I emphasized to Mr. Durkin that I am prepared to do a budget and am prepared to do revenue to pay for that budget. I’m prepared to work with every member of the Legislature on all issues before the Legislature.
I think that, again, the Legislature, especially the Democrats in the Legislature, have taken great steps to be responsive to requests from the governor in areas like governmental consolidation, procurement, sale of the Thompson Center, reorganization of the Lincoln Library. And unfortunately, we haven’t seen a comparable response from the governor.
We would feel that if we’re being responsive to the governor’s requests, he ought to engage with us on the budget-making and on raising the money to pay for the budget. And I haven’t seen that yet.
===he ought to engage with us on the budget-making and on raising the money to pay for the budget. And I haven’t seen that yet.===
Has anyone seen Rauner’s plan to raise the money his own preferred budget is predicated on? Anybody? Rauner has been playing hide the ball for almost three years now. It’s time to show your cards Governor.
I agree with him. What is the point of working out all the details, if the rug will be pulled out. Rauner, and Durkin need to make some commitments too. Here it is, “take it or leave it” won’t work with Madigan.
===We would feel that if we’re being responsive to the governor’s requests, he ought to engage with us on the budget-making and on raising the money to pay for the budget. And I haven’t seen that yet.===
“…and on raising the money to pay for the budget. And I haven’t seen that yet.”
If ya can’t read what Madigan is saying… right here…
Rauner needs to have a Rauner revenue vehicle, Republican sponsorship…
the four issues the Madigan cited are all no brainers. of course, he’ll give on them to get his tax increases.
Procurement, government consolidation and the T center save money. Madigan was the first to raise the lincoln library, which already is done.
==Rauner needs to have a Rauner revenue vehicle, Republican sponsorship…==
But that would be an admission, by Rauner, that raising taxes isn’t like Christmas in the summer for the Democrats. By admitting that Rauner needs revenue for his own budget, he’d need to drop the whole “I’ll give the Democrats the tax increase they always dreamed of in exchange for what I want” routine.
The value of the Committee of the Whole is much in question. MJM control the agenda so it does serve as political theater for issues he believes in like preserving WC bennies for union members.
What about term limits? Fair maps? Pension reform? Property taxes? Come on. Madigan offers NO substantive change. Why would GOP back a tax hike in exchange for nothing?
HE is the problem and has been for decades. Has runined this state.
===of course, he’ll give on them to get his tax increases.===
===Why would GOP back a tax hike in exchange for nothing?===
They aren’t “his” tax hikes, they belong to all of us as Illinoisans. If you don’t want the tax hikes, be prepared to live with severe cuts to government services and continued chaos, crisis and financial downgrades.
Second, the GOP gets the same thing with a tax hike that we all get: a funded government that meets its obligations. Stop pretending that hiking taxes is somehow a Republican gift to the Democrats.
The mess in Illinois is a bi-partisan (deleted) sandwich, and we all have to take a bite.
=What about term limits? Fair maps? Pension reform? Property taxes? Come on. Madigan offers NO substantive change. Why would GOP back a tax hike in exchange for nothing? =
Whelp…
House approved a property tax freeze a while ago.
House pushed through pension reform (unconstitutional) years ago…
Its hilarious how much republicans talk about personal responsibility when it comes to everyone else, but they dont want to share responsibility for everything theyve been apart of.
“House pushed through pension reform (unconstitutional) years ago…”
Not only did they do that, but Rauner and Griffin were actively lobbying against it.
And before that, Griffin lobbied the House GOP to be against the consideration model that the Governor now supports because they wanted to use the pension debt as a campaign issue.
===Only those who like government want a tax hike!===
… and vendors owed billions… those two groups… and people who benefit from paved roads, social services, higher education… so, it’s those who like government, and vendors owed money, and…
==What about term limits? Fair maps? Pension reform? Property taxes?==
Three of the four of those have nothing to do with the budget.
==Only those who like government want a tax hike!==
Bull. Those who are good at math recognize that we need a tax hike. Nobody “wants” a tax hike. Nobody has ever shown a serious budget proposal that works without a tax increase. There’s a reason for that. It can’t be done.
