Billionaire Neil Bluhm of Rivers Casino has waged war with the industry leaders, seeking to rid the field of top competition. FanDuel and DraftKings are responding with a $1 million multi-platform awareness and education campaign.
Over the next five days, advocacy advertisements will air on radio broadcast and cable, state- and city-wide, including morning and evening news, late-night talk shows and live sporting events. There will also be a multichannel digital engagement campaign across social media, search, YouTube and over-the-top streaming providers, including Hulu, Roku and radio providers like Spotify and Pandora.
It’s a strong, final push against Bluhm, who is singlehandedly pressing for legislation that ostensibly protects the interests of his own properties at the expense of Illinois’ coffers.
Illinois is in debt. But there is hope in a significant amount of tax revenue with online sports betting.
In order to benefit from this, we must allow those who are experienced in the digital gaming arena to compete in our state.
But there is a casino owned by a billionaire that wants to keep them out, which will compromise tax revenue for Illinois.
Now they want to use their political muscle to box out the competition so they can profit, reducing the tax dollars our state can make from online betting.
Don’t let Rivers Casino muddy the waters.
* Paul Gaynor, the outside counsel for Midwest Gaming and Rush Street Interactive (Bluhm’s guy)…
It’s not surprising that Fan Duel and Draft Kings are spending $1 million to try and buy a duopoly after years of engaging in conduct that the Attorney General concluded clearly constituted illegal gambling, without following regulations, paying taxes or paying licensing fees. Now they want to be rewarded for their improper behavior and put in front of the line ahead of gaming entities who complied with the law and regulations, paid taxes and put thousands of Illinois residents to work. While we support the legalization of sports betting, what we don’t support are companies that brazenly operate outside the rules, which is why a regulatory waiting period would ensure the integrity of sports betting and that they fully and readily comply with the same strict regulations already being followed by existing gaming operators.
*** UPDATE *** Marc La Vorgna, spokesman for Bet on Illinois…
At the governor’s request, the ad is being suspended for the time being while we engage in productive discussions to deliver smart sports betting legislation before the session ends.
* Related…
* FanDuel CEO says ‘Illinois needs to pass a bill’ for sports betting
* Back in 2017, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled against some food truck owners who objected to being prohibited from doing business in Chicago’s Medical Center District. So, this should probably be no surprise…
The Illinois Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Chicago’s food truck regulations are constitutional and that the city can protect restaurants from their wheeled competitors.
The court affirmed the ruling of the appellate court and the circuit court before it, which also had decided in favor of the city in a lawsuit that claimed Chicago’s food truck restrictions suppress competition.
The lawsuit, filed in 2012 by food truck owner Laura Pekarik, who runs Cupcakes for Courage, claimed a city rule prohibiting food trucks from parking within 200 feet of any establishment that serves food — a category that includes convenience stores with hot dog rollers — forces food trucks to make concessions to help their bricks-and-mortar competitors succeed. Another part of the law that mandates food trucks carry GPS devices so that the city can track their whereabouts constitutes a “warrantless search” and violates privacy protections, the suit claimed.
Chicago food truck operators say the city’s restrictions have driven entrepreneurs out of business and stunted the local scene even as it has thrived elsewhere in the nation.
* The Institute for Justice filed the lawsuit…
[IJ Senior Attorney Robert Frommer] concluded, “Today’s ruling is a sharp break from decades of Illinois precedent that protects the right to earn an honest living subject only to reasonable government regulation. There is nothing reasonable about the government prohibiting you from operating near your competitors, or tracking you like a criminal out of fear you may sell delicious food to willing customers. The Illinois Supreme Court’s failure to stand up to the powerful on behalf of ordinary folks, like Laura and other food truckers in the state, does a profound disservice to the constitutional rights of everyone in the state.”
