Another way of looking at things
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Rep. Rob Martwick (D-Chicago)…
Rich,
I read your blog post about changes to collective bargaining rights, titled “Then Do It Already.”
You correctly point out that the Governor’s proposal goes far beyond the restrictions placed on the employees of CPS as part of the School Reform Amendatory Act of 1995. However, that bill was passed by a legislature that was controlled by the Republicans. The Act not only gave the mayor of the City of Chicago complete autonomous control over CPS, but much like the turnaround agenda, it limited collective bargaining rights for teachers.
Since 1995, the Chicago Public Schools have been a complete and total financial disaster. The district didn’t make a single pension payment for a decade. They offered to pay the employee portion of the pension contribution in lieu of a salary increase (ostensibly to save money on the current operation), but then failed to make that contribution as well, exacerbating the problem. The board entered into misguided toxic rate swaps, that this year alone will cost the district over $500 million in penalties. There have been repeated instances of the board engaging in conduct that at the least is a blatant conflict of interest and at worst has been direct corruption. Finally, despite the wishes of the citizens, students, parents, and taxpayers, CPS has gone a binge of Charter School Expansion, closing neighborhood schools and creating sweetheart deals for questionable operators like UNO, without any evidence of improvement. In fact, while the overall performance of CPS has improved, the district has merely kept pace with the rest of the country. Unfortunately, the gains in academic performance have only been realized by white students. The academic achievement of blacks and latinos has been stagnant and in some cases worse.
Today the governor calls for the passage of the turnaround agenda. But here’s the thing: In 1995, the legislature passed the turnaround agenda for Chicago Public Schools. Despite the authoritarian control over the finances and operations, and the restrictions placed on collective bargaining rights, CPS has been an unmitigated disaster. If he truly believes that his agenda will improve our state, he really should come up with a better example.
Rob Martwick
OK, but the Democrats never withdrew those exemptions during their years of control and they allowed CPS to get out of making those pension payments.
* On a related note, Rep. Martwick’s legislation to elect Chicago’s school board recently passed committee on a partisan roll call. It now moves to the floor.
22 Comments  
|
* This has been confirmed…
The action is apparently designed to avoid closure before the end of spring session. I should have the full memo soon.
…Adding… Here is is…
49 Comments
|
Question of the day
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Dietrich…
In an interview in October 2010, then-Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., made what would become one of the most repeated (and embellished) quotes of the Barack Obama presidency.
“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president,” McConnell, now the Senate majority leader, told the National Journal.
As the Washington Post explained in fall 2012, McConnell’s words and the date they were spoken often have been inaccurately represented in the years since, generally by Democrats eager to present evidence of unyielding partisan opposition to Obama’s every move.
But as the Illinois state budget battle kicked into high gear last summer and fall, I’ve heard references to McConnell’s famous quote in a different context. This time it was invoked in defense of a Republican — Gov. Bruce Rauner — who has had limited success with a Democrat-led Legislature.
The logic was along these lines: How can Democrats excoriate a Republican Congress for not bending to the wishes of President Obama while at the same time applauding a Democratic Illinois General Assembly for not cooperating on Rauner’s reform agenda?
The question ignores one fundamental nuance in the Illinois debate, where the gridlock comes from Democrats opposing Rauner’s use of reforms as leverage for negotiating a budget. House Speaker Michael Madigan has stated, ad nauseum, his pledge to work “professionally and cooperatively” with Rauner on the budget, but only if Rauner leaves his reform agenda for another day. To a lot of Illinois Republicans, that position misses the entire point of Rauner’s argument. It’s the Illinois equivalent of McConnell’s “single most important thing” quote.
* The Question: Is Rauner getting the Obama treatment? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
survey software
80 Comments
|
* The Democratic results match up somewhat closely with the poll we discussed the other day. And Sen. Kirk’s gonna win his primary, but check out the large number of undecideds and the high number of folks who don’t know enough about him to rate him after over 5 years in office. The GOP base isn’t totally in love with him…
Republican Senator Mark Kirk and Democratic U.S. Representative Tammy Duckworth are the clear early leaders in Illinois’ upcoming March 15 primary to be their party’s nominee for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Kirk, according to a poll by the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.
Both Republicans and Democrats feature contested primaries for their nominations, and the November Illinois contest is widely regarded to be one of the most competitive and pivotal contests in the fierce national battle for majority control of the U.S. Senate.
