The House Democratic perspective
Wednesday, Jun 28, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Rep. Elgie Sims (D-Chicago) posted this to his Instagram account regarding today’s House floor votes on the Democrats’ “non-budget” bills. His frustration and anger is palpable…
House Democrats have attempted time and time again to try to compromise with the Governor and House Republicans on their non-budgetary items yet they continue to say it’s not enough. We give them 70% of what they want on Workers Compensation, the reply? It’s NOT enough! We give them 80% of what they want on local government consolidation, the reply? It’s NOT enough! We give them 90% on pensions, the reply? It’s NOT enough. Compromise is not the same as ceding to ultimatums.
* Rep. Will Guzzardi (D-Chicago) on Twitter…
* From today’s floor debate…
- doggonit - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 1:51 pm:
Willingness to completely destroy a state seems to be the ultimate leverage.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 1:56 pm:
The only thing I can think of is…
1) These aren’t the wins Rauner specifically wants
2) The passive destruction and continued inaction causing destruction to social services, higher education… that IS the win.
After well over 2 years, and a Doctor in the Administration in a made up title made something very clear; 90% wins aren’t wins, and Rauner defines his wins as he sees them, not as compromise dictates them.
- Arock - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 1:57 pm:
No, true and full reform to turn the State around, not lip service.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 1:57 pm:
They “gave” 70% on Workers’ Compensation? Get real. Not even close.
There is a deal on the table according to “reformer” Guzzardi who shed those reform stripes in a hurry. Just take the deal, even if it solves little or nothing.
Illinois: The Laughing Stock of the Nation.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 1:58 pm:
- Louis G Atsaves -
Ok…
Then do you believe Dr. Purvis when she made crystal clear, a 90% win for the governor isn’t “good enough”?
- Piece of Work - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 1:59 pm:
What if the GOP comes back with 4.57% for the state income tax? Would the Dems take it? I mean, it is close to 4.95%. Or, would the Dems say its not enough?
- 360 Degree TurnAround - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 1:59 pm:
It is a failure of those around the Governor to accept a win as well. Some of those in the business community need to accept the win as well. But when you can pay those around you to agree with you…then compromise won’t happen. “Yes People” = poor management.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 1:59 pm:
===No, true and full reform to turn the State around, not lip service.===
LOL!
So, no comprise? No common ground?
That’s fun.
- OpenYourEyes - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:00 pm:
Crisis creates opportunity! Gov Rauner’s words and he intends on doing exactly what he set out to do. He does not care if it destroys that State or ruins higher education.
I mean seriously… Gov Rauner was just quoted recently as saying, “I am the happiest I have been in 20 years.”
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:02 pm:
===What if the GOP comes back with 4.57% for the state income tax? Would the Dems take it? I mean, it is close to 4.95%. Or, would the Dems say its not enough===
lol, Math is math is math…
If the Raunerites want a lower required percectage, Raunerites can make the cuts… then sponsor the Rauner Tax and put Raunerite sponsors on the Rauner Tax and the 30 HGOP votes to pass it.
Why won’t they? lol
- Whatthewhat - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:04 pm:
No one wins. No one. There are no winners around the Capitol.
- mtwtsn - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:04 pm:
How is this a compromise? Where are the cost savings to business, which is the point of the reform bill? It codifies court case that lets employees take workers comp if they’re injured on the way to work. Omits causation standards. Reduces the days workers can start gaining benefits (which raises business costs). This is Madigan calling a “workers comp” bill to say he compromised, when he knows GOP won’t take it. How can ILDems be so opposed to having IL be middle of the pack (23rd most expensive state in 2005) when unions were not complaining about injured workers falling through the safety net then? This is incredibly frustrating.
- Wow - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:04 pm:
Capitulation over compromise !! That’s what BVR wants. His whole work life that process. He wants the social safety net to disappear. That’s the thinking of he and his .01% buddies
- 360 Degree TurnAround - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:10 pm:
mtwtsn,
How about insurance reform that would get more money into the hands of businesses to create jobs?
- AnonymousOne - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:11 pm:
Seems like this special session was a set up. Governor can say he called it and got no cooperation, no will to compromise.
Could’ve saved some money, skipped it and just continued the decimation……..the ultimate goal anyway.
- Anonish - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:13 pm:
I wonder how many statements from individual members of the HDem caucus will it take for the Governor’s office to accept that even if Madigan quit today they still aren’t getting votes from the caucus?
Nevermind, they (Team Rauner) don’t care.