When applying the rational basis test, our inquiry is twofold: we must determine whether there is a legitimate governmental interest behind the legislation and, if so, whether there is a reasonable relationship between that interest and the means the governing body has chosen to pursue it. See People v. Reed, 148 Ill. 2d 1, 11 (1992). The party challenging a legislative enactment as failing rational basis review bears the burden of proving by clear and affirmative evidence that the enactment constitutes arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable legislative action; that there is no permissible interpretation that justifies its adoption; or that it does not promote the safety and general welfare of the public. […]
Both brick-and-mortar restaurants and food trucks are important businesses that bring significant benefits to the City. However, they do so in very different ways. Brick-and-mortar restaurants bring stability to the neighborhoods in which they are located. The restaurants pay property taxes and have a vested interest in seeing that their neighborhoods continue to grow and thrive so that their own businesses will flourish. Moreover, in certain areas of the City, such as Greektown, restaurants are a vibrant part of the community and bring a long-term sense of cohesiveness and identity to the area. In this way, brick-and-mortar restaurants can help establish certain parts of the City as tourist destinations in and of themselves, thereby increasing revenue for the City and improving stable economic growth.
In contrast, while food trucks bring a life and energy to the City that is all their own, they simply do not have the same long-term, stabilizing effect on City neighborhoods as brick-and-mortar restaurants do. Indeed, the business model of food trucks and a good deal of their appeal are built on mobility, not stability: The trucks may be in the City one day and in Evanston or Aurora the next.
The City has a legitimate governmental interest in encouraging the long-term stability and economic growth of its neighborhoods. The 200-foot rule, which helps promote brick-and-mortar restaurants and, thus, neighborhood stability, is rationally related to this legitimate interest. […]
A case more on point to the present one is Triple A Services, in which this court upheld a Chicago ordinance that prohibited food trucks from conducting business within a certain section of the City identified as the “Medical Center District.” Triple A Services, 131 Ill. 2d at 223. Applying the rational basis test, we held that the City had the power to regulate the use of its streets for private gain and, therefore, had the authority to prohibit food trucks from operating in the medical district. Moreover, we found that the prohibition was rationally related to the City’s legitimate interest in ensuring that emergency vehicles, medical personnel, and medical clients had easy access to the medical facilities; in enhancing the appearance of the district; and in promoting sanitary conditions within the area. Thus, we upheld the ordinance as constitutionally valid. Similarly, in the present case, the City has a legitimate interest in ensuring the long-term viability of its neighborhoods, an interest that food trucks do not further.
In sum, we find that plaintiff has not met its considerable burden of showing that the 200-foot rule is an arbitrary and unreasonable municipal action and that no permissible interpretation justifies its adoption. The 200-foot rule is not unreasonable because it is a part of a regulatory scheme that seeks to balance the interests of food trucks with the City’s need to advance the stability and long-term economic growth of its neighborhoods. Having found that the 200-foot rule is rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest, we need not consider the City’s alternative rationales for upholding the constitutionality of the 200-foot rule.
Gov. J.B. Pritzker Wednesday defended his proposed tax increases to pay for a capital bill against critics who said they will disproportionately hurt the poor.
Pritzker acknowledged some of the proposed taxes might be considered regressive, but he said they also represent a stable source of income.
“In order to put an infrastructure bill together, you’ve got to have various revenue sources,” Pritzker said. “It’s important that they are stable revenue sources because you need to bond them out.”
Investors want to know there is a reliable revenue source behind bonds they invest in.
Pritzker proposed more than $1.7 billion in tax and fee increases to finance the $41.5 billion program. That included doubling the state’s gasoline tax and raising license plate fees. Those two alone account for more than $1 billion of the increases.
Pritzker also proposed higher taxes on alcoholic beverages, video gaming and a new tax on cable, satellite and streaming services.
* The Question: Your thoughts on using these sorts of revenue streams to fund a capital bill? Explain.
* Current state law requires the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum and the embattled Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library Foundation to cooperate. A bill sponsored by Sen. Andy Manar sailed out of the Senate Executive Committee yesterday without debate. The proposal (SB731) would, in part, set the terms of that official cooperation…
(a) an authorization by the Agency for the Foundation to operate, directly or through subcontractors, food service, catering service, and retail activities at the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum with the net proceeds being made available by the Foundation to the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum;
(b) a requirement that the Foundation annually provide to the Office of the Governor and the General Assembly the following:
(1) any audit of the Foundation’s financial statements performed by an independent auditor;
(2) the most recent Form 990 federal tax return filed by the Foundation with the Internal Revenue Service; and
(3) an annual report including income and expenditures of funds raised as a result of the Foundation’s operation, directly or through subcontractors, for food service, catering service, and retail activities at the Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum;
the establishment of a working group with 6 members, composed of 3 members of the Board and 3 members of the Board of Directors of the Foundation, with such members appointed by the respective chair of each board, together with the State Historian. The working group shall collaborate to advance the interests of the Agency and, as an initial responsibility, shall develop an official mission statement for the Agency which shall be presented to the Board and the Board of Directors of the Foundation for adoption and which shall serve to align and guide the efforts of both the Agency and the Foundation. Except for the State Historian, ex officio members of either board are not eligible to be appointed as members of the working group. The working group shall meet at least once each quarter and shall be chaired by the State Historian. The Foundation shall provide staff support to the working group to maintain attendance and other necessary records of the working group.
Manar has been working with the governor’s office on the proposal.
Thoughts?
* House Majority Leader Greg Harris…
Today our bipartisan Medicaid working group puts the finishing touches on sweeping omnibus reform package to fix the…
* Lots of late-session proposals out there have no publicly available language to peruse, including this one…
The developer proposing to build the One Central megaproject on air rights just west of Soldier Field is dangling a powerful political pitch as his request to get billions of state subsidies nears a final decision in Springfield—and he wants lawmakers to decide in the next 10 days whether they’ll get behind his plan.
The offer: help for Gov. J.B. Pritzker in paying billions in pension bills, and help for Mayor Lori Lightfoot in opening up transit-short South Side neighborhoods to economic growth. […]
The language of Dunn’s legislation has not yet been disclosed. Springfield insiders say his measure, which would authorize the state to make an equity investment but still apparently require negotiation of a specific contract, stands a fair chance of passing before the Legislature’s scheduled May 30 adjournment—either as a separate bill or, more likely, as a clause in other legislation, such as a pending big capital bill.
With just over a week to go in the spring legislative session, Chicago Federation of Labor President Bob Reiter is beating the drum for a plan to demolish the above-ground portion of Lakeside Center, the oldest McCormick Place building, and replace the lost convention space with a new building over Martin Luther King Drive.
Insiders said the partial teardown of Lakeside Center could result in additional parkland along the lakefront and that below-ground portions of the building, such as the Arie Crown Theater, could still be preserved. […]
“It would take down the Lakeside Center above ground. It would replace that space by building a bridge building over Martin Luther King Drive. It would also make all of the space more together, instead of spread out as it is,” Reiter said Wednesday.
“When President Obama came in, you park in the west building, walk to the north building, go through security, then walk all the way to the lake to go into the event at the Lakeside Center. You would bring all of that into a tighter area and it would also make it more marketable for bigger shows that would rather have their space fit into a tighter footprint.” […]
The expansion would be paid for, in part, by imposing a fee on ride-hailing trips. The precise amount is still being negotiated, but the text of the measure, HB2693, sets it at $1 per ride covering trips in the McCormick Place area and the city’s airports.
Thursday, May 23, 2019 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
More than 800 solar energy projects are on hold because Illinois’ renewable energy program isn’t adequately funded to meet either current demand or the statutory renewable portfolio standard requirement of 25% by 2025.
The waitlisted, shovel-ready projects could create thousands of jobs, lower consumer electric bills and generate $220 million in property tax revenue for local governments. Funding for new commercial and community solar projects and wind farms will be depleted after 2019.
U.S. Census Bureau estimates say the majority of municipalities in the Chicago region, including the city itself, lost population last year.
The yearly estimates released this week show that Chicago remains the nation’s third-largest city with just over 2.7 million residents, down an estimated 7,073 from 2017 to 2018.
African American residents, in particular, have left the region at higher rates in recent years. More than 14,000 African Americans left Cook County between 2016 and 2017.
A recent University of Chicago study found that over a third of young adults, especially African Americans, want to leave the city. Racism, fractured police-community relations, neighborhood disinvestment and lack of job opportunities were cited as the causes in the study.
If you zoom out, however, the situation isn’t as gloomy as today’s headlines suggest. Between 2000 and 2010, Chicago lost 200,418 residents. Since 2010, the city has gained 10,396 residents. That increase is really small, of course, but it could be far, far worse considering the past.
