Poll: Rauner up by 3, Durbin up by 14
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Illinois Review…
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Illinois Voters shows Republican businessman Bruce Rauner picking up 43% of the vote to Quinn’s 40%. Six percent (6%) prefer some other candidate in the race, while 10% are undecided.
The latest Rasmussen statewide poll finds Durbin picking up 51% of the vote to State Senator Jim Oberweis’ 37%. Three percent (3%) prefer some other candidate in the race, while 10% are undecided.
More here and here.
54 Comments  
|
* The Rauner campaign threw down the gauntlet today…
Republican candidate Bruce Rauner said today that if he were governor, he would veto legislation lawmakers sent to Gov. Pat Quinn last week that would cut pension benefits for some city workers and allow aldermen to raise property taxes to shore up the retirement program.
A spokesman for Rauner said the Winnetka businessman believes the measure should include shifting workers to a 401(k)-style defined contribution plan and contends that “raising property taxes is not the way to go.”
“Unless Pat Quinn wants to raise property taxes, he should veto the legislation,” said Rauner spokesman Mike Schrimpf.
* Greg Hinz…
But it looks to me like Mr. Rauner may have put himself on the griddle, too, because so far, other than a few bromides about cutting “waste,” he’s given absolutely no clue how he’d make up for tens of billions of dollars in unfunded liability in city and state pension funds. And it certainly belies any notion that Mr. Emanuel secretly backs Mr. Rauner for governor.
Today’s developments came when Mr. Quinn scheduled a news conference to talk about a plan to help lower-middle-class families buy their first homes, and the Rauner campaign sent out an advance statement accusing the Democratic incumbent of hypocrisy for not promising to veto the Emanuel bill.
“As Pat Quinn tours the state relaunching a ‘new’ home loan program, will he break his promises again and allow Chicago property taxes to rise?” the statement asked. “Will he or won’t he? Quinn won’t say if he will sign the property-tax bill.” […]
[Rauner’s] pressure on Mr. Quinn to veto the bill ought to erase any lingering notion in some political circles that Mr. Emanuel quietly backs Mr. Rauner for governor. Ain’t so. Moves like today’s by Mr. Rauner have the potential to rev up City Hall and Chicago Democrats to put aside any disagreements with Mr. Quinn and rally city voters for the Democratic incumbent.
But, keep in mind, Rauner is trying to up the GOP’s vote total in Chicago, and this ain’t a bad way to do it.
* Quinn said he was “studying” the pension bill, but also attacked Rauner…
Quinn also used the opportunity to bash his Republican opponent for governor, Bruce Rauner, who earlier Monday released a statement criticizing Quinn’s home-owner relief program as recycled and not new.
“That’s certainly a bizarre opinion,” Quinn said.
The program, available through the Illinois Housing Development Authority, offers certain first-time home buyers and those who haven’t owned a home in three years a low fixed-rate mortgage and up to $7,500 in down payment assistance.
“We are here to help families who don’t have political action committees, who don’t have lobbyists, who don’t have millions of dollars to buy more than one home …,” Quinn said in a thinly veiled reference to his opponent.
* From the Quinn campaign…
Billionaire Bruce Rauner – who owns nine homes - today went out of his way to criticize a successful state program helping everyday people across Illinois afford their very first home. Welcome Home Illinois will give many people the opportunity to buy their first and only home - but it’s clear this billionaire with nine homes of his own can’t relate. Is achieving the American Dream only for the self-proclaimed .01 percent?
This attack on everyday people again shows that billionaire Bruce Rauner is out-of-touch and doesn’t care about the people of Illinois.
More than 24,000 people have shown interest in Welcome Home Illinois, which provides a 3.75 percent interest rate for a secure, 30-year fixed mortgage.
…Adding…. From the Rauner campaign…
From Spokesman Mike Schrimpf:
Once again Quinnocchio is not being truthful with the people of Illinois - Bruce supported the program in 2005 when it was called I-loan, in 2009 when it was called “Illinois Home Start,” and even in 2011 when it was called “Smart Move. The truth is that Pat Quinn’s job-killing income tax hike continues to make life harder for potential homeowners.
Thoughts?
13 Comments
|
Sun-Times temporarily turns off comments
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From the managing editor of the Sun-Times…
Starting this weekend, the Chicago Sun-Times and the other titles in the Sun-Times Media group will temporarily cease to run comments with our articles.
The world of Internet commenting offers a marvelous opportunity for discussion and the exchange of ideas. But as anyone who has ever ventured into a comment thread can attest, these forums too often turn into a morass of negativity, racism, hate speech and general trollish behaviors that detract from the content.
In fact, the general tone and demeanor is one of the chief criticisms we hear in regard to the usability and quality of our websites and articles. Not only have we heard your criticisms, but we often find ourselves as frustrated as our readers are with the tone and quality of commentary on our pages.
To that end, we are working on development of a new commenting system we hope will not only allow for free discussion, but encourage increased quality of the commentary and help us better police the worst elements of these threads. We’ll have more in the weeks to come on this development.
* Robert Feder weighs in…
It’s true that unmoderated comment boards — or those that don’t require verification (a Facebook account in the case of my blog) — leave themselves open to abuse. But a big-city daily’s digital news site that summarily shuts off dialogue with its readers strikes me as wrongheaded and backward-thinking to the extreme.
The key word is “unmoderated.” Newspapers and other “old media” have got to get a handle on their sites. Most of them don’t have the cash to hire a full-time comment moderator, so they’ve relied on apps and programs that don’t work very well.
