To the Honorable Members of
The Illinois Senate,
99th General Assembly:
Today I veto Senate Bill 2043 from the 99th General Assembly, which would explode the State’s budget deficit, exacerbate the State’s cash flow crisis, and place further strain on social service providers and recipients who are already suffering from the State’s deficit spending.
SB 2043 Would Exacerbate Our Budget and Cash Flow Deficits
Senate Bill 2043 would appropriate $721 million for the Monetary Award Program (MAP) and community colleges programs. Senate Bill 2043 proposes the same funding levels for these programs as were included in the unconstitutional, unbalanced budget passed by the General Assembly last year, which was opposed by many legislators, including Democrats, and which I vetoed.
Despite its constitutional obligation to balance the budget, the General Assembly has not put forward a plan to pay for these programs, whether through spending reductions, revenue, or cost-saving reforms. The Governor’s Office of Management and Budget concluded that Senate Bill 2043 would add $721 million to the State’s budget deficit.
Today, the Comptroller reports 48,000 vendor vouchers waiting to be paid, a $7.2 billion backlog of bills, and a grand total balance of $145 million in the general funds. This bill would spend money the State does not have.
Moreover, Senate Bill 2043’s unfunded spending would significantly exacerbate the State’s current cash flow challenges. To protect and prioritize General State Aid payments, the Comptroller would be forced to further delay payments for other goods and services across State government, putting social services further at risk. We have already seen that the State’s deficit spending is harshest to social service providers and our State’s most vulnerable residents. Senate Bill 2043 would further delay those payments at a time when those recipients are already under fiscal stress.
A Better, Constitutional Way to Fund Higher Education
The Constitution and our obligation to taxpayers require a balanced budget. Recognizing this, legislators in both the House of Representatives and the Senate put forward a plan to pay for higher education spending – not just those programs included in Senate Bill 2043, but also funding for our public universities. I thank them for their leadership.
House Bill 4539 and Senate Bill 2349 would appropriate $1.6 billion for higher education programs, while Senate Bill 2789 would authorize the Governor, Comptroller, and Treasurer to identify and implement funding by reallocating funds and reducing spending in other areas. Together these bills would fund MAP, community college programs, and our public universities, without exploding the deficit or exacerbating the State’s cash flow crisis. This is a far more fiscally responsible – and constitutional – plan for funding higher education.
Therefore, pursuant to Section 9(b) of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return Senate Bill 2043, entitled “AN ACT concerning appropriations”, with the foregoing objections, vetoed in its entirety.
Sincerely,
Bruce Rauner
GOVERNOR
I imagine we’ll be seeing some react soon.
*** UPDATE *** Responses will be added as they come in. Illinois Treasurer Michael Frerichs…
“The Governor hurt the working poor and local taxpayers today.”
“Last year, we made a promise to 130,000 students and their families that we would help pay for college so they could achieve a better life. I don’t know when it became fashionable to not honor a promise.”
“Not doing so also hurts taxpayers. Community colleges are funded with local tax dollars. This veto ignores our responsibility to local governments, needlessly shifts this burden to local taxpayers and flies in the face of support for local control.”
“Yes, our state faces financial challenges. I agree difficult decisions are necessary. But the decision to ignore people who have demonstrated a willingness and ability to help themselves does not reflect my priorities or the values of our great state.”
* Senate President Cullerton…
“I’m disappointed in the governor. He had a chance to back up his promises with funding. Instead, he let these students down, again. I don’t understand how he can propose funding student financial aid on Wednesday, and then turn around and veto it on Friday.”
The Senate President will discuss with fellow Senate Democrats what steps to take next regarding the legislation.
* Rev. Dennis H. Holtschneider, C.M., president of DePaul University…
“DePaul University is disappointed that the political impasse has resulted in the state’s failure to meet its obligation of providing MAP awards to students in the state of Illinois. In keeping with our Catholic Vincentian mission, DePaul is announcing today that it will honor the Monetary Award Program (MAP) grants awarded by the Illinois Student Assistance Commission to DePaul students this year. That means 4,500 current DePaul students can be certain the university will stand with them during this impasse.
“In addition, thousands of high school students in Illinois are currently choosing which college to attend in the fall. Uncertainty about MAP funding should not create additional anxiety in making the college choice that best meets their academic and career goals. Therefore, DePaul will honor the MAP grant next year for all new entering students — freshman or transfer – who applied for financial aid by the cutoff date to be announced by the Illinois Student Assistance Commission, if the state continues at a budgetary impasse into next year.
“Given our mission, we also will do as much as we possibly can to maximize our support next fall for all our students who choose to continue to pursue degrees at DePaul.
“DePaul makes this decision with the full expectation that the state of Illinois will ultimately have a budget that funds the MAP program, as it has for decades prior to this year. DePaul calls on Illinois’ elected officials to put aside political differences for the good of all students in Illinois who use MAP to become productive and employed citizens of our state.
“The mission of DePaul University is to provide a world-class education to all who come through its doors, especially those with great financial need and those who are the first in their families to attend college. For decades the state of Illinois and the federal government have been partners in serving low-income students. Until Illinois gets its fiscal house in order and implements a sustainable budget, DePaul must step in and make every effort to assure its students that DePaul will support them the best we can.”
* Sen. Gary Forby…
“I am disappointed in the governor. He had a chance to help students who are struggling economically and give them the chance to work toward a better and brighter future,” said Forby. “It is important we continue to work for Illinois students so they can be competitive in the workforce. I wish the governor would have seen eye to eye with us on this one.”
* Illinois Federation of Teachers President Dan Montgomery…
“Governor Rauner’s veto of tuition assistance for low-income students and funding for community colleges was expected but incredibly disappointing. It’s also hypocritical coming just two days after he delivered a speech touting education as his top priority while failing to mention his budget proposal included a 25% cut to universities and colleges across the state. Refusing to ask the very wealthy to pay a dime more while students sacrifice and suffer at his hand reveal Governor Rauner’s true priorities, and investing in working families isn’t one of them.”
* Sen. Daniel Biss…
“Today, Gov. Rauner vetoed Senate Bill 2043, which would have provided a lifeline to the 130,000 low-income students who rely on the MAP grant, as well as to Illinois’ cash-strapped community college system. The governor indicated that rather than fund these programs without a dedicated revenue source, he would prefer that the General Assembly pass a bill that gives him the authority to find the money elsewhere in state government.
“A better approach would be for him to propose a balanced budget of his own, with a clear spending plan and adequate revenues to pay for it. For some reason, Gov. Rauner refused to do this during his budget address Wednesday, but as far as I’m concerned, late would be better than never.”
* The conservative Heartland Institute complained about Gov. Rauner’s budget address this week, issuing several comments which pointed out what they considered to be a glaring Rauner omission…
“I applaud what Gov. Rauner is trying to accomplish with his proposed budget, but I’m skeptical anything will change in Illinois’ political culture that will undo this state’s rapidly approaching fiscal reckoning.
“As for the education portion of the address, I would have preferred that the governor spent less time pointing how much he is increasing funding on education, and instead spent more time speaking on how he would like to improve school choice options for Illinois families.
“Hearing him say that one day he would like to see every child in Illinois have the opportunity to attend the school of their choice, including secular and religious private schools, without their family being penalized financially would lift the spirits of school choice proponents all over the state.”
Tim Benson
Policy Analyst
The Heartland Institute
“Gov. Rauner’s call for an increase in education funding fulfills a promise from his run for office. While this is a realistic approach given the dynamics in the Illinois legislature, it is a missed opportunity to call for more education choice.
“More money will not provide all students access to a good education. Education choice is the only avenue to quality educational access for Illinois children. Illinois must embrace full education choice. Until it does teacher unions, district administrators, and politicians will continue calling for increased school funding no matter how much they receive.”
Lennie Jarratt
Project Manager, Education
The Heartland Institute
“Illinois is in the midst of an eight-months-long impasse over the 2016 state budget between Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner and the Democratic legislature. Rauner’s speech has not soothed the residents of Illinois. According to a 2013 Gallup 50-state poll, Illinois residents are the least confident in their state government, the lowest among the 50 states by a significant margin. This week’s budget address could not have possibly increased the confidence of a single resident of Illinois.”
MaryAnn McCabe
Government Relations Manager
The Heartland Institute
* Today, speaking to reporters, Rauner said this…
“I want every parent to have a choice about its schools. Whether they’re low income, or high income, they should have good options. I’m a passionate believer in choice for parents.”
He has often said this, but I suppose it was odd that he didn’t include it in his budget address.
The governor said the way to fix the [Chicago Public School] district’s budget woes it is a state takeover of the school system, something the Illinois General Assembly has not authorized.
“If Chicago Public Schools continues just to say ‘Send cash, we’re out of money, we’re going to have to fire thousands of teachers,’ I think the legislature will say, ‘No, that’s not a good scenario. We should have the state Board of Education take over.’ I believe that’s very likely,” he said. […]
“I personally believe once the legislature really understands what’s going on, they will give us that authority. I believe that that is coming and that will happen. Once the facts are known, I believe that they’ll give us that authority. There are some lawyers who believe that the state board does have the authority themselves unilaterally to take over. I’m not sure I agree with them. There may be a legal fight about that. I don’t know, I’m not an attorney,” he said.
Springfield Democrats will be able to wait out Rauner a while longer — likely until the Legislature’s post-election veto session in November, under the timetable Claypool suggested.
“We’ve bought ourselves some time,” Claypool concluded. Finances could get a little tight in July but then the district will get its second-half property tax payment, he said. “The irony is that the governor who’s calling out CPS leads a state with $7 billion in bills and can’t pay them.”
In the phone call, Claypool, who has been arguing that the state’s current aid formula shortchanges CPS, conceded that the system’s reprieve was temporary.
He also said that “hundreds of millions of dollars” in further management efficiencies are coming but will take perhaps a year to flesh out and implement. He declined to indicate what they are but said they’re not from closing more schools.
* From the Illinois Policy Institute’s news service…
Should Illinois raise the legal smoking age from 18 to 21?
A proposal by Sen. John G. Mulroe, D-Chicago, would do just that.
Mulroe, surrounded by public health advocates, pitched the idea Thursday in a news conference. He said the change would serve the public well for several reasons, among them:
* Smoking is deadly, and the proof’s available on every pack of cigarettes in the form of a warning from the U.S. surgeon general.
* Smoking is expensive to the individual. A two-pack a-day habit in some areas (notably Chicago) can run a person $24 a day or more than $8,700 a year, Mulroe said.
* Smoking is expensive to the state. The senator and public health advocates said $5 billion annually is spent in Illinois treating smoking-related illnesses, and $2 billion of that comes from taxpayer-supported Medicaid funds.
* Raising the legal age for the purchase and possession of tobacco is a research-proven way to cut use among young people. Mulroe said research also shows that if people make it to 21 without smoking, they likely never start.
Mulroe said he’s not targeting smokers, many of whom have told him they support raising the legal age.
“The smokers tell me, ‘It’s a good bill, John,’” and when he asks why, they respond, “I wish I’d never started smoking.”
* The Question: Should the smoking age be raised to 21? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
An internal poll conducted by Lincoln Park Strategies for state Sen. Napoleon Harris (D), obtained by the Hotline, showed his Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-08) leading the primary with 64% of the vote. Former Urban League CEO Andrea Zopp (D) took 6%, and Harris took 3% (Feb. 4-7, 800 LPVs, +/-3.5%).
A memo to Harris from the pollster said, “Duckworth is in a strong position (probably a little stronger than I would have guessed)” but “there is technically a path.”
Technically a path? He’s at 3 percent in his own poll. Hilarious.
The full poll is here. Harris even released the results of negative push questions on himself. For instance, 65 percent said they’d be less likely to support a candidate who did not support gay marriage. And 84 percent said they’d be less likely to support a candidate “who has been accused of underpaying their employees.”
Oof.
That “path” looks awful tiny to me.
* According to the poll, voters are gonna stick with Duckworth…
And on a scale from zero to one hundred percent, where 100 would mean you are absolutely certain and a 50 would mean you are unsure, what would you say are the chances you will end up supporting Tammy Duckworth in the Democratic primary election for U.S. Senate this March?
Hillary Clinton 54%
Bernie Sanders 31%
Other 2%
(Undecided) 11%
(Refused) 1%
* We don’t usually get full polls like this, so let’s look at some other things…
I am now going to read a few descriptions of different characteristics a candidate for U.S. Senate might have. Please rate each on a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 means that characteristic is a very important characteristic for a candidate for Senate to have, and 0 means that characteristic is not important at all for a candidate for Senate to have. You may use any other number between 0 and 10.
