“Is that the guy from the Policy Institute?” House Speaker Michael Madigan asked his press secretary after an Illinois News Network reporter recently tried to ask Madigan a question at the Statehouse.
The Illinois Policy Institute transferred ownership of the network to the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity back in January. But they all share the same street address. “Same difference,” Madigan’s press secretary said in response to his boss’ question.
“When are you guys gonna fold your tent?” Madigan asked the reporter.
It’s true that the Policy Institute is currently in a very weak spot. Before Bruce Rauner ran for office, the institute was the go-to source for fiscally conservative talking points. Rauner was a dream candidate for an advocacy group that bills itself as a think tank. The anti-union tax-hater was a perfect fiscal and ideological match for them. The Institute backed him throughout the long governmental impasse and helped gin up rabid opposition to an income tax hike, then unleashed a furious response against the legislative Republicans who crossed Rauner and voted for that tax increase.
But then the group helped engineer Rauner’s staff purge in July of 2017, and everything went downhill from there.
Rauner abruptly fired all of his loyal top staff without helping them find other employment, which is just not done in this business. He fired the people who knew where all the bones were buried. And, man, were they ever hungry for revenge.
The former Rauner staffers who’d been with him since the 2014 campaign were replaced in large part by Illinois Policy Institute staffers and other people of that ilk. Those folks proved to be a disaster and almost all were forced out. Rauner not only hurt his own “brand” by associating his government with the institute, but the institute hurt its brand by associating itself so closely with an unpopular governor.
When Rauner signed HB40 into law, he drove another wedge between himself and the institute. The group’s chief executive officer, John Tillman, who had worked closely with Rauner during the first few years of the governor’s tenure, lashed out and called him “Benedict Rauner” for previously telling Republican legislators and others that he would veto the bill, which paid for abortions of Medicaid recipients. After the Sun-Times and ProPublica Illinois published an investigation into the institute’s intricate web of not-for-profit and for-profit activities, Rauner publicly vowed to not give the group “another nickel.”
And then Rauner got thumped like a drum in the November election, scoring just 39 points while losing by 15. Rauner is soon to be gone, but can the Illinois Policy Institute come back?
Throughout the campaign, Democrat J.B. Pritzker brushed aside questions about “reforming” the state’s pension systems, a major priority for the Illinois Policy Institute. Pritzker flatly refused to entertain any ideas for lowering pension payments to current government workers and retirees, saying a pension is a promise and he intended to keep that promise. He’s on the opposite side of the institute. The same goes for his support for union rights and increasing the minimum wage.
But right at the very top of the Illinois Policy Institute’s priority list is an issue that was also one of Rauner’s most important missions as governor: Stop a graduated income tax. The group is funded, after all, by people like Rauner. They want to keep as much of their piles of money as they possibly can, and they hate giving it to the government.
Pritzker openly campaigned for a progressive income tax. He can be seen as the Illinois Policy Institute’s ultimate nightmare: A wealthy liberal Democrat with massive legislative super-majorities.
There’s another way of looking at this, however. Pritzker could also be seen as the institute’s dream. They no longer have to defend a badly flawed governor, and eventually the richest Illinoisans will be energized when Pritzker begins to move his agenda through the legislature, particularly the graduated income tax. The Illinois Policy Institute will be a ready-made receptacle for their mad money.
Expecting Tillman and his crew to glumly pack their bags and move to Italy with the governor is not how this works. If he plays it right, Tillman could eventually rebuild his group even bigger than it was.
The unions didn’t go away when Rauner won, after all. They strengthened their political hand more than ever before because they had such a “perfect” ideological foil.
So, instead of folding their tent, Rauner’s loss just might be Tillman’s gain.
- wordslinger - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:36 am:
I’m quite certain that Tillman’s grift will pay off much better in opposition. Tickle some rich cats in their grievance zones, then ask for a fat check to “fight” for them.