REPUBLICANS
• In the GOP race, Kirk is being challenged for re-nomination by Oswego business owner and conservative, James Marter. The poll found that 53 percent of likely Republican primary voters said they would vote for Kirk, compared to 14 percent who said they were for Marter. This left one-third, or 33 percent, who were still undecided.
The sample of 306 Republicans was part of a statewide poll of 1,000 registered voters taken Feb. 15-20. The Republican sample has a margin of error of 5.6 percent.
DEMOCRATS
• U.S. Rep. Tammy Duckworth from suburban Chicago is the leader, with 52 percent of self-identified Democratic primary voters, compared with 6 percent who said they would vote for Andrea Zopp, head of the Chicago Urban League, and 4 percent who said they would vote for Illinois State Sen. Napoleon Harris of Harvey. The remaining 37 percent said they were still undecided in this race.
The sample of 1,000 Illinois registered voters contained 422 who said they would vote in the Democratic primary and those findings have a margin of error of 4.7 percent.
“These results provide just a snapshot of public opinion in Illinois at this juncture, but it is a good indicator of where the races stand with three weeks to go before the vote,” said John S. Jackson, a visiting professor at the Institute and one of the designers of the poll. “Sen. Kirk and Rep. Duckworth were widely considered to be their parties’ leading candidates for the nomination, and so far they are living up to those expectations.”
U.S. SENATOR JOB APPROVALS
The poll asked all respondents how they felt about the state’s two U.S. Senators, Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat Dick Durbin.
There were 39 percent of the total sample of 1,000 who approved of the job Kirk is doing, while 31 percent disapproved. There were 25 percent who said they did not know and 5 percent who said they neither approved nor disapproved.
Durbin won approval from 51 percent for the job he is doing. There were 34 percent who disapproved. Only 12 percent said they did not know what kind of job Durbin was doing, and 4 percent neither approved nor disapproved.
Jackson said “these results indicate that Sen. Kirk does have his critics, and that there is an unusually large number who say they do not know what kind of job he is doing. This is probably indicative of why he is being challenged in his own party.”
Crosstabs are here.
9 Comments
|
* I heard yesterday that Reps. Ken Dunkin and Reggie Phillips were working on a bill to help ease the “squeeze” on higher education, but I couldn’t get anyone to respond. Here’s their bill…
Appropriates $160,000,000 from the General Revenue Fund to the Board of Higher Education for emergency assistance to public universities. Appropriates $40,000,000 from the General Revenue Fund to the Illinois Community College Board for emergency assistance to community colleges. Effective immediately, but does not take effect at all unless Senate Bill 3044 of the 99th General Assembly becomes law.
SB 3044 would “forgive” $450 million in special funds borrowing the state did at the very end of Fiscal Year 2015.
* That’s a truly “odd couple” of sponsors, but Chicago State University and Eastern Illinois University are in the worst trouble of all the state’s public universities. So, it makes perfect sense, particularly since both men have primary opponents.
*** UPDATE *** I’ve asked for responses from the governor’s office and all four leaders. Here’s Leader Jim Durkin…
“These two bills should be given a fair hearing and awarded an up or down vote. These initiatives actually have money attached for Higher Education unlike the insincere bill regarding MAP the Governor rightfully vetoed.”
53 Comments
|
It can be done if you really want it done
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I’m not sure if y’all noticed this, but by design today I have outlined several ways of ending this impasse…
* Workers’ comp: Call Madigan’s bluff and accept language on insurance company rates and roll back the 7.5 percent increase in PPD rates or implement some of the AMA’s guidelines.
* Local collective bargaining: Call Madigan’s bluff and give all schools the same bargaining exemptions that Madigan has already given Chicago, and leave it at that.
* Higher education funding: Use the impasse to force the universities to the bargaining table in order to extract real and lasting spending reforms, but get that process moving before the schools collapse.
* K-12 funding reform: Jim Edgar first secured Democratic votes for his education funding revamp and then used that to push conservative Republicans into accepting a bipartisan compromise - which is exactly the opposite of Rauner’s approach that is doomed to failure because he simply doesn’t have enough votes to move anything forward.
* Tone: Don’t be like The Donald, because, trust me, that comparison is coming as the March 15th primary nears.
* In addition, there’s no real need to demand remap reform as a condition of negotiating the budget because a well-funded, highly organized effort is already underway to put the issue on the ballot this November.
