I read your blog post about changes to collective bargaining rights, titled “Then Do It Already.”
You correctly point out that the Governor’s proposal goes far beyond the restrictions placed on the employees of CPS as part of the School Reform Amendatory Act of 1995. However, that bill was passed by a legislature that was controlled by the Republicans. The Act not only gave the mayor of the City of Chicago complete autonomous control over CPS, but much like the turnaround agenda, it limited collective bargaining rights for teachers.
Since 1995, the Chicago Public Schools have been a complete and total financial disaster. The district didn’t make a single pension payment for a decade. They offered to pay the employee portion of the pension contribution in lieu of a salary increase (ostensibly to save money on the current operation), but then failed to make that contribution as well, exacerbating the problem. The board entered into misguided toxic rate swaps, that this year alone will cost the district over $500 million in penalties. There have been repeated instances of the board engaging in conduct that at the least is a blatant conflict of interest and at worst has been direct corruption. Finally, despite the wishes of the citizens, students, parents, and taxpayers, CPS has gone a binge of Charter School Expansion, closing neighborhood schools and creating sweetheart deals for questionable operators like UNO, without any evidence of improvement. In fact, while the overall performance of CPS has improved, the district has merely kept pace with the rest of the country. Unfortunately, the gains in academic performance have only been realized by white students. The academic achievement of blacks and latinos has been stagnant and in some cases worse.
Today the governor calls for the passage of the turnaround agenda. But here’s the thing: In 1995, the legislature passed the turnaround agenda for Chicago Public Schools. Despite the authoritarian control over the finances and operations, and the restrictions placed on collective bargaining rights, CPS has been an unmitigated disaster. If he truly believes that his agenda will improve our state, he really should come up with a better example.
Rob Martwick
OK, but the Democrats never withdrew those exemptions during their years of control and they allowed CPS to get out of making those pension payments.
* On a related note, Rep. Martwick’s legislation to elect Chicago’s school board recently passed committee on a partisan roll call. It now moves to the floor.
In an interview in October 2010, then-Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., made what would become one of the most repeated (and embellished) quotes of the Barack Obama presidency.
“The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president,” McConnell, now the Senate majority leader, told the National Journal.
As the Washington Post explained in fall 2012, McConnell’s words and the date they were spoken often have been inaccurately represented in the years since, generally by Democrats eager to present evidence of unyielding partisan opposition to Obama’s every move.
But as the Illinois state budget battle kicked into high gear last summer and fall, I’ve heard references to McConnell’s famous quote in a different context. This time it was invoked in defense of a Republican — Gov. Bruce Rauner — who has had limited success with a Democrat-led Legislature.
The logic was along these lines: How can Democrats excoriate a Republican Congress for not bending to the wishes of President Obama while at the same time applauding a Democratic Illinois General Assembly for not cooperating on Rauner’s reform agenda?
The question ignores one fundamental nuance in the Illinois debate, where the gridlock comes from Democrats opposing Rauner’s use of reforms as leverage for negotiating a budget. House Speaker Michael Madigan has stated, ad nauseum, his pledge to work “professionally and cooperatively” with Rauner on the budget, but only if Rauner leaves his reform agenda for another day. To a lot of Illinois Republicans, that position misses the entire point of Rauner’s argument. It’s the Illinois equivalent of McConnell’s “single most important thing” quote.
* The Question: Is Rauner getting the Obama treatment? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
* The Democratic results match up somewhat closely with the poll we discussed the other day. And Sen. Kirk’s gonna win his primary, but check out the large number of undecideds and the high number of folks who don’t know enough about him to rate him after over 5 years in office. The GOP base isn’t totally in love with him…
Republican Senator Mark Kirk and Democratic U.S. Representative Tammy Duckworth are the clear early leaders in Illinois’ upcoming March 15 primary to be their party’s nominee for the U.S. Senate seat currently held by Kirk, according to a poll by the Paul Simon Public Policy Institute at Southern Illinois University Carbondale.
Both Republicans and Democrats feature contested primaries for their nominations, and the November Illinois contest is widely regarded to be one of the most competitive and pivotal contests in the fierce national battle for majority control of the U.S. Senate.
REPUBLICANS
• In the GOP race, Kirk is being challenged for re-nomination by Oswego business owner and conservative, James Marter. The poll found that 53 percent of likely Republican primary voters said they would vote for Kirk, compared to 14 percent who said they were for Marter. This left one-third, or 33 percent, who were still undecided.
The sample of 306 Republicans was part of a statewide poll of 1,000 registered voters taken Feb. 15-20. The Republican sample has a margin of error of 5.6 percent.
DEMOCRATS
• U.S. Rep. Tammy Duckworth from suburban Chicago is the leader, with 52 percent of self-identified Democratic primary voters, compared with 6 percent who said they would vote for Andrea Zopp, head of the Chicago Urban League, and 4 percent who said they would vote for Illinois State Sen. Napoleon Harris of Harvey. The remaining 37 percent said they were still undecided in this race.
The sample of 1,000 Illinois registered voters contained 422 who said they would vote in the Democratic primary and those findings have a margin of error of 4.7 percent.
“These results provide just a snapshot of public opinion in Illinois at this juncture, but it is a good indicator of where the races stand with three weeks to go before the vote,” said John S. Jackson, a visiting professor at the Institute and one of the designers of the poll. “Sen. Kirk and Rep. Duckworth were widely considered to be their parties’ leading candidates for the nomination, and so far they are living up to those expectations.”
U.S. SENATOR JOB APPROVALS
The poll asked all respondents how they felt about the state’s two U.S. Senators, Republican Mark Kirk and Democrat Dick Durbin.
There were 39 percent of the total sample of 1,000 who approved of the job Kirk is doing, while 31 percent disapproved. There were 25 percent who said they did not know and 5 percent who said they neither approved nor disapproved.
Durbin won approval from 51 percent for the job he is doing. There were 34 percent who disapproved. Only 12 percent said they did not know what kind of job Durbin was doing, and 4 percent neither approved nor disapproved.
Jackson said “these results indicate that Sen. Kirk does have his critics, and that there is an unusually large number who say they do not know what kind of job he is doing. This is probably indicative of why he is being challenged in his own party.”
* I heard yesterday that Reps. Ken Dunkin and Reggie Phillips were working on a bill to help ease the “squeeze” on higher education, but I couldn’t get anyone to respond. Here’s their bill…
Appropriates $160,000,000 from the General Revenue Fund to the Board of Higher Education for emergency assistance to public universities. Appropriates $40,000,000 from the General Revenue Fund to the Illinois Community College Board for emergency assistance to community colleges. Effective immediately, but does not take effect at all unless Senate Bill 3044 of the 99th General Assembly becomes law.
SB 3044 would “forgive” $450 million in special funds borrowing the state did at the very end of Fiscal Year 2015.
* That’s a truly “odd couple” of sponsors, but Chicago State University and Eastern Illinois University are in the worst trouble of all the state’s public universities. So, it makes perfect sense, particularly since both men have primary opponents.
*** UPDATE *** I’ve asked for responses from the governor’s office and all four leaders. Here’s Leader Jim Durkin…
“These two bills should be given a fair hearing and awarded an up or down vote. These initiatives actually have money attached for Higher Education unlike the insincere bill regarding MAP the Governor rightfully vetoed.”
* I’m not sure if y’all noticed this, but by design today I have outlined several ways of ending this impasse…
* Workers’ comp: Call Madigan’s bluff and accept language on insurance company rates and roll back the 7.5 percent increase in PPD rates or implement some of the AMA’s guidelines.
* Local collective bargaining: Call Madigan’s bluff and give all schools the same bargaining exemptions that Madigan has already given Chicago, and leave it at that.
* Higher education funding: Use the impasse to force the universities to the bargaining table in order to extract real and lasting spending reforms, but get that process moving before the schools collapse.
* K-12 funding reform: Jim Edgar first secured Democratic votes for his education funding revamp and then used that to push conservative Republicans into accepting a bipartisan compromise - which is exactly the opposite of Rauner’s approach that is doomed to failure because he simply doesn’t have enough votes to move anything forward.
* Tone: Don’t be like The Donald, because, trust me, that comparison is coming as the March 15th primary nears.
* In addition, there’s no real need to demand remap reform as a condition of negotiating the budget because a well-funded, highly organized effort is already underway to put the issue on the ballot this November.
* That leaves term limits. If he got everything else, I don’t see any reason to hold up the budget for term limits. Convince the Senate to vote on it and be done with it.
* There’s also tort reform. The governor rarely talks about that topic, so maybe he doesn’t really care. I don’t know. But there has to be an idea out there somewhere.
“And what some people say to me, ‘Well, you’re just trying to strip away collective bargaining.’ No, I’m not. I just want to do what Chicago has done, and Massachusetts has done and others. When it’s necessary to protect taxpayers, give the ability for you in each community to take something out of collective bargaining if it’s necessary.
“Chicago has done this for years. And when the Democratic super-majority says to me, ‘Governor, you’ve proposed that, that’s a violation of our core beliefs.’
“Well that’s baloney.
“You’ve done it for Chicago for years. You’ve taken school day out of collective bargaining. Length of school year out of collective bargaining. Outside contracting out of collective bargaining. And right now the mayor has asked that the teachers’ pension contribution get taken out of collective bargaining.
“Why does Chicago get that and Springfield doesn’t get that? Decatur doesn’t get that. Peoria doesn’t get that. What’s, what’s going on? It’s not fair. We should treat everybody the same in Illinois.”
This is a great argument. It is unfair for Chicago to have these exemptions that nobody else has.
(a) A public employer and a labor organization may not bargain over, and no collective bargaining agreement entered into, renewed, or extended on or after the effective date of this amendatory Act of the 99th General Assembly may include, provisions related to the following prohibited subjects of collective bargaining:
(1) Employee pensions, including the impact or implementation of changes to employee pensions, including the Employee Consideration Pension Transition Program as set forth in Section 30 of the Personnel Code.
(2) Wages, including any form of compensation including salaries, overtime compensation, vacations, holidays, and any fringe benefits, including the impact or implementation of changes to the same; except nothing in this Section 7.6 will prohibit the employer from electing to bargain collectively over employer-provided health insurance.
(3) Hours of work, including work schedules, shift schedules, overtime hours, compensatory time, and lunch periods, including the impact or implementation of changes to the same.
(4) Matters of employee tenure, including the impact of employee tenure or time in service on the employer’s exercise of authority including, but not limited to, any consideration the employer must give to the tenure of employees adversely affected by the employer’s exercise of management’s right to conduct a layoff.
* If the governor would propose a bill which gives suburban and Downstate schools the same options to limit collective bargaining as Chicago already has, then he’d have a much better argument, and we might be on the road to a deal.
To me, anyway, that would be a big Rauner victory. He’s right that it’s the fair thing to do, and he’s right that the Democrats have already agreed to these ideas for the state’s largest city.
So propose a freaking bill already and put the Democrats on the spot. Unless, of course, he doesn’t want a deal.
Rauner most recently has asked lawmakers either to give him his turnaround stuff—workers compensation and tort reform, limits on public-sector unions, etc.—or give him the authority to balance the budget by moving money around and cutting line items on his own. A pending bill from House GOP Leader Jim Durkin lays out the specifics, with a similar bill filed in the Senate by GOP Leader Christine Radogno. Needless to say, Democrats don’t trust Rauner to make the decisions himself.
On its face, that legislation looks like a liberal nightmare. Specifically, to pay for MAP grants and other college spending, it would effectively give Rauner unrestricted power to “limit, reduce or adjust services, payment rates, expenditures, transfers of funds and eligibility criteria, to the extent permitted by federal law” in five departments of particular importance to Democrats: Aging, Children and Family Services, Healthcare and Family Services, Human Services and Public Health.
In fact, administration officials say, all that clause would do is restore a level playing field between those departments and others, like Corrections and Transportation, where Rauner already has a free hand and has used it to make $500 million to $600 million in cuts.
Comparing corrections and transportation to human services, eh?
Lots of spending at DCFS, DHFS and DHS falls under judicial consent decrees, so it’s like comparing apples to chair legs.
The findings from this analysis illustrate that reimbursement rates in the majority of service areas have failed to keep up with increased cost of living. The only human services field that has experienced regular rate increases is Child Care. The remainder of service rates has fallen behind cost of living. Table 1 and Figure 1 present a summary of rate increases compared to cost of living increases. Key findings include the following:
• The current rates for Substance Abuse Treatment (for Level I, II, and III, Adult Recovery Home, Case Management, Psychiatric/Diagnostic, Opioid Maintenance Therapy, and Early Intervention) would need to increase by 27% to adjust for cost of living increases that have occurred since 2000.
• Reimbursement rates for Comprehensive Care Coordination for older adults have generally not increased since 2000. These rates would need to be increased by 38% to adjust for cost of living.
