Put it up for a vote
Wednesday, Feb 1, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Greg Hinz on the Illinois Policy Institute’s budget proposal…
So, what’s in the institute’s secret sauce?
Just a few minor things: slashing the state’s Medicaid rolls by 600,000 people, allowing local governments to declare bankruptcy and impose rather than bargain pay and benefits, keeping $1.75 billion a year in revenue that the state now shares with municipalities for its own needs, and enacting workers’ compensation changes that Springfield Democrats have vigorously resisted.
Among other things.
Piece of cake, right?
Policy Institute chief John Tillman urged reporters not to be “cynical” about the plan, not at a time when the state is losing jobs and residents.
“Politicians have not earned the right to ask Illinoisans for more money,” Tillman said, accompanied by state Reps. Jeanne Ives, R-Wheaton, and Allen Skillicorn, R-Crystal Lake. “Our plan, unlike every other budget plan being discussed, ensures that taxpayers are respected and treated fairly rather than being treated like an ATM.”
The other things include a half billion dollar cut to higher education, which is supposed to “eliminate administrative bloat,” but that could mean the General Assembly would have to take over their spending line by line to enforce something like that.
Higher ed would also be saddled with $450 million in additional pension costs and school districts would be whacked with almost a billion dollars in higher pension costs.
It would also “reform” prevailing wage rules.
* WSIL TV…
Next on the proposal is a revised state pension plan. The Illinois Policy Institute says the state could save $1.65 billion next year by offering some self-managed 401K accounts instead.
The plan would also streamline Medicaid spending and reform higher education.
Um, no. The savings outlined by the group come from revising the Edgar ramp and phasing in actuarial savings over a longer period of time. Neither are bad ideas.
Also, they have a big university right down the road from that station and yet they refer to a billion dollars in cuts and added costs a year as “reform.” Maybe check a dictionary.
* Tribune…
“Raising taxes will not fix Illinois. We must reform the way Illinois does business,” Illinois Policy Institute CEO John Tillman said. “We must reform the way it actually spends the taxpayers’ money. We must slow the growth of spending to a rate below the growth in revenues. It is that simple. Spending must rise more slowly than revenues. That is the only solution.”
Agreed, but a lot of this plan isn’t about slowing state government growth, it’s about taking state money away from local governments, schools and universities and plowing it back into state coffers.
* Anyway, with all that in mind, check out the Tribune editorial board’s take…
Meanwhile, the Illinois Policy Institute, a free-market think tank, released its own budget proposal on Tuesday — a plan that would impose no new taxes. It would alleviate the budget crisis by encouraging state workers to transition to cheaper pension plans; ease collective bargaining restrictions placed on local governments while reducing the revenue they get from the state; cut Medicaid rolls by limiting eligibility to only the most disadvantaged; and provide local property tax relief with a five-year freeze.
Some of the institute’s ideas have seen bipartisan support at the Capitol. But with a Republican governor and a Democrat-controlled legislature, policy differences create a frustrating divide between what is needed and what is doable.
The “Institute” couldn’t have written that editorial better themselves. The Trib makes a radical proposal look so… mild.
But, hey, look on the bright side. Two years in and they’re finally conceding that “doable” is a real life concept. Back in 2015, you may recall, the ivory tower sneered at folks like Jim Edgar who had the audacity to suggest that the governor ought to try cutting a doable deal. The Mother Ship also referred to those who wanted to work out a compromise as the “Surrender Illinois Caucus.”
* Anyway, it would be interesting to see this proposal put into bill form. Let’s hear from the mayors, the university presidents, the school superintendents and the nursing home residents who rely on Medicaid, among others. And then let’s hear the sponsors and proponents defend it during committee hearings and floor debate. That’s what democracy looks like, not a press conference with a couple of legislators and a snazzy packet.
- SAP - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:01 am:
==Our plan, unlike every other budget plan being discussed, ensures that taxpayers are respected and treated fairly rather than being treated like an ATM.== Taxpayers shouldn’t be our ATM. Members of public pension funds should be our ATM. Public employees who are… (gulp) taxpayers.
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:02 am:
Cutting revenue sharing with municipalities? Oh please Republicans, please try to do this. It will be so much fun this campaign season watching Rs trying to defend that in my little rural corner. Please please.
- PublicServant - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:04 am:
Sure,
Put it up for a vote. I’m curious as to where the governor, a major IPI contributer, comes down on this since it seems to borrow heavily from the Gov’s TA. But by all means let Jeanne and Al co-sponser a bill, with hearings so that all affected can comment.