Illinois Democratic voters apparently say they want strong leaders who can bring people together. And they’re not much interested in state legislators, “outsiders” and those who own multiple businesses. Gee, I wonder why?
Now I am going to read you a series of statements supporters of candidates running for U.S. Senate have made. Please rate each on a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 means that you agree strongly with that statement, and 0 means you do not agree with that statement at all. You may use any number between 0 and 10.
Again, the state’s Democratic voters want people who aren’t afraid to compromise, aren’t anti-business but aren’t in the pockets of the business lobby.
The Floating Boat Dock with Canoe/Kayak Launch is in jeopardy of not getting installed at Tutty’s Crossing again in 2016. Our Illinois Department of Natural Resources’ Boat Area Access Development Grant of $64,600, approved in March 2014, will not release the funds until an Illinois State Budget is approved. It was reported that Illinois House Speaker Madigan may not bring a budget to the floor until November, after the elections. So, no Floating Boat Dock with Canoe/Kayak Launch in 2016.
What??? No Floating Boat Dock with Canoe/Kayak Launch at Tutty’s Crossing in 2016? Say it isn’t so!
* From the Illinois Policy Institute’s news service…
The group pushing for a voter referendum to change how political maps are drawn in the state say recent opposition to their proposals is misleading and shows the naysayers are running scared.
House Speaker Michael Madigan was asked if President Obama’s recent support of redistricting reform the Commander in Chief said should allow voters to pick their politicians and not the other way around is an easy concession for Governor Bruce Rauner.
Madigan was ready with a letter from the group The People’s Map, which raises concerns about the Independent Map Amendment Group’s proposals.
Madigan said the Independent Map Amendment proposal “has components that work against established constitutional and statutory requirements on minority representation on redistricting.”
“The Independent Map proposal would negate the protections that were put in place,” Madigan said. “There’s no questions about that.” […]
Madigan said the Independent Map group has ulterior motives.
“What the proponents of the Independent Maps want,” Madigan said, “is to change the underlying law and constitutional requirement in Illinois to advantage themselves in federal court action. That’s what they want.”
[Jim Bray with Independent Maps] said what Madigan and other opponents want is to hold on to their map making power.
So, what’s MJM talking about when he says the Independent Maps group has ulterior motives?
* The full document Madigan referenced can be read by clicking here. An excerpt, with some emphasis in the original and some added…
When drawing a map today, the General Assembly must follow federal law. Federal law requires that the map must not dilute a racial or language community’s ability to elect candidates of its choice. However, state law is more stringent in that it requires the General Assembly to also maximize the influence of racial and language minorities, including a requirement in the Illinois Voters Rights Act that the General Assembly draw influence and cross over districts.
Proponents of the Independent Map proposal claim the proposal protects the interests of minorities, but it actually reduces minority interest and establishes a lower standard than currently required in Illinois. Under their proposal, the map should not “dilute racial or language community’s ability to elect a candidate of its choice.” This is essentially the federal law, which every state is already obligated to follow and is a lower standard than current state law.
Interesting.
And nobody, but nobody has bothered to cover this because if a reformer says something it must be true.
This complaint deserves a fair hearing and I’ll post a reply on this particular topic if Independent Maps sends me one.
The proposal eliminates the current requirement that districts be compact, which means the Commission can gerrymander and create odd shapes to pack minorities in fewer districts.
*** UPDATE 1 *** The Independent Maps response avoids the question…
The Independent Map Amendment is entirely consistent with the state statute People’s Map is referring to and elevates the importance of protecting racial and language minorities by codifying in the Constitution specific protections for these groups during the redistricting process.
State and federal laws can be changed at any time. By putting these protections directly into our state constitution, we are creating another layer of protection for minority voting rights.
*** UPDATE 2 *** They sent another response…
The proposed amendment would put minority voting protections in the Illinois Constitution for the first time. The Illinois Voters Rights Act would remain in statute and is not in conflict with the protections in the constitutional amendment. The counter argument from the People’s Map is that the IVRA requires influence and crossover districts. Criteria #1 in the proposed amendment includes those as well. It states “(1) the redistricting plan shall not dilute or diminish the ability of a racial or language minority community to elect the candidates of its choice, including when voting in concert with other persons;” That’s what influence and cross over districts are.
The state’s debt to Chicago’s Catholic Charities, Illinois’ largest social services agency, now tops $25 million because of the state’s ongoing budget impasse, forcing the agency to do something it’s never done before — appeal to priests and parishioners to lobby politicians in Springfield on behalf of the needy.
The cash reserves that have kept the archdiocese agency alive until now are quickly running dry as the state falls further behind in paying its bills. Services that for years the state has hired the charity to provide are not covered by the budget proposed Wednesday by Gov. Bruce Rauner, said Rep. Greg Harris, a Chicago Democrat who heads the House Human Services Appropriations Committee.
In a letter going out to parish priests Friday, Monsignor Michael Boland, president and CEO of Chicago’s Catholic Charities, is urging parishioners to remind their legislators that lives are at stake if the financial crisis isn’t resolved. The agency provides services across Cook and Lake counties, from in-home care and early childhood education to feeding the homeless and substance abuse treatment.
“The safety net is fragile to begin with in social services,” Boland said in an interview Thursday. “Our elected officials have to realize these are human beings we’re talking about — human lives. Once these things start to unravel, it creates less options for people. … For us, some of these situations can be life or death.”
* I asked Catholic Charities for the appeal they’re sending out. Here it is…
Every 30 seconds someone counts on Catholic Charities for help. We are now asking for your help. Please lend your voice to advocate for the State of Illinois to end its budget stalemate and pass a budget that cares for the poor and most vulnerable in our communities.
Catholic Charities is currently owed more than $25 million by the State of Illinois - a number that grows by at least $2 million per month.
Please take time today to call your state elected officials with this simple message, “I am a voter in your district. I am contacting you on behalf of the poor and vulnerable people who depend on our state’s safety net of human services, especially the more than 1 million people served by Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago.”
If you do not know who your state representative and senator are, please call the State Board of Elections at (217) 782-4141 or visit www.elections.il.gov and click on “New District/ Official Search.” You can find more information and a template advocacy letter at www.CatholicCharities.net on the homepage.
So far, they’re being pretty polite. But if they crank this up full bore, watch out.
*** UPDATE *** Gov. Rauner was asked about this today and said, essentially, that Catholic Charities ought to put pressure on Madigan…
“I’m glad they’re doing it… Speaker Madigan is holding up the entire process. Unilaterally, one person is holding up the process. Many Democrats in the General Assembly have told me in private they’d like to work out a grand compromise. President Cullerton, in private, we could’ve already worked things out. But every time we work out a compromise on an issue, like this pension bill that he and I agree [on]… Speaker Madigan? Crush it. Hold it off. One person, one person is holding up progress here. And that one person is trying to force a big tax hike, but he won’t support a tax hike unless Republicans vote for the tax hike. This is not right. This is not gonna happen.”
Friday, Feb 19, 2016 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Despite increased costs resulting from the regulatory environment, credit unions are the only financial institutions which overwhelmingly offer free checking accounts. A recent study by Moebs Services confirmed that nearly 74% of credit unions offer free checking to their members, while only 46% of banks offer the same. In the aftermath of the financial crisis, new regulatory requirements have significantly increased compliance costs for all financial institutions. For many, the cost has been passed on to customers in the form of fees associated with financial transactions. However, credit unions continue to offer financial services at the lowest possible cost – sometimes even free – to consumers.
Experience the credit union difference. Visit ASmarterChoice.org to locate a credit union near you!
* We often see critiques of Illinois from right-wing groups like the Illinois Policy Institute or business groups like the NFIB. But here’s one from the left end of the spectrum. Marilyn Katz writing in In These Times…
The past few years have been rough on the people of Illinois. By the end of 2015, Illinois had lost more than 1 million jobs, 795,700 of them during the Great Recession of 2007-2009 alone. At the end of the “recovery,” Illinois has experienced a net loss of 83,900 private sector jobs since the beginning of 2007—losses that continued with another 3,000 jobs lost in 2015.
But the gross numbers don’t tell the whole story. Not only have jobs been lost; a different, poorer workforce as a whole has emerged.
In manufacturing, construction, transportation and information services, 287,400 jobs were lost during the recession years. In the main, they haven’t come back. The only significant growth areas were for jobs in leisure and hospitality, health care and retail—sectors typically associated with low wages.
While Illinois still suffers from higher unemployment than the nation as a whole (5.9 percent as opposed to the nation’s 4.9 percent), the change in the kind of jobs even those employed can get has impoverished the vast majority of people in Illinois. Those at the bottom, the lowest 20 percent, have seen a 15 percent decline in income; those in the middle have seen at least a 4 percent decline. And the median income for all but the highest earners in Illinois had declined by more than $5,000 per household. […]
Even with the Great Recession, Illinois’s GDP grew by nearly $100 billion, from $586 billion in 2007 to $642 billion in 2015. It would have been good news if that growth had benefitted all. Instead, 97.2 percent of all income growth—that’s right, 97.2 percent—went to the top 1 percent of wage earners, with the top 1 percent enhancing their individual incomes by 35 percent while we in the 99 percent saw flat growth (0.2 percent)
As of 2012, the average income of the top 1 percent in Illinois was $1,366,958, while the average for the 99 percent was $46,000 and change. In other words, the small group of those at the top had an average income 29 times that of the rest. Today in Illinois, 50 percent of us earn less than $36,000 a year; 20 percent, less than $15,000.
Some of this is not new. Illinois has long been one of 15 states where the rich have benefitted most in recent decades, with 64.9 percent of all growth going to the top 1% since 1979. For those with a sense of history, there is a more than a degree of irony here. The 1 percent’s share of wealth in Illinois was virtually the same in 2007 as it was in 1928—22.5 percent in 1928, 22.8 in 2007—before unions and battles for racial and gender equality leveled the playing field for decades. All told, since 1979, Illinois’ top 1 percent increased their incomes by 177 percent; the bottom 99 percent saw a decrease of 1.2 percent.
But [Rep. David Harris, an Arlington Heights Republican] says Rauner’s address showed there is room for compromise.
“We don’t need everything on the list,” he said. “He did not mention redistricting, he did not mention term limits. It can be argued that those things may not have a direct impact on the budget.”
OK, but that still leaves local government collective bargaining “reform” (which will have to be drastically toned down because Rauner’s proposal might actually be worse than his abandoned “right to work” demand since it takes just about all bargaining powers away from unions, but union members still have to pay dues), tort reform (despite all the screaming about venue shopping, I can see at least some value for having a centralized place to file things like asbestos suits so people aren’t running all over the country), and workers’ comp reform (ain’t gonna happen the way Rauner wants, but there are alternative ideas, like number 5 on this list).
It’s doable if the governor and the Democrats are willing to sit down and work things out.
* Related…
* Illinois’ economy slips but also shows a little move up: A report out today does a pretty good job detailing the weakness of the economy in Illinois and, to a slightly lesser extent, other Great Lakes states over the past couple of decades. But in what the study sponsor says is somewhat of a fluke, it also shows Illinois’ economic competitiveness improving a bit between 2012 and 2014… The good news: The state’s overall competitiveness climbed from 46th in 2012 to 39th in 2014. Why the bump up if we’re headed to Hades in a handbasket? “Overwhelmingly because of the overall economic recovery here” from the subprime recession, says chamber foundation Chairman Doug Whitley. “We have so many large and diversified companies here.”
Governor Bruce Rauner today announced his support of legislation that would save Illinois public schools more than $200 million through unfunded mandate relief.
“Providing districts with this relief costs taxpayers absolutely nothing, but will save districts millions,” Governor Bruce Rauner said. “By freeing districts from these costly mandates, schools will have more flexibility to invest their resources in classrooms and teachers. It’s a win for students, parents, districts and taxpayers.”
The legislation eliminates restrictions on third-party contracting, which eases limitations and financial pressures on school districts. This type of mandate relief is already provided to Chicago Public Schools and this legislation extends this relief to every school district in Illinois. In addition, it eases the requirement on schools to offer drivers education and physical education classes.
Third-party contracting relief, drivers education mandate relief and physical education mandate relief are three of the 27 proposals from the Government Consolidation and Unfunded Mandates Task Force.
