Access to the north entrance of the state Capitol is being restricted after concerns were raised about the structural integrity of brickwork supporting the entryway.
Secretary of State spokesman Henry Haupt said workers recently noticed some flaking underneath the brickwork supporting the north entryway.
“We had a structural engineer look at that brickwork beneath the entrance way and he determined it needed to be shored up and fortified,” Haupt said. “He’s putting together a plan to proceed. In the meantime, he recommended to err on the side of caution, that large groups of individuals, particularly just standing on that north porch, was not a good idea.”
Haupt said the office was told there isn’t a danger of collapse, but was advised that large groups of people should not be allowed to stand on the north porch.
Consequently, the north entrance will be limited to lawmakers, staffers, lobbyists and others who are issued ID badges by the secretary of state’s office. They are allowed to enter the building without passing through metal detectors.
There’s gotta be a good joke in there somewhere. I’ll leave it to you…
* They’re borrowing to make debt service payments? Uh-oh…
Moody’s Investors Service has downgraded the rating on Zion Park District, IL’s general obligation (GO) debt to Ba1 from Baa3 and the rating on the district’s general obligation limited tax (GOLT) debt certificates to Ba2 from Ba1. The Ba1 rating applies to $1.9 million in outstanding general obligation (GO) alternate revenue debt and $540,000 in GOLT debt service extension base (DSEB) debt. The Ba2 rating applies to $400,000 in outstanding GOLT debt certificates.
The outlook is negative.
SUMMARY RATING RATIONALE
The Ba1 rating reflects the district’s rapidly declining tax base; limited revenue raising ability as the district is operating at property tax rate caps in almost all of its major operating funds, and narrow Operating Fund cash reserves. Also incorporated in the rating is the district’s reliance regular borrowing to support debt service payments on outstanding debt, including plans to fully leverage its debt service extension base (DSEB) to support GO alternative revenue source debt service.
The district’s Ba2 debt certificate rating reflects the lack of a dedicated property tax levy for repayment of debt service, along with the
district’s narrow liquidity position.
OUTLOOK
The negative outlook reflects our expectation that the district’s finances will remain limited, requiring regular borrowing to pay debt service
on existing debt, as well as expectations for continued, material tax base declines.
WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATING GO UP (or remove the negative outlook)
-Stabilization or growth in the district’s property tax base
-Growth in overall liquidity supported by balanced operations
-Formalized planning toward and the attainment of self supporting enterprises
-Discontinuation of the practice of borrowing to support recurring debt service on outstanding debt
WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATING GO DOWN
-Further deterioration in property tax base valuations
-Recreation Fund tax rate hitting property tax rate cap
-Erosion of operating liquidity
-Increased Enterprise Fund dependency on the General Fund
The district’s last Moody’s downgrade from exactly one year ago is here.
* We have probably discussed this before, but not as a stand-alone topic. Just one more example of why Gov. Rauner’s proposed budget (like so many budgets before him) is so phony. From CoGFA…
The Governor has requested that a total of $2.025 billion be appropriated for the State Employees’ Group Health and Life Insurance program for FY 2016. The requested FY 2015 appropriation request for the Group Health Insurance Program was $2.790 billion. […]
CMS estimates the FY 2016 liability to be $2.777 billion, a 6.8% increase from FY 2015. The CGFA FY 2016 estimate of liability is $2.803 billion, $25.9 million more than CMS.
So, the estimated liability is $2.8 billion and the requested approp is $2 billion, leaving $800 million in unpaid costs.
Currently, for the Quality Care Health Plan (CIGNA), the delay for preferred providers and non-preferred providers is 273 and 350 days. In FY 2016, the cycle is expected to be extended significantly… CMS has calculated the amount of time it takes to make payments to managed care providers (HMOs and OAPs) at approximately seven months, which is expected to increase to 14 months in FY 2016… PPO claims would be held up to 360 days in FY 2016, above the 273 days utilized in FY 2015. Out-of-network PPO claims would rise from 350 days currently to 380 in FY 2016.
Wednesday, Mar 25, 2015 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Recently, ads on Capitol Fax have distorted the facts about the Illinois Low Carbon Portfolio Standard (SB 1585). Let’s set the record straight.
Myth:“Exelon is profitable, so they don’t need more money to keep these plants open.”
Fact: Much like a retail business with multiple stores, every location has to make money on its own. No retail chain could survive for long using profitable stores to keep unprofitable ones open. Exelon would not operate Plant A at a loss simply because Plant B is earning a profit.
The fact is, three of Illinois’ six nuclear plants are at risk of closing, and the consequences of these closures are catastrophic:
• $1.8 billion every year in lost economic activity
• Nearly 8,000 highly skilled jobs
• Up to $500 million annually in higher energy costs statewide, according to a PJM analysis
• $1.1 billion per year due to increases in carbon and other pollutants
• Hundreds of millions of dollars to construct new transmission lines
Only one legislative solution, the Illinois Low Carbon Portfolio Standard (LCPS), properly values all low-carbon sources of energy, including the state’s nuclear facilities.
According to a State of Illinois report, the cost to Illinois of allowing nuclear plants to prematurely retire are as much as 12 times greater than the maximum cost of the Illinois LCPS.
MEMBERS OF THE ILLINOIS SENATE ENERGY AND PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMITTEE:
VOTE YES ON THE LOW CARBON PORTFOLIO STANDARD (SB 1585)
Creates the Uniform Fiduciary Access to Digital Assets Act. Defines terms. Provides procedures and requirements for the access and control by guardians, executors, agents, and other fiduciaries to the digital assets of persons who are deceased, under a legal disability, or subject to the terms of a trust.
The idea is to create a legal structure for taking over somebody’s online accounts and other “digital assets” when they pass away or become incapacitated. But there could be some big privacy problems with this idea. Your executor would have complete access to all your stuff, even if you didn’t officially appoint an executor, or your court-appointed guardian in the case of incapacitation. And there are some unintended consequences as well. What if a woman is incapacitated by her abusive husband, who then gets access to all her private info?
* From Dan Sachs, Facebook associate manager of state policy…
“The people that use our service should be able to control who has access to their digital archives, particularly their private communications, upon their death – not legislators and not a fiduciary that a person did not affirmatively select. There are many Illinoisans with online accounts. This bill would effectively ignore the wishes of all of those people when they die, set aside decades of settled law, and override the innovative tools and options companies provide to protect those accounts.”
Facebook offers a “Legacy Contact” function which allows users to select someone to manage their account after they pass on – or to decide if they’d like to have their account deleted upon verification of their death.
* From Bill Ashworth, Senior Legal DIrector, Public Policy, Yahoo…
“At Yahoo, we take our users’ privacy seriously. That’s why we’re concerned with the draft legislation currently before the Illinois State House of Representatives (HB 4131) which, if approved, would automatically–and without permission–give access to the online lives of our Illinois users to their fiduciary at the time of their death. Each of our users should decide when and how they share their personal emails, messages and photos. We believe that account holders and individuals—not legislators—should determine what happens to a person’s digital archives at the time of their death.”
* Companies almost never welcome these sorts of intrusions. But what about all the other online services one might have? A well-written statute would give us a uniform standard. Not saying that these bills are well-written, just sayin.
I personally haven’t set up any mechanism to give anyone authority to access my website, e-mail accounts, Facebook, Twitter, ScribbleLive, mobile phone, fax and e-mail distribution services, my computer password or even (come to think of it) my electronic gun safe passcode.
I really need to get that done soon. Not that I’m planning on going anywhere any time soon, mind you, just that stuff happens in life.
Anyway, to the bill…
* The Question: Regardless of how you feel about the particulars of this legislation, should there be a state law to determine a process for passing along digital assets when one dies or is incapacitated? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
* Erickson reports that Gov. Bruce Rauner’s administration asked the Illinois Municipal League to send an unusual e-mail to its members…
In an email to mayors across the state, the head of the lobbying organization for municipalities said Rauner has asked for city councils to consider a resolution asking the state to allow local right to work zones, as well as changes to prevailing wage laws and worker compensation laws.
“Voters in our community should be allowed to decide via referendum whether or not employees should be forces to join a union or pay dues as a condition of employment.”
Also included in the sample resolution sent to more than 1,000 cities and villages is a question about right to work zones.
“Local control of bargaining would allow voters or local governments to determine if certain topics should be excluded from collective bargaining, including contracting, wages, provisions of health insurance.”
The governor’s office claims that there is no quid pro quo here, meaning that they won’t take into account how many municipalities pass their resolution when deciding how much to ding the locals in the ongoing budget process. As you already know, the governor wanted to sweep a ton of state revenue sharing money this fiscal year, but was blocked by the Senate Democrats. He’s also proposed a big sweep for next fiscal year.
Gov. Bruce Rauner and legislative leaders appear on track to resolve an immediate $1.6 billion deficit and avoid running out of money for prison guards and day care programs, though there’s no guarantee the rare show of bipartisan cooperation will hold up when the stakes get higher over a new budget in just a few weeks.
The fast-moving, short-term budget fix also put on public display the new political dynamic at the Capitol.
For more than a decade, Democrats controlled the legislature and the governor’s mansion, so Republicans were able to vote against budget measures without political repercussions while Democrats had to take tough votes. On Tuesday, Republicans in the House had to do much of the heavy lifting to support their rookie Republican governor, and Democrats had more political freedom to vote no. […]
Rauner would be given discretion to use a $97 million pot of money to help school districts that might be harmed by the cuts that come in the middle of the school year. He’ll also have access to another $90 million to help plug unforeseen budget problems that might arise.
The governor wanted complete discretion to make the cuts and transfers himself. He ended up with considerably less authority, but it’s a far better plan because legislators were not given a free pass.
“The (plan is) evidence of our discussions with the House and governor’s office as it relates to education, health care and local government funding,” said Rikeesha Phelon, spokeswoman for Senate President John Cullerton, D-Chicago. “Cullerton will be meeting with his caucus to measure support for passage.”
Two bills implementing the plan passed the House on votes of 69-48 and 72-45 on Tuesday. All House Republicans voted for the legislation except for Rep. Joe Sosnowski of Rockford, who was absent. All of the “no” votes on both bills came from Democrats. […]
Some parts of the budget will not be reduced. Pensions, state employee health care and programs to aid the mentally ill, developmentally disabled and autistic children will escape cuts.
Likewise, some of the special state funds will be left intact, particularly the local government distributive fund that channels state income tax money to cities and other local governments.
“This is not a perfect bill. It’s not a perfect solution. Some might say it’s not pretty but it responds to the governor’s request. It responds to the problem. It ought to be supported,” Madigan said.
Heather Steans, a Democrat and appropriations chair, expressed optimism that it could pass with fewer than half of Democrats supporting it and most Republicans.
Senate Democrats had resisted for weeks Rauner’s request for authority to move what he calls “nonessential” funds, fearing that he would take the money from programs Democrats support. The money is desperately needed to avoid child care, prisons and court reporter programs running out of money.
The Senate could take the proposals up Thursday, the final day before lawmakers take a two week Easter recess. […]
The moves will allow Rauner to divert as much as $350 million from the fund that pays for downstate road construction projects. […]
Although the measure moved out of the House on a bipartisan vote it still faces hurdles in the Senate.
The Laborers International Union, for example, called on lawmakers to be wary of taking money out of the road construction fund.
“Projects — and the jobs they create — will be dropped either now or in years to come as a result of a road fund sweep,” noted a letter from the union to lawmakers.
