81 Comments - jim - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:12 am: It’s not his plan. Why would he support it, even tacitly? - Cubs in '16 - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:14 am: “I think you will find many Democrats who will find that framework to be inadequate,” “I don’t know enough about it to say whether it’s adequate or inadequate. It’s a framework.” What exactly is his point? These statements seem contradictory. - Anon221 - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:15 am: Here’s a longer version this excerpt was taken from (18 minutes plus with Cullerton and Rauner also): http://nprillinois.org/post/madigan-cullerton-weigh-budget-deal-prospects - Illinoised - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:17 am: I am disappointed at his remarks but not surprised. - PublicServant - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:17 am: ===So, they get to a budget framework and now he’s throwing ice water on it?=== They who? Cold water? He doesn’t like it. What did you want him to say? Hey, it’s progress that a group of legislators created a framework. Good try. Can it pass? As the magic 8-ball would say: Uncertain - Ducky LaMoore - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:18 am: Apparently there has to be a complete and total revolt against all the powers that be to get done what should get done. Mike, you are such a disappointment to our cause. - Juvenal - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:18 am: Actually, Rich, I think Rauner pulled the rug before Madigan dumped the ice water. The governor can’t be traveling the state saying “if it were up to him” we’d be lowering taxes instead of raising them. It was up to him, he has had 18 months to introduce a plan that lowers taxes, and no one has seen it because its mathematically impossible. It’s evident that Rauner’s Turnaround Agenda isn’t enough for him: he still hopes to get his TA AND blame Democrats wholly for the tax increase. That is not how you get agreements done. - phocion - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:19 am: If Madigan doesn’t know enough about the framework to say whether it’s adequate or inadequate, it’s odd that he could also say that many Democrats will find the framework “inadequate.” - PublicServant - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:19 am: Juvenal+1 - Anonymous - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:20 am: He speaks authoritatively ” what the people of Illinois want from their government”. He lacks the honesty to say or lacks the capacity to care that what the people of Illinois DON’T want is exactly the kind of government he’s been a co-conspirator of for the last few decades. It all sucks big time. BIG TIME - wordslinger - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:23 am: Meh, he thought the college and social services band-aids were inadequate, too. But they got floor votes and passed. Let’s see the plan and get an idea if the governor will sign it. Rauner holds the ultimate trump card with his vetoes. - Jocko - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:28 am: If Mike’s being honest, he should say he’s caught between the devil (BVR) and the deep red sea of GOP votes. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:28 am: Confusing. I thought Gov. Rauner took the passive passenger role in this mockumentary farce? If I was the governor, I’d try to set up a meeting, kinda one on one, but with Staff, not with Madigan, over a meal of some sort, possibly a dinner, or a Sunday brunch of done kind, I mean we’re running out of days after all… So to clarify, Madigan knows, but really doesn’t, and the budget is imperative, but now the Speaker is also “but a passenger”… … meanwhile, the Governor may contemplate another move like inviting a one on one, for Staff, maybe a champagne brunch of some kind, fresh strawberries, because he may want to “one up” the passenger schtick now being “borrowed” by Madigan… from Rauner himself. Meanwhile, in a conference room somewhere under the dome, Radogno, Durkin, and Cullerton contemplate having an intervention(s) telling Madigan and Rauner they need to show up for an intervention… for the other… fooling them both. I think what bothers me most is these scenes would all work in a ridiculous mockumentary. It’s believeale enough, that it’s humorous without explanation. “Congratulations!” - Wensicia - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:29 am: After last year’s budget fiasco, Madigan has to be very careful on what he supports or doesn’t during negotiations. Otherwise, Rauner jumps in and calls it all a sham, refusing his support. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:30 am: === I think Rauner pulled the rug=== I think you’re far too sensitive. Yes, he should watch his mouth more closely, but if you think that’s pulling the rug you’re just acting way too dramatic. - HistoryProf - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:31 am: Rich, You lost me with your “come on Man.” A year + late but we are finally actually negotiating here, and you expect Madigan to accept the first offer, regardless of how “inadequate?” Keep coolie cool boy! - Motambe - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:33 am: Does anyone sense that while Rauner is losing popularity in the polls, perhaps Madigan is slowly losing influence with some Democrats in the House? - Formerly Known as Frenchie M - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:33 am: I’ll go with Occam’s Razor explanation here: Rauner has dug himself a deep, deep hole. Rauner’s poll numbers are falling. If Rauner wants to get out of the hole, he’s gonna have to figure it out himself. In the meantime, his poll numbers will continue to decline. As they should. - wordslinger - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:35 am: –The governor can’t be traveling the state saying “if it were up to him” we’d be lowering taxes instead of raising them.