“School district unfunded mandates drive up property taxes and limit local control,” Lt. Governor Sanguinetti said. “As a mother of three, I think local school districts and parents should be deciding what’s best for our children, not Springfield. We need to give the power and flexibility back to local communities and parents, and this bill does just that.”
Illinois school districts have been forced to comply with nearly 150 unfunded mandates in the past 25 years, with the General Assembly enacting more than 135 unfunded mandates in the last 15 years.
“Mandate relief is an issue of critical importance to school districts across Illinois. Countless state mandates impact nearly every aspect of every district across our state,” said State Senator Jason Barickman (R-Bloomington), the chief sponsor of SB 3098. “Relief from these costly mandates is essential to giving districts the flexibility they need, and allows them to direct their limited resources to the classroom, where they are needed the most.”
“Schools desperately need relief from burdensome unfunded mandates that are passed down to them by the state and federal government,” said State Representative Ron Sandack (R-Downers Grove), chief sponsor of HB 6164. “The provisions of this bill will give our local schools a great deal more flexibility so they can make their educational offerings more student centered and cost effective.”
Chicago has an exemption on janitorial services (which has been a disaster), but this legislation appears to cover every service.
In provisions allowing a board of education to enter into a contract with a third party for non-instructional services currently performed by any employee or bargaining unit member, removes a provision that requires any third party that submits a bid to perform the non-instructional services to provide a benefits package for the third party’s employees who will perform the non-instructional services comparable to the benefits package provided to school board employees who perform those services.
*** UPDATE *** As the Chicago janitorial contract clearly shows, school districts are often not careful enough when they contract out. One suburban school is having a big problem now…
Thousands of students are in jeopardy of going without a hot lunch or breakfast in Elk Grove Township Elementary District 59 starting in May, when food service provider Sodexo plans to withdraw early from its contract.
Superintendent Art Fessler said Sodexo officials told the district they lost $500,000 last school year and are on track to lose another $500,000 this year if they stay on through the end of the annual contract.
Now the district is scrambling to find a new food vendor to prepare meals between May 1 and June 15, the last day of school. […]
Larry Fullmer, a Sodexo district manager, said in an emailed statement that “unforeseen economic circumstances and operational challenges” led to the company’s decision to exercise a termination clause in its contract with District 59.
(T)he state faces a $6.6 billion budget deficit. Under the proposed budget, Rauner assumes he’ll be able to find $2.7 billion in savings by reducing health benefits of state workers, reining in state payments for pensions and making agencies operate more efficiently. But Rauner would need help from lawmakers and a new contract with state workers to realize much of those savings. The governor also is hoping to avoid having to pay back $454 million that his administration borrowed from special funds last year to help get through the budget impasse [but he’ll need legislative approval for that as well].
That leaves a roughly $3.5 billion hole. Rauner didn’t spell out how he would bridge it.
And yet he vetoed a budget that was $4 billion out of whack.
* Related…
* Editorial: State budget speeches 2, actual state budgets 0
* Rate it, while keeping in mind it’s targeted at union households…
…Adding… Related…
* Political Flyer Dredges Up Rep. Dunkin’s Previous Trouble With The Law: He says local Mike Madigan Democrats are out to get him because he’s broken with the House Speaker on some key issues. “It’s unfortunate, but this is the depths that they’ll stoop to because they’re so desperate and so thirsty to discredit me, because I’m my own man,” Dunkin says.
“President Cullerton and some others have made a threat,” said Governor Rauner. “They’ve basically said, publicly, ‘We won’t support funding schools, unless we come up with a plan to bailout Chicago.’ This is a big deal – big deal. That is not fair to the students and the families of Illinois, that we hold up school funding for a Chicago restructuring and a bailout. Chicago Public Schools has been mismanaged for decades,” said the Governor.
Um, no.
What Cullerton and others want is a much more fair, just and equitable school funding formula that would de-emphasize sending money to wealthy school districts (like the one the governor lives in) and instead refocus the General State Aid formula to benefit poorer districts.
* I know the governor understands this because of his remarks to the Illinois Legislative Black Caucus Wednesday night…
“We do not have a fair way to pay for our schools in Illinois. We overly rely on local property taxes, which means low income kids have to have lower income schools. That is not fair. That is not what America is about. That is not equal opportunity.
“We’re gonna change the way we pay for our schools. We’re gonna rely less on local property taxes and rely much more on state General Aid for schools. And increase that state aid so it goes disproportionately to low income schools. We’re going to get that done. Working together, we’ll get that done.”
He says one thing to reporters and the complete opposite to black legislators.
Enough.
If you want to work together to get something done, then start doing it.
One of your commenters said something about every time Madigan said something about Rauner and “extreme” he thinks of the 90’s band of “More than Words” fame.
In case you don’t remember the song or the band, click here. Just a warning, though, it’ll give you a nasty case of ear worms.
* The commenter said he was bored last night, so he took the concept “to an illogical Onion level” and created a fake press release…
Surviving members of Extreme seek to distance selves from Rauner agenda
“More than words,” said former lead singer.
SPRINGFIELD, IL — Faced with yet another round of withering political criticism from ranking Democrats regarding Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner’s agenda, surviving members of the once-popular 90’s band Extreme sought to distance themselves from the first-term governor’s policies.
“This is more than words,” said Extreme frontman Gary Cherone, who, along with bandmate Nuno Bettencourt, climbed the Billboard charts with the band’s 1990 album Pornograffitti.
Cherone said he personally tried to contact Rauner earlier this week to encourage him to drop his Extreme agenda.
“I’ve tried to talk to him and make him understand,” Cherone told reporters who gathered for the band’s hastily assembled press conference.
The plea from the band was ignored, according to numerous sources, and Rauner again called for approval of his agenda during his Wednesday budget speech.
Extreme’s public efforts to distance themelves from Rauner’s agenda come as Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan launched yet another criticism of the governor.
“We’re all better served … if we follow the traditional approach, people become reasonable with each other, move away from Extreme agendas, recognize that the No. 1 problem facing the state of Illinois is the budget deficit,” Madigan said following the governor’s budget speech.
Madigan, an influential Chicago Democrat, over recent months has similarly derided Rauner-backed political ads as “Extreme” and repeatedly encouraged the governor “to stop operating in the Extreme.”
Cherone, who confessed the situation had torn his heart in two, said the band could no longer remain silent in decades-old obscurity and decided to go public in an effort to make it clear that while Donna Arduin did in fact attend a 1991 performance at the Lansing (Mich) Civic Center, there is not now nor has there ever been any formal tie or coordination between Extreme and any member or associate of the Rauner administration.
Contacted Friday, the governor’s office had the following response: “Lad di da da di da. Thanks, ck,” Catherine Kelly said.
“Raising our taxes while dodging his own.” Oof. Proft is spending more than $600K on this spot.
* And Gov. Jim Edgar upped the ante in his bid to influence the 102nd House District three-way GOP primary. Gov. Rauner is supporting former Rep. Brad Halbrook, but Edgar cut a TV ad for Jim Acklin…
* Dan Proft is supporting Rauner’s candidate Halbrook as well. Here’s Proft’s ad, which features the governor…
* Proft is running a similar ad (without Rauner) for Mike DeSutter in the three-way primary to replace GOP Rep. Don Moffitt…
A day after Gov. Bruce Rauner accused a broke Chicago Public Schools of getting special treatment from the state, his handpicked state education team launched a financial investigation of Illinois’ largest school district that could lead to the takeover the governor is seeking.
CPS must turn over detailed financial information about cash flow, bonds, payroll and major contracts by March 4. That’s according to a letter sent Thursday by Tony Smith and James Meeks, the superintendent and the board chairman of the Illinois State Board of Education, about CPS’ “concerning financial situation.”
ISBE said CPS was put on “financial watch status” in March 2015. That allows the state to require financial information “relevant to a proper investigation of the district’s financial condition and the delivery of appropriate state financial, technical, and consulting services to the district,” ISBE said in its letter.
Financial information sought by state officials also includes three-year financial projections and assumptions, monthly payroll amounts and debt schedules that could determine if more state aid or other revenue are needed to pay off debt instead of financing operations.
“As you may be aware, an investigation into a district’s financial condition is the first step in a process of determining if conditions exist for ‘certification of financial difficulty,’” ISBE said in its letter. […]
A CPS spokeswoman said much of the information requested by the state is already publicly available and repeated the district’s position that Rauner has no authority under state law to impose any oversight. She suggested that the governor, by calling for a law to allow CPS to declare bankruptcy, was responsible for the extraordinarily high interest rates the district recently paid to borrow $725 million.
A CPS spokesperson released a statement blaming Rauner for harming CPS’s finances.
“CPS has cut its budget deficit by nearly a third, and done everything in our power to keep cuts from our classrooms,” the statement said, in part. “The last time Governor Rauner offered his financial advice … Chicago taxpayers were forced to pay even more for our bonds, and we cringe at what his latest venture could cost our children.”
Claypool retorted that the state’s arrangement with its largest district, where nearly eight of nine children are poor, is a “raw deal,” and he urged other districts by name to lobby for a fairer funding formula.
“We have to come together as citizens of this state to fight against the governor for the children who are most disadvantaged,” Claypool told reporters,. “That is a statewide issue. It is important to us in Chicago but it’s important in communities throughout the state of Illinois.”
A state board that oversees school labor disputes ruled against immediately reinstating raises for education and experience to members of the Chicago Teachers Union, but could reconsider the teachers’ request at a later trial.
A cash-strapped Chicago Public Schools told the union over the summer that it wouldn’t pay the “steps and lanes” raises while the parties negotiated a new contract to replace the one that expired June 30.
In November after several months of bargaining, the union filed a grievance with the five-member Illinois Education Labor Relations Board asking for immediate help. Three of the board’s members were appointed by anti-union Gov. Bruce Rauner.
Here’s this week’s Illinois Sunshine update - we added up all of the funds on hand for both parties, and found that Dems have over $34 Million and the GOP has over $28 Million.
Just one month before the March 15th Illinois Primary, both political parties in Illinois have amassed major war chests to aid their goals of upsetting (or defending) the balance of power in state government. The Democratic side, consisting of Senate, House, Leadership, and Party Committees, currently holds over $34 Million. Illinois Republican funds, consisting of those plus the Governor’s committee, currently have over $28 Million ready to spend. The top three Super PACs in the state, each with an individual balance of over $1 Million, have a total of $16 Million in the bank.
This all amounts to nearly $80 Million in cash on hand between both parties. This is in addition to the $17 Million already spent in the first month and a half of 2016.
Democratic funds come mostly from rank and file committees and the Leadership committees (which have fewer contribution limits than a normal PAC.) The Republican side is financed mostly by the Governor’s candidate committee, which maintained an impressive and steady balance for most of 2015.
Senate, House and Super PACs
The 39 Democratic State Senators have over $10 Million in their committee funds, while the 20 Senate Republicans have $2.8 Million. Of that $2.8 Million, $550,000 comes from Republican Leader Christine Radogno’s PAC. Another $300,000 is from the committee for Sam McCann, who faces a fierce primary race for the 50th District.
In the House, the 71 Democratic members have raised $16.8 Million, while the 47 Republicans have only $4 Million available. Illinois House Republican Leader Jim Durkin’s committee makes up $820,000 of House Republican funds.
Last but not least, there are three Super PACs that have set themselves apart in this election cycle by raising far more than any others (the fourth most funded, Personal PAC, has $690,707 on hand.) These totals are not included in the parties’ “Total Funds” above, but there are clear links between two of these committees and the Republican Party. The goal of Turnaround Illinois is to support the Governor’s agenda, and it has become the second highest donor to Liberty Principles PAC. The two groups also share donors. The IllinoisGO connection is more tenuous, but many believe it exists to fund Democrats who are willing to support the Governor’s agenda. Their heavy involvement in the Dunkin vs Stratton race has given weight to this theory.
These groups have already made a statement in certain races, and will almost certainly continue to do so until the General Elections in November.
* I had a brief moment of levity with Gov. Rauner last night. I was at the Illinois Legislative Black Caucus’ annual dinner and saw an AFSCME lobbyist with a small green button. I asked if I could have it so I could give it to the governor, who was a few feet away…
Rauner: What’s this?
Me: It’s a present. Put it on.
Rauner: What does it say?
Me: 200 Percent Union.
Rauner laughed and said he’d never wear it but would add it to his collection and put it in his pocket.
