* Crain’s Chicago Business editorial…
Gov. Bruce Rauner bears his share of the blame for this ridiculous impasse. He’s held up the budget process by demanding reforms that are only tangentially related to the business of determining how much our government costs and finding ways to pay for it. And the proposed fiscal 2018 budget he offered earlier this year was at least $4.6 billion out of whack, according to the Civic Federation’s math. When the time comes to ask whether Illinois is better off under four years of Rauner’s leadership, we know what the answer will be.
But let’s not mince words: The one person who could have passed a spending bill by May 31 and sent it to the governor’s desk is Madigan. The Democratic-controlled Senate, with President John Cullerton, did its job, passing a plan that included tax hikes that, while unpalatable, are a key part of the tough medicine that all sides—including the governor—acknowledge is necessary to bring Illinois back into fiscal health. And yet, the Democratic-controlled House, which Madigan runs like a Middle Eastern strongman, let the budget deadline come and go without doing anything.
Why? It’s simple: Madigan put his own interests before the interests of the state. A vote for a bill that would hike taxes could endanger some members of his delegation in the next election, especially downstate. And if enough of those House seats flip from blue to red, Madigan loses his spot as speaker of the House. The whole state suffers, in other words, so Madigan can keep his job.
This is the reality every Illinoisan must live with until Madigan is voted out of power. With our unpaid bills approaching $16 billion, a general funds deficit beyond $10 billion, borrowing costs skyrocketing as ratings agencies downgrade us to banana-republic levels, and unfunded pension obligations north of $130 billion, Madigan’s one-man job-security plan is too damned expensive.
* Greg Hinz…
I put Rauner first because, much as he wants to rail about how Illinois took a wrong turn under GOP predecessors Jim Thompson, Jim Edgar and George Ryan, Rauner has underperformed all of them.
Sure, Illinois needs structural reform. Chris Kennedy was right the other day in his theory about the tyranny of the property tax lawyers. But Rauner came in with an agenda as long as your leg: anti-union measures, tort reform, term limits, merit selection of judges, a property tax freeze, workers’ compensation changes, etc. In the last few weeks, he’s finally whittled that down to a manageable few. But the pattern of overreaching was set.
Rauner compounded that by highly personalizing his fight with Senate President John Cullerton and especially Madigan, throwing around terms like “corrupt.” That’s no way to get to a deal. Nor is running robocalls targeting Democratic lawmakers in the very days leading up to the May 31 budget deadline.
When Senate GOP leader Christine Radogno finally had enough earlier this year and tried to craft her own budget deal with Cullerton, she got sandbagged. Rauner pulled votes off their “grand bargain,” rather than trying to force Madigan’s hand and split the House Democratic caucus. The result: a potential “negative credit spiral,” as Standard & Poor’s put it yesterday, when it downgraded the state’s credit rating, again. Or as Civic Federation President Laurence Msall says, “As the chief executive, the governor has the prime responsibility for running the state.”
* Related…
* Where is Emanuel in the budget fight?
- Precinct Captain - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:34 pm:
Crain’s could have made their point without the needless racism.
- Now What? - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:36 pm:
Time for the ILGOP to rent the “Caine Mutiny.” Despite the low hanging fruit of blaming Madigan, the ILGOP owns this and their governor is the face of the fail.
- Anonymous - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:36 pm:
No doubt, hopefully old age gets to him sooner rather than later. Go retire in Florida old man.
- Anonymous - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:40 pm:
Crains is covering all the bases, even tho it’s logically inconsistent.
- Gruntled University Employee - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:41 pm:
==No doubt, hopefully old age gets to him sooner rather than later. Go retire in Florida old man.==
Ok genius, name one Democrat that would sign on to Rauner’s plan if Madigan were out of the picture?
To the post,
Please see Rich’s article from earlier today.
- wordslinger - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:43 pm:
If I recall correctly, the House Democrats did not have enough votes on their own to extend the income tax in 2014 when Quinn would have signed it prior to the election.
I’m not terribly surprised they don’t have the votes when Rauner would certainly veto it.
- ArchPundit - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:44 pm:
===Ok genius, name one Democrat that would sign on to Rauner’s plan if Madigan were out of the picture?
