56 Comments - Anonymous - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:23 am: Is Madigan now going to hold the budget hostage to hurt Rauner in 2018? - Rocky Rosi - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:24 am: The millionaires tax will not work! Most real “millionaires” income is from investments not earned income. To create jobs stop raising taxes and spending money you don’t have. Use common sense. - Not It - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:29 am: Glad to see the House adjourned. It’s not like they have any work to do. I think the House Republicans should have stayed in town and gone to hang out with their Senate colleaguess for the day where apparently people are doing the job they were elected to do. - CCP Hostage - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:33 am: A reminder to all involved in this budget process–people are starving in the Metro East area. Our kids are fleeing Illinois in pursuit of stable higher ed. Our anti violence programs are shuttered and crime is escalating. There are real casualties out there. So go ahead and fiddle while Rome burns, but at least look up and acknowledge the fire now and then. - PublicServant - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:36 am: Maybe the governor ought to get involved and submit a balanced budget. That might move the ball forward…I mean seeing as how it’s his constitutional duty and all. - Anon - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:37 am: ===It’s all top-down, Democrats only.=== Rauner money just got spent hitting Senate Republicans that cooperated, coordinated, and came together to craft something that on the surface looks like a sincere attempt to come to a compromise that an ideal form Republican governor in a Blue State with Democratic controlled legislators would be thrilled to sign and tout as their basis for re-election. I would imagine some of these folks in the State House feel like they’re on some shaky ground to involve themselves in these conversations. We’re not talking about a warning shot, these State Reps just saw their colleagues in the State Senate get hit. - Anon - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:38 am: ===Rocky Rosi - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:24 am:=== Found the paid troll. - Louis G. Atsaves - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:40 am: From the Speaker’s body language during the State of the State speech yesterday, I was pretty well convinced that he would not be a willing participant. Sad. - Langhorne - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:40 am: Classic madigan. You want proposals? Ill give you proposals, and you will like them. No collaboration. No acknowledgement of the senate package of bills.no input from anyone not a house dem. I have little hope for a budget any time soon. - Lucy Pierre - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:41 am: After two years of ignoring the Governor’s proposals and proposing none of our own, we will will begin a thorough vetting process of proposals that will enable us to create jobs while also lifting up and helping the middle class and struggling families around our state. But right now we stand adjourned. No reason to rush things No wonder why they don’t have a social media presence. - PublicServant - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:42 am: ===From the Speaker’s body language…=== He was just dodgin’ all those dropped g’s by the governor. - Johnnie F. - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:43 am: missing?…arbitration bill. - Arsenal - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:45 am: Love it. Madigan gets killed for 2 years for not having his own proposals to compete with Rauner’s, then when he introduces some, he gets killed ’cause they’re too much his own. - Deft Wing - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:47 am: Status quo — Madigan does not want a deal but will strive to make busy work for his Caucus while running out the clock. He wants no budget, no deal, no peace … no nothing. All to hang around Rauner’s neck for the 2018 election. News flash: Madigan doesn’t care that the state is dying. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:48 am: Public Servant Rauner is not the only politician who drops his g’s. President Obama has the same habit It doesn’t seem like you are Eric Zorn have any problem with President Obama’s speakin style http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/08/07/for-a-president-today-talkin-down-is-speaking-american.html - Emmanuel Can't - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:49 am: What’s missing? Lemme see… A budget. Workers comp reform. Infrastructure investment. Pension reform. Procurement reform. - Honeybear - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:52 am: Wow, I get it. Reverse psychology. Madigan likes EDGE so that Raunerites will kill it. Nice move. 215,000,000 in 2015 500,000,000 estimated in 2016 0 in 2017. Madigan wanted it. That’s fun as OW says - Phenomynous - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:53 am: I was never under the impression that he wanted to move the ball forward. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:53 am: Based on the House Dems past record, I’m guessing the millionaires tax and minimum wage ideas are just political posturing and game-playing. Like we need more of that. If the Dems were sincere on those matters, they likely could have passed them when Quinn was governor. Unfortunately, they didn’t try. That’s on them. At this stage, both “proposals” are deal-breakers, just like the governor’s personal, partisan agenda. It’s going to take GOP votes in both chambers and a signature from Rauner to just begin the long, hard climb out of the fiscal and squeeze-the-beast disasters of the last 18 months. This sort of game-playing, plus Rauner’s unleashing of his attack dogs on GOP Senators (while he publicly plays the impotent giant on the sidelines) leads me to believe that we’re still a long way from any responsible governing. - Anon - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:57 am: ===Like we need more of that.=== We actually do need a minimum wage hike and our overall tax impact as a state is quite regressive. Posturing or not, it’s still good policy. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:59 am: “Just like the Governor’s personal, partisan agenda” Sling Like pension reform that Senator Cullerton agree with Like Property tax freezes which everyone agrees with Like consolidating local governments which has bi partisan support Term limits, redistricting etc are not just the Governor’s’s personal agenda. These all enjoy bipartisan majority support. - illinoised - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:00 am: The only true trickle-down policy that works is a progressive income tax. - Arsenal - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:01 am: ==Like pension reform that Senator Cullerton agree with== But isn’t Constitutional… ==Like Property tax freezes which everyone agrees with== Which Rauner called a sham when Madigan actually passed it… - Illinois O'Malley - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:05 am: @Rocki, investment income in Illinois is taxed at same rate as ordinary income. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:07 am: The pension reform consideration model where future raises can given if the worker agrees to not have them calculated in a pension has never been tested in the courts. Unless you are a Supreme Court Justice I would wait to hear them weigh in on this. A raise is not a constitutional right Also, there is some debate in the pension meeting the other day if a raise was paid in the form of a bonus then that that would not be pensionable. Senator’ Harmon and Senator Cullerton disagree with you Sling A propery tax freeze with no mechanism to control local spending is a sham - wordslinger - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:12 am: –From the Speaker’s body language during the State of the State speech yesterday, I was pretty well convinced that he would not be a willing participant.– LOL, really, doctor? What was it that gave it away? The standing still and reading the text? What “body language” would have been a tell indicating “willing participation?” Going Skippa Da Flippa and doin’The Dab? - Arsenal - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:12 am: ==has never been tested in the courts== Previous court rulings give little hope for this proposal. Maybe they’ll break with precedent, but that’s a pretty slender reed to lean on. ==A propery tax freeze with no mechanism to control local spending is a sham== Then you’re talking about a prevailing wage cut, which *does not* have bipartisan support. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:16 am: –Senator’ Harmon and Senator Cullerton disagree with you Sling– Do they? On what? - Ratso Rizzo - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:23 am: I am an unabashed Progressive, but I understand that in politics you don’t get everything you want. That being said, Madigans behavior always puzzles me. There seems to be no communication between Cullerton and Madigan regarding crafting a budget. It’s kind of “I’ll do it my way and you do it yours.” Either that, or there is communication and Madigan is totally disregarding any proposals the Senate has put forth. What’s the endgame here? People have been hurt badly by two years without a budget, and even though I put most of the blame squarely on Rauners unrelated TA, Madigan does have a hand in the debacle in the sense that his endgame is murky. Is it all about power? I know it’s not about a Progressive agenda because when the Democrats controlled the legislature and Governors office they could’ve passed any programs they wanted. So, I’m not piling on with the Raunerites but rather with Progressive ideals when I say Madigan (and Rauner) truly have to go. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:23 am: Senator Cullerton’s pension reform proposal for the reason’s i listed above. Do you really believe Senator Cullerton is pushing a pension reform plan that he thinks is unconstitutional? Why would he do this? Why would the right to a future raise be constitutionally protected? - Skirmisher - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:25 am: I think that was the sound of the boilers blowing on the Titanic. - Shemp - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:28 am: A property tax freeze without school funding reform and further fire/police pension changes is nothing more than crippling local governments. State should fix its own problems first, or at least take a bigger picture. - Chicagonk - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:29 am: No specifics, no talk of meaningful revenue, no new ideas… Classic Madigan - wordslinger - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:30 am: –Do you really believe Senator Cullerton is pushing a pension reform plan that he thinks is unconstitutional? Why would he do this?– LOL, a review of recent history would answer your questions as to why bipartisan majorities in the GA would do that. You’re not paying attention to your reading, anyway. You were responding to Arsenal, not me. - facts are stubborn things - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:32 am: @- Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:23 am: =Why would the right to a future raise be constitutionally protected? = There is no constitutional protection to a future raise, however, once you receive a raise that salary becomes part of your pension calculation. To change that calculation would be to diminish and impair pensions. - Earnest - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:33 am: >It’s all top-down, Democrats only. Agreed. Maadigan seems to make the point that, regardless of the attacks on him, his being speaker, his rules being passed, he’s still in the driver’s seat of the House, and is someone the Senate and Governor will still have to deal with. Or maybe that’s too simplistic. It just seems like clumsy messaging to me. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:36 am: Any wonder why he is called King Madigan? The ads are writing themselves. Maybe the Speaker should watch the proceedings in the Senate. - wordslinger - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:43 am: –Maybe the Speaker should watch the proceedings in the Senate.