* That leaves term limits. If he got everything else, I don’t see any reason to hold up the budget for term limits. Convince the Senate to vote on it and be done with it.
* There’s also tort reform. The governor rarely talks about that topic, so maybe he doesn’t really care. I don’t know. But there has to be an idea out there somewhere.
Anything else come to mind?
64 Comments
|
Then do it, already
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Gov. Bruce Rauner spoke recently at an Illinois Chamber function and talked about his collective bargaining proposal…
“And what some people say to me, ‘Well, you’re just trying to strip away collective bargaining.’ No, I’m not. I just want to do what Chicago has done, and Massachusetts has done and others. When it’s necessary to protect taxpayers, give the ability for you in each community to take something out of collective bargaining if it’s necessary.
“Chicago has done this for years. And when the Democratic super-majority says to me, ‘Governor, you’ve proposed that, that’s a violation of our core beliefs.’
“Well that’s baloney.
“You’ve done it for Chicago for years. You’ve taken school day out of collective bargaining. Length of school year out of collective bargaining. Outside contracting out of collective bargaining. And right now the mayor has asked that the teachers’ pension contribution get taken out of collective bargaining.
“Why does Chicago get that and Springfield doesn’t get that? Decatur doesn’t get that. Peoria doesn’t get that. What’s, what’s going on? It’s not fair. We should treat everybody the same in Illinois.”
This is a great argument. It is unfair for Chicago to have these exemptions that nobody else has.
* I just wish the governor’s rhetoric matched his actual proposal…
Prohibited subjects of bargaining.
(a) A public employer and a labor organization may not bargain over, and no collective bargaining agreement entered into, renewed, or extended on or after the effective date of
this amendatory Act of the 99th General Assembly may include,
provisions related to the following prohibited subjects of collective bargaining:
(1) Employee pensions, including the impact or
implementation of changes to employee pensions, including
the Employee Consideration Pension Transition Program as
set forth in Section 30 of the Personnel Code.
(2) Wages, including any form of compensation including salaries, overtime compensation, vacations,
holidays, and any fringe benefits, including the impact or
implementation of changes to the same; except nothing in
this Section 7.6 will prohibit the employer from electing
to bargain collectively over employer-provided health insurance.
(3) Hours of work, including work schedules, shift
schedules, overtime hours, compensatory time, and lunch periods, including the impact or implementation of changes
to the same.
(4) Matters of employee tenure, including the impact of
employee tenure or time in service on the employer’s
exercise of authority including, but not limited to, any
consideration the employer must give to the tenure of
employees adversely affected by the employer’s exercise of management’s right to conduct a layoff.
* If the governor would propose a bill which gives suburban and Downstate schools the same options to limit collective bargaining as Chicago already has, then he’d have a much better argument, and we might be on the road to a deal.
To me, anyway, that would be a big Rauner victory. He’s right that it’s the fair thing to do, and he’s right that the Democrats have already agreed to these ideas for the state’s largest city.
So propose a freaking bill already and put the Democrats on the spot. Unless, of course, he doesn’t want a deal.
44 Comments
|
I don’t see it happening
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Greg Hinz…
Rauner most recently has asked lawmakers either to give him his turnaround stuff—workers compensation and tort reform, limits on public-sector unions, etc.—or give him the authority to balance the budget by moving money around and cutting line items on his own. A pending bill from House GOP Leader Jim Durkin lays out the specifics, with a similar bill filed in the Senate by GOP Leader Christine Radogno. Needless to say, Democrats don’t trust Rauner to make the decisions himself.
On its face, that legislation looks like a liberal nightmare. Specifically, to pay for MAP grants and other college spending, it would effectively give Rauner unrestricted power to “limit, reduce or adjust services, payment rates, expenditures, transfers of funds and eligibility criteria, to the extent permitted by federal law” in five departments of particular importance to Democrats: Aging, Children and Family Services, Healthcare and Family Services, Human Services and Public Health.
In fact, administration officials say, all that clause would do is restore a level playing field between those departments and others, like Corrections and Transportation, where Rauner already has a free hand and has used it to make $500 million to $600 million in cuts.
Comparing corrections and transportation to human services, eh?
Lots of spending at DCFS, DHFS and DHS falls under judicial consent decrees, so it’s like comparing apples to chair legs.