- City Zen - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:15 pm:
==We give them 70% of what they want on Workers Compensation, the reply? It’s NOT enough!…==
Depends on what’s in the other 30%. Are you giving me 70% of the 1992 Chicago Bulls without Jordan, Pippen, and Grant?
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:15 pm:
Show your math on what you consider “wins” for the other side, and what is in the other “30%”. Giving on 7 of 10 things isn’t really a “win” if your priority and most important issues are one or more of the remaining 3. Especially when items polar opposite of your goal are inserted and claimed to be “reforms”
- RNUG - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:17 pm:
== He does not care if it destroys that State or ruins higher education. ==
You are misreading things; those are not side effects. Based on the Governor’s actions, those ARE the goals.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:19 pm:
===epends on what’s in the other 30%. Are you giving me 70% of the 1992 Chicago Bulls without Jordan, Pippen, and Grant===
Again with the Dorm Room Brownies.
Let’s be very clear.
Property tax freeze, for example…
When diminishing or eliminating collective bargaining and prevailing wage aren’t added in… it’s not “good enough”
The point?
You aren’t playing Fantasy League commissioner here.
You push as far as you can, take what you can get.
If you want to play Roto-Basketball with your dorm-mate, have at it.
This ain’t that.
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:21 pm:
===Where are the cost savings to business, which is the point of the reform bill?===
And if injured workers end up on welfare instead? Is that also the point of the bill, to push employers’ costs onto the taxpayers?
Madigan has been clear from jump street. He’s not going to let that happen. All of the negotiators knew where Madigan stood on this, no one should act surprised. If business owners aren’t seeing the savings from their insurance providers, perhaps the insurance companies are to blame and not the state’s laws.
- Biscuit Head - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:22 pm:
Pass the bill.
Sign the bill.
THEN we can resume the pointless arguing over whether it was a 80% compromise or an 90% compromise or a 68.368% compromise…
Make some friggin’ progress please.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:24 pm:
Again, from Real Past Governors…
Compromise…
GHR…
===“The governor is the top guy. He is the leader. House Speaker Mike Madigan is not. The governor has to make things happen. If he doesn’t get everything he wants, he’s got to figure out how much he can get. To get something done. He’s got to take the wheel. He’s got to have a plan. It’s like everything in life.”===
Edgar, in the past…
===”He (Rauner) comes from a different background than I do. But I just think it’s very important for a governor, you’ve got to have a good budget and you need it in place,” Edgar told reporters. “You can try to compromise on some issues — and I think there are certain things (Democrats in the Legislature) might give him — but some of the things he’s asking for, they’re not going to give him. They’re just not going to give him.”===
What words, phrases, or letters in an any order that’s confusing here?
- 360 Degree TurnAround - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:27 pm:
Take the win Governor Junk. What do you call those who work for Governor Junk? Junkions? Bankruptillions?
- Now What? - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:30 pm:
Everybody see those GOP “no” votes for the beloved property tax freeze? When people can learn to count votes for real compromise, please post accordingly. Until then, Stockholm Syndrome this ain’t.
- Annonin' - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:31 pm:
“Perhaps the insurance companies are to blame” Perhaps. Costs down and profits skyrocketing. Why do employers allow themselves to be bamboozled.
Why? Maybe they are just bundling a lot of coverage—- cheap cars, life, long term care for the bosses. Perhaps Sweet deals.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:42 pm:
===”Then do you believe Dr. Purvis when she made crystal clear, a 90% win for the governor isn’t “good enough”?”===
I read contracts and go through settlement proposals daily. Usually can agree on 90%. It’s that last 10% to close the gap that often is the most difficult.
Or are you the fellow that purchases a house that is 90% built with no windows, then wonders why the heating and utility charges are so darned high? Or why the house is always filled with birds, raccoons, chipmunks, mosquitoes? Or why the floors are wet after every rain?
To paraphrase the Speaker, that’s how government negotiations work. You settle for no windows, smile and “take the deal.”
Real life is different Mr. Willy.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:47 pm:
===Or are you the fellow that purchases a house that is 90% built…===
I’m not building a house, Counselor, I’m looking at a governor that can’t see a 90% win as a win worth taking. That’s not a good governing practice.
===Real life is different Mr. Willy===
You’re right, lol, Counselor, we’re taking about legislation and compromise. No one is talking anywhere near the “reality” of a house.
Oh, Counselor, it was 90% of what Rauner wanted, not the comprise.
But… you already knew that.
- Really - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:49 pm:
-mtwtsn- are ynot u saying we were 23rd so why the need to change anything let’s pull workers comp from the table
- Skeptic - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:49 pm:
“Or are you the fellow that purchases a house that is 90% built with no windows,” That’s not a valid analogy. The buyer and seller aren’t co-equals, and buyers and sellers can always find other buyers and sellers. But more to the point, if I had no house at all, I’d settle for a house with no windows than none. Especially if it’s raining and cold outside.
- mtwtsn - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:54 pm:
Really — we were 23rd in 2005, but now we’re 8th most expensive. So no, we shouldn’t pull workers comp. Do you think businesses are just lying that costs are too high?
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:54 pm:
I guess Dr. Purvis, who said 90% wasn’t good enough for Rauner is now a lil wooden shack, no windows or doors, raccoons and animals…
… pretty good analogy of Gov. Rauner’s tenure as governor.
So… The image Louis G Astaves, Esq., wants of the tenure of Governor Bruce Rauner is…
“A wooden run down shack, with no windows, the heating and utility charges with backlog bills, no want or attempt to pay them…. the house is always filled with birds, raccoons, chipmunks, mosquitoes… the floors are wet after every rain.”
… because compromise isn’t what Rauner will agree to.
Rauner has 9 homes, but… “Dad’s Home State”… Mr. Louis gave us the reality… to the Mocumentary.
Thanks.
- Steve Rogers - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 2:57 pm:
Rauner to HGOP: “These are not the wins you’re looking for.”
HGOP: “These are not the wins we’re looking for. Move along.”
- The Real Just Me - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 3:01 pm:
The workers comp proposal is made up of a number of discrete changes that could stand alone as individual bills if necessary. Each one has been scored by the rating agency for potential savings. So the buying a house analogy is not really apt. By my count, the Democrats gave the Republicans 100% of at least 4 very significant changes that were contained in Leader Durkin’s bill, the one Governor Rauner said he could sign: fraud; shoulder & hip injuries; back injuries credit; and drug formulary. Added together these 100% wins have been scored by the rating agency as saving employers tens of millions dollars a year. In addition, the Democrats gave the Republicans 100% of some administrative changes they asked for which should produce additional savings by reducing friction costs.
- The Real Just Me - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 3:13 pm:
The actual cost in 2016 was LOWER($2.23 per $100 payroll)than it was in 2004 ($2.65) and 2016 ($2.69). Even though our actual cost was lower, our relative ranking was higher (8 in 2016 compared to 23 in 2004)because other states raced to the bottom, not because our costs are higher because in fact they are lower. By the way, our 2016 relative ranking fails to account for the 2017 decrease of nearly 13%, the 3rd largest decrease in the country.
- The Real Just Me - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 3:45 pm:
“The actual cost in 2016 was LOWER($2.23 per $100 payroll)than it was in 2004 ($2.65) and 2016 ($2.69).” Sorry for the typo. That should read: The actual cost in 2016 was LOWER($2.23 per $100 payroll)than it was in 2004 ($2.65) and 2006 ($2.69). And of course this refers to workers compensation.
- Anno - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 3:51 pm:
The fact that dems are telling Rauner to take the win probably means its not a win for him. They would NEVER concede that he won anything
- The Real Just Me - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 3:57 pm:
Anno, you are exactly right. The Governor has defined himself into a corner: Anything that is agreeable to the Democrats cannot, by definition, be a win for him. But that is his own definition. Apparently, the Governor does not believe in “win-win” situations, only in “I win when you lose.” He can change his own definition anytime.
- Mama - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 4:15 pm:
Is Rauner making money off of the state tanking?
- Will Caskey - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 4:21 pm:
Guzzardi is doing a really good job explaining the situation and in a minimally competent caucus he’d be in a leadership position already.
Understand that this is me saying this.
- so... - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 4:21 pm:
==Madigan has been clear from jump street. He’s not going to let that happen. All of the negotiators knew where Madigan stood on this, no one should act surprised. If business owners aren’t seeing the savings from their insurance providers, perhaps the insurance companies are to blame and not the state’s laws.==
That is such horse****
Look at the large companies that self insure for workers comp (i.e. no dastardly insurance companies) - Caterpillar, United, etc… They’re not seeing the kind of reductions they need to either.
