63 Comments - Ron Burgundy - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 12:55 pm: Voted yes, but with the caveat that perhaps some smaller group negotiations take place first. With the bond rating issues still out there they can’t just come back in the fall. Work on school reform, address the $15B backlog, property taxes, work comp, etc. Still plenty more that needs to be addressed quickly. - Annonin' - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 12:56 pm: Lots of yes votes..folks mst be hopin’ this will be Gov”Happy” Junk’s latest entry in the Biggest Mistake of the Year. - ILPundit - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 12:58 pm: Given how much of a winner he was in the first round of special sessions, I think this is a great idea /snark - OldIllini - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:00 pm: Voted no. I don’t see what has changed that would get a yes vote on non-budget reforms. - A Jack - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:01 pm: He can if he wants, but I doubt you will see much participation until the veto session. Anyway, property owners won’t see any property tax relief until 2018 for 2017 taxes, since 2016 has already been assessed and is being paid now. They could perhaps up the property tax credit, which would provide some relief and not affect school districts. - DuPage Saint - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:01 pm: I voted yes. Fantasy land they put something good together. Most of them said they still had work to do so let them do it. Reality; I just want to see how quickly everything stalemates - Anonymous - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:01 pm: Yes. It will be a good opportunity to find other Bipartisan issues they can override the Governor’s obstinance on. - Politically Incorrect - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:04 pm: There is no point without some negotiated deal. It costs money to call them to a special session and do nothing. Unless the Speaker is willing to put a bill on the floor, there will be more shows of power like the floor hearing on Workers Comp. - Juice - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:04 pm: Voted no. A Governor is typically in his best position when the GA is not in session. When they’re in, the members get tired and frustrated, and you have a cadre of reporters right their looking for quotes and copy, and legislators willing to air their grievances. When they’re out, the Governor is free to establish much of his own narrative, focus on the governing part of the job, do some bill signings, and move on. In addition, you have 10 to 15 GOP (at a minimum) members who aren’t exactly thrilled with the Governor and his allies right now, and dragging them back in may harden the development of a bipartisan super-majority. But as a Democrat who would prefer to see Governor Rauner not re-elected, if he wants to call endless special sessions, go for it. - Han's Solo Cup - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:04 pm: I can see it now, the first bill to land on his desk makes Carhart the official state coat. And I voted no. I don’t see anything being accomplished by it other than the Governor creating the impression he’s “still fightin’ for the taxpayer”. - RNUG - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:05 pm: Sure. Let’s see if the GA can tee up a progressive income tax amendment. And maybe a $ for $ state school support in exchange for property tax reduction that includes a higher income tax stream completely dedicated for this purpose. - Just Observing - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:05 pm: Voted yes… to raise awareness and foster dialogue about the other issues. - Joe M - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:06 pm: Voted no. Until the Governor is willing to get off his campaign horse, and roll up his sleeves and realistically negotiate something he would have the votes with, it would be a wasted effort. - Real - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:06 pm: I voted yes so more republican legislatures could see how unreasonable Rauner is and break away from him. - Lt Guv - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:07 pm: Yes, there’s still work to be done and commitments were made. It’s best to keep them and keep working in good faith. I do like the idea of letting the committees/working groups do their work first prior to calling everyone back in. - 47th Ward - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:08 pm: I voted no. As a previous commenter said best last week: Never go full Blagojevich. Calling a special session as a political stunt is “full Blagojevich.” If he wants to engage and get his hands dirty negotiating and making a persuasive, public case for his reforms, he doesn’t need a special session to do that. Nothing has even prevented him from speaking out, or meeting with the leaders or any rank-and-file lawmakers at any time to talk about anything. During the most recent special session, for whatever reason, he chose to remain bunkered down in his office, alone, with two table lamps to keep him company. Nobody needs a repeat of that. A special session without his active participation is simply an expensive political stunt and does nothing except invite more comparisons to Rod Blagojevich. - Loop Lady - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:13 pm: To what end? Riding high on his legislative victory An emphatic no. Because through his own actions, he has become radioactive…his caucus is not going to carry his water after the events of the last few weeks…stick a fork in him… - Redraider - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:16 pm: Voted yes, but he won’t because he thinks that he now has his winning message. It is not about making things better in Illinois, it is about him getting re-elected and him and his wealthy friends continuing to