Capitol - Your Illinois News Radar » Elections have consequences
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      Mobile Version     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Elections have consequences

Monday, Feb 11, 2019

* This SJ-R editorial ignores some recent history

What’s the rush?

That’s the question we have after a measure to increase the state’s minimum wage to $15 an hour over the next six years zoomed out of the Illinois Senate in less than two days. The distressing answer appears to be that new Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker is putting politics above policy on a serious issue that has huge implications for the state’s economy. […]

Given how heavily Pritzker campaigned on raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour, it was expected that a proposal to provide a bump would be brought up this legislative session. But the speed at which it has flown through the Senate — with the promise to do the same in the House this week — is troublesome. Business leaders say they have concerns about the proposal and ideas they want to be considered, but aren’t being heard. It’s disappointing that Pritzker — who wants this approved by the time he gives his first budget address Feb. 20 — is pushing for his first major legislative win at the cost of breaking his vow that he would seek compromise before decisions with far-reaching implications are made.

The legislative language for the pay increase was introduced Wednesday and the Senate voted on the measure the next day. Key details are always missed when any legislation is rushed. What repercussions are being overlooked here, and how much will those consequences cost taxpayers when it’s discovered? […]

Policy and politics are always intertwined at the state Capitol. Unfortunately for Illinois, the governor and Democratic leaders are pushing the political in their rush to hastily approve this bill.

A nearly identical bill passed both the House and Senate in 2017 only to be vetoed by the governor. We’re going to see a lot more of those vetoed bills come up for debate this session.

We’ve also had the benefit of watching Chicago’s minimum wage increases take effect and their impact on lower income neighborhoods.

…Adding… A commenter makes a good point…

Also it was punted on in 2014 because the Speaker wanted an advisory referendum, so this is 5 years late.

…Adding… Another good point in comments…

Just because the legislative calendar resets doesn’t mean everyone’s knowledge and recent history are wiped out.

So, it’s not like this isn’t some foreign concept.

* But, yeah, this was most definitely put on a fast track, partly because it was doable early on (because it had passed before) and partly to get it out of the way before the budget address, after which spring sessions tend to go in a million different directions (I’ve talked about other reasons with subscribers).

This early push has been smart politics by the governor. Whether it’s smart policy or not will be known once the raises start to kick in. But he campaigned incessantly on a $15 an hour minimum wage and, as the headline states, elections have consequences, particularly when you have a friendly General Assembly to work with.

- Posted by Rich Miller        

  1. - Fax Machine - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 10:44 am:

    Also it was punted on in 2014 because the Speaker wanted an advisory referendum, so this is 5 years late.

  2. - wordslinger - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 10:47 am:

    –What’s the rush?–

    Narrator: Illinois’ minimum wage has been $8.25 for eight years. Any increase would not go into effect until Jan. 1, 2020.

    The Daily Herald does a good job on the math and the national scene here.

  3. - Steve - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 10:50 am:

    Elections really do have consequences. The business community can’t pretend that the $15 minimum wage wasn’t an issue in the campaign. It was. It too late now. Yeah, many small businesses might be hurt. Yeah, those without a work history might be hurt. A $15 minimum wage means it’s illegal to work for $25,000 a year even if you want to .

  4. - PJ - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 10:53 am:

    The business groups have been heard on this for several years. And, surprise: what they want is for it is:

    A. not to exist
    B. to take longer to exist
    C. to have so many exemptions that it doesn’t practically exist

    I really don’t know how much more “engagement with the business community” is possible on this bill.

  5. - RNUG - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 10:54 am:

    Honeymoons and political capital only lady so long. You use it while you can …

  6. - Montrose - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 10:54 am:

    “A $15 minimum wage means it’s illegal to work for $25,000 a year even if you want to.”

    The “you are taking away individual freedom” angle is cute. I’m shocked we haven’t seen legions of low-wage workers try to stop the minimum wage hike from going into effect based on this argument.

  7. - Huh? - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 10:55 am:

    “A $15 minimum wage means it’s illegal to work for $25,000 a year even if you want to .”

    The minimum wage law has graduated increases. $25K works out to be a hair less than $12/hour which won’t kick in for a few years. So it will be legal to earn less than $25k for a few years.

  8. - LXB - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 10:58 am:

    If anyone’s so desperate to work for only $25K/year, I guess they could only work part-time.

  9. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 10:59 am:

    When Pritzker won and the General Assembly went 74/40 for the Democracts, the idea that voters may punish Dems for this is a bit premature, and also not an inoculation to do… “whatever”.

    Political capital being used here by Pritzker abd the Dems, this early, is a smart calculation, allowing this to sink in, if/when it passes and is signed, for a number of years, but a reaping of “action” that can be pointed to as actual governing.

  10. - Donnie Elgin - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:02 am:

    “partly to get it out of the way before”.. the next election cycle begins in earnest

  11. - Henry Francis - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:02 am:

    $25k annually.

    To put that in context, I recall a guy who “worked” the last 4 years without taking a salary. Yet 1 year he made over $90,000,000 while not working. Simply letting his money and investments do the work for him.

    That guy made $25k every 150 minutes. Not working.

  12. - lakeside - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:05 am:

    People working 40 hours a week make $330 a week at min wage. Imagine working full time without any days off/vacation and trying to live your life on just over 17k a year.

    And then support the bill.

  13. - Arsenal - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:05 am:

    ==is pushing for his first major legislative win at the cost of breaking his vow that he would seek compromise before decisions with far-reaching implications are made==

    66% of the Senate voted for the bill. I’m not sure why it’s necessary to get more compromises.