* And a new study looks at the state’s inadequate reimbursement rates…
The findings from this analysis illustrate that reimbursement rates in the majority of service areas have failed to keep up with increased cost of living. The only human services field that has experienced regular rate increases is Child Care. The remainder of service rates has fallen behind cost of living. Table 1 and Figure 1 present a summary of rate increases compared to cost of living increases. Key findings include the following:
• The current rates for Substance Abuse Treatment (for Level I, II, and III, Adult Recovery Home, Case Management, Psychiatric/Diagnostic, Opioid Maintenance Therapy, and Early Intervention) would need to increase by 27% to adjust for cost of living increases that have occurred since 2000.
• Reimbursement rates for Comprehensive Care Coordination for older adults have generally not increased since 2000. These rates would need to be increased by 38% to adjust for cost of living.
• Early Intervention reimbursement rates have not increased since 2004. The rates would need to increase by 26% to adjust for cost of living.
• Foster Care reimbursement rates would need to increase by at least 25% to adjust for cost of living.
• Reimbursement rates for various Developmental Disabilities Services have not increased since 2008, and would need to increase by 13% to adjust for cost of living.
• Wages for developmental disabilities residential support staff have not increased since 2002. These wage rates would need to increase by 30% to adjust for cost of living.
• Community Mental Health Service rates have not increased since 2006. Based on 2005 rates, they would need an increase of 16% to adjust for cost of living.
Cut those rates and two things will probably happen: 1) Quality of care will decrease; and 2) Wages will be suppressed, so hiring decent people will be much more difficult, which will also likely hamper qualify of care.
11 Comments
|
OK, then let’s see a plan
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* You’ll no doubt recall these recent quotes from Senate Republican Leader Christine Radogno…
Lack of funding for higher education creates “uncertainty if you’re a student,” she said. But, she added, “some of these universities have cut some of their administrative costs –- sort of squeeze-the- beast theory.”
She said “global questions” about higher ed could now be asked.
“Should we have six, eight schools of education, everybody having a program and everything? I don’t know,” Radogno said. She noted a couple of two-year colleges went to four years, including what is now the University of Illinois Springfield.
“Maybe we ought to have more going from four to two,” she said.
* Those words caught the attention of the Champaign News-Gazette and state Sen. Scott Bennett, a Champaign Democrat who represents the U of I…
“What we don’t want to see is some kind of starving out, which is what’s happening now, where the strong survive and the weaker ones die away,” Bennett said. “That’s not the way we should be deciding our higher education system.
“Honestly, that’s what appears to be happening. I don’t know if that’s the design or neglect which is resulting in this.”
Radogno spokeswoman Patti Schuh described Radogno’s comments as part of a “freewheeling” conversation with the newspaper’s editorial board, not a policy proposal. The message, Schuh said, was that budget cuts present an opportunity to “look at things differently.”
“It’s been said by many, ‘Never let a good crisis go to waste,’” Schuh said. “There are legitimate questions that are being asked.”
But she added, “There’s no plan or policy on the table right now.”
OK, take her at her word. But this “squeeze the beast” theory is at the very least a de facto plan right now.
* Make no mistake, however. This current crisis comes after years of “squeeze the beast” policy by controlling Democrats. It’s been a slow-motion train wreck…
Excluding pensions and adult education/career and technical education (which came under community colleges oversight in 2002), community colleges, public universities, need-based financial aid, and institutional grant programs all have experienced decreases in funding since 2000 after accounting for inflation. The total decrease is $1.1 billion, or 36.4 percent.
Emphasis added.
* Universities are (often rightly) seen by state policymakers as top-heavy fiefdoms which need to rein in their own spending. But depriving them of state money hasn’t worked. They’ve continued to expand non-instructional staff and jacked up tuition…
* The upside here is that the universities have been incredibly powerful in the past. It’s why they got away with those massive tuition hikes and their over-reliance on non-tenured professors, etc. The past cuts obviously didn’t work. But the current starvation diet is making them much more amendable to change.
So, how about somebody come up with a reform plan before the whole system implodes and permanent damage is done?
* Not to get all gangsta or anything, but only a short-sighted bookie has his customer’s legs broken for refusing to pay a debt. The customer can’t pay if the customer can’t work. You only break his legs when it becomes clear that he has no intention of ever paying. I don’t think we’re there yet, by any means, but this current, super-intense “squeeze the beast” policy is as close as we’ve ever gotten to breaking some legs.