* House Speaker Michael Madigan’s spokesman Steve Brown endured a heart-rending tragedy last year. He writes about it today in the St. Louis Beacon…
About four months before the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, police less than 15 miles down I-70 in St. Charles shot another man named Brown. The event barely drew any attention from anyone except immediate family and friends.
The man killed was Martin Brown; Martin Brown is my brother.
St. Charles police were called to his home on Clark Court about 9 p.m. on April 16. One call came from his wife, and she said he needed a mental health evaluation. Another caller said the man was shooting fireworks and disturbing the neighbors. Police were told there were no weapons in the St. Charles man’s house. The fireworks complainant said, however, that the Brown had a “belligerent attitude and was pointing what looked like a large pistol.”
Within seven minutes of their arrival on the scene, one officer fired a failed Taser. Another repeatedly told Brown to drop the object in his hand and did not attempt a Taser shot. A third officer issued the same command, but did not fire a Taser. Less than three minutes after arriving on the scene, he had fired his SigSauer P226 nine times, and he was on the radio requesting an ambulance.
Martin Brown, 52, was pronounced dead at a nearby hospital.
Martin Brown was a brother, husband, father and grandfather. He had series of health problems in recent years. He had been drinking before the shooting. The medical examiner’s autopsy showed a blood alcohol level of 2.0, but no evidence of other drugs. St. Charles Police provided no records or reports of additional police incidents involving Brown.
* Brown also sent an accompanying note with his e-mail today…
Some of you know this story. Some do not.
A few months ago it was suggested this story might contribute to the efforts to help reform the use of lethal force. A version of this article is now part of the official record of the Presidential Task Force on 21st Century Policing. The following was published this morning by St. Louis Public Radio/St. Louis Beacon.
I think it is appropriate for you to have a little heads up. I am not certain how much attention, if any, it might draw. Several lawyers have reviewed the incident and determined there are not grounds for action. I am not sure Marty’s immediate family has reached the same conclusion.
I can only hope it might spur broader use of body cameras and more importantly better awareness by police on how to deal with incidents involving persons with health issues.
Police have a tough job, but they also have total control of lethal force . The combined elements create responsibility that must be treated very seriously.
Rep. Aaron Schock’s longtime fundraiser sent an email to the Illinois Republican’s donors, saying she feels “sad, angry, cheated” and filled with “total disgust, disbelief and disappointment” at the congressman’s alleged misspending of taxpayer and campaign dollars.
Lisa Wagner is an Illinois-based GOP fundraiser who worked for Schock for the past four years, helping to catapult him to the top tier of the Republican money world.
Wagner’s email offers a window into the sudden fallout and acute anger in Schock’s world from the scandal that brought down the fourth-term congressman, who announced his resignation last week effective March 31. Schock is now under investigation by the Justice Department. Schock aides have been called to testify before a federal grand jury next month in Springfield, Illinois.
“You personally and generously supported Aaron in the past and were very kind to him,” Wagner wrote in an email, obtained by POLITICO. “He deceived us all.” […]
“I believe he should be held accountable for his choices…. whatever the consequences [may] be…I have no sympathy for the him right now,” she wrote.
Go read the whole thing. To some folks I’ve talked with, her letter almost seemed like a note to the G that she was completely innocent. Others, however, saw it as a perhaps unintentional likely dangerous beacon for the feds. And to others, it appeared to be a way of shoring up her place in Jeb Bush’s presidential campaign.
I talked with Wagner on Monday. She called me about my own subscriber commentary on Schock and said writing her letter was “therapeutic” for her. She was genuinely saddened by this turn of events and seemed to be quite concerned about him. But she long ago went out of her way to alienate candidate Bruce Rauner when Schock was considering a gubernatorial bid, so she is most definitely out of favor these days.
By the way, she also told Politico that she’d since spoken with Schock and “started to separate the sin from the sinner.”
* Meanwhile, from a Jil Tracy press release…
“There have been reports that I am running for Congress in the 18th District, that I am not running, or that I am seeking a different office. All of that is flattering and I appreciate all of the encouragement and pledges of support. My career spans private business, legal practice, and public service, and I am fortunate to have had the opportunity to serve. I loved my time in the legislature and I miss working on solutions to serious problems and finding ways to make living in this country better for people who want to raise a family, build a career, and enjoy the freedom and opportunities that have made our country, and our state, great.
“To clarify, I am exploring the possibility of running but I believe that making any formal announcement is premature. I will continue my discussions and exploring the practicality of running until Governor Rauner announces the timetable for the special election. At that time I will take a final look at the electoral numbers, cost, and logistical realities of running and will then make a public announcement about what I intend to do.
Whether I decide to run, or to support another candidate and look for a different way to serve, I will continue doing my best to make sure that our region continues to be a place where we fight government overreach and wasteful spending, embrace fiscal responsibility, support the family, promote education, agribusiness, and commerce, and are unwavering in defense of our constitutional rights.”
* And from Ed Brady…
“I am looking at this race very seriously and will not make a final decision on becoming a candidate until Governor Rauner announces the timeline for the special primary and general elections. It appears I could be the only viable candidate in the race who is outside the political system.
“Washington needs someone with common-sense business experience, with conservative values and with practical experience working with issues that impact our district. We need pro-business legislation and less government regulation to help create jobs, stabilize employment and improve our economy in Illinois and the 18th District.
“I believe I could bring that perspective to Congress. I am continuing to assess the race and reach out throughout the district. Once Governor Rauner issues the election schedule, my wife, family and I, along with advice from my political allies, will decide whether running is the right thing for me to do at this time.
“It has been reassuring, when making calls throughout the district, that the voters have an open mind to someone new. I look forward to listening to their challenges and working toward solutions as we work for a better district, state and country.”
Rep. Dan Brady told me much the same thing yesterday.
The governor can’t formally set the election dates until Schock officially leaves office at the end of the month. Stay tuned.
Kent Gray didn’t join the formal press conference at Saturday’s dinner, but said he’s also considering Schock’s seat. Gray said that as a Lincoln Land trustee, he represents seven on the 19 counties in the 18th Congressional District. He also remarked that 22 years ago he worked for Bob Michel, a former Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives.
“I think if you talk to all the Republicans who end getting in this race, we’re gong to be very similar on our positions on pretty much everything,” Gray said. “My issues basically are government waste, cutting taxes and trying to get a hand on spending.”
Gray also said he’s focused on agriculture and free trade issues.
* These B2B fights are never easy, but the Tribune has a solid story today about a legislative hearing on prohibiting floor prices for contact lenses and whether to prohibit lens manufacturers from refusing to sell to retailers which fail to comply with manufacturers’ demands…
Contact lens manufacturers began instituting price minimums more than a year ago, arguing that they would lower prices for consumers and encourage them to work with their eye doctors to find the right fit. But opponents say the price floors bar retailers from offering discounts on the products.
According to the article, just four manufacturing companies control 97 percent of sales.
Low-cost outlets such as Costco, Wal-Mart and 1-800-Contacts say nonnegotiable, minimum prices prevent retailers from selling lenses as cheaply as they’d like and, in some cases, drive up prices.
For example, a 30-day supply of Johnson & Johnson’s daily Acuvue Moist lenses that in 2014 cost $21.88 at Sam’s Club now sells for $33. At 1-800-Contacts, the same box cost $29.99 last year. This year it’s $33.00, according to data provided by 1-800-Contacts.
Eric Anderson of Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management, said many industries have pricing policies in place. Manufacturers of durable goods — refrigerators and coffee makers, for example — often set minimum prices so higher-end stores can compete with Amazon and Wal-Mart.
“If they don’t have a pricing policy for electronics, retailers will just stop selling the product,” Anderson said. “As a consumer, if you want to go see a television before you buy it — good luck. You won’t be able to go to Best Buy and see a television.”
Wisconsin and Virginia have begun conversations about privatizing flagship public universities. Now, Illinois is about to have the discussion. Bloomington Republican State Senator Bill Brady has introduced a bill to privatize Illinois’ public universities over six years. […]
Brady says he doubts he’ll call his bill this year but wants public debate on the measure.
“What is really the genesis of this bill is that when I was the Republican nominee for governor, I obviously spent time with university presidents, public and private, and really found two things that we’re really trying to solve here,” he said. “One is that the public universities told me how burdened they were by regulations from the Legislature, as compared to their private counterparts. My personal position is that we really ought to look at this because it may be the only way some of our universities thrive. I’m not saying survive, but thrive. We need to give them tools that would allow them to do a lot of things they just aren’t equipped to do now. […]
“It’s a discussion. A lot of people would probably be afraid to talk about what I’m suggesting here,” said Brady, a 22-year member of the General Assembly and graduate of Illinois Wesleyan University in Bloomington. “And my point is that someone’s got to be willing to say, ‘Let’s talk about it. Is there a way that this can be a win-win?’
“I’d like to elevate the discussion and what I’d like to find out is: How much do the regulations on the state universities weigh on those universities? Are they worth it? When we invest money in grants to Illinois residents, how do we hold them accountable? And is this a way that some of our universities that aren’t necessarily thriving — and by that, I believe they’re losing enrollment — do they need their own private board eventually and maybe they can raise more outside private money. And so that’s what this is all about.” […]
“I don’t pretend that my bill is the answer. I think it elevates the discussion. It could be the answer. I didn’t draft it with the idea that it didn’t make sense,” said Brady, whose Senate district includes part of Normal, the home of Illinois State University. “Having represented a campus for almost 20 years, I think I know a lot about what goes on in higher ed, so I think I bring a background in this. But I’m not suggesting that this answers every question that needs to be answered.”
Lucky for us, we can have a “discussion” right here.
* The Question: Should the state consider privatizing any of its universities? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
Tuesday, Mar 24, 2015 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
My name is Wendy Warmowski. My son, Jacob, was a perfectly healthy, happy toddler until several medical errors changed his life forever.
Jacob was diagnosed with an ear infection and given antibiotics. When his antibiotic was nearly finished he took a turn for the worse. We eventually ended up in the ER.
At the ER, Jacob should have had immediate attention and care, but instead we waited. Jacob was eventually diagnosed with strep pneumomeningitis. The doctors ordered antibiotics to be given immediately, but instead we waited again. Because of the delay in treating Jacob he had 6 strokes, fell into a coma and had to have a tube placed down his throat to help him breath. The doctors told me Jacob might not ever wake up from the coma or come off of the ventilator.
Today, Jacob continues to have physical and mental issues. He has vision problems, balance difficulties, attention issues and epilepsy. He has to have special schooling and goes to occupational, physical and speech therapy several times a week.
The civil justice system allowed our family to hold the doctors responsible for their errors and delays that resulted in Jacob’s brain injury. Our settlement allows us to give Jacob the best care he could have so that he can live the best life he can. Trust me; I’d return it all to have that happy, perfectly healthy toddler back.
The Illinois Trial Lawyers Association fights to ensure all citizens get equal footing in the courtroom. To read more about Jacob’s story, click here.
Unions contend that Rauner is deliberately choking their resources in an attempt to weaken their position as they head into negotiations for a new employment contract, which is supposed to take effect July 1.
The Illinois AFL-CIO is the lead plaintiff in most of the cases, so they’re handling the money end. But AFSCME is named in the governor’s federal case and it has long had the Chicago firm of Cornfield & Feldman on retainer. They’re probably not cheap.
But an AFSCME spokesman avoided talking about short-term union finances today and focused instead on the long term, saying, in part, “The array of Rauner attacks seems clearly intended to wipe out the labor movement in Illinois, and not just in the public sector… Everybody understands what this is really about.”
