* So far, the Illinois Republican Party has sent me no press releases whacking individual House Dems, but I assume those are coming. From the ILGOP…
“By voting to enact Madigan’s Rules, House Democrats have relinquished all ability to act independently or put the people ahead of the political machine. Today House Democrats chose to put Mike Madigan first.” - Illinois Republican Party Spokesman Aaron DeGroot
Moments ago, House Democrats voted to relinquish all autonomy and independence to the Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives, Mike Madigan, by adopting Madigan’s own handcrafted rules that govern the Illinois House of Representatives.
Madigan’s Rules continue to give the Speaker an unprecedented amount of power over the legislative agenda of the Illinois House of Representatives, stifling the voice of all other 117 members, both Democrats and Republicans. These rules allow Speaker Madigan to determine what legislation lives and dies.
House Republicans, led by Leader Jim Durkin, proposed alternative rules that increase transparency and public participation in the legislative agenda and process of the House. The House Republican proposal was not given a public hearing. Highlights of the proposal were discussed in Capitol Fax.
Thanks so much for dragging me into this, ILGOP.
The roll call is here.
* Rep. Scott Drury, who voted against Madigan for Speaker, voted “No” on the rules today.
Rep. D’Amico is listed as a “No,” but he rose after the vote to say he accidentally hit the wrong switch. Reps. Mayfield and Soto have excused absences.
…Adding… I should also probably note that House Majority Leader Currie pointed out during today’s debate that all Senate Republicans voted for very similar rules in their own chamber just this month.
* From newly elected GOP Rep. Steven Reick…
Today in Springfield the House Democrats used their majority status to push through a set of egregious House Rules that stifle democracy and silence the voices of Republican lawmakers on important issues.
After a vigorous hour-long debate that was heated at times, rules that will govern the movement of legislation for the 100th General Assembly were approved in a 63-53 vote. All but two Democrats in attendance voted in favor of rules that increase House Speaker Mike Madigan’s power over the entire General Assembly.
State Representative Steve Reick (R-Woodstock), voted against the proposed rules. “I’ve heard stories about the heavy hand of Mike Madigan and how he manipulates the rules to increase his power, but today’s action showed a breathtaking example of overreach,” said Reick, a freshman lawmaker from McHenry County. “Good ideas that benefit real people will be buried because of Mike Madigan’s singular authority over what bills get heard and what pieces of legislation will die a slow death in his all-powerful Rules Committee.”
Reick continued, “Individual Democrat members have said publicly that the rules need to change, and today we had an opportunity to return representative democracy to the people by rejecting Speaker Madigan’s Rules. Unfortunately, at the end of the debate, much like they did with the House Speaker vote at Inauguration two weeks ago, House Democrats fell in line and did what they were told to do.”
Under the rules approved on Tuesday, Madigan will retain a 3/5 majority on his House Rules Committee. Consisting of his most loyal stalwarts, no bill will be assigned for a hearing before a substantive committee without a majority vote of the Rules Committee. “Speaker Madigan’s most loyal supporters serve as the gatekeepers of the Rules Committee and all legislation,” said Reick. “These loyalists determine which bills advance through the process and which ones never see the light of day.”
The element Reick said he found to be the most egregious is a stipulation that rulings of the Speaker related to the discharge of bills cannot be appealed or challenged. “Even if lawmakers follow the rules to the letter for the discharging of a bill, the Speaker can, and has on many occasions, ruled a motion to be ‘out of order’ and his ruling is final. This unrestricted power is a slap in the face of representative democracy and it undermines our ability as legislators to bring forward legislation that benefits our constituents.”
40 Comments  
|
Question of the day
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* OK, let’s try this again since I misidentified the person in the previous question, which is now deleted. Been one of those days. Ugh. Sorry!!!
* The Question: How do you foresee the Senate’s “grand compromise” playing out in the next month or so?
28 Comments
|
* Things can change in a nanosecond on days like these, but a new service tax is expected to be unveiled before the Senate Revenue Committee meets today at 3 o’clock.
In recent days, I was told that the new tax would be somewhat limited and kinda like Wisconsin’s tax. Click here for that state’s list of taxable services. Candidate Bruce Rauner proposed a limited service tax back in the day.
I’m not sure what will be in the Illinois tax at this moment. But when/if it does surface, the amendment will likely be at this link.
No vote is scheduled on this and other tax hikes at that 3 o’clock hearing. As explained below, it’s gonna be testimony only.
* So, to recap, the sugary drinks tax is being removed from the package, the income tax will be set at 4.99 percent, a corporate tax exemption on certain dividend income that was targeted for repeal likely remains intact and a service tax could become part of the mix.
