* There are actually two stories in this One Illinois piece about the passage of HB40, so let’s take them one at a time. I’ve confirmed this part myself…
Staffers for Gov. Rauner lobbied behind the scenes to quash a controversial abortion-rights bill last year in an attempt to keep it off his desk and avoid a politically fraught decision on whether to sign it, according to state emails obtained by One Illinois. […]
The emails, obtained in a Freedom of Information Act request with the state Department of Healthcare and Family Services, show state staffers planning to “shore up” opposition among 13 Democratic representatives, most of whom they considered “ours” on the issue. […]
“This is who we need to shore up on HB40,” Donovan Griffith, Rauner’s senior House liaison, writes in an email Feb. 9, 2017, to Director of Governmental Affairs Wendy Butler and DHFS Chief of Staff Shawn McGrady. What follows is a list of 13 representatives — all Democrats, and all of whom eventually voted for HB40 when it passed the House by a 62-55 tally the following April.
“They worked to defeat it because they didn’t want the bill to end up on Rauner’s desk so that he would have to just sign it or veto it,” said Terry Cosgrove, president of Personal PAC, an abortion-rights group that actually received a candidate questionnaire from Rauner in 2014 promising to support the bill. The Rauners also lent financial support to abortion rights as well with contributions to various agencies.
By April 2017, however, Rauner was promising GOP legislators he’d veto the bill as a way of keeping them in line opposed to a budget.
That was probably a smart political move, considering the governor’s consistency issues, the grumbling within the caucuses about the impasse and the pressure he was feeling from Mrs. Rauner. Just keep it off his desk and he doesn’t have to make any decisions. A commenter who clearly has insider knowledge filled us in earlier this week on our question about Rauner’s biggest mistakes…
5) Signing HB 40 after promising the GOP caucus that he would AV it. Polling was clear that vetoing the public funding but favoring the trigger language would be net positive with voters. He had Cupich for cover. And he could bash Democrats for holding up his AV which enshrined the basic right to choose — in other words, if Dems rejected the AV, they put women at risk. This move led to his primary and the rest is history.
* You may recall that after the governor said he would veto HB40, Healthcare and Family Services Director and former Planned Parenthood Vice Chair Felicia Norwood cut a video to defend Rauner’s decision. Here’s that backstory…
Emails also find first lady Diana Rauner joining efforts to organize responses before and after the governor signed HB40 into law last September. She also suggests that DHFS Director Felicia Norwood was not informed of the governor’s decision to sign the controversial bill until moments before a news conference on the signing, and that Norwood was also instructed to withhold information on the bill’s ultimate cost when it was still in play in the General Assembly. […]
The original bill had established that there would be no economic impact from expanding abortion coverage in Medicaid and the state’s employee insurance program, but suddenly there were suggestions that there would be a significant cost, and Norwood wasn’t clarifying the issue. “There were all kinds of numbers floating around, which was our first indication that they were trying to sink the bill,” Feigenholtz said.
DHFS issued a $1.8 million annual cost estimate, which differed from an analysis of identical legislation the previous year that claimed no cost.
* Back to the story…
In return for her loyalty on the issue, Rauner apparently left Norwood hanging out to dry. After the bill cleared the House in April and the Senate in May, it was held until being dropped abruptly on the governor’s desk on Sept. 25, 2017.
Three days later, Diana Rauner writes to Norwood again in an email, seeming to suggest the DHFS director was left in the dark about Rauner deciding to sign HB40 until just moments before a news conference on the announcement.
“Felicia somehow you were not looped in and the presser is at 3,” she writes. “This was such a close hold that no one knew who was in charge of telling you.”
According to the FOIA’d email, that was sent at 2:57 p.m. the same day.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:01 pm:
The brand of Diana Rauner keeps getting tarnished by emails written… by Diana Rauner.
Raunerism is a strange, strange politic.
- VanillaMan - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:14 pm:
Thanks for the free abortions, Bruce.
Nice legacy you got going there.
We’re flat busted, and over-taxed, but at least we can get our undesired children terminated.
- Perrid - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:23 pm:
Hmmm.
