* Sen. Matt Murphy (R-Palatine) is submitting his resignation tomorrow. Murph, a Deputy Republican Leader who focuses on appropriatiions, will be the senior government relations director for Mac Strategies Group. He’ll be leading the firm’s legislative and regulatory practice
The PR firm was founded by Ryan McLaughlin in 2008. Tom Bowen, a Democratic political strategist, is a partner in the firm and former IRMA honcho Dave Vite is a counselor.
*** UPDATE *** Murphy said this morning that he now plans to formally submit his resignation letter on Monday (he’d told me earlier in the week he was planning to file his letter on Friday). The resignation will be effective on September 15th.
* Tomorrow is the one-year anniversary of my surgery, so I’m going in for my annual checkup this afternoon.
My four brothers, most of their kids, my parents and at least one of my aunts are all coming to town tomorrow and Saturday for a reunion. Today is my dad’s birthday and tomorrow is my daughter’s birthday, so it’s gonna be a party.
Tomorrow at noon I’ll be participating in the 2016 “Celebrity Beef Showmanship” dealio at the Illinois State Fair’s Junior Livestock Building. If you can make it, I’d love to see you there.
Anyway, I’m signing off until Monday, campers.
* Barton will be in charge the rest of the afternoon, and then I’ll be shutting it down for the weekend when I get home. I told Barton not to worry about posting anything unless something significant breaks. And, please, don’t make his life needlessly complicated with silly comment-section arguments. Thanks!
U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin laughed off questions Thursday about whether he would run for governor of Illinois in 2018. But he also didn’t rule out the possibility.
“I’m not even speculating on that,” Durbin said after a ribbon-cutting Thursday for a new command center at Scott Air Force Base. “I have a great job.” […]
At a stop later Thursday in Granite City, Durbin told a reporter: “It’s interesting to me, the speculation. I have not done any polling on this, and it seems to be the most interesting political topic for some.”
But he added: “I’ve got a lot more I can do for the state of Illinois as a senator. I’m honored to have this job. I’m not aspiring to any other position.”
* George Will makes some good points in his latest column about Illinois, so you should definitely read the whole thing. However, let’s look at the quotes he included from Gov. Bruce Rauner…
Illinois’ government, says Rauner, “is run for the benefit of its employees.” Increasingly, it is run for their benefit when they retire. Pension promises, though unfunded by at least $113 billion, are one reason some government departments are not digitized at all. […]
The government is so thoroughly unionized (22 unions represent almost all government employees), that “I can’t,” Rauner says, “turn on a light switch without permission.” He exaggerates, somewhat, but the process of trying to fire someone is a career, not an option. […]
Rauner let the tax lapse. To their demand for more tax increases, he sweetly says: Let’s talk. About pension reforms and tort reform. And about exempting local governments from paying on construction projects the “prevailing wage” — which Rauner says is, effectively, “whatever unions tell them they want it to be,” and which raises costs 30 to 40 percent.
Wow, that was some decision by the federal court in the Rod Blagojevich corruption case, wasn’t it?
No, not the one where U.S. Judge James Zagel resentenced a weeping Blagojevich to 14 years in prison for his criminal convictions. The other one, where the federal appeals court said evidence in a civil racketeering lawsuit demonstrated that “Blagojevich’s regular way of conducting business involved bribery.”
Blago was resentenced Tuesday. The appeals court ruled a week earlier in a spin-off case. It was a reprise of the Blagojevich corruption scandal, but in a different forum (civil court) with different actors (pay-for-play personnel looking to leverage official government action into coin of the realm).
This story is one many corruption watchers are not familiar with unless they burrowed deep into the fetid and festering sewer of official Illinois corruption.
“Hillary wants to abolish — essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, if she gets to pick, if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know,” Trump said.
He added: “But I tell you what, that will be a horrible day, if Hillary gets to put her judges in, right now we’re tied.”
* Congressman Bob Dold has refused to endorse Trump and he had this to say to CBS 2…
“Obviously that’s asking people to incite violence,” said U.S. Rep. Robert Dold. “Obviously, it is something that’s really dangerous and can’t be tolerated.”
* From his opponent’s campaign…
Schneider for Congress campaign manager Magen Ryan today released the following statement:
“Bob Dold let Donald Trump’s dangerous incitement of violence sit for a full day, only commenting timidly after being forced to respond by media questioning. That’s not leadership – it’s cowardice. Dold should have immediately stood up and denounced the nominee of his party’s incendiary rhetoric at the start.”