* Meanwhile, the Illinois Policy Institute has become an issue in a Chicago aldermanic race. From a press release…
Alderman Mary O’Connor of the 41st Ward called on her opponent Anthony Napolitano to return campaign contributions from a right-wing, “dark money” organization with ties to the Illinois Policy Institute. Today, the Liberty Justice Center, an IPI backed law firm, filed a motion in court to bust unions in Illinois through the denial of collecting “fair share” dues. Napolitano has received thousands of dollars from the IPI’s sister organization, the Illinois Opportunity Project.
“41st ward families are sick and tired of the never-ending assault on unions who give working people a collective voice, and they deserve better than a candidate who takes money from the right-wing organizations pushing that very agenda. Anthony should immediately return the money he received from the extremist groups supporting his campaign, and denounce their union-busting efforts. They have no place in the 41st ward,” said O’Connor.
O’Connor, who was endorsed by the Chicago Federation of Labor, has fought for working people as Alderman the past four years in office through policies such as water and sewer reconstruction, a program that has put numerous union members to work rebuilding Chicago’s aging infrastructure. Her efforts have earned her the support of 9 labor organizations in her campaign for reelection.
Napolitano has taken thousands of dollars from organizations tied to the anti-union efforts of the Illinois Policy Institute and the Rauner administration.
* The totals aren’t much, just $3k from the Policy Institute’s political arm and $1k from the 43rd Ward GOP…
43rd Ward Republican Committeeman Chris Cleveland: “If Bruce Wins This Election, Then We Republicans Will Have a Mandate, A Very Big One, To Take on the Unions.” According to post by Chris Cleveland on 43rdwardrepublicans.com, “Bruce Rauner has made standing up to government unions the centerpiece of his campaign. He’ll follow through on it. And that, in my opinion, makes him the right choice for governor. I like Bill Brady, really I do. But now, a week out, neither he nor Dan Rutherford are serious contenders for the nomination. It’s time to make a choice, Rauner or Dillard. It’s an easy one. If Bruce wins this election, then we Republicans will have a mandate, a very big one, to take on the unions. We can go after them on the pension problem they created. We can go after them on failing schools. We can go after them on wild overspending. We can go after them on corruption. Imagine having a mandate, here in Illinois, to do what Scott Walker did in Wisconsin. Bruce will have it. The Rauner campaign didn’t write this. I did. And I mean it. Seriously, if you haven’t yet voted, please vote for Bruce Rauner. It’s time.”
* Despite that, Napolitano is getting even bigger bucks from firefighters and police unions.
In recent weeks, Gov. Bruce Rauner of Illinois has traveled the state promoting his proposal for more than $2 billion in cuts to pensions for public employees. All public employees, that is, except police officers and firefighters.
“Those who put their lives on the line in service to our state deserve to be treated differently,” Mr. Rauner said in his February budget address to the state legislature.
By announcing the exemption, Mr. Rauner was following the lead of other Republican governors in the Midwest who have imposed unwelcome changes on state and local employees in the name of saving money and improving services.
In 2011, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin introduced a bill that would roll back collective bargaining rights for government workers and require them to contribute more toward their own pensions and health coverage. He excluded police officers and firefighters from the legislation, known as Act 10, which he signed the following month.
On the state level, the first responder unions are not falling for the rhetoric. But this Chicago thing is an interesting little twist.
Rauner told WAND’s Doug Wolfe on Monday cities can offset the losses if a series of his reforms are enacted by the Illinois legislature. Among those would be giving municipalities more control over negotiating with police and fire unions. And, giving cities more control over police and fire pensions.
“If local governments can control what gets collectively bargained, who has to join a union or not in the local government, that frees up a significant amount of money as well,” Rauner stated. “They (police & fire) work for the local taxpayers, the local citizens. And there should be more control, local control of those pension issues.”
The commenter notes…
So just like right to work, he isn’t for it, but leave it up to someone else to do the dirty work.
Tuesday, Mar 24, 2015 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
The Low Carbon Portfolio Standard (LCPS) (SB 1585) is good for Illinois consumers, our economy, our environment, and the reliability of our electric system. The LCPS is a WIN-WIN for all of Illinois’ low carbon sources of energy, which include wind, solar and existing nuclear facilities.
Unfortunately, energy policies of the past have failed to properly value Illinois’ nuclear facilities for the economic, reliability and environmental benefits they provide, and as a result, some nuclear facilities may close. If that happens, the consequences for consumers and communities all across the State of Illinois would be catastrophic:
• $1.8 billion every year in lost economic activity
• Nearly 8,000 highly skilled jobs
• Up to $500 million annually in higher energy costs statewide, according to a PJM analysis
• $1.1 billion per year due to increases in carbon and other pollutants
• Hundreds of millions of dollars to construct new transmission lines
In fact, the cost to Illinois of allowing nuclear plants to prematurely retire are as much as 12 times greater than the maximum cost of the LCPS, when fully considering increased wholesale power prices, transmission costs, adverse economic impacts, and adverse environmental impacts, according to a State of Illinois report.
MEMBERS OF THE ILLINOIS SENATE ENERGY AND PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMITTEE:
VOTE YES ON THE LOW CARBON PORTFOLIO STANDARD (SB 1585)
“The unions are clearly attempting to avoid allowing the federal courts to decide this issue, but the governor’s lawsuit continues in the Northern District, where it was encouraging to see state employees file today to intervene in support of their First Amendment rights.”
Gov. Bruce Rauner on Monday ordered a clout-heavy Chicago TV and movie studio to give back a $10 million state grant that his predecessor, Pat Quinn, had awarded to the studio’s owners to buy land that isn’t for sale.
The Rauner administration’s action came one day after the Chicago Sun-Times revealed that owners of six of the seven properties listed in the grant say they have no plans to sell their land to Cinespace Chicago Film Studios or anybody else. There’s no indication the seventh property is for sale, either.
Quinn’s administration, the Sun-Times also found, awarded the $10 million without any appraisals to justify the projected purchase prices listed by the studio’s owners.
Additionally, the former governor’s Department of Commerce and Economic opportunity had nothing to show that Cinespace had pending contracts to buy any of the properties — or even had been in negotiations to buy them, according to documents obtained under the Illinois Freedom of Information Act.
The former [Pat Quinn] aide, speaking only on the condition of anonymity, notes that the $10 million grant expires on June 30 and that Cinespace would have to repay any of the money it hasn’t spent.
The aide says it’s common practice for the state to write lump-sum grant checks to businesses like Cinespace that bring jobs to Illinois — particularly when the grants involve buying land.
“To get these deals done, you have to have liquidity,” the aide says. “There was quite a bit of due diligence and discussion, which is totally in keeping with these types of grants.” […]
Under the grant, Cinespace is required to put in twice as much of its own money as it spends from the state grant. That’s to go toward land acquisition and rehabilitation, as well as free rent for college film programs, including those at DePaul University and Columbia College Chicago.
Cinespace is a family-owned business run by former real estate developer Alex Pissios. It has used the millions of dollars it’s gotten from the state to turn what once was a Ryerson steel mill in North Lawndale into what the company touts as the biggest film studio east of Los Angeles.
Since Gov. Bruce Rauner proposed slashing spending so that it matches actual annual revenues, it seems all we hear about are the worst-case scenarios that would result as every group in Illinois fights to keep what they’ve been getting. And those worst-case scenarios sound pretty rough. […]
We know it will be painful and there might be some negative consequences from some of the cuts. It scares me, for instance, to think about having to cut help for young adults who’ve aged out of the foster system and who never have been dealt a decent hand in their short lives. But these are the conversations that must be had.
Illinois expects to collect $32 billion in tax revenue. Rauner proposes to cut more than $6 billion to deal with the deficit and spend $31.5 billion. It really would be painful if I had to cut my spending by 20 percent, but there was a time once when I had to find a way to cut 10 percent. Staycations happened rather than vacations. There were far fewer dinners out and drinks with friends after work.
I don’t kid myself. I know there are plenty of us in Illinois who cut all that and much more during the Great Recession. They’ve never recovered from it.
But now it’s up to all of us to figure out what we want to afford. What we’re willing to pay for and what we’re not willing to fund. What can we live without?
* OK, first of all, Gov. Rauner did not match spending with revenues. His budget plan is loaded with billions in phony savings.
And even with those magical mystery savings, he still had to do things like toss kids off ventilators. So, while most people might want to compare their own personal situations to the budget, being forced to take a “staycation” or buying fewer glasses of wine is quite a bit different than telling parentless kids who are wards of the state that DCFS will no longer be their parents and they’ll be completely on their own once they turn 18.
We need to cut, yes, but we need to cut things that would be described as those little luxuries she mentions cutting out of her personal budget. I didn’t see her mention cutting utilities, groceries, medical care out of her personal budget.
That’s exactly right.
* Also, not a word about revenues? Sheesh.
To compare my own family history to state budgeting, when I was a kid and my parents found themselves struggling financially (they had five boys) my dad would go out and get another job. He often worked three jobs when I was young. Did they also take out some loans to get through particularly tough times? Yep. Did my dad buy some cars (and an old tractor), fix them up and sell them for profits? Yep. Why? Because they recognized their need for more revenues. But did they also constantly watch their spending? Heck yes they did. Whew, did they ever.
Rockford resident and Illinois State University student Lauretta Schaefer testified in the Illinois Senate Appropriations I Committee yesterday about the effects Governor Rauner’s budget would have on the Department of Children and Family Services.
Schaefer receives a scholarship from DCFS that allows her to attend college - something she knew she couldn’t do otherwise.
“When I was 14 my adopted parents showed me the DCFS scholarship, and I knew that was my ticket to higher education. Without the scholarship, I wouldn’t be able to attend college. Even with it, I still work two jobs to make ends meet,” said Schaefer.
Under the proposed budget, DCFS’s budget faces a nearly $150 million cut. A majority of the cuts will eliminate services for DCFS youth who are 18 years or older.
Senator Steve Stadelman (D-Rockford) who sits on the Appropriations I Committee had concerns about the proposed cuts.
“Many of these children have no parents and no support system to fall back on once they reach the age of 18. As a parent of four, I know my children will still call me for help and advice once they reach 18. These children don’t have that safety net. If we cut these programs, these young adults will have no one to fall back on. We need to keep these programs to help these kids break the cycle of poverty, to grow up and become productive members of our society,” said Stadelman.
It’s truly worth your time to listen to her testimony…
* Jim Dey writes about that new self described Democratic group Illinoisans for Growth and Opportunity, which claims to have $20 million for Democratic legislative races…
Perhaps a better comparison would be to the Democratic Leadership Council, the organization then-Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton created in the late 1980s that was aimed at dragging the Democratic Party back from the political left to the more moderate center. Derided by the Rev. Jesse Jackson as “Democrats for the Leisure Class,” the DLC enjoyed vast success before folding.
“The DLC helped elect Bill Clinton to the presidency. That’s why people have to pay attention to the (ILGO),” said David Yepsen, who heads the Paul Simon Institute for Public Policy at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale.
The DLC did have a lot of political success, but it was constantly out there talking policy. And it folded because the rank and file grew tired of its corporatist rhetoric. The Democrats now talk a good populist game, which helps them be almost as corporatist as the DLC was. So far, we’re not getting much of anything from the ILGO except for vagaries about undefined principles.
Steve Brown, a spokesman for Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan, said his boss “generally welcomes” those who want to become active in the Democratic Party. Beyond that, Brown said, he’s waiting for specifics.