Dorm-room-debate-club opposition is their bread-and-butter. When that crew had clout with the governor and actually had a chance at governing, it was spectacular FUBAR.
- VanillaMan - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:37 am:
When Rauner failed, so did IPI. The two of them turned ILGOP governing into a laughingstock with zero credibiity. They consumated. They governed. It was ruinous.
What gave Rauner a win four years ago is still alive. Rauner and Tillman put it in a coma, so it will take a new leader and think tank to get it out again.
Tillman can talk, fewer are listening.
- ItsMillerTime - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:37 am:
I agree, groups like the IPI thrive being the opposition to “something” because they certainly can’t actually do anything. JB will the best thing for them, all the conservatives will come together and they can find some rich donors to pay for everything they want.
Which I always found amusing, IPI lectures everyone on fiscal responsibility but depend on other peoples money to actually stay afloat.
- Grandson of Man - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:40 am:
** “reforming” the state’s pension systems, a major priority for the Illinois Policy Institute **
The IPI had no problem with Rauner getting rich off of public employee pensions and gladly accepted his foundation’s $625,000 donation.
“Expecting Tillman and his crew to glumly pack their bags and move to Italy”
Indiana is much closer and would be a much easier move.
- G'Kar - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:45 am:
The worst thing for any “advocacy” group, be it IPI or conservative talk radio, is to have “their” side in power. Who would they oppose? Where would the anger and, more importantly, the $$$$ come from if the government was doing what those groups want?
- 19th Ward guy - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:46 am:
Agree in principle with the article, but Tillman not the guy. He’s toxic with donors and the Chicago media–neither trust him. Sun Times piece pulled back the curtain on the finances and the Proft/Tillman $ scheme didn’t sit well. And, I believe the majority of the funding comes from Uncle Dick. After going on a decade without flipping a seat, I’m guessing even a tone deaf guy like DU has had enough,
- 47th Ward - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:49 am:
It’s kind of like a dog chasing a car, wondering what the heck the dog is going to do if he ever manages to catch the car. Tillman got his man in Rauner. He got everything he could ever dream of in a Governor. And together they proved they had no idea what to do now that they had it.
Yep. I think Tillman is going to love Governor Pritzker. It’s so much easier complaining from the sidelines and sending out fundraising e-mails than it is to get things accomplished in the arena.
Tillman was made to be an outsider throwing stones. That’s his gift, that and separating gullible millionaires from their money. He’s going to be just fine.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:50 am:
===guy like DU has had enough===
People have been saying that for years. Unless you can point to new evidence, I think I’m on pretty safe ground in saying you are wrong.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:51 am:
===depend on other peoples money to actually stay afloat===
Name me one not-for-profit which doesn’t.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:52 am:
What IPI and Tillman were able to do with Rauner and Raunerism is quite interesting to how grifting works and failing at governing occurs… when your own policy is to grift off being a minority voice.
That’s it. Tillman is best when his voice and IPI are the minority voice to real honest governing.
The monies and grifting need angst, not from having to do the lift, but being the complainers of how those actually doing the lift are doing it.
That summer, the summer where Diana Rickert reminded us all Rauner is a white man so he can’t have an opinion on racism, was about “the deal”… lest we forget… the grifters would get the levers…
Proft and Besler and their grift to run the political…
Tillman, and the IPI running the governing…
… just as Diana Rauner wanted, dismissing the Superstars, for branding Diana Rauner wanted.
Fallout, and a fall from grace, IPI, Tillman, Besler, Proft… the polling… it was important first for the agrieved parties renounce Rauner, than take him back, once lost to the politics. Then the money, the minority status, the marginalized polices, the grifting becomes the “last hope for Illinois”
Tillman and Co did “enough” phony to seem to mend with Rauner on narrow things, but will be free of Rauner to grift again because Rauner imploded the ILGOP.
Tillman and the IOP will gain so much more now, with the “one party rule destroying Illinois” drivel to drive results… of grifting.
Great read, Rich, per usual.