“When you’re running for president, you have to be very careful about what you say. He’s not careful enough. We’ve all seen these gaffes that make him not prepared for the big job.”
* From the Democratic Party of Illinois…
Kirk on Kirk’s Gaffes:
“Levine asked Kirk about a series of controversial statements he has made in recent memory. That includes a reference last year to Chicago’s South Side, when he referred to an unmarried colleague as a ‘bro with no ho.’
‘When you’re in a race like I’m in, everything is taken the wrong way,’ Kirk says.” [CBS Chicago, 7/21/16]
Confused about the difference, Senator? Maybe you should visit www.TrumporKirk.com to get a refresher.
“We do not know if Mayor (Rahm) Emanuel can stand another teachers’ strike, especially at a time when confidence in his leadership is at an all-time low and the city is in an uproar over another police shooting of another unarmed African-American youth,” she said. “Do not force our hand.”
That’s some seriously over the top hardball right there.
“I want the teachers to be part of the solution. … I believe we can strengthen our classrooms and strengthen our teachers’ pensions,” Emanuel said.
“Chicago taxpayers have stepped up to be part of the solution. The State of Illinois, for the first time, has stepped up to be part of the solution. The [CPS] central bureaucracy, in the sense of the fat, has stepped up to be part of the solution. And I think the teachers should be part of the solution in not only stabilizing their finances, but strengthening our classrooms.”
Emanuel pointed to test results that show CPS fourth-graders “lead the nation” in reading gains while eight-graders are doing in the same in math. He also pointed to a high school graduation rate that, he claimed, is “climbing at a higher rate” than the rest of the country.
“I believe the public knows that. They are willing to step up to be part of the solution … as it comes to stabilizing the teachers’ pension. The state has been an issue for all of us for 70 years [by treating] teachers and taxpayers in Chicago differently than they treat Downstate. We’ve now resolved that issue. But teachers — as it relates to securing their own pensions dating to a decision Mayor [Harold] Washington made for one year — need to be part of it,” he said.
On Thursday, Pastors Protecting Youth (PPY), an association of Illinois pastors, filed a Federal lawsuit against the State of Illinois in regards to the Youth Mental Health Protection Act, the state’s newly enacted ban on sexual identity counseling for minors. The suit maintains that the ban unconstitutionally restricts a young person’s right to make personal choices regarding his or her own choice of sexual identity, as well as the pastors’ right to free speech and the exercise of religion.
The Act, which went into effect January 1, 2016, bans any licensed counselor from helping a young person who is seeking to overcome unwanted same-sex attractions. The Act further states that any “person or entity” in “any trade or commerce” who offers sexual identity counseling in a manner that portrays homosexuality as a disorder or illness, is guilty of consumer fraud. PPY is seeking a Declaratory Judgment from the court stating that the law should not apply to pastoral counseling which informs counselees that homosexuality conduct is a sin and disorder from God’s plan for humanity.
PPY’s attorney John W. Mauck of Mauck & Baker, LLC, says, “We are most concerned about young people who are seeking the right to choose their own identity. This is an essential human right. However, this law undermines the dignity and integrity of those who choose a different path for their lives than politicians and activists prefer. Each person should be free to receive Biblical and spiritual counseling from the pastor of their choice to help them orient their sexuality.”
Pastor Steven Stultz of Nu-Church Apostolic Ministries of East Garfield says, “In 1 Corinthians 6:9, the Apostle Paul writes to those who had overcome many sins including homosexuality, stating, ‘such were some of you’ but you were changed through God’s healing. I have personally witnessed many people change their sexual orientation through counseling and know it is possible. The government is interfering into someone’s private decisions. This ban on counseling creates fear in the people most in need of comfort and support.”
I’ve asked for a copy of the lawsuit, but have yet to hear back from the lawyers.
The Youth Mental Health Protection Act, which was sponsored in the House by state Rep. Kelly Cassidy and in the Senate by state Sen. Daniel Biss, was signed into law by Gov. Bruce Rauner in Aug. 2015. The law forbids mental health providers from engaging in therapeutic practices aimed at changing the sexual orientation of a minor. […]
“Fundamentally, this isn’t surprising,” said Cassidy. “In every state where we’ve had this kind of law, they’ve challenged it, and every time, they’ve lost. So we’re ready.”
Numerous psychiatric and medical professional associations have said conversion therapy doesn’t work, and can lead to further psychological damage to a patient. An American Psychiatric Association position statement said, “Psychotherapeutic modalities to convert or ‘repair’ homosexuality are based on developmental theories whose scientific validity is questionable.