* So, at least I covered myself. Any other gift ideas? Humor only. No meanness, please…
* Illinois has had a “performance-based funding” statute on the books (Public Act 097-0320) since 2011. The idea is pretty good and it has received some national kudos. A brief explanation from the governor’s office…
- The universities’ performance formula generally focuses on:
o Completion data, including degrees awarded and degrees per 100 students
o Time to degree data, including graduation rates in 150% of time (6 yrs for a BA)
o Cost efficiency, including cost per credit hour and cost per completion
o Success of diverse populations, including Pell-eligible, adults over 25, African-American and Hispanic students
o Success of student pursuing high-need fields, specifically STEM and healthcare
o 3 year averages of all data
- The community colleges’ performance formula generally focuses on:
o Completion of degrees and certificates, including a focus on at-risk students
o Transfer rates to a four-year institution
o Advancement of remedial students and adults over 25
o Momentum points
* This is an incentive program. But the state hasn’t put much money behind the effort in the past, so the schools haven’t really paid much attention to it.
In FY 15, for instance, just $6 million was allocated for universities and only $352K for community colleges.
Gov. Rauner’s new budget has greatly upped the ante, with $50 million for four-year schools, and over $9 million for community colleges.
* The problems facing higher education right now are existential, with several schools on the brink of closing. So, this program is admittedly small-ball stuff. But it’s also the sort of thing we should be doing more of… if only we had a budget.
* From the Illinois Department on Aging’s budget book…
Enrollment in the Department on Aging’s Community Care Program (CCP) has significantly grown over the past 10 years, from 40,965 enrollees in 2005 to 83,787 enrollees in 2015, a 105% increase over a decade. Looking forward, the growth in Illinois’ aging population will also more than double by 2030, with an expected 57 percent increase in individuals aged 60 plus over the next 15 years. Sustaining CCP as it exists today will cost an additional $93.3 million in the next six years assuming the completion of the managed care transition by FY2018.
* The Community Reinvestment Program is a new initiative targeted to older adults who are not eligible for CCP who need assistance to live independently in the community.
* The initiative represents a long term strategy to maintain community-based supports for our current aging population as well to address the anticipated growth in the population its first year at a funding level of $225 Million.
* Transition individuals who are non-Medicaid eligible to a new Community Reinvestment Program (“CRP”).
– Non-Medicaid eligible clients will have their DON score applied to the new service cost maximum table to derive a new individual spending allocation.
– CRP will provide greater flexibility of services. The AAA Network (Area Agency on Aging) will be utilized as the mechanism for the coordination of preventative services.
– Similar to other states, Illinois’ approach will maintain a service package for individuals that do not meet Medicaid eligibility requirements.
– This approach will maintain the Department’s commitment to maintaining individuals in their own home and community and delay the number of admissions in nursing facilities, which is currently a large portion of the Medicaid budget at $1,583,008,257 per year out of the total spending for Medicaid Long Term Care.
* SEIU Healthcare is calling this an almost $200 million budget cut for 44,000 seniors…
1) The Bruce Rauner proposed FY17 budget dramatically cuts home care for seniors through a $197.6 million cut to the Illinois Department on Aging budget.
2) The Rauner budget would do this by splitting the Community Care Program (CCP), which currently provides home care services for roughly 84,000 seniors, into two programs: one for those covered by Medicaid, and a new “Community Reinvestment Program” for seniors not in Medicaid.
3) This proposal, if implemented, would have a substantial negative impact on the 43,700 seniors who the Rauner budget indicates would be moved to the “Community Reinvestment Program”
· The $197.6 million cut represents average cut of $4,520 in services annually per affected senior
· $4,520 is a 43% cut in services compared with the average amount of services seniors receive currently.
4) In CCP right now, the average cost of care per senior per year is roughly $10,430. The average cost to Medicaid of a nursing home is around $52,000 a year, or about five times as much.
5) The Rauner budget gives NO DETAILS about the nature of these cuts. The Illinois Department on Aging Budget presentation indicates that for seniors moved to the “CRP”
· There would be a different set of services available than those available to them now
· There would be different set of service cost maximums their services could not cost above.
But the Shimkus folks did their homework, even if their rhetoric is way over the top. Watch the spot by clicking here.
* Script…
It’s Washington vs. you. Washington insiders picked Kyle McCarter. In Springfield he sides with the Chicago machine, voting to urge Congress to create Obamacare, and funding Planned Parenthood. Kyle McCarter doesn’t even live in our district. John Shimkus does. He’s fought Barack Obama, voting 66 times to limit or repeal Obamacare. It’s Kyle McCarter and the Washington insiders, or John Shimkus and you.
Resolves that the time for a national solution to the American healthcare crisis that threatens the economic and physical health of the people of Illinois and people across the country is now and recognizes the urgent need for a national solution to the healthcare crisis that meets key criteria for comprehensive health care reform set forth by President Obama and Health Care for America Now.
Hi. I’m Sam McCann. Representing hard working people, making sure their voices are heard. That’s the most important thing I do. Sometimes that upsets powerful people, but that’s okay. Sticking up for you and what you believe is what’s important. That’s what this race is really about. I’m being attacked because I did what was right for this district. Powerful politicians shouldn’t be able to punish hard-working families. Not if I have anything to say about it. I’m Sam McCann, asking for your vote.
Discuss.
* Related…
* Bernard Schoenburg: Local Republican leader critical of Gov. Rauner’s ‘ambush’ at GOP Lincoln Day Dinner
* From the governor’s press office regarding the House passage this week of the so-called AFSCME “no strike” bill…
“Illinois taxpayers cannot afford HB 580 – it’s a $3 billion tax hike masquerading as a labor bill. If it becomes law, it will dig Illinois’ fiscal hole even deeper, further squeezing social services and, ironically, it will lead to layoffs.
On Tuesday, Madigan’s House dissed the governor by passing a dangerous bill that would take the AFSCME negotiations out of the governor’s hands and submit the two sides to binding arbitration. A three-member panel would look at AFSCME’s desires and the governor’s offer and pick a winner. No let’s-split-the-difference compromise based on what Illinois could actually afford. Just pick a side. Feel lucky? The Rauner administration doesn’t. The stakes are absurdly high: The union’s demands could add another $3 billion in spending over the life of the contract.
* Part of AFSCME’s response…
The governor’s wildly exaggerated claim appears to reflect not union proposals but existing costs. AFSCME’s proposals on general wage increases would average just $58 million a year more than Rauner’s proposals over four years. AFSCME’s proposals on health care, steps, overtime and holiday pay do not increase status quo costs or employee compensation. Moreover, AFSCME has made clear that its latest proposals are not its bottom line, and that in contrast to the Governor’s adamant refusal to continue negotiating, the union is willing to negotiate further.
* Here’s the union’s cost comparison of wage proposals on the table in January, when talks ended. These are year by year, beginning Fiscal Year 2016 through FY 19…
* So, I asked the governor’s office for deets and they sent me this…
* I then asked AFSCME for a more detailed rebuttal…
Rich —
Here are the facts of the administration’s purported $3 billion claim. Clearly, as stated in what we provided to you yesterday, their numbers are wildly exaggerated and attempt to misrepresent status quo provisions as if they reflected new or added costs.
General Wage Increase- The administration’s figure is $530 million, including rollup for FICA and pension); my number is $497 million over four years. Either way it’s pretty close.
Step Increase- Their number is inflated by the inaccurate assumption that all step-eligible employees will receive steps for all four years of the contract. In fact, of the 40% of all employees eligible to receive steps, nearly half (45%) will reach the top step prior to the last year of the contract. Further, their calculation neglects the attrition savings that, as we pointed out yesterday, generally make steps cost-neutral (that is, steps are paid for by the savings realized when employees retire at step 8 and are replaced by new hires at step 1). Finally, the Union proposal does not change the current agreement so does not represent a new or additional cost.
Holiday Pay- The Union’s proposal does not change the current agreement, so this does not represent a new or additional cost.
Overtime Pay- The Union’s proposal does not change the current agreement, so this does not represent a new or additional cost.
Roll Call Overtime- The Administration withdrew its proposal and agreed to current language, so this does not represent a new or additional cost.
Additional Longevity Pay- The Union on Jan. 8 withdrew its proposal to increase longevity pay.
Temporary Assignment Pay- The Administration withdrew its proposal and agreed to current language, so this does not represent a new or additional cost.
Additional Payouts and Incentives- I have no idea what this refers to.
Indirect Impact of AFSCME agreement- The administration is charging $300 million in phantom costs that are associated with the impact of the AFSCME agreement on other union agreements. Those costs should be assigned to those other collective bargaining agreements, not AFSCME’s.
Health Insurance Savings- As we explained yesterday, the union’s health insurance proposal essentially represents the status quo, so it does not represent a new or additional cost. The Administration claims a value of $1.72 billion, which I suspect they produce by multiplying the savings in their FY 17 proposed budget ($566 million by 3 years). However, this savings is for the entire group health insurance program. Of the approximately 275,000 active employees and dependents enrolled in the state’s group health insurance, I estimate that just 80,000 (about 30% of the total) are AFSCME members and their dependents. So here again, the Administration is jacking up purported costs by including costs associated with other state employees and university employees, not just the 38,000 AFSCME state employees.
I hope this is helpful to you.
Martha Merrill
Director of Research and Employee Benefits
AFSCME Council 31
Hillary Clinton had some harsh words for Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner and Illinois Republicans Wednesday during a campaign rally in Chicago.
“When I look at what’s happening here in Illinois, the Republican agenda to roll back the clock on everything that made the middle class strong in the 20th century, it’s pretty terrifying,” Clinton said.
Clinton also took swipes at Rauner, who gave his budget address Wednesday despite the fact that the state had operated without a budget for more than eight months because of gridlock in the Legislature over the governor’s “Turnaround Agenda.”
“His plan would turn Illinois around, all right,” Clinton said. “All the way back to the time of the robber barons at the start of the 19th century.”
20th Century. 19th Century.
Does she ever talk about the future?
* No offense meant at all to senior citizens, but Clinton not only talks mainly about the past, she also seems to surround herself with older people, and then wonders why she isn’t attracting any young folks to her campaign…
Tuesday night in New Hampshire, 83% of voters aged 18-29 chose Sanders, according to exit polls. And those voters were a full one-fifth of the electorate. Sanders also won 78% of first-time voters. The only age demographic Clinton won? People 65 and older. […]
Clinton lost the vote among women Tuesday night, 44% to Sanders’ 55%, according to exit polls.
Delmarie Cobb named Illinois Press Secretary for the Hillary For America campaign on Feb. 2, 2016. Since then Ms.Cobb no stranger to politics has been busy on the campaign trail making sure that Hillary is not only visible in Illinois but that she connects with the community.
Yes, the same person who backed Clinton in 2008 and who derided the Obama campaign’s pursuit of young voters. The same person who called Obama’s supporters kool aid drinkers. The same person who said, when speaking of her client Roland Burris, “We should be happy as Illinois citizens, because now we actually do have a senator who wants to be there.”
Of all the people who could’ve been chosen to be the face of Clinton’s campaign here and it’s Delmarie Cobb.
* She’s probably gonna murder me for suggesting this, but wouldn’t somebody like Rikeesha Phelon have been a much better pick? She’s young, respected by just about everyone and, above all, she has mad skills.
American politics is always about the future. Well, at least it is for the winners. Losers generally inhabit the past.
According to Rauner’s budget documents, he’s proposing $36.3 billion in spending but just $32.8 billion in revenue. The $3.5 billion difference is for “working together or executive management,” according to an administration official.
Forgetting for a moment that this fiscal year’s deficit isn’t addressed in next fiscal year’s budget proposal (which makes it even further out of whack), let’s take a look at this “executive management” proposal.
• Establish a wide array of spending reserves recognized and clearly enforceable by the comptroller;
• Reduce provider rates that are currently set in statute;
• Reduce or modify statutory transfers out of any state funds;
• Reallocate balances from other state accounts into general funds; and
• Alter or delay payments under continuing appropriations.
Passage of this legislation would allow the executive branch to make the needed spending reductions to bring spending in line with revenues and balance the budget. If enacted, the governor would neither reserve nor reduce General State Aid or early childhood education funding, ensuring we balance the budget while maintaining early childhood and General State Aid as our state’s top priorities. Furthermore, the governor would closely consult with the general assembly in making the difficult decisions necessary to balance the budget. In addition to protecting funding for General State Aid (K-12) and early childhood education, these powers could not extend to the Road Fund, debt service or payment of pension benefits to retirees.