capitalize on the misery - Demoralized - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:17 pm: If he doesn’t then he’s been blowing a lot of hot air. If he does he and the Republican leaders might want to actually participate in the discussions, though. You can’t complain that nothing is being done while at the same time refusing to talk about it. - Just Sayin' - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:17 pm: Voted yes because if we do no other reforms our bonds will go junk in 30 or 60 days per the credit bureaus and revenue-increase alone will weaken the State’s financial outlook without additional reforms. But I agree with Ron Burgundy’s comments that smaller/leader discussions and concessions need to occur first. - Pelonski - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:18 pm: No, in my view a special session should be used to address an immediate crisis. They can continue to work on reaching agreements and crafting bills in the meantime, but the voting should all take place in the fall veto session. - northsider (the original) - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:20 pm: Voted no. Time to give it a rest and come back fresh. - Gooner - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:20 pm: The Governor needs to stop playing games and start doing the hard work of the Governor. If we had a competent Governor, in light of the comments from the bond rating agencies, a special session to address some of those issues would be worthwhile. However, with Rauner nothing will get done. He will sit in his office waiting for the leadership to do something and then he will veto it. That is what is going to happen. It is 100% predictable. - Wensicia - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:21 pm: No, it would be a waste of taxpayer’s money. Rauner abdicated his role in this last session, so who can trust him to lead now? He’d rather campaign anyway. - Pundent - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:22 pm: Voted yes. I’ve always been a proponent of reforms. Part of the issue though is while we keep hearing about the need for “reforms” the definition keeps changing and the term has become utterly meaningless. The supposed “turnaround agenda” has morphed so many times that I’m not sure what exactly Rauner wants. I know that it’s wishful thinking but let’s have an honest transparent debate on reforms. - Arock - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:23 pm: The Madigoons had 2 1/2 years to make reforms, they sure aren’t going to make any of any substance before the election after raising taxes on their voting base. I see them possibly giving away the store to AFSCME to stick it to Rauner again to lock in the Union vote. - Anon - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:23 pm: Property tax reform is almost impossible because someone would have to make up the difference for the school funding lost and the state is completely tapped out budget wise with all the pension increases coming that will hoover up any available revenue increases. With 20-25% of the general fund already going to pension obligations (with an avalanche on the horizon) there just isn’t money to deal with the property tax problem as it would result inevitably in the state having to increase spending to local governments. We are going to have to raise taxes again in 2-3 years as it is if we just hold stagnant the commitments we’ve already made. Any new spending is completely off the table at this point absent another sizable tax increase. - Curl of the Burl - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:25 pm: Yes - but only after the education battle is finished. Doing it before then would be pointless and only irritate potential allies. Rauner could come out of this smelling like roses. If he calls a special session for property taxes - and assuming that nothing happens - then he gets his campaign ammo. Fair or not he could get a lot of play from a failed special session. - Anon - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:28 pm: Yes. They need to get working on a pension reform that can pass constitutional muster to make sure the state won’t get downgraded to junk. - sonny chiss - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:29 pm: No….he doesn’t know how to “do the doable”. Not likely that he has learned how yet, very unlikely that he will learn. - wondering - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:30 pm: No, he has been made irrelevant. He for all intents and purposes is a lame duck. - illinifan - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:31 pm: I voted yes. Key to showing Illinois residents that more needs to be done and our legislators are willing to continue the work. If the governor does not call the session, the chamber leaders need to be very clear and active showing that they will work on reforms. If they do the property tax freeze and other efforts the tax increase media blitz may loose a little bite. - Atsuishin - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:31 pm: No it would be a waste of precious taxpayer dollars. With all of the new taxes, Ruaner needs to focus on cutting spending and keeping it as low as possible. State work force needs to be right sized. 