* Meanwhile, in 2000, the city was 36.8 percent African-American. After losing over 170,000 black residents in the following ten years, that percent dropped to 32.9 percent. It’s now 30.5 percent. The redistricting process is going to be excruciating because black legislators won’t want to give up any seats.
In 2000, the city was 31.3 percent white. Now, it’s 32.7 percent white.
Chicago was 26 percent Latinx in 2000 and that demographic is now 29 percent of the total population.
Though Chicago remains the third-largest city in the United States, behind New York and Los Angeles, fourth-place Houston continued to close the gap, moving to within 380,492 residents of Chicago. After losing an estimated 7,073 people from 2017 to 2018, Chicago stands at just over 2.7 million residents, according to the new census data. Houston, the biggest city in Texas, gained 8,057 last year and now has more than 2.3 million.
The growth in Houston reflects national trends, as cities in the South and West — including Phoenix, San Antonio, Fort Worth, Texas, Seattle and Charlotte, N.C. — continue to gain population at a rapid clip. Chicago will be overtaken by Houston eventually, demographers say, given the rates of change for both cities — but not in the next couple of years.
There’s no doubt that people are flooding into Houston. But that city also annexed 83 populated square miles between the beginning of this century and 2012. I’m not sure how much it’s annexed since.
* Related…
* Chicago is two cities when it comes to capital flows: Affluent white neighborhoods draw nine times as much investment capital as poor black areas, especially for housing, the Urban Institute concludes in a report right in the new mayor’s wheelhouse.
* Chinatown’s Getting A Massive New Neighbor. What Happens Next?: For decades, a giant swath of vacant land has separated the Loop from Chinatown. Now, the city has approved plans for a massive new high-end neighborhood there; it’s development on a scale Chicagoans have never seen. Called “The 78,” it’s slated to include 10,000 new housing units as well as commercial and office space and a river promenade. Sixty-story buildings will be allowed to sprout just two blocks north of Chinatown.
* Licensed, regulated and significantly taxed cannabis growing facilities will not have machetes, caches of illegally possessed guns, kilograms of cocaine and Chicago street gang diamond jewelry…
Rachad “Baller” Lucas, 38, of Calumet City, is accused of manufacturing, storing and distributing controlled substances, namely a mixture containing marijuana, in a storage unit in Calumet City, according to the Northern District of Illinois U.S. Attorney’s Office.
Lucas has also been charged with possessing marijuana with the intent to distribute, possessing a handgun in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime and illegally possessing a handgun as a felon.
A total of 11 people were charged, including a mother, Harriette McPherson, 46, of Chicago, and her two sons, 19-year-old Sincere Brannon and 26-year-old Rakim Asad. Brannon is charged with possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime.
Authorities seized 29 firearms, ammunition, a machete, a kilogram of cocaine, 78 pounds of marijuana and $190,000 in suspected illicit cash. In addition, diamond jewelry, Rolex watches and designer clothing appraised at more than $300,000 was also collected. Police also seized two necklaces with the initials, “LAFA” written in diamonds, referring to a Chicago street gang, from Asad.
House Minority Leader Jim Durkin (R-Western Springs) has said he believes the expungement portion is only included as “an enticement” to get “certain caucuses” to support the legislation. On WILL’s radio show, The 21st, Durkin said: “People who deal with drugs and people who have destroyed neighborhoods, should be given the opportunity to have this expungement … for the purposes of putting them back into the legal trade, doesn’t make any sense to me. It’s not right.”
The Legislative Black Caucus has openly advocated for social equity and criminal justice reforms to be included, but Gov. J.B. Pritzker has also said this was one of his primary reasons for legalization.
“Certain caucuses” represent “certain neighborhoods” that have borne the brunt of the war on drugs and those “certain caucuses” disagree with the former prosecutor who, no offense, lives in a safe leafy suburb. The bangers in the first story on this post are the types of people who have destroyed “certain” neighborhoods. But they wouldn’t be eligible for expungement, so they wouldn’t be getting licenses.
Earlier in May when language for Illinois’ recreational cannabis proposal was unveiled, it was Gov. J.B. Pritzker who stole the headlines, receiving much of the credit. While it’s his signature that will ultimately appear on any proposal passed by the legislature, it was four female lawmakers who chose to embark on the difficult path to legalization years ago.
