What: Governor Rauner signs Executive Order on Criminal Justice Reform
Where: Sangamon County Courthouse – County Board Chambers, Room 201
200 S. 9th Street, Springfield
Date: Wednesday, February 11, 2015
Time: Media arrival – 8:45 a.m.
Executive Order Signing - 9:00 a.m.
SEIU Healthcare Illinois launched a television ad campaign today calling on Gov. Bruce Rauner and the Illinois General Assembly to protect funding for the Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP).
The Department of Human Services announced a $300 million budget shortfall last month that will leave 160,000 thousand children in low-wage households without safe, reliable child care services.
The ad is one part of an aggressive campaign being led by early childhood education advocates, parents, childcare providers and children’s organizations throughout Illinois to restore funding for the child care program. It will be shown in all major media markets in the state including: Chicago, Rockford, Peoria, Quad-Cities and Champaign. The ad will air Feb. 11 through Feb. 18.
Susan and Jason McWhirter and their two children are featured in the ad. (Click here for a profile of the family). The Peoria family relies on the child care program to go to work.
“We’re very concerned about losing child care assistance,” Mrs. McWhirter said. “’My husband and I both work and I go to school so I can get a better job. Many families have no options but to leave their children in the care of others while they make a living for their family. The child care program gives me and my family options for child care that we can trust.”
The ad comes the week before Gov. Rauner is set to unveil his budget proposal on Feb. 18. The Chicago Tribune called the shortfall an “immediate test” for the governor. Working parents and children’s advocates across the state have been very vocal about the crisis and the devastating impact of not fully funding the program.
Tuesday, Feb 10, 2015 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
My name is John Lattner. I grew up and raised my family in the Chicago area. I played football for the University of Notre Dame and was honored to have won the Heisman Trophy in 1953 and went on to continue my football career playing for the Pittsburgh Steelers in 1954.
I have recently learned from my doctors that I have been diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma and that I have a challenging prognosis. I am hoping that I get luckier than most folks who get this kind of news. I have been very lucky most of my life and I hope that luck holds up. Any man who has had the life I have had and the family with which I have been blessed with has already had more than his share of good luck.
Back when I was playing at the University of Notre Dame, I was able to get summer jobs working with asbestos in Chicago. No one ever told us anything about it being dangerous and I was happy to have a job at all. I went on to do other things and now learn years later that this asbestos has given me cancer.
My doctors told me that it is medically impossible to get mesothelioma before a minimum of 15 to 20 years of exposure. The outlook for my condition is not good and I’ve been told most people who are diagnosed with this disease die within a year or two. I am someone who has always believed in fairness. I don’t think anyone should have a leg up on any other person. A strong civil justice system in Illinois provides that fairness not just for me, but for the other men and women who get the call from the doctor that I got. I know how tough of a call it is to get.
Tuesday, Feb 10, 2015 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
While the state budget crisis increasingly hits struggling Illinois families, Exelon demands a corporate bailout. This is exactly the wrong thing for Illinois’ citizens and businesses.
Exelon is a successful, profitable company and while we appreciate success, when they claim they need more of OUR MONEY, it’s time to be skeptical.
EXELON FIRST QUARTER 2014 PROFITS: $93 MILLION
THAT’S MORE THAN ONE MILLION DOLLARS A DAY
And the rest of 2014 got even more profitable. Tune in every day this week to find out how well they did the rest of the year, culminating with their 2014 earnings report on Friday!
* The company scored high in the licensing process, so whatevs…
A strip club owner was approved by the state Friday to sell medical marijuana from a West Loop storefront.
The approval of Perry Mandera’s Custom Strains came Friday, the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation announced in a news release. The approval means Mandera, the owner of VIP’s A Gentleman’s Club, can open a dispensary in a vacant building at 1105 W. Fulton St.; the business will cater to military veterans.
* She has a degree from Cornell in environmental engineering and also has business experience in environmental engineering. She’s probably making less than her fellow graduating class, so, again, whatevs…
State payroll records reviewed by The Southern Illinoisan Springfield bureau show Emily Clamp was hired on Jan. 16 to a $70,008 per year job at the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency.
While a Rauner spokeswoman says the 25-year-old is “well suited” for the position based on her college studies, her sister, Sarah Clamp, was political director of Rauner’s successful campaign for governor against Democrat Pat Quinn. […]
In her new post, Emily Clamp is a policy adviser at the IEPA, working on a clean power plan, said Rauner spokeswoman Katherine Kelly.