What’s going on with that Grand Compromise thing by the way, Rich?
I know, I know…subscribe.
- Arsenal - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:06 am:
As a liberal Democrat, I heartily support the Republicans adopting IPI’s budget in toto and making it clear to every voter in the state that this is their game plan.
- titan - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:08 am:
Much of the “savings” to the state tax rolls are shifts of costs to more local units of government. Maybe a good idea, maybe there would be some long term savings. But probably not immediately (without severe service cuts).
Shifting state employees would not do anything to help the large chuck of money that the state, in effect, borrowed from the pension funds.
- RNUG - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:10 am:
There is as much revenue stealing in this plan as there is spending cuts. In some cases, like reduced revenue sharing, it is one and the same thing. We won’t even talk about the fake pension savings through av401k plan.
This is nothing more than the state, through the back door, forcing local government to raise their taxes. You’d almost think the IPI was working with the GA to make sure the Legislators don’t get blamed for the increased taxes.
- Saluki - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:10 am:
37 Democrats in the Illinois Senate.
67 Democrats in the Illinois House.
What does the I.P.I. not understand about that? I suppose it does not matter to them, because they are not here to propose passable solutions, they are here to howl at the partisan moon.
- Not It - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:14 am:
IPI is an advocacy group, they are free to advocate for their positions, even if they aren’t based in political reality.
You will note that they want to cut back Medicaid, which is almost entirely funded by the federal government, so they don’t really care about state issues as much as they care about extreme ideology.
- Obamas Puppy - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:15 am:
Yeah and I have some radical ideas I would like to have heard too, like where does IPI get their money. Why aren’t they transparent about their funding? Why do they get to run parallel organizations in the press, lobbying and advocacy world?
- Cubs in '16 - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:15 am:
===What’s going on with that Grand Compromise thing===
Haven’t you heard? The AG single-handedly ruined that. /s
- Hamlet's Ghost - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:16 am:
== This is nothing more than the state, through the back door, forcing local government to raise their taxes. ==
With a five year property tax freeze, suburban school districts couldn’t raise taxes.
- walker - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:21 am:
A large number of these local boards across the state are filled with Republicans.
Theoretical discussions are fun until they impact your own budget.
- Demoralized - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:23 am:
==This is nothing more than the state, through the back door, forcing local government to raise their taxes.==
Given the property tax relief included in their proposal and the proposal to allow for municipal bankruptcy I think they are trying to force local governments into bankruptcy so that they can (potentially) restructure their pension obligations (i.e. cut pensions) and get rid of collective bargaining agreements.
- JoeMaddon - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:23 am:
The only thing you need to know about the lack of credibility of this proposal? They only two legislators they could get were Jeanne Ives and Allen Skillicorn.
- Anon - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:28 am:
== “We must slow the growth of spending to a rate below the growth in revenues. It is that simple.” ==
That might work if we had a tax system that captures economic growth. That would mean extending the sales tax to services, which is where the growth is, and adopting a graduated tax to capture the huge growth in income among the 1 percent.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:30 am:
I just can’t weigh and measure this to the 60 and 30 litmus test necessary.
If you are in the camp of “doing the doable”, then breaking down, just the Higher Ed diminishing alone, how can a majority of both chambers see the hundreds of millions still outstanding and the hundreds of millions that this plan slashes as “doing the doable” within the constrains of also being committed to this state being a Higher Ed beacon.
Can’t.
That’s one “small” element.
I have such difficulty starting there with this.
- Joe M - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:33 am:
“The ideas were unveiled by the Illinois Policy Institute — a group that received at least $500,000 from Rauner before he was governor”
- from the Tribune article
- sparky791 - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:39 am:
There are many studies out there that refute the idea of big savings on a 401k plan. Like every other state problem. Pay the damn bill!
- Joe M - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:41 am:
Often a good policy will spread the pain when there are tough decisions to be made. I don’t see too much in IPI’s plan that gives much pain to the very wealthy?
They would still get by with a 3.75 state income tax rate, whereas in most of our near-by states, they would be paying much more. Iowa: 8.98%; Minnesota: 9.85%; Wisconsin: 7.65%; Missouri: 6%; Kentucky: 6%
- Anon - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:42 am:
Rich, your last paragraph is critical. As a Democrat, I’ll admit I’m biased, but I feel that Democrats have not shied away from raisin taxes when necessary. They have made the proposals, put the votes on, and taken the blowback because they believed it the right thing to do. I would say they have owned their side of the ledger. If the Republicans are serious about these cuts, put it in a bill and have an honest debate about what you’re trying to do. Be honest, Republicans, and explain what exactly these cuts and “reforms” will mean. Explain the impact cutting Medicaid will have on nursing home residents. Explain what cutting those funds to higher ed will do to tuition costs and university staffing levels. explain how cutting the LGDF will cause municipalities to either raise their own taxes or cut the most essential of services (police and fire). Be honest, republicans! Put it in a bill and defend it!