5% across-the-board cuts are not enough. Much more is needed and rauner needs to deliver on this. - Collinsville Kevin - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:33 pm: No — let the children enjoy the rest of their summer vacation. - Fixer - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:34 pm: Voted yes. Not because I’m thrilled with the idea of more special session days, but because there just might be a little momentum to get some of the non budgetary items taken care of now. There’s still the credit rating axe swinging over their heads and they just had a successful override of the governor. Get back to work and finish the job. - Workin' - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:35 pm: If not then he’s just waitin’ for someone else to do the job. Or at least that could be the perception. If I were Cullerton I’d be holding hearings in every school district on evidence based approach. And then offer to use Rauner’s soda pop tax to cut property taxes statewide. - Anon221 - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:38 pm: No. If a Special Session is called for anything, it should be for the education reform bill work. Something is going to have to be done very soon. Either send SB1 to Rauner and let him veto it and then override if there are enough votes. If there aren’t enough votes, get to work and show that bipartisanship can become even stronger. If Barickman wants to be petulant and embrace Raunerism, let him. Once the K-12 pressure starts to build, there may be more than Republicans than Raunerites in the House and Senate. - Ahoy! - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:42 pm: Is the school funding formula considered a non-budget item? i would say it is and that he should call special sessions to deal with that before anything else. I would also say that pension reform and workers compensation are budget issues since both could save taxpayers money. Should the Governor call legislators back to deal with term limits or fair maps or another issue that is not budget related? No. Bottom line, State has not done nearly enough to deal with our financial issues and they have so much work left to do. Given them all 2 weeks off and then get them back into town because they still got to fix this mess they have created. - Last Bull Moose - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:49 pm: Voted no. Negotiate the deals first. Then, if useful, call a special session to conduct the structured vote. No reason to believe that they can negotiate a deal. - Curl of the Burl - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:50 pm: This is why I stated yesterday that the House should have done their budget work BEFORE the end of regular session. By delaying the inevitable (i.e. budget and tax votes) everyone is now tired and in need of a break. Had this been done earlier a special session or two would have been more palatable. If a special session is called now I wonder how many people would actually show up. - Anon221 - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:54 pm: Curl of the Burl- If it means K-12 schools get to open and stay open, I really doubt many will “skip class”. - d.p.gumby - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 1:56 pm: No. Brucie is toxic…the less involved he is the greater the possibility of something being accomplished. But then most of his agenda is pure rhetoric and not legitimate policy. Now, if they want to address progressive income tax as reform of property tax, go to it. - downstate hack - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:03 pm: yes, There is so much more to do. Mainly cut budgets more to get the State in a position to actually move to solve the still overwhelming budget deficits. - Curl of the Burl - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:04 pm: 221 - my point was more so in reference to the non-budgetary items (i.e. property taxes). Education reform is budget-related because of the SB 9 booby trap. It has to be dealt with. I wish the House had done the budget work before the end of session so that everything else could have been dealt with over June and now. - Ducky LaMoore - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:04 pm: I voted no because it seems like it would be a big waste of time on the taxpayers’ dime. But after reading comments, I will say yes. The education reform has to get done. I wouldn’t mind seeing the two or even four year property tax freeze happen. Progressive income tax on the ballot in 2018? Sure. Meaningful worker’s comp reform? If it does indeed exist without making us a state that if you lose an arm, “Here’s 5 grand, good luck.” That backlog, whoa, is huge. That needs to be addressed. A dedicated revenue stream would be much appreciated. Still a ton of work to do. - Earnest - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:05 pm: I voted ‘no.’ He should keep his focus on what he does best and keep campaigning. I’d love to see the legislative branch making progress on these issues though,and continue the conversation about spending and revenue. - Cook County Commoner - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:11 pm: No. Gov. Rauner just got beat up, with help from his own party members. Time to lay back, especially when there’s no credible evidence that anything would be accomplished, except bad press. - Anon221 - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:20 pm: Curl of the Burl- If the reforms had continued to be placed before the budget issues, then we would be back in the same situation we were for the last two go-rounds: Stop Gap and K-12 only. Rauner would have kept vetoing or interfering to drag it out as well. Reforms can and probably will be made, but to keep saying “we’re close, oh so close” was becoming disingenuous. Andresson and the other Republicans who stood up and took the hard votes saw that and said that in a variety of ways. Some had to get hurt in the pocketbook a bit like Reggie Phillips to really start seeing the pain more of the same would have caused. - RNUG - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:28 pm: == They need to get working on a pension reform that can pass constitutional muster to make sure the state won’t get downgraded to junk. == Then they need to pass another revenue bill with the income stream dedicated to paying off the pension debt … and not substitute it for existing payments like the did with the lottery and education funding. - Norseman - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:29 pm: No. A special session will only bring further embarrassment. There is still