I shut down comments for a while when I used the Blogger platform because I couldn’t effectively moderate comments. I moved over to WordPress and that helped me deal with most of my problems. But monitoring comments, and engaging with commenters to nudge or even shove them back onto the topic at hand ain’t easy. It’s a lot of work. Every time I leave to run an errand (as I’m about to do), I worry about what’s being posted and try to constantly check the blog to make sure all is OK.
So, I have little confidence that a magic program will solve all their problems. If they really want to get at the heart of the issue, they’ll hire somebody to watch over their comments. It’s the only truly effective way to solve this very real problem.
74 Comments
|
Question of the day
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Mark Brown notes that if Gov. Pat Quinn were running against anyone else, his reception at last week’s IEA forum might not have been so warm, what with pension benefit cuts and cuts to education funding…
But Quinn reminded delegates to the Illinois Education Association that the choice in the upcoming election isn’t between what they want and what he did.
“Please don’t compare me to the Almighty. Compare me to the alternative over here,” Quinn said, gesturing to Rauner, who makes no secret of his antagonism toward teacher unions. […]
Meeting briefly with reporters after the session, Rauner started off by quipping: “I’ve never been called Bruce Almighty before. I kinda like that.” […]
We’ve been needing a nickname for Rauner to go with the Quinnocchio depiction he’s hung on Quinn, and I’d say Bruce Almighty is a perfect fit.
Bruce Almighty: the candidate with the miraculous plan to cut the state income tax back to pre-Quinn levels and still provide more money for education and pay off the state’s backlog of bills.
* The Question: What would your nicknames be for both candidates? Make sure to explain.
73 Comments
|
Fun with money
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Crain’s…
Andrew Boron, director of the Illinois Department of Insurance, is pushing legislation that would provide $5 million to a new state corporation chaired by Mr. Boron to recruit out-of-state insurers. The money would be siphoned from the fees insurers and insurance brokers pay to fund the state’s regulation of them.
He wants to replicate the success the department had in wooing EquiTrust Life Insurance Co. from suburban Des Moines, Iowa, which is a national hub for life insurers. […]
The $5 million to lure insurers from other states accounts for about 10 percent of the $52 million the Insurance Department receives annually from insurers and brokers.
So, the plan is to take insurance company fee money and use that cash to lure competing insurance companies to Illinois?
I suppose I can see the logic in this, but has anyone thought of just lowering the insurance fees by 10 percent?
21 Comments
|
Reform and renewal
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Eric Zorn came up with a great analogy about Bruce Rauner’s proposed constitutional amendment for term limits, etc.…
In one of the more memorable scenes in the 1971 comedy “Bananas,” Woody Allen’s character Fielding Mellish is perusing the magazine rack at a small store. He’s trying to sneak peeks at the erotic fare in a way that avoids the notice of a matronly woman at the nearby checkout counter (see YouTube clip below)
He settles on a plan. “I’ll get a copy of Time magazine,” he says, loud enough for the woman to hear, as he takes a copy off the rack. “I’ll take Commentary. And the Saturday Review. And, uh, let’s see, Newsweek, and just I’ll grab one of these…”
He slips one of the skin magazines into the small collection of periodicals he doesn’t really care about, then turns to the cashier. “I’ll take `em all,” he mumbles as the woman looks on from several feet away.
It’s a nice try at misdirection.
Zorn’s premise is that Rauner is attempting to get around the state Constitution’s limit of popular amendments to only “structural and procedural” changes in the the General Assembly’s Article by proposing a change in the number of House and Senate members and an increase in the number of votes to override a gubernatorial veto…
So think of the term limits proposal as the equivalent of the pornographic publication in “Bananas” — the illicit yet true object of desire.
And think of the other two elements on the Committee for Legislative Reform and Term Limits petition as the equivalent of Saturday Review and Newsweek — conventional, but, really, beside the point.
Both are clearly constititutional.
* Meanwhile, the Tribune editorialized again in favor of a different constitutional amendment for redistricting reform…
Next comes the inevitable lawsuit, challenging the constitutionality or the language of the amendment, or both. It would fall to the Illinois Supreme Court, whose members were elected with party support, to decide whether the measure stays on the ballot.
Then there’s the big disinformation campaign, on which millions will be spent to convince voters that the amendment is bad for them. Already, the state’s top Democrats are voicing disingenuous concerns that the measure could reduce minority representation.
Um, I wonder who’s gonna spend “millions” to fight this? The unions will be spending all they can to defeat Rauner. The House and Senate Democrats will be spending cash on their own races, along with the state party.
Is there a pro-status quo millionaire out there who will step in and throw big money away attempting to defeat a proposal which has overwhelming popular support? I kinda doubt it.
* And Paul Green, writing in the Daily Herald, gets the last word again…
Reform is a many splendored thing. You want to be a reformer? It’s easy; simply call yourself one, e.g., every Chicago mayor since 1837 has labeled himself or herself — a reformer. As we meander into the Illinois General Assembly’s closing weeks of session and ponder the upcoming November general elections, once again its “Reform Time — Illinois Style”.
Some “reformers” want to change how Illinois legislative maps are drawn. Other “reformers” want to initiate term limits for state legislators, while almost everyone claiming reform DNA — constantly use the terms “transparency” and accountability” like those words have some biblical meaning to frame their intentions.
Statewide reform goals and philosophy aside, the main target for all this activity is Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan. Reformers lament and criticize “The Speaker’s” power, influence and durability, especially in his control of the Illinois House.