• Early Intervention reimbursement rates have not increased since 2004. The rates would need to increase by 26% to adjust for cost of living.
• Foster Care reimbursement rates would need to increase by at least 25% to adjust for cost of living.
• Reimbursement rates for various Developmental Disabilities Services have not increased since 2008, and would need to increase by 13% to adjust for cost of living.
• Wages for developmental disabilities residential support staff have not increased since 2002. These wage rates would need to increase by 30% to adjust for cost of living.
• Community Mental Health Service rates have not increased since 2006. Based on 2005 rates, they would need an increase of 16% to adjust for cost of living.
Cut those rates and two things will probably happen: 1) Quality of care will decrease; and 2) Wages will be suppressed, so hiring decent people will be much more difficult, which will also likely hamper qualify of care.
Lack of funding for higher education creates “uncertainty if you’re a student,” she said. But, she added, “some of these universities have cut some of their administrative costs –- sort of squeeze-the- beast theory.”
She said “global questions” about higher ed could now be asked.
“Should we have six, eight schools of education, everybody having a program and everything? I don’t know,” Radogno said. She noted a couple of two-year colleges went to four years, including what is now the University of Illinois Springfield.
“Maybe we ought to have more going from four to two,” she said.
* Those words caught the attention of the Champaign News-Gazette and state Sen. Scott Bennett, a Champaign Democrat who represents the U of I…
“What we don’t want to see is some kind of starving out, which is what’s happening now, where the strong survive and the weaker ones die away,” Bennett said. “That’s not the way we should be deciding our higher education system.
“Honestly, that’s what appears to be happening. I don’t know if that’s the design or neglect which is resulting in this.”
Radogno spokeswoman Patti Schuh described Radogno’s comments as part of a “freewheeling” conversation with the newspaper’s editorial board, not a policy proposal. The message, Schuh said, was that budget cuts present an opportunity to “look at things differently.”
“It’s been said by many, ‘Never let a good crisis go to waste,’” Schuh said. “There are legitimate questions that are being asked.”
But she added, “There’s no plan or policy on the table right now.”
OK, take her at her word. But this “squeeze the beast” theory is at the very least a de facto plan right now.
* Make no mistake, however. This current crisis comes after years of “squeeze the beast” policy by controlling Democrats. It’s been a slow-motion train wreck…
Excluding pensions and adult education/career and technical education (which came under community colleges oversight in 2002), community colleges, public universities, need-based financial aid, and institutional grant programs all have experienced decreases in funding since 2000 after accounting for inflation. The total decrease is $1.1 billion, or 36.4 percent.
Emphasis added.
* Universities are (often rightly) seen by state policymakers as top-heavy fiefdoms which need to rein in their own spending. But depriving them of state money hasn’t worked. They’ve continued to expand non-instructional staff and jacked up tuition…
* The upside here is that the universities have been incredibly powerful in the past. It’s why they got away with those massive tuition hikes and their over-reliance on non-tenured professors, etc. The past cuts obviously didn’t work. But the current starvation diet is making them much more amendable to change.
So, how about somebody come up with a reform plan before the whole system implodes and permanent damage is done?
* Not to get all gangsta or anything, but only a short-sighted bookie has his customer’s legs broken for refusing to pay a debt. The customer can’t pay if the customer can’t work. You only break his legs when it becomes clear that he has no intention of ever paying. I don’t think we’re there yet, by any means, but this current, super-intense “squeeze the beast” policy is as close as we’ve ever gotten to breaking some legs.
The university system is a big part of our heritage. Responsible stewards improve on that heritage to pass along to the next generation. Blagojevich and Quinn and the Democratic General Assembly were not responsible stewards. Rauner could turn out to be even worse unless he comes up with a plan.
* Um, dude, they own the Chicago Cubs. That’s probably the worst imaginable thing that anybody would ever try to hide. But, as we all know, they were quite public about their purchase of that evil monstrosity. So, I’m not sure how anything else in their collective family past could possibly be any worse than that…
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump took to Twitter on Monday to denounce a super political action committee opposing his campaign that’s primarily funded by Marlene Ricketts, whose family owns the Chicago Cubs.
“I hear the Rickets (sic) family, who own the Chicago Cubs, are secretly spending $’s against me. They better be careful, they have a lot to hide!” wrote Trump, the businessman and reality TV show star who is no stranger to making pronouncements, name-calling denunciations and predictions via social media.
Trump’s message apparently was in response to a USA Today story noting that Ricketts, the family matriarch who lives in Nebraska, had put $3 million into the Our Principles PAC in January. The PAC has spent about $3.5 million in ads, mailings and other efforts to oppose Trump, federal records show.
* Gov. Rauner and Leader Durkin refused to respond. But one guy did…
But, will Trump’s Twitter strategy work in Illinois? Former Illinois Republican Party Chairman Pat Brady thinks not.
“It does stir it up and he sucks all the oxygen in the room and other candidates can’t get out there, but I don’t think it’s going to work very well here,” Brady said.
The sample of 306 [Illinois] Republicans was part of a statewide poll of 1,000 registered voters conducted Feb.15 to 20. The GOP voter sample has a margin of error of 5.6 percent.
But I doubt that Trump has suddenly fallen behind in Illinois. As we’ve already clearly seen, a large number of Illinoisans absolutely love it when their guy is constantly on the attack. And Pat Brady ought to know this because he’s been loudly cheering something eerily similar to this in his own back yard for a while now.
The top Republican in the Illinois House says there is room to compromise with Democrats on the conservative agenda Gov. Bruce Rauner Is pushing.
Jim Durkin is a Republican from Western Springs. On Monday, he told a meeting of the City Club in Chicago that he wants Democrats who control the General Assembly to negotiate “with open minds” on a balanced budget. […]
Durkin says there are steps within a workers comp reform package that could be agreed upon, such as adopting American Medical Association guidelines for compensating worker injury.
“In my caucus, I believe that workers’ comp is extremely important, extremely important,” said Durkin, R-Western Springs.
“And I’m of the belief, after my discussions with the (House) speaker and the (Senate) president, over the months, that is an area where we can find some common ground.”
“If we‘re going to get through the budget … that’s one of the things we’re going to have to address. It has to be part of the plan, it has to be part of the big picture,” Durkin said in a presentation to the City Club of Chicago.
Durkin also said the GOP doesn’t expect Democratic support for big changes in workers’ compensation “causation,” which refers to whether an injury actually occurred at work and to what degree the workplace is responsible.
Still, he said, “there are many other issues we can deal with on workers’ comp,” citing as examples the implementation of American Medical Association recommendations and changes in payment-for-loss schedules.
“We passed legislation last year that focuses on the insurance industry, which appears to be a blockade point,” said Madigan spokesman Steve Brown.
“The important thing is there have been independent studies that say the cost of workers’ comp has come down dramatically since the 2011 reforms (but) the insurance companies aren’t passing it along,” said Brown.
“We have a bill that was passed that could focus on the insurance companies (and) get the money to the employers, but the governor is focused on taking wages away from employees,” Brown said.
Brown referenced House Bill 1287, which passed the House last June by a vote of 63 to 39. While Democrats said it was a substantial measure and an olive branch to the governor, Republicans dismissed it as an insincere gesture and falling well short of the changes they want. The bill remains in the Senate.
A 2005 bill that raised payments to workers who suffered permanent partial disabilities on the job [by 7.5 percent] caused workers’ compensation insurance rates in Illinois to soar. Miller said a repeal of that law could break the budget stalemate and satisfy both Rauner and Madigan, who has argued that Rauner’s agenda for workers’ comp will send injured workers to emergency rooms for treatment and force them onto welfare rolls:
“‘If we get this, workers’ comp is done’ [the governor’s people have told me]. Now, rolling back a 7.5 percent benefit increase is not going to put one person on welfare or send one person to the emergency room. That is a doable, possible fix.”
* The question becomes does either side really want to do a deal? I think Durkin is indicating that he’s willing to move forward on something. Brown has laid out what his boss wants. A governor interested in advancing his cause would immediately see this as a prime opportunity for progress.
Put the Speaker on the spot by agreeing to his demand. There’s no better way to test whether Madigan is more interested in compromise or gridlock.
* And, frankly, the same can be said of Rauner. I’m still of the mind that Rauner wants to do a deal. I think that’s supported by what he told the bigshots at GE last year when the company wanted to move its HQ to Chicago, but were worried about governmental instability. Rauner asked for more time because he (for whatever reason) thought he was close to ending the impasse. I don’t think he would’ve told the company execs that if he wanted this thing to go on indefinitely. Maybe I’m wrong, but I still believe he wants to move the state forward. It’s just that he absolutely must find another way to do it.
As Rauner has done throughout the past year, he tried to pin the problem on House Speaker Michael Madigan, saying the current school funding formula that Democrats now want to change was created by the longtime lawmaker.
“I did not create the school funding formula, I just got here,” Rauner said. “This has been in place for decades and you know who created? Speaker Madigan and the Democrats in the General Assembly. Somehow, I’m new, and it’s all my fault and I’m the defender of it. I mean, good grief.”
And the formula which determines how much state aid each school gets hasn’t been changed since 1997.
* That was a huge piece of legislation, by the way, pushed hard throughout most of 1997 by Gov. Jim Edgar…
I felt that in the end, we got 75 percent of what we were out to get. I mean, we didn’t get property tax relief. I think the media has a tendency to dwell on property tax relief. We didn’t get that, but we did get the minimal foundation level, we did get more money for schools; we did get some reforms, but most importantly, we got the minimal foundation level. We helped poor school districts in the state; that was the basis of what we wanted to accomplish, and we did accomplish that.
This legislation took months to pass, over the initial opposition of suburban Republicans, who eventually decided that their Downstaters were getting such heat that they needed to cut a deal with Edgar. That’s why Downstate Sen. Frank Watson was made the chief sponsor.
* The bill had problems in the House Democratic caucus as well because it started off as an income tax hike. Here’s Jim Edgar again….
I think we were in April, late April, probably, because we still had time in that Senate. But Madigan came to me and said, “My guys are nervous that they’ll vote for this and then you’ll campaign against them for raising taxes. They want an endorsement.” I said, “I’m not going to give them an endorsement.” Finally we settled on I’d give them a letter thanking them for their support of this proposal. He came back and said, “Okay, that’ll work.” Anybody who votes for this will get a letter from me thanking them for their courage in voting for this important piece of legislation.
* And it required some serious horse trading in the Senate GOP caucus…
We knew we had all the Democrats, and we needed two or three Republicans to vote for a discharge. Now, this is a trickier vote than voting for it on the floor. There are some guys who just won’t vote for a discharge, and we knew that. But I was down to one vote; I knew who the senator was, and I had him down in my office. At that time we were building a new prison in Illinois, and this senator came from a long family of politicians who cared about jobs.
* My overall point here is that when a governor completely engages, he can get things done. Maybe not everything he wants, but 75 percent isn’t bad. You live to fight another day.
What you don’t do is spend all your time publicly bashing one guy. It might make you feel good. It might make your supporters love you more. But it doesn’t actually get anything accomplished. Keeping your base and the Tribune fired up and giddy as little schoolgirls is no substitute for governance. Period.
* Gov. Bruce Rauner appeared today with Juan Salgado, the innovative President/CEO of Instituto Career Health Services Academy, to talk about the future of education. From the governor’s comments…
“[As Salgado said a few minutes ago, he would] put more resources into the other support networks for our students. Psychological support, counseling support, health support, because the challenges students have to overcome every day in their lives to be able to get in the classroom and study and learn is pretty overwhelming.
“That’s one of the reasons that we just created the Governor’s Cabinet for Children and Youth. We have 15 state departments that touch our young people in different elements of their life. We need to coordinate that, better focus it, so when we interact with a student who needs support, healthcare, counseling, potentially unfortunately sometimes justice issues, corrections issues. When we have a government touching a student, we should be coordinating that effort so we can maximize the impact with the students.
“For example, right now we have a dozen different databases about students, and if a student touches one department another department doesn’t even know that that interaction is even going on, and they can’t impact and benefit each other by coordinating the services that that student needs to realize their full potential. We need more cooperation, we need less bureaucracy, more efficiency and more money in the classroom to support our students.
“If we do that, every student can realize their fullest potential and we can have great schools and students ready to step into great careers in every neighborhood.”
The governor absolutely nailed it. He really gets this.
Except for one thing.
Those much-needed support services he spoke of are being decimated by this impasse.
As we were speaking with Gail Owen, the regional schools superintendent for Tazewell, Woodford and Mason counties, after the budget address, she made a point about another impact of the stalemate that hadn’t gotten much attention.
Of course many of us have heard — if not from the full-throated voice of our own local law enforcement — about how cutbacks in social services, many of them providing care for mental illness, affect the justice system.