“The Hyde Amendment is one of the most discriminatory laws in the country,” [state Rep. Sara Feigenholtz of Chicago] said, “and I was determined to rid Illinois of it. And I did.”
And a few sentences before:
“Feigenholtz emphasized, however, that for her it was not power politics but about fairness…”
Seems a little contrary, saying it’s not about power and then emphasizing that SHE had done it. I have no problem giving her credit (or blame, depending) for the law, I think she probably earned it, but the humble brag is unimpressive.
- A guy - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:28 pm:
==“The Hyde Amendment is one of the most discriminatory laws in the country,” [state Rep. Sara Feigenholtz of Chicago] said==
Understanding all sides of this very controversial issue, this procedure is still an elective one. Medicaid doesn’t pay for any other elective procedures that I’m aware of.
This whole thing just stinks.
- A guy - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:29 pm:
And it turns out is does cost money…what a shock.
- Perrid - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:32 pm:
A little off topic, but the only way these abortions, an extra service the state didn’t pay for, could be budget neutral is if you account for not giving services to the pregnant woman or the baby once it’s born. So because the kid isn’t around, they won’t be on Medicaid or a dependent in the Employee Health Plan, and therefore won’t cost money.
I just feel like that’s an important clarification on the statement that it’s budget neutral. If I’m wrong please educate me, but that’s the only way I can come up with paying for a new service at no cost.
- Moderate - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:39 pm:
Someone needs to explain to Diana Rauner that she wasn’t elected to anything. And someone needs to explain to Bruce Rauner what a promise is.
- Perrid - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:42 pm:
Another thought: Norwood took off for Anthem in June. I wonder if this little debacle factored into her deciding to jump off the sinking ship early. Pure speculation.
- LTSW - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:45 pm:
Period, you are correct on your budget neutral assumptions.
- lakeside - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:48 pm:
A guy - getting a broken leg set is also an elective procedure by that standard. Your life will be very different if you don’t get it set, but you don’t have to get it done. Medicaid covers such procedures precisely because they are life-altering. (I think we should stick to the post and not get into a debate over abortion, but abortion is not cosmetic.)
- Nordberg - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:51 pm:
=And someone needs to explain to Bruce Rauner what a promise is.=
He’s not in charge, remember?
- Cheryl44 - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 12:57 pm:
I think this is the one good thing Rauner did.
- thornwood - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 1:22 pm:
it is actually budget positive. having less unwanted poor children means less medicaid spend for all and less incarceration costs for the small number that would have offended in 18 plus years. i think future taxpayers will think this is the only good thing rauner did in his thankfully short one term.
- Perrid - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 1:47 pm:
@Thornwood, careful now, getting a little close to eugenics talk.
- I Miss Bentohs - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 1:57 pm:
The Rauners knew better than to let Norwood know anything ahead of time. She has a great Finance crew at HFS and thus she would have learned the truth and importantly they know she would have told the truth.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 2:15 pm:
–And it turns out is does cost money…what a shock.–
Read the post. The administration changed their original analysis of zero cost when they decided to try to kill the bill.
For a guy who never said a peep about piling on $10 billion in unpaid bills, you’re awfully concerned about a dodgy at best $1.8 million cost estimate.
What would you prefer for poor women? Coat hangers? They’re cheaper.
- Last Bull Moose - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 2:34 pm:
Sounds like the staff were doing their best to protect Rauner politically.
The Rauners wanted publicly funded abortions and got them. So they had to lie and undercut their employees. That is their standard operating practice.
I am glad the right to an abortion is locked into Illinois law. Liked the Roe v Wade rules, but hated that the Supreme Court shortcircuited the political process. It has been a poisonous element ever since.
I don’t like public funding of private goods that are opposed by many on religious and moral grounds. To me, that is like establishing a state church.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Oct 17, 18 @ 2:39 pm:
–“Felicia somehow you were not looped in and the presser is at 3,” she writes. “This was such a close hold that no one knew who was in charge of telling you.”–
No one in charge, again.
Others have said it before, but the Rauners at times bring to mind Tom and Daisy Buchanan. Under the bus, under the roadster, same thing.