– Well, of course, it is up to Rauner, the whole magilla — what, if any, taxes are raised and by how much. No revenue plan can be passed without his signature. There is nowhere near a veto-proof majority for a tax increase. Again, the governor holds the trump card, and has since his inauguration, despite the silly spin that he’s some sort of impotent bystander in the process. - Johnny Pyle Driver - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:36 am: Why would he pass on the opportunity to look like one of the adults in the room? - Just Me - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:40 am: C’mon, Rich. Cut the Speaker some slack! He was the lone adult in the room during the Blagojevich years. It is his turn to be immature finally. - out of touch - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:40 am: More telling in the interview was Cullerton’s comment that Rauner will have to bring forth the tax increase and determine how high. Madigan’s comment and Cullerton’s together say this: we’re not endorsing a proposal (with revenue) until the Governor owns it. - Bulbous1 - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:40 am: Misdirection: Works just as well in politics as it does in football. - 47th Ward - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:42 am: I don’t have enough info about the framework to offer an opinion, but is it possible this framework only provides for a FY17 budget, leaving everyone stuck where they are in FY16? If that’s the case, isn’t that a $2-$3 billion cut to the current year spending? Because that might be legitimately called “inadequate.” - cdog - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:42 am: I hope Madigan is insisting on a far-reaching TAX-SWAP for the education portion of any Grand Bargain, and Rauner is close to agreeing. - Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:42 am: Highly recommend listening to the entire 18 minutes. Rauner says he is encouraged and cautiously optimistic The Speaker is discouraged and not optimistic Rauner says is not a tax fan and would like to cut taxes but given our debt and the fact he is willing accommodate some of the democrats interests he is willing to look at new revenue and be supportive Madigan gives no acknowledgement of Republican interests of passing reforms which will allow our economy to grow Who is the unreasonable one here? - James Knell - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:42 am: Rauner’s rants yesterday made me feel sick. It’s like he locks himself away with his “IPI pipe” and hits it until he can see the “one true reality” stumbles out of his office and spews the same old dogma. His use of the term “AFSCAME” or whatever underscores his fanaticism. This makes Madigan look like a statesman. Has anyone told Rauner is he is the 6th most unpopular governor in America? - Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:44 am: ===and you expect Madigan to accept the first offer=== Oh, please. Another whiner heard from. But to answer your question: No. But I do expect him to fully engage the process. He clearly isn’t. - AC - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:44 am: ==many Democrats will find the framework “inadequate== My interpretation - a significant number of Republican votes will be required. Democrats won’t own this all by themselves, and having a handful of them vote against this will ensure the passage of the budget deal is bipartisan. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:44 am: I do believe two reasons Madigan is moving the goal posts, being less than cooperative, even stalling the process out to a halt. 1) #TaxHikeMike - Trust… is a Madigan Must. Unless Rauner makes clear that revenue increases will not be turned on their ear and face millions, #TaxHikeMike ignorance is still out there. Which lead to… 2) Rauner continues to purposely and methodically “sell” this … “I’m open to more revenue”. Problem is… revenue is a required element. It’s not even close to optional now. So, while touring the state with Raunerisms, the false narrative of a “give” might give anyone pause, let alone anyone labeled… #TaxHikeMike. Madigan isn’t going to get caught in the jetwash of millions in a double-cross Ad campaign that #TaxHikeMike forced this “gigantic” tax increase, destroyin’ colleges, eleminatin’ social services… … Trust. It’s always been a matter of trust… - PublicServant - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:45 am: ===passing reforms which will allow our economy to grow=== Any cite besides “Because I said so?” - Allen D - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:45 am: If it isn’t Madigan’s Idea it isn’t good for the State… Case closed… another reason for GA term limits…. - Langhorne - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:47 am: After 18 months of destruction and suffering, the fact that some members were meeting to talk about some basic elements of a way out, i.e., framework, gave everyone hope. Probably too much hope. Another patch, even a big one, is not good enough. Some caution is in order, but madigan should get behind the framework and build on it. Its more than he has produced. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:47 am: ===Madigan isn’t going to get caught in the jetwash of millions in a double-cross Ad campaign that #TaxHikeMike forced this “gigantic” tax increase, destroyin’ colleges, eleminatin’ social services…=== He’s gonna get hit with that whatever happens. Might as well do something to actually earn it. - The Muse - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:47 am: Looks like we won’t be getting a budget until January. I feel like we’ve been overly optimistic this whole time. Most people DO NOT know who Speaker Madigan is but they know who the governor is. Plus Trump is at the top of the GOP ticket… I don’t think the Speaker could have written this scenario up better for himself. - A guy - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:48 am: People are tuned into this a bit more now. Moving back the goal posts is never considered good form. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:48 am: ===Most people DO NOT know who Speaker Madigan is=== That’s total malarkey. Most people do know who he is. And most people don’t like the man. I happen to usually disagree with that assessment, but it’s the reality. Pull your head out of… the sand. - PublicServant - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:51 am: The voters in his district who keep electing him and the majority that keep electing him speaker don’t seem to be fazed, by your assessment that “most people don’t like the man”…Just sayin. - Demoralized - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:52 am: This is a bit like Charlie Brown and Lucy playing football. Every time the ball is about to be kicked it’s pulled out of the way. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:52 am: ===He’s gonna get hit with that whatever happens. Might as well do something to actually earn it.=== I was assessing and speculating, and not agreeing with the thought process. I’m still of the belief the budgeteers cobble enough around both Madigan and Rauner and make it impossible for either to disagree with veto-proof numbers supporting a plan. It’s beyond ridiculous now. - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:55 am: Ugh! ===He’s gonna get hit with that whatever happens. Might as well do something to actually earn it.=== This got cut off. I agree. No way was Madigan going to get out of any of this, agreement or “agreement”, without the jetwash happening in the Tier 1 targets. My apologies. - AC - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 9:55 am: ==He’s gonna get hit with that whatever happens.== Several Republican votes would go a long way toward countering #TaxHikeMike. - Ahoy! - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:00 am: –Speaker Madigan has said from Jump Street that crafting a budget was the most important thing that Gov. Rauner could do and what the state truly needs. So, they get to a budget framework and now he’s throwing ice water on it?– Nobody wants this war to keep going more than Madigan, it’s his plan for November and nothing comes between Madigan and his plans for November, not people, not children, nobody. - Federalist - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:00 am: As I have said far too many times on this site, neither Madigan or Rauner want to make things work. It is all about THEM! This has been quite obvious, at least to me, for a very long time. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:03 am: ===The voters in his district who keep electing him and the majority that keep electing him speaker don’t seem to be fazed, by your assessment that “most people don’t like the man”…Just sayin. === It’s not my assessment. It’s the result of every poll taken for quite a while in this state. If you can’t see it, you’re willfully blind. - wordslinger - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:03 am: –Madigan gives no acknowledgement of Republican interests of passing reforms which will allow our economy to grow Who is the unreasonable one here?– It would reasonable to see some grown-up projections with assumptions and data and all that stuff. The guv’s peeps moved like lightning producing “projections” on the proposed graduated income tax. Detailed numbers going out 14 years. Who’s kidding whom? You don’t sell this kind of stuff with word-salad. If you can’t produce numbers that can be put to the test after all this time, it just shows you’re selling snake oil. - Tone - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:06 am: Um, 4th highest tax burden in the nation. One of the highest unemployment rates in the country. One of the worst job growth rates in the country. Losing people faster than any state other than West Virginia. Job growth picked up under Rauner when the tax rates fell to 3.75% from 5.0%. What proof are you looking for? Illinois is an economic basket case. - Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:08 am: Wordslinger you seriously don’t think the Speaker should be held to account for his failure to acknowledge our stagnant economy? If the economy was growing we would have not revenue for the state. He wants to change nothing and views any reform as an attack on the middle class. All the while proposing a higher tax burden on the middle class. - tobor - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:18 am: Jack Franks, where were your votes. - gg - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:22 am: Rauner needs to present a budget. No budget presentation .. no deal. Rauner needs to present .. otherwise Rauner cannot be trusted. Look at all the folks he has hurt. IMHO He does not care about tomorrow. - cdog - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:25 am: so Tone, if you’re premise is true, why did Rauner squander the magical tax decrease by continuing to add BILLIONS to the bill backlog? Oh yeah, the 1.4% return on the TA. Lower income taxes might have been in Illinois’ future, but not after the Rauner FUBAR. - cgo75 - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:30 am: Most people don’t like him but I think many do respect him for his longevity and his political savvy. His style is always interesting and you’ve got to love how far reaching his tentacles are! - Belle - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:46 am: The problems with our economy goes back to the 80’s-these are old, well-nurtured issues that have been compounded by many. - Liberty - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 10:47 am: What else do you do with a petulant governor? - wordslinger - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 11:06 am: –Wordslinger you seriously don’t think the Speaker should be held to account for his failure to acknowledge our stagnant economy? – LOL, those are lot of words in a row that must mean something to someone. Just show me your charts on the economic and fiscal ROI of The Turnaround Agenda. That would help me understand the justifications for running a $6.2 billion deficit while tuning up higher ed and social services. If you can’t sell it like a big boy, move on. - GA Watcher - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 11:07 am: Let’s not forget that the Governor and other leaders also gave the budgeteer proposal cool receptions. Leader Durkin even said he wouldn’t call it a framework for a budget deal. - walker - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 11:08 am: Better that Madigan had said some optimistic things, to help with the process. Better that Madigan or Rauner began to own some of the progress. This is a tepid, passive response. But this is not “No.” The message to his members with the proposed solutions, was that they had better make a serious effort to sell their proposals to some fellow Democratic caucus members. The resistance will not be from him especially, but from within their own caucus. He won’t try to force the sale until others prepare the ground. That is often the situation. - My New Handle - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 11:11 am: The Governor has not presented a balanced budget in two cycles. That is a major constitutional part of his job description. The GA handed him one unbalanced budget which he was too lazy to amend. What am I missing? He wanted crisis and he got crisis. He can declare that victory, crow about it if he needs to. Madigan isn’t moving goalposts, just trying to get Rauner to declare where they are. - Norseman - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 11:21 am: Walker +1 - Sue - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 11:27 am: Mr Speaker- there would be more money for everyone if you were just willing to stop protecting your public sector union masters who with your help put us in this mess to begin with - gg - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 11:34 am: Sue, Do you have any details? Or are you just whistling in the wid? - gg - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 11:35 am: wind? - Yukon Gold - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 11:40 am: It is frustrating and embarrassing to to a resident of Illinois because ALL our elected officials have forgotten that there comes a time of going what is best for the State instead of insisting on personal or political ideas and priorities. That time is now for BOTH Parties. What a disappointment our State must be to the “Greatest Generation” many of whom gave their lives to protect this Republic. - Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 11:51 am: ==“I don’t know enough about it to say whether it’s adequate or inadequate. It’s a framework.”== Who am I to help lead and be engaged in those negotiations as the Governor was through Tim Nuding? I am just the Speaker. What do I know about any of this? - Formerly Known As... - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 12:26 pm: This is exactly why I was asking last week who Madigan’s emissary was in that room. To make sure there were no =misunderstandings= and that everyone was on the same page. No surprises, no excuses, no distancing yourself after the fact or feigning you didn’t know what was going on in those negotiations and then saying you don’t support them. This is the best chance we have at getting something done for the year. It is not perfect, it is not even great imho in some respects, but it is what we have to work with because these folks are the only ones who sat down together to help lead. It has more tax increases than some were expecting, but it is doable with some give and take. Please, do not sabotage this. - Honeybear - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 12:30 pm: Sue- you are going up on the “Ignant” list in the office. Madigan was AFSCME’s enemy number 1 before Rauner. Let’s just say that our interests are temporarily aligned. If if we were his masters we weren’t the cause of the states’ problems. Why don’t you go back to watching your Trump coverage on Fox. - Sue - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 12:49 pm: Hey honey- I voted for the Bern. Yea Madigan and AFSCME ain’t in bed together- then why does he keep trying to get the Union written Arbitration bill thru. Why not just let the State declare its impasse and implement. Summer is a nice time to be on strike. You can alternate your days on the picket line with some fishing. Truth be told there won’t be a strike because the state work is a good gig even under what the G proposes - Honeybear - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 1:06 pm: Sue, Do you work for the state? Madigan understands that if we get to a declared “impasse” by the ILRB, we are forced out on strike, or even accept the Rauners last best and final offer, the union is busted. The only thing that will prevent that from happening is HB580. If HB580 fails the union is gone and thus Madigan loses our meager money, but most importantly he loses our ground forces who reliably show up and get the job done as we did for McCann. Look you needn’t be a putz about all the union stuff. We lost the second Rauner was elected. The only game now is how much damage we sustain. But most important of all. Madigan knows that if Rauner gets his way the state workforce will collapse and not be revivable. Those who do not work in state government have no way of knowing or understanding this. We’ll collapse. Call me hyperbolic. Call me passionate. It’s what I am most afraid of. Your constant harping and criticism of the people who work for the state is just plain mean and unethical. You have no idea all that we do and keep going. We’re good people. We are not the cause of the problem. - Sue - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 1:15 pm: Honey bear- you as individuals certainly are not responsible- but your union leadership IS. The public sector unions are bankrupting the country. Plain and simple. They care about preserving their positions and membership to the detriment of everyone else. If you think that States like Texas and Florida are in better fiscal shape then Illinois or NY is coincidental then you are naieve. Now there is done talk of public pension bailouts by the Feds. All I can say is thank our lucky stars we have divided govt at the national level - btowntruth - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 1:54 pm: ” The public sector unions are bankrupting the country. Plain and simple.” Show us facts and figures to back that statement up,please. - Sue - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 3:10 pm: Brown- your kidding right. There is only one reason Illinois is in the current state of fiscal distress- as is Chicago- benefit costs associated with our public sector work force- retired and active - Honeybear - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 3:12 pm: Wow….Sue….you’ve gone into a fever dream….sue…come back to the light….sueeeee - Sue - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 3:19 pm: Honey-how am I wrong. The pension payments Illinois is currently paying are nearing 30 percent of the annual budget. We literally are robbing the future to satisfy these obligations. Clearly- many bare the fault for allowing this to reach this point but we have to now pay for those mistakes which mean cuts for everything else. - RNUG - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 3:57 pm: Sue, It isn’t the benefit structure that was / is the problem, it was the diversion of funds from it. And there is plenty of room to raise revenue; the State was managing to pay all the bills, and pay off part of the backlog, before the tax increase was allowed to expire. It is not a lack of state-wide wealth, it is strictly a lack of political will … - Tom K. - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 4:17 pm: RNUG - you are likely the most measured, logical poster on this blog. You must know then, why the Dem’s diverted pension funding instead of raising revenue for the past twelve years - because it would have cost them elections! Plus, the unions and the Dems knew that the constitutional protection would kick in down the road anyway, hence there was no “risk” to the unions’ pensions from underfunding. Therein lies the oft-quoted “unholy alliance” between public sector collective bargaining and politicians, and why it should not be allowed to exist. - pundent - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 4:55 pm: Sue - I’m more than willing to get behind your argument. But here’s one word of caution. The arguments that you make regarding the pension liabilities could just as easily be made about social security. Both systems have been woefully underfunded. So I’m sure you’ll be willing to forego social security given the burden that it is placing on the country. - btowntruth - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 5:04 pm: “The pension payments Illinois is currently paying are nearing 30 percent of the annual budget.” We have a budget? Somebody better tell Rauner and the GA,I can only imagine their surprise. - RNUG - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 5:08 pm: - Tom K. - Yes, and I also know that it was both D and R Governors who, for various reasons, collaborated in shorting the pension funds. And, even after the 1975 IFT pension ruling, it was not a foregone conclusion in the GA that the court would always come down on the side of the retirees. There is a (not always valid) presumption that any law passed by the GA is constitutional; I’m sure a lot of the members of the GA thought they could just pass a law to go around the Pension Clause. History has proven that belief wrong. And yes, Illinois has a mismatch between revenue and expenses. It always has. The flat income tax, when introduced, was supposed to generate enough money to solve that. It did for about 2 Fiscal Years. Then the shorting of the pension funds started, hence the IFT decision. Ever since then, there has been a mismatch between revenue and expenses that has been papered over by various means. But I also know that until Rauner, the system of compromise worked. It wasn’t pretty but the wheels did stay on. - Sue - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 5:12 pm: Pundent-comparison does not equate - The US has a printing press which Illinois does not possess. Additionally congress is free subject to politics to do anything it wants in terms of benefit payments and retirement ages. Unfortunately the Illinois Supreme Ct won’t let our legislature do squat - Sue - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 5:15 pm: RNUG- even pre- Rauner the annual payments were encroaching upon everything else. Subsidies for METRA- municipal revenue sharing- school payments. Going back to 5 ain’t gonna do it absent huge cuts elsewhere - Sue - Tuesday, May 17, 16 @ 5:20 pm: RNUG- one way to curb future pension obligations would be to curtail salaries which would be totally constitutional. Why not legislate salary caps for administrators or like in MLB charge a tax on School Fistricts which exceed the caps with the payments going into the pension system. Who will cry if administrators couldn’t be paid more then X dollars a year Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.