But whether it’s violence prevention, post sexual assault counseling, even the lengthy fight over child care reimbursement, other support networks are seeing the effects on kids of cutbacks in programs that help either them or their parents and guardians. That includes teachers in the classroom.
Owen put it bluntly to us: “Without those support services, the schools are picking up the slack.”
Changes in state law have made it difficult for organizers to put on amateur events for kickboxing and martial arts, which aren’t regulated the way boxing and mixed martial arts are, so over the years opportunities for athletes to compete in Illinois have become fewer and farther between. Pending legislation that would allow for such competitions seems to have stalled in the state Senate.
“I think it’s very frustrating that we’re training year-round and we may have four opportunities to fight,” said Josh Brackett, who trains fighters and competes himself. “We probably haven’t fought in Illinois in five or six years.” […]
The current legislation, House Bill 1646, drew support from athletes and trainers and has been endorsed by public bodies, including the Peoria City Council and Peoria Civic Center Authority, and passed the state House by a vote of 114-0 last spring. The bill is opposed, however, by the state’s Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, which oversees licensing and regulation of boxing and would oversee kickboxing competitions, should they be allowed. […]
Ryan Blackorby, a kickboxing trainer and enthusiast, estimates that the number of kickboxing competitions has dropped in Illinois by 90 percent in the last decade, while boxing and MMA have continued to be allowed.
* The Question: What other things should Illinois over-regulate to the point of almost banning it?
Snark is heavily encouraged, of course. But please explain your tongue in cheek nomination. Thanks.
* US Sen. Mark Kirk has been whacked by Democrats for not saying whether he supports his party leadership’s rejection of the notion that the President ought to be able to appoint Justice Scalia’s successor. Kirk has an op-ed in the Sun-Times on this topic…
As a 23-year veteran of the U.S. Navy Reserve and as a United States senator, I swore an oath to protect and uphold the constitution. That oath is to our constitution, not to a party or any one individual, but to the ideals that bind our nation.
In that role, I recognize the right of the president, be it Republican or Democrat, to place before the Senate a nominee for the Supreme Court and I fully expect and look forward to President Barack Obama advancing a nominee for the Senate to consider.
I also recognize my duty as a senator to either vote in support or opposition to that nominee following a fair and thorough hearing along with a complete and transparent release of all requested information. The Senate’s role in providing advice and consent is as important and significant as the president’s role in proposing a nominee.
A partisan or extreme nominee would not be prudent nor would it provide a steady, scholarly hand to guide the constitutional ship of state.
My sincerest hope is that President Obama nominates someone who captures the sentiment he spoke about before the Illinois General Assembly this month — a nominee who can bridge differences, a nominee who finds common ground and a nominee who does not speak or act in the extreme.
Such a selection by the president would demonstrate a break from the rancor and partisanship of Washington and a real commitment to a new beginning even as his own term nears its end.
*** UPDATE *** Duckworth campaign…
“I’m pleased Sen. Kirk has chosen under pressure to do the right thing and support the President’s constitutional duty to nominate a Supreme Court nominee. He should go a step further, however, and demand Senators McConnell and Grassley end their obstruction and hold hearings and allow a vote on a nominee.” — Tammy Duckworth
Monday, Feb 22, 2016 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Exelon announced that its profits for 2015 were $2,270,000,000 and that it is increasing dividends to shareholders 2.5% per year for the next three years.
So you’re thinking – “The company is healthy, shareholders are getting more $$$, the power auctions provided them $1.7 billion for their nuclear plants in Illinois so they must be done asking struggling Illinois ratepayers for a bailout, right?” Nope - it’s never enough for Exelon.
“Groundhog Day was yesterday, but Exelon appears to want to keep celebrating. The Chicago-based nuclear giant is back to threatening to close nuclear plants in Illinois without financial help from the state.” – “Exelon’s Crane beats the drum again for nuke subsidies” Crain’s, February 3, 2016
To review:
Exelon made more than TWO BILLION DOLLARS ($2,270,000,000) last year
Exelon is INCREASING DIVIDENDS FOR SHAREHOLDERS
Exelon received a $1.7 BILLION WINDFALL through new capacity charges
Illinois still has no budget, the state’s finances and services are in shambles, the social safety net is being decimated but Exelon STILL wants the Legislature to pass a huge BAILOUT.
BEST Coalition is a 501C4 nonprofit group of dozens of business, consumer and government groups, as well as large and small businesses. Visit www.noexelonbailout.com.
* Gov. Bruce Rauner correctly pointed out today that he couldn’t have totally balanced the General Assembly’s budget last year with line item and reduction vetoes alone because so many spending programs are tied to state statutes. But then he was asked why he didn’t include many cuts in his budget proposal last week and instead listed $3.5 billion in revenue or cuts that don’t actually exist…
Because this is a partnership. This is something that we’ve gotta do together. There are many ideas on the table of things to cut. The best answer is bipartisan decision-making on that process… Everything we do should be on a bipartisan basis.
Um, OK.
* That answer obviously wasn’t good enough, so he was pressed again…
We, we proposed a bunch of, of things last year in a budget. We proposed a budget last year. It was completely ignored. My, my, my point is, let’s not just reproduce what happened last year. Let’s just not do that again.
I listed some things out last year, they got ignored. So, you can go study it. You can go study it.
One thing that got “ignored” was Rauner proposal to immediately use savings from his pension reform plan, plus another $800 million or so in savings from state employee health insurance. Those projected savings are down to about $500 million in his current budget proposal.
The Governor shall prepare and submit to the General Assembly, at a time prescribed by law, a State budget for the ensuing fiscal year… Proposed expenditures shall not exceed funds estimated to be available for the fiscal year as shown in the budget.
* Related…
* Illinois governor eyes blocking Chicago school debt: Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner said on Monday the state has the power to block any debt offerings by financially distressed school districts, including the cash-strapped Chicago Public Schools (CPS), which has been dependent on borrowing to fund operations.
* It’s amazing to me that candidates are still getting caught doing this. From Kerry Lester…
A candidate running for state Senate wrote a $2,595 check to the Cook County Assessor on Friday after I called to ask him about improperly claiming two primary homeowner exemptions for a number of years.
Steve Caramelli, who’s running against Cristina Castro of Elgin in the 22nd District Democratic primary, listed homes in both Hoffman Estates and Chicago as primary residences during property tax years 2010 to 2014, records show. Caramelli, who rents out the Chicago property, wasn’t aware of the issue, spokesman Ryan Keith said, and took care of it as soon as he learned.
Caramelli’s not the only politician to run into this problem in recent years. In fact, Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner was claiming exemptions on a Winnetka home, a Chicago penthouse and a condo on a separate floor of the same building for a number of years. Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth also claimed two homeowner exemptions from 2007 to 2010 in DeKalb and Hoffman Estates. Like Caramelli, both paid the amount owed after the Daily Herald pointed out the errors.
* And from SEIU Healthcare…
Watch this video to hear child care worker Brenda McMillon and home care worker Vanessa Land talk about their disturbing encounter recently with Rep. Ken Dunkin. We think he owes them an apology.
*** UPDATE *** The earlier video had no disclaimer. It’s now been fixed…
* Gov. Bruce Rauner reverted to his “Speaker Madigan and the legislators he controls” rhetoric today. Click here. Relevant comments start just after the 11 minute mark
Old, wizened, wealthier than a great lord but running out of time, House Speaker Michael J. Madigan sits upon the Iron Throne and looks at what he’s done to Illinois.
Perhaps not a throne of iron exactly, but some great pyramid of bleached skulls of taxpayers who couldn’t make it out of this failing state alive.
It really doesn’t matter what he sits on. For decade upon decade, Boss Madigan has controlled state government and the state Democratic Party, while making a fortune in his legal practice by reducing taxes for owners of downtown real estate, most of whom are Republicans. He sits on high for now.
But he’s in his 70s. His Southwest Side 22nd House District was once heavily Polish, Irish and Lithuanian, but the old ethnics have given way to young Latinos.
Madigan draws the state political maps, but he can’t control the demographics forever. He’s as sentimental as a boning knife, so he’s wise enough to see the end of things.
And he finally has a real challenger in the March 15 Democratic Party primary: Jason Gonzales, 40, a successful business consultant with two postgraduate degrees, one from MIT, the other from Harvard.
* PR consultant Kitty Kurth linked to the Kass column on her Facebook page and then explained why she’s working for Jason Gonzales…
(F)or me it is all about what Mike Madigan did to Patrick Botterman. And what he has not done for the Illinois Democratic Party. I have endured decades of humiliation when talking with my Democratic friends around the country and what seeing how they are all light years ahead of us because Madigan won’t join the modern world. No email in bound or outbound for the Illinois Dems.
Ed Ronkowski, chairman of the Will County Republican Party, says House Speaker Michael Madigan is behind the influx of cash into the Democrat’s coffers.
“(Rep. Kate Cloonen) does exactly what Madigan tells her to do,” Ronkowski says. “When Madigan authorizes money for a campaign, he asks people to vote a certain way. Republicans don’t do it that way.”
Cloonen disputes that depiction.
“There’s never been a time when the speaker has come to me and told me how to vote. That’s not how it works,” Cloonen says.
Ohio Gov. John Kasich’s presidential campaign has brought on a new adviser whose name and face will be familiar to close Kasich observers.
Mike Schrimpf, who has been serving as Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner’s deputy chief of staff, will “oversee strategic message development and outreach” in the role of communications director, Team Kasich announced Sunday in an email.
Schrimpf’s twin brother, Chris, had that title when Kasich’s campaign launched last summer. Chris Schrimpf has taken on a role as senior communications adviser and continues to direct Kasich’s press operation on the road.
Both Schrimpfs are veterans of the Republican Governors Association.
“Mike has worked well with our organization for many years at RGA and will be a good fit with the team as Governor Kasich’s growing support creates new opportunities for us to talk about his positive, unifying vision for America,” Kasich campaign manager Beth Hansen said in the emailed statement. “He is an excellent communication thinker and leader who knows how to work effectively in senior positions with large teams and we’re fortunate to have him join the campaign.”
* From the governor’s office…
Mike Schrimpf remains a trusted adviser to Governor Rauner and will continue to advise the Illinois Republican Party throughout the year.
With Schrimpf’s departure, Lance Trover will serve as Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications while Richard Goldberg will serve as Deputy Chief of Staff for Legislative Affairs and Strategic Initiatives.
It was explained to me that Goldberg will now have a role in comms planning.
If Kasich’s bid does peter out sooner than later, Schrimpf will then move toward helping with 2016 state races in Illinois, we’re told. The governor’s office on Sunday said Schrimpf will advise the Illinois Republican Party for the remainder of the year. There are a batch of contested seats in the Illinois Legislature that are part of a larger fight between Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan and Rauner. It’s expected Schrimpf will return to team Rauner at some point.
– Kasich vs. Rubio: Schrimpf, who was the top spokesman during Rauner’s record-spending campaign run, will go to battle against Chip Englander, Rauner’s former campaign manager who recently landed with team Rubio. Kasich managed to capture the support of traditional Republicans in Illinois but Rubio’s team says it’s ties here are just as deep. Game on.
(reported by the Chicago Tribune on Oct. 5, 2015) Elected to the Senate in 2012, representing the 21st District. He previously served two terms in the House, first elected in 2008; on the DuPage County Board, elected in 200; and as a Lisle village trustee. Connelly is an attorney from Lisle, in private practice for over 20 years. J.D. from the John Marshall Law School,1989; undergraduate degree from Loyola University,1986. Born in Chicago and raised in LaGrange.
Co-Chair U.S. Rep. Darin LaHood
(reported on Oct. 14, 2015) Represents the 18th CD, Peoria; elected in a special election in Sept. 2015. Served in the Illinois State Senate, 2011-15. U.S. Attorney for the District of Nevada, 2001-05. Prosecutor in Tazewell County, IL, 1999-2001. Prosecutor in Cook County, IL, 1997-99. Worked for U.S. Rep. Jerry Lewis (CA), 1990-94. J.D. from John Marshall Law School, Chicago, Ill., 1997; B.A. from Loras College, Dubuque, Iowa, 1990.