State Sens. Heather Steans (D-Chicago) and Toi Hutchinson (D-Olympia Fields) as well as state Reps. Kelly Cassidy (D-Chicago) and Jehan Gordon-Booth (D-Peoria) said this yearslong and statewide effort has taught them a lot, but it mostly reinforced their friendship with each other.
* Medical marijuana use in workers comp looms: In Illinois, the state’s opioid alternative pilot program, which took effect about three months ago, allows individuals who otherwise would be prescribed opioids to opt for a prescription for marijuana to be filled at a dispensary. Mr. Unruh said the pilot also set up a marijuana tracking system to collect data on the risks and benefits to allow for informed public policy decisions in the future.
* Annie Sweeney, Stacy St. Clair, Cecilia Reyes and Sarah Freishtat at the Tribune…
As many as 30,000 guns may still be in the possession of Illinois residents deemed too dangerous to have them, according to a Tribune investigation.
In an analysis of data released for the first time, the Tribune found the state has repeatedly failed to ensure that people surrender their weapons and gun permits after their Firearm Owner’s Identification cards are revoked, resulting in the breakdown of a system put in place to deter gun violence.
In all, nearly 27,000 Illinois residents over the past four years have not informed authorities what they did with their guns after state police stripped their licenses, according to the analysis. That means law enforcement has no idea whether 78% of revoked cardholders since 2015 still possess guns. […]
Among those with dismal compliance rates are residents convicted of domestic violence or people who had their cards rescinded because of mental health concerns, the Tribune analysis shows. About 3 out of 4 such revokees failed to tell the state where their weapons are, despite making a combined 5,000 serious inquiries about purchasing guns before the revocation. […]
Before the Tribune finished its analysis, gun rights advocates predicted it would be a waste of time, insisting most people had their cards revoked simply because they moved out of state. In reality, less than 4% — or 1,332 of 34,221— lost their FOIDs for that reason.
First, the governor’s motor fuel tax increase would bring in $560 million a year, not $1.2 billion (although a commenter points out correctly that another big chunk collected by the state would go to local municipalities). And, sorry, but imposing new or higher taxes and licensing fees on things people choose to do, like smoke cigarettes, bet on sports or play video gaming machines, buy cannabis, or whatever, does not strike me as particularly egregious.
…Adding… As a commenter notes, the Illinois Policy Institute published a recent story entitled “Illinois can spend another $10B on infrastructure without tax hikes.” In that story, “legalized sports betting” is identified as a non-tax way to help pay for it. Yet, that revenue is identified above as taxation.
* But here’s John Tillman in a Tribune op-ed bemoaning all those taxes…
Why are Springfield lawmakers and our new bully billionaire governor trying to make taxpayers the only defense against decades of fiscal mismanagement by their state government?
When state representatives have the audacity to oppose the governor’s proposal, Pritzker responds by attacking them. That’s what happened when these two Democrats, state Reps. Sam Yingling of Grayslake and Jonathan Carroll of Northbrook, recently said the progressive tax was the wrong choice for their constituents.
Pritzker responded to their pro-constituent decision by saying, “Those who oppose this (progressive tax) plan are siding with millionaires and the very wealthy against everyday Illinoisans, and they need to offer an alternative that will fix our state’s long-standing fiscal challenges.”
Heaven forfend, it’s a… it’s a press release! It’s also downright tame compared to how the Policy Institute has weaponized its Facebook page.
House Speaker Michael Madigan in 2012 supported aligning responsibility for setting retirement benefits with accountability for paying these retirement benefits at schools and universities. These two policies alone would save $12.2 billion over five years.
He claims school consolidation would save $2.9 billion over five years, which means the pension cost shift to local school districts would free up $9.3 billion, or close to $2 billion a year. The very next paragraph…
Taxpayers are already paying the second-highest property taxes in the country, paying the sixth-highest sales taxes and paying the fifth-highest overall tax burden. For fairness, it is time to limit automatic pay raises for some of the nation’s highest-paid state workers.
They’re gonna be paying even higher property taxes if they have to start picking up $2 billion a year in pension costs. Also, how would limiting automatic raises for state workers help local property taxpayers?