“I am troubled by proposals that would appear to return to the days of skipping pension payments and raiding local funds to prop up state spending. That won’t help our state and it won’t help our local communities,” Cullerton said in a statement.
Remember how the governor came after local revenue sharing money last year? Well, every mayor in the state ought to be freaked out about this request.
Giving Rauner more budget power seems equally unpopular among Democrats. State Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat, said the idea “gives me a lot of pause.”
House Speaker Michael Madigan, a Chicago Democrat and Rauner’s chief budget foil, highlighted their differences when asked about Rauner’s argument that previous governors have been given additional budget-cutting powers and pressed for what was different this time.
“The person occupying the governor’s office,” he said.
We must fully fund this foundation level as a first step toward reforming our school funding formula. Our current formula doesn’t meet the needs of our children. Past attempts to fix the formula didn’t work because they pitted communities against each other.
This year, we are already seeing this cynical strategy being deployed. After years of financial mismanagement, our largest school system is threatening a lawsuit against the state. Such a course could set back funding formula reform for years to come, and ignores reality.
Not only did Chicago Public Schools ask for the current arrangement, they are benefiting from a special deal. CPS receives an extra $600 million more every year than school districts with similar student demographics. Any school funding reform proposal that involves taking money from one school district and giving it to another, is doomed to fail.
OK, first of all, if a federal lawsuit is filed and the plaintiffs win based on discriminatory school funding (and we’re worst in the nation, according to Senate President John Cullerton, which leads him to believe a suit could be successful), then that’ll radically change the playing field in favor of places like Chicago.
• Chicago has 18 percent of the state’s special education student population, but it receives 30 percent of state special education block grant funding.
• Chicago has fewer than 19 percent of all students in the state, but it receives approximately 27 percent of the state’s personal property replacement tax paid by corporations.
• Chicago has 30 percent of all low-income students in the state, but it receives more than 50 percent of all free breakfast and lunch dollars, 42 percent of poverty-based education funding and 37 percent of early childhood funding for at-risk students.
• Chicago’s population accounts for 25 percent of communities that receive supplemental property tax funding, yet CPS receives 88 percent of Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL) adjustment dollars.
All told, sweetheart deals yield CPS an additional $600 million in state education funding.
* I asked the Senate Democrats for a response…
Rich,
Two docs attached.
1 – Staff memorandum walking through legislative history that got us to the current school funding formula, along with staff’s rebuttal to Leader Radogno’s Trib op-ed from early December, and a walk up to how the SGOP maybe got to their $600 million figure
2 – An ISBE report indicating that if CPS were treated like all other districts, they would’ve received an extra $219.3 million from the state (not $600 million)
Both are exciting reads for a Wednesday night.
Enjoy.
* According to the SDEM staff memorandum, Rauner and Radogno are counting personal property replacement tax money received by both the city of Chicago and CPS. So, an argument about school funding ought to stick to school funding and not include municipal funding.
The staff memo also points out that the PTELL adjustment formula for CPS is the same as for all other districts…
• The adjustment corrects the “double whammy” problem that existed in the GSA formula for tax capped districts:
o Districts subject to PTELL cannot collect as much revenue as they might if they were not capped.
o The General State Aid Foundation Grant formula assumes that they can access a certain percentage of local property wealth, which tax caps prevent, and so those districts would lose out on GSA Foundation funding.
• The adjustment has nothing to do with enrollment in a district but instead compares the current Equalized Assessed Valuation (EAV) of the district to the EAV at the time the district was subjected to tax caps.
The staff analysis claims that if the $58 million in PPRT was taken away from CPS, the district would get $50 million back from the foundation formula grant.
* You think pensions are hard to understand? Try school funding.
The funding formula that determines the state’s annual contribution to the pension systems sets the contribution at a level percentage of payroll for the years remaining in the funding schedule to try to provide a level of certainty in annual payments. Over the years, changes to the pension systems have excluded some payroll from the funding formula. Beginning in fiscal year 2017, the proposed plan calls for all payroll to be included in the calculation of contributions in order to provide more level payments. This would include the payroll for “Tier 2” members (those first hired after December 31, 2010).
Phase-In of Assumption Changes
The proposal includes a five-year phase-in of state contribution variations (up or down) caused solely by changes in actuarial assumptions (including revised investment return and discount factor assumptions) as set unilaterally by each pension system board. Changes in assumptions have increased pension liabilities by more than $12.5 billion in the last two years, causing significant deviations from the initially projected State contributions. Increases or decreases in state contributions attributable to assumption changes would be smoothed in over five years, which is the same period used for smoothing the effect of the deviation of actual investment returns from return assumptions. This phase-in will facilitate long-term planning for state pension contributions and will reduce payment volatility.
* From Sen. Daniel Biss, who has worked on pension reform for quite a while now…
Just an FYI:
What BVR calls “Funding Formula Based on Payroll” and “five-year phase-in of state contribution variations” both create “savings” by totally artificially and unjustifiably backloading the payment schedule.
* I asked him to explain…
“Funding formula based on payroll” means this:
We’re supposed to fund our pensions based on a “level percentage of payroll”. So the actuaries project how much payroll will grow over the years and that determines how steep the ramp is. If they assume payroll will grow fast, that results in a more backloaded funding schedule; if they assume it will grow slow, that’s a more frontloaded schedule.
This proposal says that instead of basing it on payroll which counts toward the pensions, it’s based on total payroll. What’s the difference? Total payroll includes salary that’s above the pensionable salary cap. But because the salary cap grows more slowly than the top salaries (ESPECIALLY for Tier 2 but likely also for Tier 1), that means they’re replacing the correct definition of payroll with a totally irrelevant one that happens to grow more quickly and therefore backloads the payments.
“Five-year phase-in of state contribution variations” means that when the pension board drops the investment return assumption, instead of making the proper (larger) payments based on the new assumption, they’re phasing that change in over 5 years. So the pension board says “we expect 7.5% investment returns” and the state says “OK, well we’ll start paying attention gradually, but only completely do what you tell us is required in 5 years.” In other words, during the course of those 5 years the state is deliberately putting in less money than the pension board expects to be necessary to meet the funding target.
What’s frustrating is that you can play these games forever. This stuff is complicated enough that if your goal is to find some confusing but ultimately bogus justification to pay less you have a very target-rich environment. I thought we weren’t supposed to do that any more though!
* According to the Chicago Tribune editorial board, nobody but dorks should fret that the governor submitted a clearly unbalanced budget yesterday…
Gov. Bruce Rauner addressed the Illinois General Assembly on Wednesday, outlining his plans for next year’s state budget. The poindexters whipped out their calculators.
But the crucial takeaway was broader than an exercise in number-crunching: We’re at the end of the road in Springfield. No more pavement, nothing but dirty orange barricades and languid yellow warning lights.
* But a pox on that unbalanced budget approving General Assembly…
No one would have guessed on June 25, 2015, when Rauner vetoed the unbalanced-by-$4-billion budget Democratic leaders sent him, that the state would have no spending plan today. Yet here we are.
* Instead of being a horrific outlier, we’re apparently more like America than any other state…
Hi Rich,
With the results of the earlier primary-election states greatly affecting which candidates stay in the presidential race — raising the question of which state truly deserves the top spot in the primaries — the personal finance website WalletHub today released its 2016 Electorate Representation Index.
To determine which states fairly represent the U.S. electorate, WalletHub’s analysts compared the 50 states to the U.S. across five key categories: 1) Sociodemographics, 2) Economy, 3) Education, 4) Religion, and 5) Public Opinion.
“Yesterday, I expressed my hope that Gov. Rauner would introduce a balanced budget in today’s address. In fact, he proposed two budgetary paths.
“The first path would allow him to unilaterally control spending and policy decisions, representing an abdication of the General Assembly’s responsibility and a breakdown in our system of representative government. It may constitute a balanced budget, but nobody thinks it’s the best way of handling things.
“The second path requires negotiation and compromise to produce an agreed-upon package of new revenues, spending changes and structural reforms. Clearly, everyone would prefer that we go down this path. However, his comments raise two crucial questions.
“First of all, while I agree that we must all compromise to reach an agreement, it is a shame that today’s address did not include Gov. Rauner’s preferred mix of revenues and spending cuts. Our system expects a governor make such a proposal, which then becomes a useful starting point for negotiations.
“Secondly, Gov. Rauner spoke extensively about our state’s real structural problems and demanded that structural reforms be a part of the solution. I agree. However, he continues to prioritize anti-worker reforms that would push down wages and harm the middle class. In fact, he continues to imply that states can only thrive economically if they embrace right-wing, anti-union policies. Of course, this assertion is utterly false.
“As we seek to enact the structural reforms that our state needs, we must be open to all points of view and all ideas, including Democratic ideas such as repealing our bizarre constitutional provision that mandates a flat income tax. I am confident that if Gov. Rauner is willing to have a truly open negotiation on the question of revenues, spending and reform, then we can come together in the spirit of compromise and move forward.
“I hope he is willing to engage in that fair process, and I hope it happens quickly. Our state is being grievously harmed by the current budget situation, and neither the vulnerable people who rely on our human services, nor the students who attend our institutions of higher education, nor the good people who provide those services should be forced to accept any more of this.”
Wednesday, Feb 17, 2016 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
The Greater Decatur Chapter of Credit Unions established the Lend A Hand charity in 2012. The program is designed to help people working through Decatur temporary employment agencies. Decatur area credit unions established this program after recognizing the need of workers receiving temporary employment. Those in temporary work situations are likely not receiving benefits from their employer because of the temporary nature of their work; however, they also may not qualify for government benefits because they are working. The Greater Decatur Chapter of Credit Unions is proud to support those who are working toward a better life, and appreciates the opportunity to provide a hand up.
Temporary employees are encouraged to apply for anything they might need. Lend A Hand has provided applicants with furniture, appliances, gas cards, groceries, winter coats, non-skid work shoes, and even a lawnmower. Most requests are fulfilled with used items donated by credit union employees or with money generated from the annual Taste of Credit Unions fundraiser.
The Decatur Lend A Hand program is just another example of the credit union motto…People Helping People.
* Rep. Ken Dunkin told Mike Flannery this past weekend that he voted for AFSCME’s “no strike” bill last spring and would’ve voted for the bill again last fall if he hadn’t been in New York during the roll call. Asked if he would vote for it on the third try, he said “There’s a high chance that I possibly will.”
Dunkin broke ranks with the resurrected arbitration bill Tuesday, and voted no. Dunkin says he’s been with unions most of the time in his 13-year career in Springfield, despite his recently soured relations.
“They have no loyalty to any black politician in the General Assembly,” he said. Dunkin says he wanted a last-minute change to the legislation to help black and Latino state employees.
Welch, who like Dunkin is black, says it was too late to make such a change as it had just been introduced on Tuesday, but would support the idea in the future.
I’m not sure Dunkin realizes that “loyalty” is a two-way street. The unions backed him when he voted with them. They left when he walked away from them. It’s not rocket science.
State Rep. Christian Mitchell, D-Chicago, delivered a punishing blow to Dunkin, who spoke against the bill if a last-minute amendment wasn’t adopted. “I find it interesting and perhaps even troubling that the last speaker given his recent voting record spoke about complicity. But I suppose that’s why the president said: ‘Some folks don’t change.’”
Mitchell then seared Dunkin with other remarks Obama made to the embattled Democrat last week. “I am speaking to the bill sir, you might want to take his second bit of advice, which is to sit down.”
Like I’ve been saying for a while now, Dunkin’s biggest problem is with his fellow Democratic legislators. This isn’t just a Madigan thing. His members want the guy punished.
Much the same can be said of Sen. Sam McCann. You don’t see any Republican legislators standing with him at campaign press conferences.
Wednesday, Feb 17, 2016 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Exelon announced that its profits for 2015 were $2,270,000,000 and that it is increasing dividends to shareholders 2.5% per year for the next three years.
So you’re thinking – “The company is healthy, shareholders are getting more $$$, the power auctions provided them $1.7 billion for their nuclear plants in Illinois so they must be done asking struggling Illinois ratepayers for a bailout, right?” Nope - it’s never enough for Exelon.