Supporter Kenneth Griffin
(reported by The New York Times on Dec. 9, 201) “billionaire hedge fund manager”
Co-Chairs:
Dan Cronin, DuPage County Board Chairman
Dave Syverson, Illinois State Senator, 35th District
Ed Sullivan, Illinois House of Representatives, 51st Distrct
David Harris, Illinois House of Representatives, 53rd District
Ron Sandack, Illinois House of Representatives, 81st District
Tom Demmer, Illinois House of Representatives, 90th District
Randy Frese, Illinois House of Representatives, 94th District
Jim Schultz, Director, Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity; Chairman, Citizens for Rauner
Pat Brady, former Chairman of the Illinois Republican Party
Sean Morrison, Cook County Commissioner, 17th District
(announced Dec. 3, 2015)
Jil Tracy, former State Representative, 94th House District from 2006-15
Joseph Mohorovic, Commissioner of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
(announced Oct. 14, 2015)
Leadership Team:
Aaron Del Mar, Chairman of the Cook County Republican Party
Seth McMillan, Chairman of the Christian County Republican Party
Jerome Groniger, Chairman of the Coles County Republican Party
Liz Gorman, former Cook County Commissioner, 17th District
Cory Jobe, Director, Illinois Office of Tourism, Ward 6 Alderman
John Farney, Champaign County Auditor
Kristy Stephenson, City Treasurer, City of Metropolis
* House Republicans could be hurt by strong downdraft from Donald Trump if he wins presidential nod: Unlike some other vulnerable Republicans, Dold is not waiting to distinguish himself from Trump in his suburban Chicago seat, where Democrats are likely to turn out in droves to back their presidential nominee. And it is not an idle concern that moderate Republicans — or independents who might support a Republican in another presidential year — will choose to either stay home or worse, back Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders. “For me, it’s personal,” Dold said in an interview with the Washington Post. “[Trump’s] comments about women, his comments about minorities, about Latinos — for me that’s not a guy I would support.” In a refrain that national Republican strategists may be echoing if Trump or Cruz wins the GOP nod, Dold believes the key to his reelection comes from ticket-splitters, voters who are likely to pull the lever for him and either Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders.
* Remember Jonathan Kaye? He’s the Republican House candidate running against Rep. Reggie Phillips (R-Charleston) who posted an utterly fascinating life story and confession about a dark chapter of his past on Facebook last month.
Kaye’s problem is that he doesn’t have enough money to respond to a TV ad which uses devastating newspaper headlines against him. He’s reported raising just $8,000 this year, almost all of it from himself.
Then again, even if he had a bunch of money, I’m not sure he could effectively respond.
Citizens for Rauner also transferred $50,000 to the campaign fund of freshman Republican Rep. Reggie Phillips, a Charleston Republican being challenged by Democrat Jonathan Kaye this fall.
Kaye is a Republican, of course, but Rauner is in it to win it.
* Those “//” marks were also all over legislators’ copies of the State of the State Address last month…
There apparently were two printed versions of Gov. BRUCE RAUNER’s budget speech last week.
One, which wasn’t given to the news media, contained double slash marks — like these // — after several sentences.
“This is the budget speech he handed out,” said Sen. JOHN SULLIVAN, D-Rushville, clutching a copy of the speech with slash marks. “Wherever the hash marks are, that’s where the Republicans were supposed to applaud. I’m following the speech and about on this page I’m like what are those? And all of a sudden it hit me. Every time he got to that point the Republicans all applauded.”
Rauner spokesman LANCE TROVER said “it’s unfortunate Democrats are more focused on hash marks in a speech” than passing a balanced budget.
I think they used to call Lance’s response a “non-denial denial.”
There are always two audiences for formal gubernatorial addresses: 1) Legislators who actually attend; and 2) Everyone else outside the Statehouse who watch it or read about it later.
Gov. Bruce Rauner’s budget address last week seemed far more designed for people outside the building, most of whom don’t really care about the intricacies of government finance. Most do, however, want to see everyone finally get along and end this 8-month governmental impasse, despite what you may read in online comment sections.
That’s probably why Rauner barely even talked about the budget. It’s no surprise why. For the first time since Illinois became a state in 1818 a governor has submitted a budget for the next fiscal year without having passed a budget for the current fiscal year.
The failure is not just an embarrassment. Tens of thousands of the most vulnerable Illinoisans are paying dearly. No budget means the state can’t help homeless teens, assist women with the trauma of a brutal rape or help addicts kick heroin.
Tens of thousands more may have to drop out of college because state universities and a special scholarship program aren’t being funded. The majority African-American Chicago State University is perilously close to shutting down, as are Western Illinois University and Eastern Illinois University.
Even Rauner’s lines that some described as an “olive branch” to the Democratic legislative majority seemed aimed more at the folks back home.
Why? Well, words, even very kind words, are not going to be enough to get this done. The sides are simply too far apart, and now that election season has cranked up again, I’m not sure how this thing is going to be resolved.
The governor wants Democrats to help him undermine their labor union allies before he’ll cut a budget deal. But he’s got tens of millions of dollars in campaign bank accounts which are already being unleashed on Democrats. They won’t unilaterally disarm themselves in the face of a threat like that.
House Speaker Michael Madigan is one of those Democrats with a well-funded primary opponent. Despite adamant denials from the governor and the opponent himself, Madigan firmly believes that Rauner put the guy into the race.
So, after Rauner concluded his budget address and turned to shake Madigan’s hand, Madigan leaned in and sarcastically cracked, “Thanks for the candidate.”
This was the second time that Madigan “thanked” the governor for his opponent. The first time was immediately after January’s State of the State Address. A noisy House chamber meant Rauner didn’t understand what Madigan said, thinking he made some comment about state Rep. Jack Franks. But the message came through loud and clear last week.
Some people think that if we could just get rid of Mike Madigan then the governor would have a free hand to solve all the state’s problems.
But that’s just not the reality. Almost all rank and file Democratic legislators are adamant about opposing Rauner.
Hours after his budget address, Rauner attended the Illinois Legislative Black Caucus’ annual dinner event. The governor chatted with folks and was then unexpectedly asked to speak. Rauner relied on his usual stump speech that he gives at black churches, saying “The Good Lord didn’t make us Democrats and Republicans, the Good Lord put us on Earth to do His work.” He talked about how he wanted to work with everyone in the room. But then he laid an egg.
“My agenda, my goal aligns exactly with the interests of the African-American community,” Rauner declared. “But we’ve got a broken politics in Illinois and around America where African-Americans primarily vote Democrat and as a result Democratic leaders can pretty much ignore the interests of the African-American community because they have the votes all locked up anyway.”
Um, most people at the dinner were Democratic leaders, and most of them were also African-Americans. His remarks were taken as a direct insult by many in attendance.
Rauner’s comments were from an often-used GOP playbook. And I don’t think he had ill intentions because he also said, “Republicans don’t want to listen to African-American concerns because they never get their votes. That is wrong. We should change that. We should work together in the common interests.”
I don’t know if many people heard that, but they did applaud when Rauner said he wanted to spend more money on education “so it goes disproportionately to low income schools.”
What he didn’t say, but what everyone in the room knew, is that he will only agree to do this after Democrats help him gut the power of organized labor.
To the Honorable Members of
The Illinois Senate,
99th General Assembly:
Today I veto Senate Bill 2043 from the 99th General Assembly, which would explode the State’s budget deficit, exacerbate the State’s cash flow crisis, and place further strain on social service providers and recipients who are already suffering from the State’s deficit spending.
SB 2043 Would Exacerbate Our Budget and Cash Flow Deficits
Senate Bill 2043 would appropriate $721 million for the Monetary Award Program (MAP) and community colleges programs. Senate Bill 2043 proposes the same funding levels for these programs as were included in the unconstitutional, unbalanced budget passed by the General Assembly last year, which was opposed by many legislators, including Democrats, and which I vetoed.
Despite its constitutional obligation to balance the budget, the General Assembly has not put forward a plan to pay for these programs, whether through spending reductions, revenue, or cost-saving reforms. The Governor’s Office of Management and Budget concluded that Senate Bill 2043 would add $721 million to the State’s budget deficit.
Today, the Comptroller reports 48,000 vendor vouchers waiting to be paid, a $7.2 billion backlog of bills, and a grand total balance of $145 million in the general funds. This bill would spend money the State does not have.
Moreover, Senate Bill 2043’s unfunded spending would significantly exacerbate the State’s current cash flow challenges. To protect and prioritize General State Aid payments, the Comptroller would be forced to further delay payments for other goods and services across State government, putting social services further at risk. We have already seen that the State’s deficit spending is harshest to social service providers and our State’s most vulnerable residents. Senate Bill 2043 would further delay those payments at a time when those recipients are already under fiscal stress.
A Better, Constitutional Way to Fund Higher Education
The Constitution and our obligation to taxpayers require a balanced budget. Recognizing this, legislators in both the House of Representatives and the Senate put forward a plan to pay for higher education spending – not just those programs included in Senate Bill 2043, but also funding for our public universities. I thank them for their leadership.
House Bill 4539 and Senate Bill 2349 would appropriate $1.6 billion for higher education programs, while Senate Bill 2789 would authorize the Governor, Comptroller, and Treasurer to identify and implement funding by reallocating funds and reducing spending in other areas. Together these bills would fund MAP, community college programs, and our public universities, without exploding the deficit or exacerbating the State’s cash flow crisis. This is a far more fiscally responsible – and constitutional – plan for funding higher education.
Therefore, pursuant to Section 9(b) of Article IV of the Illinois Constitution of 1970, I hereby return Senate Bill 2043, entitled “AN ACT concerning appropriations”, with the foregoing objections, vetoed in its entirety.
Sincerely,
Bruce Rauner
GOVERNOR
I imagine we’ll be seeing some react soon.
*** UPDATE *** Responses will be added as they come in. Illinois Treasurer Michael Frerichs…
“The Governor hurt the working poor and local taxpayers today.”
“Last year, we made a promise to 130,000 students and their families that we would help pay for college so they could achieve a better life. I don’t know when it became fashionable to not honor a promise.”
“Not doing so also hurts taxpayers. Community colleges are funded with local tax dollars. This veto ignores our responsibility to local governments, needlessly shifts this burden to local taxpayers and flies in the face of support for local control.”
“Yes, our state faces financial challenges. I agree difficult decisions are necessary. But the decision to ignore people who have demonstrated a willingness and ability to help themselves does not reflect my priorities or the values of our great state.”
* Senate President Cullerton…
“I’m disappointed in the governor. He had a chance to back up his promises with funding. Instead, he let these students down, again. I don’t understand how he can propose funding student financial aid on Wednesday, and then turn around and veto it on Friday.”
The Senate President will discuss with fellow Senate Democrats what steps to take next regarding the legislation.
* Rev. Dennis H. Holtschneider, C.M., president of DePaul University…
“DePaul University is disappointed that the political impasse has resulted in the state’s failure to meet its obligation of providing MAP awards to students in the state of Illinois. In keeping with our Catholic Vincentian mission, DePaul is announcing today that it will honor the Monetary Award Program (MAP) grants awarded by the Illinois Student Assistance Commission to DePaul students this year. That means 4,500 current DePaul students can be certain the university will stand with them during this impasse.
“In addition, thousands of high school students in Illinois are currently choosing which college to attend in the fall. Uncertainty about MAP funding should not create additional anxiety in making the college choice that best meets their academic and career goals. Therefore, DePaul will honor the MAP grant next year for all new entering students — freshman or transfer – who applied for financial aid by the cutoff date to be announced by the Illinois Student Assistance Commission, if the state continues at a budgetary impasse into next year.
“Given our mission, we also will do as much as we possibly can to maximize our support next fall for all our students who choose to continue to pursue degrees at DePaul.
“DePaul makes this decision with the full expectation that the state of Illinois will ultimately have a budget that funds the MAP program, as it has for decades prior to this year. DePaul calls on Illinois’ elected officials to put aside political differences for the good of all students in Illinois who use MAP to become productive and employed citizens of our state.
“The mission of DePaul University is to provide a world-class education to all who come through its doors, especially those with great financial need and those who are the first in their families to attend college. For decades the state of Illinois and the federal government have been partners in serving low-income students. Until Illinois gets its fiscal house in order and implements a sustainable budget, DePaul must step in and make every effort to assure its students that DePaul will support them the best we can.”
* Sen. Gary Forby…
“I am disappointed in the governor. He had a chance to help students who are struggling economically and give them the chance to work toward a better and brighter future,” said Forby. “It is important we continue to work for Illinois students so they can be competitive in the workforce. I wish the governor would have seen eye to eye with us on this one.”
* Illinois Federation of Teachers President Dan Montgomery…
“Governor Rauner’s veto of tuition assistance for low-income students and funding for community colleges was expected but incredibly disappointing. It’s also hypocritical coming just two days after he delivered a speech touting education as his top priority while failing to mention his budget proposal included a 25% cut to universities and colleges across the state. Refusing to ask the very wealthy to pay a dime more while students sacrifice and suffer at his hand reveal Governor Rauner’s true priorities, and investing in working families isn’t one of them.”
* Sen. Daniel Biss…
“Today, Gov. Rauner vetoed Senate Bill 2043, which would have provided a lifeline to the 130,000 low-income students who rely on the MAP grant, as well as to Illinois’ cash-strapped community college system. The governor indicated that rather than fund these programs without a dedicated revenue source, he would prefer that the General Assembly pass a bill that gives him the authority to find the money elsewhere in state government.
“A better approach would be for him to propose a balanced budget of his own, with a clear spending plan and adequate revenues to pay for it. For some reason, Gov. Rauner refused to do this during his budget address Wednesday, but as far as I’m concerned, late would be better than never.”
* The conservative Heartland Institute complained about Gov. Rauner’s budget address this week, issuing several comments which pointed out what they considered to be a glaring Rauner omission…
“I applaud what Gov. Rauner is trying to accomplish with his proposed budget, but I’m skeptical anything will change in Illinois’ political culture that will undo this state’s rapidly approaching fiscal reckoning.
“As for the education portion of the address, I would have preferred that the governor spent less time pointing how much he is increasing funding on education, and instead spent more time speaking on how he would like to improve school choice options for Illinois families.
“Hearing him say that one day he would like to see every child in Illinois have the opportunity to attend the school of their choice, including secular and religious private schools, without their family being penalized financially would lift the spirits of school choice proponents all over the state.”
Tim Benson
Policy Analyst
The Heartland Institute
“Gov. Rauner’s call for an increase in education funding fulfills a promise from his run for office. While this is a realistic approach given the dynamics in the Illinois legislature, it is a missed opportunity to call for more education choice.
“More money will not provide all students access to a good education. Education choice is the only avenue to quality educational access for Illinois children. Illinois must embrace full education choice. Until it does teacher unions, district administrators, and politicians will continue calling for increased school funding no matter how much they receive.”
Lennie Jarratt
Project Manager, Education
The Heartland Institute
“Illinois is in the midst of an eight-months-long impasse over the 2016 state budget between Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner and the Democratic legislature. Rauner’s speech has not soothed the residents of Illinois. According to a 2013 Gallup 50-state poll, Illinois residents are the least confident in their state government, the lowest among the 50 states by a significant margin. This week’s budget address could not have possibly increased the confidence of a single resident of Illinois.”
MaryAnn McCabe
Government Relations Manager
The Heartland Institute
* Today, speaking to reporters, Rauner said this…
“I want every parent to have a choice about its schools. Whether they’re low income, or high income, they should have good options. I’m a passionate believer in choice for parents.”
He has often said this, but I suppose it was odd that he didn’t include it in his budget address.
The governor said the way to fix the [Chicago Public School] district’s budget woes it is a state takeover of the school system, something the Illinois General Assembly has not authorized.
“If Chicago Public Schools continues just to say ‘Send cash, we’re out of money, we’re going to have to fire thousands of teachers,’ I think the legislature will say, ‘No, that’s not a good scenario. We should have the state Board of Education take over.’ I believe that’s very likely,” he said. […]
“I personally believe once the legislature really understands what’s going on, they will give us that authority. I believe that that is coming and that will happen. Once the facts are known, I believe that they’ll give us that authority. There are some lawyers who believe that the state board does have the authority themselves unilaterally to take over. I’m not sure I agree with them. There may be a legal fight about that. I don’t know, I’m not an attorney,” he said.
Springfield Democrats will be able to wait out Rauner a while longer — likely until the Legislature’s post-election veto session in November, under the timetable Claypool suggested.
“We’ve bought ourselves some time,” Claypool concluded. Finances could get a little tight in July but then the district will get its second-half property tax payment, he said. “The irony is that the governor who’s calling out CPS leads a state with $7 billion in bills and can’t pay them.”
In the phone call, Claypool, who has been arguing that the state’s current aid formula shortchanges CPS, conceded that the system’s reprieve was temporary.
He also said that “hundreds of millions of dollars” in further management efficiencies are coming but will take perhaps a year to flesh out and implement. He declined to indicate what they are but said they’re not from closing more schools.
* From the Illinois Policy Institute’s news service…
Should Illinois raise the legal smoking age from 18 to 21?
A proposal by Sen. John G. Mulroe, D-Chicago, would do just that.
Mulroe, surrounded by public health advocates, pitched the idea Thursday in a news conference. He said the change would serve the public well for several reasons, among them:
* Smoking is deadly, and the proof’s available on every pack of cigarettes in the form of a warning from the U.S. surgeon general.
* Smoking is expensive to the individual. A two-pack a-day habit in some areas (notably Chicago) can run a person $24 a day or more than $8,700 a year, Mulroe said.
* Smoking is expensive to the state. The senator and public health advocates said $5 billion annually is spent in Illinois treating smoking-related illnesses, and $2 billion of that comes from taxpayer-supported Medicaid funds.
* Raising the legal age for the purchase and possession of tobacco is a research-proven way to cut use among young people. Mulroe said research also shows that if people make it to 21 without smoking, they likely never start.
Mulroe said he’s not targeting smokers, many of whom have told him they support raising the legal age.
“The smokers tell me, ‘It’s a good bill, John,’” and when he asks why, they respond, “I wish I’d never started smoking.”
* The Question: Should the smoking age be raised to 21? Take the poll and then explain your answer in comments, please.
An internal poll conducted by Lincoln Park Strategies for state Sen. Napoleon Harris (D), obtained by the Hotline, showed his Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-08) leading the primary with 64% of the vote. Former Urban League CEO Andrea Zopp (D) took 6%, and Harris took 3% (Feb. 4-7, 800 LPVs, +/-3.5%).
A memo to Harris from the pollster said, “Duckworth is in a strong position (probably a little stronger than I would have guessed)” but “there is technically a path.”
Technically a path? He’s at 3 percent in his own poll. Hilarious.
The full poll is here. Harris even released the results of negative push questions on himself. For instance, 65 percent said they’d be less likely to support a candidate who did not support gay marriage. And 84 percent said they’d be less likely to support a candidate “who has been accused of underpaying their employees.”
Oof.
That “path” looks awful tiny to me.
* According to the poll, voters are gonna stick with Duckworth…
And on a scale from zero to one hundred percent, where 100 would mean you are absolutely certain and a 50 would mean you are unsure, what would you say are the chances you will end up supporting Tammy Duckworth in the Democratic primary election for U.S. Senate this March?
Hillary Clinton 54%
Bernie Sanders 31%
Other 2%
(Undecided) 11%
(Refused) 1%
* We don’t usually get full polls like this, so let’s look at some other things…
I am now going to read a few descriptions of different characteristics a candidate for U.S. Senate might have. Please rate each on a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 means that characteristic is a very important characteristic for a candidate for Senate to have, and 0 means that characteristic is not important at all for a candidate for Senate to have. You may use any other number between 0 and 10.
Illinois Democratic voters apparently say they want strong leaders who can bring people together. And they’re not much interested in state legislators, “outsiders” and those who own multiple businesses. Gee, I wonder why?
Now I am going to read you a series of statements supporters of candidates running for U.S. Senate have made. Please rate each on a scale of 0 to 10, where 10 means that you agree strongly with that statement, and 0 means you do not agree with that statement at all. You may use any number between 0 and 10.
Again, the state’s Democratic voters want people who aren’t afraid to compromise, aren’t anti-business but aren’t in the pockets of the business lobby.
The Floating Boat Dock with Canoe/Kayak Launch is in jeopardy of not getting installed at Tutty’s Crossing again in 2016. Our Illinois Department of Natural Resources’ Boat Area Access Development Grant of $64,600, approved in March 2014, will not release the funds until an Illinois State Budget is approved. It was reported that Illinois House Speaker Madigan may not bring a budget to the floor until November, after the elections. So, no Floating Boat Dock with Canoe/Kayak Launch in 2016.
What??? No Floating Boat Dock with Canoe/Kayak Launch at Tutty’s Crossing in 2016? Say it isn’t so!
* From the Illinois Policy Institute’s news service…
The group pushing for a voter referendum to change how political maps are drawn in the state say recent opposition to their proposals is misleading and shows the naysayers are running scared.
House Speaker Michael Madigan was asked if President Obama’s recent support of redistricting reform the Commander in Chief said should allow voters to pick their politicians and not the other way around is an easy concession for Governor Bruce Rauner.
Madigan was ready with a letter from the group The People’s Map, which raises concerns about the Independent Map Amendment Group’s proposals.
Madigan said the Independent Map Amendment proposal “has components that work against established constitutional and statutory requirements on minority representation on redistricting.”
“The Independent Map proposal would negate the protections that were put in place,” Madigan said. “There’s no questions about that.” […]
Madigan said the Independent Map group has ulterior motives.
“What the proponents of the Independent Maps want,” Madigan said, “is to change the underlying law and constitutional requirement in Illinois to advantage themselves in federal court action. That’s what they want.”
[Jim Bray with Independent Maps] said what Madigan and other opponents want is to hold on to their map making power.
So, what’s MJM talking about when he says the Independent Maps group has ulterior motives?
* The full document Madigan referenced can be read by clicking here. An excerpt, with some emphasis in the original and some added…
When drawing a map today, the General Assembly must follow federal law. Federal law requires that the map must not dilute a racial or language community’s ability to elect candidates of its choice. However, state law is more stringent in that it requires the General Assembly to also maximize the influence of racial and language minorities, including a requirement in the Illinois Voters Rights Act that the General Assembly draw influence and cross over districts.
Proponents of the Independent Map proposal claim the proposal protects the interests of minorities, but it actually reduces minority interest and establishes a lower standard than currently required in Illinois. Under their proposal, the map should not “dilute racial or language community’s ability to elect a candidate of its choice.” This is essentially the federal law, which every state is already obligated to follow and is a lower standard than current state law.
Interesting.
And nobody, but nobody has bothered to cover this because if a reformer says something it must be true.
This complaint deserves a fair hearing and I’ll post a reply on this particular topic if Independent Maps sends me one.
The proposal eliminates the current requirement that districts be compact, which means the Commission can gerrymander and create odd shapes to pack minorities in fewer districts.
*** UPDATE 1 *** The Independent Maps response avoids the question…
The Independent Map Amendment is entirely consistent with the state statute People’s Map is referring to and elevates the importance of protecting racial and language minorities by codifying in the Constitution specific protections for these groups during the redistricting process.
State and federal laws can be changed at any time. By putting these protections directly into our state constitution, we are creating another layer of protection for minority voting rights.
*** UPDATE 2 *** They sent another response…
The proposed amendment would put minority voting protections in the Illinois Constitution for the first time. The Illinois Voters Rights Act would remain in statute and is not in conflict with the protections in the constitutional amendment. The counter argument from the People’s Map is that the IVRA requires influence and crossover districts. Criteria #1 in the proposed amendment includes those as well. It states “(1) the redistricting plan shall not dilute or diminish the ability of a racial or language minority community to elect the candidates of its choice, including when voting in concert with other persons;” That’s what influence and cross over districts are.
The state’s debt to Chicago’s Catholic Charities, Illinois’ largest social services agency, now tops $25 million because of the state’s ongoing budget impasse, forcing the agency to do something it’s never done before — appeal to priests and parishioners to lobby politicians in Springfield on behalf of the needy.
The cash reserves that have kept the archdiocese agency alive until now are quickly running dry as the state falls further behind in paying its bills. Services that for years the state has hired the charity to provide are not covered by the budget proposed Wednesday by Gov. Bruce Rauner, said Rep. Greg Harris, a Chicago Democrat who heads the House Human Services Appropriations Committee.
In a letter going out to parish priests Friday, Monsignor Michael Boland, president and CEO of Chicago’s Catholic Charities, is urging parishioners to remind their legislators that lives are at stake if the financial crisis isn’t resolved. The agency provides services across Cook and Lake counties, from in-home care and early childhood education to feeding the homeless and substance abuse treatment.
“The safety net is fragile to begin with in social services,” Boland said in an interview Thursday. “Our elected officials have to realize these are human beings we’re talking about — human lives. Once these things start to unravel, it creates less options for people. … For us, some of these situations can be life or death.”
* I asked Catholic Charities for the appeal they’re sending out. Here it is…
Every 30 seconds someone counts on Catholic Charities for help. We are now asking for your help. Please lend your voice to advocate for the State of Illinois to end its budget stalemate and pass a budget that cares for the poor and most vulnerable in our communities.
Catholic Charities is currently owed more than $25 million by the State of Illinois - a number that grows by at least $2 million per month.
Please take time today to call your state elected officials with this simple message, “I am a voter in your district. I am contacting you on behalf of the poor and vulnerable people who depend on our state’s safety net of human services, especially the more than 1 million people served by Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago.”
If you do not know who your state representative and senator are, please call the State Board of Elections at (217) 782-4141 or visit www.elections.il.gov and click on “New District/ Official Search.” You can find more information and a template advocacy letter at www.CatholicCharities.net on the homepage.
So far, they’re being pretty polite. But if they crank this up full bore, watch out.
*** UPDATE *** Gov. Rauner was asked about this today and said, essentially, that Catholic Charities ought to put pressure on Madigan…
“I’m glad they’re doing it… Speaker Madigan is holding up the entire process. Unilaterally, one person is holding up the process. Many Democrats in the General Assembly have told me in private they’d like to work out a grand compromise. President Cullerton, in private, we could’ve already worked things out. But every time we work out a compromise on an issue, like this pension bill that he and I agree [on]… Speaker Madigan? Crush it. Hold it off. One person, one person is holding up progress here. And that one person is trying to force a big tax hike, but he won’t support a tax hike unless Republicans vote for the tax hike. This is not right. This is not gonna happen.”
Friday, Feb 19, 2016 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Despite increased costs resulting from the regulatory environment, credit unions are the only financial institutions which overwhelmingly offer free checking accounts. A recent study by Moebs Services confirmed that nearly 74% of credit unions offer free checking to their members, while only 46% of banks offer the same. In the aftermath of the financial crisis, new regulatory requirements have significantly increased compliance costs for all financial institutions. For many, the cost has been passed on to customers in the form of fees associated with financial transactions. However, credit unions continue to offer financial services at the lowest possible cost – sometimes even free – to consumers.
Experience the credit union difference. Visit ASmarterChoice.org to locate a credit union near you!
* We often see critiques of Illinois from right-wing groups like the Illinois Policy Institute or business groups like the NFIB. But here’s one from the left end of the spectrum. Marilyn Katz writing in In These Times…
The past few years have been rough on the people of Illinois. By the end of 2015, Illinois had lost more than 1 million jobs, 795,700 of them during the Great Recession of 2007-2009 alone. At the end of the “recovery,” Illinois has experienced a net loss of 83,900 private sector jobs since the beginning of 2007—losses that continued with another 3,000 jobs lost in 2015.
But the gross numbers don’t tell the whole story. Not only have jobs been lost; a different, poorer workforce as a whole has emerged.
In manufacturing, construction, transportation and information services, 287,400 jobs were lost during the recession years. In the main, they haven’t come back. The only significant growth areas were for jobs in leisure and hospitality, health care and retail—sectors typically associated with low wages.
While Illinois still suffers from higher unemployment than the nation as a whole (5.9 percent as opposed to the nation’s 4.9 percent), the change in the kind of jobs even those employed can get has impoverished the vast majority of people in Illinois. Those at the bottom, the lowest 20 percent, have seen a 15 percent decline in income; those in the middle have seen at least a 4 percent decline. And the median income for all but the highest earners in Illinois had declined by more than $5,000 per household. […]
Even with the Great Recession, Illinois’s GDP grew by nearly $100 billion, from $586 billion in 2007 to $642 billion in 2015. It would have been good news if that growth had benefitted all. Instead, 97.2 percent of all income growth—that’s right, 97.2 percent—went to the top 1 percent of wage earners, with the top 1 percent enhancing their individual incomes by 35 percent while we in the 99 percent saw flat growth (0.2 percent)
As of 2012, the average income of the top 1 percent in Illinois was $1,366,958, while the average for the 99 percent was $46,000 and change. In other words, the small group of those at the top had an average income 29 times that of the rest. Today in Illinois, 50 percent of us earn less than $36,000 a year; 20 percent, less than $15,000.
Some of this is not new. Illinois has long been one of 15 states where the rich have benefitted most in recent decades, with 64.9 percent of all growth going to the top 1% since 1979. For those with a sense of history, there is a more than a degree of irony here. The 1 percent’s share of wealth in Illinois was virtually the same in 2007 as it was in 1928—22.5 percent in 1928, 22.8 in 2007—before unions and battles for racial and gender equality leveled the playing field for decades. All told, since 1979, Illinois’ top 1 percent increased their incomes by 177 percent; the bottom 99 percent saw a decrease of 1.2 percent.
But [Rep. David Harris, an Arlington Heights Republican] says Rauner’s address showed there is room for compromise.
“We don’t need everything on the list,” he said. “He did not mention redistricting, he did not mention term limits. It can be argued that those things may not have a direct impact on the budget.”
OK, but that still leaves local government collective bargaining “reform” (which will have to be drastically toned down because Rauner’s proposal might actually be worse than his abandoned “right to work” demand since it takes just about all bargaining powers away from unions, but union members still have to pay dues), tort reform (despite all the screaming about venue shopping, I can see at least some value for having a centralized place to file things like asbestos suits so people aren’t running all over the country), and workers’ comp reform (ain’t gonna happen the way Rauner wants, but there are alternative ideas, like number 5 on this list).
It’s doable if the governor and the Democrats are willing to sit down and work things out.
* Related…
* Illinois’ economy slips but also shows a little move up: A report out today does a pretty good job detailing the weakness of the economy in Illinois and, to a slightly lesser extent, other Great Lakes states over the past couple of decades. But in what the study sponsor says is somewhat of a fluke, it also shows Illinois’ economic competitiveness improving a bit between 2012 and 2014… The good news: The state’s overall competitiveness climbed from 46th in 2012 to 39th in 2014. Why the bump up if we’re headed to Hades in a handbasket? “Overwhelmingly because of the overall economic recovery here” from the subprime recession, says chamber foundation Chairman Doug Whitley. “We have so many large and diversified companies here.”
Governor Bruce Rauner today announced his support of legislation that would save Illinois public schools more than $200 million through unfunded mandate relief.
“Providing districts with this relief costs taxpayers absolutely nothing, but will save districts millions,” Governor Bruce Rauner said. “By freeing districts from these costly mandates, schools will have more flexibility to invest their resources in classrooms and teachers. It’s a win for students, parents, districts and taxpayers.”
The legislation eliminates restrictions on third-party contracting, which eases limitations and financial pressures on school districts. This type of mandate relief is already provided to Chicago Public Schools and this legislation extends this relief to every school district in Illinois. In addition, it eases the requirement on schools to offer drivers education and physical education classes.
Third-party contracting relief, drivers education mandate relief and physical education mandate relief are three of the 27 proposals from the Government Consolidation and Unfunded Mandates Task Force.
“School district unfunded mandates drive up property taxes and limit local control,” Lt. Governor Sanguinetti said. “As a mother of three, I think local school districts and parents should be deciding what’s best for our children, not Springfield. We need to give the power and flexibility back to local communities and parents, and this bill does just that.”
Illinois school districts have been forced to comply with nearly 150 unfunded mandates in the past 25 years, with the General Assembly enacting more than 135 unfunded mandates in the last 15 years.
“Mandate relief is an issue of critical importance to school districts across Illinois. Countless state mandates impact nearly every aspect of every district across our state,” said State Senator Jason Barickman (R-Bloomington), the chief sponsor of SB 3098. “Relief from these costly mandates is essential to giving districts the flexibility they need, and allows them to direct their limited resources to the classroom, where they are needed the most.”
“Schools desperately need relief from burdensome unfunded mandates that are passed down to them by the state and federal government,” said State Representative Ron Sandack (R-Downers Grove), chief sponsor of HB 6164. “The provisions of this bill will give our local schools a great deal more flexibility so they can make their educational offerings more student centered and cost effective.”
Chicago has an exemption on janitorial services (which has been a disaster), but this legislation appears to cover every service.
In provisions allowing a board of education to enter into a contract with a third party for non-instructional services currently performed by any employee or bargaining unit member, removes a provision that requires any third party that submits a bid to perform the non-instructional services to provide a benefits package for the third party’s employees who will perform the non-instructional services comparable to the benefits package provided to school board employees who perform those services.
*** UPDATE *** As the Chicago janitorial contract clearly shows, school districts are often not careful enough when they contract out. One suburban school is having a big problem now…
Thousands of students are in jeopardy of going without a hot lunch or breakfast in Elk Grove Township Elementary District 59 starting in May, when food service provider Sodexo plans to withdraw early from its contract.
Superintendent Art Fessler said Sodexo officials told the district they lost $500,000 last school year and are on track to lose another $500,000 this year if they stay on through the end of the annual contract.
Now the district is scrambling to find a new food vendor to prepare meals between May 1 and June 15, the last day of school. […]
Larry Fullmer, a Sodexo district manager, said in an emailed statement that “unforeseen economic circumstances and operational challenges” led to the company’s decision to exercise a termination clause in its contract with District 59.
(T)he state faces a $6.6 billion budget deficit. Under the proposed budget, Rauner assumes he’ll be able to find $2.7 billion in savings by reducing health benefits of state workers, reining in state payments for pensions and making agencies operate more efficiently. But Rauner would need help from lawmakers and a new contract with state workers to realize much of those savings. The governor also is hoping to avoid having to pay back $454 million that his administration borrowed from special funds last year to help get through the budget impasse [but he’ll need legislative approval for that as well].
That leaves a roughly $3.5 billion hole. Rauner didn’t spell out how he would bridge it.
And yet he vetoed a budget that was $4 billion out of whack.
* Related…
* Editorial: State budget speeches 2, actual state budgets 0
* Rate it, while keeping in mind it’s targeted at union households…
…Adding… Related…
* Political Flyer Dredges Up Rep. Dunkin’s Previous Trouble With The Law: He says local Mike Madigan Democrats are out to get him because he’s broken with the House Speaker on some key issues. “It’s unfortunate, but this is the depths that they’ll stoop to because they’re so desperate and so thirsty to discredit me, because I’m my own man,” Dunkin says.
“President Cullerton and some others have made a threat,” said Governor Rauner. “They’ve basically said, publicly, ‘We won’t support funding schools, unless we come up with a plan to bailout Chicago.’ This is a big deal – big deal. That is not fair to the students and the families of Illinois, that we hold up school funding for a Chicago restructuring and a bailout. Chicago Public Schools has been mismanaged for decades,” said the Governor.
Um, no.
What Cullerton and others want is a much more fair, just and equitable school funding formula that would de-emphasize sending money to wealthy school districts (like the one the governor lives in) and instead refocus the General State Aid formula to benefit poorer districts.
* I know the governor understands this because of his remarks to the Illinois Legislative Black Caucus Wednesday night…
“We do not have a fair way to pay for our schools in Illinois. We overly rely on local property taxes, which means low income kids have to have lower income schools. That is not fair. That is not what America is about. That is not equal opportunity.
“We’re gonna change the way we pay for our schools. We’re gonna rely less on local property taxes and rely much more on state General Aid for schools. And increase that state aid so it goes disproportionately to low income schools. We’re going to get that done. Working together, we’ll get that done.”
He says one thing to reporters and the complete opposite to black legislators.
Enough.
If you want to work together to get something done, then start doing it.
One of your commenters said something about every time Madigan said something about Rauner and “extreme” he thinks of the 90’s band of “More than Words” fame.
In case you don’t remember the song or the band, click here. Just a warning, though, it’ll give you a nasty case of ear worms.
* The commenter said he was bored last night, so he took the concept “to an illogical Onion level” and created a fake press release…
Surviving members of Extreme seek to distance selves from Rauner agenda
“More than words,” said former lead singer.
SPRINGFIELD, IL — Faced with yet another round of withering political criticism from ranking Democrats regarding Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner’s agenda, surviving members of the once-popular 90’s band Extreme sought to distance themselves from the first-term governor’s policies.
“This is more than words,” said Extreme frontman Gary Cherone, who, along with bandmate Nuno Bettencourt, climbed the Billboard charts with the band’s 1990 album Pornograffitti.
Cherone said he personally tried to contact Rauner earlier this week to encourage him to drop his Extreme agenda.
“I’ve tried to talk to him and make him understand,” Cherone told reporters who gathered for the band’s hastily assembled press conference.
The plea from the band was ignored, according to numerous sources, and Rauner again called for approval of his agenda during his Wednesday budget speech.
Extreme’s public efforts to distance themelves from Rauner’s agenda come as Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan launched yet another criticism of the governor.
“We’re all better served … if we follow the traditional approach, people become reasonable with each other, move away from Extreme agendas, recognize that the No. 1 problem facing the state of Illinois is the budget deficit,” Madigan said following the governor’s budget speech.
Madigan, an influential Chicago Democrat, over recent months has similarly derided Rauner-backed political ads as “Extreme” and repeatedly encouraged the governor “to stop operating in the Extreme.”
Cherone, who confessed the situation had torn his heart in two, said the band could no longer remain silent in decades-old obscurity and decided to go public in an effort to make it clear that while Donna Arduin did in fact attend a 1991 performance at the Lansing (Mich) Civic Center, there is not now nor has there ever been any formal tie or coordination between Extreme and any member or associate of the Rauner administration.
Contacted Friday, the governor’s office had the following response: “Lad di da da di da. Thanks, ck,” Catherine Kelly said.
“Raising our taxes while dodging his own.” Oof. Proft is spending more than $600K on this spot.