- Hamlet's Ghost - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 9:55 am:
==It’s true that the Policy Institute is currently in a very weak spot. Before Bruce Rauner ran for office, the institute was the go-to source for fiscally conservative talking points.==
It remains true that many of those “fiscally conservative talking points” are simply wrong.
As is “1 + 1 = 3″ kind of wrong.
Or the “Earth is flat” kind of wrong.
Or the “Earth is about 7000 years old” kind of wrong.
- Just Me - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:03 am:
The strange thing is that all those legislative liaisons are now going to try and get lobbying jobs. I wouldn’t hire any of them.
- Norseman - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:05 am:
Sadly, Rich is spot on. IPI will thrive in its opposition role. The IL GOP is dependent upon them for their misleading “research” to back-up GOP policy positions. Word pointed out IPI’s worse mistake during the last four years was their actual attempt to govern. They are a propaganda organization and that is what they will now focus on as JB tries to govern.
- Ok - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:09 am:
I think what the Illinois Policy Institute learned, more quickly than anyone in this state’s history, is that life is far easier lobbing stones at the house than having to build it up brick by brick.
This is more their speed.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:11 am:
===The strange thing is that all those legislative liaisons are now going to try and get lobbying jobs. I wouldn’t hire any of them.===
The incoming Pritzker Administration must look very deeply at IPI/Proft ties and realize they can be nice folks, but they are Raunerites, or were believers in Raunerism, that led to hurting the state the administration now inherits.
They aren’t there to help.
- Give Me A Break - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:12 am:
“The strange thing is that all those legislative liaisons are now going to try and get lobbying jobs. I wouldn’t hire any of them.”
I’m not sure they can lobby given the EO their boss signed. This might be a test of the power of gvt being able to prevent someone from making a living in their chosen field.
- City Zen - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:19 am:
==IPI lectures everyone on fiscal responsibility but depend on other peoples money to actually stay afloat.==
That pretty much covers every business model.
How do you think the CTBA stays afloat?
- Steve - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:23 am:
John Tillman is a bright and capable guy. There’s no doubt that Pritzker plus Madigan working for a progressive income tax will motivate some rich people to give. No doubt. But, Mike Madigan might decide he doesn’t want a progressive income tax. Madigan is no dumby . He knows that if a progressive income tax comes to Illinois, many voters would want to change public pensions and go to term limits. So, Tillman’s operative will be a function of Mike Madigan’s time table. The status quo has been very good to Mike Madigan, why rock the boat if you don’t have to?
- RNUG - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:25 am:
== Tillman was made to be an outsider throwing stones. ==
Not just Tillman but Rauner too.
Even Pat Quinn to some extent was more effective changing policy as an outsider than as Governor.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:26 am:
===He knows that if a progressive income tax comes to Illinois, many voters would want to change public pensions and go to term limits.===
What do you base this on?
“A progressive income tax change is gateway legislation. Next thing you know… “
- wordslinger - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:28 am:
–But, Mike Madigan might decide he doesn’t want a progressive income tax.–
He’s been on board publicly for months.
And he’s not the all-powerful Oz. The partisan talking points of the Rauner/IPI/tronc propaganda machine aren’t meant to be taken literally by sentient beings.
- El Conquistador - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:31 am:
The IPI and Rauner hate government. You simply can’t hate something back to health.
Criticism is easy. Making something better requires work and that you actually want to make it better.
- Anonymous - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:34 am:
Madigan loves Government, how has he worked to bring it back to health and restore citizens faith in it
- Rich Miller - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:35 am:
===So, Tillman’s operative will be a function of Mike Madigan’s time table.===
So after years of bashing him as evil, now he’s your only hope? lol
Funny how politics works.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:37 am:
===Madigan loves Government, how has he worked to bring it back to health and restore citizens faith in it===
Welp, the voters had so much faith in Democrats at the Illinois House level, there are more Dems in the Illinois House than at any time MJM has been Speaker.