Furthermore, anecdotal reports of ‘cures’ are counterbalanced by anecdotal claims of psychological harm. In the last four decades, ‘reparative’ therapists have not produced any rigorous scientific research to substantiate their claims of cure. Until there is such research available, [the American Psychiatric Association] recommends that ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals’ sexual orientation, keeping in mind the medical dictum to first, do no harm.”
This is weak sauce. As was yesterday. She’s for and has been for comprehensive immigration reform, which includes enhanced border security measures, as well as a path to citizenship. I didn’t make a stink about this yesterday, but in 2006, she supported a path to citizenship, as well, which is more than you can say for Kirk. He opposes the DREAM Act, for [crying out loud].
*** UPDATE 1 *** Kirk campaign…
Not accurate. The DREAM Act was incorporated into the 2013 bipartisan immigration reform bill supported by Kirk. Below is a clip from Progress Illinois citing that and it includes the quote below from Cong. Bill Foster praising the DREAM act provisions.
I am especially pleased to see that this plan includes an expedited path to citizenship for DREAMers and access to federal student aid, because we shouldn’t be pushing away talented young students from the only home they have ever known. We should give them a chance to succeed.
*** UPDATE 2 *** From DPI…
Hey Rich,
Hope you’re feeling better from your fall. I just read the update from the Kirk campaign in your Cap Fax post and thought it was important to note that Kirk voted against the DREAM Act in December, 2010 when it had a real chance of passing.
It was also already in the bill when Kirk voted with 14 other hardliners to filibuster comprehensive immigration reform in 2013 — so if we’re being generous, he voted against it several times before voting for it.
More below:
Kirk Voted Against The Dream Act [Chicago Daily Herald, 12/18/10]
Kirk Did Not Support Bill That Would Grant Path To Citizenship For Dreamers Who Had Come To Country As Children. “While Mr. Kirk is a moderate Republican-he supported last week’s failed attempt in the Senate to pass gun control legislation and recently became one of a few Republicans to support gay marriage-he has yet to say whether he’ll vote for immigration reform. […] In the past Mr. Kirk has been considered a hard-liner on the issue. Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Chicago, one of the leading congressional advocates of reform, said during the 2010 Senate race that ‘I do not see much difference between (Mr. Kirk’s) views and those of the most xenophobic opponents of reform.’ For example, the senator hasn’t supported citizenship for undocumented immigrants who came to this country as children, as outlined in the so-called Dream Act sponsored by Mr. Durbin. The Senate bill introduced last week beefs up border protection and provides a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants after a 13-year wait, payment of penalties and other requirements.” [Crain’s Chicago Business, 4/22/13]
Kirk Voted To Filibuster Comprehensive Immigration Reform In 2013, siding with conservative hardliners. It was only after a significant amount of criticism in Illinois for “inexplicably” siding “with the most conservative hardliners” that he switched positions and voted for the bill. [CQ, 6/11/13, S.744, Vote 146, 6/11/13] [Chicago Sun-Times, Lynn Sweet, 6/14/13], [Joliet Herald News, Editorial, 6/13/13]
Several U.S. states studied by S&P Global Ratings are ill-equipped to deal with an economic recession, hampered by the slow rebound in U.S. economic growth after the damage wrought by the Great Recession.
Fiscal imbalances, slower state tax revenue growth and increased spending on social services have contributed to a challenging economic landscape, as real GDP has only increased at 2.1 percent per year since 2009, S&P said in a report issued on Tuesday. […]
To determine states’ fiscal capacity to withstand the first year of a hypothetical recession, S&P sampled 10 states, the report said. The study found that a collective revenue shortfall would eclipse the states’ combined budget reserves by $5.4 billion.
Of the 10 states studied, several have budget reserves that equal less than half of “potential revenue underperformance” in the first year of a moderate-intensity recession. These include Illinois, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Connecticut.
Already the lowest rated of the 50 states, Illinois’ revenue and expenditure volatility is moderate relative to other states in our sample; however, the state’s weakened fiscal position, limited financial flexibility, and political gridlock leave it susceptible to the most severe fiscal stress in the event of a recession. Despite seven years of a national economic expansion, Illinois is still operating at a significant structural imbalance and continues to contend with a large and growing backlog of payables. Decision making has been severely hampered by top leadership’s political intransigence and deeply polarized views on how to address the state’s current structural imbalance. It nonetheless adds to existing fiscal pressures at a time when the state is at risk of approaching service level insolvency, which could more fundamentally jeopardize its creditworthiness.
For fiscal 2016, we estimate the state’s structural imbalance was over $4 billion. In the absence of a fully enacted budget the state operated under a de-facto budget that led to unchecked spending based on continuing appropriations, consent decrees, judicial ruling, and appropriations enacted. In addition to its lingering structural budget gap, which opened up following the expiration of the temporary tax increases on Dec. 31, 2014, the state has a large and growing backlog of unpaid bills. We expect the bill backlog to range between $9 billion and $10 billion, close to one-third of the expenditures at 2016 fiscal year-end. The recently agreed upon stopgap budget depletes the remaining $275 million left in its reserves.
In our simulation, the state’s three largest sources of revenue–income, corporate and sales taxes–would experience moderate declines in the first year of a recession. We estimate that these general tax revenues would decline 3.4% from the prior fiscal year. Based on the governor’s fiscal 2017 estimated revenues, and assuming no changes to the tax structure, these revenues would decline by $1.29 billion, or 5.5% from the estimate, adding to the state’s already sizeable structural misalignment. On the expenditure side, a recession would place additional pressure on an already Illinois overstrained social support network. Unemployment, already well above the national average, would increase further, especially if issues such as Brexit negatively affects large employers in the state, such as Caterpillar, which has significant operations in the United Kingdom. Falling incomes and rising unemployment would correspond with rising Medicaid caseloads and translate into a $282 million, or 2%, increase on the state’s projected Medicaid spending.
Faced with falling revenues and rising expenditures, the state would be left with very few options. Typically, states would rely on at least some portion of their reserves to either delay or mitigate the blow of necessary revenue raising and austerity measures. In the absence of reserves, Illinois would have to either raise revenues or reduce expenditures, or both. Given the current structural imbalance, tax increases or spending reductions would have to be more draconian to cover the current budget gap plus the newly opened recessionary one. The tax rate decline in 2015 suggests there is some capacity to increase revenues, although taxpayer tolerance for increases might be less when including increases imposed at the local level; say, Chicago, for example. Reducing expenditures would also prove challenging given its high and rising level of fixed costs, including debt and pension expenses, especially in absence of a budget. Reductions to education, in addition to likely facing political resistance, would place increased pressure on entities that are already struggling, such as Chicago public schools and the state’s community colleges. As fiscal 2016 demonstrated, in the absence of a budget, most of the state’s spending will likely continue unchecked based on continuing appropriations, consent decrees, and court-ordered spending.
Even with some room to make adjustments, it is unlikely that Illinois would react to a recession in a timely manner. The state has historically been unable to make difficult and politically unpopular revenue and expenditure decisions necessary to restore balance to its operations and has allowed deficits and payables to accumulate. Illinois is required to adopt a balanced budget, but is not required to maintain balance throughout the year. In our view, this ability to end the year out of balance and carry forward deficits is likely one of the most significant weaknesses in the state’s government framework. Decision making is further complicated by a high level of consensus required to adopt legislation that become effective immediately and political gridlock. The state requires a simple majority to enact immediately effective laws from January 1 through May 31, but a three-fifths majority during the remainder of the year. Despite operating for a full year without a comprehensive budget, growing payables, increased social pressure, and 2016 being an election year, the state was only able to adopt a stopgap measure that funds six months of continued spending deferring action on its structural budget gap until next year.
In our view, the state’s remaining options add uncertainty, are likely to come with an increased cost, and would further weaken the state’s creditworthiness. The state would likely manage its liquidity by continuing to accumulate either short-term or long-term payables, both of which are temporary measures that would further weaken the state’s fiscal position. Arguably, many of the state’s service providers are operating with weakened balance sheets after having to endure a full year with no or reduced payments. The ability, if not the willingness, to continue to provide services in exchange for deferred payment, albeit at a premium, could come into question during a recession, especially if payables continue to rise. As an alternative, the state could access the capital markets to issue deficit bonds. GO must be authorized by at least 60% of the General Assembly and there is a well-established priority for payment of debt. We would expect that if deficit bond financing were to be approved, it would come at a premium.
* S&P estimates Illinois’ Medicaid costs would rise from $7.8 billion to $7.954 billion, or 2 percent in a recession. The revenue shortfall would be $1.286 billion, with no reserves on hand to cushion the blow. Revenue would fall from $23.271 billion to $21.985 billion, or 5.5 percent. And the share of debt, pension payments and other post-employment benefits would rise from 28.8 percent of revenues to 30.0 percent.