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:46 am:
Cut funding to local school districts, cap their property tax revenue, and then ask them to pick up the pensions. I hope my daughter doesn’t enter a kindergarten classroom of 80 kids in a couple years.
- Annonin' - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:50 am:
The fun part is once the services are gutted …citizens will go to court and get more orders and cost will go up….but having a vote is a fun idea.
- ArchPundit - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 10:57 am:
I’m of the opinion the Speaker and Leader Cullerton (not Tom, the other guy) should put it up for a vote every day until there is a real budget.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 11:01 am:
Anon, for the record, I’m against raisin taxes. Leave raisins alone!!!
- Cable Line Beer Gardener - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 11:07 am:
I have read the 3 articles in the Tribune’s coverage of the IPI budget proposal and am perplexed. Ives describes the IPI as an non-partisan think tank, the Trib editorial board described it as free-market think tank and Kim Geiger referred to it as a conservative think tank allied with Rauner. I think I would give Ives a pinocchio for that non-partisan label.
- Earnest - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 11:29 am:
This just in from the IPI: Rich Miller stated on his Capitol Fax website that he is opposed to raisin’ taxes. /humor
- Grandson of Man - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 11:51 am:
It’s vulture capitalism, near and dear to the governor’s heart. Busting out of obligations and responsibilities, damaging workers and vicious sacrifices by those with the lowest incomes and higher ed.
Rauner was against ACA Medicaid expansion before the political crocodile tears started flowin’.
- Joe M - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 11:52 am:
Tom Cross, along with the Civic Club of the Chicago Commercial Club, used to co-introduce pension legislation. Perhaps some GA member, along with IPI, will co-introduce legislation on the IPI budget.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 11:58 am:
–Meanwhile, the Illinois Policy Institute, a free-market think tank,–
LOL, when it comes to free markets, they were in the Rauner-Tank on that Exelon nukes shakedown.
The government forces billions in consumer rate increases for the sole benefit of a highly profitable corporate concern and to prop up its allegedly money-losing plants that can’t cut it in the free market.
And the “free-market think tank” was silent.
Seriously, the tronclodyte edit board has no respect for its readers or the English language. They aspire to sophistry, but they’re just so bad at it.
- Honeybear - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 12:23 pm:
No raisin currant taxes!
Not on raisins OR currants!
Got to be specific!
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 12:48 pm:
Dont pecan tax payers with raisin taxes. Make Illinois grape again!
- Blue dog dem - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 12:50 pm:
“Politicians have not earned the right to ask taxpyer dor more money…”
I agree with this statement. Past and present.
But i will cede a 50-50 ratio on new revenue to spending cuts.
- Ducky LaMoore - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 2:04 pm:
===I agree with this statement. Past and present.===
Well then… according to 16th amendment, you are both wrong. Gosh I’m bored today….
- Andy S. - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 3:50 pm:
I read the pension section of the 52 page report. They propose to offer a 401k plan that copies the self-managed plan in SURS. This would be mandatory for new employees and voluntary for existing employees. Their analysis assumes that ALL current Tier 2 employees (those hired since 2011) will switch to this self-managed plan, as would some percentage of younger Tier 1 employees.
These assumptions are simply laughable, because they are demonstrably false. Every newly hired SURS employee since 1998 has had the option of choosing the self-managed plan. Of those hired between 2011 and 2016 (all Tier 2), anywhere from 14-19%, depending on the year, chose the self-managed plan over the Tier 2 plan. How can you possibly assume that 100% of these folks will now voluntarily choose the self-managed plan when they did not do so before?
If the pension section of the report is at all indicative of the rest of it, it is a shoddy piece of work that is not worth the paper it is printed on.
- Hopeful - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 4:48 pm:
Anyone notice yesterday when Rep Ives made comments at the press conference she spoke of getting 600,000 adults off of Medicare (not Medicaid). I know it’s petty but if she is spokesperson to support this I would expect her to know the difference. As already stated, a $10,000,000 cut in state Medicaid expenses are really a $20,000,000 cut in Medicaid benefits to our residents because of the federal match. Very short sighted
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Feb 1, 17 @ 5:33 pm:
IPI Budget Proposal = Corporate Wish List