* And Gov. Jim Edgar upped the ante in his bid to influence the 102nd House District three-way GOP primary. Gov. Rauner is supporting former Rep. Brad Halbrook, but Edgar cut a TV ad for Jim Acklin…
* Dan Proft is supporting Rauner’s candidate Halbrook as well. Here’s Proft’s ad, which features the governor…
* Proft is running a similar ad (without Rauner) for Mike DeSutter in the three-way primary to replace GOP Rep. Don Moffitt…
A day after Gov. Bruce Rauner accused a broke Chicago Public Schools of getting special treatment from the state, his handpicked state education team launched a financial investigation of Illinois’ largest school district that could lead to the takeover the governor is seeking.
CPS must turn over detailed financial information about cash flow, bonds, payroll and major contracts by March 4. That’s according to a letter sent Thursday by Tony Smith and James Meeks, the superintendent and the board chairman of the Illinois State Board of Education, about CPS’ “concerning financial situation.”
ISBE said CPS was put on “financial watch status” in March 2015. That allows the state to require financial information “relevant to a proper investigation of the district’s financial condition and the delivery of appropriate state financial, technical, and consulting services to the district,” ISBE said in its letter.
Financial information sought by state officials also includes three-year financial projections and assumptions, monthly payroll amounts and debt schedules that could determine if more state aid or other revenue are needed to pay off debt instead of financing operations.
“As you may be aware, an investigation into a district’s financial condition is the first step in a process of determining if conditions exist for ‘certification of financial difficulty,’” ISBE said in its letter. […]
A CPS spokeswoman said much of the information requested by the state is already publicly available and repeated the district’s position that Rauner has no authority under state law to impose any oversight. She suggested that the governor, by calling for a law to allow CPS to declare bankruptcy, was responsible for the extraordinarily high interest rates the district recently paid to borrow $725 million.
A CPS spokesperson released a statement blaming Rauner for harming CPS’s finances.
“CPS has cut its budget deficit by nearly a third, and done everything in our power to keep cuts from our classrooms,” the statement said, in part. “The last time Governor Rauner offered his financial advice … Chicago taxpayers were forced to pay even more for our bonds, and we cringe at what his latest venture could cost our children.”
Claypool retorted that the state’s arrangement with its largest district, where nearly eight of nine children are poor, is a “raw deal,” and he urged other districts by name to lobby for a fairer funding formula.
“We have to come together as citizens of this state to fight against the governor for the children who are most disadvantaged,” Claypool told reporters,. “That is a statewide issue. It is important to us in Chicago but it’s important in communities throughout the state of Illinois.”
A state board that oversees school labor disputes ruled against immediately reinstating raises for education and experience to members of the Chicago Teachers Union, but could reconsider the teachers’ request at a later trial.
A cash-strapped Chicago Public Schools told the union over the summer that it wouldn’t pay the “steps and lanes” raises while the parties negotiated a new contract to replace the one that expired June 30.
In November after several months of bargaining, the union filed a grievance with the five-member Illinois Education Labor Relations Board asking for immediate help. Three of the board’s members were appointed by anti-union Gov. Bruce Rauner.
Here’s this week’s Illinois Sunshine update - we added up all of the funds on hand for both parties, and found that Dems have over $34 Million and the GOP has over $28 Million.
Just one month before the March 15th Illinois Primary, both political parties in Illinois have amassed major war chests to aid their goals of upsetting (or defending) the balance of power in state government. The Democratic side, consisting of Senate, House, Leadership, and Party Committees, currently holds over $34 Million. Illinois Republican funds, consisting of those plus the Governor’s committee, currently have over $28 Million ready to spend. The top three Super PACs in the state, each with an individual balance of over $1 Million, have a total of $16 Million in the bank.
This all amounts to nearly $80 Million in cash on hand between both parties. This is in addition to the $17 Million already spent in the first month and a half of 2016.
Democratic funds come mostly from rank and file committees and the Leadership committees (which have fewer contribution limits than a normal PAC.) The Republican side is financed mostly by the Governor’s candidate committee, which maintained an impressive and steady balance for most of 2015.
Senate, House and Super PACs
The 39 Democratic State Senators have over $10 Million in their committee funds, while the 20 Senate Republicans have $2.8 Million. Of that $2.8 Million, $550,000 comes from Republican Leader Christine Radogno’s PAC. Another $300,000 is from the committee for Sam McCann, who faces a fierce primary race for the 50th District.
In the House, the 71 Democratic members have raised $16.8 Million, while the 47 Republicans have only $4 Million available. Illinois House Republican Leader Jim Durkin’s committee makes up $820,000 of House Republican funds.
Last but not least, there are three Super PACs that have set themselves apart in this election cycle by raising far more than any others (the fourth most funded, Personal PAC, has $690,707 on hand.) These totals are not included in the parties’ “Total Funds” above, but there are clear links between two of these committees and the Republican Party. The goal of Turnaround Illinois is to support the Governor’s agenda, and it has become the second highest donor to Liberty Principles PAC. The two groups also share donors. The IllinoisGO connection is more tenuous, but many believe it exists to fund Democrats who are willing to support the Governor’s agenda. Their heavy involvement in the Dunkin vs Stratton race has given weight to this theory.
These groups have already made a statement in certain races, and will almost certainly continue to do so until the General Elections in November.
* I had a brief moment of levity with Gov. Rauner last night. I was at the Illinois Legislative Black Caucus’ annual dinner and saw an AFSCME lobbyist with a small green button. I asked if I could have it so I could give it to the governor, who was a few feet away…
Rauner: What’s this?
Me: It’s a present. Put it on.
Rauner: What does it say?
Me: 200 Percent Union.
Rauner laughed and said he’d never wear it but would add it to his collection and put it in his pocket.
* So, at least I covered myself. Any other gift ideas? Humor only. No meanness, please…
* Illinois has had a “performance-based funding” statute on the books (Public Act 097-0320) since 2011. The idea is pretty good and it has received some national kudos. A brief explanation from the governor’s office…
- The universities’ performance formula generally focuses on:
o Completion data, including degrees awarded and degrees per 100 students
o Time to degree data, including graduation rates in 150% of time (6 yrs for a BA)
o Cost efficiency, including cost per credit hour and cost per completion
o Success of diverse populations, including Pell-eligible, adults over 25, African-American and Hispanic students
o Success of student pursuing high-need fields, specifically STEM and healthcare
o 3 year averages of all data
- The community colleges’ performance formula generally focuses on:
o Completion of degrees and certificates, including a focus on at-risk students
o Transfer rates to a four-year institution
o Advancement of remedial students and adults over 25
o Momentum points
* This is an incentive program. But the state hasn’t put much money behind the effort in the past, so the schools haven’t really paid much attention to it.
In FY 15, for instance, just $6 million was allocated for universities and only $352K for community colleges.
Gov. Rauner’s new budget has greatly upped the ante, with $50 million for four-year schools, and over $9 million for community colleges.
* The problems facing higher education right now are existential, with several schools on the brink of closing. So, this program is admittedly small-ball stuff. But it’s also the sort of thing we should be doing more of… if only we had a budget.
* From the Illinois Department on Aging’s budget book…
Enrollment in the Department on Aging’s Community Care Program (CCP) has significantly grown over the past 10 years, from 40,965 enrollees in 2005 to 83,787 enrollees in 2015, a 105% increase over a decade. Looking forward, the growth in Illinois’ aging population will also more than double by 2030, with an expected 57 percent increase in individuals aged 60 plus over the next 15 years. Sustaining CCP as it exists today will cost an additional $93.3 million in the next six years assuming the completion of the managed care transition by FY2018.
* The Community Reinvestment Program is a new initiative targeted to older adults who are not eligible for CCP who need assistance to live independently in the community.
* The initiative represents a long term strategy to maintain community-based supports for our current aging population as well to address the anticipated growth in the population its first year at a funding level of $225 Million.
* Transition individuals who are non-Medicaid eligible to a new Community Reinvestment Program (“CRP”).
– Non-Medicaid eligible clients will have their DON score applied to the new service cost maximum table to derive a new individual spending allocation.
– CRP will provide greater flexibility of services. The AAA Network (Area Agency on Aging) will be utilized as the mechanism for the coordination of preventative services.
– Similar to other states, Illinois’ approach will maintain a service package for individuals that do not meet Medicaid eligibility requirements.
– This approach will maintain the Department’s commitment to maintaining individuals in their own home and community and delay the number of admissions in nursing facilities, which is currently a large portion of the Medicaid budget at $1,583,008,257 per year out of the total spending for Medicaid Long Term Care.
* SEIU Healthcare is calling this an almost $200 million budget cut for 44,000 seniors…
1) The Bruce Rauner proposed FY17 budget dramatically cuts home care for seniors through a $197.6 million cut to the Illinois Department on Aging budget.
2) The Rauner budget would do this by splitting the Community Care Program (CCP), which currently provides home care services for roughly 84,000 seniors, into two programs: one for those covered by Medicaid, and a new “Community Reinvestment Program” for seniors not in Medicaid.
3) This proposal, if implemented, would have a substantial negative impact on the 43,700 seniors who the Rauner budget indicates would be moved to the “Community Reinvestment Program”
· The $197.6 million cut represents average cut of $4,520 in services annually per affected senior
· $4,520 is a 43% cut in services compared with the average amount of services seniors receive currently.
4) In CCP right now, the average cost of care per senior per year is roughly $10,430. The average cost to Medicaid of a nursing home is around $52,000 a year, or about five times as much.
5) The Rauner budget gives NO DETAILS about the nature of these cuts. The Illinois Department on Aging Budget presentation indicates that for seniors moved to the “CRP”
· There would be a different set of services available than those available to them now
· There would be different set of service cost maximums their services could not cost above.
But the Shimkus folks did their homework, even if their rhetoric is way over the top. Watch the spot by clicking here.
* Script…
It’s Washington vs. you. Washington insiders picked Kyle McCarter. In Springfield he sides with the Chicago machine, voting to urge Congress to create Obamacare, and funding Planned Parenthood. Kyle McCarter doesn’t even live in our district. John Shimkus does. He’s fought Barack Obama, voting 66 times to limit or repeal Obamacare. It’s Kyle McCarter and the Washington insiders, or John Shimkus and you.
Resolves that the time for a national solution to the American healthcare crisis that threatens the economic and physical health of the people of Illinois and people across the country is now and recognizes the urgent need for a national solution to the healthcare crisis that meets key criteria for comprehensive health care reform set forth by President Obama and Health Care for America Now.
Hi. I’m Sam McCann. Representing hard working people, making sure their voices are heard. That’s the most important thing I do. Sometimes that upsets powerful people, but that’s okay. Sticking up for you and what you believe is what’s important. That’s what this race is really about. I’m being attacked because I did what was right for this district. Powerful politicians shouldn’t be able to punish hard-working families. Not if I have anything to say about it. I’m Sam McCann, asking for your vote.
Discuss.
* Related…
* Bernard Schoenburg: Local Republican leader critical of Gov. Rauner’s ‘ambush’ at GOP Lincoln Day Dinner
* From the governor’s press office regarding the House passage this week of the so-called AFSCME “no strike” bill…
“Illinois taxpayers cannot afford HB 580 – it’s a $3 billion tax hike masquerading as a labor bill. If it becomes law, it will dig Illinois’ fiscal hole even deeper, further squeezing social services and, ironically, it will lead to layoffs.
On Tuesday, Madigan’s House dissed the governor by passing a dangerous bill that would take the AFSCME negotiations out of the governor’s hands and submit the two sides to binding arbitration. A three-member panel would look at AFSCME’s desires and the governor’s offer and pick a winner. No let’s-split-the-difference compromise based on what Illinois could actually afford. Just pick a side. Feel lucky? The Rauner administration doesn’t. The stakes are absurdly high: The union’s demands could add another $3 billion in spending over the life of the contract.
* Part of AFSCME’s response…
The governor’s wildly exaggerated claim appears to reflect not union proposals but existing costs. AFSCME’s proposals on general wage increases would average just $58 million a year more than Rauner’s proposals over four years. AFSCME’s proposals on health care, steps, overtime and holiday pay do not increase status quo costs or employee compensation. Moreover, AFSCME has made clear that its latest proposals are not its bottom line, and that in contrast to the Governor’s adamant refusal to continue negotiating, the union is willing to negotiate further.
* Here’s the union’s cost comparison of wage proposals on the table in January, when talks ended. These are year by year, beginning Fiscal Year 2016 through FY 19…
* So, I asked the governor’s office for deets and they sent me this…
* I then asked AFSCME for a more detailed rebuttal…
Rich —
Here are the facts of the administration’s purported $3 billion claim. Clearly, as stated in what we provided to you yesterday, their numbers are wildly exaggerated and attempt to misrepresent status quo provisions as if they reflected new or added costs.
General Wage Increase- The administration’s figure is $530 million, including rollup for FICA and pension); my number is $497 million over four years. Either way it’s pretty close.