How’s that?
- DeseDemDose - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:41 am:
IPI depends on other peoples money but they should give refunds when completely incompetent.
- Arsenal - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:44 am:
Another reason IPI/Tillman is in a surprisingly good position is that there’s a power vacuum on the right in Illinois, and IPI/Tillman, given that they already have a media apparatus, are well-positioned to fill it.
- Steve - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:45 am:
If the Illinois constitution can be changed to allow a progressive income tax, it can also be change to alter public pensions. Yes, the two are separate things. But, public finance is taxes and expenditures. If you can change one side of the equations many voters might be open to the other. I’m sure Mike Madigan has thought about this. We could have had a progressive income years ago if Mike Madigan wanted it. So, what I’m saying here isn’t too crazy. Once, you open a can of worms if could affect the Democrat majority in the House. Yes, Madigan says he’s on board for the change. He could have had the resolution on the ballot weeks ago but he decided not to. Stay tuned, because we are due for a national recession in the next 24 months and that may delay the resolution. I don’t see Madigan pushing a progressive income tax if he thinks voters will be voting on it in the middle of a recession.
- Oswego Willy - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:54 am:
===the Democrat majority===
Ugh…
===If you can change one side of the equations many voters might be open to the other. I’m sure Mike Madigan has thought about this.===
Where are the 71 and 36 to change, from the point of passage on, the Illinois constitution?
Why do you think Rauner held a state hostage for an entire GA, 2 years.
The votes aren’t there.
If two years without a budget and the damage done didn’t destroy labor… you think that passing a progressive income tax will?
Doubt that.
===We could have had a progressive income years ago if Mike Madigan wanted it. So, what I’m saying here isn’t too crazy.===
Unless you can point to 71 and 36 that were for it, then your assessment has no truth to your want of it.
===I don’t see Madigan pushing a progressive income tax if he thinks voters will be voting on it in the middle of a recession.===
Depends on the scales and where the whom who pay more fall.
It’s not “because Madigan” when the votes haven’t existed outside Madigan.
- Jocko - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 10:56 am:
==it can also be changed to alter public pensions==
You said “alter” when you mean to say “stiff”.
- Ginhouse Tommy - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 11:08 am:
I said at the time that IPI had so alienated members of the ILGOP that after Rauner is gone they will have a hard time getting those members to even listen to them. They will find doors closed and with no answer when they knock. They’re locked out now. They made their own mess and now they have to live with it. Let’s face it, the Republicans have a right to be mad.
- wordslinger - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 11:11 am:
==it can also be changed to alter public pensions==
Pensions going forward can be and have been altered legislatively.
As far as the state stealing money earned under existing contracts, see Article 1, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution.
- The Way I See It - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 11:11 am:
Uihlein may continue to fund IPI ad Tillman, but when other donors are asked for cash, they may be a bit more discerning about results.
That said, it is a huge opportunity for Tillman and friends. Rauner fundamentally broke the ILGOP. Having their own easy source of funding seems to have caused them to forget how to raise their own money - numbers outside of donations from big donors were anemic - and to do the political work that involves things other than writing big checks to TV/radio/internet vendors.
Since they have the biggest bullhorn and no strong competition, they may be in a position to take control of the ILGOP.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 11:44 am:
===If the Illinois constitution can be changed to allow a progressive income tax, it can also be change to alter public pensions===
False equivalence.
- Skeptic - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 11:49 am:
” it can also be change to alter public pensions.” Not retroactively it can’t.
- Griffin - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 11:51 am:
I look forward to the discussion of publicly mocking a reporter and the attendant First Amendment threat/degradation of democratic norms/etc. /s
To the main point, it depends on what IPI aspires to be. If it’s an organization that can play the foil on a few key economic issues, then they’ll be fine and certainly better positioned to draw attention with a Rauner L. If it’s to be more than that (it is), they will need to go through their own re-org.