“I don’t know much more than what I’ve read,” he said, describing the organization’s criticisms of Democratic leadership as “vague.” He predicted, however, that Democratic legislators are “not going to turn (their) backs” on traditional constituencies because “rich” people demand a shift in course.
“I’m not sure $20 million gets you very far any more,” said Brown, referring to the organization’s bankroll.
Um, $20 mil is still a lot of dough, Brownie. But, so far, Brown’s boss has been working with the governor. As I’ve said before, this may be more about intimidating the Senate President and his liberal caucus.
Lawmakers are scheduled to consider a new plan introduced by House Speaker Michael Madigan to end weeks of negotiations over plugging a $1.6 billion hole in this year’s state budget.
The Legislature faces a fast-approaching deadline to act as money runs out for subsidized childcare programs, prisons and court reporters.
The Chicago Democrat introduced the plan late Monday. It would authorize Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner to transfer $1.3 billion from other purposes, including parks and conservation. The rest would come from a 2.25 percent across-the-board budget cut. […]
Madigan’s spokesman declined to comment as did the governor’s office. Senate Democrats said they planned to review the “progress” with their caucus.
Subscribers know more, but the amendments are here and here. House Republican Leader Jim Durkin was added as a chief co-sponsor yesterday on both measures. Both measures are posted for hearings this morning in the House Executive Committee.
Rep. Barbara Flynn Currie, D-Chicago, said the cuts, including about a $150 million cut to education will be painful, but more than 80 percent of the budget hole is being filled by taking money from the special state funds. […]
To ease the impact of the education cuts, Gov. Bruce Rauner will be given discretion to use up to $97 million to aid districts that are facing severe financial problems because of the cuts.
“I think what we are looking at here are very serious problems that could result in the stoppage of education across the board,” Currie said.
Federal funds will not be touched as part of the plan. Also, Illinois hospitals agreed to a plan in which they pay to help leverage federal health care matching funds that are then returned to them.
* Crain’s published an op-ed today that has some advice for whomever is elected Chicago’s mayor: Help small businesses start and grow. Here are a few of their suggestions, which are all pretty good..
Create easy-to-find checklists for license and permit applications. Entrepreneurs often have to spend hours waiting in City Hall only to be told they do not have all the paperwork they need to receive a license or permit.
Treat minor regulatory infractions with a friendly warning rather than a fine. Today, a first-time offense means a fine that runs in the hundreds of dollars, and often an administrative hearing that requires expensive legal support.
Reduce the administrative hearings that require businesses to spend money on legal representation. Chicago has an online system to deal with minor traffic violations like red-light tickets, but none for minor business violations. When business owners get a ticket, they must appear before the Department of Administrative Hearings and then sometimes appear again before the Department of Business Affairs, even when the ticket has been dismissed […]
Simplify signage and awning rules. Chicago should have a one-step online application for sign and awning permits. Today, the entire City Council votes on each signage request and on every awning that hangs over the public way. Furthermore, a bonded sign-erector is required to put up every sign.
Foster home businesses. Don’t outlaw the next Jeff Bezos. Let home businesses operate in garages so long as they don’t disturb the neighbors or impact the environment. Repeal the prohibition against home businesses hiring more than one employee, especially for remote employees. And end the restriction on selling homemade products outside of the home.
Make it quick to start up. It takes 32 days to start a professional-services business in Chicago. In Phoenix, an online system gets businesses through permitting and licensing in one day.
Tuesday, Mar 24, 2015 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Credit unions are committed to several cooperative principles, including social responsibility. At Staley Credit Union in Decatur, encouraging their members and the community to make steps toward better health is a top priority. Since 2006, the credit union has been a primary sponsor of the annual Penguin in the Park 5K. As a result of the credit union’s staunch support, this important community event has grown from 135 to nearly 1,000 participants.
Now in its 10th year, Penguin in the Park will once again receive more than $3,500 from Staley Credit Union for medals, t-shirts, sports bags, and other items. This event continues to be highly important to the credit union because health statistics in Macon County relative to obesity and physical inactivity exceed comparable data for all other Illinois counties.
Helping the community develop and maintain healthy lifestyles is just one facet of the credit union’s extensive outreach, which also includes awarding college scholarships, financially supporting a wide variety of city and county school athletic programs, post prom parties, and helping to sustain local food pantries. At the heart of the credit union philosophy is the principle of people before profits – and another reason why members are so fiercely loyal.
* A federal judge in southern Illinois has ruled in favor of unions attempting to block Gov. Bruce Rauner’s fair share fee plan.
You’ll recall that the governor filed a preemptive federal lawsuit in Chicago to declare the employee fair share fees unconstitutional.
The unions responded to that federal suit, claiming that the matter belonged in state court. The unions also filed another suit in state court in St. Clair County challenging the legality of the governor’s refusal to transmit fair share fees to the unions.
The governor then asked a federal court in southern Illinois to take the case from the county court. That federal court refused his request today, saying essentially that a state issue belongs in a state court.
District courts have “original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The Supreme Court has recognized two ways in which a case may arise under federal law. Gunn v. Minton, 133 S. Ct. 1059, 1064 (2013). First, a case most commonly arises under federal law when federal law creates the cause of action. Second, a case asserting only state-law causes of action may arise under federal law “if a federal issue is (1) necessarily raised, (2) actually disputed, (3) substantial, and (4) capable of resolution in federal court without disrupting the federal-state balance approved by Congress.” Gunn, 133 S.Ct. at 1065; Grable & Sons Metal Prods., Inc. v. Darue Eng’g & Mfg., 545 U.S. 308, 312 (2005) (recognizing that “federal-question jurisdiction will lie over state-law claims that implicate significant federal issues”). […]
It is well-settled, however, “that a case may not be removed to federal court on the basis of a federal defense . . . even if the defense is anticipated in the plaintiff’s complaint, and even if both parties concede that the federal defense is the only question truly at issue.” Caterpillar v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 392 (1987); see also Doe v. Allied-Signal, Inc., 985 F.2d 908, 911 (7th Cir. 1993). Pursuant to the “well-pleaded complaint” rule, a plaintiff may avoid federal court jurisdiction by pleading only state-law claims, even “though certain federal questions may be implicit in his or her claim.” Doe, 985 F.2d at 911.
Here, unlike Grable, a federal question is not “necessarily raised” in Plaintiffs’ Complaint because a federal issue is not an essential element of Plaintiffs’ state-law causes of action. Even if Plaintiffs [unions] anticipated that Defendants [Rauner] would raise the First Amendment of the United States Constitution as a defense or even if both parties concede that the First Amendment of the United States Constitution is the only question truly at issue, this Court does not have jurisdiction. Plaintiffs’ “well-pleaded complaint” raises only state-law questions.
For the foregoing reasons, the Court REMANDS this case to the Circuit Court for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, St. Clair County, Illinois. The Court further DENIES as moot Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand (Doc. 26) and Motion to Accelerate the Briefing Schedule
Former Illinois Rep. Bobby Schilling hasn’t closed the door on running in the special election to replace embattled Republican Rep. Aaron Schock, according to a knowledgeable GOP source.
State Sen. Darin LaHood of Peoria is the early frontrunner in the forthcoming Republican primary, but Schilling represented [16 percent] of Illinois’ 18th District during his time in Congress and could bring some name identification to the race. […]
Former state Rep. Jil Tracy, who is from Quincy on the western edge of the 18th District, could have access to personal money, which could help her overcome an initial name identification deficit. Her husband’s family has a large trucking and food distribution company.
Tracy, who lost a race for lieutenant governor in 2014, made calls to potential donors in Chicago late last week, testing the waters for a potential congressional run, according to local sources.
But GOP sources also said Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner is working behind the scenes for LaHood and has offered to gather significant financial support for Tracy if she challenges Democratic state Sen. John Sullivan in 2016 instead of running for Congress.
I talked to Schilling just a few weeks ago and he said he had no desire to ever run for office again. Things change.
Also, Rauner’s people are indeed pushing LaHood, from what I’m told. And the SGOPs (and Rauner) would love to have Tracy challenge Sullivan in 2016. She could be the only person who has a shot at defeating him. But I don’t think she’s sold on that one yet. Stay tuned.
* From a Rauner administration press release. All emphasis added…
IDOT, ISP, Tollway, Industry Partners Urge Caution in Work Zones
Event Kicks Off Work Zone Awareness Week
CHICAGO –The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), Illinois State Police (ISP), Illinois Tollway, and labor representatives are teaming up to promote safe driving in work zones as part of National Work Zone Awareness week, which runs March 23-27. This joint effort is aimed at reducing the number of work zone crashes and saving lives on Illinois roads.
WHO: Tony Quigley, District 1 Project Implementation Engineer highways - IDOT
Lt. David Byrd – ISP
Mike Stone, Chief of Staff – Illinois Tollway Mike Sturino, President – Illinois Road and Transportation Builders
WHAT: Safety message for motorists on the importance of driving safely in work zones.
I know Mike Sturino. I like Mike Sturino. I’ve even spoken to Mike’s fine group.
But Mike Sturino is in no way a “labor representative.” And if this administration thinks he is, then we have more craziness ahead than we can ever know.
A new survey, Chicago Latino Voters and the 2015 Mayoral Runoff, conducted by Latino Decisions and co-sponsored by Latino Policy Forum, National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Communities (NALACC) and Univision Chicago, was released at a town hall meeting this morning. […]
The poll found Latino voters demonstrate an exceptional level of interest in April’s election. When asked how enthusiastic they were in casting a vote in the upcoming race, 85% said they were very or somewhat enthusiastic. […]
Findings showed nearly two out of every three Latino voters have not been asked by “anyone from a campaign, political party, or community organization” for their vote or if they were registered to vote.
Illinois coach John Groce said his team handled injuries and suspensions to make the most of its first 31 games. That left the Illini on the verge of a spot in the NCAA Tournament.
But the last three games left the Illini in the National Invitation Tournament and, finally, done for the season.
Groce said Monday that Illinois’ trouble started in the second half of the regular-season finale at Purdue. It ended with a blowout loss to Alabama in the NIT.
Groce said the Illini didn’t play tough or together in those games, and players and coaches share the blame.
Sorry, coach, but if a team doesn’t play well together it’s the coach’s fault. Period.
Additional compensation includes compensation for TV, radio and Internet appearances; apparel sponsorships; consulting; promoting the program and making public appearances.
Groce receives a bonus of $500,000 if he retains his job beyond the 2016-17 basketball season.
Groce and his wife are each provided a car.
The University pays for his membership at the Champaign Country Club.
Groce also received up to $25,000 to move his household to Champaign-Urbana when he was hired.
Groce must report all outside compensation to the athletic director and the chancellor at the end of each year.
Illinois coaches for all sports are eligible for insurance, retirement and sick leave
Anybody wanna guess if he gets that $500,000 bonus?
Either way, consider this a sans Illini March Madness open thread.
* Again, these are ancient numbers for a public opinion snapshot, but let’s look at ‘em anyway…
Registered voters in Illinois are less likely than in the past to believe “cutting waste and inefficiency” can solve the state’s budget woes, and more likely to believe that revenue increases are at least part of the solution, according to the results of a Simon Poll released Monday.
As in six previous polls, conducted by the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University Carbondale, interviewers presented respondents with three options for fixing the state budget deficit:
1. Increase taxes, because programs and services have already been cut; or
2. Cut waste and inefficiency in government, because the state takes in enough money to pay for services; or
3. A combination of cuts and revenue increases, because the budget problem is so large.
For the second time in seven surveys going back to 2009, almost half (48 percent) chose a response that included revenue increases—whether tax increases alone (14 percent) or in combination with budget cuts (34 percent).