==Let’s cut then. Everything. Only those who like government want a tax hike!==
That includes Rauner, who never supported the IPI budget as the default option. A tax increase isn’t a “give” by Rauner when his own budget requires one.
Demo, ya just don’t get it man. Rauner ran on those issues, you can say they have nothing to do with a budget, but everybody except possibly you realizes MJM won’t give a thing after the fact.
Many blame Rauner, a LOT blame MJM for the state’s problems.
GOP talking point that their bill is a compromise because they will agree to the democrat tax increase. Did I miss the GOP balanced budget without a tax increase? A tax increase is the only way to fill their only proposed budget gap. It is not a democrat tax increase it is the adult thing to do.
==Did I miss the GOP balanced budget without a tax increase?==
No, you didn’t miss something that never existed. The IPI proposed such a budget, but Rauner didn’t support it, probably because he wasn’t willing to take the arrows for such an unrealistic budget. Rauner wants Democrats to take the arrows for the tax increase his own budget requires and he wants them to throw their constituents under the bus for the privilege.
Rauner began by holding the budget hostage for a bunch of non-budgetary items (he didn’t explicitly campaign on). No budget until he got those. Two years pass, no budget.
Now it seems he’s holding everything hostage until Democrats concede on some issues and take responsibility for the necessary (according to all involved who can do math, as noted above) tax increase. The Democrats do not want a tax increase as some kind of policy end-in-itself. This, perhaps, is Rauner’s fantastical version of the “Democrat” party.
This last tells us what the longer game is. He’s holding this up (on the tax part of his budget) in order to force electoral losses on Democrats for raising taxes (in a flat tax state, where the consequences of that are very dire for people who would naturally be the base). He will blame them for the tax increase.
For a guy who struggles with honesty, I don’t see why he just doesn’t go with the tax increase and blame the Democrats anyway. If he can somehow tie the budget to property taxes, I bet he can do that as well.
Debate Captain-who did your homework in high school?
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 6:45 pm:
Rauner wants to stick Democrats with a tax increase and for them to cut their own supporters. Is there any wonder why there are so many cold feet?
It’s the same with the unions. The WSJ and Rauner must be incredulous that people just don’t roll over and die for them. How silly is it of the WSJ to think that Rauner can hold out and get RtW and collective bargaining cuts with a Democratic-majority GA? That to me shows how out of touch they are, and why Rauner drops g’s and wears those phony costumes.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:33 pm:
===he ought to engage with us on the budget-making and on raising the money to pay for the budget. And I haven’t seen that yet.===
Has anyone seen Rauner’s plan to raise the money his own preferred budget is predicated on? Anybody? Rauner has been playing hide the ball for almost three years now. It’s time to show your cards Governor.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:33 pm:
I agree with him. What is the point of working out all the details, if the rug will be pulled out. Rauner, and Durkin need to make some commitments too. Here it is, “take it or leave it” won’t work with Madigan.
- Texas Red - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:34 pm:
I have to laugh at this offer..”reorganization of the Lincoln Library”. That is not what an auditor would call material.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:35 pm:
===We would feel that if we’re being responsive to the governor’s requests, he ought to engage with us on the budget-making and on raising the money to pay for the budget. And I haven’t seen that yet.===
“…and on raising the money to pay for the budget. And I haven’t seen that yet.”
If ya can’t read what Madigan is saying… right here…
Rauner needs to have a Rauner revenue vehicle, Republican sponsorship…
- jim - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:37 pm:
the four issues the Madigan cited are all no brainers. of course, he’ll give on them to get his tax increases.
Procurement, government consolidation and the T center save money. Madigan was the first to raise the lincoln library, which already is done.
- AC - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:43 pm:
==Rauner needs to have a Rauner revenue vehicle, Republican sponsorship…==
But that would be an admission, by Rauner, that raising taxes isn’t like Christmas in the summer for the Democrats. By admitting that Rauner needs revenue for his own budget, he’d need to drop the whole “I’ll give the Democrats the tax increase they always dreamed of in exchange for what I want” routine.
- Lech W - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:46 pm:
The value of the Committee of the Whole is much in question. MJM control the agenda so it does serve as political theater for issues he believes in like preserving WC bennies for union members.
- John Rawlss - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:48 pm:
What about term limits? Fair maps? Pension reform? Property taxes? Come on. Madigan offers NO substantive change. Why would GOP back a tax hike in exchange for nothing?