– Yes, it’s quite a spectacle to see GOP Senators get the stuff kicked out of them by the governor’s IPI and Chamber lackeys, while Rauner concern-trolls from the sidelines and pretends to be powerless to help them. - RNUG - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:46 am: == Unless you are a Supreme Court Justice I would wait to hear them weigh in on this. A raise is not a constitutional right == I agree no one is entitled to a raise. But I’ll bet if you get a raise, it HAS to be pensionable and the IL SC will see it that way because the bill as proposed coerces you to pick which diminishment you want, and that violates straight contract law allows you to keep an existing contract without forced modification. And my track record on predicting pensions speaks for itself … - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:49 am: What about a bonus in lieu of a raise? the language seems to pretty specific about final salary being the basis for a pension calculation - Mama - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:50 am: How does bashing Speaker Madigan move the ball? All of the media bashing of Madigan is not working. If you really want to move the ball, use positive Madigan messages all day every day. - Arsenal - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:51 am: ==Do you really believe Senator Cullerton is pushing a pension reform plan that he thinks is unconstitutional? == I think that Cullerton might be wrong about what is and is not Constitutional. I mean, he already was once. - Mama - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:57 am: RNUNG, you are correct. Your track record on predicting pensions speaks 100% for itself. Question: Are 3% COLAS (raises) are not protected before and/or after one retires? - Mama - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 11:01 am: Sorry… the second ‘are’ @ 10:57 should not be there. At times.. my computer seems to have a mind of its own. - Ratso Rizzo - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 11:19 am: RNUG, I have a pension question for you. The State Police Act, which may or may not concern me, states that ISP officers will receive 5% raises at the 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 year levels. I’ve heard this is “constitutionally protected”, though the State Police Act is not in the Constitution but rather the ILCS. What is your opinion? - Mama - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 11:26 am: == Do you really believe Senator Cullerton is pushing a pension reform plan that he thinks is unconstitutional? == I think Cullerton is putting pension reforms out there to get the governor to support the Senate’s budget bill. I have a feeling he believes there is a slight chance the courts will approve it because it will be the employee not the state who decides to diminish one’s benefit. The real kicker is… the employee is being forced into making a choice to diminish his benefits. - Arock - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 11:52 am: - PublicServant - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 9:36 am: “Maybe the governor ought to get involved and submit a balanced budget. That might move the ball forward…I mean seeing as how it’s his constitutional duty and all.” Like the previous Governors presented balanced budgets and the Legislature passed balanced budgets in the 16 years prior to Rauner. Those are the reasons that have caused this mess and Madigan will not move on anything to get a balanced budget and stop the bleeding. - Arock - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 11:55 am: From Speaker Madigan’s statement yesterday… “Under my direction, the House will begin a thorough vetting process of proposals that will enable us to create jobs while also lifting up and helping the middle class and struggling families around our state.” Begin? - little late to the game there buddy. - JS Mill - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 1:24 pm: =Like Property tax freezes which everyone agrees with= Not everyone. =What about a bonus in lieu of a raise?= Isn’t that income? It is, so it is pensionable and always has been. - Cubs in '16 - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 1:44 pm: =What about a bonus in lieu of a raise?= ===Isn’t that income? It is, so it is pensionable and always has been.=== Federal and state taxes are taken out of bonus checks. So yes that is income. - Anonymous - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 2:00 pm: “- Shemp - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 10:28 am: A property tax freeze without school funding reform and further fire/police pension changes is nothing more than crippling local governments. State should fix its own problems first, or at least take a bigger picture.” Total agreement with this. Let the locals determine what they need. These talks are actually even counter productive as the fiscally responsible response to the threat of a property tax freeze is for the local taxing bodies to increase their tax rates to the max possible. Touting a property tax freeze may be good politics; but it is very, very bad governance. Any politician pushing this, while the state is in the mess it is, is a hypocrite of the highest order. - RNUG - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 4:41 pm: -Mama-, To paraphrase the courts, the rules in place at time of hiring PLUS enhancements granted by the General Assembly are the pension contract that is protected by the Pension Clause (and I would add Federal and State Contract Law). So the 3% AAI in retirement is protected. - RNUG - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 6:06 pm: == The State Police Act, which may or may not concern me, states that ISP officers will receive 5% raises at the 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 year levels. == I don’t believe that has ever been an issue before the courts, do I don’t know. My guess is that they would be but I’d give it about 60:40 odds since I’ve read decisions where similar issues like mandatory retirement age related to pensions have gone both ways, sometimes not protected, sometimes protected. - Lucky Pierre - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 6:12 pm: Of course a bonus is income but the final pension calculation is based on salary. There could be a loophole having pay increases be a bonus, not a salary increase Senator Harmon brought this up in he hearing the other day - RNUG - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 6:26 pm: - Ratso Rizzo - Without going into all the reasoning, I’d give it about 60:40 that the courts would find it protected for pension purposes. - Ratso Rizzo - Thursday, Jan 26, 17 @ 8:10 pm: Thanks RNUG Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.