Just over four in ten (42 percent) said the budget problem could be fixed by cutting waste and inefficiency alone—the lowest number in the time series, and down from a high of 58 percent in 2011.
Simon Institute visiting professor Charlie Leonard said he and his colleagues believe they are measuring a real sea change in the way Illinoisans view the budget problem. “Because mistrust of state government is unusually high in Illinois, compared to the rest of the country, voters have long believed there must be enough waste and fraud to offset the massive budget deficits we have faced for years,” Leonard said. “However, after detailed, protracted coverage in the media, and facing the real prospect of cuts to programs they like, we think Illinoisans are coming to grips with a problem that is far larger than they used to believe.”
* But…
In the 2015 survey, partisanship predictably influenced responses. Half (51 percent) of Republican respondents believed cutting waste alone could balance the budget, compared with just under half (46.9 percent) of Independents and just over a third (34.9 percent) of Democrats.
Similarly, belief that cuts alone could solve the problem was higher downstate (47.3 percent) than in the Chicago suburbs (42.6 percent) or in the city of Chicago (33.5 percent).
You’d think that after suffering through one facility closure after another that Downstaters would shy away from cuts, but maybe they are thinking about cuts to things than don’t impact them.
* Anyway, here are the year-by-year results to this question: The state of Illinois has a budget deficit of over [amount varies by year]. I’m going to read three statements that people have made about how to fix the deficit, and ask you which one comes closest to your views. If you haven’t thought much about this issue, just tell me that…
* And the trend remains strong against public employees…
Since 2008 Simon Institute polls have asked Illinois registered voters whether they favor or oppose budget cuts for a number of state programs, from education to infrastructure to social programs for the poor and disabled.
Respondents were more likely to favor cuts to state workers’ retirement than in any other area tested. Even so, opposition to cuts in retirement spending was higher than support (at 44.3 percent in favor to 49.1 percent opposed).
Support was lowest for cuts in spending on programs for the disabled (13.2 percent) and cuts to K-12 education (15.7 percent). While opposition to cuts in specific program areas outweighs support in every instance, it is also true that levels of support for cuts in those areas has grown, again in each of the seven program areas tested.
Support for cutting pension benefits has more than doubled since 2008, from 22 percent back then to a high of 45.5 percent a few years ago, to 44 percent now…
There’s been a lot of tough talk under the Dome about how the Republicans are going to have to put all 20 of their members on a Fiscal Year 2015 budget fix. Maybe they’ll get a break, some say. and only have to put on 19. The Democrats correctly say the Republicans refused to cooperate on the budget for years and Rauner demanded that the GA not extend the income tax hike, so now the GOP is gonna have to carry the proportionate load.
The Republicans, understandably, want the structured roll call to be more even-Steven. And by that, I don’t mean that half the Democratic caucus would have to be for it (which would require at least 19 Senate Democratic votes), but that the partisan split would be closer to 15-15. After all, it was a Democratic budget that got us into this current mess, they rightfully say, and many of the fixes would benefit primarily Democratic constituencies (like child care funding, which the Democrats intentionally shorted last year). They’re willing to put up a higher caucus proportion than the Dems, but the overall numbers need to be more equal.
* The Question: Should the Republicans carry a vastly higher structured roll call burden or should the FY 15 vote be more even-Steven? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
In a study released Monday, the ACLU says that Chicago officers last summer conducted more than 250,000 stops of people who weren’t arrested.
The report, based on CPD data, found that the practice was employed at a rate that was four times as high as New York “at the height” of officers’ use of the practice there.
According to the report, officers are required to write down the reason for stops. However half of the stops reported gave an unlawful reason, or no reason at all.
The ACLU also says that almost three-fourths of those stopped were African-American, though they make up about a third of the city’s population.
The data analyzed by the ACLU shows that stops most commonly take place in the districts with the largest minority populations. For example, in 2014, police conducted 266 stops per 1000 people in the Englewood area (which is predominantly African American) while the rate in predominantly white Lincoln/Foster district was just 43 per 1000 people.
However, the data also shows that African Americans are much more likely to be the target of stops in predominantly white neighborhoods. Thus, in Jefferson Park where the population is just 1% African American, African Americans account for a full 15% of all stop-and-frisks in that area. In the Near North District, where the African American population is 9.1%, African Americans are subjected to more than one-half (57.7%) of all the stops. The ACLU report concludes that “black citizens are disproportionately subjected to more stops than their white counterparts. […]
The City only records information about stops if there is no arrest or charges. Stops that result in arrest are not identifiable and so the rate of innocent persons stopped cannot be ascertained. In New York, which does keep such data, 88% of persons stopped were innocent (they were not arrested or issued a summons). Also, Chicago records no information about frisks, which prevents the City from computing the rate of frisks resulting in the seizure of contraband. For example, in New York, which records frisk data, only 2% of the frisks turned up weapons.
The Chicago Police Department is fighting to keep a lid on how, when and where officers have used covert cellphone tracking systems — with an outside law firm billing the city more than $120,000 to battle a lawsuit that seeks those secret details.
Since 2005, the department has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on cell-site simulators manufactured by the Harris Corp. in Melbourne, Florida, records show. The devices — with names like StingRay and KingFish — capture cellphone signals.
Cops can use the technology, originally developed for the military, to locate cellphones. Police agencies in other states have revealed in court that StingRays and similar devices have been used to locate suspects, fugitives and victims in criminal investigations.
But privacy activists across the country have begun to question whether law enforcement agencies have used the devices to track people involved in demonstrations in violation of their constitutional rights. They also have concerns the technology scoops up the phone data of innocent citizens and police targets alike.
* This is the second time in a few months that the governor’s motorcade has been involved in an accident. Thankfully, nobody was seriously hurt…
On Monday, the Illinois State Police reported one of the vehicles in Rauner’s security detail hit the rear of a tractor trailer during an incident on Interstate 55 in Countryside.
The governor’s vehicle was not involved in the crash. The trooper driving the vehicle that hit the truck was transported to a local hospital and has been treated and released, a state police memo noted.
Police blamed the accident on wintry road conditions.
The crash happened about 8:15 a.m., when Rauner and officers with the Illinois State Police Executive Protection Unit were heading southbound on the expressway (I-55) near LaGrange Road doing a routine movement, State Police said.
One of the tail vehicles driven by a state trooper lost control and struck the rear tandem axle of a truck tractor, according to a statement from state police. It was snowing and the roadway was slick at the time of the crash.
The trooper was taken to a local hospital and was treated and released, police said. The vehicle Rauner was traveling in was not involved in the crash.
Illinois law forces most employees of state government to pay money to a union as a condition of keeping their jobs. Even though state employees aren’t forced to be full-fledged union members, they are required to pay fees to the union whether or not they want representation. Today, three state workers represented by the Liberty Justice Center have taken legal action to end that practice.
In February, Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner issued an executive order to stop collecting “fair share” union fees from employees of state government who are not union members. Gov. Rauner simultaneously filed a federal lawsuit asking a federal judge in Chicago – and ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court – to declare mandatory non-member union fees unconstitutional. The three state workers represented by the LJC have filed a motion in federal court seeking to intervene in that lawsuit.
“The First Amendment guarantees everyone the right to choose whose speech they support and what groups they associate with. State workers shouldn’t have to sacrifice that right just to keep their jobs,” said Jacob Huebert, senior attorney at the Liberty Justice Center. “No one should be forced to pay money to a government union to keep their job. In filing this motion, these state workers are asking the court to protect their fundamental First Amendment rights and the rights of all state workers.”
Background: In February, Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner issued an executive order to stop collecting “fair share” fees from people who work for state government and are not full-union members. Gov. Rauner simultaneously filed a federal lawsuit asking a federal judge in Chicago – and ultimately the U.S. Supreme Court – to declare non-member union fees unconstitutional.
Government unions and Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan asked the court to dismiss Rauner’s lawsuit, arguing the governor did not have standing to bring this suit because he has not been required to pay union fees.
Regardless of how the court rules on the standing issue, the three state workers taking legal action today do have standing to challenge these union fees. For years, they have been forced to pay money to a union against their will, just to keep their jobs. These plaintiffs seek to intervene in this lawsuit to make sure that their fundamental First Amendment rights are protected.
Due to the magnitude of this case, it may ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. The court is positioned to rule that mandatory non-member union fees are unconstitutional based on of its June 2014 ruling in Harris v. Quinn, in which a home health worker challenged former Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn. In the Harris decision, the U.S. Supreme Court wrote that a 1977 decision allowing mandatory non-member union fees was “questionable.” In Harris, a majority of the high court ruled that requiring home health workers to pay mandatory union fees was a violation of their First Amendment rights.
The Liberty Justice Center is a “public interest law firm started by the Illinois Policy Institute,” according to an earlier press release.
The three plaintiffs are Mark Janus, Marie Quigley, and Brian Trygg. Janus works for IDOT, the others work for Healthcare and Family Services.
[Mark Janus] does not agree with what he views as the union’s one-sided politicking for only its point of view. Janus also believes that AFSCME’s behavior in bargaining does not appreciate the current fiscal crises in Illinois and, does not reflect his best interests or the interests of Illinois citizens. […]
[Marie Quigley] also objects to many of AFSCME’s public-policy positions, including the positions that AFSCME advocates for in collective bargaining.
For example, she disagrees with AFSCME’s negotiation of contract terms that favor seniority over employee merit for purposes of layoffs and promotions, is concerned about the effect that AFSCME’s bargaining behavior is having on the Illinois budget, believes that union representatives are only looking out for themselves at the expense of union members and the people of Illinois, and does not believe that AFSCME is acting in her best interest or in the best interests of Illinois citizens. […]
[Brian Trygg] has sincere religious objections to associating with Teamsters Local 916 and its agenda. Trygg also believes that Teamsters Local 916 harms Illinois residents by objecting to efforts by the State to reduce costs that would allow public funds to be made available for more important uses. For example, the Union resists any furlough days, despite the State’s budget issues.
Discuss.
*** UPDATE *** Illinois AFL-CIO President Michael Carrigan…
“It’s no surprise that corporate-funded, anti-worker organizations are supporting Gov. Rauner’s illegal executive order. The Right To Work Foundation and Illinois Policy Institute are corporate shell groups looking to further erode middle class economic security to boost the objectives of their benefactors. We will protect the integrity of the law, our collective bargaining agreements and the rights of all workers from these politically motivated attacks.
“The issues raised in the Governor’s lawsuit and by the interveners were decided long ago by the U.S. Supreme Court in a case called Abood. The concept of charging employees for non-political union representation is permitted under the First Amendment. We are opposed to workers having a free ride where the union is required to represent them without reimbursement for representation expenses that are non-political in nature.”
When I asked Samuel C. Scott III, one of the group’s three named board members, about whether the purpose of the organization was to back Rauner’s moves in Springfield, he said:
“It’s to give him support, yes. It’s to try to make clear some of the things he’s doing.”
I asked Scott, retired chairman of Corn Products Intl., if he had spoken to Rauner personally about this. He said he hadn’t, but added: “I know he’s talked to Tony Anderson.”
Scott was referring to Anthony K. Anderson, a retired vice chair at Ernst & Young who was identified as chairman of the group.
Anderson didn’t agree with Scott’s characterization.
“I’m not sure the governor is going to like what we do,” said Anderson, arguing that his goal is to “give Democrats cover” to take tough votes that might put them at political risk.
“We’ve talked to everybody, including the governor, about this,” he said.
A third member of the group’s board of directors, Patricia Pulido-Sanchez, who operates her own communications and marketing company, was clear about her political allegiances.
“I am a Rauner supporter. I think he’s the best governor we’ve had in a long time,” said Pulido, which wasn’t much of a surprise considering that her husband, attorney Manny Sanchez, has also been a prominent supporter of Rauner’s.
Illinois GO is designed to help lawmakers make better decisions through research, education campaigns, and public engagement. Illinois GO is not designed to push Gov. Bruce Rauner’s, or any other individual’s, agenda, as Mark Brown assumes in his column.
As for Mr. Brown’s “dark money” allegations, 510(c)4 structures, under which donors are not publicly disclosed, is the very same design used by hundreds of chambers of commerce and trade and labor groups across the country. Is the Sun-Times asserting that local chambers of commerce or AARP or the Sierra Club need to disclose the details of their members’ dues every time the group takes a position on a piece of legislation? Further, direct contributions to independent expenditure campaigns are always disclosed, and transfers from 510(c)4 are allowed.
If they transfer the dark money to the IE account, it’s still dark money. Sheesh.
* On Thursday afternoon, the Illinois Senate overwhelming confirmed Gov. Bruce Rauner’s choice to chair the Illinois State Board of Education, former Sen. James Meeks.
Almost immediately thereafter, gay rights group Equality Illinois denounced the governor for nominating Meeks. That condemnation was shortly followed by an equally harsh rebuke by a large coalition of Chicago-area community groups, many with no direct connection to gay rights issues.
* On Friday, Gov. Rauner met with Equality Illinois and other groups and agreed to take some action and hire another staffer…
In the first of its kind meeting with LGBT leaders, Gov. Bruce Rauner today committed his administration to strict enforcement of non-discrimination laws and suggested an openness to new initiatives to protect Illinoisans who experience unequal treatment. […]
During the discussion in the James R. Thompson Center, Gov. Rauner told the participants his office will issue a directive to all state officials and agencies to strictly enforce Illinois non-discrimination and anti-bullying laws, including as they apply to protect LGBT individuals. This directive is a first for Illinois.
The Governor’s office has also issued a second directive to the Illinois Department of Human Rights to conduct a survey on patterns of discrimination and unequal treatment faced by Illinoisans and to provide actionable recommendations to the Governor by January 31, 2016. […]
In addition, the governor will appoint a liaison to the state’s LGBT community providing an open and ongoing line of communication.
Four years ago, controversial Rev. James Meeks skewered mayoral candidate Rahm Emanuel, saying he wasn’t out for the best interests of black voters.
“Ask any African-American leaders about that. They will tell you he had a role in keeping African-Americans out of the White House. All of the sudden, he sails into town, into African-American communities with all of this great stuff he’s going to do for us,” Meeks said during a talk show on WVON-AM 1690 at the time. “Your proof is in your track record. If he’s never done anything for African-Americans, wake up people. What would make us think he’s going to sail into town and start doing things for us now?”
But on Friday, Meeks stood side by side with Emanuel, endorsing him and saying he’s made a difference in black communities.
“You cannot turn a city like Chicago around in four years, it takes longer,” Meeks said in a resounding speech. “We appreciate the job that the mayor has been doing and we believe that he deserves four more years to continue his work.”
* So, to sum up, Meeks gets his job on Thursday, and the next day Rahm gets his Meeks endorsement and Rauner calms the anger of gay activists and makes what is apparently a patronage pledge.
Maybe this isn’t all connected, but if it is, then it was very well done. Also, if it was coordinated, then Gov. Rauner is playing a more active role in Rahm’s campaign than he has admitted.
Officials from Gov. Bruce Rauner’s administration say his proposed state budget cut for a program that serves toddlers with disabilities and developmental delays wouldn’t be as drastic as first portrayed.
Among the Republican governor’s many suggested cuts in human services for the fiscal year that begins July 1 — to deal with a multibillion-dollar budget deficit — is a $23 million general revenue fund cut in Early Intervention services.
Supporters of the program said earlier this month, based on information presented by Rauner’s aides after his budget speech, that 10,000 fewer children would be served by Early Intervention in fiscal year 2016 under Rauner’s plan.
If the reduction estimate were accurate, the number of children from birth to age 3 receiving therapy through the program each year — currently more than 21,000 — would be cut almost in half.
But that’s not the case, said Linda Saterfield, associate director of the office of early childhood at the Illinois Department of Human Services. Rauner’s plan actually would reduce the caseload by 4,000 in fiscal 2016, putting the total number served at roughly 17,000, she said last week.
But a 50 percent reduction in the statewide caseload would happen in a few years as children currently in the program complete therapy or reach age 3, [Amy Zimmerman, director of the Chicago Medical-Legal Partnership for Children] said. Saterfield agreed that the situation Zimmerman described could be a possibility.
A newly formed group of self-described “center-left” Democrats claims to have secured $20 million in commitments to spend on state legislative races here.
But that $20 million apparently isn’t meant to counter Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner’s infamous $20 million campaign stash, which he says will be used to support his allies and punish his enemies. Indeed, the Democratic group appears to be promoting what could be seen as a somewhat softer, neo-liberal version of Raunerism.
Illinoisans for Growth and Opportunity is not a traditional Democratic group, as its name more than implies. The press release announcing the group’s launch blasted Democratic leadership, including former Gov. Pat Quinn and both legislative leaders, for passing a budget last year “that they knew would create a financial crisis.”
The group also bemoans the lack of manufacturing employment, the state’s horrible credit rating and its poor business climate ratings, without specifically endorsing any real world fixes like workers’ compensation reform.
The ILGO blames all these problems on unspecified “special interests” which have had “far too much influence with legislative majorities in setting public policy.”
In interviews last week, the leaders of the group refused to specify which Democratic-allied special interests they were talking about, but they did point to the ultra-liberal Chicago Teachers Union as an organization which takes hardline stances without regard to “reality.”
The idea, apparently, is to create a well-funded alternate path for Democrats who may fear upsetting organized labor and other traditional party allies this year. The group doesn’t appear to be an overtly Rauneresque “anti-union” organization, but they are definitely not intending to echo organized labor’s positions, claiming that they’re “not bound by the constructs” of the party and its traditional allies.
Further evidence of this is that the new organization appears mainly designed to buttress Democrats who find themselves in tough primary races. “We’re not very interested in the balance of power as relates to Democrats vs. Republicans,” said an official with the organization. The hottest Democratic primaries lately have been fought between activist union-allied candidates and business-backed candidates.
So far, though, specifics are almost completely absent. Usually, it’s pretty easy to assess where a Statehouse organization stands. They have priority lists and even lists of legislation which they support and oppose. No such list currently exists for Illinoisans for Growth and Opportunity.
The group’s leaders say they will be “communicating very clearly” and “working with the leaders and caucuses” throughout the spring session. But so far at least, they aren’t taking a stance on things like taxation. “We’re not advocating that you raise taxes, and we’re not advocating that you cut spending,” said another group leader. Instead, they say they want a “holistic” approach. They are clearly interested in protecting some state spending, claiming that there are many state programs which are “important” for Illinoisans.
Despite their harsh talk about their party’s legislative leadership, they claim that they’ve reached out to the caucus leaders to assure them that “we have their backs.”
And while they did identified a handful of board members, financing will likely be done mostly in the dark. The group has formed a not-for-profit 501(c)(4) group, which will allow contributors to remain anonymous. That money and other public contributions will then be funneled to an independent expenditure committee.
The general consensus under the Dome after news first broke about ILGO is that it’s probably little more than a Rauner front organization.
The three publicly identified board members have contributed relatively few actual campaign dollars in the past, and one of them is married to a prominent Rauner supporter. That’s leading some to believe that Rauner’s super-wealthy pals (many of whom have also contributed big bucks to Mayor Emanuel, who has ties to the firm which is handling the new organization’s activities) will be the real force behind the ILGO’s “dark money” fund.
The ILGO’s press release, which was so critical of the state’s Democratic leadership it purports to support, had as its main thrust fixing this fiscal year’s budget problem, which is currently the biggest Statehouse topic by far. Quite a few Senate Democrats said that it looked like the press release was aimed directly at them because they weren’t fully cooperating with Gov. Rauner on the budget fix.
* On Friday, I posted the Rauner administration’s react statement to Attorney General Lisa Madigan’s official opinion claiming that the governor’s right to work ideas are not legal. Here’s the full response from the governor’s general counsel…
From: Jason Barclay, General Counsel to the Governor
Re: Permissibility of Employee Empowerment Zones Under Federal Law
Date: March 20, 2015
The Governor has proposed legislation to protect employee rights, including the right to employment not conditioned upon union membership, in employee empowerment zones. Under the Governor’s proposal, voters could decide whether such rights should apply within their respective county, municipality, school district, or other unit of local government.
The National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”), 29 U.S.C. § 158(a)(3), preempts the regulation of “union security agreements” in all instances that impact interstate commerce. That preemption does not apply, however, where such agreements have been “prohibited by State . . . law.” Specifically, Section 14(b) of the NLRA provides:
Nothing in this subchapter shall be construed as authorizing the execution or application of agreements requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment in any State or Territory in which such execution or application is prohibited by State or Territory law.
In opinion 15-001, issued March 20, 2015, Attorney General Lisa Madigan concludes that this exception permits state to prohibit union security agreements only “on a statewide (or territory- wide) basis”, as 25 states and one territory have done. She argues that local governments cannot prohibit such agreements.
The Attorney General’s opinion cites several cases, including Kentucky and New Mexico, that challenged a local ordinance establishing the right-to-work in that locality. Notably, in each of these cases, the law at issue was enacted by the local government, without state authority. None of these cases addressed the structure being proposed by Governor Rauner, which would be based on new state law.
Under Governor Rauner’s proposal, the state would establish a uniform set of employee rights. Those rights would apply to employees only in those parts of the state that opted-in to the state law. Thus, in the plain language of Section 14(b) of the NLRA, the use of labor security agreements in those parts of the state would be “prohibited by State law.” While state law would authorize voters to decide whether or not to apply these employee protections, if applied the protections would derive from state law, not local law, and therefore fit squarely within the exception under Section 14(b) of the NLRA.
That’s actually a pretty decent argument on its face, particularly the final, highlighted paragraph. Also, I think Rauner’s attorney may have missed an angle. The AG’s opinion rightly points out that the federal Labor Relations Act is based on legit interstate commerce issues. But what if a school district wanted an “empowerment zone” only for its employees? Is that really interstate commerce? I suppose the district probably buys goods from other states (including textbooks), but does one have much to do with the other?
The issue of the validity of local ordinances that prohibit union security agreements was again addressed in New Mexico Federation of Labor v. City of Clovis, 735 F. Supp. 999 (D.N.M. 1990). In City of Clovis, a group of affected labor organizations brought an action against the home rule city challenging an ordinance that purported to prohibit employers located within the city from requiring membership in a labor organization, or the payment of dues, assessments, or other charges to such an organization, as a condition of employment. Concerning preemption, the court found that:
The Congressional regulation of union security agreements is comprehensive and pervasive. [Citation.] Section 8(a)(3) of the NLRA provides for specific conditions which must be met in order for an agreement to be valid. Congress intended to prohibit non-federal laws which would allow agreements impermissible under the Act. [Citations.] This indicates * * * that Congress intended an exclusive regulatory system and that §8(a)(3) so thoroughly regulates the subject * * * so as to preempt the matter from state legislation except to the extent specifically permitted under §14(b) of the Act.