HE is the problem and has been for decades. Has runined this state.
- cdog - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:50 pm:
Is Madigan prepared to quit acting like a Chicago Democrat, sneaking in windfalls?
This is a two-bit carny act. He’s scheming all along to try and get more money to Chicago.
Clean bills, sir. Clean bills. Then you can say you’re the truthful one, not before that though.
- John Rawlss - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:50 pm:
Oswego, who gives a darn who sponsors the revenue bill? It’s a silly talking point. An agreement to raise taxes will be a pox on both houses.
To quote HRC, “what difference does it make?”
Madigan will destroy this state to protect his fiefdom.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:51 pm:
–Why would GOP back a tax hike in exchange for nothing?–
Honor their contracts, pay their bills, like the Big Kid Conservatives used to do.
Just how high are you willing to let that backlog of bills grow before you put on the big boy pants?
- Henry Francis - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:52 pm:
===Has anyone seen Rauner’s plan to raise the money his own preferred budget is predicated on?===
Heck, has anyone seen Rauner? Is he still lurking in the dark corners of the Old Capitol?
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:54 pm:
===of course, he’ll give on them to get his tax increases.===
===Why would GOP back a tax hike in exchange for nothing?===
They aren’t “his” tax hikes, they belong to all of us as Illinoisans. If you don’t want the tax hikes, be prepared to live with severe cuts to government services and continued chaos, crisis and financial downgrades.
Second, the GOP gets the same thing with a tax hike that we all get: a funded government that meets its obligations. Stop pretending that hiking taxes is somehow a Republican gift to the Democrats.
The mess in Illinois is a bi-partisan (deleted) sandwich, and we all have to take a bite.
- JS Mill - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:54 pm:
=What about term limits? Fair maps? Pension reform? Property taxes? Come on. Madigan offers NO substantive change. Why would GOP back a tax hike in exchange for nothing? =
Whelp…
House approved a property tax freeze a while ago.
House pushed through pension reform (unconstitutional) years ago…
House passed WC reform in 2011.
Ya got him on fair maps though.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 3:56 pm:
===who gives a darn who sponsors the revenue bill? It’s a silly talking point. An agreement to raise taxes will be a pox on both houses===
“It’s a silly talking point.”
If that’s true, just a talking point, why not have a Republican just flat out sponsor that Rauner Tax needed for Rauner’s budget bills.
Think on that.
“An agreement to raise taxes will be a pox on both houses”
… Except is 100% required for any budget. Not an option. So get that pox ready, even two of them.
- Dr. Bonners - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:05 pm:
Its hilarious how much republicans talk about personal responsibility when it comes to everyone else, but they dont want to share responsibility for everything theyve been apart of.
- John Rawlss - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:06 pm:
Let’s cut then. Everything. Only those who like government want a tax hike!
- Juice - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:07 pm:
“House pushed through pension reform (unconstitutional) years ago…”
Not only did they do that, but Rauner and Griffin were actively lobbying against it.
And before that, Griffin lobbied the House GOP to be against the consideration model that the Governor now supports because they wanted to use the pension debt as a campaign issue.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:09 pm:
===Only those who like government want a tax hike!===
… and vendors owed billions… those two groups… and people who benefit from paved roads, social services, higher education… so, it’s those who like government, and vendors owed money, and…
Ugh.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:09 pm:
==What about term limits? Fair maps? Pension reform? Property taxes?==
Three of the four of those have nothing to do with the budget.
==Only those who like government want a tax hike!==
Bull. Those who are good at math recognize that we need a tax hike. Nobody “wants” a tax hike. Nobody has ever shown a serious budget proposal that works without a tax increase. There’s a reason for that. It can’t be done.
- Revenue - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:09 pm:
The State should enact the Hillbilly Tax better known as the Sweetened Beverage Tax.
- wordslinger - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:10 pm:
–Let’s cut then. Everything. –
An anarchist and a deadbeat at the same time.
- AC - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:10 pm:
==Let’s cut then. Everything. Only those who like government want a tax hike!==
That includes Rauner, who never supported the IPI budget as the default option. A tax increase isn’t a “give” by Rauner when his own budget requires one.
