44 Comments - ANON. - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:36 am: Enjoy your beer at the mansion after. - hisgirlfriday - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:37 am: Not paying human service providers at all is temporarily more efficient I suppose. - illini97 - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:37 am: I’d be more inclined to listen to any proposals to “fix” social services if the numbers and research for his other proposals added up. They don’t. Let’s hear the numbers and see the background information full of research. - 360 Degree TurnAround - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:38 am: The Governor’s goal today will be to flail his arms and make it look like he has accomplished something. He won’t be able to help himself though, he will take his usual shots at labor and Madigan. And it sounds like he will try to privatize services. - Blake - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:41 am: I think it is inaccurate to even call it privatization since taxes will be going to work government outsources - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:41 am: === And it sounds like he will try to privatize services. === lol They already are. - AC - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:42 am: All this was deliberate, the impasse makes sense now. It doesn’t make it any less of a tragedy, but it does make it easier to understand. - Cubs in '16 - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:43 am: So now he suddenly has a panacea for social service delivery? Strange he hasn’t mentioned it before now. You’d think that would have been one of his main campaign talking points. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:43 am: efficiency in Rauner means centralization. expect more statewide grants and fewer local providers, as a way to address service gaps. - 360 Degree TurnAround - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:45 am: === And it sounds like he will try to privatize services. ==lol They already are. == It depends, does “privatizing” mean just not doing those services? - Spliff - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:49 am: So which family friend or donor will open a company and bid to be the clearing house for a master contract on social services? They will provide the oversight we need for just a tiny slice of that pie. - Downstate - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:50 am: Through all the noise, it seems pretty clear that all parties support pension reform. Maybe that’s where the parties should start. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:53 am: To the Post, Diana Rauner, President of Ounce of Prevention probably understands the challenges better than the Governor of Illinois, who happens to be her husband. Why is this significant? As Rich points out clearly, there is a very huge network of Social Service providers that have been working hand and glove with the state, and programs, social service programs not only have had bipartisan support, Republican Governors realized that they could lead in making that relationship stronger and better, and saw “big long term gains” in helping people, a responsibility that both parties have taken seriously in the past. So, back to President Rauner, Ounce, and Social Services. The gutting of the safety net by Governor Rauner by refusing to pay what is currently owed Illinois’ social service partners will make any plan “announced” today under greater scrutiny, and with far larger challenges than there needed to be if Illinois currently had a budget. Budgets, they frame out these type of programs because Governors craft budgets. Governors take the budget document and make clear, with financial and administrative costs their priorities. What’s mind-boggling to me are Raunerites claiming a budget is up to the Legislature, and now they will point to a program, or idea, or whatever this turns out to be, and say that’s Rauner governing. Ok, but won’t seeing of prioritizing this in a budget make it more real? Budgets define and give value, real and otherwise, to programs and ideas like this. The irony is holding a budget hostage, hurting social services, a President of a Social Service organization vouching for a governor that’s there’s no social agenda and the State of the State, year two, has a social agenda, and no budgetary way to see its importance. Budgets are owned by Governors because ideas like these need to be seen in a document showing its value. Otherwise, this speech will just be hollow words. - Cassandra - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:57 am: Unconstitutional pension reform, Downstate. There is no place to start, unless they want to eliminate pensions for new hires, which has its own problems. I guess the pension dance will be an annual fixture for years to come, but they’re (we’re) still gonna have to pay up. - Fusion - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:59 am: A lot of these critical services for seniors, developmentally disabled, the poor, etc. are performed by people that aren’t exactly making Bruce Rauner money. But it’s important work. So while it’s easy to rail against “bureaucracy,” think about the worker that’s helping an elderly person use the washroom — while making $12 an hour. These social service employees should be sainted. Not demonized. And they certainly shouldn’t be unemployed. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:02 am: –“Historically, the state has spent most of its resources — tens of billions of dollars — on a broken patchwork of reactive, expensive, and ineffective interventions,” Rauner is set to say, according to prepared remarks.