She certainly seems “well suited” and qualified for the job, and it is, after all, a political appointment. Yeah, he campaigned against some of Pat Quinn’s patronage moves, but I just can’t seem to get upset about this.
Tuesday, Feb 10, 2015 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Credit unions are not-for-profit financial cooperatives. They were first exempted from federal income taxes in 1917 to fulfill a special mission as valuable and affordable cooperative alternatives to for-profit banks.
Even though credit unions are exempt from income tax, they still are subject to, and pay, property, payroll, and sales taxes, and a host of governmental regulatory supervision fees. Since their inception, credit unions have more than fulfilled their mission, as evidenced by Congressional codification of the credit union tax exemption in 1951 and 1998. Though the range of services has evolved to effectively serve their members in an increasingly competitive financial marketplace, the cooperative structure, which is the reason for their tax exempt status, has remained constant.
Nationally, consumers benefit to the tune of $6.6 billion annually because credit unions are tax-exempt. In Illinois, by most recent estimates credit unions annually provide nearly $205 million in direct financial benefits to almost three million members. In an era that continuously poses economic and financial challenges, credit unions remain true to one principle - people before profits - and represent a highly valued resource by consumers.
The National Right to Work Foundation is offering free legal aid to public employees seeking to exercise their right to refrain from paying union dues or fees that may result from Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner’s newly-issued executive order.
Governor Rauner issued an executive order late Monday that instructs all state agencies to put in escrow, pending the outcome of a federal court lawsuit the Governor filed the same day, all forced union-fee deductions from nonmember state employees’ wages required by Illinois’ public-sector labor relations statute. The Governor’s lawsuit asks that a judgment be entered declaring unconstitutional the provisions of state collective bargaining agreements that require nonmember state employees to pay union fees, a judgment that would effectively grant those workers Right to Work protections.
The National Right to Work Foundation has a long history of assisting employees seeking to exercise their Right to Work rights, most recently under newly enacted Right to Work provisions in Wisconsin, Indiana, and Michigan. Foundation attorneys also provided free legal representation to Illinois home-based personal care providers who, under executive orders issued by former Governors Rod Blagojevich and Pat Quinn, were forced to pay union dues or fees against their will. In that case, Harris v Quinn, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Illinois scheme, ruling that individuals who indirectly receive state subsidies based on their clientele cannot be forced to pay compulsory union fees.
Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Foundation, issued the following statement:
“Governor Rauner’s actions may give Illinois public employees the Right to Work protections they so desperately need and deserve. These are bold steps to protect Illinois state employees’ rights not to pay tribute to union bosses as a condition of working as public servants.
“Unfortunately, union officials won’t give up their forced dues power easily. In addition to fighting Governor Rauner in court, it won’t be surprising to see them make it difficult for workers to exercise their rights. State employees who try to exercise those rights may encounter stonewalling, intimidation, or harassment at the hands of union officials.
“Right now, over 6,500 employees of the state government are being forced to pay union dues even though they’ve said they don’t want to support them.”
Those payments by workers opting out of union membership but working in workplaces operating under contracts negotiated by a union are called “fair share” payments.
“The call that ‘fair share.’ Let me tell you it’s anything but fair,” Rauner said, adding that the “fair share” deductions cost the employees who pay them an average of $577 per year.
What’s so unfair about non-members paying $48 a month for services? Argue the amount, perhaps, but the governor really believes people who have state jobs that are classified as union jobs shouldn’t be forced to pay for contract negotiations, grievance procedures, etc.?
“Government union bargaining and government union political activity are inextricably linked,” Rauner said. “As a result, an employee who is forced to pay unfair share dues is being forced to fund political activity with which they disagree. That is a clear violation of First Amendment rights and something that, as governor, I am duty-bound to correct.”
That is some seriously circular logic. The bottom line here is that Rauner believes some folks just shouldn’t have to pay for a legitimate service. They’re perfectly free to quit their state jobs, after all.
Also, when the Catholic Conference sued over being barred from some state programs because of its position on gay marriage, that suit was dismissed because the group had no inherent right to a state contract. Is this issue really all that different? Maybe it is. Lemme know in comments.
* From a subscriber…
Is this some crazy way of setting the table for a pension bill? This is so over-the-top it makes me think it’s a negotiating stance and could be leading to an opportunity to extract concessions on COLAs or increased employee contributions towards pension costs. He could withdraw the order if he gets the concessions, for example, which AFSCME might go for if there is a chance his EO might be upheld by the courts.
This just feels like theater to me and on its own, it doesn’t make sense.
What’s Rauner’s end game? It can’t be to eliminate unions, public or otherwise. That’s not going to be achievable for him, not even with two or three terms.