Do Trump supports like J.B. Pritzker’s graduated income tax? A new poll commissioned for the Illinois Clean Jobs Coalition shows a majority of GOP women and non-college voters 55 and older approve of the plan. “More than two-thirds of voters indicate they support the plan after hearing basic information and support extends across the state and across the ideological spectrum,” according the poll by Tulchin Research, the pollster for Bernie Sanders. The survey talked to 500 “likely” November 2020 voters in Illinois from May 2 through 6. There’s a 4-percent margin of error.
The poll memo shows that 68 percent of likely white voters surveyed support the “Fair Tax,” as Pritzker calls it, and 27 percent oppose. Among African Americans, 79 percent support and 17% oppose. And among Latinos, 76 percent support to 17 percent oppose. The poll shows the tax has 67 percent support among white college grads and 68 percent support among whites without four-year college degrees.
* I took a pass on this poll yesterday. Why? Here’s the question…
Here is a statement by SUPPORTERS of the Fair Tax plan to move Illinois to a graduated income tax system:
Under the Fair Tax plan, Illinois could fund schools and finally pay its bills while 97% of Illinois residents would not see a state income tax increase. Only those making above $250,000 a year will see their taxes go up, with the largest increases applying to those making more than $1 million.
Now, do you support or oppose the Fair Tax plan?
That “basic information” is more than just a little leading, if you ask me.
Thursday, May 23, 2019 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
It’s simple. Credit unions are member-owned, so any earnings are simply returned in the form of lower loan rates, higher interest on deposits and lower fees. Credit unions create a fair financial alternative for the taxpayers of Illinois. Credit unions are not-for-profit financial cooperatives that don’t focus on increasing revenue or paying dividends to outside stockholders. Illinois credit unions are focused on the member-owners we serve. Visit www.YourMoneyFurther.com to learn more about the benefits of credit union membership.
* Subscribers knew about this particular caucus in advance…
The sponsor of a bill that would replace Illinois’ current abortion law with language that is less restrictive said Wednesday she feels the bill will be moving forward, even after it was previously stalled in subcommittee.
The Reproductive Health Act, sponsored by Rep. Kelly Cassidy, D-Chicago, would, among other provisions, make it so everyone has “a fundamental right to make autonomous decisions” about their reproductive health. It also requires private health insurance companies that cover pregnancy-related benefits to cover abortion and allows physician-assistants to perform the procedure.
The bill had previously been put into the House Human Services committee and moved to the Informed Consent subcommittee, before being pushed back to the Rules Committee.
Cassidy said at the end of a caucus meeting, House Speaker Michael Madigan did confirm he would entertain a request for a hearing on the bill in a different committee. She said she did not know which committee it would be. […]
“I feel like we’ll be moving forward (with the bill),” Cassidy said.
Rep. Cheri Bustos of Moline, who chairs the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, has pulled out of a fundraising event for anti-abortion Rep. Dan Lipinski, highlighting the growing concerns in the party about abortion rights.
In a statement sent out on Twitter, Bustos said that she had agreed to attend a fundraiser for Lipinski several months ago, “but I’ve determined that I must cancel my participation in this event.”
“I’m proud to have a 100 percent pro-choice voting record and I’m deeply alarmed by the rapidly escalating attacks on women’s access to reproductive care in several states,” Bustos said.
Lipinski, a conservative Democrat from Western Springs who faces a rematch with abortion rights supporter Marie Newman next year, said in a statement that in discussions with Bustos this week “it became clear that her attendance at a fundraiser for me has become a distraction from her work.”
The decision, which was first reported by the New York Times, is a clear nod to progressive members and outside groups, who have also criticized Bustos for codifying a DCCC policy that prohibits vendors and consultants from working with candidates challenging incumbents since March. Her decision to fundraise with Lipinski added more fuel to the fire.
Bustos stands by the policy and has given no indication that she will reverse course, which has continue to irritate the caucus’s left flank, particularly lawmakers who, themselves, ousted more moderate incumbent Democrats.
“It’s a smart move and I’m glad she listening to progressive voices,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who has sharply criticized Bustos’ for her handling of the vendor policy. “I appreciate that Cheri has shown a willingness to listen and change. I hope she’ll take the same approach on the vendor blacklist issue. I remain committed to sitting down with her and seeking a principled compromise.”