– Oh, so running LSSI and Catholic Charities into the ground has been a good thing, part of the humanitarian plan. “Danny, I’ve sent boys younger than you to the electric chair. I didn’t want to, you understand, I felt I owed it to them.” Judge Smails. - Frenchie Mendoza - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:06 am: Doesn’t movement on this stuff — any of this — depend on a budget? How can he talk about transforming X or Y without a budget in place? And what happens to the social service agencies that are shutting down or have shut down. What, Rauner’s got his own ideas about what agencies are important? Or which are necessary? “Data-driven outcomes” is just a buzzword for a controlling authority. It’s not about data — and it’s certainly not about outcomes — it’s about manipulating the data for a specific outcome in order to gain political power. That’s all. - Earnest - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:09 am: I agree that the overall approach to social service can be improved. I agree that outcomes and other metrics have utility. But it’s a broken patchwork because it doesn’t have the resources. Any improvement will have to start with th at. In some ways, it’s like his new IT department–the way it will become better and more efficient will cost money in terms of modernizing software and maintaining up to date hardware. I read what I wrote, and see it could well be criticized as “you just want to raise taxes and throw more money at the problems.” I’d have to say that I do, but I support measuring the return on investment and adjusting as we go along. - 13th - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:11 am: is he really looking to his “privatize services” taking away from the “not for profits” entities and giving it to for profit companies to provide those services, I am sure they will not take a big chunk off the top to “manage” the workers and I am sure the worker will get paid big dollars lol not for staff make very little money for all they do - walker - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:16 am: Certainly hope his idea is better than: “If we can just fix the state with my Turnaround Agenda, then we won’t have so many people needing these services.” - Cassandra - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:18 am: I don’t think most of us include direct caregivers as part of the social service bureaucracy. We’re talking about highly paid administrators and other office staff. How many middle managers does an agency need in the internet age. In the private sector, middle management is disappearing. In the public sector, less so. And some of those executive compensation packages in the nonprofit sector are pretty plush. We’re helping pay for that. - Try-4-Truth - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:28 am: ===- Cassandra - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:18 am: I don’t think most of us include direct caregivers as part of the social service bureaucracy. We’re talking about highly paid administrators and other office staff. How many middle managers does an agency need in the internet age. In the private sector, middle management is disappearing. In the public sector, less so. And some of those executive compensation packages in the nonprofit sector are pretty plush. We’re helping pay for that.=== Do you read what you write? Or is it a stream of conscientiousness thing? Not-for-profits fund raise and have revenue sources that are not governmental in order to subsidize state sanctioned services. That’s a fact,and I do know what I’m talking about here. Are you saying everyone should work for free? Everyone who delivers state sanctioned services should be poor? Do you ask that from for-profit companies that contract for state sanctioned activities? How about the CEO’s of road construction companies. How about owners of private equity companies who invest state pensions? Oh, that’s right, they should make whatever they want and use that money to run for governor. Please try again. - 13th - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:45 am: who do you think do work for not for profits - crazybleedingheart - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:56 am: Yes, services are privatized. But there is an incredible difference between privatized services being provided by Lutheran Social Services of Illinois, vs by G4S or CCC or GEO (or GTCR) or any of the other scam for-profits the poor in FL, GA, MS, TX have to deal with. - crazybleedingheart - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 10:59 am: That is what his code of “paying for results” means. It means social services run like a caricature charter school. Push out those who need the most help, keep those on the state dime, inflate the outcome numbers, help no one, deplete public resources, profit. It’s tried and true. But Illinois used to be better than that. - VanillaMan - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 11:02 am: “Historically, the state has spent most of its resources — tens of billions of dollars — on a broken patchwork of reactive, expensive, and ineffective interventions,” Rauner is set to say, according to prepared remarks. Only a fool could say this, not an experienced governor or government leader. I’ve been asking simple basic questions about government service to highly intelligent people. Their answers expose them as being completely unaware of the complexities and enormous size of the Illinois government. Rauner has been governor a year - he still hasn’t figured this out? It takes a smart leader to explain what the average citizen doesn’t understand, but needs to know. Rauner isn’t that leader. He sees a mess? What has he been doing in office over the past 12 months? Our current social services are not designed by mistakes. There are more reasons for seeing what it is he objects to - than he seems to have time to even understand. The fallacy that we can just centralize to make the current system more efficient is an idea that literally everyone without an understanding of government, has. Someone get Rauner a veteran legislator to explain this to him. Someone offer Rauner some basic Professor Jim Edgar classes. Every new governor says this, because they just don’t understand or appreciate how complex and personalized governments have needed to become. Rauner’s view of government wouldn’t work in the business world, what makes him think it would ever be appropriate for the government world? Say McDonalds want more efficiencies - are you going to see them return to just offering burgers, fries and shakes in paper wrapping and paper bags? They will be suddenly dropping every other menu item? They will need to return to offering a combo under a buck - because they will find no one at their restaurants anymore. Control freaks demand change in order to simplify what it is they don’t understand, can’t understand or won’t understand. People like Rauner see inefficiencies because HE DOES NOT UNDERSTAND what it is he is seeing. How about learning your job, Bruce? - crazybleedingheart - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 11:08 am: ==Oh, so running LSSI and Catholic Charities into the ground has been a good thing, part of the humanitarian plan.