And it’s doubtful that we’ll see floor votes this week…
Republican Leader Christine Radogno said she’s unsure if a series of votes will come at all this week, citing concerns from lawmakers who are worried about the size and scope of the evolving package. The plan calls for everything from raising the income tax to overhauling how schools are funded.
“It’s gigantic, there’s a lot of moving parts, we are still amending it,” Radogno said Tuesday. “I, who have been living and breathing it for two months, am still having a hard time getting my head around certain pieces. So obviously, we want to respect people who have to cast a vote, that they are comfortable.”
* As always, keep track of everything by monitoring our live coverage post below.
*** UPDATE 1 *** The Senate bill could include what’s called an “opportunity tax.” It’s essentially a tax on employers based on their payroll. It’s supposedly a low tax that could raise big bucks because there are so many employers here. It has been estimated by one business group to raise $500 million a year and it’s sort of a “nod” to Speaker Madigan’s proposal to make all corporations pay a tax. ADDING: I’m now hearing this could raise $750 million a year at the level set in the legislation.
*** UPDATE 2 *** The amendment is now public. Click here. A quick reading shows a service tax on storage, amusements, repair and maintenance, landscaping, laundry and drycleaning,
*** UPDATE 3 *** And here’s that “opportunity tax” language…
(a) Beginning on July 1, 2017, a tax is hereby imposed upon each qualified business for the privilege of doing business in the State.
(b) The tax under subsection (a) shall be imposed in the following amounts:
(1) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is less than $100,000, then then annual tax is $225;
(2) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $100,000 or more but less than $250,000, then the annual tax is $750;
(3) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $250,000 or more but less than $500,000, then the annual tax is $3,750;
(4) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $500,000 or more but less than $1,500,000, then the annual tax is $7,500; and
(5) if the taxpayer’s total Illinois payroll for the taxable year is $1,500,000 or more, then the annual tax is$15,000.
Apparently, there are about 100,000 businesses in Illinois with a payroll of less than $100,000.
And, yes, the personal income tax rate will indeed be set at 4.99 percent. The corporate rate will be set at 7 percent.
*** UPDATE 4 *** The proposal also repeals the franchise tax, which is a tax hated by the Illinois Policy Institute…
Illinois’ corporate franchise tax makes no sense. It is convoluted and economically harmful, and should be repealed. Even the term “franchise tax” is misleading and outdated, as it is not a tax on the franchise locations of a larger business, such as a chain of Burger Kings. Rather, it is a tax on entrepreneurs and investments in Illinois for the privilege of doing business here.
70 Comments
|
* From the Southern Illinoisan…
The Senate package, which also includes tax increases, gambling expansion, pension reforms and a host of other issues, would allocate an additional $1.1 billion in the current year for higher education. That includes money for universities, community colleges and grants to low-income students through the Monetary Award Program.
Combined with nearly $1 billion for higher education that was included in a stopgap spending deal approved in June, the Senate plan would restore university funding for this year to where it was in the 2014-15 school year. Schools currently aren’t receiving any state funds because the stopgap deal expired after Dec. 31.
* But drill down…
Under the Senate’s proposal, SIU would receive $93.4 million on top of the $106.2 million it received from the June stopgap spending plan. But the university, like others across the state, used the stopgap money to pay for expenses from the 2015-16 school year, during which it received only $57.5 million from an emergency funding measure approved in April.
In effect, Charles said, because the June stopgap money was used for last year’s expenses, the $93.4 million from the Senate plan would be SIU’s only state funding for the current year, compared with $199.6 million for the 2014-15 school year.
And the same goes for the other schools. They’re gonna wind up being about a billion short, I think. But they should go back to “normal” next fiscal year. If, that is, the governor and legislators can come to some sort of agreement.
21 Comments
|
* Subscribers know lots more about this topic…
The plan is to take testimony on the bills, then go to caucus late this afternoon. If the caucuses approve, then they’ll go back to committee for votes [the bills will be moved to the floor by the Senate Assignments Committee, which is unusual, but further amendments could be heard in committee]. If they don’t approve, then votes will be postponed until next month when the Senate returns. Again, subscribers know more about the why’s and the what’s.
As Monique says, floor votes tomorrow do, indeed, look iffy right now. Stay tuned and keep a close eye on our live coverage post below.
*** UPDATE *** Subscribers were told about this earlier today…
Again, keep an eye on our live coverage post below.
27 Comments
|
Today’s number: Up to 95,000 lost jobs
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* SJ-R…
The Illinois Health and Hospital Association has said block grants for Medicaid, combined with the loss of subsidized private insurance [via the ACA], could lead to a potential loss of $11.6 billion to $13.1 billion in annual “economic activity” in Illinois. The IHA says that translates to a potential loss of 84,000 to 95,000 jobs.