  14. - Rich Miller - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:06 am:

    ===he would seek compromise before===

    Technically, he did. Tip credit is in the bill to get restaurants on board.

  15. - Anonymous - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:09 am:

    From the article: $380 million in new state revenues, $348 million in new local government revenues, $87 million saved from people getting off the social safety net. Plus the article points out many employers are already paying $11 and more now, because they benefit from less turn over and less stressed workers.

  16. - Michelle Flaherty - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:16 am:

    A better question would be: Where’s the SJR edit board been the last few years?

    What’s the rush?
    C’mon. What’s taken so long?

    Just because the legislative calendar resets doesn’t mean everyone’s knowledge and recent history are wiped out.

  17. - Rich Miller - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:17 am:

    ===Just because the legislative calendar resets doesn’t mean everyone’s knowledge and recent history are wiped out. ===

    Exactly. Same with weed.

  18. - A 400lb. Guy on a bed - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:18 am:

    =The SJ-R ignores recent history=


  19. - Anonymous - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:28 am:

    I’d love to see the payroll records from legislators’ district offices. How many of them are paying a “living wage” currently or a salary that is below $31,000.

  20. - Montrose - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:33 am:

    Has the business community ever backed a minimum wage hike? That’s a sincere question. My hunch is no and the whole “slow down” argument is simply trying to delay something they will always be opposed to.

    Pritzker did not promise to only support agreed legislation. So far, he has shown he is good at counting to 30 and 60. That’s a lot more important than making sure folks that will never support you are on board.

  21. - MG85 - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:38 am:

    I have always found it interesting that those who ask for more time and “what’s the rush” are the same ones who are not without the rights, not without the power, and not without access.

    If your prevailing argument is “what’s the rush” then you don’t have an argument. You have a losing opinion without substantial facts to back up your claims and you know it.

  22. - Grandson of Man - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:41 am:

    Democrats in my opinion have more to worry about from their own voters rather than Republicans. Turnout was pretty good in 2018. There are many more Democratic than Republican voters in Illinois. Democrats need to enact what their voters want. It’s past time for a minimum wage hike, for many voters.

  23. - The Dude Abides - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 11:56 am:

    It’s not lost on me that the SJR endorsed Rauner for a second term so it’s not surprising that they oppose a minimum wage increase. Their guy got beat by a landslide of historic proportions so now the SJR preaches compromise but not so much when their guy was Governor.

  24. - Anonymous - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 12:11 pm:

    Not sure how anyone missed that this would happen? He campaigned on it, he promised it during his transition now it’s his first agenda item.
    The speed at which it happens? Eh, who cares? Business got the concessions they were going to get. They all were against JB and the Dems anyway. Spent tons of money while this message was being played and still lost.

    Maybe we should be more like Mississippi and Louisiana and have no minimum wage and high poverty but lots of Red votes? Btw both of those states are 2 of the highest who rely on the Fed to fund their annual budgets.

  25. - Oversight - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 12:22 pm:

    It looks like the a large amount of people will be over income limits for social service programs, which are based on Federal Poverty Limits (FPL). While the intentions may be help get people off such programs, the results could be a net loss for the individual. Here’s more income, by the way you don’t qualify for Medicaid, Snap, or Childcare Assistance anymore.

  26. - wordslinger - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 12:38 pm:

    –Here’s more income, by the way you don’t qualify for Medicaid, Snap, or Childcare Assistance anymore.–

    You say that like it’s a bad thing.

    Don’t you want people to earn enough to get off public assistance?

  27. - Rich Miller - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 12:51 pm:

    What word said.

  28. - don the legend - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 12:59 pm:

    What Word said but…. When your new minimum income just barely makes you ineligible for a host of benefits then you are working for just a few dollars. You could get the assistance from the programs without busting your hump for a few dollars a week.

    I disagree as work often leads to better paying work but it is a point of view that is taken by some.

  29. - Oswego Willy - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 1:04 pm:

    It is quite confusing, the argument to keep wages lower… to keep people on public assistance, in any form.

    The “Republican” thinking was to keep as many off any type of government assistance, now the “Republican” thought is to keep the minimum wage low, as the number of possible people getting assistance “may” be reduced by sheer math.

    It’s confusing to both fiscal thought and social service strains.

    I’d like to know what the post Rauner GOP wants in policy that makes sense to any GOP thoughts going forward.

  30. - Scribe - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 1:41 pm:

    Time will tell. I hope it works out for everyone. Many years ago when companies thought their employees were making too much money, they started shipping jobs overseas and using automation. I’m not saying $15 is too much, but that is why companies have accountants.

  31. - Norseman - Monday, Feb 11, 19 @ 2:41 pm:

    === Where’s the SJR edit board been the last few years? ===

    With it’s philosophical head in the sand. Or should I say back in the 1970s.

Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.

* Sherri Garrett responds to Hickey report
* Hickey wants Madigan to be more available to employees
* *** UPDATED x1 *** Mapes responds to Hickey report: "It is my position that the recent criticisms made against me do not truly appreciate the size of the responsibility of my position"
* Fun with numbers
* "Bank On" initiative signed into law
* AG attempts to dismiss lawsuit against gun dealer regulations
* Pritzker, Lightfoot launch new campaign committees
* Planned Parenthood loses federal funding for contraception, cancer screening and STD tests
* *** UPDATED x1 *** Hickey report released
* Sandoval issues another statement, but not another apology
* Pritzker's Chicago office gets a facelift
* *** UPDATED x1 *** Lightfoot wants state approval for city tax hikes
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Yesterday's stories

Visit our advertisers...





Main Menu
Pundit rankings
Subscriber Content
Blagojevich Trial
Updated Posts

August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005


RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0

Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller