1:14 pm: LGA- “The Turn Around Agenda is being portrayed as being crazy, out of touch and a menace to this State” For once, I can agree with something you said. Rauner’s Turn Around Agenda is a canard. - Mason born - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 1:14 pm: Louis It is the Governors fault if his turnaround agenda isn’t being portrayed as crazy etc. as you say. He isn’t selling it to the public I have heard him say reform a few thousand times what I haven’t heard is him explain what reforms he wants and how they will help John Q Public. Maybe in hindsight the money spent to blame MJM would have been better spent convincing the public those reforms were needed. I think you missed my point. No voting for the turnaround agenda wouldn’t end MJM but what it would do is end many of his members. Since MJM can’t deliver anything without his members votes, and his members won’t vote to in essence retire themselves he cannot deliver it period. - blue dog dem - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 1:33 pm: ROI-Rauner Owns It? - UIC Guy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 1:44 pm: @Skeptic, 11:29: Removing it represents an insignificant saving to local government. This does not mean that it is not a significant, even large, loss to the individuals who benefit from it. - Skeptic - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 1:55 pm: UIC Guy: I wasn’t arguing for or against prevailing wage, just countering the argument that if it’s so insignificant that the D’s should just pass it anyway with a “and vice versa.” - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 2:07 pm: @Mason born, “He isn’t selling it to the public . . .” I agree. I watched the entire video yesterday and came back impressed. More like that is needed to sell his agenda. Include position papers with projections and figures. Oswego Willy seems upset that I left a few things out in my response to you. But then again, he is always upset with what I say. So riddle me this: if the prevailing wage provisions Rauner wants results in “minimal” or very modest savings, “not worth even talking about” then why are they being fought against tooth and nail? I always understood that you negotiate away the items that don’t hurt your position. That conflict I am having a difficult time trying to reconcile under these circumstances. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 2:19 pm: ===So riddle me this: if the prevailing wage provisions Rauner wants results in “minimal” or very modest savings, “not worth even talking about” then why are they being fought against tooth and nail?=== If it’s so little, why ask for it at all? Why must Gov. Rauner hace it? Maybe Gov. Rauner doesn’t thibk its about the ROI, financially, but the ROI to destro Unions. “So riddle me this: if the prevailing wage provisions Rauner wants results in “minimal” or very modest savings, “not worth even talking about” then why are they being fought against tooth and nail?” If Rauner agrees it minimal too, I’m sure prevailing wage dismissed quickly by the Governor. Whew. Thanks - Louis G Atsaves -, and thanks for pointing out your purposeful omissions - Me too - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 2:21 pm: Louis, just because the savings is minimal, does not mean that the cost to workers is insignificant. In fact, prevailing wage increases wages for people it doesn’t even apply to. The point is that for a tiny amount of savings, we would be depressing wages in a very real way. This wage reduction would further reduce demand, and have a very real effect on the economy. - Me too - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 2:25 pm: Rauner doesn’t want the savings. He wants to weaken unions, which will hurt democratic fundraising and also increase corporate influence over both parties. If you think corporate influence is less corrupt than union influence I can’t help you. Unions aren’t bad bro. In fact they are the only bulwark against the interests of the super wealthy. Even you can’t think a large percentage of them have middle class people’s interests in mind when they spend millions of dollars buying politicians. - Dinsdale - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 3:05 pm: Pat Quinn’s Cutback Amendment of 1980 created Mike Madigan. - Blue dog dem - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 3:32 pm: Drive 150 miles south of a major metropolitan area, bid out some work, go back home and see if prevailing wages aren’t significantly lower. Extrapolate that wage over a year and see if you could live in Lincoln Park,Joliet or a Edwardsville. Don’t let anybody tell you it’s NOT significant. Was in Arkansas a couple weeks ago. I saw a standard of living that looked third world. - Wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 3:42 pm: – Include position papers with projections and figures.