So if that’s not his end game, I figure the next best prize is public employees eating more of the pension/retiree healthcare costs.
Frankly, I don’t really care how much Tillman makes. I make a decent buck myself, but, hey, I’m in the private sector.
The IEA is a huge organization, while Tillman’s is quite small, so using generally accepted market principles it would stand to reason that IEA President Cinda Klickna would make more than Tillman. But that isn’t the case, unless Tillman has taken a recent pay cut. So, I’m not sure where his beef is. Also, check out his overhead. Whew.
[ *** End Of Update *** ]
* The Illinois Policy Institute has long bashed public employee unions and has pushed for “right to work” legislation. Yesterday, the group unveiled a new report…
“The anatomy of influence: Government unions in Illinois” takes a close look at unions’ political spending and the influence afforded to government unions as a result. This analysis offers an unprecedented review of the political donations to the current Illinois General Assembly, as well as top recipients of union political giving since 2002. It also highlights how profitable the business of forced unionization can be for those who run the unions by listing a sampling of the highest-compensated employees for the state’s major government unions: the Illinois Education Association; Illinois Federation of Teachers; American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Council 31; and Service Employees International Union.
This book also reports how unions spend the money collected from mandatory dues, according to the unions’ own filings with the federal government. In the state’s largest teachers union, the Illinois Education Association or IEA, only 26 cents out of every $1 in union dues is actually spent on the union’s stated reason for existence: representation of workers. The rest of the union’s dues and fees revenue went mainly toward overhead, administration and political activities. Other unions also fail to spend the majority of dues money on actual representation – which is supposed to be unions’ key function. At both the IEA and the Illinois Federation of Teachers or IFT, the top 20 highest-paid employees all are paid salaries of more than $100,000 annually. Cinda Klickna, head of the IEA, pulls in $235,404 annually.
In addition to salaries, money spent on politics makes up another big chunk of union spending. The Illinois Policy Institute reviewed campaign-finance reports from 2002 to 2014 and found the five major government unions in Illinois spent a combined $46 million in political campaigns in that time. That number offers just a glimpse of union political spending, as it does not include donations by local chapters of government unions.
While the vast majority of government-union political spending goes to Democrats, the review of campaign spending since 2002 showed that Republicans received nearly 17 percent of the unions’ campaign spending during that time. Former Gov. Pat Quinn, a Democrat, sat atop the heap, with $11.1 million in union donations, including nearly $8 million from the Service Employees International Union.
* Now that Gov. Rauner has opened the “debate” over right to work, the Institute will attempt to muddy up the unions by using their own financial disclosures. For instance…
In 2014, the IEA spent $692,203 on hotels and $213,118 on consultants.
The union often sends staff into the field to assist locals, and there’s plenty more cherry picking. The IFT…
• Representation takes up about 60 cents of every $1 of IFT union dues, with 22 cents spent on administration, 12 cents spent on overhead and 6 cents spent on political activities.
• In 2013, the union spent $348,958 on hotels, $104,886 on consultants and $195,854 on attorneys.
• AFSCME spent 51 cents of every $1 in union dues on representation, 28 cents on overhead, 13 cents on administration and 5 cents on political activities.
• In 2013, the union spent $463,943 on hotels, $107,059 on consultants and $654,295 on attorneys.
• In 2013, AFSCME reported spending $31,972 at its “holiday party” for staff and directors. The spending included hotels rooms and other party expenses.
• The main SEIU locals combined spent 60 cents of every $1 on representation, 23 cents on overhead, 9 cents on political activities and 6 cents on administration.
• In 2013, SEIU Healthcare spent $533,218 on hotels, $330,637 on restaurants and catering, $345,030 on airlines, $312,687 on rental cars
and $838,417 on consultants.
• SEIU Healthcare spent $49,619 on its “membership” Christmas party in December 2013. Among other Christmas party expenses, catering cost $34,556 and the tab at Binny’s Beverage, a liquor store, amounted to $6,063, lower than the $6,859 tab for its party the year before.
• SEIU Healthcare spent $7,523 for floral arrangers at an event in 2013. The year before, it spent $6,859 on Christmas decorations for the office.
Mandatory union fees were upheld by the Supreme Court’s 1977 decision in a Detroit school board case that concluded fair share dues were constitutional as long as the fees were not used to support a union’s political activities like lobbying or campaign contributions.
But in ruling on the 2014 home health care case, Justice Samuel A. Alito argued that the court’s analysis in the Detroit case had been “questionable on several grounds.”