“Groundhog Day was yesterday, but Exelon appears to want to keep celebrating. The Chicago-based nuclear giant is back to threatening to close nuclear plants in Illinois without financial help from the state.” – “Exelon’s Crane beats the drum again for nuke subsidies” Crain’s, February 3, 2016
To review:
Exelon made more than TWO BILLION DOLLARS ($2,270,000,000) last year
Exelon is INCREASING DIVIDENDS FOR SHAREHOLDERS
Exelon received a $1.7 BILLION WINDFALL through new capacity charges
Illinois still has no budget, the state’s finances and services are in shambles, the social safety net is being decimated but Exelon STILL wants the Legislature to pass a huge BAILOUT.
BEST Coalition is a 501C4 nonprofit group of dozens of business, consumer and government groups, as well as large and small businesses. Visit www.noexelonbailout.com.
A bill that aims to fund Monetary Award Program (MAP) grants for thousands of financially burdened students was sent to Gov. Bruce Rauner’s office Tuesday.
Senate Bill 2043 passed both chambers over two weeks ago and was delivered to the Republican governor by Democratic Rep. Kelly Burke of Evergreen Park and Sen. Donne Trotter of Chicago.
“We’ve held this bill for two weeks because we want the governor to understand this is a government of the people, by the people and for that people, and that we’ve given him a chance to listen to the many voices who have determined that this is a necessity for us to move forward in the society that we live in,” Trotter said. “We have told the governor by our actions that it is a responsibility, but more importantly, something that is necessary to receive and maintain for viability of our state.”
If signed by the governor, the Illinois Student Assistance Commission estimates that roughly 125,000 eligible students would receive MAP grant aid.
However, Rauner has said — and his administration reiterated Tuesday — that he intends to veto the bill since there is no source of funding for the $721 million proposal, which also includes funding for community college operations and adult education programs.
Yet, the same governor is demanding increased state funding for early education and K-12 without a revenue source.
Marty Durkan, who’s running as a Democrat for a water reclamation board seat, spent around $50,000 on a mailing for Ald. Michelle Harris, who’s the Cook County party’s endorsed candidate for Circuit Court clerk.
* From a reader…
A front and back mailer I got today. What Bruce Rauner has to do with the Cook County Circuit Clerk or the MWRD I have no idea, but it must poll well or something.
Also, in the 10 years I’ve lived in Cook County I have never voted in a Democratic Primary so they may want to check their universe sampling.
I was honestly confused what the [heck] I was getting until I read it word-for-word which is never good for a mail piece. And why is it paid for by Durkan (which is an unfortunate name to have for a Democratic candidate in Cook these days)? Since this obviously went to a lot of people (see above) couldn’t they have funneled it through the state party and saved a ton of cash?
Rauner doesn’t exactly poll well in Cook these days.
“It’s hard to give a budget speech for a state that doesn’t have a budget,” Rauner said Tuesday while addressing the state’s pork producers. “But you know what? It’s not really about the budget. It’s about the future direction of Illinois.”
Yep. The budget is being used as “leverage” in the real fight, which is, as he says, about the direction of Illinois. Unfortunately, the direction the governor demands is opposed by members of both parties in the Illinois General Assembly. It’s like trying to pedal a tandem bicycle while your fellow driver hits the brakes. Nothing’s gonna happen until both people start moving those pedals together.
So, in the interim, universities are allowed to crumble and people who rely on critical social services are kicked to the curb.
I hate to keep saying this, but I’m going to until it happens: Find. Another. Way.
* Related…
* So what’s in the cards?: Illinois Playbook has learned that the governor will offer up a choice to lawmakers. Behind door No. 1: Rauner will ask for the sole authority to make billions of dollars in cuts to programs, with no tax increase. Rauner will propose making the cuts himself. Or … Behind door No. 2: He will achieve a balanced budget through 1) a series of reforms — watered down from his go nowhere Turnaround Agenda, 2) cuts in spending 3) new revenue. The governor is to make clear he is looking to negotiate a settlement to the state budget impasse once and for all. Takeaway: Door number one is dead on arrival. Can anyone see Democratic leaders going for that? Door number two sounds plausible, depending on how far he backs away from proposed law changes that harm unions. Otherwise, it’s really dressing up the same way he’s operated since last year.
* Durkin’s Expectations For The Budget Address: “At some point cooler heads are going to have to prevail. That means we have to be austere, we have to live within our means, and if we do have to make investments, we have to have a revenue source that we can rely upon.”
With Black History Month and the South Carolina primaries taking place in February, the personal finance website WalletHub conducted an in-depth analysis of 2016’s States with the Highest Political Engagement Among Blacks.
To determine where black Americans are most engaged in the political process, WalletHub’s analysts compared the 48 states across six key metrics. They include black voter turnout and registration during the most recent midterm and presidential elections as well as the proportional representation of blacks in the state legislature and national party conventions.
Political Engagement of Blacks in Illinois (1=Most Politically Engaged; 24=Avg.)
4th – Black Voter Turnout (2012 Presidential Election)
17th – Black Voter Turnout (2014 Midterm Elections)
7th – Black Voter Registration (2012 Presidential Election)
31st – Black Voter Registration (2014 Midterm Elections)
1st – Proportional Representation of Blacks in State Legislature
Look at that horrible number for 2014 voter registration. Pat Quinn’s campaign depended on a heavy African-American turnout, which didn’t happen, and high voter registration, which also didn’t happen. It was a complete failure.
* That last number is pretty interesting to me. I’ve been told by African-American legislators that their counterparts in other states are often amazed at how many black people are in the Illinois General Assembly. It’s one reason why some African-American leaders here are skeptical of the remap reformers’ intentions. They have built something that no one else has matched, and they don’t want it taken away.
With 11 weeks remaining in the petition drive for redistricting reform, the Independent Maps coalition has exceeded the 507,500 petition signatures collected in the 2014 effort and is on target to reach the new coalition’s goal of 600,000 signatures.
“Support for the Independent Map Amendment has been phenomenal,” said Dennis FitzSimons, Chair of Independent Maps. “We’ve collected 510,000 signatures so far and will turn in many more signatures than the previous campaign, which fell short of the number needed to qualify for the ballot. We’re confident our petition signatures – well in excess of the required 290,216 signatures – will withstand challenges by opponents of reform.”
Rauner’s team said Tuesday that the governor will use the budget speech to call on lawmakers to send him another stand-alone bill that spends even more on schools and early childhood education.
“No matter how this session unfolds, send that education bill to my desk — clean, no games — and I’ll sign it immediately,” Rauner plans to say.
That request signals a continuation of the political positioning that’s dominated the last year. But as Rauner and Democrats continue to bicker, social service groups and colleges and universities remain caught in the middle.
* Here’s a preview of his remarks on this topic…
We must make the education of our children our top priority. The one thing I won’t back down on – the one thing that’s non-negotiable for me – is increasing education funding.
That is why Leader Durkin and Leader Radogno will be introducing a standalone appropriations bill for early childhood education and our K-12 schools.
No matter how this session unfolds send that education bill to my desk – CLEAN – NO GAMES – and I’ll sign it immediately…
Our budget for early childhood education increases state support by $75 million, a nearly 25 percent increase…
The $393 million this budget proposes investing in early childhood education is the most in state history – and will allow us to make giant strides towards ensuring every child in Illinois enters Kindergarten with a chance to succeed.
Our budget also proposes fully funding the General State Aid foundation level for the first time in seven years.
This will mark the most state money we’ve ever invested in our school funding formula and eliminate the need for any proration – a practice that has forced teachers, administrators and school boards to make cuts that negatively impact our kids.
We must fully fund this foundation level as a first step toward reforming our school funding formula.
I understand that the formula we currently use to fund our schools does not adequately meet the needs of all our children. Efforts to reform the funding formula in the past didn’t work because they pitted communities against each other…
To achieve formula changes, we must increase state support for education so that no community sees state funding taken away during the transition. I pledge to work with you on this issue to find a bipartisan way forward. But much like our larger discussion about the budget and reforms in the days ahead, nothing should delay the General Assembly from funding early childhood education and K-12 schools for the coming fiscal year.
I restate my request — send me that appropriations bill right away – CLEAN – NO GAMES – to give our schoolchildren and parents the security of knowing that education is our shared priority.
With Gov. Bruce Rauner set to deliver a new budget plan to lawmakers Wednesday, several suburban school leaders appeared in Springfield to urge state officials not to cut their funding.
Their testimony before a House committee Tuesday echoes a debate over how Illinois pays for schools that has raged for decades, with lawmakers trying to find a way to send more money to downstate and Chicago schools that often have less property wealth and spend less per student than in the suburbs.
Democratic Illinois Senate President John Cullerton has sought to make school funding changes a priority in the state’s ongoing budget battle.
Schaumburg Elementary District 54 Superintendent Andrew DuRoss argued the state should spend more on education, enough to help schools that have less money without taking state resources away from suburban schools that have the means to spend more.
* Monsignor Michael Boland, the President of Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago, has been keeping a pretty low profile during the long impasse. But he’s starting to speak out and talked to Mark Brown…
Boland admits he has been hesitant before now to speak out, in part not wanting to scare the people who rely on Catholic Charities for help, such as the 15,000 seniors who participate in a program that provides them various services in their homes to help them avoid going into a nursing home.
One in three Chicago residents receive some service from Catholic Charities over the course of a year, Boland said. Surprising to me, some 75 percent of its $200 million annual budget comes from government funding.
If Catholic Charities were to close 20 percent of its programs, that would hurt 200,000 people, Boland said.
“Where would they go? For me, I’m trying to hold the line … because I don’t think these people should be pawns of government.”
Boland noted that some are starting to say there will be no resolution to this crisis until after the general election in November.
“I don’t know what will be left after the general election as far as services,” he warned.
There’s no way that Catholic Charities, or any other group, can raise private funds to make up for the continuing non-payment of their state service contracts.
What’s happening here is the absolute shredding of the state’s safety net. And for what? To savage the already waning power of unions.
I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again, the governor needs to find another way to expand the economy before this state implodes. And the Democrats absolutely need to help him find that alternate path…
“The two sides are so entrenched, how are they going to walk it back?” said Chris Mooney, director of the Institute of Government and Public Affairs at the University of Illinois. “They are too far gone, somehow they’ve got to find a way both can declare victory and go home.”
The Emanuel administration agreed to pay $4.5 million to the family of a woman killed in 2012 by an off-duty Chicago cop even though city lawyers didn’t interview the officer or other witnesses under oath — an unusual move in such wrongful death cases.
Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez’s office, meanwhile, waited months to gather key evidence in the shooting, including the ownership history of the officer’s unregistered gun and blood tests on a cell phone and knife found at the scene, records show.
Those details — revealed in emails released by Alvarez’s office after a public-records request by the Chicago Sun-Times — raise new questions about how city lawyers and county prosecutors handle controversial police shootings like Detective Dante Servin’s killing of 22-year-old Rekia Boyd.
Civil rights attorneys are seeking the appointment of a special prosecutor to take over the case of Chicago Police Officer Jason Van Dyke, charged in the shooting death of Laquan McDonald, alleging that Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez is too conflicted to handle it.
A petition, filed in Cook County court Tuesday morning, also calls for the special prosecutor to investigate any possible police cover-up of the shooting.
Attorneys want a judge to rule that Alvarez is disqualified from prosecuting the case “because she is so aligned with the Fraternal Order of Police,” said Sheila Bedi, a clinical associate law professor at Northwestern University Law School and an attorney at the MacArthur Justice Center. Bedi contended that Alvarez is part of the code of silence among police officers and can’t handle the case fairly.
But Alvarez disagreed, saying in a statement that it was “more than a little coincidental” that the petition was brought so close to the election by supporters of her opponent.
Alvarez denied she has any conflict of interest and said her office has been working hand in hand with federal authorities for more than a year to build a “meticulous case” against Van Dyke.
She also defended her record on charging police, saying she has brought charges against 96 law enforcement officers in her seven years in office.
“This case is no different — Jason Van Dyke should be prosecuted by experienced Cook County state’s attorneys using the resources gathered during the thorough joint investigation with federal authorities, Alvarez said. “It is clear that there is no legal conflict in this case, and prosecution will proceed to hold Jason Van Dyke accountable for the murder of Laquan McDonald.”
* The Question: Should the Laquan McDonald case be handed over to a special prosecutor? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
Comparing all-funds sustainable revenue for FY15 ($65.6 billion from Table 1) to all-funds spending in FY15 ($69.8 from Table 2), the reference year of FY15 had a structural deficit of $4.2 billion. Projected total sustainable revenue for FY16 (Table 1) is $63.7 billion, but the “benchmark” amount needed to achieve prior year spending levels is $70.3 billion—a deficit of $6.6 billion. An enormous deficit to start was made much worse by the scheduled drop in income tax rates and the scheduled increase in pension payments.