Alas, what is seldom if ever mentioned, is that Speaker Madigan was created — you guessed it — by reformers. Yes, my friends, over 30 years ago, a youngish reformer (who now happens to be Illinois governor) led a constitutional crusade to end cumulative voting for electing Illinois House members.
It was called the “Cut-back” Amendment” — it created single member districts, reduced House membership from 177 to 118 members and obliterated independent Republicans from Chicago and independent Democrats from suburban Cook and the Collars. And it gave a shrewd and workaholic Mike Madigan the opportunity to create a power base that would have been impossible pre-Cut-back.
Ergo, beware of reform promises. Or, said another way, if folks are promising a New Deal, make sure you cut the cards.
* Related…
* ADDED: House votes to make secret government severance deals public
* AARP backs changes to redistricting process
* Baar-Topinka tells broadcasters term limits are stupid
25 Comments
|
Simple solutions are usually neither
Monday, Apr 14, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Greg Hinz writes about the costs of Chicago pension reform…
Some critics want to tap the city’s tax- increment financing system rather than raise property taxes $50 million each of the next five years, as Mr. Emanuel’s plan requires.
TIFs are a big, juicy target for those who want to protect homeowners. The city’s 153 TIF districts have a total of $1.7 billion in the bank and generate another $400 million-plus each year.
But roughly $1.5 billion of the $1.7 billion is already committed for projects such as an $800 million school construction plan announced a few years ago, a $15 million Chinatown library, an $18 million Albany Park library and a $12 million streetscape project for Devon Avenue, says Budget Director Alexandra Holt. She didn’t detail all $1.5 billion, but I have no reason to doubt her. With a couple of exceptions, the money is going to neighborhood projects, not downtown handouts.
Similarly, much of future years’ receipts are committed for things such as a $50 million el station at Cermak Road, a $9 million industrial project in Pilsen and debt payments. And total receipts are beginning to drop quickly, as TIF districts with a legal 23-year life begin to expire, like the huge $120 million-a-year Near South TIF.
Ironically, because of the tax hike for pensions, the TIF districts are expected to produce about $20 million in additional revenue, Ms. Holt says. The city will declare that money a surplus and apply its $4.6 million share to pensions, potentially softening the blow of the property tax increase.
* A recent Sun-Times editorial also looked at various options…
What about a Chicago casino, which also requires state approval? That’s worth pursuing but can’t be counted on for now. If lawmakers ever approve, casino revenue is years away and inherently unpredictable. At its peak, perhaps five to seven years into its life, revenue could reach $80 million to $120 million, city officials tell us. […]
The Chicago Teachers Union and others have pushed a financial transaction tax and eliminating tax-increment-financing districts, both of which sound good on paper but have more downsides than pluses.
State actions: Emanuel has advocated for expanding the narrow list of items subject to the sales tax to cover services (think dry cleaning and hair salons). If done right, this could generate more revenue overall while also lowering the tax rate. Quinn is opposed, but an expanded sales tax that matches the modern economy could benefit the entire state. It’s also what most states do. Lawmakers also could increase the share of state income tax revenue shared with municipalities, including Chicago. That was cut in 2011, costing Chicago more than $400 million. The downside, of course, is that the state needs the money.
* Meanwhile, the Chicago Tribune has editorialized strongly in favor of the city’s pension reform bill…
The Illinois General Assembly delivered a special package Tuesday to the Chicago City Council: a pension fix that probably requires aldermen to raise property taxes — less than a year before they stand for re-election.
Given the terrible finances of the city’s pension funds, Gov. Pat Quinn has no responsible choice other than to sign the bill, and the aldermen have little choice but to raise taxes.
So, to sum up, the Trib is in favor of higher property taxes to help solve the city’s historic pension underfunding problems, but totally against an income tax hike to help solve the state’s historic pension underfunding problems.
Go figure.
* And that leads us to this Eric Zorn post listing four reasons why a Chicago income tax should be considered…
But if the alternative is a significant decrease in city services leading to a deteriorating quality of civic life, a city income tax is among the least objectionable options for balancing the books.
* The city’s media ran stories last week about how Mayor Emanuel had completely ruled out the idea…
Mayor Rahm Emanuel on Wednesday ruled out creating a city income tax as a way to shore up the city’s municipal and laborers’ retirement funds while describing the $250 million property tax increase he wants to pay for the pension changes as “a measured way, a responsible way to address the question.”
* Glossed over in all of this is an important point noted in that above-linked Sun-Times editorial…
Emanuel is opposed to a city income tax, which must be approved by Springfield. [Emphasis added.]
* From the Illinois Constitution…
SECTION 6. POWERS OF HOME RULE UNITS
… A home rule unit shall have only the power that the General Assembly may provide by law (1) to punish by imprisonment for more than six months or (2) to license for revenue or impose taxes upon or measured by income or earnings or upon occupations.
* Paul Green has the last word…
Illinois governments at all levels are facing financial disasters and yet various “stakeholders” (I love that word) are bickering as if time were on their side. These stakeholders hope that somehow pension debt and overdue bill payment will be “hoped” away.
The specifics of these crises in Springfield and Chicago are economically complicated, politically toxic and do not lend themselves to a 30 second political commercial. However, the general parameters of the problem are not so complicated. Governments have promised more than they could deliver.
Incoming revenue does not meet expenditure needs, and to resolve these issues everyone in Illinois (Chicago included) has to lose something.
In short, this is a math exam, not an essay test.
25 Comments
|
* My weekly syndicated newspaper column…
A long time ago I asked Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan why he never golfed at his golf outing fundraisers.
Madigan explained that he was a terrible golfer (he’s since improved, I’m told) If people saw him embarrassing himself badly on the golf course, they might take a dimmer view of him as a leader.
He has applied this lesson to just about everything he does. He examines every angle before he acts. He hates mistakes and almost never acts precipitously or impetuously.
For example, Madigan and his staff gather a few times a week to read through every bill and every amendment to those bills to look for flaws, hidden agendas or to discuss strategies. He always wants to be as prepared as possible.
As a result, he rarely fails.
But something else has been happening over the past year or so.
Madigan has become a media hound.
The Speaker has never really sought media attention. He does what he does, and then he goes home, or, more likely, back to his office. A Republican friend of mine calls him “James Bond.”
But after getting royally hammered by the Chicago media over how he asked Metra to give one of his loyal patronage workers a raise, he’s seemed to change. Nowadays, he seeks publicity, and credit.
It started after the House passed the gay marriage bill. It wasn’t an easy task by any means and Madigan publicly took the credit for its passage. A few months later, he took the lion’s share of the credit for passing the long-sought pension reform bill.
Then, earlier this year, out of the blue, he proposed a 50 percent cut in the corporate income tax rate. He got a ton of media coverage, but he hasn’t yet followed up on it. It looked like a “press release bill.” Legislation unveiled merely to generate media interest. It might yet resurface, but as of now it has been disappeared into the ether.
Madigan was also working behind the scenes this spring with the Senate Democrats on a constitutional amendment to impose a three percent surcharge on income over a million dollars. But then Madigan went ahead with his own announcement of the proposal. It was referred to in pretty much all media reports as “Madigan’s millionaire tax.”
At the time of the unveiling, Madigan said he’d done his homework and had talked to his members before announcing his proposal. The constitutional amendment required a three-fifths super majority, so Madigan would need every single one of his Democrats if he couldn’t lock down any House Republican votes.
Rep. Jack Franks, a Democrat who prides himself on never voting for tax hikes, offered tentative early support, but his support was tied to allowing the 2011 income tax hike to expire. Just days later, Madigan publicly supported keeping the tax hike permanent.
Rep. Franks says he told the Speaker that he couldn’t back the proposed constitutional amendment a couple weeks ago. Madigan asked for time to try and find GOP votes. In the meantime other Democrats went off the reservation, including Rep. Scott Drury, who issued a press release last week announcing his opposition. The momentum was going too fast the other way, so the plug was pulled.
Madigan, through a spokesman, blamed the Republicans for the proposal’s defeat. But Madigan had surprised the Republicans with his plan’s unveiling, instead of finding some GOP support in advance.
As it turns out, Madigan simply bit off more than he could chew. His proposal failed, but he sure got a lot of publicity about it, much of it favorable.
And, hey, lemons into lemonade. Pro-business groups like Americans for Prosperity Illinois offered up praise for Rep. Drury, who faces a Republican opponent in November. Drury and Franks, “should be commended for siding with taxpayers and small businesses by taking a courageous stand against this proposal,” said AFP Illinois State Director David From via press release. That’ll surely make Drury more palatable to tax sensitive business owners in his district.
And the proposal put Republican gubernatorial candidate Bruce Rauner in a difficult spot. Rauner flatly opposed the tax, while leaving open the possibility that he could favor taxing retirement income and services. It didn’t make him look good.
Maybe this is all part of some grand scheme. But right now it sure looks like James Bond has gone tabloid.
26 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
|
Comments Off
|
Your post-debate moment of Zen
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I just did a quick read-through of the comments on the Rauner vs. Quinn at the IEA event post. You guys did a tremendous job. I’ll bet you’re all still kinda keyed up, so here’s something to chill everybody out before the weekend.
Oscar the Puppy and I have been playing a fun new game recently…
5 Comments
|
Question of the day
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* NBC 5…
A bill preventing the use of police ticket quotas passed in the Illinois Senate Thursday in a 57-1 vote.
The legislation would prevent ticket quotas at any state, county and municipal police departments. It also states that departments would not be allowed to evaluate an officer’s performance based on the number of citations they issue.
The bill had the support of 19 sponsors in the Senate, including Sen. Kirk Dillard. The Illinois Association of Chiefs of Police, however, fought the measures.
* SJ-R…
Republican Sen. Tim Bivins, the lone “no” vote, said the bill would give the small percentage of officers who don’t want to do their jobs incentive to slack off.
Bivins, a former sheriff in Lee County, said that if the bill passes, it would take discretion out of the hands of management and could be the first step toward “circumventing the collective bargaining practice that exists.”
But Manar argued that officers need more discretion, calling the bill “necessary because a quota takes away from a police officer’s ability to use good judgment.”
He also said local governments are often tempted to use law enforcement quota policies as a way to raise revenue.
* The Question: Have you ever experienced a traffic ticket situation where you believed the police officer didn’t have the discretion to issue a simple warning? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
panel management
34 Comments
|
Not taking the bait
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The best way for the Democrats to use this “voter suppression” amendment to gin up turnout is to hope that somebody, somewhere trashes it and they hype that negative comment in hopes of angering their base. The Republicans have mostly refused to take the bait so far. Sun-Times…
Without opposition, House Speaker Michael Madigan’s plan to amend the Illinois Constitution to ban voter-suppression tactics passed the Senate Thursday.
The measure, which needed 36 votes to pass in the Senate, cleared the chamber 52-0 and will appear on the November 4th ballot after having passed the House earlier this week. […]
Sen. Matt Murphy, R-Palatine, said this would allow voters “unfettered access” to exercise their voting rights.
“We take seriously that fundamental, quintessential concept of the right to vote,” he said. “We can send a message and make clear with this bill right here that it doesn’t matter what your surname is, if you have earned that right to vote, you will not be impeded in any way in exercising it.”
* Even tea party Sen. Kyle McCarter held his tongue…
“We’ve heard the stories from around the nation of states implementing laws specifically to limit the right to vote,” said Sen. Kwame Raoul, D-Chicago. “This is definitely intended to discourage voter ID laws because of their disparate impact.”
Statistics have shown the poor, elderly and minority voters are less likely to have the photo IDs needed in some states in order to vote.
“In the county where I reside, we’ve had issues,” said Sen. Kyle McCarter, R-Lebanon. “If a (photo ID) is not available, we should make it available. I firmly believe we should have a voter ID law that does not discriminate.”
McCarter did not vote on the amendment.
* Meanwhile, a handful of liberal Democrats were crushed in the House yesterday…
Spurred by a gun-rights activist’s scrape with the law, the Illinois House voted Thursday to block state conservation police from going into someone’s home or onto their yards to enforce state hunting laws without search warrants.
The measure sponsored by House Minority Leader Jim Durkin, R-Western Springs, arose after National Rifle Association lobbyist Todd Vandermyde was cited last December by Department of Natural Resources police on private hunting ground. […]
(S)tate Rep. Ann Williams, D-Chicago, another gun-control advocate, rose up to raise questions about the precedent the House was setting with the issue and voiced concern about any similar, potential efforts to water down safety components of the newly enacted concealed-carry law, which Vandermyde helped draft.
“I don’t think the best genesis for changing those laws is something that stems out of a violation,” Williams said.
House Majority Leader Barbara Flynn Currie, D-Chicago, Rep. Sara Feigenholtz, D-Chicago, and Rep. Robyn Gabel, D-Evanston, were the other “no” votes on the legislation, which Durkin said was supported by state conservation police.
The bill passed 102-5.
21 Comments
|
Tone it down, please
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* You may have read this advertorial yesterday…
Uber’s lies and deception over the last month are an affront to Representative Zalewski and the entire General Assembly. Uber’s representatives, including their Worldwide Director of Policy, participated in lengthy negotiations. Uber, in writing, requested 13 changes to HB 4075.
All 13 changes have been addressed.
Eight changes were fully accepted.
Four changes were addressed through a part-time / full-time compromise for drivers.
The final change was negotiated by Uber, the Illinois Insurance Association and Illinois Trial Lawyers Association.
We were under the impression from the negotiations that the deal would be acceptable to Uber.
* Uber did, indeed, get just about everything it wanted in those negotiations. But it’s now hyperventilating to the media after the House passed the negotiated bill. Sun-Times…
The Illinois House voted 80-26 on a proposal that would require all ridesharing companies to conduct driver background checks, safety training and have commercial liability insurance. Ridesharing drivers would be restricted from using taxi loading zones. Those drivers logging more than 18 hours would need registration plates, a chauffer’s license, and vehicle safety inspections.
Ridesharing companies would still be allowed to use price surging, or raising prices in times of high demand. […]
“The passage of HB4075 in its current form destroys thousands of jobs in Chicago, slashes income opportunities for Chicago’s rideshare drivers, and effectively shuts down uberX in Chicago,” said Andrew Macdonald, Uber Chicago general manager, in a prepared statement.
“Today is a win for the corporate taxi special interests and a loss for the thousands of Uber users in Chicago who banded together in short order to save ridesharing in Illinois and were effectively ignored,” he said.
…Adding… Rep. Mike Zalewski and the cab companies are right about this point…
Zalewski told WBEZ that Uber’s lobbyist in Springfield, attorney Michael Kasper, supported the idea of bifurcating drivers into different regulatory categories depending on how much time they work. “I can only negotiate with who Uber tells me to negotiate with,” he said, “and their representatives were willing to negotiate on this point.”
But almost immediately after the bill passed, Uber denied that it was consulted in the crafting of the bill. “Uber has not signed off on a proposal that bifurcates drivers,” said Andrew MacDonald, Regional General Manager of Uber Midwest. Lyft issued a similar statement: “Bifurcating drivers into two groups was not a compromise and we did not support this model in conversations with the bill sponsors.”
“That’s an outright lie,” said Pat Corrigan, a Principal at Yellow Group and representative of the Illinois Transportation Trade Association, which includes nearly all of Chicago’s taxi companies. “We talked to Uber representatives, including Michael Kasper, their lobbyist, over the weekend in an attempt to understand how we could satisfy their wishes.” Kasper did not respond to an e-mail by posting time.
* Look, bills are never perfect. And the ride sharing companies could still ask for changes in the Illinois Senate. But it’s not a bad deal at all and that hyperbole from Uber just looks like crazy talk.
But it’s to be expected, I suppose.
* From an Inc. profile of Uber CEO Travis Kalanick…
[Uber] also has an aggressive culture and growth strategy set by a CEO who is so headstrong, so enthusiastic, and so combative in defense of his big idea that he is at risk of seeming like a parody of today’s tech entrepreneur–up to and including having a thing for Ayn Rand. You hear a lot about tech companies shaking up staid industries, pushing past slow, complacent competitors. This is the next phase. This is Silicon Valley’s cult of disruption taking on city hall. […]
When quiet negotiations with city officials don’t seem to be getting him anywhere, he has a tendency to lash out, often by implying that the people standing in his way are corrupt. […]
Kalanick does his part to bait his critics. He can be at times comically grandiose and un-self-aware. When I ask him why he left angel investing (which he was doing after selling Red Swoosh) to run Uber, his rambling, five-minute answer includes two hyperbolic claims, a mixed metaphor (”It’s so complex all you can do is swim in uncertainty”), childish whimsy (”that is my happy place”), and, believe it or not, an unironic Braveheart reference.
“That’s part of me, that freedom fighter in me,” he says. “It’s like Braveheart. Like, ‘freeeeeduuuuuuuuum.’ ”
I strongly defended Uber last month when the taxi companies came after it. Their original bill was grotesque. This bill is far from that.
8 Comments
|
Rauner offers preview of today’s IEA forum
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* We’ll have live video coverage today at 2 o’clock of the Illinois Education Association’s forum featuring both Gov. Pat Quinn and Bruce Rauner, so make sure to check back.
Rauner’s campaign put out a preview release today and Illinois Review provided a good summation of the candidate’s expected talking points…
“Bruce has pledged to increase education funding as governor. He believes education is the most important thing we do as a community and should be the top priority in Illinois,” a campaign statement says.
Secondly, Rauner is “personally devoted to the cause.” Rauner has invested time and resources to improving education in Illinois by leading the Chicago Public Education Fund, which helped more teachers achieve National Board Certification, and he has personally funded a Chicago program aimed at financially rewarding the best performing principals,” the statement says.
Rauner also claims his investment firm has helped the Teacher Retirement System by producing “tremendous results.” The Rauner campaign points to comments made by Governor Quinn’s own spokesperson concerning GTCR, an investment firm Rauner founded. […]
Rauner will remind the teachers that their IEA President Cinda Klickna Led Motion to Invest in GTCR back in 2003. […]
Rauner will pitch that he wants teachers to control their retirement savings - rather than leave it in the hands of “union bosses,” something he’s likely to leave unsaid in his sales pitch.
No kidding he won’t. The phrase “union bosses” appears nowhere in the press release. Here’s what it said on that topic…
Bruce believes teachers should be able to keep the pensions that they’ve honestly accrued, but moving forward they should be shifted into a defined-contribution style system that puts teachers in charge instead of the politicians.
“Politicians” are now the targets.
26 Comments
|
About that crime victims’ amendment
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Back in 1992, Illinois voters approved a new constitutional amendment…
SECTION 8.1. CRIME VICTIM’S RIGHTS.
(a) Crime victims, as defined by law, shall have the following rights as provided by law:
(1) The right to be treated with fairness and respect for their dignity and privacy throughout the criminal justice process.
(2) The right to notification of court proceedings.
(3) The right to communicate with the prosecution.
(4) The right to make a statement to the court at sentencing.
(5) The right to information about the conviction, sentence, imprisonment, and release of the accused.
(6) The right to timely disposition of the case following the arrest of the accused.
(7) The right to be reasonably protected from the accused throughout the criminal justice process.
(8) The right to be present at the trial and all other court proceedings on the same basis as the accused, unless the victim is to testify and the court determines that the victim’s testimony would be materially affected if the victim hears other testimony at the trial.
(9) The right to have present at all court proceedings, subject to the rules of evidence, an advocate or other support person of the victim’s choice.
(10) The right to restitution.
(b) The General Assembly may provide by law for the enforcement of this Section.
(c) The General Assembly may provide for an assessment against convicted defendants to pay for crime victims’ rights.
(d) Nothing in this Section or in any law enacted under this Section shall be construed as creating a basis for vacating a conviction or a ground for appellate relief in any criminal case.
There was a lot of false or misleading info in comments yesterday about the new constitutional amendment, which will go before voters this November. So, let’s clear up a few things.
* The big compromise back in 1992 was that no “enforcement” provision would be put into the Constitution. The enforcement provision in state statute doesn’t give victims any standing.
From the Marsy’s Law website…
Why is a constitutional amendment necessary?
The Illinois Constitution currently guarantees crime victims certain rights, but these rights are technically unenforceable, making them ineffective and weak… Illinois is the only state that actually bars the enforcement of victims’ rights.
* When the attorney general’s office held discussions on this topic a few years ago, it was decided that the best way to proceed was through another constitutional amendment. This is from AG Madigan’s office…
Illinois has both a constitutional and statutory Victims’ Bill of Rights. Article I, Section 8.1 of the Illinois Constitution states that “nothing in the section addressing the rights of crime victims or any law enacted under the section shall be construed as creating a basis for vacating a conviction or a ground for appellate relief in any criminal case.”
Consequently, victims who are denied their rights have no redress because the denial is literally not subject to any kind of review. Because the problem lies with the Constitution, the only way to correct it is via constitutional amendment.
* The Illinois State Bar Association was opposed to a similar effort two years ago and testified against it. The group opposed it this year, but didn’t testify. They weren’t even in the room during the two public hearings. That’s usually Statehouse code for “we got the best, least offensive deal possible.”
* The new amendment gives victims some more rights, including…
The right to be heard at any post-arraignment court proceeding in which a right of the victim is at issue and any court proceeding involving a post-arraignment release decision, plea, or sentencing
They also would now have the right to be notified of the conviction, sentence, etc., instead of just the right to the information.
* There’s also this…
The right to have the safety of the victim and the victim’s family considered in denying or fixing the amount of bail, determining whether to release the defendant, and setting conditions of release after arrest and conviction.
* But while the victims are given standing, there are clear restrictions…
The victim has standing to assert the rights enumerated in subsection (a) in any court exercising jurisdiction over the case. The court shall promptly rule on a victim’s request.
The victim does not have party status. The accused does not have standing to assert the rights of a victim. The court shall not appoint an attorney for the victim under this Section.