The university system is a big part of our heritage. Responsible stewards improve on that heritage to pass along to the next generation. Blagojevich and Quinn and the Democratic General Assembly were not responsible stewards. Rauner could turn out to be even worse unless he comes up with a plan.
43 Comments
|
Because… Ricketts!
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Um, dude, they own the Chicago Cubs. That’s probably the worst imaginable thing that anybody would ever try to hide. But, as we all know, they were quite public about their purchase of that evil monstrosity. So, I’m not sure how anything else in their collective family past could possibly be any worse than that…
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump took to Twitter on Monday to denounce a super political action committee opposing his campaign that’s primarily funded by Marlene Ricketts, whose family owns the Chicago Cubs.
“I hear the Rickets (sic) family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $’s against me. They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!” wrote Trump, the businessman and reality TV show star who is no stranger to making pronouncements, name-calling denunciations and predictions via social media.
Trump’s message apparently was in response to a USA Today story noting that Ricketts, the family matriarch who lives in Nebraska, had put $3 million into the Our Principles PAC in January. The PAC has spent about $3.5 million in ads, mailings and other efforts to oppose Trump, federal records show.
* Gov. Rauner and Leader Durkin refused to respond. But one guy did…
But, will Trump’s Twitter strategy work in Illinois? Former Illinois Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady thinks not.
“It does stir it up and he sucks all the oxygen in the room and other candidates can’t get out there, but I don’t think it’s going to work very well here,” Brady said.
Yeah, OK.
* From a Paul Simon Public Policy Institute poll…
If the Republican primary for president were held today, would you vote for Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, John Kasich, Marco Rubio, or Donald Trump?
Donald Trump 28%
Ted Cruz 15%
Marco Rubio 14%
John Kasich 13%
Jeb Bush 8%
Ben Carson 6%
Someone else (not read) 1%
Other/Don’t know (not read) 15%
* It’s obviously dated, the sample size was small and the poll was taken over several days…
The sample of 306 [Illinois] Republicans was part of a statewide poll of 1,000 registered voters conducted Feb.15 to 20. The GOP voter sample has a margin of error of 5.6 percent.
But I doubt that Trump has suddenly fallen behind in Illinois. As we’ve already clearly seen, a large number of Illinoisans absolutely love it when their guy is constantly on the attack. And Pat Brady ought to know this because he’s been loudly cheering something eerily similar to this in his own back yard for a while now.
Just sayin…
48 Comments
|
* AP…
The top Republican in the Illinois House says there is room to compromise with Democrats on the conservative agenda Gov. Bruce Rauner Is pushing.
Jim Durkin is a Republican from Western Springs. On Monday, he told a meeting of the City Club in Chicago that he wants Democrats who control the General Assembly to negotiate “with open minds” on a balanced budget. […]
Durkin says there are steps within a workers comp reform package that could be agreed upon, such as adopting American Medical Association guidelines for compensating worker injury.
* More…
“In my caucus, I believe that workers’ comp is extremely important, extremely important,” said Durkin, R-Western Springs.
“And I’m of the belief, after my discussions with the (House) speaker and the (Senate) president, over the months, that is an area where we can find some common ground.”
“If we‘re going to get through the budget … that’s one of the things we’re going to have to address. It has to be part of the plan, it has to be part of the big picture,” Durkin said in a presentation to the City Club of Chicago.
Durkin also said the GOP doesn’t expect Democratic support for big changes in workers’ compensation “causation,” which refers to whether an injury actually occurred at work and to what degree the workplace is responsible.
Still, he said, “there are many other issues we can deal with on workers’ comp,” citing as examples the implementation of American Medical Association recommendations and changes in payment-for-loss schedules.
* But…
“We passed legislation last year that focuses on the insurance industry, which appears to be a blockade point,” said Madigan spokesman Steve Brown.
“The important thing is there have been independent studies that say the cost of workers’ comp has come down dramatically since the 2011 reforms (but) the insurance companies aren’t passing it along,” said Brown.
“We have a bill that was passed that could focus on the insurance companies (and) get the money to the employers, but the governor is focused on taking wages away from employees,” Brown said.
Brown referenced House Bill 1287, which passed the House last June by a vote of 63 to 39. While Democrats said it was a substantial measure and an olive branch to the governor, Republicans dismissed it as an insincere gesture and falling well short of the changes they want. The bill remains in the Senate.
