The concept of a public meeting on November 18th by the four legislative leaders and the governor sounds nice, but will it actually move the ball forward and break the months-long governmental impasse?
As you probably know, a group of good government types recently called on the state’s leaders to sit down and talk about solving the state’s budget issues. The four tops and the governor haven’t met as a group since late May.
House Speaker Michael Madigan quickly accepted and then suggested that the meeting be held in public. The move has quite a few people scratching their heads because nobody expects anything will be solved while the public is looking on.
So, why bother?
A big reason is that the Democrats want the public to see what they’ve been seeing with their own eyes for months. The governor walks in, they say, exchanges pleasantries, then repeats the same basic talking points that he’s been making since April.
Top Democratic sources say that Rauner cannot talk in detail about much of his Turnaround Agenda. They’ve asked relatively uncomplicated questions about tort reform, for example, and claim they’ve been met with empty stares.
“They can prep [Rauner] on the budget for the next month and it won’t do any good,” fretted a top Republican shortly after Madigan suggested a public meeting.
It’s not that the governor isn’t bright. He is a very smart man. It’s just that he has never been a detail guy. And a big part of the problem with these negotiations is that many of the topics are nothing but details. Even the far more experienced Madigan might be able to delve down only a couple of levels into the workers’ comp issue, but he doesn’t have the expertise to go much deeper than that, Democrats admit.
What they need to do is set up some expert committees and let them deal with the details. But the experts can’t do that until the tops give them some sort of direction, and everybody is just floundering right now.
Anyway, back to the upcoming meeting.
Gov. Rauner did his level best the other day to once again tamp down expectations ahead of the meeting. “I don’t think it’s going to matter much,” the governor said, noting correctly that people don’t like to compromise in front of cameras.
Rauner and his legislative allies have been insisting that the governor be allowed to set the agenda, which has some of the good government reformers who initially proposed the sit-down worried that Gov. Rauner would attempt to highjack the meeting and insist on talking only about his “Turnaround Agenda,” which he wants resolved before he will negotiate the budget. The agenda includes some harshly anti-union proposals on collective bargaining, as well as some unacceptable (to Democrats and unions) changes in the workers’ compensation program and things like term limits and redistricting reform.
But the governor also said something last week which went almost completely unnoticed. The governor told reporters that he was planning a “comprehensive agenda” for the meeting.
“We will include structural reform in the agenda,” Rauner said (predictably, since that’s code for his Turnaround stuff), and then said, “We will include revenue and taxes on the agenda, we’ll include spending levels on the agenda.”
The idea may be to put the Democrats on the spot and finally make them talk about what taxes they want to raise.
House Speaker Michael Madigan reiterated his support for new revenues recently in Chicago. “The number one problem facing the government of the State of Illinois is the state budget deficit,” he said for the millionth time, according to the Chicago Sun-Times. “Which means that we have to get together to talk, negotiate, do some cuts and do some new revenue. There should be a balanced approach.”
Madigan, however, has never specifically said what “new revenue” he would actually back, and neither has his fellow Democrat Senate President John Cullerton. The governor’s people have been quietly pointing out this glaring omission for the past several days.
The governor told top Democrats during a private meeting months ago that he would be willing to raise the income tax to 4.75 percent, which is a percentage point higher than its current level, if he got what he wanted on the Turnaround Agenda. The Democrats have not yet accepted that proposal and have apparently been waiting for the governor to make his offer public.
I doubt anything gets done, but it might be fun to watch.
- Frenchie Mendoza - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 8:41 am:
The best hope for both sides — especially Rauner — is to use the meeting to announce a budget — not start the negotiations.
What would be truly astonishing — and, I know, totally impractical — would be for both sides to admit that secret negotiations have been going on for several weeks and that they’ve come to a tentative agreement.
- Dilemma - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 8:42 am:
We have a massive deficit. We can’t cut our way to a balanced budget. I’d like to see the governor’s balanced budget that has a 4.75% tax, then there is a place to begin negotiating. If that tax rate doesn’t balance the budget, then he needs to come back with one that does. Then, if the democrats want to protect programs that were cut or increase spending on something, then they can ask for even more taxes. But the baseline has to be determined, and it is that baseline that the governor, not the democrats, is asking for.
- Arizona Bob - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 8:42 am:
The 4.75 rate would put the flat rate higher than the Arizona PROGRESSIVE rate.
We’re already getting bunches of businesses moving in from California (Texas, Nevada and Arizona are where most Cali businesses are going-1500 left over the last 7 years). Illinois businesses are also more than welcome. Leave the corruption and festering dysfunction behind and enjoy the sun!
- Anonymous - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 8:49 am:
If Rauner isn’t a details guy, then who among his superstars is that guy? Either they are all Big Thinkers exclusively, or they do have detail guys and either can’t get Rauner to understand their points, or he doesn’t care enough to work a bit and grasp the nuts and bolts and repercussions of same. Having an open meeting should be revealing one way or the other. I fear it will be the realization of all our worst fears have been realized for all to see. No more conjecture.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 8:50 am:
The number one reason Gov. Rauner hijacked the meetin’ was to make sure what has happened in the Governor’s own obstinance can be spun by the Governor’s Office and the Governor as part of Rauner’s own negotiating “style”
Playing by the Good Government group’s game plan and premise would leave Bruce Rauner twistin’ in the wind as someone takes 7 minutes of his time, reads from a sheet his edicts, sees no capitulation, and then Rauner moves on, says “things are movin’ along” and the fantasy of gettin’ a budget continues.
Rauner can NOT be seen as failing to understand compromise.
Bruce Rauner is the Governor of Illinois.
More like Jim Edgar, Mr. Rauner, less Rod Blagojevich.
…
- Stones - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 8:54 am:
At least it will be good theatre. My fear is that this will only make our problem worse, not better.
- Robert the Bruce - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 9:07 am:
Enjoyed the column!
The agenda (structural reform/turnaround; revenue; expenses) seems reasonable and is probably not too far from what the GooGoos would’ve developed.
Rauner could have just let them develop the agenda, ended up with a similar agenda, without appearing so partisan.
- Facts are Stubborn Things - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 9:08 am:
It is a start in the process of how you start the process. Illinois must have a budget, but does not have to have a “turn around agenda”. Somehow, a budget deal must be reached, but with something for Rauner to claim a path forward on his “agenda” or at least he holds out long enough that he gives in and the “give in” becomes the rally cry for Republicans in the 2016 legislative elections.
- Facts are Stubborn Things - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 9:11 am:
What has to change is the idea that if the Dems will give Rauner his “turn around agenda” then Rauner will let the Dems raise taxes. Not a good deal for the Dems….we cut our core and get blamed for the tax increase. Any tax increase will have to have a sizable number of Republicans on the bill. Will need to get past January so that only a majority is needed to pass and each side can protect members better.
- Norseman - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 9:21 am:
Good column. I never expected the meeting to in the impasse. I think the benefit of the meeting was to garner public attention to the lack of negotiations by the leaders and to start a negotiations process.
- @MisterJayEm - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 9:23 am:
“The governor told top Democrats during a private meeting months ago that he would be willing to raise the income tax to 4.75 percent, which is a percentage point higher than its current level, if he got what he wanted on the Turnaround Agenda.”
As others have noted previously, Rauner continues to operate under the mistaken premise that the Democrats see a tax increase as a carrot. They don’t. They see it as a mathematical necessity.
Until the governor’s team accepts the fact that a tax increase is a budgetary inevitability (and therefore non-partisan or bi-partisan), I’m not holding out much hope.
– MrJM
- Roamin' Numeral - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 9:30 am:
The tax increase is a mathematical necessity. And 4.75% isn’t high enough. And the longer we wait, the higher it must go.
- Frenchie Mendoza - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 9:34 am:
MrJM is spot on.