Exactly, it’s not like the Senate Dems have been ready to go along either. Madigan makes this more difficult, but he’s not the ultimate roadblock.
- William j Kelly - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:47 pm:
I guess it would be embarrassing for Craines to admit that the governor is responsible for proposing a balanced budget after they have endorsed him in every primary and general election. Ridiculous
- Mama - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:48 pm:
I have to disagree with Crain. If Rauner had not pulled the Republican votes from the Senate’s ‘Grand Bargain bill, it would have passed with bipartisan votes. If Rauner would have allowed the Republicans to vote on the Senate bill, the House Republicans & Democrats would have both passed the Grand Bargain bill too.
- G'Kar - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:52 pm:
Yes, it is true that Madigan needs to take some of the blame, and yes, and Crain’s is correct that politics played a role in his decision not to call the budget. But, what was the point if Rauner had already stated he would veto it? Why, Crain’s should Madigan allow the bill to be passed so Rauner can say “See I saved Illinois from evil Madigan and his 32% tax hike.”
Also, if the bill was passed, what would stop Rauner from line item vetoing everything but the K-12 education budget and allowing his destruction of the rest of Illinois to continue for another year?
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:52 pm:
Here is my take;
I’m a legislator, doesn’t matter the party, and my leader wants me to vote for a tax increase, and my leader knows I’m in a competitive district, opposite party of the governor, who said s/he will veto the tax increase IF there are enough, and my leader says there aren’t enough votes WITH me to pass it, votes to veto the governor…
Why on God’s Green Earth will I vote for an “unripe” tax increase, that IF it got the total, magically, it will get vetoed?
Here is where Crain’s fails.
There were not 60 votes to be had. Rauner was threating a veto…
Do they realize how incredibly brave the SDems were?!
- Roman - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:53 pm:
== Where is Emanuel in the budget fight? ==
That’s a pretty good story in Crain’s. The question gets answered toward the end of the piece: Rahm doesn’t have the patronage or political popularity to sway legislators. So, why bother? It used to be that city and suburban Cook County-based legislators were tied to their aldermen and committeemen, who were usually close with the mayor. Heck, a couple dozen legislators used to be on the city or county payroll when they weren’t in Springfield. Those connections have almost all disappeared in the post-Shakman era. As a result, we live in a time when the CTU president can move far more Chicago votes in the GA than the mayor can. Just look at the roll call for the elected school board bill.
One of Rauner’s many political miscalculations was that Rahm could and would help him in Springfield. The truth is he can’t help much at all — even if he wanted to.
- Arock - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:53 pm:
The Governor could have proposed a balanced budget and he should have, but the GA is obligated to pass a balanced budget and send it to the Governor. That hasn’t happened in three years either. Well actually the GA hasn’t sent any Governor a balanced budget using real accounting practices since who knows when.
- Hamlet's Ghost - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:55 pm:
Are they actually claiming that a large number of Democratic members of the IL House WANTED to vote for a tax increase (that would certainly have been vetoed) but Madigan forbade it?
Mushroom: Please Mr. Speaker, I want to raise taxes so very badly.
MJM: No! I said No!
== Why? It’s simple: Madigan put his own interests before the interests of the state. A vote for a bill that would hike taxes could endanger some members of his delegation in the next election, especially downstate. And if enough of those House seats flip from blue to red, Madigan loses his spot as speaker of the House. The whole state suffers, in other words, so Madigan can keep his job. ==
- Tom - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:56 pm:
Baloney. We are in this mess because the governor said he would veto any tax increase not tied to the exact reforms HE wanted. If the House Republicans participate, it appears there are 46 dems on a tax increase vote–and that is just the start.
- jw - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:58 pm:
Rauner should buy another nursing home become a resident run by his rules then see how he likes those apples
- Illinois O'Malley - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:58 pm:
That Crain’s editorial is about as silly as a Katrina McQuery article. How many house R’s did Rauner or Durkin put on the budget? But go ahead and blame Madigan…
- Downstate - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:59 pm:
“..since who knows when.”