A myriad of local regulations would create obstacles to Congress’ objectives under the NLRA. If the Ordinance is allowed to stand, other local governmental entities * * * could enact such ordinances, or different ordinances, concerning the same subject matter. The result would be a crazy-quilt of regulations within the various states. * * *
It is true that by enacting §14(b), Congress contemplated diversity of regulation throughout the country on the subject of union security agreements. [Citation.] However, the diversity that arises from different regulations among various of the 50 states and the federal enclaves within the 21 right-to-work states is qualitatively different from the diversity that would arise if cities, counties, and other local governmental entities throughout the country were free to enact their own regulations. * * * This result would * * * undermine the NLRA’s purpose by discouraging rather than encouraging bargaining on “conditions of employment.” City of Clovis, 735 F. Supp. at 1002-03.
The court specifically addressed whether the phrase “State or Territorial law” in section 14(b) could be interpreted to encompass local ordinances, and concluded that it could not:
No mention is made [in section 14(b)] of local ordinances or other means. “Congress is presumed to use words in their ordinary sense unless it expressly indicates the contrary.” [Citations.] In ordinary usage, the words “State or Territorial law” would not include legislation enacted by political subdivisions of the state. [Citation.] Courts have held that as a matter of plain language, reference to a “state” does not include reference to subdivisions of the state. City of Clovis, 735 F. Supp. at 1004.
Because of its conclusion that units of local government are preempted by the NLRA from enacting local ordinances that regulate union security agreements, the court found it unnecessary to address the question of whether the city possessed the requisite authority to enact such an ordinance in the first instance. City of Clovis, 735 F. Supp. at 1004.8
I highlighted that one fragment to show that the AG’s office believes that even identical and uniform local right to work zones would be prohibited. But that isn’t much.
* The hard truth is that no governor has ever tried to do what Rauner wants - establish a state opt-in law for local right to work zones. It’s all new and mostly untested. And because of that, his lawyers can keep on saying what they’re saying and the governor will undoubtedly keep pushing the idea during his innumerable public remarks. AG Madigan ain’t gonna stop Rauner’s speechifyin’.
* Also, notice that first line of the general counsel’s memo…
The Governor has proposed legislation…
“Proposed,” I’m told by the governor’s office, does not mean “introduced.” We all know that this thing isn’t going anywhere under the current legislative makeup. So, he will likely introduce it at some point, but perhaps refuse to call it for a vote because it’s just not quite soup yet (notice his endless comments that an FY 15 budget fix is just “days away”).
The end result? More endless speechifyin’ until he either gets a new and more favorable legislative map in his possible second term, or until he leaves office.
Gov. Bruce Rauner’s former campaign manager is now working for Republican presidential hopeful Rand Paul, but that’s not Chip Englander’s only new gig.
The political strategist has joined the Chicago office of Michael Best Strategies LLC, a Wisconsin-based lobbying start-up that’s trying to break into Illinois.
This isn’t the first time a top official or political aide, perhaps looking to leverage his or her clout and connections, has gone to work for a lobbying firm.
But this move is notable because on the campaign trail Rauner criticized that revolving door and a day after taking office, on Jan. 13, signed an executive order that bans state employees from working for a lobbying firm for one year after leaving state government. “Business as usual is over in Illinois,” he said at the time.
Englander was never a state employee, so the order doesn’t apply here.
He isn’t a registered lobbyist but the Michael Best web site says he “anchors the practice in Illinois.”
Still, the question remains: Is it hypocritical of Rauner to block ex-state employees from doing what a top aide is doing?
And how will Rauner manage the potential conflict of interest when Michael Best lobbies the governor’s office, as it indicated in state filings it plans to do?
Rauner spokesman Lance Trover says, “Chip Englander is not a registered lobbyist, nor is or was a member of the administration. . . . There’s nothing else to say.”
* Well, OK. But the BGA could’ve looked inward to answer the question of how Rauner will “manage the potential conflict of interest” when Best (not Englander, Best) “lobbies the governor’s office.”
Look further and you’ll see that the BGA’s registration filing shows that they intend to lobby the governor’s office and the governor himself.
They even have a contract lobbyist on the payroll, who is involved with several high-profile issues this year and does subcontracting work for the Ounce of Prevention Fund, which is run by the governor’s wife.
* Look, I’m not saying that the BGA is corrupt in any way. Sanctimonious and hypocritical, yes. But not corrupt.
Also, Rauner has no absolute, direct control over Chip’s career now. He isn’t a king. He can’t stop somebody from working for a firm that does some lobbying.
So, the answer to the BGA’s question is the governor should deal with Michael Best the way he deals with any lobster, including the BGA and Andy Shaw (and keep in mind that Rauner has donated big bucks to the BGA in the past).
* I kept comments opened later than usual because of the two attorney general opinions and I was awaiting a response from the governor’s office, which hasn’t yet arrived. I’m done for now.
* Attorney General Lisa Madigan has just issued two formal opinions. One was about the ability of local units of government to establish their own “right to work” zones. Nope, says Madigan…
She also said local governments cannot opt out of state prevailing wage laws.
I’ll have the links in a moment.
…Adding… The right to work opinion is here. The prevailing wage opinion is here.
There has been some fear within organized labor that Gov. Bruce Rauner and/or his anti-union allies were hoping to convince a local government to set up its own right to work zone or attempt to opt out of other labor laws. These opinions make that much less likely to happen.
…Adding… Sen. Gary Forby and Rep. Jay Hoffman requested the opinion. Here’s Forby’s statement…
“I guess that’s that. The Attorney General’s opinion makes it pretty clear this is a matter for state lawmakers, and the Southern Illinois lawmakers I know – on both sides of the aisle – aren’t going to hurt working families,” said Senator Forby.
“Maybe now the governor can start focusing on putting people back to work in Southern Illinois. People around here just want jobs where they’ll be respected with an honest wage for an honest day’s work.”
*** UPDATE 1 *** This is more of a repudiation of Rauner than I previously realized. The opinion says basically that it’s “all or nothing.” Rauner has been saying he doesn’t want the whole state to be right to work, but does think locals should be given the opportunity to create their own zones. Madigan says in the opinion that the entire state has to be right to work. Local zones aren’t permitted, even with a state law.
…Adding More… Illinois AFL-CIO President Michael T. Carrigan…
“While Gov. Rauner continues his obsessive war on unions and the middle class, he just keeps running into huge road blocks – like the law.
The Attorney General’s opinions on right to work zones and prevailing wage are confirmation of what we suspected from the outset.
I think the people of the state would actually appreciate the Governor working on the pressing issues in front of us, instead of continually proposing illegal and politically-motivated fixes to non-existent problems.”
*** UPDATE 2 *** The response…
“The Rauner administration respectfully disagrees with the Attorney General’s opinion regarding local right-to-work. The administration is confident that with enabling legislation from the state, local governments can create employee empowerment zones.”
* The reporter and the subject know each other, so I’ll believe this Bloomberg piece when I see it…
This week began like most of Mike Flynn’s recent weeks. The conservative strategist was in a slow, tedious war with Comcast, trying to get NBC affiliates in some key political states to run a two-minute commercial from his Conservative War Chest PAC. The providers had been uninterested in taking money for a video jeremiad against their news divisions, so they’d been resisting. Cleta Mitchell, the ultra-connected conservative attorney and American Conservative Union board member, was making legal arguments. By Friday, if there was no progress, she’d prepare an FCC complaint, and the well-covered crusade against media bias would escalate.
And then Aaron Schock happened. The Illinois congressman’s somewhat surprising resignation (he’d been tumbling from scandal to scandal, but had not told leaders that he’d be leaving) opened up a congressional seat in the stretch of rural Illinois where Flynn was raised. In 2010, he’d consulted for Bobby Schilling, a Republican candidate who unseated a Democrat in a district that overlapped with the new 18th. (A Democratic gerrymander, in 2011, merged parts of the districts and helped shore up Schock while taking out Schilling.) Conservatives in the district called Flynn and told him to consider running.
“This is a longstanding conservative district, and I think the people who live there are annoyed by their representation,” said Flynn. “It’s the same story all over Illinois. I don’t know what these elected officials are doing. We have these professional politicians who are totally failing us.” […]
Flynn… estimated that he’d need $500,000 to $700,000 to mount his own bid. He’d spent more than 20 years in politics, much of it in Illinois, much of the recent work in the high-dollar world of issue PACs. If he was convinced that the money was there, he imagined an anti-establishment campaign that could capitalize on conservative disappointment with the new Congress. He hadn’t lived in the district in 20 years (at 47, he’s 14 years older than the disgraced Schock), but he had roots there, and an existing family business. He had a message.
“I can’t believe this Republican Congress is funding something that the courts already found to be illegal,” he said, referring to President Obama’s executive actions on immigration. If he won, and he got a 2017 vote on the speaker of the House, he’d be inclined to back “a conservative” instead of John Boehner.
These seats don’t come up a lot, so there’s always a scramble when they do. But he hasn’t lived in the district in 20 years and is likely a totally unknown quantity there.
The Tea Party Patriots announced today the addition of Michael Flynn to serve as Political Director of a newly formed Super PAC – Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund. With years of campaign and political experience, Flynn will lead the Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund’s efforts to grow the Tea Party’s presence in Congress as it continues its fight against the Washington establishment.
“Michael Flynn brings more than 20 years of experience in policy development, legislative affairs, media relations, political campaigns, and crisis communications to the team and we are thrilled to have him,” said Jenny Beth Martin, Chairman of the Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund. “His immeasurable expertise will help us achieve our goal of electing candidates who are fighting to secure the economic future of our country.”
Breitbart News Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon said, “Mike Flynn was a trusted adviser to Andrew Breitbart and understands the nature of the fight ahead. With his detailed knowledge of the Tea Party and political campaigns he is the perfect choice for the Tea Party Patriots. Breitbart News looks forward to having Mike continue as a contributor on our pages.”
More background on Flynn is here. For Statehouse types, he’s Libby Brunsvold’s brother. He’s also a former Illinois House GOP staffer.
Keep in mind that the 18th CD is pretty darned conservative, and that special GOP primary will likely be loaded with hard-right voters.
Not so long ago, Exelon…was extolling the merits of an open market for power as its profits rolled in. Now, with power prices plunging, Exelon has lost enthusiasm for the open markets it championed in the 1990s and wants the Legislature to devise a new formula that will protect its profits, quite likely driving up utility bills for homeowners and businesses.
If Exelon is hard up, they can show us. The company should open its books to show how its nuclear fleet is performing.
What’s good for Exelon doesn’t much matter if it’s bad for the rest of Illinois.
Good old Exelon. The company has come up with legislation to subsidize its nuclear reactors, get electric users throughout the state to pay for it and claim it’s in the interest of clean energy.
State lawmakers need to see this bill for the dirty trick it is and kill it.
State Representative Mike Unes of East Peoria says he will not make a run to fill Congressman Aaron Schock’s 18th District seat.
The Republican issued the following statement:
“People from all walks of life have come forward and given me and my family such encouragement and support asking me to run in the special election. The positive feedback that I have received has been overwhelming and extremely humbling.
“As I said on Tuesday, I wanted to give this the careful consideration it deserves in consultation with my family. After careful consideration and, even with the love, support, and encouragement of my wife and kids, I will not be entering my name for consideration in this special election.”