In other words, it will take more than a handshake, a vote and a signature to restore spending in FY16 to FY15 levels. There is a $6.6 billion deficit to deal with. Already over seven months into FY16, it is hard to imagine any new sources of sustainable revenue that could be adopted and cover a gap of this magnitude. That leaves either non-sustainable sources, i.e., some form of borrowing that shifts the burden—with interest—of paying for FY16 spending to Illinois taxpayers in future years or huge cuts to FY16 spending relative to FY15 levels.
The distribution of cuts necessary to get through FY16 across different agencies and programs will be very uneven.
First in line to be paid with the limited resources available are those already paid in the first six months of FY16.
Second in line—and mostly the same group— are those with spending authority from annual FY16 appropriations, continuing appropriations, consent decrees or court orders.
Last in line—and on the chopping block— are those with authority to pay only labor costs. A rough indication of the favored and vulnerable groups is given by the column in Table 2 that shows mid-FY16 spending as a percent of FY15 levels. Agencies with the lowest percentage already paid are, in general, most vulnerable.
On February 12, U.S. District Court Judge Andrea R. Wood issued a one-page order, granting the Illinois Libertarian Party’s motion for summary judgment that the Illinois full-slate law is unconstitutional. The decision will be issued later. The minute entry says, “For the reasons stated in the Memorandum Opinion and Order to follow, Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is granted and Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is denied.”
The full-slate law was passed in 1931. It was probably passed to thwart the Communist Party, which had a very popular activist named Claude Lightfoot, a leader of Chicago’s African-American community. He received 33,337 votes for State Representative in 1932, not enough to win, but a strong showing. At the time Illinois used cumulative voting for State House elections. Each district elected three candidates. Each party was permitted to run either one, two, or three candidates. Voters each had three votes, and they could give one vote to each of three candidates, or they could accumulate their votes to give two votes to one person and one to another; or they could give all three votes to a single candidate. Illinois had been using this system since 1870.
The lawsuit dates back to 2012, when Libertarian Party candidates challenged a trio of state election requirements, including the full slate law.
“If the Libertarian party, or the Green Party, or the Constitution Party, or any other new party would want to run for governor, they would also have to find a qualified candidates for Attorney General, and a candidate for Secretary of State, Comptroller, etc.,” Libertarian Party Chair Lex Green explains. […]
“So we just asked that we be put on equal footing with the Democrats and the Republicans,” Green says.
But the amusing part was when Rauner said he told AFSCME he wanted to implement a four-year wage freeze but with salary increases based on “productivity and saving taxpayers’ money,” and then re-enacted the conversation.
“I said, ‘I’ll give you more pay but I’ll give you 5 cents for every dollar you save taxpayers,’” Rauner recounted.
“And the employees said, ‘Yeah, we love that.’ But the union bosses go, ‘No, no, no. We don’t do that. We do seniority. We don’t do incentive pay. We don’t do merit pay.’
“And I said, ‘Yes we do. We’re doing it now.’
“And they said, ‘No we’re not.’
“And I said, ‘Yes we are.’
“And they said, ‘Well, if you demand that, we’re going to strike.’
“So I said, ‘Well, I hope you don’t. I don’t want you to strike. But if you do we’re going to beat you. We’re going to keep the government running.
“And they said, ‘Whoa, no governor’s ever said that to us before. Every governor in Illinois history has always given us what we wanted, of both political parties.’ That’s a fact. That’s a tragic fact.
A live poll of 400 likely Democratic voters taken February 9-11 by GBA Strategies asked 8th District voters in the northwest Chicago suburbs which candidate they would vote for if the election were held today.
Krishnamoorthi had the support of 41 percent of voters with State Sen. Mike Noland at 27 percent and Villa Park President Deb Bullwinkel with 5 percent. Undecided voters accounted for 26 percent of the poll. The margin of error was +/- 4.9 percentage points.
“The primary election is a month away and we have a long way to go,” Raja said. “But I’m encouraged that voters are responding to our message of protecting Social Security and Medicare, fighting for sane gun laws and standing up for policies to help struggling working families.”
On the presidential front, the survey found 52 percent for Clinton, the former Secretary of State raised in nearby Park Ridge and 40 percent for Sanders, an indication that the Vermont senator is doing well enough to potentially pick up some delegates. […]
Other findings: most people, 29 percent, who have heard of Krishnamoorthi said it was through mail, handouts or flyers; only 2 percent have seen his website; only 4 percent knew about the Durbin endorsement and only 3 percent knew he went to Harvard and Princeton.
* PPP had different results, but its poll was from a month ago, Jan. 13-14…
According to the poll, Noland received 22 percent of votes, Krishnamoorthi received 17 percent and Deb Bullwinkel received 11 percent. Fifty percent of voters were unsure who they would vote for.
On February 6, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced that a nuclear power plant about 40 miles from Manhattan had leaked one of the most potent radioactive carcinogens into the groundwater. The groundwater in that area flows to the Hudson River just 25 miles north of New York City.
“Yesterday I learned that radioactive tritium-contaminated water leaked,” the governor said in an official statement. “The company reported alarming levels of radioactivity at three monitoring wells, with one well’s radioactivity increasing nearly 65,000 percent.”
Alarmingly, the leak is not the first for this plant in recent years. In fact, such leaks are relatively common among U.S. nuclear power plants.
The La Salle County Board has postponed a June training exercise on nuclear safety because the state won’t release the funding — $16,000 locally and $650,000 statewide. This is money Exelon pays to the state designated for this purpose, and the county has to meet a number of planning standards for Exelon to maintain its operating license at the local plant.
The money is being held hostage, plain and simple, in the budget battle between Gov. Bruce Rauner and the Chicago Democrats who control the Legislature. If Exelon had been allowed to just pay county emergency management agencies directly, there would be no issue. But the money went through Springfield and there it sits until someone with power realizes what’s at stake if the funds aren’t released.
There’s no way this is good government. Fix it fast, please.
The anti-union lawsuit known as Friedrichs vs. California Teachers Assn. is widely viewed as one of the leading casualties of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s death.
What’s less well-known is how the anti-union plaintiffs connived to fast-track the case through the federal judiciary in order to get it before the court while it still harbored a conservative majority. Their method was to encourage the lower courts to rule against them, so they could file a quick appeal. But Scalia’s passing is likely to leave a 4-4 deadlock over the case, so the last ruling, in which the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled for the teachers union, remains in force. […]
Abood as a precedent has withstood previous attacks, but the conservative Supreme Court majority had begun to signal that it was primed to overturn Abood, notably in cases in 2012 and 2014. Friedrichs was the stiffest test yet.
Plainly aware that Abood was hanging by a thread, the Center for Individual Rights strived to speed the Friedrichs case through the lower court after it was filed in 2013. It did so by conceding in both federal court in Santa Ana and at the 9th Circuit that both would be bound by the Abood precedent; therefore, it asked both courts to simply rule in the teacher union’s favor so it could promptly carry the appeal to the Supreme Court. Both lower courts did so. […]
The implications of Scalia’s death for Friedrichs are a bit uncertain. Some experts say the appellate ruling in favor of the union would be effectively affirmed by an evenly divided court. Others believe the court will ask for re-argument of the same case next term, presumably after it gets back up to full nine-member strength by the appointment and confirmation of successor to Scalia.
It would only be affirmed for the 9th Circuit “as if the Supreme Court had never heard the case.” And the losing side could probably come back next term either way, unless the President gets someone onto the court before the end of this term or a Democrat wins the White House.
* Unions appear to realize the temporary nature of their “victory”…
In a statement Sunday, Joshua Pechthalt, president of the California Federation of Teachers said that Scalia’s death “is likely to result in a delay of the Friedrichs case but it’s not certain and I think the public sector unions and the education unions have to continue the organizing we have been doing with the assumption nothing has changed.”
Last week, in a little-noticed case called D’Agostino v. Baker, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation lost at the First Circuit in their attempt to argue that the First Amendment does not allow exclusive representation of home healthcare workers. This case sought to expand the Harris holding by arguing that the First Amendment prohibits home healthcare unions not only from collecting fees from workers who don’t want to pay, but also from bargaining on behalf of any worker who doesn’t opt to be a member.
Former Supreme Court Justice David Souter wrote the decision for the First Circuit in D’Agnostino, relying heavily on Abood and its progeny. If history is any indication, National Right to Work was planning on appealing this case to the Supreme Court. The case provided a glimpse of what the likely post-Friedrichs plan of attack would have been: After you win on the dues front, go after membership. […]
Therefore, unlike other cases on the Court’s docket, if Friedrichs goes away quietly, it will stay gone until there is another conservative majority.
And that could be next year or even further into the future if the GOP loses the presidential race.
A U.S. Supreme Court case that could affect Gov. Bruce Rauner’s move to do away with union’s so-called “fair share” payments is among those thrown into question by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.
Rauner signed an executive order last year saying state workers who don’t want to join their union don’t have to pay fees — typically less than union dues — to help with bargaining costs.
But while that move is tied up in court, the U.S. Supreme Court is reviewing a California case on the same issue that unions have characterized as a possible threat to their future. […]
Rauner and Illinois aren’t parties to the case, but the governor filed a brief on the plaintiff’s side, arguing the fees shouldn’t be required.
By the way, last Friday West Virginia became the 26th state to approve a so-called “right to work” law, in this case, over the governor’s veto.
Tuesday, Feb 16, 2016 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
A bipartisan effort to help preserve our state’s nuclear plants is not about Exelon, it is about the future of Illinois. It is about what’s best for Illinois consumers, our workers, our economy, our environment, and the reliability of our electric system.
Without the adoption of energy policy reform legislation, several of Illinois’ nuclear plants are at risk of closing, which would be catastrophic to the state. According to a report issued by the State of Illinois, the state faces:
• $1.8 billion every year in lost economic activity
• Nearly 8,000 jobs lost, many of which are highly skilled, good paying jobs
• Up to $500 million annually in higher energy costs statewide, according to a PJM analysis
• $1.1 billion per year due to increases in carbon and other pollutants
• Hundreds of millions of dollars to construct new transmission lines
The risk is real for many of our communities in Illinois. We do not want to see the same devastating impacts that communities in Vermont and Wisconsin have already experienced and that communities in Massachusetts and New York will experience as a result of the anticipated closing of nuclear energy plants.
We know the importance of the state’s nuclear power plants firsthand as they are the lifeblood of our communities. They support our schools, public works, police and fire departments, and numerous community programs and interests. We are tired of some shadowy organization called the BEST Coalition telling us what’s best for our communities.
Nancy Norton Ammer, CEO, Grundy Economic Development Council
Tara Barney, CEO, Quad Cities Chamber of Commerce
Marian Brisard, Executive Director, Clinton Area Chamber of Commerce
Roger Cyrulik, Mayor of Clinton, Ill.
James Homa, Village President of Braceville, Ill.
Ron Jacobs, Superintendent, Riverdale School District
Terry Kernc, Mayor of Diamond, Ill.
Dick Kopczick, Mayor of Morris, Ill.
Deanna Mershon, Executive Director, Byron Chamber of Commerce
Chris Millard, Mayor of Byron, Ill.
Dean Moyer, Mayor of Cordova, Ill.
Larry Russell, Mayor of Fulton, Ill.
David Spicer, Mayor of Seneca, Ill.
James Trager, Mayor of Marseilles, Ill.
Christina Van Yperen, Executive Director, Grundy County Chamber of Commerce & Industry
Jim Vehrs, Mayor of Braidwood, Ill.
State Sen. Sam McCann has billed his campaign fund for thousands of dollars in mileage reimbursements, including more than $38,000 in just the last year.
At the federal mileage reimbursement rate of 57.5 cents per mile, it would mean McCann, a Republican from Plainview, drove more than 66,000 miles on public business in the last year alone.
In addition, campaign finance records show that McCann has received thousands of dollars in reimbursements for what the campaign labeled as “grouped expenditures.” […]
Since he took office in 2011, McCann claims he has put more than 500,000 miles on his vehicles traveling the district. McCann said in his early years in office he often paid expenses out of pocket without taking a reimbursement from his campaign fund
In the last year, McCann’s disclosed “mileage” reimbursement and the “grouped expenditures” total $59,019. If that entire amount were for mileage, that would equal 102,641 miles driven in the last year alone.
