79 Comments - The Captain - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:21 am: Natch? Natch. - Piece of Work - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:22 am: Cheri is probably right, there have been budgets, way out of balance budgets and out of control spending. Just as there has been waaaaaay out of control spending at the federal level. It is the actual adhering to a budget and constraint on spending the dems seem to not understand - Anonymous - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:22 am: And how did those budgets work out? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:23 am: Sneedless to say, the Kennedy cheerleaders now will be very sensitive here and will continue to speak in scripted language and be less and less persuasive every time. Stay tuned! - PublicServant - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:25 am: Wait, Didn’t Bruce sign an * billion dollar out of balance stopgap budget, that doesn’t even fund higher ed and social services? Seems like out of balance budgets are being done on both sides of the isle. Just sayin… - MAMA - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:27 am: “And how did those budgets work out?” Apparently past ’state budgets’ worked out better than Rauner’s so called ’stopgap budgets’. We are in worse shape financially today than before Rauner took office. Numbers don’t lie. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:28 am: ===way out of balance budgets and out of control spending=== Need I remind you that the state was paying bills in less than 30 days by the end of 2014? The cycle now is multiple months. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:28 am: Higher Education, since 1858 was funded by governors up to Governor Bruce Rauner. Understanding all of “Rauner’s First”, that’s where the rubber meets the road. - Anonymous - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:29 am: Rich, does Chris Kennedy have the funds to beat Rauner? - Handle Bar Mustache - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:30 am: Cheri is right. Bruce Rauner is failing in his basic duties as governor. Don’t take it from me - here’s Crain’s: “there’s no way to deny it: By nearly every measure, the state is worse off since Rauner took office. Pension liabilities now top $110 billion and are rising by the minute. The stack of unpaid bills is ballooning, turning Illinois into a notorious deadbeat. Vital social service agencies are being cut. Students are abandoning the state’s universities. Illinois’ credit rating hovers just above junk-bond range.” http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20160625/ISSUE07/306259997/gov-rauner-youve-proved-us-wrong - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:31 am: “We have always had a budget until Governor Rauner was in office” Does Representative Bustos support passing another unbalanced budget with no reforms? Per Chicago Tribune on December 6th: The numbers are daunting. When Democrats took full control of the governor’s office and General Assembly in 2003, the pension funds — covering teachers outside Chicago, university workers, state workers, lawmakers and judges — faced unfunded liabilities of about $43 billion. By 2010, the figure had grown to roughly $86 billion. Today, those same pension funds face $130 billion in unfunded liabilities — and that’s a conservative estimate. The total grows every day. Taxpayers are on the hook for every penny of it. Governor Rauner, Senator Cullerton and Speaker Madigan struck a deal in June that serious pension reform would be addressed as a condition of the $215 million dollar payment to CPS pension funds. Is it too much to ask Rep Bustos and potential Chris Kennedy their thoughts on the issue? Governor Rauner did agree to Senator Cullerton’s proposed stop gap budget which would make it one of the few bipartisan agreements in Springfield this year. - A guy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:32 am: Chris is in…until he’s out. - Handle Bar Mustache - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:35 am: Lucky, You’re a strong advocate but be honest here. Quinn’s last budgets were “complete” and included “reforms”. And bills were getting paid on time. And he didn’t lie about the need for revenue. He didn’t lie about raising funds for higher education. He recommending increasing MAP and early childhood, and offered a real plan to pay for those things. Rauner lied about all of it and won the election. If Kennedy, Biss or Bustos want to dive in, I know any of them would be more honest and SUCCESSFUL than lying Bruce Rauner. - RNUG - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:35 am: == And how did those budgets work out? == Well … the last few years under Quinn the State’s bills were getting paid, the bill backlog was cut in half, and the pension fund payments were being made on time. So I’d say those budgets worked better than not having s budget. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:43 am: - Mal - You keep breaking your word… - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:44 am: I am a strong advocate and Democrats passed a “temporary tax hike” that did pay current bills in a more timely fashion but did not cut spending enough or pass constitutional pension reform. Governor Rauner has said he has been willing to increase revenue for two years now. Those same Democrats who supported weak reforms under Quinn have now taken their ball and gone home- denying Governor Rauner any compromise. Sorry but if the 2011 tax hike had been done in a more progressive or permanent manner, alot of these issues would be much less severe. - Anonymous - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:44 am: Rich, thanks for not including the Kennedy picture again. - Romeo - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:44 am: Sadly enough, Illinois would almost want Quinn back at this point. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:51 am: - Lucky Pierre - All you say would be huge in the argument… Had Rauner not ran to ensure the rollback, and asked the lame duck in 2014 to let the rollback happen, and not have a “tax increase” It was Rauner’s first mistake. Had Rauner stayed silent, the rollback would’ve been a heavy hammer for Rauner now. Rauner applauded the rollback, advocated the rollback, ran on the rollback. - PublicServant - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:54 am: Um Lucky, they passed constitutional pension reform, Tier 2, effective January 1st, 2011. I’m glad you support a progressive tax…me too. If Rauner’s willing to increase taxes, as Willy says, I’m sure he could get a good number of Democrats to support him, as well as the Republicans that he owns to stand behind him on the podium while he announces his compromise. I’ve been waiting for two years now. - thunderspirit - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:58 am: == Governor Rauner has said he has been willing to increase revenue for two years now. == He has intimated that, sure. And yet no budget he’s actually proposed (which is one, in 2015, with unconstitutional pension cuts if I recall correctly) has been close to balanced without new revenue. So a willingness to increase revenue is a given, not an option. Why, it’s almost as though he’d rather blame Madigan than actually get something accomplished. - Anonymous - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:58 am: @- Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:44 am: =I am a strong advocate and Democrats passed a “temporary tax hike” that did pay current bills in a more timely fashion but did not cut spending enough or pass constitutional pension reform.= Constitutional pension reform was passed in 2011. Tier 2 pension reform was and is huge. There is not further constitutional pension reform that is meaningful left. The ISC has made it clear you can not diminish ore impair benefits. That leaves a few snip around the edges changes that could be done. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:58 am: Rauner has used the revenue as a lever to pass reforms both sides agree are necessary but we after two years nothing has been done because the Speaker has resisted. Anyone who honestly believes any reforms would have passed in the past two years if Rauner just reinstated the tax rate two years ago is in serious denial. I would love to hear someone make that case with straight face - Pundent - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:59 am: =Sorry but if the 2011 tax hike had been done in a more progressive or permanent manner, alot of these issues would be much less severe.= I absolutely agree. But Rauner was presented with this same opportunity and said that we didn’t need the tax. Perhaps he thought that he could follow your suggestion and “cut spending enough” or “pass constitutional reform”. But here we sit almost two years later and I haven’t seen anything from Rauner in that regard. While he’s whittled his list of “reforms” down, nothing that he’d demanded addresses the fundamental problems that have brought us to where we are today. If you’re now suggesting that our budgetary issues will be fixed through permanent property tax freezes and term limits I’d love to see the math. - facts are stubborn things - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:59 am: the Anonymous - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:58 am: was mine. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:06 am: ===necessary but we after two years nothing has been done because the Speaker has resisted. Anyone who honestly believes any reforms would have passed in the past two years if Rauner just reinstated the tax rate two years ago is in serious denial.=== You just made the case that… Rauber supported the rollback to hold the budget and revenue hostage, and that it was a choice by Rauner, and it’s use is to strong arm votes and hold a budget hostage for Rauner’s agenda. All on your own. Thanks! - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:09 am: If Democrats really cared about the little guy they would support reducing future benefits through Cullerton’s pension framework for tier one (especially higher salaried workers and lawmakers) and have AFSCME propose a tier 2 pay structure that would treat tier 2 more favorably in terms of health care benefits and salary. - hisgirlfriday - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:12 am: Cheri and Chris, I am with you that Rauner is a bad governor. Now tell me what yourvision is for Illinois going forward beyond just passing a budget. Rauner is proof that the nuts and bolts of governing may not matter as much to voters as their overall feeling about things. What contrasting feeling/vision so you bring to the table? - A guy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:16 am: ==- Romeo - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:44 am: Sadly enough, Illinois would almost want Quinn back at this point.