[Comments are now open.]

* Sen. Chapin Rose (R-Mahomet) during Senate debate tonight about raises for care workers…

Well, here’s what we didn’t do. To get to 150 percent of minimum wage for those development disabled workers. [A] bipartisan bill, Senate Bill 1690, Leader Koehler. Only takes $2 an hour to get to 150 percent of minimum wage. Why do I say 150 percent? Because that’s where we were when Governor Pritzker became governor. We’ve gone backwards on funding the development disabled for six years. We’re backwards! It takes $2 to get to 150 percent. You know what the dollar amount of that is? It’s $80 million. $80 million out of GRF.

The minimum wage was $8.25 an hour in 2019, so 150 percent of that was $12.38 an hour. The minimum wage today is $15 an hour, so 150 percent of that is $22.50.

Illinois’ minimum wage has also risen faster than inflation. $8.25 an hour in January of 2019 would be $10.51 an hour today.

Those care workers absolutely deserve it, and I agree with Rose that the money should’ve been found. But Sen. Rose voted against the 2019 bill to increase the minimum wage to where it is today.

* The Senate’s chief budgeteer Elgie Sims talked about this topic a bit today after the budget vote…

Sims: As I have told you time and time again, this budget is a statement of our priorities. It’s balanced, focuses on not just today, but tomorrow. But one of the things I would have to say, it’s amazing the hypocrisy from some of the comments from the other side of the eye. I did not and have not seen them vote for those DSP workers. I have not seen them vote for property tax relief grants. I’ve not seen them vote for investments in education. It’s easy to talk about problems. It’s harder to find solutions. We are finding solutions. We’re running right towards those solutions, and we’re making the hard choices to make Illinois better.

Reporter: Chapin Rose’s comments on developmental disabilities. Your thoughts? Do you think there could be any amendments, and like in the future, if there was a summer budget?

Sims: We’ve been working on this issue, and we funded this. I would welcome my colleague on the other side of the aisle participating with us to provide additional resources. But come to the table. It’s not just enough to say what you’re against, tell me what you’re for.

They need to find the money.

* The rest of his press availability…

Reporter: The tax on tobacco products… was something that was new since February. What was the process that led to that being included?

Sims: A number of advocates came to us and talked about what they’d like with some of those revenue ideas that they had. We divided this budget into really three buckets. The bucket on, in terms of collecting resources from those who are able to pay for them, or who have been trying to avoid them; those who owe taxes or revenues based on those who make choices, and those in government resources. This one came about from the advocates who are looking for a way to capture those resources and also to make sure that we are using those resources effectively. So we are doing that. We are putting those resources into health care, but also in into cessation programs.

Reporter: I know it wasn’t in the budget bill, the transit bill, but how do you reconcile ‘we’re not going to do a broad based increase on working people’ and then have this delivery tax? How do you reconcile those two?

Sims: Well, that’s, again, that falls in that bucket of choices. This is a service, that’s a revenue source that you may or may not choose to use, or service you may or may not choose to use. But instead, what we’d like to do, what we were trying to do, is make sure that we had options that individuals were able to if they chose to use those services, they could certainly pay for them.

Reporter: Leader, why was the digital ad tax removed?

Sims: Well, there’s not enough support both in the House or the Senate to pass it at this time. But that does not mean, it’s not an issue that’s under consideration, something that we continue to talk about. It’s something that we’ll consider to explore. We’ve looked at both the examples of how it was happening, how it was done, both in Maryland and Washington, to examine whether it stands on sound legal footing. We’ll continue to examine that and other revenue sources to make sure we have a budget that works for people.

Reporter: Senator, we’re hearing fair share. Multinational corporations paying their fair share, corporations paying their fair share. What does fair share look like?

Sims: Well, one of the one of the revenue options is we included what’s called the 80/20 rule. Under that rule, corporations use a sophisticated tax plan strategy to avoid taxation. So in a case like that, you’d have the unitary body who would then create a subsidiary, pay the subsidiary, who was really just an offshoot of the corporation, and then deduct the monies that they pay that subsidiary that should not be so you shouldn’t be avoiding tax. You should be paying your fair share.

Reporter: Senator, I think one of the biggest critiques from both houses the past few days has just been the fact that you guys released a budget with a little bit more than 24 hours to go, maybe not giving time for people to look at the budget, including constituents. I mean, your thoughts on that?

Sims: Well, most of this budget was out. It was introduced when the governor introduced his budget back in February, so I disagree with the contention that folks didn’t have the opportunity to see what’s in the budget. Not only did we post a budget in February, but we’ve posted multiple, multiple amendments and had public hearings. So we had a public hearing earlier today to make sure that folks had a chance to have questions hear what was in the budget.

Reporter: So, how about property tax relief? What about property tax relief? That was one of the major critiques that was about this budget.

Sims: I would I would love to see our Republican colleagues vote for property tax relief. As I mentioned earlier, I have not yet seen them put a vote on a property tax relief grant, but I’m waiting for it.

Reporter: Republicans have, I guess, said that Democrats get like, a certain amount for projects in their district. That sort of thing. And I know that last night, the House talks around that to tie back. Can you just explain a little bit more transparently, like, what the process is for special projects that members want to get done in their districts?

Sims: The budget is spent in every district across the state of Illinois, whether it’s from Cairo to Chicago, from Waukegan to the Quad Cities. The budget spends everywhere, and that includes Republican districts and Democratic districts. When the money goes for universities. There are universities in Republican districts represented by Republicans. There are tourism activities in Republican districts. So the contention that Republicans are not having money spent in their districts is just not true.

Reporter: How do you balance, you know, taxing multinational corporations their fair share while also encouraging them to develop and expand in the state?

Sims: I mean, I want them to expand here. That’s why we made investments in economic development opportunities to ensure that they will have the opportunity to have the best, most trained, most educated workforce. That does not change just because we are making sure that they are not using complicated strategies to avoid taxation.

That property tax relief answer was not his best moment, to say the least.