The tax increase is a given. Whether Radogno wants to go all partisan on it and label a D tax increase — whatever. Both sides will get it.
But the more interesting question — and one that Rauner and the media have (IMHO) skillfully avoided is what will Rauner *give* the D’s? The tax increase ain’t it.
I mean, what is Rauner willing to give up? Not what he *has* to give up because it made no sense in the first place.
But what do the D’s get out of the deal?
For a supposedly successful businessman — which I’ve always known was bunko through and through — Rauner is amazingly dense. Maybe he ain’t dumb. But he sure acts like he is.
- walker - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 9:47 am:
Madigan might not have stated exactly what tax revenues he will support, but he clearly stated what amount would be necessary to balance the spending budget the GA passed months ago.
The problem is that the number is now higher, due to the impact of the impasse.
- illinifan - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 9:57 am:
The strategy he uses with the dems of coming in saying what he wants and providing no detail is also what he is doing to the republicans. Both parties are frustrated with him, the only difference one is scared to openly talk about their frustration. What we will see on the 18th is not the reality of what is happening, but rather the show each side wants to put forward. Unfortunately real negotiations will not occur until they agree to a committee that will negotiate behind closed doors, and as has been said, that will not happen until someone actually defines the desired outcomes, rather than a talking point.
- Anonymous - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 10:05 am:
I would like the tax question on the table who’s behind the millionaire tax and/or who wants to tax the elderly
- In a Minute - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 10:08 am:
I hope it is substantive and each presents their side effectively. I think if Rauner is able to show how much the pension costs hamstring state governments ability to manage out of this crisis and increase borrowing costs, then he will have advanced his cause well.
Madigan and Cullerton need to present a united plan for how they would deal with underfunded pensions that doesn’t rely on increased revenue in such amounts that businesses are driven away from the state at an even faster rate.
When was the last time Illinois had a constitutional convention or ballot initiative to deal with the pension guarantee language? That should also be discussed.
- Formerly Known As... - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 10:10 am:
Knowing that Democrats cannot support certain things before petition deadlines gives Rauner additional room to take some public positions that Madigan and Cullerton cannot support for at least another month, even if Rauner himself has no plans of eventually supporting those positions in January.
The timing of this ==meeting== does not help encourage compromise, but the show will be chaotic.
- One of the 35 - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 10:19 am:
For years the GA has been as disingenuous as the US Congress in making laws that apply to others but not themselves. A case in point is the Illinois Open Meetings Act requirements which apply to all units of local government. (they cannot be trusted, like you can trust the Illinois GA). If the powerful 4 tops are required to meet and discuss issues in public, as they require of local governments, wonder what would happen?
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 10:24 am:
===I think if Rauner is able to show how much the pension costs hamstring state governments ability to manage out of this crisis and increase borrowing costs, then he will have advanced his cause well.===
I think the downgrade, with Rauner as governor, already makes clear the cost. They all know the cost, the cost isn’t at issue.
===Madigan and Cullerton need to present a united plan for how they would deal with underfunded pensions that doesn’t rely on increased revenue in such amounts that businesses are driven away from the state at an even faster rate.===
No.
Governor Rauner needs to present a budget that can be voted on, addressing “your” concerns as Article VIII, Section 2(a) describes. Please, please keep up.
===When was the last time Illinois had a constitutional convention or ballot initiative to deal with the pension guarantee language? That should also be discussed.===
Considering all the hoops needed to get to an end game of a convention versus having a needed budget, today (yesterday!), your dorm room fantasy of solving all the ills of Illinois with Sophomore Year “demands” is lacking in really understanding what’s at play, and what can end the impasse.
You’re not helping, even if you think you are. Sorry.
- Anonymous - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 10:56 am:
Rauner is the only one offering any substantial alternatives to business as usual at the moment. Madigan is becoming an obstructionist offering few meaningful remedies.
- Just Me - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 10:57 am:
It can’t hurt to try something new, and if a public meeting moves the ball forward a little bit, fine with me.
But yeah, nothing will probably happen other than everyone talking and then waiting to see if that moves public support any.
- walker - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 10:58 am:
Anonymous 10:56
Yes we know that is the campaign message. Now go back to work.
- Quiet Sage - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 11:18 am:
What’s generally not known, and this article alludes to, is that Madigan is also not at all a detail guy. McPike (especially), Hannig, Mautino, and Currie have at different times served as his detail back-up within the Democratic leadership through the years.
- walker - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 11:31 am:
Is there a logical route to agreement, that minimizes the blame-throwing?
Perhaps an initial negotiation on a total yearly spending budget, along with tradeoffs related to the Turnaround Agenda priorities — And then Tax levels treated last, presented as what arithmetic requires to balance the agreed spending budget.
Not easy, by any route.
- RNUG - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 12:28 pm:
== I think if Rauner is able to show how much the pension costs hamstring state governments ability to manage out of this crisis and increase borrowing costs, then he will have advanced his cause well. ==
It doesn’t matter what kind of case Rauner puts together on the pensions. He can’t come up with a constitutional proposal to negate that debt. Nobody seems top get that ‘Tier 2′ WAS the constitutional reform; now you have to pay off the debt.
If the explanation is just an excuse to pass another unconstitutional bill delaying work on the pension debt, it is a total waste of time.
Now if Rauner intends to use the (more fully explained) pension debt as an excuse for raising taxes, he could have done that months ago.
- RNUG - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 12:33 pm:
===When was the last time Illinois had a constitutional convention or ballot initiative to deal with the pension guarantee language? That should also be discussed.===
Again, that doesn’t rather. ‘Tier 2′ already changed the rules. Even if the Pension Clause was successfully removed, the $110 pension funding shortfall still exists and still must be paid.
When is everyone going to understand the ONLY LEGAL SOLUTION is to pay the debt?
- RNUG - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 12:35 pm:
darned auto-correct …
Again, that doesn’t matter. ‘Tier 2′ already changed the rules. Even if the Pension Clause was successfully removed, the $110B pension funding shortfall still exists and still must be paid.
- Demoralized - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 1:13 pm:
==When is everyone going to understand the ONLY LEGAL SOLUTION is to pay the debt?==
Doesn’t matter how many times you say it. Some people simply won’t accept it.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 1:22 pm:
What do they hope to accomplish with this public meeting?
Political points.
- Mama - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 2:18 pm:
Why wait until the 18th to hold the meeting of the 5 leaders? Why not do it while everyone is in Springfield?
- Dilemma - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 3:39 pm:
In a minute ==When was the last time Illinois had a constitutional convention or ballot initiative to deal with the pension guarantee language? That should also be discussed.==
The problem with the Constitutional language is not that pensions are guaranteed, but that there is nothing in the Constitution requiring that money be appropriated to fund the pensions. If you want to hold a convention to fix the problem, then you need to add language that says not only are pensions guaranteed, but that they must be funded.
All that happens if you remove the pension guarantee is that you make pensions worthless because every time there is a fiscal issue, they will just raid the pension funds again. It was that raiding that led to the pension guarantee in the first place.
- Lucky Pierre - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 3:46 pm:
I sense a recurring theme- Rauner doesn’t know we passed workers comp a few years ago, Rauner doesn’t understand his budget, Rauner’s can’t comprehend tort reform. Illinois is not a business. Only democrats understand how to run state government. Except Democrats don’t understand how to run state government because they “like to spend money but not tax people ” as Senator Cullerton says
They like to talk in sound bites but not offer specifics and they accept no blame for the condition of our state or their own unbalanced budget. They are really good at deflecting but have no desire to make Illinois more competitive for employers
- Wordslinger - Monday, Nov 9, 15 @ 9:35 pm:
I find it troubling that they can “prep the governor on the budget for a month and it won’t do any good.”
He’s the chief executive, the manager.
What is distracting him that he can’t do a deep dive on the subject?