== This speech might be one small step toward transparency. You know, if you read between the lines. - All the king's men - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 11:13 am: Did they ever finish the renovarious to that mansion he is supposed to live in? - Anon221 - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 11:18 am: All the king’s men- Maybe the Illinois Executive Mansion Association (an organization SINCE 1972) has been waiting for the First lady’s new COS to get on board to be able to do anything…. https://www.facebook.com/illinoismansion/ http://www.illinois.gov/gov/about/executivemansion/Pages/default.aspx (BTW- the Donate page link is broken on this site. Maybe DoIT was FixIT??) https://illinoismansion.org/ - crazybleedingheart - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 11:18 am: ==The Commission earlier this month recommended 14 reforms that can help us achieve our goal of SAFELY reducing the State’s prison population by 25 percent by 2025== So the answer is no, they’re not at 25. What’s the number? - crazybleedingheart - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 11:21 am: Sorry. Wrong post. - Mama - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 11:27 am: ++- Spliff - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:49 am:++ My guess is his wife. - crazybleedingheart - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 11:43 am: == - Spliff - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 9:49 am: So which family friend or donor will open a company and bid to be the clearing house for a master contract on social services? They will provide the oversight we need for just a tiny slice of that pie. == Wife? Nah, the “blind” trust can handle that business. If not these cats, someone just like them. http://www.gtcr.com/investments/healthcare/?=company-correct-care-solutions - Lt. Guv. - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 12:14 pm: The man MUST learn how to pronounce a “g” to be taken seriously. Really! That said, he’s comparing us to TX. Has he seen the price of oil lately? The layoffs in TX are epic. - Cassandra - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 2:10 pm: There is a difference between working for free and compensation packages worth hundreds of of thousands of dollars, not to mention lots of highly-compensated aides. Many nonprofit CEO’s are very highly paid by anyone’s lights and their numerous office aides aren’t starving either. This is not, of course, limited to Illinois nonprofits. But some of that plush compensation package does come out of government contracts. The ones we taxpayers pay for. - Anon221 - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 3:01 pm: Cassandra- please provide actual examples and numbers with links to the non-profits’ financials. Otherwise, your comments are only drive-by worthy. BTW, I have worked for a state non-profit (now defunct), and we never had any “highly compensated aides”. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 3:08 pm: ===- Cassandra - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 2:10 pm: There is a difference between working for free and compensation packages worth hundreds of of thousands of dollars, not to mention lots of highly-compensated aides. Many nonprofit CEO’s are very highly paid by anyone’s lights and their numerous office aides aren’t starving either. This is not, of course, limited to Illinois nonprofits. But some of that plush compensation package does come out of government contracts. The ones we taxpayers pay for.=== Highly compensated compared to what? If a non-profit Exec. Dir. makes $150,000 per year, you may say that is “over paid”. But, what if that same Director runs an agency with a $5-10 million budget with 100’s of employees. Now this Director can take his/her skills to the private sector and make 2-3 times that amount. Should non-profits only recruit low-skilled executives? No, you are incorrect. I’ll add this. Many non-profits have other sources of funding besides government and their salaries are divided among these various funding sources. Please educate yourself before you type nonsense on the internet. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 3:09 pm: And, I’ll add this: Do you have the same objection to for-profit companies who do business with the state? Do you think they are over paid too? Because if you don’t, then you are just spouting nonsense. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 3:23 pm: - @MisterJayEm - has a great rule about ignoring “- Anonymous -” It’s growing on me more and more - Try-4-Truth - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 3:32 pm: Sorry, Willy. The last to anonymous were me. Cleaned my cookies and didn’t reenter my secret identity. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 3:38 pm: With humbled respect, I am sorry - Try-4-Truth - I was wrong. OW - @MisterJayEm - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 4:49 pm: Cassandra, The financials of not-for-profits are readily available on the internet. Please direct us to the charities with which the state has contracted for social services where the administrators and their aids so wildly over paid. If you know what you claim to know, it should be a simple task. If it is as rampant as you claim, it shouldn’t take any time at all. You don’t have to be seen as a dishonest smoke-blower, all you need to do is name the offending organizations and point us to your evidence. (In the spirit of charity, I’ll give you a head start: www.google.com) – MrJM - Capitol View - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 4:58 pm: Is there a date set by the Governor for a budget announcement? According to the state constitution, the Governor’s announces his recommended budget and that begins the appropriations process. Or we till doing a federal style budget reconciliation and limping into the next fiscal year, as we are limping blindly through this one? - zatoichi - Wednesday, Jan 27, 16 @ 5:36 pm: “Many nonprofit CEO’s are very highly paid by anyone’s lights and their numerous office aides aren’t starving either.” Cassandra, Please put a number to ‘Many’, what is very highly paid, and how many numerous office aides do these CEO’s have. You apparently have the data to make statements like that. Wouldn’t the same logic work for someone making $200M off state employee pension investing. Isn’t that state money that should go back into the state pension not a private pocket. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.