Nothing in this Section shall be construed to alter the powers, duties, and responsibilities of the prosecuting attorney. […]
Nothing in this Section or any law enacted under this Section creates a cause of action in equity or at law for compensation, attorney’s fees, or damages against the State, a political subdivision of the State, an officer, employee, or agent of the State or of any political subdivision of the State, or an officer or employee of the court.
These are all quite reasonable changes and that’s why it was overwhelmingly approved by both chambers.
* And, believe it or not, big kudos go to Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez. Alvarez led the charge against this effort two years ago, but when changes were made and AG Madigan convinced her to switch positions she forcefully argued for the new draft. She even reportedly convinced DuPage County State’s Attorney Robert Berlin to back off his opposition. Berlin also hotly opposed the effort to amend the Constitution two years ago.
18 Comments
|
Culture wars alive and well in GA
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* I have no idea why she called this bill yesterday when 20 members were absent from the chambers…
A bid to block therapists from engaging in “conversion therapy” with gay, bisexual and transgender youth in order to make them heterosexual failed Thursday in the Illinois House.
The measure, proposed by Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, lost on a 44-51 roll call despite her plea to colleagues to stop gay, bisexual and transgender teens 17 and under from being “horribly and humiliatingly abused.”
“This treatment plan causes depression, causes suicidal actions and is incredibly harmful to children,” said Cassidy, who is openly lesbian and one of the lead architects of Illinois’ same-sex marriage law.
“The practice of conversion therapy is dismissed by every major scientific organization and should not be utilized. There’s not a single scientific basis for one’s sex orientation being a disorder,” she said. “We need to protect our children.”
* The Illinois Family Institute was overjoyed…
In an article last month on this issue, IFI’s Laurie Higgins pointed out that the “ultimate motivation behind this legislation is to promote the Leftist assumptions of adult homosexuals who seek to wipe disapproval of homosexual acts from the face of the planet even if doing requires deception, harms children, undermines parental rights, and corrodes fundamental First Amendment speech and religious liberty.”
In a remarkable display of rhetorical excess, Cassidy argued that minors who desire to change their unwanted same-sex attraction through counseling are “horribly and humiliatingly abused.” It boggles the mind that Cassidy would expect her colleagues to believe that every counselor who helps minors with unwanted same-sex attraction “horribly and humiliatingly” abuses their young clients. Further, Cassidy expected her colleagues to believe her without any conclusive studies to support such an outlandish claim.
It defies logic that “progressives” believe that gender-confused minors should be able to receive treatment to change their unwanted “gender identity” but not their unwanted sexual preferences.
* Meanwhile, Rep. Cassidy did pass a bill yesterday recommended by Illinois’ Bullying Prevention Task Force. Illinois Review’s take…
Rep. Cassidy said that the ban on bullying was needed because of students with disabilities being “tortured” and biracial students being “attacked.” Cassidy said, as she called for the House floor vote, that she was bullied as a student, not because of being a gay student, but because she held strong religious convictions.
“The fact that the bill’s sponsors and the ACLU have refused to ensure the rights of students and school employees to opt-out of ‘programming’ and ‘training’ that promote ideas that conflict with their personal and/or religious beliefs reveals the real goal,” Illinois Family Institute said in a statement issued after the bill passed.
That goal, IFI says, is to use public education to promote unproven, non-factual beliefs about the nature and morality of homosexuality and “transgenderism.”
* And quite a large number of pro-life legislators opposed a bill that would increase protections for pregnant mothers in the workplace…
The bill, which moves now to the Senate, requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for pregnant employees, if so requested, unless the employer can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the business’ ordinary operation.
Also, it would be considered a civil rights violation if an employer denies employment opportunities or benefits to a pregnant woman, or takes adverse action against an otherwise qualified job applicant or employee. The employers may not require an employee or job applicant to accept an accommodation offered or force that employee to take leave.
State Rep. Jeanne Ives (R-Wheaton) said that she was pregnant twice while serving in the military, was provided numerous considerations while expecting and understood the need to make accommodations for pregnancy. However, the mother of five was concerned about a possible rise in litigation the bill would fuel.
* More…
Flowers’ bill would make employers permit frequent bathroom breaks, water breaks, seating, assistance with manual labor, less physically demanding duties, adjustment of the work schedule, time off to recover from childbirth, leave and break space for breast feeding. […]
Rep. Ron Sandack, R-Downers Grove, who voted against the legislation, said “no one’s against pregnant women” but said the bill goes too far.
“It’s problematic because it expands rights beyond what’s already provided in federal law,” he said. “It has many undefined terms that could be abused.” […]
But Flowers said litigation didn’t erupt in California after it enacted a similar law.
25 Comments
|
Turning a corner?
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* We still have a long way to go, and if the pension reform law is struck down all heck is gonna break loose. But good news shouldn’t be ignored. Paul Merrion at Crain’s…
On its latest sale of $250 million in long-term debt, the state got much better interest rates than just a few months ago on a similar package sized at $1 billion.
Bank of America/Merrill Lynch had the winning bid [yesterday] with an overall interest rate of 4.08 percent on the general obligation bonds, compared with 4.46 percent interest a small group of investment firms agreed to pay on a $1 billion bond deal in February.
Since then, the state’s worst-in-the nation credit rating hasn’t changed, but Gov. Pat Quinn issued a five-year budget plan and called for a continuation of temporary income tax hikes that were supposed to start phasing out next year, which the credit rating agencies embraced. […]
The difference between the current rate for AAA-rated borrowers and the state’s interest rate this week was about one quarter of a percentage point less than it was in February for bonds maturing in 2029. That works out to an 18 percent reduction in the yield penalty to Illinois.