=== Everyone who thinks this should have a meeting. Book a really small room. So far, it’s only you and Pat…unless you are Pat. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:16 am: Yes Willy and Speaker Madigan and Senator Cullerton have held the state and future generations “hostage” as they have refused to change the trajectory of the state to protect their special interests and have allowed the unfunded pension liability to increase from 43 billion to over 130 billion dollars since 2003. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:22 am: - Lucky Pierre - Your Raunerite talking points do not negate today’s truth you yourself admitted… Rauner wanted and cheered on the rollback, purposely, to hold the state hostage, today, to leverage an unpassable agenda. You said so yourself. Do I need to highlight that for you. Today, even you see… Today’s crisis of revenue is Rauner cheering on the rollback, for his own leverage. Again, “thanks!” - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:30 am: The roll back was probably the only time the Speaker and Senate President have done anything Rauner asked for. What was their motivation? Ever think about that? Did they really think the Governor would just raise taxes and settle for nothing from his agenda? Truly stunning incompetence from the legislature especially these last two years. After 12 years of fighting the Governor from their own party tooth and nail on everything they took it to Def Con five after Rauner’s inauguration. Every wonder why term limits are so popular? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:38 am: ===The roll back was probably the only time the Speaker and Senate President have done anything Rauner asked for. What was their motivation? Ever think about that? Did they really think the Governor would just raise taxes and settle for nothing from his agenda?=== That’s Rauner’s mistake. Had Rauner stayed silent, what a hammer Rauner would have. It doesn’t really matter the Dem’s motivations, you made crystal clear Rauner’s and that Rauner wanted that leverage, Rauner also gets to have part of the blame and a very sneaky and harmful motive to boot. You made that clear, - Lucky Pierre -, you made it crystal clear. - Anonymous - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:39 am: LP: “Anyone who honestly believes any reforms would have passed in the past two years…” Which reforms? What has Rauner proposed as reform that has specific budget numbers attached? - yeah - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:39 am: President Bush and a Republican Congress and Republican Senate gave us the era of half trillion dollar annual shortfalls. Balanced budgets…it polls well. - Try-4-Truth - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:42 am: ======- Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:09 am: If Democrats really cared about the little guy they would support reducing future benefits through Cullerton’s pension framework for tier one (especially higher salaried workers and lawmakers) and have AFSCME propose a tier 2 pay structure that would treat tier 2 more favorably in terms of health care benefits and salary.====== Have one of the Raunerites introduce a bill. It’s easy. Do it. If this is a priority, introduce a bill. Why do the Democrats have to act first? If this is what the Raunerites want, go get it. - Piece of Work - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:45 am: At the end of 2014, there had been four years of 5% state income taxes collected, the ‘ol 67% increase that took approximately $25-$30 billion out of people’s pockets and gave it to the state. Just maybe that had something to do with the abysmal GDP that has occurred. Just sayin - Rich Miller - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:50 am: ===that had something to do with the abysmal GDP that has occurred=== Try the Google. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:50 am: Oh - Piece of Work - How’s that backlog of state bills helping the state and the people waiting on those billions? Show your math, please, lol - RNUG - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 10:55 am: Sigh … Where to start? Meaningful pension reform did happen: Tier 2. There ain’t no more to be done; the courts have said so. Pension debt … That increase is structual; it was deliberately built into the Edgar Pension Ramp, which was passed by BOTH parties and SIGNED by an R Governor. Rauner wants the State employee to pay 100% of their health care costs. Rauner also wants to hold down wages because he doesn’t want to raise taxes. Given that, WHY would he support giving better benefits to Tier 2 employees? - Anonymous - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:04 am: “- Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 9:58 am: ” “Anyone who honestly believes any reforms would have passed in the past two years if Rauner just reinstated the tax rate two years ago is in serious denial.” Um… Lucky Pierre, you never told us how Rauner’s so called ‘reforms or Turnaround Agenda” will help balance the budget. Please inform… - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:05 am: Courts have not weighed in on consideration model. Democrats in the Congress voted for the Affordable Care act that has a 40 percent Cadillac tax on gold plated health care benefits like the state employees have. - City Zen - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:06 am: ==the last few years under Quinn the State’s bills were getting paid, the bill backlog was cut in half== Said it before and I’ll say it again: $32B extra collected from tax hike for specific purpose of paying down $8B in bills and backlog reduced by only $4B. Yes, I know - pensions, budget not resized, etc. But still, 4x the amount needed to pay down those bills was collected and only 50% reduction. Folks keep glossing over that fact. Anywhere else in the real world where 400% effort produces 50% of desired result would not be considered a success. - Crispy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:09 am: Man, I wish I had LP’s powers of denial. I’d use them to convince myself that … shinola … was really shaving cream and moonbeams. Also, people need to seriously consider using quotes around “reforms.” As wielded by Rauner and his acolytes, it’s up there with the Vietnam-era “pacification” in the annals of political doublespeak. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:14 am: ===400% effort produces 50% of desired result=== That’s stupid. You point out the pension payments, but then conveniently leave them out when discussing the desired result. The need to make the pension payments and still fund the rest of the government was the desired result. Post that ridiculous argument again and you’ll be deleted. - Righty - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:17 am: - City Zen - The tax increase also helped the state make full pension payments for four straight years — probably the first time in decades that has happened. That cost about $28 billion. - Honeybear - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:22 am: To prove the benefit of the TA Rauner would have to not only share the results of the REMI analysis but more importantly the assumptions that built the economic model. It’s useless to ask for ROI. That can be faked with the wrong assumptions going in. - City Zen - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:23 am: ==Meaningful pension reform did happen: Tier 2.== How meaningful will that reform be when Tier 2 inevitable fails safe harbor rules for Social Security? - Lincoln Clay - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:27 am: ==I would love to hear someone make that case with straight face== Actually, I think one could make that argument easily. Madigan’s sole argument to this point, on any of the TA items is “this has nothing to do with a budget”. Almost all of the heat Rauner is taking, he is taking for damage done to the poor caused by not having a budget in place. All of the reasons that Crain’s pointed out to show that Rauner has failed so far, are caused by having no budget in place. Had Rauner extended the tax increase, continued to pay down the backlog and pay the pension payments he could have combined higher revenue with made cuts elsewhere to get the budget much closer to being “balanced” than it is now. He would enjoy higher ratings from that string of successes, and could have focused his entire message that D’s were blocking specific items that are popular with voters - like term limits and redistricting. Perhaps so much so that he could have increased his pickup of R seats this past election, and most likely would have cruised to re-election in 2018. And who knows, Madigan and the unions weren’t on the best of terms when Bruce showed up - the Gov may have had an uneasy ally to help attack the biggest problems afscme presents. And Madigan has a long history of working better with R governors than those from his own party - he’s never shied away from deal making with those he disagrees with. Instead, he chose total war right out of the gate. In a blatant attempt to use the budget as a hammer to quickly crush afscme, instead of chipping away but by bit with a likely assist from Madigan, he has driven his own ratings down and drove union members into the arms of the speaker. I think he’d have accomplished much more in convincing D’s to support - or at least allow passage - of many of these reforms - justacitizen - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:28 am: If I were Rauner I would propose a temporary tax increase that would “balance” the budget and include quantified reforms necessary to get IL back on the right track. It wouldn’t pass, of course, and then he could walk away in 2018 knowing he fought the good fight. - Ratso Rizzo - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:30 am: In 2018, after 4 years with no budgets, Rauner will be saddled with #RateHikeRauner, #NoBudgetBruce, and #TurnAroundTroll - PoW - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:30 am: Willy, show the math on how pulling $25-$30 billion out of people’s pockets helps the economy. Those TV’s that weren’t purchased, those meals that weren’t purchased from restaurants, those weekend trips to Oswego that weren’t made. et. al. Econ is hard for some. - RNUG - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:31 am: == Courts have not weighed in on consideration model. == Nobody has proposed an actual voluntary consideration change along contract lines. Everything proposed to date has been a coercive change. We don’t need a new court ruling on coercive changes to contracts; there is a whole body of law already on it. It won’t be legal. Voluntary change the court might permit … as long as it isn’t viewed as coercive. But it’s hard to avoid coercion when you are the employer. And I can pretty much assure you the Sidley-Austin model won’t fly. You won’t be able to use future raises or the AAI as the carrot for a change. So all that leaves is a voluntary buyout program. The State doesn’t have the cash to pay their bills or make timely pension fund payments; where will they get the cash for the buyouts? If you take the cash out of the funds, you’ve made the funds worse and created other problems for the State. Plus, given the clear court rulings, you will have to offer over and above the present net value for people with good financial advice to even consider it. Go offering a premium and you’ve cost the funds more than the liabilities you are shedding. Not a good financial move, and possibly not even a legal one since the funduciaries are charged with keeping the fund solvent, not bailing out the State. In fact, the fund managers may even be legally required to oppose such an action. - Loop Lady - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:33 am: A placeholder I hope until someone else declares? Yay another Irish Catholic except this one is a Kennedy! How original, not… - m - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:34 am: =Had Rauner stayed silent, what a hammer Rauner would have.= Agree Rauner should have stayed silent. I would add dems should’ve made the hike permanent then when they could. Elections have consequences and so do bad political decisions. But it seems like it would’ve benefited the dems more to have made it permanent, because Rauner would in theory have less “leverage” today. But maybe I’m reading too deep or not following something, but what’s the hammer in your mind? Rauner having control of all that spending? Or just the political hammer about how dems made the tax hike permanent? Or Rauner blaming dems for not making it permanent? - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:35 am: ====Willy, show the math on how pulling $25-$30 billion out of people’s pockets helps the economy. Those TV’s that weren’t purchased, those meals that weren’t purchased from restaurants, those weekend trips to Oswego that weren’t made. et. al.=== You need to tell that to the vendors? They don’t need to shop? Pay bills? ===Econ is hard for some.=== Contract law is difficult for one. See how that works? - Ducky LaMoore - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:44 am: Chris Kennedy sometime in 2017… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPDISgMAyWE - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:49 am: The hammer is the ability to say Democrats knew the need for revenue and still Democrats plopped the rollback that on “me”, and the backs of vendors and increasing the debt. Rauner is now complicit by cheering, advocating, and congratulating the rollback. Rauner had fiscal responsibly as the hammer by the Dems stopping revenue. That’s but one of a few angles, and a huge hammer too. - Arsenal - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 11:51 am: ==both sides agree are necessary== How many Democrats are in on the Turnaround Agenda? This is one of Rauner’s problems, he gets high on his own supply. He thinks that if he just got rid of Madigan he’d get everything he wanted, but you could replace Madigan with any Democrat in the state and that caucus would still never agree to whacking unions and trial lawyers. That’s like saying that, but for Jim Durkin, Republicans would happily vote against church-goers and business owners. - AlfondoGonz - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 12:04 pm: “Willy, show the math on how pulling $25-$30 billion out of people’s pockets helps the economy” Because it paid vendors for services provided and was spread out amongst enough people where they could shoulder the burden. You are typing on either a computer or smartphone, aren’t you? Funny how you hear of real suffering when programs aren’t funded, but only people who can afford to complain do so when a necessary tax hike is implemented. Be mindful of your ignorance when accusing others of it. - m - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 12:11 pm: =That’s but one of a few angles, and a huge hammer too. = I don’t know, I don’t think Rauner would’ve won without running against a tax hike. - Gary from Chicagoland - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 12:16 pm: Illinois has a revenue problem, so make some cuts and increase the State Income Tax back to 5%. The election is over and our leaders need to shallow their pride and get a butget done. Too many people are getting hurt with the lack on decision making going on in Springfield. I paid the 5% rate for years and I didn’t even feel the financial pain. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 12:17 pm: - AlfondoGonz - Well said. The forgetting of the vendors and the debt is the Achilles’ Heel in that talking point. Rauner may or may not have won but “Pat Quinn failed” was the mantra, and now Rauner, when he was Governor-Elect made sure he was on the side of the rollback. He coulda stayed silent after winning. That was the smart play, said it then too… … too smart for their own good, now Rauner lost the hammer. Now it “appears” Rauner asked for the continued rollback and the Dems obliged. Didn’t have to be that way. Dems coulda rolled it back, Rauner let it happen, then Rauner coulda let the Dems have that noose all to themselves. Poor politics after the win. - Notacop - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 12:19 pm: -PoW- ===Willy, show the math on how pulling $25-$30 billion out of people’s pockets helps the economy. Those TV’s that weren’t purchased, those meals that weren’t purchased from restaurants, those weekend trips to Oswego that weren’t made. et. al. === Illinois median income is around $55k. For someone making the median income the roll back put an extra $50 a month in their pocket. I know I’d rather be $50 a month poorer personally and not have social services public colleges collapsing while the state teeters on the brink of insolvency. Now that we are looking at 2 years (4?) of spending at the rate we did when we had 5% tax while only 3.75% is coming in, we are going to have to make up the deficit somewhere. All the cuts in the world aren’t going to bring the backlog down in any reasonable timeframe. When taxes go back up, and they must, it will be beyond the 5% that you are speaking against. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 12:49 pm: Democrats aren’t church goers? Ridiculous statement - PoW - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 1:21 pm: Someone making $50 grand a year lost $1000 for each of four year between 2011-2014. That may seem insignificant to you NOTACOP but it isn’t to many families and it is not to businesses. Take into account real estate taxes went up and other taxes increased and you have decreased buying power. - NIU Grad - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 1:52 pm: Regardless of where you stand on the politics, Bustos will have political problems if her response to the Madigan question is a repetition of his talking points. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 1:55 pm: ===political problems if her response to the Madigan question is a repetition=== I’m inclined to agree with that. To date, Durbin has had the best response by far: Rauner “inherited a mess and turned it into a crisis.” https://capitolfax.com/2016/08/19/todays-quotable-106/ - Arsenal - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 2:20 pm: ==Democrats aren’t church goers? Ridiculous statement== Well, yes, it is, which is why it kinda mystifies me that you said it. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 2:54 pm: Arsenal maybe you can explain your comment Republicans would happily vote against church goers or business - PoW - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 3:44 pm: I’d love to see Durbin run against Rauner in 2018. Maybe he will reconsider! - Anonymous - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 3:59 pm: Chris Kennedy… because the food court at the Merchandise Mart was remodeled. Proven leadership! - Arsenal - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 4:03 pm: ==Arsenal maybe you can explain your comment== What part confused you about it? Please confine your answer to things I actually said, not more things you wish I said. ==Republicans would happily vote against church goers or business== I doubt it. The Governor controls the agenda, and he hasn’t even introduced anti-church or anti-business measures. Which, of course, is fine. Preferable, even! I don’t want churches or businesses to get whacked (though I have specific items in mind to rein in the excesses of the latter). But the fact remains, the very religious and business owners are integral to the Republican electoral coalition, just as unions and trial lawyers are to the Democratic coalition. You can probably find extreme circumstances where enough members of either party can be peeled off to pass a measure attacking those groups, but as a rule- and this isn’t new information- politicians don’t bite the hands that feed them. And that’s why, contrary to your line, there’s no bipartisan consensus on the Turnaround Agenda that is only being thwarted by Mike Madigan. Democrats actually, honestly disagree with the Turnaround Agenda. Replace Mike Madigan with any other Democrat in the state, and we’ll still disagree with it. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 4:05 pm: ===or anti-business measures=== The IMA would disagree with you (see: Exelon bailout). Just sayin… - Arsenal - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 4:08 pm: ==The IMA would disagree with you (see: Exelon bailout). Just sayin…== Did he really introduce it, though, or have it foisted on him by Exelon (which is, of course, a business itself)? Plus, I would hardly categorize Republican support for that bill as “happily” given. - Rich Miller - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 4:19 pm: ===Did he really introduce it, though, or have it foisted on him=== His office was instrumental in passing it. Ask ‘em. - Anonymous - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 7:19 pm: With the political juggernaut of Kamis and Winick behind him I don’t see how he could lose… - Ron Burgundy - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 8:32 pm: Sneed says Bill Daley will support Kennedy if he runs. So the perpetual name floaters caucus appears united. - Robert E Lee - Thursday, Dec 8, 16 @ 8:37 pm: We awaitn’ fer Kennedy da karpetbager se ha he do wid da skalewags. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.