The hospital association is an interest group, so take its job numbers with a grain of salt.
But, man, even if those lost jobs are half that number. Whoa.
16 Comments
|
Rauner announces changes to pharmacy oversight
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Our old buddy Ray Long at the Trib…
Responding to a Tribune investigation that found drugstores frequently failed to warn customers about potentially dangerous drug interactions, Gov. Bruce Rauner is unveiling a major plan designed to improve public safety at pharmacies throughout the state.
The administration’s proposal would require pharmacists to counsel patients about risky drug combinations and other significant issues when buying a medication for the first time or when a prescription changes. Illinois law now requires only that patients be offered counseling, a mandate often addressed at the cash register with a brief inquiry, such as: “Any questions for the pharmacist today?”
The governor also plans to beef up state oversight, including directing inspectors to put more emphasis on adverse drug reactions and launching a “mystery shopper” program to test how well pharmacists comply with the law. […]
A Walgreens spokesman said: “Our goal is to provide the highest level of care to patients, and we are supportive of the governor’s effort to further promote a culture of safety in community pharmacies.”
Rauner’s plans to use existing inspectors and new mystery shoppers to improve safety at Illinois pharmacies can be achieved through executive orders. But changing the counseling requirement would need the approval of a bipartisan House-Senate panel, as would his proposal to post signs in pharmacies with a consumer hotline along with information about a patient’s right to counseling.
I still don’t understand why these big pharmacy chains don’t have computer programs that can automatically cross-check a customer’s prescriptions for potential harmful interactions. Why are we relying on human memory here? Humans can make mistakes because they get too busy (on orders from on high) or whatever.
…Adding… The proposed additions are underlined along with stricken text…
Failing to provide ensure that patient counseling in accordance with this Part, failing to respond to requests for patient counseling, attempting to circumvent patient counseling requirements, or otherwise discouraging patients from receiving patient counseling concerning their prescription medications is offered or refusing to respond to requests for patient counseling. […]
c) Every licensed pharmacy directly serving patients at a physical location must conspicuously post a sign provided by the Division containing a statement that the patient has the right to counseling, the Division’s consumer hotline number, information on how to file a complaint for failure to counsel, and any other information the Division deems appropriate. The sign must be printed in color ink or displayed electronically in color, measure at least 8 1⁄2 x 11 inches in size, and be posted at either a cashier counter or waiting area clearly visible to patients. Licensed pharmacies that do not maintain a physical location directly serving patients must include a copy of the sign within any dispensed prescriptions. The sign will be available to download on the Division’s website. […]
Nothing in this Section shall be construed as requiring a pharmacist to provide counseling when a patient or patient’s agent refuses such counseling. When a patient or patient’s agent refuses to accept patient counseling as provided in this Section, that refusal shall be documented. The absence of any record of a refusal to accept the offer to counsel shall be presumed to signify that the offer was accepted and that counseling was provided.
34 Comments
|
This didn’t have to happen
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From way back in late May of 2015…
Mayor Rahm Emanuel said Wednesday he wants to see how the frenzied final days of the Illinois General Assembly’s spring session play out before asking the new City Council to begin the search for new revenue to solve the $30 billion pension crisis that has dropped Chicago’s bond rating to junk status.
“We’re in active discussions on a casino as a funding source to shore up” police and fire pensions, the mayor told reporters after a City Council meeting. […]
Emanuel said he remains hopeful on what he once described as a “mega, mega-deal” that may include a sales tax on services, partial restoration of the expired increase in the state income tax, a Chicago casino and pension relief for police and fire and Chicago teachers.
“We’re now in the final two weeks before the end of the session. And as you know, this is usually the time — not just in Springfield, but with legislative bodies [everywhere] — when days are weeks and weeks are like months,” he said.
“There will be a lot of activity. I’m gonna be out there pressing the issues that are related to Chicago and its future [to make certain] Springfield does not make decisions at the expense of Chicago because there’s not a healthy Illinois without a healthy Chicago,” Emanuel said.
And since then? Almost nothing but destruction. And now we have a Senate plan that looks a whole lot like what was floating around a couple of years ago.
It all seems so pointless.
* From today’s NY Times…
At a meeting with the leaders of several construction and building trade unions, President Trump reiterated on Monday his interest in directing hundreds of billions of dollars to infrastructure investments, some of it from the federal government, union officials said.
“That was the impression I was taken away with,” said Sean McGarvey, the president of North America’s Building Trades Unions, an umbrella group, on a call with reporters after the meeting. “That the American citizenry and the American Treasury will be invested in building public infrastructure.” […]
Mr. McGarvey and Terry O’Sullivan, the general president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America, stressed to reporters their satisfaction at meeting with the president so soon after the inauguration. They said they went the entire Obama administration without being invited to a similar meeting. […]
At the meeting, Mr. McGarvey raised one point of possible discord between the labor leaders and the Trump administration: the so-called Davis-Bacon Act, which requires the federal government to pay contractors and subcontractors “locally prevailing wages,” as determined by the Labor Department, on most construction or renovation projects.