* Meanwhile, Standard & Poor’s took a look at both the governor’s “recommended” budget and his “not-recommended” budget. The ratings agency obviously doesn’t care for the not-recommended budget, which doesn’t include a full year’s worth of revenue from the tax hike…
The state achieves budget balance in the not-recommended budget with $2 billion of proposed spending reductions. Total expenditures under that scenario are $29.4 billion, or 6.5% below fiscal 2014 spending levels; total and expenditures and transfers would be $34.6 billion, or 5.6% below 2014 levels. Spending reductions would be across the board in broad program areas excluding debt service, pensions, and most of the Medicaid program. Pension costs in the budget do not include the impact of recently enacted pension reform; the costs are budgeted at $6.2 billion, or 4.3% above fiscal 2014. Education funding under this scenario would decline about $1 billion and other general program areas also decline significantly.
We believe that the not-recommended budget could weaken structural alignment for Illinois.
That last line could be bigtime political ammo for Gov. Pat Quinn against those, like Bruce Rauner, who want to allow the tax hike to expire.
* S&P isn’t overly thrilled with the recommended budget, but they do appear to prefer it…
The recommended budget could contribute to enhanced structural alignment due to less severe spending reductions needed to achieve balance, but it still relies on nonrecurring resources, such as the interfund loan, as well as continued progress on Medicaid reform and other cost containment measures.
* And while expressing some constitutional and other reservations about the recent pension reform law, S&P wrote “we believe it would provide significant budget relief and substantially improve funded ratios over time.”
* There was also this historical perspective…
On many levels, Illinois’ credit quality is a study in contrasts. In our opinion, despite a long history of structural budget imbalance and weak pension funding levels, the protections for general obligation (GO) bonds are strong. Even during the Great Recession’s depths, when liquidity was extremely strained, the state’s commitment to bondholders was steadfast, in our view, and remained a policy focus. The recent pension reform further highlights this, with specific statutory provisions that subordinate pension payments to debt service. We believe the provisions relating to GO debt are longstanding and strong in supporting the priority of payment for debt service.
Illinois does not have to deal with constitutional or statutory revenue limitations, has what we consider to be a broad and diverse economy with above-average wealth levels, and has flexibility to adjust spending levels. However, despite these strengths, structural imbalance has been a regular feature of its budget position for many years.
* But…
Although the state has implemented improvements in budget and financial management practices, they have not been robust enough to offset the sluggish economy and the accumulated structural budget deficit. Illinois’ budgetary performance, rising unfunded pension liability, and legislative inaction on many fronts contributed to a pattern of credit deterioration since 2008; as a result, we have lowered our rating four times. This is at odds with the state sector’s credit performance as a whole. Only time will tell which path credit quality moves. As such, our developing outlook best reflects the state of Illinois’ credit quality, in that it might improve — or get worse — in the next two years.
* Related…
* Cullerton: ‘I confess: I like Illinois’
25 Comments
|
Rate the new Rauner ad
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Diana Rauner…
Hi.
The response to the TV ad we released last week has been great. The ad was a lot of fun for Bruce and me to make.
But I wanted to share a little more about why I think Bruce will make an excellent governor for every Illinoisan.
Watch here: bit.ly/1eot4vD
I hope you enjoy our new ad.
And if you’re interested in volunteering for the campaign please click here.
Thank you for all that you’re doing to bring back Illinois.
Diana
* Rate it…
…Adding… I forgot to include the cable buy stats. I don’t have the network buy info as of yet…
Citizens for Rauner
Republican candidate for Governor of Illinois
Agency: Access Media, Los Angeles
Total schedule: $82,256
Flight Dates: 4/11/14 - 4/17/14
Networks: BRVO, FOOD, HGTV, TVL, USA
Dayparts: 9A-4P, 4-7P, 7P-Midnight
Syscodes / zones / $ by zone
5170 / Chicago Interconnect / $68, 880
9804 / DirecTV / $7,917
9810 / DISH / $5,459
90 Comments
|
“Whatever it is, you look good”
Friday, Apr 11, 2014 - Posted by Rich Miller
* Here’s something you won’t see every day, particularly from me.
I came up with what I thought was a pretty good column idea for Crain’s Chicago Business. My editor, Tom Corfman, liked it and gave it a green light.
But then I wrote myself into a hopeless corner. That happens sometimes. It’s never pleasant. I worked on it and worked on it and thought I fixed it, but Corfman didn’t think I had. I read it again and realized he was right.
Uh-oh.
I labored over some revisions, but unbeknownst to me, Corfman also put some effort into it. His revision was far better than mine so we went with his changes.
* I usually hate it when somebody else touches what I write, unless it’s a typo or something like that. But I gotta give props to Corfman here. He made this column work…
For the past few years, whenever I’d get a haircut I could always count on people asking, “Have you lost weight?”
In reality, I’d probably gained weight and I would sometimes say that. “Well, whatever it is, you look good,” I’d hear.
For the past couple of months, though, folks have been telling me they loved my new haircut.
But I’ve been telling them, I’ve only had one haircut in three months. “Well, whatever it is, you look good,” they’ve been replying.
I couldn’t figure out why so many people loved my nonexistent haircut until it finally dawned on me that I’d…
Go read the whole thing.
17 Comments
|
|
Comments Off
|
|
Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...
 
...............
...............
...............
...............
|
   
|
Hosted by MCS |
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax |
Advertise Here |
Mobile Version |
Contact Rich Miller
|