Exactly. Some constitutional provisions in this state seem more protected than others.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:59 pm:
===The Governor could have proposed a balanced budget and he should have, but the GA is obligated to pass a balanced budget and send it to the Governor.===
No. No. Sorry, no..,
“The Governor could have proposed a balanced budget and he should have…”
Article VIII, Section 2, (a) requires, not optional, requires… but your own disingenuous ways… you excuse Rauner…
“However…” LOL!…
“…but the GA is obligated to pass a balanced budget and send it to the Governor”
Your shillness is compelling and transparent, but it still lacks any honesty.
Now it’s all up to the GA, as you purposely give dispensation to Rauner and his “obligation”?
You really should enjoy the outdoors today, lol
- Hamlet's Ghost - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 2:59 pm:
I suppose the Crain’s headline should be
“How Madigan blocked a tax increase from being sent to the Governor’s desk.”
- Anonymous - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:04 pm:
Shifting the blame works.
- Signal and Noise - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:07 pm:
Crains is shocked, SHOCKED to find politics going on in this Capitol!!!
The refusal to mention that Rauner would not have signed the damn thing and making members take a meaningless tax hike vote is just plain dumb gives this wailing and knashing to teeth nonsense zero cred.
- northsider (the original) - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:09 pm:
OMG!!! Tronc has taken over Crain’s.
- Ducky LaMoore - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:13 pm:
“We’re in this mess because of Mike Madigan.”
Oh, because I thought they said, “By nearly every measure, the state is worse off since Rauner took office.” http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20160625/ISSUE07/306259997/gov-rauner-youve-proved-us-wrong
Same exact people, writing two very different opinions.
- winners and losers - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:15 pm:
@JBPritzker is now actively promoting SB 1, a bill that will be vetoed or significantly changed by the House and Senate?
- tberry - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:20 pm:
“…passing a plan that included tax hikes that, while unpalatable, are a key part of the tough medicine that all sides—including the governor—acknowledge is necessary to bring Illinois back into fiscal health.”
No ALL SIDES do not acknowledge this is necessary…the TAXPAYER side doesn’t seem to have a vote. Polls show the majority of Illinois residents do not support this. A reasonable tax hike might gain support, but when the starting point for a discussion is a 28% tax hike, Plus making it retroactive, Plus adding a services tax…this becomes ridiculous. Anyone who disagrees with the above increases is considered to be mean and selfish. As hard as it is for the readers of this blog to believe, some people actually cannot afford this. Particularly those residents of Chicago who are also caught in a competition between the city of Chicago and the county of Cook who seem to be trying to each tax more and spend more than the other.
Other than that, I’m all for it!
tberry
- What the - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:21 pm:
I don’t like Madigan, and I blame the democrats … but there’s equal blame on the republicans. If all the republicans vote no, and many of the dems do too, how can it be all Madigan’s fault? It’s absurd.
- wordslinger - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:23 pm:
– Anyone who disagrees with the above increases is considered to be mean and selfish.–
Try not to drop your petals, daisy.
Some people chime in here just to claim victimhood.
- What the - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:27 pm:
Every year the republicans blame madigan and make him public enemy number one. What has it gotten them? Zip.
- walker - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:27 pm:
There are limits to Madigan’s power over the individual votes of his caucus members, on some key issues. That’s been proven time and time again. It is too easy and lazy to assume it is all about the Leaders’ own choices. There are more than three responsible parties to the legislative process.
It is more about their behavior and trustworthiness. If they are inconsistent with goals and unreliable with commitments, then it is very tough to establish a baseline from which to deal.
When a Leader tells you he’s willing to provide x number of votes on a given issue, and history suggests he simply cannot get more than x plus 8 out of his caucus even with pressure, the experienced Governors of either party used to understand the trustworthiness of those kinds of statements, know how to estimate the odds of an outcome. Then they worked within that context to get something done. The same goes for Durkin — e.g. he goes in knowing a handful of his members would never vote for a tax increase, and MJM understands that reality. Rauner appears unable or unwilling to deal at that level.
- Tommy - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:35 pm:
That Crains “Where’s Rahm?” story linked above is really worth reading. The city’s lobbying operation in Springfield is a shadow of its former self.
- One to the Dome - Friday, Jun 2, 17 @ 3:49 pm:
So… according to Crain’s, the Gov should keep up the “Fire Madigan” approach that has worked so far? Maybe Rauner needs one more election cycle to flip the House.