“In the public sector, core issues such as wages, pensions and benefits are important political issues, but that is generally not so in the private sector,” Alito wrote. “In the years since (the ruling), as state and local expenditures on employee wages and benefits have mushroomed, the importance of the difference between bargaining in the public and private sectors has been driven home.”
That argument was mirrored by Rauner’s team in its lawsuit filed Monday. The suit asserts that “indeed, the significant impact that Illinois public sector labor costs have imposed and will continue to impose on the state’s financial condition clearly demonstrates the degree to which Illinois state employee collective bargaining is an inherently political activity.”
Rauner’s suit joins another case brought by union opponents in California that was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court this year. That suit was brought on behalf of an Orange County, Calif., elementary school teacher, who objects to being required to pay about $650 a year to the teachers union.
When Unions expend dollars collected pursuant to the Fair Share Contact Provisions to lobby or bargain against reductions to their own benefits packages or to shift more significant reductions to other state programs or services, there is no principled distinction between the Unions and the various special interest groups who must expend money on political activities to protect their own favored programs and services.
Indeed, the significant impact that Illinois public sector labor costs have imposed and will continue to impose on the State’s financial condition clearly demonstrates the degree to which Illinois state employee collective bargaining is an inherently political activity. […]
(I)n Knox v. Service Employees International Union, Local 1000, __ U.S. __,132 S. Ct. 2277, 2289 (2012), the Supreme Court also recognized that “a public-sector union takes many positions during collective bargaining that have powerful political and civic consequences.” For that reason, “compulsory fees constitute a form of compelled speech and association that imposes a significant impingement on First Amendment rights.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted). Knox emphasized the “general rule” that “individuals should not be compelled to subsidize private groups or private speech.” […]
Regarding the “fair share” provisions at issue in that case, the [Harris v. Quinn] majority noted that “‘[t]he primary purpose’ of permitting unions to collect fees from nonmembers is ‘to prevent nonmembers from free-riding on the union’s efforts, sharing the employment benefits obtained by the union’s collective bargaining without sharing the costs incurred.’” Harris, 134 S. Ct. at 2627 (quoting Knox, 132 S. Ct. at 2289). The Court continued, however, that “‘[s]uch free-rider arguments . . . are generally insufficient to overcome First Amendment objections.’”
A majority of the Supreme Court also recognized in Harris that “fair share” provisions in public employee collective bargaining agreements impose First Amendment concerns not necessarily presented in the private sector, because the collective bargaining process itself is political when taxpayer funds go to pay the negotiated wages and benefits, especially given the great power of unions in electoral politics and the size of public employee payrolls. In coordination with their express political advocacy, the Unions routinely take positions in the collective-bargaining process that greatly affect the State’s budget.
* The following House Republicans were endorsed by the Illinois AFL-CIO last November…
20th Michael McAuliffe - R
68th John Cabello - R
74th Donald Moffitt - R
87th Rich Brauer - R
99th Raymond Poe - R
100th CD Davidsmeyer - R
101st Bill Mitchell - R
102nd Adam Brown - R
In addition, GOP Rep. Dwight Kay was endorsed by the Illinois Education Association (which isn’t affiliated with the state fed). Sen. Chapin Rose was endorsed by the Illinois Federation of Teachers, as were Republican Reps. Michael Tryon, Robert Pritchard, Michael Unes, Norine Hammond, Chad Hays, Dan Brady, Charles Meier and the aforementioned AFL-CIO endorsees.
It’s not like any of those folks were given the endorsements against their will.
Governor Bruce Rauner today signed Executive Order 15-13 eliminating unfair share dues for state employees who do not wish to fund government union activities and positions with which they may disagree.
The governor’s actions come after an extensive legal review of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last year in Harris v. Quinn. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act violated the First Amendment by forcing certain state employees to involuntarily pay fees to a labor union.
In light of that decision, the Rauner administration has concluded that the so-called “fair share” provisions of the current collective bargaining agreements, that are similar to those invalidated by the Supreme Court in Harris v. Quinn, are also unconstitutional.
“Forced union dues are a critical cog in the corrupt bargain that is crushing taxpayers. Government union bargaining and government union political activity are inexorably linked,” Governor Rauner said. “An employee who is forced to pay unfair share dues is being forced to fund political activity with which they disagree. That is a clear violation of First Amendment rights – and something that, as governor, I am duty-bound to correct.”
The executive order allows state employees who wish not to support government unions’ activities to stop paying the forced fees. It has no impact on those employees who wish to remain paying members of the union and fund union activities out of their paychecks.