- Lucky Pierre - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 1:05 pm:
Maybe Mike Madigan can have the reporter asking the uncomfortable questions expunged from the record
- Thomas Paine - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 1:28 pm:
Tillman and Proft are not going away as long as Uhlein is writing checks, and Uhlein shows no signs of writers’ cramp.
I would not go so far as to say that Rauner’s loss is Tillman’s gain, its just not Tillman’s loss necessarily.
The bigger problem for Tillman is Scott Walker’s loss. Uhlein can’t be Kingmaker of the Midwest if he can’t hold onto his own castle.
Also, does Uhlein really want to get into a spending contest with Pritzker? The big unknown right now is whether Pritzker will keep the cash flowing now that he is governor.
- RNUG - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 2:33 pm:
== If the Illinois constitution can be changed to allow a progressive income tax, it can also be change to alter public pensions. ==
The income tax change would be a forward looking one (new / next year return).
Any pension change would also be a forward looking one (new hires). But you don’t need to change the State Constitution to make changes to the pension going forward (for new hires). The courts have allowed that in the past. You would need to change the State Constitution if you wanted to eliminate protection of the pensions for new hires.
Regardless, you can’t change the current pensions to involuntarily diminish them; the IL SC had been consistently clear on that for 40+ years. And if you can’t reduce the Tier 1 pensions, you can’t eliminate the pension debt … which has been the whole point of the attempted “reforms” … to lower or eliminate the pension debt so all the missed payments don’t have to be repaid.
—–
Voluntary consideration would be a legal way to change the existing Tier 1 pensions. Here is an example of a benefit swap that the courts would most likely consider legal (based loosely on a past change from non-coordinated to coordinated pensions).
Offer each employee or retiree a choice to keep the current fixed 3% AAI or to switch to an uncapped CPI-U based COLA.
If inflation stays low, the State wins by whatever amount the CPI-U stays under 3%. (The State would have won big the past decade.) If inflation takes off and goes over 3%, the State wins and the retirees lose.
If you don’t like that proposal, then come up with another benefit swap. Maybe offer a up front cash buyout in exchange for voluntatily switching to the Tier 2 COLA structure. But if you structure it heavily in favor of the State (like the limited bills that did pass), don’t expect s lot of people to switch.
- Shamrockery - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 3:04 pm:
===If the Illinois constitution can be changed to allow a progressive income tax, it can also be change to alter public pensions===
Me next!
“If the Illinois constitution can be changed to allow a progressive income tax, it can also be change to” give everyone their own personal unicorn.
Rats, I guess Rich was right. Just because you put the words “If the Illinois constitution can be changed to allow a progressive income tax, it can also be change to” in front of something doesn’t magically make it possible. Or constitutional.
Too bad. I really wanted that unicorn…
- Skeptic - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 3:16 pm:
RNUG: I’m confused, with your suggestion, if inflation stays low, the state wins, but if inflation takes off, the state wins?
- RNUG - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 3:28 pm:
== RNUG: I’m confused, with your suggestion, if inflation stays low, the state wins, but if inflation takes off, the state wins? ==
Mistake on my part. Hard to see it all on a phone even though I try to proof before hitting enter.
What it should read is: If inflation takes off over 3%, the retirees win and the State loses.
- Norseman - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 4:52 pm:
RNUG, there you go again. Trying to bring reasonable ideas to the table. The money folks don’t want reasonable. They want to cut retiree benefits to save as much money as they think they can get away with.
- RNUG - Monday, Dec 3, 18 @ 5:23 pm:
== The money folks don’t want reasonable. ==
Well, -Norseman-, the money people can be reasonable and maybe save a little bit on the pension debt or they can continue to be unreasonable and save nothing.
And I’m not so sure there would be that much savings with the need to set up bookkeeping for additional categories of retirees. Add in the uncertainty of budgeting 6 months in advance for an unknown COLA and it could be a bigger budget management problem than the current system which is at least consistent and predictable.