Many conservatives contend that the act inflates the cost of infrastructure projects, and on Tuesday, Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, is proposing a bill to suspend it for federal highway construction contracts.
President Trump was apparently non-committal about the proposed GOP changes.
But just imagine how much things could’ve been different in Illinois if our Republican governor had reached out to the building trades right away like Trump just did.
* From Illinois Public Radio…
The [Senate’s proposal] shows there are many areas in which Democrats and Republicans can come to an agreement. But it still leaves one big philosophical question unanswered.
That question is whether a governor can say: “Pass my agenda, and only then will I negotiate on a budget.” […]
“It’s a very dangerous precedent to set,” [Sen. Kwame Raoul] says. “You don’t know who’s going to be elected governor in the future, and if we start to do these types of thing now, every governor is going to want to do that.”
One can imagine a future governor holding out on the budget in exchange something she wants around guns or abortion or some other contentious issue.
And here we are.
110 Comments
|
* Finke…
The Illinois Senate’s “grand bargain” package of bills will be revised to create a balanced budget, Senate President John Cullerton and Senate Minority Leader Christine Radogno said Monday.
During a meeting with The State Journal-Register editorial board, Cullerton, D-Chicago, said he will show Senate Democrats a draft for the state to have a balanced budget by June 30, 2018. […]
Cullerton said he believes the analysis produced by Rauner’s budget office contained some flawed assumptions, and that lawmakers will be able to work throughout the spring on a balanced spending plan for next year that will be based on additional revenue. […]
Cullerton warned that the state could be facing another credit downgrade if it doesn’t take action this month to show it is dealing with the budget crisis.
Subscribers know more about those claimed “flawed assumptions” by GOMB.
* More on the possible credit downgrade from Pierog and McKinney…
Fitch has warned that inaction on the budget front would result in a downgrade by the end of this month.
“If they do not do something that comprehensively addresses their budget problem and their long-term accumulated budgetary liabilities, then we certainly would take action,” Fitch analyst Karen Krop said Monday.
21 Comments
|
New House rules proposed by Leader Durkin
Tuesday, Jan 24, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Yesterday, a commenter wondered why the House Republicans didn’t propose an alternative to Speaker Madigan’s proposed rules, which have been sharply criticized by the GOP and the Illinois Policy Institute as autocratic.
Well, House Republican Leader Jim Durkin filed a rules proposal yesterday. You can click here to read through it. I asked the HGOP early this morning for quick highlights of some of their proposed changes…
1. Creates specific requirements for advance notice of Rules Committee hearings, including identification of the measures to be considered:
One-hour notice for floor amendments & concurrence motions
72-hours notice to consider referral of bills to committee
24-hours notice for any other purpose
Currently, the Rules Committee often meets without providing any public notice; and it does not identify the legislative measures to be considered at the hearing.
Also requires a 2/3 vote for the Rules Committee to bypass standing/special committee consideration and advance floor amendments and concurrence motions to full House. In other words, such a motion to expedite business would require support from both the majority and minority party members of the committee.
2. Creates a public review period before action on committee amendments by requiring at least two-hours advance notice for an amendment to be considered in a committee.
Currently, committee amendments must be filed with the Clerk by 3 p.m. on the preceding day, but there is no requirement to provide public notice that such amendment may be considered at hearing of a particular committee.
3. Extends the Public Review Period for Floor Amendments (currently 1 hour) - Creates a longer public review period before committee consideration of floor amendments and concurrence motions by requiring that advance notice of a public hearing be given no later than the calendar day before the date of the hearing.
With the current one-hour notice requirement, a floor amendment can be filed, posted for a hearing, and adopted to the bill, and the bill passed by the House, all on the same day.
4. Restores a requirement in the House Rules that each bill be referred to a standing or special committee during the first year of a G.A. In 2013, the Democrat majority removed this decades-old requirement, thereby allowing the Rules Committee to kill a bill by preventing its consideration in a standing or special committee.
5. Second reading of bills during perfunctory session would be prohibited. In order to expedite the consideration of bills when the full House is not in session, the Clerk is often instructed to read bills a second time during the perfunctory session. This practice sometimes allows a bill to be approved by committee and then read by the Clerk on the same day, thereby allowing final passage on the following day.
Your thoughts?
16 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
   
|
Hosted by MCS
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax
Advertise Here
Mobile Version
Contact Rich Miller
|