…Adding… Rauner said he has hired Dan Webb and Winston & Strawn to handle this issue on a pro bono basis. From the EO…
…Adding More… The governor’s office says there are 6,500 state employees who pay “fair share” dues. That’s significant, but a fairly small overall percentage.
…More… Twitters…
Governor simultaneously filing declaratory judgement action so the Supreme Court can declare the unfair share provisions unconstitutional.
· The federal government prohibited the forced collection of union dues in 1978 as part of the Civil Service Reform Act signed by President Jimmy Carter. That law passed the U.S. Senate 87-1 and the U.S. House of Representatives 365-8. Illinois Senator Charles Percy was one of the co-sponsors.
· 29 other states have laws that prohibit government entities from forcing public workers join or financially support labor organizations that they do not support.
· While Harris v. Quinn only decided the constitutional issue as it relates to a subset of Illinois state employees (home care workers), the Supreme Court’s majority opinion found that much of the landmark case Abood v. Detroit Board of Education was ”questionable on several grounds.”
· Notably, the Supreme Court said in Harris v. Quinn:
o “Abood failed to appreciate the conceptual difficulty of distinguishing in public-sector cases between union expenditures that are made for collective-bargaining purposes and those that are made to achieve political ends. In the private sector, the line is easier to see. Collective bargaining concerns the union’s dealings with the employer; political advocacy and lobbying are directed at the government. But in the public sector, both collective-bargaining and political advocacy and lobbying are directed at the government.”
o “Abood failed to appreciate the difference between the core union speech involuntarily subsidized by dissenting public-sector employees and the core union speech involuntarily funded by their counterparts in the private sector. In the public sector, core issues such as wages, pensions, and benefits are important political issues, but that is generally not so in the private sector. In the years since Abood, as state and local expenditures on employee wages and benefits have mushroomed, the importance of the difference between bargaining in the public and private sectors has been driven home.”
§ “Recent experience has borne out this concern. See DiSalvo, The Trouble with Public Sector Unions, National Affairs No. 5, p. 15 (2010) ( ‘In Illinois, for example, public-sector unions have helped create a situation in which the state’s pension funds report a liability of more than $100 billion, at least 50% of it unfunded’).”
o “A union’s status as exclusive bargaining agent and the right to collect an agency fee from non-members are not inextricably linked. For example, employees in some federal agencies may choose a union to serve as the exclusive bargaining agent for the unit, but no employee is required to join the union or to pay any union fee. Under federal law, in agencies in which unionization is permitted, ‘each employee shall have the right to form, join, or assist any labor organization, or to refrain from any such activity, freely and without fear of penalty or reprisal, and each employee shall be protected in the exercise of such right.’”
“Child protection workers, caregivers for veterans and the disabled, correctional officers and everyone else employed by state government has a right to a voice at work and in the democratic process through their union.
“Bruce Rauner’s scheme to strip the rights of state workers and weaken their unions by executive order is a blatantly illegal abuse of power.
“Perhaps as a private equity CEO Rauner was accustomed to ignoring legal and ethical standards, but Illinois is still a democracy and its laws have meaning.
“It is crystal clear by this action that the governor’s supposed concern for balancing the state budget is a paper-thin excuse that can’t hide his real agenda: Silencing working people and their unions who stand up for the middle class.
“Our union and all organized labor will stand together with those who believe in democracy to overturn Bruce Rauner’s illegal action and restore the integrity of the rule of law.”
…And More… Senate President John Cullerton responds…
“Our legal staff is reviewing the Governor’s executive order regarding fair share. At the same time, I look forward to hearing the Governor’s budget as we search for common ground to address our fiscal challenges.”
I stumbled into this interesting map that might make for a good blog item. It splits up North America based on political culture and its historic development. Note that Illinois is one of only a handful of states that is divided into three “nations.” When I give my standard “how-things-work-in-Springfield” talk to civic groups or students, I often argue that regional differences shape the debate in Illinois as much as partisan affiliation does. This gives a pretty good overview of that phenomenon:
* Here’s a close-up shot of Illinois. The full map is here. Dark blue is “Yankeedom,” light blue is “The Midlands” and the red area is “Greater Appalachia”…
YANKEEDOM. Founded on the shores of Massachusetts Bay by radical Calvinists as a new Zion, Yankeedom has, since the outset, put great emphasis on perfecting earthly civilization through social engineering, denial of self for the common good, and assimilation of outsiders. It has prized education, intellectual achievement, communal empowerment, and broad citizen participation in politics and government, the latter seen as the public’s shield against the machinations of grasping aristocrats and other would-be tyrants. Since the early Puritans, it has been more comfortable with government regulation and public-sector social projects than many of the other nations, who regard the Yankee utopian streak with trepidation.