leverage to be had with SB 1. If, and for Rauner that is a BIG IF, he wants to avoid further public losses, Rauner should work through Durkin and Brady on some deal to sign SB 1 or come up with an agreed replacement along with other “reform” measures. Working cooperatively on 75-80% would be a lot better than looking like a loser shooting for 98%. Calling a special session sets a negative tone and only increases the cost to taxpayers. - PublicServant - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:43 pm: Sure and what would really make the session special is him providing numbers to support his items. Just sayin. - RNUG - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:47 pm: == I would also say that pension reform and workers compensation are budget issues since both could save taxpayers money. == I don’t believe there is any legal pension reform left to the current structures that will save any significant amount of money in the short term (1-5 years). The just passed changes are about all you can do within the constraints of the IL SC decisions. However … The only reform that would save taxpayers money long term, shifting to making current actuarial payments, actually requires more money in the short term. And … Now if you want to split hairs and define state taxpayers and local taxpayers (property taxes) as different classes of people, and you are willing to pit them against each other, then there is one or two things you can do to slightly ease the State burden while increasing the property owner’s burden. 1) Do a complete shift of the “normal” pension cost for teachers (TRS). It will need to be phased in, so the school districts can absorb it. And it must be iron-clad that any state level savings be paid into the pension funds in addition to the normally scheduled payments. 2) For future teacher’s contracts, ban (or phase out) any school district pickup of the employee portion of the pension contribution. For some (but not all) school districts, this will free up money that can then be used to pay the employer portion that was cost shifted from the State. Note: expect #2 to be challenged in court; I would give a ban something like 65/35 odds of surviving for various reasons. Note: for purposes of these proposals, I define school district as any K-12 school or community college that has tax levy authority. - Chicagonk - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:47 pm: No - My hope is that Madigan takes a cue from Radogno and realizes it’s time to pass the torch. - don the legend - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:48 pm: Voted no. That 50 million is gathering dust. Only about 525 days to spend it. That’s a little less than $100,000 per day of campaign advertising to spend. - Yooper in Diaspora - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 2:50 pm: While it does cost money, calling for a special session on some of the non-budget issues would allow for bipartisan work on those issues without the pressure of having to pass a budget. But now I find myself wondering: can the legislative leaders also call for a special session at this time? And who gets to set the agenda of what is addressed? - walker - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 3:23 pm: Not until Durkin, and Brady meet with Democratic leaders and negotiate compromises on the remaining “non-budget” items. No sense in having a special session with no bills to vote on, especially if one side is not willing even to meet. It would be great if they were willing to deal, and compromises were available to vote on. That is still what we should be working toward, for the good of the state. - wordslinger - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 3:33 pm: Well, obviously, yes, because they are all critically important to the future of the state. Whatever they are these days. I kid. The governor will want to keep his “reforms” around as campaign talking points. He’s been in full campaign mode for two years. His true interest was squeeze the beast, and he had a good run on that, from his point of view. The other stuff was just obfuscation. I mean, the Great Salesmen couldn’t put together a coherent sales pitch for more than two years. - Illinois Refugee - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 3:42 pm: Absolutely not. Madigan said yesterday they still had work to do so I assume they’ll be back next week without a special session. If you can’t take Madigan for his word, who can you trust? - Oswego Willy - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 3:46 pm: Vote “No” “Why?” Unless Rauner proves that 90% of getting what he wants is workable, then have the working groups meet, informally, with Rauner approval, then call everyone down and roll call the “reforms” The “90% still no dice” take is Dr. Purvis being honest. Not a good trait to pretend Rauner is reasonable. - VanillaMan - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 3:51 pm: No. Rauner needs a Plan B. We’re all sick and tired of his Plan A after hearing it since 2014. Rauner needs to reboot completely. Maybe someone will convince him that he needs to govern. - CEA - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 3:54 pm: Voted yes, out of a small shred of misplaced optimism that there may be momentum to capitalize upon. A very, very small shred. - Bogey Golfer - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 4:21 pm: Voted ‘no’. Perhaps an extended fall session. But think a lot of the GA needs to take stock of themselves, and see what issues are winable, and which ones need deferal (to after 2018). - Captain Ed Smith - Friday, Jul 7, 17 @ 4:35 pm: Why? He called a special session for the budget and didn’t participate in the process. Then when he got a budget that by all accounts was better than the “capitol Compromise” he vetoed it. He has proven that enough is not ever enough. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.