Step Increase- Their number is inflated by the inaccurate assumption that all step-eligible employees will receive steps for all four years of the contract. In fact, of the 40% of all employees eligible to receive steps, nearly half (45%) will reach the top step prior to the last year of the contract. Further, their calculation neglects the attrition savings that, as we pointed out yesterday, generally make steps cost-neutral (that is, steps are paid for by the savings realized when employees retire at step 8 and are replaced by new hires at step 1). Finally, the Union proposal does not change the current agreement so does not represent a new or additional cost.
Holiday Pay- The Union’s proposal does not change the current agreement, so this does not represent a new or additional cost.
Overtime Pay- The Union’s proposal does not change the current agreement, so this does not represent a new or additional cost.
Roll Call Overtime- The Administration withdrew its proposal and agreed to current language, so this does not represent a new or additional cost.
Additional Longevity Pay- The Union on Jan. 8 withdrew its proposal to increase longevity pay.
Temporary Assignment Pay- The Administration withdrew its proposal and agreed to current language, so this does not represent a new or additional cost.
Additional Payouts and Incentives- I have no idea what this refers to.
Indirect Impact of AFSCME agreement- The administration is charging $300 million in phantom costs that are associated with the impact of the AFSCME agreement on other union agreements. Those costs should be assigned to those other collective bargaining agreements, not AFSCME’s.
Health Insurance Savings- As we explained yesterday, the union’s health insurance proposal essentially represents the status quo, so it does not represent a new or additional cost. The Administration claims a value of $1.72 billion, which I suspect they produce by multiplying the savings in their FY 17 proposed budget ($566 million by 3 years). However, this savings is for the entire group health insurance program. Of the approximately 275,000 active employees and dependents enrolled in the state’s group health insurance, I estimate that just 80,000 (about 30% of the total) are AFSCME members and their dependents. So here again, the Administration is jacking up purported costs by including costs associated with other state employees and university employees, not just the 38,000 AFSCME state employees.
I hope this is helpful to you.
Martha Merrill
Director of Research and Employee Benefits
AFSCME Council 31
Hillary Clinton had some harsh words for Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner and Illinois Republicans Wednesday during a campaign rally in Chicago.
“When I look at what’s happening here in Illinois, the Republican agenda to roll back the clock on everything that made the middle class strong in the 20th century, it’s pretty terrifying,” Clinton said.
Clinton also took swipes at Rauner, who gave his budget address Wednesday despite the fact that the state had operated without a budget for more than eight months because of gridlock in the Legislature over the governor’s “Turnaround Agenda.”
“His plan would turn Illinois around, all right,” Clinton said. “All the way back to the time of the robber barons at the start of the 19th century.”
20th Century. 19th Century.
Does she ever talk about the future?
* No offense meant at all to senior citizens, but Clinton not only talks mainly about the past, she also seems to surround herself with older people, and then wonders why she isn’t attracting any young folks to her campaign…
Tuesday night in New Hampshire, 83% of voters aged 18-29 chose Sanders, according to exit polls. And those voters were a full one-fifth of the electorate. Sanders also won 78% of first-time voters. The only age demographic Clinton won? People 65 and older. […]
Clinton lost the vote among women Tuesday night, 44% to Sanders’ 55%, according to exit polls.
Delmarie Cobb named Illinois Press Secretary for the Hillary For America campaign on Feb. 2, 2016. Since then Ms.Cobb no stranger to politics has been busy on the campaign trail making sure that Hillary is not only visible in Illinois but that she connects with the community.
Yes, the same person who backed Clinton in 2008 and who derided the Obama campaign’s pursuit of young voters. The same person who called Obama’s supporters kool aid drinkers. The same person who said, when speaking of her client Roland Burris, “We should be happy as Illinois citizens, because now we actually do have a senator who wants to be there.”
Of all the people who could’ve been chosen to be the face of Clinton’s campaign here and it’s Delmarie Cobb.
* She’s probably gonna murder me for suggesting this, but wouldn’t somebody like Rikeesha Phelon have been a much better pick? She’s young, respected by just about everyone and, above all, she has mad skills.
American politics is always about the future. Well, at least it is for the winners. Losers generally inhabit the past.
According to Rauner’s budget documents, he’s proposing $36.3 billion in spending but just $32.8 billion in revenue. The $3.5 billion difference is for “working together or executive management,” according to an administration official.
Forgetting for a moment that this fiscal year’s deficit isn’t addressed in next fiscal year’s budget proposal (which makes it even further out of whack), let’s take a look at this “executive management” proposal.
• Establish a wide array of spending reserves recognized and clearly enforceable by the comptroller;
• Reduce provider rates that are currently set in statute;
• Reduce or modify statutory transfers out of any state funds;
• Reallocate balances from other state accounts into general funds; and
• Alter or delay payments under continuing appropriations.
Passage of this legislation would allow the executive branch to make the needed spending reductions to bring spending in line with revenues and balance the budget. If enacted, the governor would neither reserve nor reduce General State Aid or early childhood education funding, ensuring we balance the budget while maintaining early childhood and General State Aid as our state’s top priorities. Furthermore, the governor would closely consult with the general assembly in making the difficult decisions necessary to balance the budget. In addition to protecting funding for General State Aid (K-12) and early childhood education, these powers could not extend to the Road Fund, debt service or payment of pension benefits to retirees.
“I am troubled by proposals that would appear to return to the days of skipping pension payments and raiding local funds to prop up state spending. That won’t help our state and it won’t help our local communities,” Cullerton said in a statement.
Remember how the governor came after local revenue sharing money last year? Well, every mayor in the state ought to be freaked out about this request.
Giving Rauner more budget power seems equally unpopular among Democrats. State Rep. Elaine Nekritz, a Northbrook Democrat, said the idea “gives me a lot of pause.”
House Speaker Michael Madigan, a Chicago Democrat and Rauner’s chief budget foil, highlighted their differences when asked about Rauner’s argument that previous governors have been given additional budget-cutting powers and pressed for what was different this time.
“The person occupying the governor’s office,” he said.
We must fully fund this foundation level as a first step toward reforming our school funding formula. Our current formula doesn’t meet the needs of our children. Past attempts to fix the formula didn’t work because they pitted communities against each other.
This year, we are already seeing this cynical strategy being deployed. After years of financial mismanagement, our largest school system is threatening a lawsuit against the state. Such a course could set back funding formula reform for years to come, and ignores reality.
Not only did Chicago Public Schools ask for the current arrangement, they are benefiting from a special deal. CPS receives an extra $600 million more every year than school districts with similar student demographics. Any school funding reform proposal that involves taking money from one school district and giving it to another, is doomed to fail.
OK, first of all, if a federal lawsuit is filed and the plaintiffs win based on discriminatory school funding (and we’re worst in the nation, according to Senate President John Cullerton, which leads him to believe a suit could be successful), then that’ll radically change the playing field in favor of places like Chicago.
• Chicago has 18 percent of the state’s special education student population, but it receives 30 percent of state special education block grant funding.
• Chicago has fewer than 19 percent of all students in the state, but it receives approximately 27 percent of the state’s personal property replacement tax paid by corporations.
• Chicago has 30 percent of all low-income students in the state, but it receives more than 50 percent of all free breakfast and lunch dollars, 42 percent of poverty-based education funding and 37 percent of early childhood funding for at-risk students.
• Chicago’s population accounts for 25 percent of communities that receive supplemental property tax funding, yet CPS receives 88 percent of Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL) adjustment dollars.
All told, sweetheart deals yield CPS an additional $600 million in state education funding.
* I asked the Senate Democrats for a response…
Rich,
Two docs attached.
1 – Staff memorandum walking through legislative history that got us to the current school funding formula, along with staff’s rebuttal to Leader Radogno’s Trib op-ed from early December, and a walk up to how the SGOP maybe got to their $600 million figure
2 – An ISBE report indicating that if CPS were treated like all other districts, they would’ve received an extra $219.3 million from the state (not $600 million)
Both are exciting reads for a Wednesday night.
Enjoy.
* According to the SDEM staff memorandum, Rauner and Radogno are counting personal property replacement tax money received by both the city of Chicago and CPS. So, an argument about school funding ought to stick to school funding and not include municipal funding.
The staff memo also points out that the PTELL adjustment formula for CPS is the same as for all other districts…
• The adjustment corrects the “double whammy” problem that existed in the GSA formula for tax capped districts:
o Districts subject to PTELL cannot collect as much revenue as they might if they were not capped.
o The General State Aid Foundation Grant formula assumes that they can access a certain percentage of local property wealth, which tax caps prevent, and so those districts would lose out on GSA Foundation funding.
• The adjustment has nothing to do with enrollment in a district but instead compares the current Equalized Assessed Valuation (EAV) of the district to the EAV at the time the district was subjected to tax caps.
The staff analysis claims that if the $58 million in PPRT was taken away from CPS, the district would get $50 million back from the foundation formula grant.
* You think pensions are hard to understand? Try school funding.
The funding formula that determines the state’s annual contribution to the pension systems sets the contribution at a level percentage of payroll for the years remaining in the funding schedule to try to provide a level of certainty in annual payments. Over the years, changes to the pension systems have excluded some payroll from the funding formula. Beginning in fiscal year 2017, the proposed plan calls for all payroll to be included in the calculation of contributions in order to provide more level payments. This would include the payroll for “Tier 2” members (those first hired after December 31, 2010).
Phase-In of Assumption Changes
The proposal includes a five-year phase-in of state contribution variations (up or down) caused solely by changes in actuarial assumptions (including revised investment return and discount factor assumptions) as set unilaterally by each pension system board. Changes in assumptions have increased pension liabilities by more than $12.5 billion in the last two years, causing significant deviations from the initially projected State contributions. Increases or decreases in state contributions attributable to assumption changes would be smoothed in over five years, which is the same period used for smoothing the effect of the deviation of actual investment returns from return assumptions. This phase-in will facilitate long-term planning for state pension contributions and will reduce payment volatility.
* From Sen. Daniel Biss, who has worked on pension reform for quite a while now…
Just an FYI:
What BVR calls “Funding Formula Based on Payroll” and “five-year phase-in of state contribution variations” both create “savings” by totally artificially and unjustifiably backloading the payment schedule.
* I asked him to explain…
“Funding formula based on payroll” means this:
We’re supposed to fund our pensions based on a “level percentage of payroll”. So the actuaries project how much payroll will grow over the years and that determines how steep the ramp is. If they assume payroll will grow fast, that results in a more backloaded funding schedule; if they assume it will grow slow, that’s a more frontloaded schedule.
This proposal says that instead of basing it on payroll which counts toward the pensions, it’s based on total payroll. What’s the difference? Total payroll includes salary that’s above the pensionable salary cap. But because the salary cap grows more slowly than the top salaries (ESPECIALLY for Tier 2 but likely also for Tier 1), that means they’re replacing the correct definition of payroll with a totally irrelevant one that happens to grow more quickly and therefore backloads the payments.
“Five-year phase-in of state contribution variations” means that when the pension board drops the investment return assumption, instead of making the proper (larger) payments based on the new assumption, they’re phasing that change in over 5 years. So the pension board says “we expect 7.5% investment returns” and the state says “OK, well we’ll start paying attention gradually, but only completely do what you tell us is required in 5 years.” In other words, during the course of those 5 years the state is deliberately putting in less money than the pension board expects to be necessary to meet the funding target.
What’s frustrating is that you can play these games forever. This stuff is complicated enough that if your goal is to find some confusing but ultimately bogus justification to pay less you have a very target-rich environment. I thought we weren’t supposed to do that any more though!
* According to the Chicago Tribune editorial board, nobody but dorks should fret that the governor submitted a clearly unbalanced budget yesterday…
Gov. Bruce Rauner addressed the Illinois General Assembly on Wednesday, outlining his plans for next year’s state budget. The poindexters whipped out their calculators.
But the crucial takeaway was broader than an exercise in number-crunching: We’re at the end of the road in Springfield. No more pavement, nothing but dirty orange barricades and languid yellow warning lights.
* But a pox on that unbalanced budget approving General Assembly…
No one would have guessed on June 25, 2015, when Rauner vetoed the unbalanced-by-$4-billion budget Democratic leaders sent him, that the state would have no spending plan today. Yet here we are.
* Instead of being a horrific outlier, we’re apparently more like America than any other state…
Hi Rich,
With the results of the earlier primary-election states greatly affecting which candidates stay in the presidential race — raising the question of which state truly deserves the top spot in the primaries — the personal finance website WalletHub today released its 2016 Electorate Representation Index.
To determine which states fairly represent the U.S. electorate, WalletHub’s analysts compared the 50 states to the U.S. across five key categories: 1) Sociodemographics, 2) Economy, 3) Education, 4) Religion, and 5) Public Opinion.