THE MIDLANDS. America’s great swing region was founded by English Quakers, who believed in humans’ inherent goodness and welcomed people of many nations and creeds to their utopian colonies like Pennsylvania on the shores of Delaware Bay. Pluralistic and organized around the middle class, the Midlands spawned the culture of Middle America and the Heartland, where ethnic and ideological purity have never been a priority, government has been seen as an unwelcome intrusion, and political opinion has been moderate. An ethnic mosaic from the start—it had a German, rather than British, majority at the time of the Revolution—it shares the Yankee belief that society should be organized to benefit ordinary people, though it rejects top-down government intervention.
GREATER APPALACHIA. Founded in the early eighteenth century by wave upon wave of settlers from the war-ravaged borderlands of Northern Ireland, northern England, and the Scottish lowlands, Appalachia has been lampooned by writers and screenwriters as the home of hillbillies and rednecks. It transplanted a culture formed in a state of near constant danger and upheaval, characterized by a warrior ethic and a commitment to personal sovereignty and individual liberty. Intensely suspicious of lowland aristocrats and Yankee social engineers alike, Greater Appalachia has shifted alliances depending on who appeared to be the greatest threat to their freedom. It was with the Union in the Civil War. Since Reconstruction, and especially since the upheavals of the 1960s, it has joined with Deep South to counter federal overrides of local preference.
* The Question: Do you agree or disagree with your locale’s description? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
Arduin has been contracted to “provide advice to the governor” on how to deal with Illinois’ pending fiscal challenges.
For that, she — or more specifically, her consulting firm — will be paid $120,000 for four months of work. Rauner justified Arduin’s contract during a Sunday stop in Bloomington.
“Because she’s the best in America,” Rauner said when asked by a reporter how he can justify that expense. “She’s a brilliant lady who’s done financial turnarounds at a number of states. She’s the smartest state government budget person in America that I was able to find and she’s well worth it, because she’s going to save us billions.”
The contract’s signing comes as Rauner has called salaries of highway maintenance workers, prison barbers and other state employees “unsustainable.”
* The contract included an attachment that explains why it was sole sourced. This is the section entitled “Business Rationale”…
The talk in much of Illinois is whether Democrats in the Legislature will go along with any of Gov. Bruce Rauner’s long, ambitious and almost revolutionary list of changes, ranging from merit selection (not election) of judges to limiting prevailing wage requirements on public works projects.
But how about the Republicans in the Legislature, especially the ones whose districts include universities and state prisons, and whose constituents include large numbers of state employees?
There was a telling moment at Friday morning’s appearance by Rauner in downtown Decatur, where an enthusiastic group of supporters welcomed him inside the Decatur Club, but an equally enthusiastic group of opponents hooted and chanted outside the building.
Just before Rauner spoke, Mirinda Rothrock, the president of the Greater Decatur Chamber of Commerce, asked for elected officials in the crowd to stand. Not one Republican state lawmaker was there.
I got chewed out last week by some GOP lawmakers for making a similar observation about Rauner’s appearance in Champaign. But the truth is that downstate Republicans, who for so long have been able to simply criticize Democratic governors and legislative leaders, now have to maneuver around political landmines. Do they support Rauner, their constituents (and their constituents’ interest groups), or somehow both? […]
“Right now they’re keeping their distance,” said one Republican, who said it’s an “adjustment period” for downstate Republicans.
Attorney General Lisa Madigan and Randolph County State’s Attorney Jeremy R. Walker today filed a two-count criminal information against Drew Peterson, 61, an inmate at the Menard Correctional Center, charging him with one count of solicitation of murder for hire and one count of solicitation of murder, both Class X felonies.
The charges allege that between September 2013 and December 2014, the defendant solicited an individual to carry out a murder-for-hire plot against Will County State’s Attorney James Glasgow. The defendant made an initial appearance on the charges today at the Randolph County Courthouse. A preliminary hearing is set for March 3 at 10 a.m.
The case will be jointly prosecuted by the Illinois Attorney General’s Office and the Randolph County State’s Attorney’s Office.
The public is reminded that these are merely charges and that the defendant is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
* I’m guessing this one’s gonna face a tough slog…
Hunters and other shooting enthusiasts would be allowed to have silencers on their guns under a bill filed in the Illinois legislature.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Brandon Phelps, D-Harrisburg, said gun owners want silencers for a simple reason: to avoid hearing loss.