* Also not a surprise is this DCCC press release…
Known for his prolific fundraising, soon-to-be-former Congressman Aaron Schock has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for Republicans in Congress. Travel for some of that fundraising activity is what partially led to an ethics investigation and now his announced resignation. Now that it has become clear that thousands of taxpayer dollars went into Schock’s pocket, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is calling on all recipients of Schock’s contributions to donate those funds to the Treasury to make the taxpayer whole.
“Aaron Schock made a name for himself jet-setting around the country raising dollars for Republicans – some of that at taxpayer expense,” said Matt Thornton of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “If his soon-to-be-former colleagues in the House are truly as concerned with wasteful spending in Washington as they claim to be, then they will donate Schock’s money to the Treasury.”
Congressmen Bob Dold and Mike Bost each received $10K from a Schock campaign committee, according to the DCCC.
Rep. David Jolly, R-Indian Shores, is donating $5,000 he received from disgraced Rep. Aaron Schock, who announced yesterday he was resigning amid a scandal of misuing taxpayer money.
“In an abundance of good faith Congressman Jolly will be donating $2,500 to the Homeless Emergency Project in Clearwater to support veteran housing services and $2,500 to the Philip A. Bryant Melanoma Foundation,” his campaign spokeswoman Sarah Bascom told the Tampa Bay Times.
* The Question: Should Bob Dold and Mike Bost donate their Schock money to charity or otherwise jettison it? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
* Some folks have asked me over the years why I use the “It’s just a bill” headline here on the ol’ blog.
Several years ago, I ribbed a legislator hard who was known back then for his friendliness with the utility interests. He’d just sponsored yet another in a long line of outrageous bills written by and for a utility company. My recollection is I referred to him as being what some used to call a “lady of the evening,” or (more likely) words to that effect.
“It’s just a bill, Rich,” was his cheery reply.
In other words, the legislation was, to him, merely a starting point. Plenty of negotiations were ahead and the bill would be changed. No worries.
But by sponsoring that legislation as written, he was allowing the utility company to set the terms of the coming debate. Sure, changes would be made to that bill, but it was still the utility’s bill. They controlled the debate, and the committee it would be heard in, as well as the chairman of that committee and the bill’s sponsor.
Commonwealth Edison on Thursday unveiled a plan that it billed as an expansion of ongoing efforts to overhaul the power grid and invest in renewable energy but that critics said would result in customers paying more to the electricity giant. […]
Opponents decried the move as an effort by the utility to set into law a major change in rate structures. They argue ComEd is trying to protect its bottom line by billing at peak usage times because households are increasingly becoming more energy-efficient.
Now, consumers can cut their energy bills by switching to more efficient light bulbs or buying more efficient appliances. Those investments pay off over time when consumers use less energy and bills decrease.
ComEd was vague about the expected impact on residential customers’ power bills. ComEd Senior Vice President Thomas O’Neill said the company was still evaluating its plan.
So, ComEd - one of the most sophisticated and successful lobbying entities in Illinois - doesn’t even have a ballpark on how much money it’ll make off its own bill?
An Illinois Senate committee advanced legislation Thursday to make sweet corn the official state vegetable, but not before giving the sponsor a tough time.
State Sen. Sam McCann, R-Plainview, introduced the proposal after being contacted by fourth-grade students in Chatham. […]
State Sen. Neil Anderson, R-Rock Island, was accompanied at the committee meeting by his son Steel.
“Just to give my colleague a little bit of a hard time. My son is in fourth grade. Steel, is corn a vegetable?” Anderson asked.
Steel replied no.
“Is it a grain?” Anderson asked.
“Yes,” Steel replied.
Doesn’t Illinois already have a bad enough reputation without making a grain our state vegetable?
Vickie Oriekaose is in her third week of free classes to get certified as a Microsoft Office Specialist, which she hopes will help her land a job that offers decent pay. Microsoft estimates that people who are certified can make as much as $16,000 a year more than workers who aren’t accredited.
“I’m trying to get back into the workforce,” said the 58-year-old widow, who has been a stay-at-home mom. Oriekaose has a son who is a senior in high school, and twins who are sophomores.
But the Eliminate the Digital Divide grant program, which this year is providing $4.1 million to 102 organizations that are training 25,000 people, would lose funding under the proposed 2016 budget of Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner.
Today, I had to call about 100 poor, elderly, and disabled people to tell them that Illinois LIHEAP ended early (low-income energy assistance) because the state refused to match federal funds due to “austerity” measures. This is a safety-net program that many low-income people have come to rely on to supplement their rising electric bills. Thanks for making me do your dirty work, Governor Rauner — nobody becomes a billionaire without stepping on a few little guys along the way.
Transit fare increases and service cuts are “very likely” if Gov. Bruce Rauner’s proposal to trim nearly $170 million in state funding from the CTA, Metra and Pace becomes a reality, RTA officials warned Wednesday.
The Chicago Transit Authority would be “disproportionately” and “hardest hit” by the plan, shouldering a $130 million revenue loss — up from an original estimate of $105 million, Regional Transportation Authority officials said.
To put the CTA revenue loss in perspective, the RTA estimated it was the equivalent of what a hefty 30 percent jump in CTA fares would generate.
Champaign County Board members are on record as against proposed budget cuts that would strip at least $1.6 million a year from the county, or about 5 percent of its general fund.
The county board Thursday night passed a resolution protesting the cuts proposed by Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner. The resolution was adopted 15-5 with the “no” votes coming from Republican board members Stan Harper, John Jay, Gary Maxwell, Max Mitchell and Jack Anderson.
A tuition increase is off the table this year but just about everything else is on it at the University of Illinois if big budget cuts are enacted, top UI officials told lawmakers Thursday.
Gov. Bruce Rauner’s proposed budget calls for a 31.5 percent, or $209 million, reduction at the UI for the fiscal year beginning July 1.
In separate appearances before House and Senate appropriations committees, UI officials outlined possible areas for cuts: personnel, student employment, extension services, public broadcasting and more deferred maintenance.
But Republican members of both the Senate and the House prodded university officials to seek efficiencies and to embrace reforms, including changes in workers compensation and procurement policies.
A former Chicago charter schools executive is earning $250,000 a year to spearhead Gov. Bruce Rauner’s top education initiatives, a salary that is more than double what her predecessors received and places her as the highest-paid member of a Cabinet already under scrutiny for its lofty paychecks. […]
Purvis is being paid as an independent contractor and accepting neither state health nor retirement benefits, according to the governor’s office.
From 2003 until last year, Purvis, who holds a doctorate in special education, served as CEO of the Chicago International Charter School, a network of 15 schools in Chicago and Rockford. She previously worked as a special education teacher in Maryland and Tennessee, as a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago and served on education advisory councils under the last two Illinois governors.
In an interview with the AP, Purvis said her salary is “commensurate with what I’ve been paid in the past” and cited her three decades of experience. Rauner spokeswoman Catherine Kelly called Purvis “one of the few education experts in the country prepared to lead a true cradle to career approach to education.”
Look, I don’t usually care about state salaries. And I fully understand how difficult it is to recruit top talent with government money. But, man, is the governor ever gonna take a licking on this one.
* This poll will probably get a lot of media play because of who sponsored it, but check out the highlighted dates on this thing…
Governor Bruce Rauner’s job approval rating stands at 36.5 percent as he begins his term in office, according to a new poll of registered Illinois voters by the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.
There were 31.4 percent who either strongly or somewhat disapproved and 23.1 percent who had no opinion about the newly-elected Republican chief executive.
The poll of 1,000 registered voters was taken Feb. 28 to March 10 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percentage points. […]
Rauner saw his highest job approval ratings Downstate, where 43.3 percent either approved or somewhat approved and only 26.7 percent disapproved or somewhat disapproved. In the Chicago suburbs, 34.6 percent approved and 32.2 percent disapproved of his performance.
Rauner’s lowest level of support was in Chicago, where 36.5 disapproved and 31.0 percent approved.
Partisanship is also strongly evident in Rauner’s job approvals. He enjoys the approval of 60.6 percent of Republicans, with only 10.3 percent who disapprove or somewhat disapprove. This is followed by 36.7 percent of Independents who approve and 32.7 percent who disapprove or somewhat disapprove. There are 46.1 percent of Democrats who disapprove or somewhat disapprove while only 24.2 percent approve or somewhat approve of the governor’s job performance so far.
February 28? That’s three weeks ago. And they spent 11 days on it? And then they sat on the results for ten more days?
Sheesh.
What, do they have an intern manually dialing an antique rotary phone while tabulating results on note cards or something?
Anyway, if this is accurate, the governor’s approval rating is already in Pat Quinn territory.
* And Illinoisans may not be feeling Rauner’s “turnaround” yet…
63.0 percent [said] that Illinois is going in the wrong direction and only 22.1 percent said we are going in the right direction.
* On to US Sen. Mark Kirk…
Kirk had a total of 44.5 percent who somewhat or strongly approved of the job he is doing, while 21.3 percent either somewhat or strongly disapproved of the job he is doing. These totals meant that Senator Kirk enjoys a net job approval rate of 23.2 percent.
Kirk’s highest approval ratings were in central city Chicago where 48 percent either approved or somewhat approved of the job he is doing, followed closely by 47.0 percent in the Chicago suburbs and 38.0 percent Downstate.
Most (53.1 percent) of Kirk’s fellow Republicans either approved or somewhat approved of the job he is doing with 16.4 percent who disapproved or somewhat approved. They were followed by 44.9 percent of Independents who approved or somewhat disapproved with 23.1 percent who disapproved or somewhat disapproved. Among Democrats, 40.5 percent approved or somewhat approved while 24.0 percent disapproved or somewhat disapproved of the job he is doing.
The FBI and the federal prosecutors in Illinois are investigating whether Rep. Aaron Schock broke the law in accounting for campaign expenses, according to people familiar with the matter. […]
The FBI has now begun delivering subpoenas seeking testimony before a grand jury in Springfield, Ill. […]
A U.S. law enforcement official says the investigation is at an early stage. Justice Department officials were monitoring published reports about Schock’s expense troubles and were taken by surprise when he announced his resignation, according to another U.S. law enforcement official.
So, his lawyer didn’t cut a deal before he resigned? Really bad move. He’s now a smaller target because he’s no longer in office, but he’s also a much easier target because US Attorneys have to jump through several hoops before they can indict an elected official.
Federal probers based in Springfield are looking into Rep. Aaron Schock (R-Ill.), spending of taxpayer and government money and other business dealings, the Chicago Sun-Times has learned. FBI agents have been delivering subpoenas and witnesses will be called before a grand jury in Springfield next month.
That Springfield US Attorney’s office is not to be trifled with. It’s become quite an impressive organization.
*** UPDATE 1 *** This is about a whole lot more than just campaign money. The AP has its alert out now…
A person familiar with the case tells The Associated Press that the Justice Department is formally investigating whether Rep. Aaron Schock of Illinois, who has submitted his resignation, committed crimes with his office expenditures and business dealings.
The government is convening a federal grand jury in Springfield, Illinois, this source says, and the FBI has started issuing subpoenas to compel people close to the Republican congressman to testify. The source spoke only on grounds of anonymity because the person wasn’t authorized to publicly discuss the case.
Agents with the FBI have delivered subpoenas to aides of U.S. Rep. Aaron Schock and demanded access to his records, a source said Friday.
Press reports and the source said the subpoenas were served to Schock’s Peoria office Thursday ahead of possible testimony next month to a federal grand jury sitting in Springfield.
* We’re coming a little late to this, but you can watch this morning’s legislative hearing on Rep. Ron Sandack’s municipal bankruptcy bill right here, via BlueRoomStream.com…