* OK, just combine the two and be done with it. Or, maybe roll back all or part of this statute…
A 2005 bill that raised payments to workers who suffered permanent partial disabilities on the job [by 7.5 percent] caused workers’ compensation insurance rates in Illinois to soar. Miller said a repeal of that law could break the budget stalemate and satisfy both Rauner and Madigan, who has argued that Rauner’s agenda for workers’ comp will send injured workers to emergency rooms for treatment and force them onto welfare rolls:
“‘If we get this, workers’ comp is done’ [the governor’s people have told me]. Now, rolling back a 7.5 percent benefit increase is not going to put one person on welfare or send one person to the emergency room. That is a doable, possible fix.”
* The question becomes does either side really want to do a deal? I think Durkin is indicating that he’s willing to move forward on something. Brown has laid out what his boss wants. A governor interested in advancing his cause would immediately see this as a prime opportunity for progress.
Put the Speaker on the spot by agreeing to his demand. There’s no better way to test whether Madigan is more interested in compromise or gridlock.
* And, frankly, the same can be said of Rauner. I’m still of the mind that Rauner wants to do a deal. I think that’s supported by what he told the bigshots at GE last year when the company wanted to move its HQ to Chicago, but were worried about governmental instability. Rauner asked for more time because he (for whatever reason) thought he was close to ending the impasse. I don’t think he would’ve told the company execs that if he wanted this thing to go on indefinitely. Maybe I’m wrong, but I still believe he wants to move the state forward. It’s just that he absolutely must find another way to do it.
45 Comments
|
Because… Madigan!
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2016 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Tribune…
As Rauner has done throughout the past year, he tried to pin the problem on House Speaker Michael Madigan, saying the current school funding formula that Democrats now want to change was created by the longtime lawmaker.
“I did not create the school funding formula, I just got here,” Rauner said. “This has been in place for decades and you know who created? Speaker Madigan and the Democrats in the General Assembly. Somehow, I’m new, and it’s all my fault and I’m the defender of it. I mean, good grief.”
Um, no. Try Lee Daniels and Frank Watson…
And the formula which determines how much state aid each school gets hasn’t been changed since 1997.
* That was a huge piece of legislation, by the way, pushed hard throughout most of 1997 by Gov. Jim Edgar…
I felt that in the end, we got 75 percent of what we were out to get. I mean, we didn’t get property tax relief. I think the media has a tendency to dwell on property tax relief. We didn’t get that, but we did get the minimal foundation level, we did get more money for schools; we did get some reforms, but most importantly, we got the minimal foundation level. We helped poor school districts in the state; that was the basis of what we wanted to accomplish, and we did accomplish that.
The bill also created EFAB and a school construction program.
This legislation took months to pass, over the initial opposition of suburban Republicans, who eventually decided that their Downstaters were getting such heat that they needed to cut a deal with Edgar. That’s why Downstate Sen. Frank Watson was made the chief sponsor.
* The bill had problems in the House Democratic caucus as well because it started off as an income tax hike. Here’s Jim Edgar again….
I think we were in April, late April, probably, because we still had time in that Senate. But Madigan came to me and said, “My guys are nervous that they’ll vote for this and then you’ll campaign against them for raising taxes. They want an endorsement.” I said, “I’m not going to give them an endorsement.” Finally we settled on I’d give them a letter thanking them for their support of this proposal. He came back and said, “Okay, that’ll work.” Anybody who votes for this will get a letter from me thanking them for their courage in voting for this important piece of legislation.
* And it required some serious horse trading in the Senate GOP caucus…
We knew we had all the Democrats, and we needed two or three Republicans to vote for a discharge. Now, this is a trickier vote than voting for it on the floor. There are some guys who just won’t vote for a discharge, and we knew that. But I was down to one vote; I knew who the senator was, and I had him down in my office. At that time we were building a new prison in Illinois, and this senator came from a long family of politicians who cared about jobs.
* My overall point here is that when a governor completely engages, he can get things done. Maybe not everything he wants, but 75 percent isn’t bad. You live to fight another day.
What you don’t do is spend all your time publicly bashing one guy. It might make you feel good. It might make your supporters love you more. But it doesn’t actually get anything accomplished. Keeping your base and the Tribune fired up and giddy as little schoolgirls is no substitute for governance. Period.
81 Comments
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
   
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|