“There are a lot of veterans, a lot of hunters and shooters, who have suffered hearing loss,” Phelps said.
Phelps acknowledged that gun opponents are likely to challenge the bill.
“I’m used to that. They said that about concealed-carry — they said everybody was going to be running around shooting each other, like the wild west,” Phelps said. “That’s the movies.”
Illinois Senator Tim Bivins has introduced an act to allow people with valid concealed carry permits to carry, purchase, and possess switchblade knives, stun guns, or tasers.
It is an incremental reform to the Illinois code. If the bill can make it out of committee and up for a vote, it seems imminently sensible.
Who would object to someone who is legally allowed to carry a concealed pistol, from being allowed to carry a knife, stun gun, or taser in the same circumstances? […]
The ban on knives that open with the push of a button, or “switchblades” comes from an era when yellow journalists were testing the limits of their new found power. They were able to push for a ban on common pocket knives by appealing to emotion and prejudice. Some say that the play “West Side Story” was directly responsible for the ban.
* From the Illinois Policy Institute’s news service…
Jerry Lack, Executive Director of Illinois Construction Management Labor Counsel, says the prevailing wage laws are meant to ensure people make money.
“You gotta have good paying jobs that people can support families on. The prevailing wage helps that become a reality.”
But Billy Michaels, an out of state contractor that has done business in central Illinois, says prevailing wage and other union issues could impact his ability to keep guys from drawing unemployment.
“Where I may be willing to take a eight percent profit on a job versus having to take fifteen. I’m willing to take that eight percent to be able to get the job and keep my guys working all the time versus having them collect (unemployment). It puts an undue burden on the small business owners.”
An out of state contractor complaining about his Illinois profit margin because his workers make more money than they do wherever he’s from. Great example there, guys.
Rauner said after his speech that he believed it would take the General Assembly to pass legislation to allow local municipalities the right to vote on whether to implement the zones, a daunting task as Democrats hold veto-proof majorities in the House and the Senate.
The rest of his presentation focused on a variety of topics he had expressed interest in taking on during his first term, including term limits for officeholders, more charter schools, lowering workers compensation and unemployment insurance costs for businesses and reducing local property taxes.
Despite the breadth of his goals, Rauner said he is confident he can pass every piece of agenda through the General Assembly in eight comprehensive bills.
“We can pass eight bills,” he said. “We have to focus like a laser and get this done.”
Illinois has the most governments in the country – nearly 7,000 local units, and the taxpayers of Illinois can no longer afford all of them.
DuPage County Executive Dan Cronin is with us today. He has already achieved significant government consolidation. To date, his reforms have generated a projected $100 million in taxpayer savings through shared services, joint purchasing, employee benefit reforms and modifications to procurement practices.
Congratulations, Dan. You are a role model for all of us.
The most up-to-date initiative figures supplied by DuPage County officials show savings of about $116.4 million over the next 20 years. But much of the projected savings doesn’t come directly from what could be called “consolidation” of local governments.
The largest area of projected savings – 31 percent – is $36.5 million from budget cuts made since fiscal year 2011, which included the termination of 45 employees, according to initiative figures. Cronin pushed for those reductions after his election as county board chair in 2010 after serving 20 years in Springfield.
A 2010 state measure, sponsored by Cronin when he was a senator, will repeal a DuPage County Water Commission sales tax in 2016. The repeal will result in $33 million worth of tax savings for residents – another 28 percent of the “consolidation” savings – according to initiative figures.
“I’ve gone into the Department of Revenue, Department of Health and Human Services, IDOT — people are giving me standing ovations and are like, ‘Governors never come see us. . . . I’ve worked here for 25 years and I’ve never seen a governor,’ ” he said.
He let the anecdote sink in for a moment before announcing, “Hello?! I mean, come on.”
Illinois rehabilitation facilities could be short $110 million for two programs, one for mental health services and another for adults with developmental disabilities.
Greg Shaver, executive director of Kaskaskia Workshop in Centralia, which helps adults with disabilities, said payments are starting to slow.
“The current problem is about to unveil itself,” Shaver said. “We’re beginning to see that they were paying at a very timely manner and had most (payments) current until about election time.” […]
“Because of the ongoing issue over the last couple of years, (banks) are reluctant to issue any kind of credit, or they have tightened the guidelines because they have increased concerns that the state won’t pay them back,” [Janet Stover, president of the Illinois Association of Rehabilitation Facilities] said. “They are very careful.”
Illinois will run out of money to pay the state’s court reporters within weeks, but Gov. Bruce Rauner is working with lawmakers to find a “responsible solution to the problem,” his spokeswoman said.