The insurance issue is a distraction. A red herring. Horse****
- Skeptic - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 4:29 pm:
I just stumbled on this Dilbert which seems so appropriate: https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/2b/84/4c/2b844c962e24a549f761b15e12baaa14.jpg
- Skeptic - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 4:45 pm:
I will admit, in a way Louis does have a valid point. Consider Rauner’s “substantially similar” (which can be interpreted as 90%) contract to AFSCME. In saying “10% is in the eye of the beholder”, he’s absolutely right. However, that doesn’t mean the beholder is being reasonable, cooperative, or compromising.
- The real just me - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 5:02 pm:
No 10% is not in the eye of the beholder. It is an objective number. You can disagree with the number. But it is not subjective. The workers compensation changes have been scored. The numbers are not subjective. They are right or wrong.
- Yellow Dog Democrat - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 5:03 pm:
=== These aren’t the wins Rauner specifically wants ===
Bingo, @OswegoWilly.
“These aren’t the droids you are looking for.”
The last two and a half years have been one giant Jedi mind trick.
Rauner has never been interested in a budget.
The budget, the turnaround agenda, the battle over the daily news cycle have had a single objective: drive a wedge through the Democratic coalition to give Republicans complete control of all three branches of state government. From there, hopeful gain atleast a foothold in Chicago and Cook County.
Rauner campaigned on a plan to drive a wedge, bust the unions, and give the GOP control of both chambers by 2022.
Those are the wins he cares about.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 5:10 pm:
===Rauner campaigned on a plan to drive a wedge, bust the unions, and give the GOP control of both chambers by 2022.===
This.
The only thing, “only” thing, Rauner can see worth all this “aggravation” (translation: loving the passive destruction) is making sure he (Rauner) can raise his hand in 2019 and use that same hand to sign a Map to make lots mote Raunerite legislators possible.
That’s it.
That’s really it.
- Molly Maguire - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 5:17 pm:
Deep down, I think Rauner fears a win. He fears a win that is made of mutual compromise.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 5:22 pm:
- YDD -
I’m sure there’s emails to that effect too. Maybe spam, maybe “Spam”…
- 47th Ward - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 5:23 pm:
===Horse****===
Maybe. But Madigan has been clear and consistent in his remarks about W/C all along. Rauner? As far as I know, he’s never put pen to paper and offered a list of specific recommendations. He’s asked Greg Baise to negotiate on his behalf, so maybe Baise has drafted some language. But again, unless I missed it, we have no real idea what Rauner means when he says he wants “substantial reforms” to W/C.
It’s almost July 1. It seems to me, somebody who really wanted a deal would make a counter-offer to what’s been placed on the table by the other side. How long do we have to wait for Durkin, Rauner or Baise to make that counter-offer?
Tick-tock. These guys should have been putting this stuff out back in March instead of pulling votes off the Senate’s grand bargain. It’s almost like Rauner doesn’t really want a deal.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 7:10 pm:
Willy and YDD are on it. Wise old sages know that without the labor relations issues Rauner can’t win in 2018. If Madigan deserts labor, they won’t show up in 2018 and Rauner wins the race and the map by extension. If Madigan doesn’t desert labor there will be no budget. No country for old men.
- JohnSchmidt - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 7:56 pm:
- Piece of Work - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 1:59 pm:
What if the GOP comes back with 4.57% for the state income tax? Would the Dems take it? I mean, it is close to 4.95%. Or, would the Dems say its not enough?
I’m sure the Dems would take it as long as the gov/republicans will spell out where the cuts will come from to make up the lost revenue as the gov is calling for a ballances bill…
Think the gov/republicans will do that???
- JohnSchmidt - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 8:02 pm:
Personally, I can’t wait to term limit Rauner, except that’s not entirely accurate..because he is done in 2018 if I have any say in the matter….
Right now I am in the ABR camp — anybody but Rauner…
- Whatever - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 8:22 pm:
=Is Rauner making money off of the state tanking?=
Junk bond rating = higher yields to investors in state bonds, supposedly because the risks are higher. But if you’re good buddies with the man who can increase taxes simply by taking his boot off the necks of the GOP members of the General Assembly (or if you are that guy), the risks are a lot lower than what bond rating agencies and others outside the charmed circle believe.
- RNUG - Wednesday, Jun 28, 17 @ 11:20 pm:
Speaking of unions, remember that the AFSCME contract hanging out there in the courts also involves the State employee / retiree health insurance. The employees / retirees will he facing drastic increases in premiums, deductibles, co-pays, out of pocket, dependent coverage, etc. if the State / Rauner wins.