– Louis, your man-crush has you seeing funny. Those things don’t exist. If they did, we would have seen them by now, don’t you think? Because, in case you missed the point of the entire post when you were sounding out the words, there is not a reasonsable “economic and fiscal” rationale for this strategy. Let’s take, as an example of the lack of rationale, the goofy word-salad from Todd the Chamber Man, a real business go-getter, point-by point: According to Todd, under the governor’s strategy, this is what’s being restored: “Fiscal sanity” — $6 billion and growing in FY16 deficit, alone, plus billions more for social services and unis out in tne cold. Then, you have hundreds of millions in dedicated revenues, like MFT, that you’re being taxed for, every day, gathering dust in the Treasury and not going for their intended purposes. Because…. hang in there. “Basic competency” — Many examples, but my favorite is the downgrade of McPier seven notches from AAA to BBB+ , because the dog obviously ate some superstars’s homework when this routine transfer of dedicated funds was vetoed, then, sheepishly, after-the-fact, re-instated with a new bill. Blago never screwed that up at the height of his battles with Madigan. “Partnership with business” — That’s a real knee slapper. Businesses aren’t being paid, by the billions. They like to get paid, for services rendered. When they don’t, they throw people out of work, go into debt and stop services, all of which are happening right now. There’s your ROI, Louis. Sell it. - Chicago 20 - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 3:55 pm: Blue Dog Dem- Prevailing wage laws are based on the county’s prevailing wage, not the State’s. Prevailing wages 150 miles south of metropolitan areas are based on that county’s prevailing wages, not the metropolitan areas. Extrapolate that for every county. Do some research. - Louis G. Atsaves - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 4:08 pm: @wordslinger, you truly are slipping. I said INCLUDE position papers. If that forced your rant I truly pity you. - Wordslinger - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 4:23 pm: Louis, I know you’re hooked on phonics, but read more closely. I quoted you accurately: – “Include position papers with projections and figures.– What’s your beef? It’s Nov. 3. Obviously, those “position papers with projections and figures” don’t exist, and are not possible, or we would have seen them by now. Again, Louis, that’s tne point of the column. Lawyer Louis, keep pounding the table when you can’t pound the evidence. - IL17Progressive - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 5:13 pm: Only thing Demos should do is repeat “Gov Brucie & Highly paid Staff & GOP acolytes : Show us the analysis that shows how {idea} aids in (1) paying backlog of bills, (2) making stable budget environment, (3) pays the unfunded pension liability.” Rich’s prevailing wage is one analysis which assumes that spending decreases by the some % due to prevailing wage. That is a FALSE assumption. Every GOP minion I know claims prevailing wage is a way to do more with the SAME $ - not to reduce total spending. I’ve previously giving my analysis of that vision. The result being a 10-15% DROP in state revenues from sales and income taxes because far fewer $ going to PEOPLE who pay those two taxes. { I appolgize for cross post. } - Roscoe Tom - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 5:15 pm: Dear Gov. Rauner, let’s start over and 1) please for the first time read the ILLINOIS CONSTITUTION AND 2) SUBMIT A Balanced Budget - HB000 - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 5:55 pm: At least the Democrats have filed bills, had debates, and voted on budget legislation…. If you want to see the GOP proposal, you must look up HB000. It’s counterpart, SB000 - the Senate GOP caucus budget proposal also is pending. Analysis is easy. They are both blank sheets of paper… - Blue dog dem - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 6:39 pm: Chicago 20. Don’t get your point. Eliminate prevailing wage and you will see Cairo wages in Chicago. You won’t see Chicago wages in Cairo. - Joe M - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 7:35 pm: Can someone show us a study where eliminating prevailing wages in a state improved the economy of the state? There are a number of studies that show eliminating prevailing wages has hurt various states, and especially lowered wages in those states. - Blue dog dem - Tuesday, Nov 3, 15 @ 7:46 pm: Joe M.- the Raun Man wants to pay us blue collar guys $8/hr. He wants us to pay lots of taxes so he can give out EDGE tax credits to corporate America so the CEO and officers can make a couple of million/ yr. not throwing a pity party for myself. Hell ,I chose my profession. Just a shame that guys like him don’t understand blisters and back aches. - Chicago 20 - Wednesday, Nov 4, 15 @ 7:37 am: Blue Dog- Chicago’s prevailing wages are Cook county’s prevailing wages. Cairo’s prevailing wages are Alexander county’s prevailing wages. The prevailing wages are different in every county because they are based on that county’s wages. A worker in Chicago would be paid Cook county’s prevailing wages in Cook county when working in Cook county, if that same person works in Cairo they would be paid the Alexander county prevailing wage rate. - Harry - Wednesday, Nov 4, 15 @ 3:23 pm: “No one is to blame, we all had a bad few months but now we have a deal.” That’s how you might get movement. Sometimes you have to rise above principle in order to get things done. Plenty of opportunity to fight about it in the 2016 and 2018 elections. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.