Rauner spokeswoman Catherine Kelly said the state program that pays for court reporters faces a $14.3 million budget shortfall for the current fiscal year, which ends June 30, and that the program is on pace to run out of money at the end of March.
“The financial challenges facing the court reporters is just one more stress point pushing us all to look at a solution that addresses this year’s shortfall,” Cullerton spokeswoman Rikeesha Phelon said. “We look forward to working with the governor as he outlines solutions to address the challenges for this year and the next.”
In the meantime, local court leaders have to try to manage the problem. Court reporters are present for many proceedings, taking down a record of what’s said. The role is critical for the justice system, the judges say.
DuPage County, Creswell said, can get by with electronic recordings in some cases. But those recorders still have to be operated by court reporters, who make important notations as the tapes roll. […]
In a Jan. 20 letter that was obtained by the Daily Herald, Tammy Bumgarner, director of Court Reporting Services for the state, told her employees lobbyists are optimistic about a fix, but warned “we must remain vigilant if it does not pass quickly or without issues.”
Without a fix, Creswell said, the state’s more than 20 chief judges soon will have to decide how to stretch out the remaining money to keep as much of the court system operating as possible.
I don’t believe I’ve ever seen a governor openly and loudly laughed at on the House floor. At least not while he was present.
Gov. Bruce Rauner was doing pretty well with his legislative audience during his first State of the State address this week, delivering strong applause lines with his refreshing calls for bipartisanship. He even thanked legislators “for your service” and predicted they would do “great” things together. He warned them that he would say things they liked and didn’t like and urged them to see the “big picture,” which will “lift up all of the people we’ve been chosen to represent.”
Members of the Legislative Black Caucus were especially receptive to the governor’s attacks on labor union apprenticeship programs. Rauner claimed about “80 percent of individuals in Illinois apprenticeship programs are white even though Caucasians make up fewer than 63 percent of our population,” and demanded that be addressed with legislation. Black and Latino legislators have tried for years with limited success to break those barriers, and no governor has ever so clearly sided with them.
Legislators erupted in loud applause when the governor proposed raising the minimum wage to $10 an hour. But when Rauner added “over seven years,” their laughter was even louder, and longer. Democrats appeared to realize that they might’ve fallen for a bait and switch, and it was mostly downhill from that point on.
Much of Rauner’s address was aimed at his campaign enemies. As usual, public employee unions were at the top of his list. “Government must never force its employees to fund activities they do not support,” Rauner claimed. But, by law, state workers are not required to pay full union dues. They are automatically enrolled into what’s called “Fair Share,” which is the portion of dues that funds things like collective bargaining, grievances, etc. They can opt in to full dues, which include funding for things like political work, if they choose.
The Illinois Hospital Association backed Gov. Pat Quinn last year, and Rauner took a clear shot at the IHA last week. “While we currently ban contributions from many businesses with state contracts,” the governor said, “some of the largest recipients of taxpayer money, like hospitals that receive millions from Medicaid, are still able to funnel huge campaign donations to elected officials.” He then called for a campaign contribution ban from “organizations funded by entities receiving state Medicaid funds.”
But hospitals don’t fund the IHA’s political activities, mainly because most are nonprofits and are banned by law from contributing. Pretty much all of the group’s political contributions come from hospital executives.
The IHA was clearly surprised by the gubernatorial shot across its bow. “We’re not sure where this came from,” said an exasperated IHA executive. Not for nothing, but the IHA attempted to atone for its Quinn contributions by donating $100,000 to Rauner’s inauguration fund—and the check was cashed.
By the time he got around to attacking the trial lawyers with a proposal to ban all attorney contributions to judicial candidates, not a single person applauded on either side of the aisle. He waited for a briefly uncomfortable moment, then moved on.
Rauner’s people say he feels “liberated” since the election to say whatever he wants, hence the constant references to his enemies list.
There are those who believe (myself included) that there may be a method to the madness. Under this theory, the governor has planted his flag on a distant economic fringe so that he can drag the General Assembly off its current path. And if he’s eventually willing to compromise and tone things down, it just might work.
But it would’ve been much better for Rauner if he was booed last week. From some I’ve talked to, he may even have wanted that to happen. Being booed by the “entrenched elite” would’ve been a net positive for him with the general public. And legislators might’ve felt bad about booing him once they had time to reflect. Maybe they’d even feel the need to apologize for such a negative reaction.
When people are laughing at you, however, they don’t care what you think and they’re most definitely not listening.