- 47th Ward - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:17 pm:
Only those who like roads want a tax hike.
Only those who like highways patrolled want a tax hike.
Only those who benefit from public education want a tax hike.
Only those who want senior citizens to have food AND medicine want a tax hike.
Only those who want battered women to find shelter want a tax increase.
Only those who want to attract the best and brightest students to Illinois colleges want a tax hike.
Only those like it when sick children can see a doctor want a tax hike.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:21 pm:
Demo, ya just don’t get it man. Rauner ran on those issues, you can say they have nothing to do with a budget, but everybody except possibly you realizes MJM won’t give a thing after the fact.
Many blame Rauner, a LOT blame MJM for the state’s problems.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:23 pm:
Madigan - 61% disapprove
Rauner -58% disapprove.
ALOT = 3% while also being under water.
(Sigh)
- wordslinger - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:24 pm:
–Demo, ya just don’t get it man. Rauner ran on those issues–
LOL, perhaps you could link us up with substantive “issue” that Rauner ran on.
Platitudes are not “issues.”
- A guy - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:29 pm:
Gotta give him this much. His rewrite department has come up with a dozen ways to say nothing new.
- Really - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:46 pm:
GOP talking point that their bill is a compromise because they will agree to the democrat tax increase. Did I miss the GOP balanced budget without a tax increase? A tax increase is the only way to fill their only proposed budget gap. It is not a democrat tax increase it is the adult thing to do.
- Rufus - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 4:59 pm:
“What about term limits? Fair maps? Pension reform? Property taxes?”
How does any of that effect the Budget? The Budget is the issue right now!
- AC - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:01 pm:
==Did I miss the GOP balanced budget without a tax increase?==
No, you didn’t miss something that never existed. The IPI proposed such a budget, but Rauner didn’t support it, probably because he wasn’t willing to take the arrows for such an unrealistic budget. Rauner wants Democrats to take the arrows for the tax increase his own budget requires and he wants them to throw their constituents under the bus for the privilege.
- JPC - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:05 pm:
@Really
I have a similar perspective.
Rauner began by holding the budget hostage for a bunch of non-budgetary items (he didn’t explicitly campaign on). No budget until he got those. Two years pass, no budget.
Now it seems he’s holding everything hostage until Democrats concede on some issues and take responsibility for the necessary (according to all involved who can do math, as noted above) tax increase. The Democrats do not want a tax increase as some kind of policy end-in-itself. This, perhaps, is Rauner’s fantastical version of the “Democrat” party.
This last tells us what the longer game is. He’s holding this up (on the tax part of his budget) in order to force electoral losses on Democrats for raising taxes (in a flat tax state, where the consequences of that are very dire for people who would naturally be the base). He will blame them for the tax increase.
For a guy who struggles with honesty, I don’t see why he just doesn’t go with the tax increase and blame the Democrats anyway. If he can somehow tie the budget to property taxes, I bet he can do that as well.
- DeseDemDose - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:05 pm:
The speaker speaks. Simply put. When will the Republicans offer their tax plan. Who youze guyz crappin?
- Morty - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:17 pm:
- John Rawlss - that was just a childish statement
- Annonin' - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:21 pm:
Hey you missed the big Durkie presser.
- peon - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:33 pm:
This budget-as-leverage thing has never had legs. Fortunately reality gets a vote also.
- efudd - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 5:56 pm:
“Only those who like government want a tax hike”
Debate Captain-who did your homework in high school?
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 6:45 pm:
Rauner wants to stick Democrats with a tax increase and for them to cut their own supporters. Is there any wonder why there are so many cold feet?
It’s the same with the unions. The WSJ and Rauner must be incredulous that people just don’t roll over and die for them. How silly is it of the WSJ to think that Rauner can hold out and get RtW and collective bargaining cuts with a Democratic-majority GA? That to me shows how out of touch they are, and why Rauner drops g’s and wears those phony costumes.
- Cardsfan - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 7:14 pm:
== Many blame Rauner, a LOT blame MJM for the state’s problems.==
A lot of people don’t vote for MJM. Everyone votes for Rauner.
- park - Thursday, Jun 22, 17 @ 9:36 pm:
Time for a con-con. This ain’t working.