McCann acknowledged to The Insider that the “grouped expenditures” were payments to him and that “some” was for mileage, but declined identify how much or to explain why the earlier reimbursement payments were cloaked in anonymity.
“In those grouped reports, some was for mileage, but not all,” McCann wrote in an e-mail. “I started running in 2009. In those six years, I have accumulated over 300,000 miles. I just started reimbursing myself for mileage.”
Indeed, in previous campaign filing periods between 7/1/2-9/30/12 and 4/1/4-6/30/14 McCann disclosed no similar mileage reimbursements or “grouped expenditures.” In past filings, McCann disclosed only minimal car expenses. In the first quarter of 2013, 1/1/13-3/31/13, for example, he reported only $510.61 in gas receipts.
Still, at the assumed rate of McCann’s current mileage reimbursement implied in the campaign finance reports, it suggests that approximately one-third of those 300,000 miles driven over the last 9 years were accumulated within the last year. Odd. Without a more detailed public accounting of the $59,019 in reimbursements, the payments will likely beg more questions.
At first blush, it may have seemed like a rare moment of bipartisanship at the Illinois Capitol: Democratic President Barack Obama called for changes to a process for drawing political maps that too often favors one party, bringing Republican lawmakers to their feet.
“In America, politicians should not pick their voters; voters should pick their politicians,” Obama said during last week’s speech in Springfield, echoing comments from his final State of the Union address.
But Illinois’ redistricting process is shaping up to be one of the biggest battles of 2016, as a bipartisan group of supporters and Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner push to put a measure on the November ballot and opponents, including some top Democrats, argue it would “devastate the voices of minority communities.”
* Not mentioned in that story is the 2001 remap process. The Democrats won the right to draw the new legislative district map and Senate President Emil Jones took away Gold Coast and lakefront precincts from Sen. John Culleron and gave them to state Sen. Barack Obama. The idea was to help Obama run for higher office by putting a bunch of rich people in his new district.
In other words, Obama very deliberately “picked” his voters to advance his own career.
I’m not saying Obama is wrong to push for remap reform. After all, he has first hand experience with what remapping can do to or for somebody. I’m just sayin…
Together with Rich Miller, we’ll be hosting a happy hour reception at the Sangamo Club, 227 E Adams St, today from 3:30 to 6:30pm. We’ll have a computer set up, so you can see first-hand how TrackBill can work for you.
Stop by for cocktails and light appetizers, and feel free to bring a friend!
Doubts about Dunkin still linger. On Feb. 5–one day after Stratton made news by bagging several high-profile endorsements from angry Black leaders—Dunkin held a packed meeting in the conference room of the Chicago Defender’s office for members of the Black Press, including the Chicago Crusader. Accompanying Dunkin was Cory Jobe, director of the Illinois Office of Tourism and another official.
Dunkin, who chairs the Illinois House Tourism and Convention Committee, promised to funnel more state dollars for advertisements in Black newspapers, but when it came to details, Dunkin and Jobe were unable to give specifics about how much a piece of the pie was available and how Chicago’s Black Press could reap state tourism dollars. Perhaps, the biggest problem—as one press member pointed out—there is no money available because of the budget impasse.
To some, the spotty presentation and unanswered questions were an insult to a media that has often struggled for equality in obtaining advertising dollars.
With Dunkin’s image tanking in the media and elections just over a month away, some Blacks are left wondering if this was another desperate attempt by the veteran politician to buy favorable press coverage in the Black community. After all, when was the last time Dunkin held a press conference to try to steer tourism dollars to the Black media?
This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it confined to a specific region or demographic. But it usually isn’t reported so openly.
Yes, this doesn’t look all that savory. But, frankly, if black-owned newspapers aren’t receiving their fair share of advertising dollars, then this is a good thing. The big boys downtown shouldn’t get it all. Spread it around.
Then again, if there’s no state appropriations to allow this money to be spent, then the meeting got pretty close to the line.
Despite being at odds with Mike Madigan, State Representative, Ken Dunkin’s campaign has received the largest political contribution in the state’s history. Dunkin who bucked the Democratic machine and cut a deal with Governor Rauner to restore budget cuts to Child Care, Disability and the Determination of Needs score has been on a roll ever since. Regardless of the machine’s attempt to villainize him and depict him as a defector, he continues to get things done for his constituents despite the stranglehold in Springfield.
That just looks so in the tank bad, particularly with the newly revealed context.
Antonin Scalia was a giant in the history of American jurisprudence. His legacy and contribution to our nation will long endure. The political debate erupting about prospective nominees to fill the vacancy is unseemly, let us take the time to honor his life before the inevitable debate erupts.
Contacted by the Tribune, Kirk’s campaign pointed to a statement the senator issued Monday that avoided taking a stand on the question of Scalia’s successor and described the political maneuvering as “unseemly” at this time.
Kirk’s statement called Scalia a “giant in the history of American jurisprudence” and said the public should “take the time to honor his life before the inevitable debate erupts.”
But the debate has already erupted, and Kirk is a key target of politicking on both sides. He already faces the difficult task of winning a second term as a Republican in a state that in recent presidential election years has sided with Democrats.
* The react…
February 14, 2016
Statement by Bernard Cherkasov, CEO, Equality Illinois
Equality Illinois offers condolences to the family of Justice Scalia and to his colleagues on the United States Supreme Court.
With the Court’s work too important to go without a ninth member, President Obama should promptly nominate a successor. We trust that Sen. Dick Durbin and Sen. Mark Kirk will give the nominee due consideration and decide whether to confirm based on the best interests of the people of Illinois and the United States.
Already, the Senate Majority Leader, Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell, and several of Sen. Kirk’s Republican colleagues have called for a delay of nearly a year until the new president can nominate Justice Scalia’s successor. This is an abuse of power and contrary to the United States Constitution and American history. We hope Sen. Kirk accepts that it is President Obama’s constitutional authority and responsibility to fill the vacancy.
Sen. Kirk will be under tremendous pressure from his colleagues to automatically reject the President’s nominee. Yet, Sen. Kirk has demonstrated a thoughtful willingness to work in a bipartisan manner on important issues, including the Equality Act to prohibit discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans and his support for marriage equality. This is the Mark Kirk that we hope will be part of the confirmation process for President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court.
* Tammy Duckworth…
“I am deeply disappointed in Senator McConnell’s pronouncement that the Senate will refuse to perform its Constitutional role of advice and consent regarding any Supreme Court nominee President Obama rightfully and dutifully sends its way. Three years ago, and for more than 20 years before that as an Army officer, I swore and continue to abide by an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. I take that oath seriously. It does not cease to apply in an election year, nor does it cease to exist for the benefit of a political party that lost the last Presidential election and wishes to impose a procedural do-over.
“Senator Mark Kirk must immediately level with the people of Illinois, and let us know whether he supports the Constitution, or if he’ll be a rubber stamp for Mitch McConnell’s obstructionist and unconstitutional gambit.” — Tammy Duckworth
* Andrea Zopp…
“Senator Kirk needs to fulfill his constitutional duty. This is not the time to ‘non-comment.’ It is time to take a position. That’s why we have the gridlock we have in Washington and that’s why we desperately need change.”
“I have been studying, interpreting, and advocating for people under the law for decades,” said Zopp who after graduating from Harvard Law, clerked for a judge, and was a prosecutor for over 13 years. “No one in this primary has experience that comes close. If the Senate Republicans get their way and obstruct the President’s appointment, we need a Senator who knows the law and can advocate for a well-deserved candidate. I am the only one in this race that can be that Senator.”
Senate Republicans are going all in behind Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s strategy of spurning a replacement for Justice Antonin Scalia until next year. Sens. Rob Portman of Ohio and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania became the latest incumbents from states that President Barack Obama has won to throw in with their leader to bar a new Supreme Court justice, joining Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire. Mavericks like John McCain are in the same boat, as are senators with no reelection considerations at all, like Sen. Dan Coats of Indiana. Meanwhile, of course, Democrats are predicting that the GOP will lose the Senate over this.
Story Continued Below
Two polite dissenters: Two of the most moderate Senate Republicans are criticizing both parties on the SCOTUS politicking. Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois joined Sen. Susan Collins in this position on Monday, with Kirk releasing a statement saying: “The political debate erupting about prospective nominees to fill the vacancy is unseemly, let us take the time to honor his life before the inevitable debate erupts.”
My own opinion is that Kirk is right. It is horribly unseemly that such a fight would break out moments after Justice Scalia’s death was announced. There’s no need to rush here, even if the media and the Democrats are jumping up and down demanding statements.
President Barack Obama seemed to admit almost right from the start of his address to the Illinois General Assembly last week about the need for a more civil politics that he probably wouldn’t sway his audience, which has been bickering amongst itself for over a year.
Obama talked about his first Illinois Senate speech, after which Republican Senate President Pate Philip “sauntered” over to his desk, slapped him on the back and said, “Kid, that was a pretty good speech. In fact, I think you changed a lot of minds. But you didn’t change any votes.”
Frankly, after months without any progress in Springfield, I’d settle for a few changed minds. But I’m not even sure a single mind was changed. Instead, the speech gave people on both entrenched sides just enough ammo to bolster their cases against the other.
Predictably, Obama weighted the argument in favor of his own policy views, bringing up his support for union collective bargaining, which Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner has repeatedly attacked.
But he threw just enough bones at the Republicans to allow them to issue statements like the one from GOP state Rep. Barb Wheeler: “The President reiterated what the Governor and others have said before, without compromise we cannot govern.”
It might come as a shock to Democrats, but the vast majority of Republicans truly believe that Rauner has tried to compromise and the Democrats are refusing to budge. So, the President’s words were music to their ears.
Obama said he believed many Republicans “share” many of his values, adding, “And where I’ve got an opportunity to find some common ground, that doesn’t make me a sellout to my own party.”
At that moment, Rep. Ken Dunkin, D-Chicago, jumped from his seat and yelled “Heck yeah!” Dunkin has portrayed himself as diligently working to move things forward by cooperating with Gov. Rauner. But he’s been thrashed by his fellow Democrats for being a “sellout” to the wealthy Republican governor by suddenly flip-flopping on issues and voting against his party’s values, including union rights.
“Well, we’ll talk later, Dunkin, you just sit down,” Obama said to uproarious applause. “One thing I’ve learned is folks don’t change.”
The line was a devastating slash at Dunkin, who Obama dealt with when he was still in the General Assembly.
Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass quickly tweeted: “So #Obama tells #Illinois pols about need for compromise, then rips Rep. Dunkin, D, who dared go against Boss Madigan. That’s #thechicagoway.”
But Kass did Dunkin no favors. Rep. Dunkin is fighting for his political life in a Chicago Democratic primary against a union-backed candidate. Call me crazy, but I don’t think his majority African-American constituency will be happy that their state legislator was publicly humiliated by the nation’s first black President.
Word is the Democrats warned the White House that Dunkin would attempt to insert himself into the visit, and they were quite satisfied with the result. They may have also warned the President that Dunkin’s 1990s arrest record was about to become an issue in his primary race.
Even so, House Speaker Michael Madigan made a significant mistake last week. Obama has often called former Senate President Emil Jones his political “godfather.” Jones mentored Obama, gave him important assignments and drew a district for him that meandered up Chicago’s wealthy Gold Coast to allow the ambitious young pol to raise campaign cash from the elite. No Emil Jones, no President Obama. The President gave Jones a couple of shout-outs during his speech and said he misses him.
But Jones and Madigan fought bitterly for years. Indeed, if you go back and look at what Senate Black Caucus members were saying about Madigan during that fight, you’d see they said many of the same harsh things about Madigan as Gov. Rauner says today.
Madigan relegated Jones to the gallery while inviting former legislators of far less stature onto the House floor. Madigan’s snub was deeply resented by many and brought back a lot of very bad memories.
If Rauner had done a better job of understanding his job, he’d be able to build on this anger at Madigan. But making statements about how tax money is being thrown down the “toilet” at the majority black Chicago State University, and cozying up to Dunkin (who just last week called his fellow legislators “monkeys”) and pushing social service agencies into bankruptcy has so damaged his relationships that he probably can’t take much advantage.
“We’re winning,” Rauner told a Downstate audience hours after Obama’s “unity” speech. No, he’s not. Nobody is.
